I personally believe that Apple complied to Chinese government's demands is because their bread and butter is in that country (the entire manufacturing of hardware devices).
Edit: Would you go and visit North Korea on a vacation with your family?
So? Failing to adhere to ad-tech needs would mean exiting the ad-tech market. Did I miss the other company CEOs' blistering attacks on the "Chinese anti-privacy cooperation complex"? Can we at least admit, since violation of privacy by chosen market is a choice, that Tim Cook is a hypocrite?
Additionally, Apple's participation in the market (or lack thereof) would have no impact on Chinese data privacy laws, but participation has positive global effects through economies of scale and R&D revenue.
A real hypocrite would actually have to enable oppressive behavior... selling data mining technology, surveillance cameras, etc.
They have a say in whether they are complicit. That they choose to operate in that anti-privacy market while demeaning others choosing to operate in their anti-privacy market is hypocritical. Could be considered worse if you factor in the consequences of that data.
> A real hypocrite would actually have to enable oppressive behavior
We disagree on whether providing technology for oppressive behavior is "enabling" it.
However, a hypocrite's stated beliefs directly contradicts their autonomous actions, often with intent to deceive. China's state coercion voids any claims of hypocrisy.
Furthermore, from a privacy perspective I'd argue it is more ethical for Apple to participate than withdraw. Apple does try to provide as much privacy as possible within Chinese law, following the letter of the law and no more. Withdrawing forces people to use their competitors, which happily go beyond the law to appease state authorities.
Apple can't legally protect Chinese users from their government the way it can in this country--for now at, least. But Apple can protect Chinese users from other malicious actors.
From Apple's point of view, it was either refuse to follow the law and leave all Chinese users to the general security and privacy shitshow that is what every other phonemaker has to offer, or, play by the rules and give them something that's better in every use case except for the one where their government wants to hurt them.
Your argument is that locking your door can't stop a SWAT team from breaking into your house, therefore people selling locks don't care about keeping your house locked. It's a weirdly simplistic and uninformed argument coming from someone who claims to be tech-literate.