Chinese engineer commits suicide after losing a 4th generation iPhone prototype
trueslant.com
trueslant.com
You never see the same thing in ancient trades; agriculture, education, restaurants, etc. specially in China. Family or community owned industries. It's businesses operated by "forward looking" management that's learning and applying this robo-militaristic attitude. Henry Ford did the same thing, the man pretty much removed workers from society and built walled cities in the jungle. Though I think Henry the Great might be shooting for a "benovelant dictator" sort of title.
Edit: we've also worked with a small Japanese startup company with maybe 4 employees, and they bust their asses all the time. So part of the culture is really a corporate culture difference as well.
I've read a lot about mainland Chinese office workers quitting Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, and Singaporean companies because of the "attitudes" and the office culture their superiors impose on them.
Foxconn is a Taiwanese company, so I'd expect some extra formalities involved in the offices. Interestingly enough, since the mainland companies are eager to emulate foreign corporate cultures, a good portions of them are adopting the formalities from its Asian neighbors. Though to balance things out many companies are also going for the more casual tones of western firms. It'd be interesting to see how it'll work out.
Assembly line workers are a different story. They are pretty much all treated like crap, since they are considered a lower social class because of their rural births and the lack of legal permits (and thus forfeiting many rights) to live in the cities. This is the major source of social unrest in China, it's mostly unreported in the west, and it's a much greater threat to the government than all the ethnic conflicts you hear in the media.
Also the question is would the people be better off without the jobs from foreign companies? Surely they put up with pressure at their jobs because they don't have a better alternative?
And the Cambridge students chose to be under that pressure.
The obvious way to achieve minimum working conditions is legislation. Many believe this would be counter productive. I'm not certain.
In any case, refusing to purchase from them and 'buying local' instead denies those workers that job. Doing this does not improve their situation.
I'm sure I've butchered their words, but the point is that because of how big China is, it is difficult to correctly assume that what you may believe is true for all or even most of China. I'm not saying that what you say isn't true, but I ask that we clarify and quantify our use of "the Chinese way" when making claims about it.
I can work like a dog from 9-5, once it's quitting time I'm done. I don't need lunch or breaks, that's how I was taught to work. I can't even approach office culture because from my point of view everyone is a slackass doing nothing because there's always some people who appear not to be working.
Perhaps my view of working is similar to those of the Chinese where the industry grew out of manual labour. In fact this so called "Chinese way" is indicative of Japan and South Korea (as mentioned elsewhere), where all of the money grew out of steel and ships. When you deal with extreme hazards like red-hot steel (the process of building ships included a lot of manually placed red-hot rivets, and in China still does) so I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the CEO's and directors grew up from these industries and inherited the work ethic. In the west we turned to the service industries quite early, we're not agricultural or industry any more, so the 100% focus needed for work has likely diminished too.
One thing I was taught early, 'Never assume, just find out and then you'll know.' This advice has served me well from measuring cuts with materials to dealing with people. It's very ignorant to assume when it's simple to find out. Assumptions can easily kill and I've been witness to that; I saw a guy shot across the room because he assumed the power was turned off when we were working, finding out was merely asking a sentence (to us or his boss who was a foot away) but he didn't and he ended up in hospital (it wasn't negligence on our part, his boss asked us to turn a circuit on so they could run their power tools and the kid decided to run a jump off the live line at the same time).
Said that I guess we (and the companies) should start thinking if this kind of 'collaboration' or contracts with Chinese companies are not only profitable (that is the main -if not only- reason) but good for China, the Chinese company, the Chinese workers, the non-Chinese company and the end user.
Because I guess, we are exploiting the workers in a country with a dictatorship just to get cheap gadgets, toys and such.
And yes, I would say Apple is a bit to be blamed for this. Not that Apple were aware or that Apple would approve these (I'm 100% sure it doesn't) actions.
But, if this Chinese company -and others- keep their contracts with American or European companies although things like keep happening (At least we know about this case! How many of them have happened?)... they (the 'first world companies') will become (if they are not already) part of the problem.
ps. Sorry for my English (I'm from Spain and well...)
Why the cult of 'new' is so crazy about having the latest gadgets and how much that drives sales is totally beyond me. If it works and I need it I'll buy it, otherwise you can keep it.
I never realized how bad it really was until a good friend - who shall remain nameless - vowed to queue to be one of the first to have an iphone. Seriously, who cares. People think they're cool because they have cool stuff, not because they do cool stuff.
This is one of the reasons I read HN. People whose writing skill makes me think "I wish I could write as clearly as that".
Many (most?) other companies have talked a product to death by the time it is actually for sale. There is no excitement at this point, it has all been dissipated away. Consumers don't see much of a need to buy it right away. Maybe they'll forget about it altogether before making the decision.
I'd say this works pretty well for Apple. You are trivializing their methods in an ugly way.
Are you saying that expo demos and previews for the media actually hurt sales? I always thought manufacturers do it to build up interest and excitement; this way when the product is released everybody is rushing to buy it. Look at the games industry, for example. It seems to work.
Why Apple thinks it works the other way around, is beyond me.
For some products a slow trickle of information helps, however it's generally the exception than the rule (I'd say the movie industry is wholly an exception to this). Windows 7 is faltering because it's the alternative to Vista and now the bad scuff marks of Vista are appearing on 7, instead they could have had 7 appear suddenly and have sold millions of copies before anyone even heard a bad word.
Apple has major flaws sometimes, the iPod Nano was a flat out disaster in Europe, but it turned into a disaster after they'd sold millions of copies and not before they'd sold a single copy. If test versions of the Nano had broken en masse even the hardcore Apple fans wouldn't have touched it.
Apple thinks it works the other way around is because it does work the other way around. Announcing a product early can set it up for failure, especially today when products can go from concept to market in less than six months. If I announced in Q2 2008 that I had a product coming out at the start of Q4 2009, it gives nearly 18 months to challenge me. It doesn't help that there's a nasty habit of identical products coming out at the same time and if you announce a unique feature early, you're identical by release.
I still don't think that in software industry it works the same way. Most people I know would not care about new version of Windows coming out of the blue, unless there has been enough hype for long enough time.
And it is certainly so in the video games industry, where previews, trailers and detailed media reports are released in abundance sometimes years before the game is finished. Especially so for the more popular game franchises.
The new Harry Potter was held off last year because the produces were afraid two competing fantasy series could kill each other near a Christmas recession. Twilight, which is basically swept up in the box office and with Harry Potter 6 due out literally like a week later and cost almost 7 times as much to make.
However cooincidences occur frequently with movies and games due to waiting for the right market attention. I mean a G.I. Joe movie or Transformers movie could have been made whenever, similar with a lot of movies, however it's been impossible up until late to make live action movies with quality animation.
I personally see little difference between a lot of video games and movies. I'm uninterested in 2012, because I already saw it with Knowing and its about as meaningful as a movie on the millennium bug would have been in 1997. Then there's the whole Bedtime Stories following Inkheart (Which was due out in March 2008, but was pulled back to December 12 at least in the UK), and Bedtime Stories looked like it was rushed into production following the sale of Inkhearts rights.
Again, I'm probably not the best person to ask as I had a movie pass at like 13 (the pass cost $20 a month, I easily got $40 worth of movies per weekend). So I'll say there is a need for hype in the movie and video game industry, however I still believe there's a big opportunity for companies to rush poor quality movies into production to steal the limelight from another. This is especially true when some movies can take 3 years to produce and others are done and finished in 9 months and may wait another 6 months for release, but if you group movies too closely you end up with two distinct groups of movies (like plays) Comedy or Tragedy and then all grouping is meaningless.
i'll add one thing. an enormous amount of work often goes into products that are killed before release. evidence exists that this has happened many times within apple. anticipated products that get cancelled leave a bad taste in people's mouths. if you don't announce until the product is for sale, you've automatically guarded against vaporware.
I don't think that assigning blame to Apple is warranted here. Apple certainly is horrified at what has happened - not just due to bad PR, but because an engineer took his life over a consumer gadget.
There are no easy answers here. My hope is that within a few generations the societal earthquakes will settle down with respect to modernization. Even then though, what does it take to overcome millennia of societal acceptance of suicide?
Edit: What, you don't believe me? Try this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_the_People%27s_Repu...
Hu Jintao has been President since 2004, succeeding Jiang Zemin who became President in 1993. Some dictatorship.
Not everything non-western is equivalent. That's just sloppy thinking.
Sometime back HP had employed an agency that used illegal means in the US to trap peoples phones etc. While the contract agency committed the crime, HP did take responsibility for this.
On similar lines Apple could investigate take action on their outsource partner. It should also see if its own staff gave such expectations to the outsource partner.
It's strange to see how these days people in their twenties are expected to behave like adolescents. There was a recent NYT article gushing about how incredible it was that Obama's speech writer was only 27 whilst his peers played video games all day. By that age Darwin was already back from a five year voyage collecting samples and Einstein had written a paper on special relativity.
Luckily the HN community expects us to do something worthwhile regardless of age.
I think work age is slightly different in Asia. Most people do not work till they have at least a BS Degree (21/22) or possibly even a Masters degree. And also, while they are in school/college they pretty much stay at home in the comforts of their family unless they go for an engineering college to a different city. So, indirectly they are pretty much protected from the real world issues for a major part of their youth. So, age/maturity also seems to have some cultural flavor to it as well.
Also, I really don't understand why this should be a job for some _manager_, who doesn't even need to ever see the phone, and not the engineer who needs to work with them. Managers are more important and trusworthy than engineers? Oh. Why.
"nobody needs to kill themselves over revealing the details"
I completely don't understand that statement. Like anyone associated with the iPhone can say "someone needs to kill themselves over this project." Suicide is never the result of outside details, it's a personal disorder.
I think in many cases suicide is an individual manifestation of a societal disorder. There's a reason Japan and South Korea have some of the highest suicide rates in the world. When death is seen as a tolerable or even honorable method of saving face, people will exercise that option.
(edit: The numbers I was looking at came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_OECD_countries_by_suici... which is more of the list of "developed" nations. Japan and South Korea are comfortably in the lead there. If you go by all nations then the post-Soviet countries do rank highest.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_ra...
The World Health Organization figures on suicide rates around the world, conveniently gathered in the linked Wikipedia article, provide more nuance on this issue. Throughout our lifetimes, the top countries in the world for suicide rates have been in Europe.
One of the first books of sociology was about suicide: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_(book) .
A person is doing it of course, but all the circumstances and environment around count! Otherwise, exaggerating a little bit this kind of reasoning, one could say: "poverty is sometimes the result of outside details, but one can overcome them, so it's more a personal disorder."
Isn't it true in the most literal sense? I read somewhere that the #1 reason for the homelessness in the US phenomenon is the lack of socialized healthcare, specifically mental healthcare. There are much fewer homeless people in Europe, because they get treated.
If you look at the Wikipedia link tokenadult posted, it's clear that there are huge variances both over time (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Hungarian...) and between different countries (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_ra...).
That strongly suggests that some component of a society does influence the suicide rate. Of course, it's not the only factor, but it is surely a factor.
A sufficient amount of harassing and violence (both mental and physical) can lead someone to mental breakdown. The threshold may vary from one person to the next, of course, but it can be done.
Furthermore, some studies suggest that depressed people have a more objective assesment of reality (specifically, their estimation of what other people think of them is spot on, whereas non depressed people think that the others see them in a better light than they actually do).
We developed through evolution an optimist bias that keeps most people afloat and allowed humans to survive despite their part of rationality.
Did you read the article? It says the guy would have been tortured and beaten (to death?) if he hadn't committed suicide. Given that he actually did kill himself, we can assume he was indeed going to be tortured and beaten, probably to death. It doesn't seem like personal disorder to me, just a honest and smart (engineer) human being wanting to die with dignity and peacefully.
As other comments suggest, he might as well have been murdered.