Recommended Posts

original.jpg

Earlier this morning, Greenpeace launched a full offensive against Apple's Cupertino headquarters. First, in the middle of the night, they projected messages onto the main fa?ade of Infinite Loop. Later, they placed an Apple-branded pod right on the door, inside Apple's property.

You can see the pod in this image. Inside the pod there were two people wearing "iPhone costumes." O course?when you protest against Apple it's either that or spinning rainbow beach ball costumes.

Their whining didn't last long. Cupertino's police came into the scene and arrested them. Apparently, they were "broadcasting audio messages from people around the world to Apple's employees and executives". Messages protesting against Apple's usage of electricity produced by coal-fueled thermal power plants for their cloud servers.

Well, I'm not a fan of Greenpeace but I've to agree completely with them on this one: Apple should stop using coal and use nuclear power instead.

But, seriously, I've two questions about this. The first: how the hell did they manage to get the pod right on Apple's door? I've been there many times and, the moment you stop to take a photo or anything else, a guard will come to tell you that you can't stand there.

And the second question: who the hell is driving that Ferrari?

greenpeace-infinite-loop3.jpg

Police grabs the Greenpeace activists.

xlarge.jpg

Projection of tweets against the fa?ade.

Source: Gizmodo

Greenpeace activists invade Apple HQ & get arrested: 1 comment

Greenpeace activists invade Microsoft HQ & get arrested: 97 comments (HOT!)

:( faith in humanity: gone

To add insult to injury, I was the one who sent in the news tip via the Contact form (I do quite often)... no mention of that though! :p

Edit: Ah, I missed the 'Microsoft' the first time round reading that, I thought you were referring to this article being republished on the front page.

I thought Apple was the "eco-friendly" company?

Apple are the antithesis of eco-friendly. They quite intentionally don't use eco-friendly procedures as they increase costs and reduce profits.

As for Greenpeace... I hate Apple, but I hate Greenpeace more! Chuck em all in a woodchipper and use em for fertilizer. Goddam tree huggers.

I thought Apple was the "eco-friendly" company?

Thought so too, but I guess I wouldn't really know.

One of many cool things about the company I work for, the entire 60+ acre campus is heated and cooled almost 100% geothermally and as soon as they flip the switch on what will be the largest solar farm in WI, it'll be covering some 14% of electricity with more development to come in areas like biomass and possibly wind. More here... http://connectverona.com/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=2&ArticleID=4111

To add insult to injury, I was the one who sent in the news tip via the Contact form (I do quite often)... no mention of that though! :p

Edit: Ah, I missed the 'Microsoft' the first time round reading that, I thought you were referring to this article being republished on the front page.

Oh haha yeah, I saw it on the front page too. Do they usually not credit people for news tips?

Apple should stop using coal and use nuclear power instead.

There are similarly protest groups who would do the same over nuclear power.

Greenpeace activists invade Apple HQ & get arrested: 1 comment

Greenpeace activists invade Microsoft HQ & get arrested: 97 comments (HOT!)

:( faith in humanity: gone

Your "faith in humanity" is based around who comments on what tech news? You need more going on in your life :(

I thought Apple was the "eco-friendly" company?

Think about why you believe this? Glass building and white packaging suggest a sentiment of being "clean and transparent", but the company is far from it. Again, I will say Apple market themselves well!

As for Greenpeace... I hate Apple, but I hate Greenpeace more! Chuck em all in a woodchipper and use em for fertilizer. Goddam tree huggers.

Them and PETA can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. They are more about self-publicity than anything of any moral value.

[. . .]

As for Greenpeace... I hate Apple, but I hate Greenpeace more! Chuck em all in a woodchipper and use em for fertilizer. Goddam tree huggers.

Yeah, caring about the environment and doing things that cause no harm to ensure the Earth lasts longer (thus, the human race lasts longer) is a terrible thing. Humans shouldn't do it. /s :)

Why do you hate Greenpeace?

Why do you hate Greenpeace?

I personally don't hate Greenpeace but I feel that their activity is inefficient and ultimately pointless.

Other less vocal groups have done much more for the environment and eventually companies and governments are forced to invest and develop more efficient energy sources in face of the sheer reality that the resources are slowly dwindling and cannot be sustained as the population grows. Greenpeace tend to claim that due to their activity companies and individuals are taking steps to improve their environment but in reality we were doing it on our own long before they came around or did anything about it.

In short, they're making a lot of noise but have very little to show for it.

Yeah, caring about the environment and doing things that cause no harm to ensure the Earth lasts longer (thus, the human race lasts longer) is a terrible thing. Humans shouldn't do it. /s :)

Why do you hate Greenpeace?

It's not their message, it's their messengers and the methods they use.

I personally don't hate Greenpeace but I feel that their activity is inefficient and ultimately pointless.

Other less vocal groups have done much more for the environment and eventually companies and governments are forced to invest and develop more efficient energy sources in face of the sheer reality that the resources are slowly dwindling and cannot be sustained as the population grows. Greenpeace tend to claim that due to their activity companies and individuals are taking steps to improve their environment but in reality we were doing it on our own long before they came around or did anything about it.

In short, they're making a lot of noise but have very little to show for it.

Them making a fuss is still better than nothing, in my opinion :) It still drums up interest in the cause. Of course, if other organisations are doing more for the cause, it's up to the donator to decide who best to donate to, but everyone should be thankful that Greenpeace are at least campaigning and protesting, in my opinion.

It's not their message, it's their messengers and the methods they use.

Which messengers and what methods do you disagree with? I feel that as long as no one is being harmed, everything is fine. But you might be able to provide examples of methods that aren't fine.

IF Greenpeace's agenda were this "let's save the planet" nonsense they hide behind, then fair play.

But it's not. It's pure self-publicity for the organisation and those concerned. They do as much damage as they do good, and are often labelled as eco-terrorists due to the tactics they employ.

Look at the damage they did to the coral reef, how their ship spewed pollution, etc... They seem to attract the type that are just looking for a protest.

Which messengers and what methods do you disagree with? I feel that as long as no one is being harmed, everything is fine. But you might be able to provide examples of methods that aren't fine.

I could list all sorts of things (like Nik has above), but you're far more likely to believe me if you spend a little time with Google/Bing and look yourself. I did that once with Mother Teresa, and it was quite an eye opener! ;)

They break into nuclear power stations and protest about them...

If those that did that got radiation poison and died out in the fields I wouldn't really care, but the amount of disruption they do.

Half of greenpeace wants nuclear power, the other half wants to get rid of it, and I bet the latter half were those protesting at apple using coal power.

They break into nuclear power stations and protest about them...

If those that did that got radiation poison and died out in the fields I wouldn't really care, but the amount of disruption they do.

Half of greenpeace wants nuclear power, the other half wants to get rid of it, and I bet the latter half were those protesting at apple using coal power.

99% of the morons in Greenpeace can't even spell nuclear, let alone actually understand it. If they did, they'd know full well that modern power stations are far safer than current coal powered ones.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!