The Dehumanization of Young Workers Producing Our Computer Keyboards

[sixty]

Not exactly "our" keyboards - but yeah it's an interesting read. Quite shocking yet not surprising.



http://www.nlcnet.org/admin/media/document/China/2009_meitai/HIGHTECH_MISERY_CHINA_WEB.pdf

I hope Costar treats their workers better!

[itlnstln]

I hope Costar treats their workers better!

I thought this said "I hope Costar beats their workers better!"
 
 
 
I am so ashamed.

[lowpoly]

http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?t=5315

Contains a link to the original thread which of course doesn't work anymore.

Edit: Here:

http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?t=5291

[erricrice]

Not exactly "our" keyboards - but yeah it's an interesting read. Quite shocking yet not surprising.

Show Image

http://www.nlcnet.org/admin/media/document/China/2009_meitai/HIGHTECH_MISERY_CHINA_WEB.pdf

I hope Costar treats their workers better!

Wow, that's disgusting!

If they know all this about what's going on, why haven't they been shut down yet?
Obvious answer being politics and money of course....

[timw4mail]

Wow, that's disgusting!

If they know all this about what's going on, why haven't they been shut down yet?
Obvious answer being politics and money of course....

The simple is the average consumer does not want to have to pay a cent more than possible for a computer, and that computer must include a keyboard, so the manufacturer obliges in the best way that they can.

I certainly don't agree with it, but that seems to be what's going on.

[patrickgeekhack]

The simple is the average consumer does not want to have to pay a cent more than possible for a computer, and that computer must include a keyboard, so the manufacturer obliges in the best way that they can.

I certainly don't agree with it, but that seems to be what's going on.

And the trend has already been started. Even if consumers are prepared to pay more today, manufacturers will still use cheap labour to keep cost as low as possible.

[Rajagra]

Not so different in principle to when I worked for one of the largest U.S. financial firms, tbh.

Only difference is the degree of BS they could get away with.

[timw4mail]

And the trend has already been started. Even if consumers are prepared to pay more today, manufacturers will still use cheap labour to keep cost as low as possible.

When I look at the quality of the construction of, say a Model F keyboard compared to a Model M keyboard, its already sad the deterioration in quality of manufacturing.

When you get down to modern rubber dome keyboards, it's downright inexcusable to see the lack of quality.

When the consumer is at the point where a low feature, older product is good enough, something's got to be wrong with what you are selling.

[erricrice]

When I look at the quality of the construction of, say a Model F keyboard compared to a Model M keyboard, its already sad the deterioration in quality of manufacturing.

When you get down to modern rubber dome keyboards, it's downright inexcusable to see the lack of quality.

When the consumer is at the point where a low feature, older product is good enough, something's got to be wrong with what you are selling.

But all they see is $$$ so in their eyes it's a much improved product.  
Holy hell I hate the world.

[D-EJ915]

gonna go ahead and say nsfw language lol the good part is around 2:58

[itlnstln]

[Some good stuff]

Exactly.  I wouldn't mind paying more for well-crafted products.  There are still some manufacturers in the high-end audio world that put quality ahead of a cost/retail target, but in the computing world, these types are few and far between.  Due to obsolesence, I can see why some parts and peripherals are made as cheaply as they are, but keyboards you can use for a lifetime, but I guess that's the point.  If they didn't make it so it would break at some point, you would never buy another.  It's the same problem Unicomp claims it has.

[Rajagra]

There are a few honourable craftsmen around who still take pride in their work, but they tend to cater for the more obscure products. Anyone who uses a straight razor and visits straightrazorplace.com will know this gentleman. If only he made keyboards too.

[timw4mail]

Ironically, in software, it seems like quality goes down and price goes up.

Either that, or you tend to pay for the amount of bytes in the software rather than the actual merit of the program.

[ch_123]

Out of the three keyboards that I operate, two were made in Kentucky and one was made in Taiwan. Phew, my soul has been saved!

[lowpoly]

Now I think of it, lowpoly should team up with Stallman to declare his board the official Stallman/GNU keyboard. Stallman would love it, small and with quality switches and no Windows keys. And then all the GNU/GPL lemmings will just have to buy the official keyboard, otherwise they lose their nerd license. And slashdot will cover it and set fire to the server. And then after selling a million, lowpoly and Stallman will retire in the Caribbeans, where they will live happily ever after.

Sounds like a plan. Hopefully my wife will get used to Stallman when we retire. :-)

[msiegel]

is it... pez?

[quadibloc]

I want to avoid getting into politics here as much as I can. While I believe that the document is likely to be accurate in substance, and I am not inclined to be sympathetic towards the People's Republic of China, when I saw that this document was prepared by The National Labor Committee, I was immediately suspicious that this was an organization representing labor unions - motivated to protect cheap labor from competing with their members.

However, I first checked their web site, and then the Wikipedia article about the organization, and apparently it is a completely independent human-rights organization, initially founded by a Presbyterian minister out of concern over issues in Central America.

Since workers in China or India, even if given better working conditions, would still produce goods at vastly lower prices than people elsewhere, abuses like this are symptomatic of cut-throat competition between Chinese firms to be the lowest bidder.

Companies in the United States and elsewhere can help, by ensuring that conditions for workers that don't embarrass them are part of the substance of any deal; the Chinese government, which is in a better position to effectively monitor such things, should not be afraid to act as well, since, as noted above, they would not make their country a more expensive supplier even than Taiwan or South Korea if they did so.

[majestouch]

At least this dehumanization is limited only to workers making keyboards...

[erricrice]

At least this dehumanization is limited only to workers making keyboards...

That is true...There could be many worse jobs out there to have these kinds of conditions(unfortunately there probably already are and are just hidden similar to the way this was).
Just kinda makes me sick.
I just wish people cared more about the product and less about the price(hard to do, I know)

[Rajagra]

At least this dehumanization is limited only to workers making keyboards...

Have you seen videos about Chinese fur farming showing animals being skinned alive? (*)  I'd have to be terribly desperate to take a job like that. Sadly many Chinese workers are that needy.

(*) I won't link the videos. 1. They are horrific. 2. They are filmed by a very biased group who may have actually encouraged the brutal treatment.

[microsoft windows]

This is another reason to get a clicky keyboard: They're made in America!

[erricrice]

This is another reason to get a clicky keyboard: They're made in America!

Hellz yeah to that!

Have you seen videos about Chinese fur farming showing animals being skinned alive? (*)  I'd have to be terribly desperate to take a job like that. Sadly many Chinese workers are that needy.

(*) I won't link the videos. 1. They are horrific. 2. They are filmed by a very biased group who may have actually encouraged the brutal treatment.

**** that man, I'm not even going to look for that stuff. Thanks for not linking them lol.  I wouldn't be able to stomach it.  It's really sad that the world has degraded to the point where people actually have to consider taking jobs like that(or that the jobs even exist in the first place).
Yick

[quadibloc]

It's really sad that the world has degraded to the point where people actually have to consider taking jobs like that

I'm not sure if it is the result of the world "degrading". Many of the world's problems are completely unnecessary, only caused by some people being bad. But for the cause of the problem of many people being poor and desperate to earn enough money for basic needs, one doesn't need to look further than the natural desires that lead people to fall in love - and have children.

[AndrewZorn]

make omelet break eggs

but my future topre is made in japan

[nanu]

This fits in well into part of the picture as explained in a video I watch from time to time when I feel like wanting to blame someone for the tangible problems of the world.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

[Rajagra]

This fits in well into part of the picture as explained in a video I watch from time to time when I feel like wanting to blame someone for the tangible problems of the world.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

The style of presentation set my teeth on edge (starting when she described use of raw materials as "exploitation" - don't you just love loaded terminology?) I bet they lose 90% of viewers before she gets around to mentioning the few facts that were relevant and interesting. (*)

Ironic that they are planning to print a book version, too.

EDIT>(*) Hmmm. Even the Victor Lebow quote was ... out of context, to say the least.

[erricrice]

The style of presentation set my teeth on edge (starting when she described use of raw materials as "exploitation" - don't you just love loaded terminology?) I bet they lose 90% of viewers before she gets around to mentioning the few facts that were relevant and interesting. (*)

Ironic that they are planning to print a book version, too.

EDIT>(*) Hmmm. Even the Victor Lebow quote was ... out of context, to say the least.

I did like it in general, but it did seem like something was just off the whole time.  Like when she started talking about computers and how the only important thing was the CPU up in the corner(which is complete BS to begin with, there is so much more to it), but you can't just replace it because it doesn't fit so you have to buy a whole new computer.  The only reason that sockets change is to support more advanced and faster data transfer, so saying that they're doing it so we have to buy new stuff is BS.  You can't support a memory controller on a CPU and have only 775 pins.  It just doesn't work, then thing would melt.  Thus comes 1336 and Core i7.

[Hak Foo]

Err... Socket 754 Athlon 64s had an integrated memory controller.

[huha]

I did like it in general, but it did seem like something was just off the whole time.

I didn't like it in general, as most explanations were fundamentally flawed. I don't think it's the right way to comment on the situation by constantly oversimplifying things until they're just horribly wrong; I especially don't like the way industrial production is characterized.
Very few chemicals in widespread use are actually highly toxic, and great care is taken to reduce their amount.

Also, Tetra Paks can be recycled (quite well, in fact), which is already done in Europe and other countries worldwide.
If a video is going to boast such claims, some research on the subject should be done beforehand to avoid telling things that are easily falsifyable.

You can't support a memory controller on a CPU and have only 775 pins.  It just doesn't work, then thing would melt.  Thus comes 1336 and Core i7.

Ever heard of Socket 754?
Most of the time, reasons are technological. Yet sometimes, it's just pure marketing crap or deliberate technical obsolescence. CPUs aren't designed in 6 months, so power requirements of future pin-compatible CPUs are already known when a new series is introduced. In the past, people had to upgrade mainboards for no other reason than increased power requirements, which older boards could not cope with.

-huha

[erricrice]

Err... Socket 754 Athlon 64s had an integrated memory controller.

But had quite the lower clockspeeds and needed much less throughput than say a 3 Ghz Quad-core CPU(socket 775)

I'm talking about current technology here folks.

[timw4mail]

But had quite the lower clockspeeds and needed much less throughput than say a 3 Ghz Quad-core CPU(socket 775)

I'm talking about current technology here folks.

Funny how AMD consistently is able to use less pins in a just-as-effective manner as Intel.

[erricrice]

Funny how AMD consistently is able to use less pins in a just-as-effective manner as Intel.

But then again, take a look at the performance differences clock-for-clock.  Intel has been way ahead for quite a while now.(Since the Core 2 Arch.)

[timw4mail]

But had quite the lower clockspeeds and needed much less throughput than say a 3 Ghz Quad-core CPU(socket 775)

I'm talking about current technology here folks.

But then again, take a look at the performance differences clock-for-clock.  Intel has been way ahead for quite a while now.(Since the Core 2 Arch.)

I don't have any respect for a company that has deliberately gone backwards on performance to get ahead in speed. (Pentium 4)

[lal]

I don't have any respect for a company that has deliberately gone backwards on performance to get ahead in speed. (Pentium 4)

They were expecting the P4 to go to clock speeds of well over 10 GHz.  Turned out to not be possible so they realized Netburst was the wrong way and kind of started from scratch with the P3 design.  Everyone does mistakes.

[molto]

But had quite the lower clockspeeds and needed much less throughput than say a 3 Ghz Quad-core CPU(socket 775)

I'm no electrical engineer, but is there really such a close relationship between throughput and number of pins?! I could understand that more pins means greater bus width, but clock rate should be unaffected. For instance, SATA (8 contacts) is much faster than PATA (40 contacts).

Funny how AMD consistently is able to use less pins in a just-as-effective manner as Intel.

Not to mention that the Phenom II uses 940 pins, whereas the Core 2 uses 775 while being more efficient!

[Rajagra]

Ah yes, happy times poking fun at the Pentium 4.
http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_1.htm

Except the idea doesn't work. Benchmark after benchmark after benchmark shows the 1.5 GHz Pentium chip running slower than a 900 MHz Athlon, and in some cases slower than a 533 MHz Celeron, even as slow as a 200 MHz Pentium in rare cases.

[erricrice]

I'm no electrical engineer, but is there really such a close relationship between throughput and number of pins?! I could understand that more pins means greater bus width, but clock rate should be unaffected. For instance, SATA (8 contacts) is much faster than PATA (40 contacts).

Not to mention that the Phenom II uses 940 pins, whereas the Core 2 uses 775 while being more efficient!

My point was that there is only so much data that you can put through something at a given clockspeed.  There is also a maximum clockspeed for a given material and thickness of material.  

The Core 2 does not have the memory controller on the cpu, the Phenom II does have the memory controller on the cpu.  Having the memory controller requires many more pins since more data must be put through to the cpu since it's controlling the memory as well.  Given that for the most part those pins are maxed out as it is and their clockspeed(and the clockspeed is close to it's max), the only solution is to add more pins.  If there was a more efficient way to do it, they would be using it.  Lower building costs that way, and less complex design.

[erricrice]

Wait, what happened to his original post...

[quadibloc]

Well, if you want to use a computer for word processing and web surfing, Windows 3.11 will do that. If you want to watch DVDs, Windows 98 will handle that. So people are buying all these brand new CPUs, using up metal and creating pollution, because of a sinister conspiracy to get people to buy things they don't really need.

And the solution is obvious; Microsoft should have to get permission before it brings out a new operating system, and it should have to show why it is really needed - and, especially, any increase in hardware requirements would have to be justified. This would allow our old computers to be useful in running the latest software for decades. But, of course, there are reasons, and valid ones, for not doing that.

[erricrice]

Ah yes, happy times poking fun at the Pentium 4.
http://www.emulators.com/docs/pentium_1.htm

Love it man!

So much pertinent information!

Well, if you want to use a computer for word processing and web surfing, Windows 3.11 will do that. If you want to watch DVDs, Windows 98 will handle that. So people are buying all these brand new CPUs, using up metal and creating pollution, because of a sinister conspiracy to get people to buy things they don't really need.

And the solution is obvious; Microsoft should have to get permission before it brings out a new operating system, and it should have to show why it is really needed - and, especially, any increase in hardware requirements would have to be justified. This would allow our old computers to be useful in running the latest software for decades. But, of course, there are reasons, and valid ones, for not doing that.

I totally agree with you that people buy stuff that they are never going to need.  90% of the population is never ever going to need more power than a dual-core and most of the time a P4 will do just fine, yet for some reason they insist that they need a quad-core to surf the web.  A lot of it really is just 'keeping up with the Jones' kinda thing, but there are some people who actually use the technology boosts, like me and probably most of the people on the forum(and those who don't understand that they don't need more and haven't upgraded =)

[timw4mail]

Gamers are probably the only "home" consumers that regularly use their hardware capabilities.

[itlnstln]

Gamers are probably the only "home" consumers that regularly use their hardware capabilities.

Gamers and media fiends (ripping/encoding).  Probably artists, too, depending on what they do.

[ch_123]

Err... Socket 754 Athlon 64s had an integrated memory controller.

For single channel DDR1. And LGA1366 supports triple channel DDR3. More channels = more lines of communication = more pins. A more valid comparison would be between the current 938-pin Socket AM3 and the Lynnfield socket, which will have about 1100-odd pins - both for dual channel DDR3. A bit out, but not as much as the earlier fallacious comparison.

Funny how AMD consistently is able to use less pins in a just-as-effective manner as Intel.

The bastards! Adding in extra pins when they don't need to! However will I survive?

I'm no electrical engineer, but is there really such a close relationship between throughput and number of pins?! I could understand that more pins means greater bus width, but clock rate should be unaffected. For instance, SATA (8 contacts) is much faster than PATA (40 contacts).

Not to mention that the Phenom II uses 940 pins, whereas the Core 2 uses 775 while being more efficient!

First bit is due to parallel vs serial means of data tranmission. SATA just sends the data over one line really quickly whereas IDE break it up more.

Second bit is debatable.

You know that you're on Geekhack when a discussion about the plight of keyboard manufacturer employees turns into a debate on the merit of Intel's vs AMD's CPU socket designs...

[quadibloc]

I totally agree with you that people buy stuff that they are never going to need.

Just to be clear, though, that's not really what I was claiming. Because while in principle they don't need more than Windows 98, and a computer that can run it, to do what they want to do, the choice of using such a computer isn't really open to them. Because some of the things they will be using the computer for do require them to be able to buy currently available software.

And the software that you can get for your computer requires a reasonably contemporary system on which to run. So the problem, in my opinion, isn't people buying excessively powerful computers (given the costs of a monitor, keyboard, and power supply, it makes sense not to skimp on the CPU) but the industry, particularly Microsoft, creating circumstances which pressure people into doing this.

[ch_123]

Yeah, Windows is really a jack of all trades solution to a jack of all trades problem. If cloud computing is successful and we see even a partial return to the mainframe/terminal/workstation model, MS is going to find itself in a lot of trouble.

[erricrice]

Just to be clear, though, that's not really what I was claiming. Because while in principle they don't need more than Windows 98, and a computer that can run it, to do what they want to do, the choice of using such a computer isn't really open to them. Because some of the things they will be using the computer for do require them to be able to buy currently available software.

And the software that you can get for your computer requires a reasonably contemporary system on which to run. So the problem, in my opinion, isn't people buying excessively powerful computers (given the costs of a monitor, keyboard, and power supply, it makes sense not to skimp on the CPU) but the industry, particularly Microsoft, creating circumstances which pressure people into doing this.

Ahhh, I see what you mean now!  And again, I agree with you! Lol

[huha]

If cloud computing is successful

It's not and it won't be because

the mainframe/terminal/workstation model

just sucks.


Cloud computing relies on relegating tasks to a "cloud," but I think it's horribly over-hyped. You can get almost everything cheaper if you buy it yourself than if you buy it in/for the cloud, so why should you use the cloud when it's not absolutely neccessary? Latency is a big problem for cpu-intensive realtime tasks, so this won't be able to do on the cloud. Games? Get a real computer. Word processing/spreadsheets? Even the most despectable POS of a computer can do this fine nowadays, so there's no use for the cloud there, either. (Remote storage for sharing documents, however, is quite nice. I like this!) When it comes to CPU-intensive, data-intensive non-realtime tasks, performance of cloud computing scales directly with performance of your connection to the cloud, which is, at this point, especially lousy in pretty much every area you can get to, save big metropolises, Japan and Korea. This is the greatest bottleneck of all, as telecommunication channels take ages to be improved, because they're quite expensive and population density is paramount. So when it comes to crunching massive amounts of data, like video encoding or what have you, speed is limited by your internet connection, which will be appalingly slow. So slow, in fact, you'd better use your crappy netbook-style terminal for it while you surf the web.
What remains are CPU-intensive tasks with little input data and no particular requirement for latency, i.e. compiling and probably 3d rendering (depending on whether the textures are already in the cloud or not, as they're usually huge), which is what everyone and their dog like to do all day long.

I just don't see any incentive for cloud computing. Primarily, it'll get horribly expensive for the infrastructure alone, and the actual benefit is somewhat lacking. The interesting aspects are too slow and too cumbersome, while technology for normal desktop PCs improves so steadily cloud computing will be obsoleted by new generations of workstations after a short time. Cloud computing is an interesting model, at least theoretically, as it uses the underlying computers at maximum capacity; but on the other hand, this will cost money the user can better spend on buying himself a better computer in the first place (which doesn't need to be updated so often and no one has to make a profit by running this computer, so he can go for the best price/value components instead of considering energy usage, upcoming CPU performance, memory and HDD throughput etc.).

So, I don't think it's the future. Terminals are absolutely dead, and that's for the better.

-huha

[erricrice]

Thread ninjas, this thread should look into some protection from them.

Like fire.