Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • That means unless you bought fair trade chocolate ... the ingrediants (sic) in your lovely chocolate bar, coffee mocha or cookie was farmed or processed by a child slave.

    That statement is not even close to accurate, from any facts I've seen. The Salon story says less than half of the chocolate imports come from a nation where some of the chocolate was farmed by children, some of whom are slaves. You say all of it is farmed of processed by a child slave. That is clearly false.

    You are misrepresenting th
    • I felt the Salon story seemed to be blurring the truth a bit. At one point they are talking about slavery, at another they seem to be talking about families keeping their children out of school and making them work, perhaps comparable (perhaps much more severe, though) to the United States in the 1800s. It is unclear if all of the children they are talking about are slaves, or if some of them could be branded as underprivileged and perhaps they are trying to lump them all together to make the slave group

      --
      J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
      • I have no problem at all with fairly presenting the issue. I have a problem with careless or intentional disregard for truth, in something that is so obviously wrong as saying that all chocolate, that is not from a particular source, is the result of child slavery.
        • Right. I was mostly trying to amplify what you said and suggest that maybe the misrepresentation began at the Salon article.

          Life has been so tough since I realized last year (thanks to some of you people, actually) that there seems to be no such thing as unbiased news!

          --
          J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
          • Oh god!

            Its okay to eat chocoloate there is only a reasonable chance it was farmed by child slaves - it may have been produced or farmed by children forced to work by their families instead!

            For pities sake you people spend so much time nitpicking you don't ever worry about actually worrying about the important issue.

            Would you have shouted down those who opposed slavery because actually some slaves had been freed and others were domestic servents paid a pittance and therefore not slaves and entirely acc

            --

            @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
            print reverse @JAPH;
            • For pities sake you people spend so much time nitpicking you don't ever worry about actually worrying about the important issue.

              No, we are worrying about the important issue: getting the facts straight. As pudge pointed out: «The Salon story says less than half of the chocolate imports come from a nation where some of the chocolate was farmed by children, some of whom are slaves.»

              I'm not a statistician, but for the sake of argument, let's say that the probability that a single chocolate

              • The facts are straight - The industry refuses to disclose the proportion of cocoa producedby chold labor or child slave labor.

                Each time you buy a chocolate bar - chances are the cocoa will not be from a single source - its not audited or accountable. Therefore if 50% of cocoa is from a country that suffers child slavery then there is a very high probability that some of that bar is from that country - say 80 to 90%.

                Then because the cocoa from that country is again unaccountably bought in bulk and all mixed in, the odds of *some* of the cocoa in that bar produced by children would be a low proportion of 80% - say 50%, which would be 50% - so a 50/50 chance your chocolate bar contains cocoa from child labour, then again 50% chance that *some* of the cocoa from that bar is child slavery means that maybe a 25% chance that *some* of that cocoa in your chocolate bar is from child slavery - thats 1 in 4.

                In your perfect nitpicking statistical world where you can't see the wood for the trees every child slave would have had all their cocoa kept perfectly together and never ever mixed with less contaminated cocoa so you could happily eat your chocolate knowing that only a tiny proportion of the chocolate bars you eat involved child slavery - this is foolish in the extreme. Lets face it there is a chance that a small ammount of the chocolate in any chocolate you eat required the suffering of child slaves.

                Continuing to buy chocolate from big brands who remain unaccountable and turn a blind eye to slavery while keeping commodity prices so low as to ensure that some of their produce is from slavery means that slavery will continue or increase.

                Buying chocolate (or coffee or clothing or sporting goods) that is fair trade ensures that a) big brands don't profit from slavery, b) you don't contribute to slavery and c) the cocoa farmers are given a fair price that allows them to form cooperatives and educate themselves.

                --

                @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
                print reverse @JAPH;