The problem is, most people don&#x27;t have perfect information about where the products they use are from. So individual calls to action are a bit meaningless. How many people in this thread even knew this was a concern for chip manufacturing? How many would be able to name any other compatible chip brand that is conflict-free?<p>Not researching the implications of each purchase you make in a thoroughly globalized world is not the same as saying &quot;I&#x27;d rather have people die than pay a bit more for my processor&quot;. Maybe that&#x27;s the &quot;price signal&quot; you send, but that doesn&#x27;t imply that it is your conscious ethical decision. You may be more than willing to support laws that forbid conflict chips from being sold in your country, even if those laws cause a surge in computing equipment prices.<p>Maybe go one step less than that and sell conflict chips like we sell cigarettes: with a huge picture of some kid with their leg blown up in the box. If people still buy them then (despite conflict-free alternatives existing), then you can make the argument that they are implicitly (but consciously) deciding cheap chips matter more than dying people.