Live data from Hacker News

Forced to upgrade

herman.bearblog.dev

111–120 of 303 posts

Re: Forced to upgrade

#111
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article is awfully short on estimating environmental impact. Other sources on the web say that, including 4 years of electricity usage, an iPhone's total carbon impact is ~175 pounds of CO2, or about 9 gallons of gasoline. Which is roughly 0.25% of emissions from driving a car the average amount for four years. Imperceptible changes to urban planning to shave off a few miles of driving would have a bigger impact…

"The use phase of a smartphone is not the most significant in the life cycle, in terms of [greenhouse gas] emissions", https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11367-015-0909-4 , from 10 years ago. From https://eeb.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Coolproducts-repo... (2019): "Our analysis shows that a 1-year lifetime extension of all smartphones in the EU would save 2.1 Mt CO2 per year by 2030, the equivalent of tak…

Exactly, it's the production of the phones where most of the carbon is generated.

As for the comparisons there, it's hard to make head or tails of the meaning, because the "context" provided is apples to oranges. A million cars versus how many phones? Or a million cars versus how many cars in Europe? Citing a big number does not mean much unless we have something to compare that big number to, and I question the intentions of such "bald big numbers" because I see it so often used to muddy the waters and confuse people on many topics. For example, nuclear advocates will often disparage solar, talking about X million square kilometers without giving any context on whether that's actually a big number or not.

2.1Mt CO2 (over how many years with that "by 2030") versus how many Gt Co2 per year? Seems to be 2.5-3.1Gt/year based on a web search..

And what percentage of total EU emissions are from cars?

These numbers also make the argument that phones are a small rounding error compared to other much bigger actions.

Should we mandate repairability? Of course! It's good! But getting bent out of shape on the impact of phones compared to far more common and wasteful practices is a bad use of our limited amount of time to make drastic action.

And the EU is far better on cars than the US, so perhaps it makes more sense for them to take action on phones, but in the US, our car addiction makes for far better and practical environmental action.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#112
post #79
post #26

This situation doesn't happen with hardware running an open source OS. For example laptops running Linux can upgrade basically forever. Why are community maintained open source OSes better at this than commercially maintained proprietary OSes?

It is more about hardware / software bundling than the openness of the source code. Windows is as proprietary as it gets. I was able to upgrade my desktop PC from 2008 to Windows 10. It required removing quite a bit bloatware but it works. Actually, I have a negative example for FOSS for you. I have a laptop with an Nvidia GPU on it from 2012. I cannot use it under Linux since Linux world is terrible at API / ABI sta…

> Actually, I have a negative example for FOSS for you. I have a laptop with an Nvidia GPU on it from 2012. I cannot use it under Linux since Linux world is terrible at API / ABI stability. So Nvidia driver has stopped working.

Your example of FOSS not working... is the proprietary nvidia driver breaking? Even though it would almost certainly work if your card were supported by the open source drivers?

Re: Forced to upgrade

#113
post #29

What is to me frustrating is how artificial these lifecycles feel. Even more so on Android side. Just upstream your drivers and "support" should be pretty much free.

Recently upgraded to a Pixel 8 from a different aarch64 phone (OnePlus Nord N100) and discovered that I can't run 32-bit apps anymore :(

Re: Forced to upgrade

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not define "environmental impact" solely in terms of carbon emissions and then do a trivial comparison to some mundane activity. Smartphones may have a low carbon emission footprint relative to some other things (numbers I found varied widely) and that still wouldn't be a good argument for discarding them unnecessarily. Their production and disposal has a great deal of other side effects that aren't defined by…

You're definitely helping me prove my point, what are those other environmental impacts? Let's imagine we can stop a single car from needing to be produced: that will dwarf all the mining impacts from probably thousands of phones! Cars are soooo much worse along any angle you can possibly imagine, yet people are misdirected from their use of cars to worrying about miniscuke rounding errors from their phones.

so let's stop unnecessary cars and unnecessary phones

Re: Forced to upgrade

#115

Unusability preservation law: Whenever a technology gets into a state where it becomes usable, when it starts to suit you, you get into it and you are satisfied with it, something always happens that either completely impairs it or makes working with it significantly uncomfortable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME#GNOME_3

Re: Forced to upgrade

#117

I'm still daily-driving an iPhone 7, so I sympathize. A few apps have complained about the older OS; so far I've been able to react by deleting the apps. Smartphones cause a truly astonishing amount of waste ( https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2018/12/11/right-to-repair-... : ~151 million phones discarded in the US each year, as of 2018), to say nothing of the various social follow-on effects that are being argued to…

I always trade my phones in to Apple, who reuse/recycle large portions of it.

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/recycled-iphones-apple-produ...

Not sure if there's a better document that talks more about it, that was just what I could quickly find.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#119

I'm still daily-driving an iPhone 7, so I sympathize. A few apps have complained about the older OS; so far I've been able to react by deleting the apps. Smartphones cause a truly astonishing amount of waste ( https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2018/12/11/right-to-repair-... : ~151 million phones discarded in the US each year, as of 2018), to say nothing of the various social follow-on effects that are being argued to…

That article is awfully short on estimating environmental impact. Other sources on the web say that, including 4 years of electricity usage, an iPhone's total carbon impact is ~175 pounds of CO2, or about 9 gallons of gasoline. Which is roughly 0.25% of emissions from driving a car the average amount for four years. Imperceptible changes to urban planning to shave off a few miles of driving would have a bigger impact…

> Imperceptible changes to urban planning to shave off a few miles of driving would have a bigger impact than doubling the lifetimes of mobile phones.

Urban planning too obviously cannot be pinned on consumer choices. Which is why it would never become the locus of attention.

I don’t know if you are right or wrong about this point. But nonetheless.

Re: Forced to upgrade

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not define "environmental impact" solely in terms of carbon emissions and then do a trivial comparison to some mundane activity. Smartphones may have a low carbon emission footprint relative to some other things (numbers I found varied widely) and that still wouldn't be a good argument for discarding them unnecessarily. Their production and disposal has a great deal of other side effects that aren't defined by…

You're definitely helping me prove my point, what are those other environmental impacts? Let's imagine we can stop a single car from needing to be produced: that will dwarf all the mining impacts from probably thousands of phones! Cars are soooo much worse along any angle you can possibly imagine, yet people are misdirected from their use of cars to worrying about miniscuke rounding errors from their phones.

Suppose (made up scenario) we can stop a million phones being discarded every week by mandating that camera modules have to be replaceable by third-parties.

We can drop that legislation tomorrow, basically no problem.

Are you gonna say, no we have to wait and do cars first because a car is equal in carbon to 20 phones (or whatever).

Cars are one of the large container targets, but it takes years to change urban environments, to build transportation infrastructure, to change building zones, etc., to prepare the way for people using alternative transport (or none). Unless you can win over your citizens (and politicians who are in lobbies pockets) for a grand plan like 'no more new cars from now on'.

Post reply on HN