i think youre seeing a small problem in a wider system. (that being capitalism)
in this case of apple, its a hard situation to solve enviromentally due to the 𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲 chunk of the mobile market theyve monopolized. they force customers who buy their phones to stay in their ecosystem of tech, which leads to the market insentive to make garbage like this “one time use battery.”
the main driving factor in whether or not something is made is the demand (the persons want, and choice to buy or not)
if more people chose to buy an iphone but 𝘯𝘰𝘵 the “one time use battery” apple wouldnt make it, (in theory) better yet if people bought android before being forced into apples walled-garden then you would: help the enviroment, take power away from a monopoly, and have the choice to use FOSS OSs instead of stock android.
(TLDR make a market insentive through consumers demand for eco-friendly products)
Please review the c/anti_consumerism community rules
No debating or concern trolling capitalist arguments. There are other places you can do that. Our discussion starts with a presumption that capitalism is inherently unethical.
An explicitly anti-capitalist anti-consumerism community is not a place to defend capitalism and advocate “eco-friendly” consumerism.
Without disrespecting the mod’s note to you, let me present you a critique that might move you.
Capitalism idea tries to revolve around the notion that choices create competition and competition creates more choices. Tell me one country or even a state where people have not resorted to choosing between A or B, instead of A, B, C… Z. The only case I have seen this happen is budget minded people who bear zero brand loyalty and focus on the value for money aspect on products, like India (here), China, Brazil and such budget conscious and/or large population markets.
The reality is that plutocratic capitalism and associated psychological marketing creates a notion by omission of argument that your choices are binary, not plural. Look at these common examples - Coke vs Pepsi, Apple vs Google, Windows vs MacOS, Levis vs US Polo jeans, McDonalds vs Burger King, PC vs Mac, Sony vs Microsoft (consoles), Mars vs Snickers, and so on.
I almost forgot these - Android vs iOS, green vs blue bubbles (American teens) and Intel (Team Blue) vs AMD (Team Red). Also AMD (red) vs Nvidia (green).
Do you notice a pattern? Do you even need more examples for a critique of what you are suggesting?
i think youre seeing a small problem in a wider system. (that being capitalism) in this case of apple, its a hard situation to solve enviromentally due to the 𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲 chunk of the mobile market theyve monopolized. they force customers who buy their phones to stay in their ecosystem of tech, which leads to the market insentive to make garbage like this “one time use battery.” the main driving factor in whether or not something is made is the demand (the persons want, and choice to buy or not) if more people chose to buy an iphone but 𝘯𝘰𝘵 the “one time use battery” apple wouldnt make it, (in theory) better yet if people bought android before being forced into apples walled-garden then you would: help the enviroment, take power away from a monopoly, and have the choice to use FOSS OSs instead of stock android.
(TLDR make a market insentive through consumers demand for eco-friendly products)
Please review the c/anti_consumerism community rules
An explicitly anti-capitalist anti-consumerism community is not a place to defend capitalism and advocate “eco-friendly” consumerism.
link to rules please
They are on the sidebar of the community: https://lemmy.ml/c/anti_consumerism
As far as I can tell, this is a standard practice for Lemmy communities.
deleted by creator
You’re arguing that more capitalism will solve this capitalism problem?
Without disrespecting the mod’s note to you, let me present you a critique that might move you.
Capitalism idea tries to revolve around the notion that choices create competition and competition creates more choices. Tell me one country or even a state where people have not resorted to choosing between A or B, instead of A, B, C… Z. The only case I have seen this happen is budget minded people who bear zero brand loyalty and focus on the value for money aspect on products, like India (here), China, Brazil and such budget conscious and/or large population markets.
The reality is that plutocratic capitalism and associated psychological marketing creates a notion by omission of argument that your choices are binary, not plural. Look at these common examples - Coke vs Pepsi, Apple vs Google, Windows vs MacOS, Levis vs US Polo jeans, McDonalds vs Burger King, PC vs Mac, Sony vs Microsoft (consoles), Mars vs Snickers, and so on.
I almost forgot these - Android vs iOS, green vs blue bubbles (American teens) and Intel (Team Blue) vs AMD (Team Red). Also AMD (red) vs Nvidia (green).
Do you notice a pattern? Do you even need more examples for a critique of what you are suggesting?