[simonh]

Most victims of crime are also socially disadvantaged, so enough with the Robin Hood crap. Theft is also strongly associated with violence, intimidation and mental stress on the victims. Promoting or justifying crimes in your comments here is reckless and irresponsible.

If someone wants to sell a device second hand it's pretty easy to voluntarily wipe your device. Apple devices have very long lives, receive software updates for much longer than competing devices and keep their second hand value very well and so make excellent and very economical second hand devices. Contrary to your claims of Apple not wanting a second hand market, they support the device wiping process and even have a trade in program that channels refurbished iPhones to 3rd world countries.

If you really do care about the environment and supply chain ethics, you'll also be happy to know Apple get the highest score of any of the big tech companies from Greenpeace. In fact the only tech company at all that beats them is Fairphone, but since they get only 2 years of updates I think Greenpeace doesn't sufficiently take into account device longevity.

[southerntofu]

> Most victims of crime are also socially disadvantaged

True in most cases, but not when it comes to owning a recent iPhone. Millions of people struggle for eating decently, and most of these folks are certainly not spending >500€ on a phone.

What may not have been clear in my original comment is most users who have a stolen device don't have knowledge of it, and are not complicit in it. So why do they have to be the ones paying the price?

> If someone wants to sell a device second hand it's pretty easy to voluntarily wipe your device.

In my experience, it's not uncommon that neighbors seek support because a relative offered them their old phone willingly but are far away and unable to remember their password over the phone. Sometimes, it's a phone/account they had not used in years. I've encountered this situation at least twice in the past year, and i'm not even working in a computer/phone shop.

> Fairphone, but since they get only 2 years of updates I think Greenpeace doesn't sufficiently take into account device longevity

Fairphone only supports updates for 2 years, but there's a growing ecosystems of distros targeting the Fairphones (LineageOS, /e/, PostmarketOS), while Apple have been condemned for pushing updates that made iPhones slower (to encourage them buying new ones).

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724

[Toutouxc]

> So why do they have to be the ones paying the price?

What price?

The original price of the device? Because we all do.

Or the price of having to buy a different machine than the $200 MacBook from the shady person online which came without the original box, warranty or charger? For the same reason, and also because they're stupid.

[southerntofu]

> What price?

The price of having to pay a shady black market of "icloud unlocker" (usually through legit phone stores) to unlock of phone they have already paid for in good faith.

> the $200 MacBook from the shady person online

It's not just an online thing, and the person doesn't have to be shady (they're usually just a middleperson who have little clue). You can find questionable hardware in most open markets and second-hand shops.

> without the original box, warranty or charger?

Most second-hand hardware i purchase from legit sources comes with at least two of those missing (when not three) out of three.

> also because they're stupid.

I agree it's stupid to purchase a device you have no idea how to access/use/unlock. But i strongly disagree that good-faith people, who genuinely paid for an Apple device (after being advertised into thinking they need one), should suffer because of a lack of judgement on their part.

[simonh]

There’s no way to slice out crime against owners of a ‘recent iPhone’ as being acceptable, crime doesn’t work like that. There’s no way you can know when buying a stolen phone who it was taken from but disproportionately they come form people who can least afford to lose them.

There are over a billion iOS devices active right now, are all of those people rich exploiters who deserve to have their phones stolen? What your saying isn’t anti-capitalist, it’s advocating disproportionate oppression of the most vulnerable in society and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

How dare you come here, advocate crime and criticise owners of devices with the highest recyclability, lowest ecological impact and longest device lifetimes in the industry on moral grounds.

I’m sure your perfectly aware of what the purpose of those software updates were, to extend device lifetimes when batteries start to fail, but you’re perfectly prepared to betray your ecological ideals which should be in favour of this in order to score points. It’s absolutely disgraceful. These arguments might work against people unaware of the facts, but you’re not going to get away with this disingenuous claptrap here.