[coldtea]

Nobody cares about e-waste. If they did companies would stop producing new products at breakneck speed and consumers would stop buying them.

Instead they care about the optics, so you get the ocassional Apple video about how they replaced foo material with bar, while creating not servicable BS - oh, and things like paper straws.

Recycling is also mostly BS (things in the "recycle" bins just end in landfills abroad).

So this is just another drop in the huge ever increasing pile.

[yterdy]

Nobody with money cares about e-waste. Those of us on a tight budget value our devices and lament the difficulty of repair.

My phone is 6 years old, and I'm hoping to be able to pay someone to replace the screen and battery at some point (knock on wood).

I specifically bought a gaming laptop to replace my hoity-toity Surface-with-the-dead-battery-base, thinking it would be easier to repair. Come charge port issues, I happily tear it down only to find that it's soldered in (my 2008 HP laptop did not have this problem).

Even when consumers are forced by circumstances to reduce, and make efforts to reuse, companies essentilly force recycle (which, as you said, is essentially "trash").

[bombcar]

It’s sad but the best way to avoid e-waste on a personal level appears to be “buy the absolute most common of everything and take care of it”. Because those are the most likely to have parts or even whole working copies available.

And then you still run into “repairing this phone screen is $200, you can buy a used one on eBay for $100” issue.

[coldtea]

>Nobody with money cares about e-waste. Those of us on a tight budget value our devices and lament the difficulty of repair.

People on a tight budget are more concerned about the budget impact of repairability far more than the waste too (which makes sense).

And the hundreds of millions with not so tight budget, still buy all kinds of crap, like "fast fashion" and the latest gadgetry.

[yterdy]

I disagree. The difficulty of replacing tech changes one's relationship to one's devices. Things that I see people throw away as "e-waste" are really, "Things someone couldn't be assed to repair or repurpose." For example, broken TVs could be repurposed as large light panels (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JrqH2oOTK4), or their main boards could be hacked for fun and profit (https://hackaday.com/2022/11/14/a-single-board-computer-from...). When I see a broken TV, even one I don't own, that's where the pain comes from. Same with phones, laptops, etc. We throw away so mny perfectly good general-purpose computers, it's insane. When we run out of a necessary resource for their manufacture, will we just be scavenging them?

[coldtea]

>I disagree. The difficulty of replacing tech changes one's relationship to one's devices

It does, but does it stay after the budget increases? Or is it a side-effect of the budget that goes away when it's not an issue?

[yterdy]

Please direct your attention to any instance of the vast amount of media concerning the inability of people who grew up poor to shake not only their habits but how that background makes them feel about the world. One was up for several Academy Awards last year. The answer is an unequivocal, if not necessarily universal, yes.

But that's also immaterial. That a person's feelings, thoughts, and behaviors might change when they find themselves in a different socioeconomic context doesn't make those experiences any less meaningful - to themselves or society. If personal scarcity inspires more sustainable behavior amidst an environment of eventual, absolute planetary scarcity, which can be applied more widely, all the better.