Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by benrutter 12 days ago
Yeah, that's really not great at all! From their website:

> Wait, it's single use? Yes. We know this sounds a bit odd, but in this particular circumstance we believe it's the best solution to the given set of constraints

I don't want to be too harsh, since it seems like the pebble team are working hard at producing some exciting tech. But intentionally making a single use device is phenomenally irresponsible in today's climate.

I know they say they'll recycle them, but it'd be naive to expect anything other than a tonne of these becoming e-waste.

5 comments

I was initially put off by the lack of recharging too, but I've changed my mind a bit.

I think the amount of ewaste is pretty small. My uneducated guess is that it's probably about the same as a musical birthday card. And unlike a singing card that probably gets used a dozen times and thrown away, the Index can be used >10,000 times before it's time to recycle it (assuming it lives up to the specs)

For comparison, check out the rechargable Stream ring. It's bulkier, costs >2x as much (before including subscription... The sub alone costs more than buying an index every 2 years), and needs to be recharged every night. It's sort of in line with Pebbles advantage over other smart watches- doesn't need to sleep on a charger every night

Constraints include needing to keep component cost low and ensuring that they could sell more hardware in 2 years.
Both true; could just the very top of the receiving end components of a wireless charge system be added to the watch with the rest on a dock?
They weigh 5g. A tonne of them is two hundred million of them. I very much doubt that many will be e-waste.
A phone has 10-20x if not more weight of electronics.

I assume you will use your phone for 20-40 years?

The ring can record for 12-15 hours before it's empty. I'd guess it's incredibly rare that people throw away their phone before reaching 15h * 20 = 12.5 days of active screen time.
Of course!
What do you mean by “today’s climate”?
The EU just mandated cell phones must have user replaceable batteries by 2027: https://www.cereport.eu/news/european-union/91054

So making this single use is kinda flying into the wind in that regard.

The EU just backtracked on user replaceable batteries for wearables.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/07/14/apple-watch-meta-...

Western Europe is experiencing a record setting deadly heatwave, for one interpretation.
Currently in middle of Europe we have about 25°C. There was few days where we had about 38°C. Nothing deadly.
38 in daytime and 30 at night kills.
Freezing during winter kills about 8 times more.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524696

I was thinking about the combination of:

- Human impact on the environment, which e-waste is a big part of, is causing damage to wildlife, and serious climate change.

- There's huge awareness of and push back against bad hardware practices (often around non-replacable batteries) so they must have at least considered this.

It’s a tad hot in some places lately, and getting hotter.
Yes, it's summer.
Ah yes, the hottest summer ever. Probably nothing to worry about.
I can't tell if you're being serious, but if so, this is a bit silly. It feels like saying Covid 19 was no big thing because the Black Death of the 1300s was much worse.

But even more so than that, your own wikipedia article seems to fly in the face of your point:

> Estimated annual temperatures in 1540 were by far the highest between 1500 and 2000, while estimated precipitation was by far the lowest registered until 2025

The weather events we're seeing now are even more extreme that those of 1540, but the impact hasn't been as severe because our food and water supply chains are more resilient.

That was… once, 500 years ago. The hottest summer before this year was 2023. The one before that a few years before.