And you can continue using it as is. But let the rest of us have full access to the hardware to extend its capabilities and lifetime.

Didn't Apple just release an patch that covered the 5S? The phone's 9 years old, now. An open bootloader is a different story, but so far, Apple's delivered on long-term support.

That's a great to hear, but unfortunately nobody else is doing it and Apple does so many other bad things to more than make up for that from an environmental pov.

Device reusability is an environmental issue, so your happiness is utterly irrelevant here. Making devices (or their parts) easy to keep using or repurpose means fewer need to be created and fewer end up in the landfill.

> an environmental issue, so your happiness is utterly irrelevant here

Ah, the insanity of the progressive left.

The changes you’re describing aren’t free and would have minuscule benefit overall. Instead, they would just increase prices for everyone else without any tangible benefit.

Yes, smartphones are more capable than they were. No, people aren’t going to fill up racks with them in lieu of actual desktop hardware. All of the infrastructure required to ice and maintain an old phone isn’t worth the effort and high failure rates. OSS firmware doesn’t solve those issues.

Pigouvian taxes. Next.

Right, because that has worked perfectly every time so far...

1. The added cost will simply be passed down to the consumer. Since a perfect alternative doesn't exist and the market isn't free anyways, customers won't switch. And since the number of customers stays the same, profits stay the same, so the producer won't change.

2. The money from the tax won't actually solve the problem. Perfectly usable electronics will still be discarded, landfills will still fill and new devices will still be unnecessarily manufactured. The harm done is the same, only now the government has some extra change.

This perspective has a huge following on Hacker News and it's baffling. This site celebrates clever reuse of technology, creative thinking, and open source. But when Apple comes up, some people close down completely and the sharply defined cognitive dissonance looks very cult-like.

HN consists of multiple people who can each have different opinions. It's not a single person that simultaneously holds anti-closed-source and pro-Apple mindsets. A small number of people here might, but I bet if you asked them to explain their position, it would make sense.

I like using what Apple builds and I don't like forcing people to operate by coercion. Apple builds and sells a product. If you don't like it... use something else.

As a customer would I personally put pressure on them? Sure. But the authoritarian coercive approach proposed by some is harmful at best.

If believing in freedom is a cult, count me in.

apple has acted against principles of free speech quite often.