4 ms·

It's probably greenwashing (I've not done any estimates of Apple's environmental impact), but above all it's lobbying currency. Edit: getting some downvotes, p

by dmos62 6y ago

It's probably greenwashing (I've not done any estimates of Apple's environmental impact), but above all it's lobbying currency. Edit: getting some downvotes, probably because I'm coming off as cynical. Thing is that to take Apple's investment into green energy as anything other than manipulation of perception or their tax situation is to be terribly naive. Charity of this scale doesn't exist amongst the business giants.

zepto 6y ago
Except that what they are doing is well documented, and nobody has so far demonstrated any truth to the cynical counterclaim you are making. If you had some evidence, it would help.
- dmos62 6y ago
  What do you mean by counterclaim? Apple's claim you're referring to is that they're environmentally friendly? Isn't it self-evident that that's false? 1.2 gigawatts can't offset the impact of producing millions of Apple devices cheaply. Not to mention attacking right to repair, using audacious planned and forced (updates that throttle old devices) obsolescence. My gripe with Apple isn't their environmental impact, which isn't very exceptional, it's the user-hostile lobbying, and these projects are a cheap way for Apple to buy influence in that sphere.
  - zepto 6y ago
    > Apple's claim you're referring to is that they're environmentally friendly? They aren’t making this claim. They are simply announcing progress in improving their environmental impact. That is what they are claiming. Your counterclaim is that their efforts to improve their environmental impact are ‘just greenwashing’.
    - dmos62 6y ago
      Greenwashing is when you use something ecological to shape perception. The greenwasher does that one relatively cheap thing, and then can use it as a comeback. Again, I'm not commenting on Apple's environmental impact, which is relatively mundane. I'm commenting on the intention behind these investments. Can you honestly say you believe that they're doing this out of sincere communal and ecological concern?
      - zepto 6y ago
        > I'm not commenting on Apple's environmental impact, which is relatively mundane. Aren’t you? > Can you honestly say you believe that they're doing this out of sincere communal and ecological concern? Of course they are. They have to operate in the same environment as everyone else.
        dmos62 6y ago
        Well, I guess society needs innocence, as well as cynicism.
        zepto 6y ago
        I take it you think of yourself as cynical. You don’t think that using sustainable energy sources is in the long term interests of business?
        dmos62 6y ago
        I do think it's in the interest of everyone, and that other strategies are suicidal in the long term. It's just that in my perception Apple (or most any big business) is short sighted.
        zepto 6y ago
        > It's just that in my perception Apple (or most any big business) is short sighted. Ok, so let me restate what your position seems to be: you acknowledge that the move is in their long term best interests, but you assume that they must be doing this for other reasons, because you’ve already decided that.

by dmos62 6y ago

zepto 6y ago

Except that what they are doing is well documented, and nobody has so far demonstrated any truth to the cynical counterclaim you are making. If you had some evidence, it would help.

dmos62 6y ago
What do you mean by counterclaim? Apple's claim you're referring to is that they're environmentally friendly? Isn't it self-evident that that's false? 1.2 gigawatts can't offset the impact of producing millions of Apple devices cheaply. Not to mention attacking right to repair, using audacious planned and forced (updates that throttle old devices) obsolescence. My gripe with Apple isn't their environmental impact, which isn't very exceptional, it's the user-hostile lobbying, and these projects are a cheap way for Apple to buy influence in that sphere.
- zepto 6y ago
  > Apple's claim you're referring to is that they're environmentally friendly? They aren’t making this claim. They are simply announcing progress in improving their environmental impact. That is what they are claiming. Your counterclaim is that their efforts to improve their environmental impact are ‘just greenwashing’.
  - dmos62 6y ago
    Greenwashing is when you use something ecological to shape perception. The greenwasher does that one relatively cheap thing, and then can use it as a comeback. Again, I'm not commenting on Apple's environmental impact, which is relatively mundane. I'm commenting on the intention behind these investments. Can you honestly say you believe that they're doing this out of sincere communal and ecological concern?
    - zepto 6y ago
      > I'm not commenting on Apple's environmental impact, which is relatively mundane. Aren’t you? > Can you honestly say you believe that they're doing this out of sincere communal and ecological concern? Of course they are. They have to operate in the same environment as everyone else.
      - dmos62 6y ago
        Well, I guess society needs innocence, as well as cynicism.
        zepto 6y ago
        I take it you think of yourself as cynical. You don’t think that using sustainable energy sources is in the long term interests of business?
        dmos62 6y ago
        I do think it's in the interest of everyone, and that other strategies are suicidal in the long term. It's just that in my perception Apple (or most any big business) is short sighted.
        zepto 6y ago
        > It's just that in my perception Apple (or most any big business) is short sighted. Ok, so let me restate what your position seems to be: you acknowledge that the move is in their long term best interests, but you assume that they must be doing this for other reasons, because you’ve already decided that.