3 ms·
These technologically sustainable choices would also have to be desirable on their own merits. Largely, they're not; they're often ugly, difficult to use, requi
by mrtranscendence 4y ago
These technologically sustainable choices would also have to be desirable on their own merits. Largely, they're not; they're often ugly, difficult to use, require specialized knowledge, or of uncertain quality (e.g. used cars). The technologically sustainable, not-designed-to-milk-your-wallet alternative to subscription music services is ... buying or pirating everything you want individually, which is inconvenient and potentially even more expensive than Spotify. That's an uphill battle.
What's the sustainable alternative to buying a new locked-down laptop? If it's a ten-year-old laptop running coreboot then almost nobody is ever going to go that route. You could explain your principles until you're blue in the face but it will never seem like a better alternative than a fast, warrantied new laptop that does almost everything they want to do fairly easily.
- mindslight 4y agoWhile I agree with the general dynamic of what you're saying, you're also referencing a lot of the advertising bullet points that are used to confuse consumers to sell crap. Like there's very little point to worrying about a 3 year warranty that you'll have to beg the company to send a service person out for, for an item that is expected to last 10-20 years (like say a TV or appliances). Also the point of opting for media self-ownership (which may include piracy) isn't to save money on subscription services, but rather to avoid the inevitable rug pulls and other backstabbing down the line. All these articles about Netflix clamping down on account sharing are only relevant if you've bought into their zero sum world. I understand that's where pop culture is these days, but it's unfortunate that the tech community, who should know better, treats it as if it's anything more than a passing fad.