This is why it's hard to take the 'climate change' argument seriously. Why can companies issue a software change without having to provide a public risk assessm

This is why it's hard to take the 'climate change' argument seriously. Why can companies issue a software change without having to provide a public risk assessment of the impact of making such a change - especially in regards to the proper handling and disposal of the now - assuredly useless - devices? Sometimes you have to wonder about all the energy required to make the materials and components to make these products just for a software update to render them all useless...complete waste. Why not allow a longer lead time? Or deny any new made devices going forwards whilst older ones are EOL? I feel there are many better solutions than "sorry pls throw away thx". I'd really like to see studies of the human impact and cost of what a single software update can do - my understanding is it all ends up in landfill to rot and hardly anything is recycled.