Five minutes of hate news

[Jormungandr]

On my part, many functionally impossible to recycle with current technology components that demanded a very long series of very long distance trade to create in the first place being reduced to waste. Frequently, E-waste gets chucked at African shitholes with zero environmental regulations to be picked clean for the few pieces of viable salvage, leaving toxic heavy metals to leech into the groundwater from all the parts that aren't. Also Apple's "walled garden" bullshit for capturing the market with untransferable data.

This, and people don't need the latest model of iCrap -- they want it. They want it because it's there/the newest thing, not because it's something they need, especially when the iCrap 24 has everything the 25XXX Max Ultra has except for, say, one inch more of screen, or ten minutes of extra battery life.

Yes, it is their money and they can do what they want with it, but the age old adage of "a fool and his money are soon easily parted" is a true thing.

I mean, fucking hell, I'm still using a Galaxy S9.

 

[Zachowon]

What's wrong with wanting?
Do we need video games?
Do we need pets?
What do we truly need outside of food and water?

 

[mrttao]

On my part, many functionally impossible to recycle with current technology components that demanded a very long series of very long distance trade to create in the first place being reduced to waste. Frequently, E-waste gets chucked at African shitholes with zero environmental regulations to be picked clean for the few pieces of viable salvage, leaving toxic heavy metals to leech into the groundwater from all the parts that aren't. Also Apple's "walled garden" bullshit for capturing the market with untransferable data.

1. Where do you think all those metals come from? (pro tip. the ground).

2. E-waste being smuggled to africa is not a problem of "mindless consumerism". it is a problem of bad behavior by megacorps and governments.
Rather than accusing commoners/peasants of ruining the environment by daring to buy stuff, identify the real culprit which is govt and megacorps. which are where the fixes should be done at.

This, and people don't need the latest model of iCrap -- they want it.

People want to not just be meat robot serfs who work all day. Shock and horror.
Stop repeating the oligarch verbiage of saying that the commoners are not allowed to want things and do anything for fun. Just work as a slave until you die.

 

[Zachowon]

You know it's a bad take when me and Mrttao agree on something

 

[mrttao]

You know. this is really comical.
The oligarchs are mishandling manufacturing and trash disposal in the most egregious ways they can come up with.

Then they order their media stooges to scream and cry "why did you / capitalism force me to do this" at the commoners. Trying to gaslight us into thinking their bad behavior is somehow our fault.

 

[Jormungandr]

1. Where do you think all those metals come from? (pro tip. the ground).

2. E-waste being smuggled to africa is not a problem of "mindless consumerism". it is a problem of bad behavior by megacorps and governments.
Rather than accusing commoners/peasants of ruining the environment by daring to buy stuff, identify the real culprit which is govt and megacorps. which are where the fixes should be done at.

People want to not just be meat robot serfs who work all day. Shock and horror.
Stop repeating the oligarch verbiage of saying that the commoners are not allowed to want things and do anything for fun. Just work as a slave until you die.

The points are motivation and context.

I, for example, want Homeworld 3. It's a game, and it's because of a want, not a need.

If they released a Homeworld 4 in three, four years, I'd buy that, too.

If they released a Homeworld 4 less than a year (say, as in months) after 3 and it was pretty much the same game except with, say, a few new units or levels? I'd ask "what'd be the point in buying this?". But there would be people who would buy it just "because Homeworld". That's mindless consumerism; just buying it because it's a Homeworld game.

But anyway, there is a vast difference between that and buying, say, a new 25 inch TV when you just bought a 24 inch TV a few months or even a year ago, and it works perfectly fine/the same way; that you don't need it but want it. If the TV breaks and isn't fixable (either because the components are too expensive and you might as well just buy a new TV in the cost/effort ratio), then yeah, I'd understand and agree with buying a newer model.

Homeworld 3 is consumerism. The TV is mindless consumerism. It's not "obliarch verbiage" to know what is simple consumerism and what is mindless consumerism.

Also, your #1 has got to be the dumbest comment I've seen you type.

"It's a metal that was in the ground in the first place before it was mined, so what's wrong with dumping those (now refined and toxic) metals back into the ground as e-waste/heavy metal waste where it can contaminate the soil and water supplies? It's just metal, bro."

Just... fucking smh.

 

[ParadiseLost]

1. how?
2. there is nothing wrong with buying stuff.

Nice strawman.

It is pretty insane that you would try to conflate "mindless consumerism" with "buying stuff."

I also never said there was anything wrong with buying stuff. What I said was:

"If one actually cared about the environment: Discourage people from mindless commercialism."

This is extremely far away from your strawman.

why exactly is it bad that someone spends 2000$ on the latest iCrap?

I don't mean "why does it make them stupid".
I mean "why do you think this harms society / the planet"

People's extreme susceptibility to marketing introduces market inefficiencies.

Shopaholics frequently buy a ton of cheap trash that ends up in landfills.

There's nothing wrong with buying stuff, but I don't view very positively people that buy a ton of cheap electronics that quickly end up in landfills, or cheap plastic stuff that end up in landfills.

You know. this is really comical.
The oligarchs are mishandling manufacturing and trash disposal in the most egregious ways they can come up with.

Then they order their media stooges to scream and cry "why did you / capitalism force me to do this" at the commoners. Trying to gaslight us into thinking their bad behavior is somehow our fault.

People certainly aren't responsible for corporations mishandling of trash. They are responsible for their own mishandling of trash.

What's wrong with wanting?
Do we need video games?
Do we need pets?
What do we truly need outside of food and water?

This is such a strawman, are you high because you are in another galaxy right now dude, compared to where this conversation is taking place.

There is a big difference between a healthy desire for material possession and self-actualizing ownership, and being a mindless consumer who has poor impulse control.

 

[Zachowon]

I have horrible impulse control but I am not mindless.
Because I buy what I want and plan to use it to death.
Do I buy things even if they sre brand new and I had last years model?
I have done that before, but I actually use it.

Sure things go to waste and people throw away such things, but acting like people buying what they want is something we should push against is stupid.

Let them buy what ever. If they buy mindlessly and waste money, go ahead.
Why stop them? Why make it a point that they are horrible at impulse buying?

 

[ParadiseLost]

I have horrible impulse control but I am not mindless.
Because I buy what I want and plan to use it to death.
Do I buy things even if they sre brand new and I had last years model?
I have done that before, but I actually use it.

You can't even finish your personal anecdote without contradicting yourself. If you're buying a brand new model of pretty much any electronic when you have last years model, you aren't using your goods to death. Not even close dude.

Sure things go to waste and people throw away such things, but acting like people buying what they want is something we should push against is stupid.

On what basis?

There's no argument here; you're just using connotative language in a poor attempt to make my position sound unreasonable.

Obviously, I'm not trying to argue that people "shouldn't buy what they want."

Indeed, people frequently buy things they don't want on impulse - look up studies on buyers remorse. First page of google is a treasure trove. People do in fact frequently buy things they don't really want, due to poor purchasing habits or as a way to alleviate stress.

What people should do is practice more introspection and patient to avoid making many wasteful purchases that they will regret later.

Let them buy what ever. If they buy mindlessly and waste money, go ahead.
Why stop them? Why make it a point that they are horrible at impulse buying?

You could literally make this argument for not intervening against any vice, because you aren't actually making any point here.

Like, your argument applies equally to not trying to convince people to avoid extreme drugs like PCP, or to not have eight kids with eight women, or literally any other behavior that negatively impacts society, because you've literally made no argument, just said, "Why stop people from doing bad thing X, if they want to do it go ahead."

And sure, there are certainly stronger arguments against doing extreme drugs or having eight kids with eight women, compared to not engaging in unhealthy commercialism and stress purchasing, but the point is you're trying to argue against personal intervention in negative social behaviors but not actually giving any reason why people shouldn't engage in personal intervention against negative social behaviors.

If you can easily apply a given argument to a completely different and unrelated topic by simply changing a few words, its probably not a great argument.

 

[mrttao]

The points are motivation and context.

I, for example, want Homeworld 3. It's a game, and it's because of a want, not a need.

If they released a Homeworld 4 in three, four years, I'd buy that, too.

If they released a Homeworld 4 less than a year (say, as in months) after 3 and it was pretty much the same game except with, say, a few new units or levels? I'd ask "what'd be the point in buying this?". But there would be people who would buy it just "because Homeworld". That's mindless consumerism; just buying it because it's a Homeworld game.

But anyway, there is a vast difference between that and buying, say, a new 25 inch TV when you just bought a 24 inch TV a few months or even a year ago, and it works perfectly fine/the same way; that you don't need it but want it. If the TV breaks and isn't fixable (either because the components are too expensive and you might as well just buy a new TV in the cost/effort ratio), then yeah, I'd understand and agree with buying a newer model.

Homeworld 3 is consumerism. The TV is mindless consumerism. It's not "obliarch verbiage" to know what is simple consumerism and what is mindless consumerism.

Now this is the most ridiculous take yet.

1. there is no fucking way you will be replaying a single video game for 4 years straight.

2. video games are distributed digitally. So there is no pollution caused.

But anyway, there is a vast difference between that and buying, say, a new 25 inch TV when you just bought a 24 inch TV a few months or even a year ago, and it works perfectly fine/the same way; that you don't need it but want it. If the TV breaks and isn't fixable (either because the components are too expensive and you might as well just buy a new TV in the cost/effort ratio), then yeah, I'd understand and agree with buying a newer model.

There is nothing wrong with buying a new TV when your old one works fine.
The old one most likely is going to end in the hands of someone else anyways. letting poorer people enjoy a TV too.

Also technology marches on. that new TV is better. Likely more energy efficient too while we are at it.
And by buying the new stuff you are financing all those technological developments that give us better tech in the first place.

Also, your #1 has got to be the dumbest comment I've seen you type.

"It's a metal that was in the ground in the first place before it was mined, so what's wrong with dumping those (now refined and toxic) metals back into the ground as e-waste/heavy metal waste where it can contaminate the soil and water supplies? It's just metal, bro."

Just... fucking smh.

Facepalm.
"refining" does not magically take non toxic metals and turn them toxic.
I assure you those metals were toxic even before they were mined.

This is almost as dumb as people thinking that nuclear reactors creative radioactivity when in fact they reduce the amount of radioactivity on earth by spending radioactive fuel to produce energy.

 

[ParadiseLost]

Also technology marches on. that new TV is better. Likely more energy efficient too while we are at it.
And by buying the new stuff you are financing all those technological developments that give us better tech in the first place.

Energy efficiency improvements rarely (almost never) make up for the energy that it costs to create a new product.

You are not being more environmentally friendly by buying the most environmentally friendly car every five years. All you are doing is stimulating market demand for more cars.

Facepalm.
"refining" does not magically take non toxic metals and turn them toxic.
I assure you those metals were toxic even before they were mined.

This is almost as dumb as people thinking that nuclear reactors creative radioactivity when in fact they reduce the amount of radioactivity on earth by spending radioactive fuel to produce energy.

Holy shit, nobody tell this guy that concentration of a metal plays a heavy part in whether or not it has a toxic impact on the environment.

Obviously there is a big difference between unconcentrated lead buried ten feet under the soil, and dumping a ton of refined lead waste on to the topsoil.

 

[mrttao]

Energy efficiency improvements rarely (almost never) make up for the energy that it costs to create a new product.

You are not being more environmentally friendly by buying the most environmentally friendly car every five years. All you are doing is stimulating market demand for more cars.

Except that your old car is not tossed into the trash. It gets resold.
So all you are doing is giving a discount to someone on a limited budget by letting him/her have your previous car

 

[ParadiseLost]

Except that your old car is not tossed into the trash. It gets resold.
So all you are doing is giving a discount to someone on a limited budget by letting him/her have your previous car

You are still increasing the demand for vehicles, and its not like nobody else is selling vehicles.

If you want to be environmentally friendly or fiscally responsible, its best to keep your car as long as is reasonable based on mileage, repair costs, etc.

 

[Jormungandr]

Now this is the most ridiculous take yet.

1. there is no fucking way you will be replaying a single video game for 4 years straight.

2. video games are distributed digitally. So there is no pollution caused.

There is nothing wrong with buying a new TV when your old one works fine.
The old one most likely is going to end in the hands of someone else anyways. letting poorer people enjoy a TV too.

Also technology marches on. that new TV is better. Likely more energy efficient too while we are at it.
And by buying the new stuff you are financing all those technological developments that give us better tech in the first place.

Facepalm.
"refining" does not magically take non toxic metals and turn them toxic.
I assure you those metals were toxic even before they were mined.

This is almost as dumb as people thinking that nuclear reactors creative radioactivity when in fact they reduce the amount of radioactivity on earth by spending radioactive fuel to produce energy.

...Er, yes? I still play single player games I've bought ten/twenty years ago, though not constantly I admit.

It was an example of the motivations behind buying a product dude, not that if it were digital or not. This is literally an "/r/whoooosh" moment for you. smh

...Are you seriously saying that concentrated, refined, and heavy/toxic metals being dumped back into the dirt is the same as when they were still in the rocks/unmined and not concentrated?

Dude, all you have to do is a two second Google and you'd find case study after case study (if common sense isn't your thing, of course) that all say the same thing: Heavy Metals. E-Waste. Bad for Ground. Polluted Water. Do Not Dump/Bury.

I... yeah, I'm just gonna Farnsworth this, if this is what you actually think.

 

[mrttao]

...Er, yes? I still play single player games I've bought ten/twenty years ago, though not constantly I admit.

You made the argument that buying a new Homeworld game every 6 months was frivolous, they should wait 3-4 years between releases.
This indicates constant play. To the point where you don't have the time to switch to a new game.

...Are you seriously saying that concentrated, refined, and heavy/toxic metals being dumped back into the dirt is the same as when they were still in the rocks/unmined and not concentrated?

Dude, all you have to do is a two second Google and you'd find case study after case study (if common sense isn't your thing, of course) that all say the same thing: Heavy Metals. E-Waste. Bad for Ground. Polluted Water. Do Not Dump/Bury.

Google is gaslight crap. Use literally anything else.
I recommend presearch which is distributed and FOSS.

"case studies"?... yea I see case study after case study that says I must castrate little boys or they will commit suicide over NOT being castrated.

I also see the ridiculously false claim that the reason the ocean has mercury in it (and thus fish have it) is that people "polluted" the ocean with mercury. when in fact it is naturally dissolved from the environment.

I also see the ridiculously false claim that the reason rain is slightly acidic is because of "human pollution" when it has always been that way due to natural processes

All e-waste is doing is moving that mercury from one place to another place.
Funny how water is super efficient at dissolving shit out of human waste but super bad at dissolving shit out of natural rocks. (pro tip. it isn't. water is amazing at dissolving minerals out of rocks. it is already full of shit anyways. this is why you want to clean it before drinking it).
mercury is pretty rare in e-waste anyways.

Also, it might shock you, but when burying waste it is usually done in concrete. exactly specifically to contain and prevent any hypothetical water contamination.
The only exceptions being shitholes which... goes right back to my earlier argument that this is not a "consumerism" issue it is a corrupt government issue.

> Don't buy a new iCrap because your old one will be sold to africa where the corrupt government will just burn it instead of properly disposing of it. and it is all YOUR FAULT

is a pretty shit argument.

 

[mrttao]

You are still increasing the demand for vehicles

No, because you offset someone else's demand for the manufacturing of a new car by selling him a used car instead.

See, do you view demand as "wants to own 1 car" or do you view it as "want a car manufactured"?

Your demand remains 1, the person who bought from you had a demand for 1 car (new or old), it just allowed him to save some money as he acquired it from thee supply of "used" instead of the supply of "new"
But your price undercuts the new car market.

Although... if someone who could not afford a car before now can afford it because you supplied the cheap used car, then this could technically be a "demand increase".
but if this is the demand increase you meant, then this is a good thing.

Poor people deserve opportunities too. "poor people give up because they can't afford it" is the worst possible way to keep demand down

 

[ThatZenoGuy]

Buying stuff only because you have been mentally brainwashed by billionaires is in my opinion stupid and you should lose a finger (or two) because of it.

How many people 'really' are buying Funko pops because their inner psyche wants it?

Edit: To explain 'mindless' consumption.
Scenario A: "Huh, I don't have headphones and I really want some to listen to music without blasting the household with noise, look at those new Senheiser ones, they look neat!"

Scenario B: My year old phone can't run candycrush extreme XXX edition anymore because Apple is a turbo-retarded planned obselescence company, I better buy another 1000$+ phone despite my one being perfectly functional! And lets stay in the totally-not-rigged apple ecosystem!"

Person A identified what they needed and even splurged a bit for a want (good headphones vs bad ones)

Person B followed what their masters want them to follow and didn't think at all for themselves

 

[mrttao]

Buying stuff only because you have been mentally brainwashed by billionaires is in my opinion stupid

sure. I can agree with that.

and you should lose a finger (or two) because of it.

yeesh. what the actual fuck.

also, it being stupid and self harming is very different than "you are destroying the planet and it is your fault that megacorps and govt do bad things"

I am very very leery about all those people who seem to want to judge other's purchasing habits. And try to decide which is acceptable spending and which is frivulous.

After all, we have seen where it leads. Such as new york banning gas cooking. And various environmental product bans or restrictions.

 

[ThatZenoGuy]

sure. I can agree with that.

yeesh. what the actual fuck.

also, it being stupid and self harming is very different than "you are destroying the planet and it is your fault that megacorps and govt do bad things"

Oh, in that regard it's the fault of the megacorps, less so than the consoomers. But they remain part of the problem.
Find a friend/family member and try to hammer into them to swap from apple to something else.

Good luck! These people are pre-programmed to the maxx. It's hard to help them, and unless you can get them on your side, they'll eat up whatever megacorp shit is made.

 

[mrttao]

Another thing to consider is that frivolous spending is a form of social correcting mechanism which drains wealth (and thus power) from the stupid.

Most lottery winners lose everything because of frivolous spending.