this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
13 points (66.7% liked)

Technology

58942 readers
3531 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Apple played into the greenwashing since a long time. For example removing charger for "climate", "ecology", while changing the cable port from a usb A (the rectangle one you plug onto the charger) to a usb C when first removing the charger from the box (thanks for bringing this s* to android too).

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Removing the charger from the box does have an environmental benefit. It's less plastic and manufacturing, and makes the packaging smaller meaning they can ship more products causing fewer transportation emissions.

That it also saves them money is just a massive boon to them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

“Carbon offsets” is a scam like recycling.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought the change to usb c was because of the EU law?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

They all do.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was all in favour until I saw it was a Chinese research organisation.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

For what it’s worth, the organization is reportedly well regarded as a climate-focused NPO. But their claim of “climate-washing” (which is a new term to me; I’ve only ever heard “green-washing” before) is pretty weak at the moment. They don’t provide any actual evidence of wrongdoing, just a lack of proof of rightdoing (see I can do it too). The issue they cite is simply that Apple doesn’t require carbon emissions reporting from all of the associated factories, so it’s hard to substantiate the lofty claim of carbon neutrality.

So it’s like claiming you lied about donating to charity because you aren’t showing receipts; it’s certainly much more likely that you’re lying about it, but it’s not proof at all.