Slashdot Mirror
Almost Nothing About the 'Apple Harvests Gold From iPhones' Story Is True (vice.com)
Jason Koebler, reporting for Motherboard: You may have seen a viral headline floating around over the last few days: Apple recycled $40 million worth of gold last year, which was extracted from iPhones. Almost none of what was reported is true. [...] Here is the truth: Apple paid independent recyclers to recycle old electronics -- which were almost never Apple products, by the way -- because it's required by law to do so. Far from banking $40 million on the prospect, Apple likely ended up taking an overall monetary loss. This is not because Apple is a bad actor or is hiding anything, it's simply how the industry works. All electronics manufacturers that sell products in the United States are required to do e-waste recycling under laws enacted in 25 states. The laws are different in each state, but none of them require Apple to recycle Apple products. Instead, they usually require manufacturers to recycle a certain amount of pounds of e-waste, which is linked to either their market share or to the overall weight of products they sell. That's why you see Apple noting that it recycled "71 percent of the total weight of products we sold seven years earlier."
As long as they do it, it's a good thing.
How does the author take a statement such as "Apple recycled $40 million worth of gold from phones last year" and basically end up with "that's not true because it wasn't $40 million in profits"?
#DeleteChrome
Don't think one set of facts will change the original emotionally generated stories. The common view is that facts don't matter, it's what people "feel" that counts.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
why is the seven years earlier relevant ?
it seems a bit long to be based on the expected lifetime of the product, considering apple expects users to replace their devices every 3 years.
And? Most stories reported on the Internet are not true. They are just clickbait. Slashdot is continuing this proud tradition. Click here to see the shocking details of what happens next!
Why is why I killed my Newspaper subscription and watch less news on TV.
The are far more interested in bullshit hype than the truth. And Slashdot is certainly full of both as Apple/Microsoft/Google/OSX/IOS/Android/Windows/Linux haters try to peddle stories that are simply not true in the belief they are doing something great to support their platform.
I have used computers since having to load stuff via Cassette tape and my first disk OS was CPM2.2.
I eat what I like, I wear what I like, I drive what I like, and I will use what ever computer I like, NONE of which makes any difference to anyone else's life and none of the bullshit stories will change anyones choices.
Who said anything about Apple making any money on the effort? What exactly is the alleged falsehood? As far as I can tell, the article never actually identifies an inaccuracy in anything that has been reported.
They recovered $40 million in gold that they would have otherwise had to buy. At the same time, they handled e-waste responsibly and paid for whatever that cost to do. Even if the cost of the recycling was $50 million and they lost some money (for which this dumbass offers zero evidence), the net is reduced by the fact that they recovered some valuable and usable material from the effort.
It's a complete strawman to suggest that ANYONE believes recycling is a moneymaker. It's just a responsible thing to do that most companies hate to pay for. Who cares whether Apple is doing it voluntarily? The only thing that matters is that they are doing it. Brownie points are for children.
> How does the author take a statement such as "Apple recycled $40 million worth of gold from phones last year"
That's false because the article is based on data that isn't about recycling phones. Mostly it's CRT televisions and monitors. So if we take out the incorrect words "from phones", we get "Apple recycled $40 million worth of gold". Of course "Apple recycled" isn't true either, so take that out. The (possibly) true part is "$40 million worth of gold". So half the words are true, half aren't.
Reduce, reuse, repair, recycle.
It's nice to see some progress on the recycle part.
Soon, the little shit will pass by with her fucker-of-the-day winner here. It's almost like as a peacock, as if the fact she is a Faceturd full of photoshit wasn't enought to already make my mind it ISN'T my type of girl.
Does this mean the smoldering pile of iPhones in my back yard will not make me rich? At least I my vial of tears from former iPhone owners.
I have not trusted TV since monopolization was allowed and the TV all became the same company with the same owners, stories, and spin. Oh, it took a bit to move that way so that it was not too obvious, but as countless journalists warned it happened. The AP with the same spin is intermixed with slightly different fairy stories to claim "we are different".
Newspapers suffered the same fate, and now primarily have the same owners with the same AP stories and spin. Mixed with some slightly different fairy stories to claim "we are different".
Funny how well this has worked. I had someone argue with me that my facts, with easily searchable backing, is trope and emotionally driven. While their opinion with zero factual basis is better than facts. I wish I was joking.
I have very little faith in humanity today. Maybe I should just start taking the drugs and join Facebook....
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Almost nothing of any Apple-sponsored story is actually true. This company seems to operate it's marketing department like a propaganda arm these days. A very effective one at that.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Well, I once was a part of this industry. Some people were interested of buying ifones "directly from the Chinese OEM"circa 2007-2009. But there were no such thing, foxconn was just selling refurbished units. Later, Apple expressively ordered them to destroy them instead of remarketing. Apple also intimidated Alibaba to delist refurbished iphones from their websites under a threat of a lawsuit.
iPhones and other mobile phones have more gold per unit weight than almost any other consumer electronics, and they are much more valuable than gold ore ... if, and only if, they can be collected and processed in very high volume. Apple is not in the high volume business of smelting and refining iPhones, so of course it contracts with a subcontract electronics recycling industry that has existed for decades to recover gold. And that industry puts all gold-bearing electronics, e.g. mobile phones, circuit boards, connectors, into large process-efficient batches. A batch is smelted in copper, and after the copper is removed the residue is further refined for precious metal content. After all of this no one can trace a molecule of gold back to a specific source, but It is entirely possible that $40 million in gold from that industry is fairly attributable to recycled Apple iPhones. Whether Apple receives a payment for its collection and delivery of iPhones and other electronic scrap into the electronics recycling industry, or a credit against costs, seems irrelevant to its goal of putting raw materials back into commerce, rather than disposing of them.
Please tell me I can still show off the Apple logo to everyone in the coffee shop.
Only if t's the latest model otherwise it's worst than having a copy of Mein Kampf with highlighted sections and multiple bookmarks.
lucm, indeed.
I accidentally burned my Macbook Pro in the firepit in the backyard two years ago. I had tossed the wrong box in the fire (I had two boxes... one had cardboard in it, the other had my Macbook Pro and a couple of boxes in it and I mixed them up). My GF at the time asked me "is that your Macbook in there?"
oops.
Not a tear was shed though. I laughed about it - because I loathed the thing. Chicklet keyboard, much of the assembly glued together to make it as unrepairable and un-upgradable as possible (Apple is very likely THE least green tech company in existence) so I rarely used it, instead preferring my much older and very rugged (albeit heavy and ugly) Del Precision M6400.
At work I could have had a new Macbook Pro (with "Retina" display, yadda yadda yadda) or a Dell Latitude E6540. I picked the Dell. When I get an upgrade at work, I'll very likely choose the Dell over the Crapple again because I telecommute and in a pinch I can crack open the Dell and have it repaired in minutes, whereas with Apple I need to bake the thing to loosen the adhesive, pry it apart, perform a rain dance, pray to several gods, and hope that nothing warps or craps while disassembling it, and then reassemble it and wait for adhesives to cure. Thanks, but no thanks.
Apple is grossly irresponsible and the furthest they can get from being "green" as they can be - they've made huge efforts to tear the environment a new asshole.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Don't think one set of facts will change the original emotionally generated stories. The common view is that facts don't matter, it's what people "feel" that counts
No sweetie. That is what they tell you to think. And you are obviously stupid enough to believe them.
If facts don't matter, then how come companies like Apple spend so much money disguising them?
If there is no such thing as bad PR then how come companies spend so much money managing theirs?
If the spec don't matter, how come Apple insist on distinguishing models with retina displays?
If you lie to yourself, how can we trust anything you ever say to anybody?
How can you?
Q. How can you tell if someone has an apple product?
A. Just wait, they'll tell you.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
No, Apple didn't send the TVs anywhere. Apple sent a check to a recycling company in exchange for X million pounds of their recycling credits, as required by law.