Yes, you can have a setting that slows the phone down to make it use less power. Hell, you can enable it by default. As long as I can go and disable it. If I find out that the battery then does not last long enough, I'll get the battery replaced - even if it takes special tools to take the phone apart, the phone is not potted and the battery can be replaced.
If the phone is deliberately slowed down with no way to undo it, then even if I replace the battery the phone will be slow (though probably last longer than new).
Over draining a single cell Li battery is not as dangerous as overcharging or reverse charging (happens when you over drain a multi cell battery). However, even for an old battery the cutoff voltage is the same, and I presume that none of Apple and Samsung phones work right down to 0V.
So, having an old battery and full speed phone will only result in the battery discharging faster and the phone turning off. If the battery is really weak (internal resistance too high), the phone might start shutting down when there is higher CPU usage or during a call, but work OK after your turn it back on (this usually is when I replace the battery).
So, what Apple is doing is obfuscating the real and noticeable problem (old battery) which can be fixed by replacing the battery by creating an artificial and less directly noticeable problem of the phone just working slower, which causes the owner to think that the phone is just slow and go buy a new one instead of replacing the battery.
Also, it seems that the self-driving car proponents really dislike owning stuff as usually the next proposal is no personal cars, but only rented time on state (or company) owned cars. So, almost like public transport.
And I can tell you about this, as my country had something like this for 50 years. Personal cars were not common in the USSR, as they were expensive and you also usually had to wait in line for something like 10 years if you wanted to buy a new car (after getting the permission to do so from your workplace). We still see the echoes of that in the overcrowded tiny parking lots for old apartment buildings (at the time, it was expected that there would be one car per 3 - 10 apartments).
And, I guess, people did not need cars. After all, you can take the bus to work and back and take the bus or the train if you wanted to visit some other city. You can even use a taxi if you can afford it. Why would you even want a car?
After the USSR collapsed and cheap used cars from the West became available, everyone bought them.
So, every time when someone brings up the "cars are bad, use public transport" in my country, they forget that that we already had that system and did not like it.
It seems to me that most people who work as programmers make software worse than someone drives while texting and with 0.2% BAC. Would you put your life in the hands of the programmers who produce Windows 10 updates?
Intersections may still be human controlled in my country. I haven't seen a cop controlling traffic around an accident, but I have seen a cop control traffic after a basketball game.
We can pretty much assume that when you take your driving test, you're performing the best that you can.
I really doubt that the stress of the test makes anyone perform their best. Also, people gain experience over time, so, someone who has been driving for a while might be better than someone who may still have to think about how to shift gears.
The principle is simple: people behave better when they're being monitored.
Stick a camera behind me and I will perform worse, because I'll constantly think how to make it look better for the camera rather than drive normally.
There's also the liability issue. If I am not in control of the car, then I should not go to jail if the car runs over a pedestrian (and it WILL happen, at least once somewhere). But who will go to jail for that? The programmer? Would the manufacturer just have to pay a fine?
Because if I am held accountable for something then I want to be in control of it. Why should I pay a fine or go to jail if the programmer fucks up?
Yes, so much better. You just get in your car and it automatically takes you to the gulag.
If the self-driving cars have internet access or remote update capability, I would love to see (from far away) what the terrorists can do with them after hacking the update server.
1. Rent a virtual server or infect a PC in China, use that to hack whatever. The logs will show a China IP. (available for anyone) 2. Spoof the IP at the ISP level (available for the ISP of the server) 3. Mess with routing and make the traffic for the Chinese IP go to your device (available for ISP of the server, a transit ISP and/or national agencies).
How many times have you had your car fixed only to have the problem return soon afterwards.
Maybe it's because I know competent mechanics, very rarely - pretty much only if the problem is very intermittent and the mechanic was not able to reproduce it at all.
Or it maybe that my cars are old and not very complicated. OTOH it takes a bit more competent mechanic to diagnose the problem as there is no port to connect the scan tool.
It also may be that I do some of the repairs myself, especially for the intermittent problems (as I can be there when the problem occurs to try things out instead of going to the mechanic and finding out that the car worked perfectly for him).
1. Primarily use common, standard parts instead of custom ones unless there is a really good reason not to. 2. Make the firmware available for download, so the MCU or the flash chip can be replaced and then flashed. 3. Use standard li-ion batteries, there are various flat li-ion batteries available if one is needed. 4. Whatever custom parts used, make them available to buy or make specifications/drawings available so that others can make those custom parts.
And yes, it may make the device slightly bigger etc. However, I always try to buy devices that are repairable, because I usually intend to use them for a long time.
I currently do not need a different car, but if I needed one, I would primarily look for one that is easy to repair and the parts are widely available and would not buy one that's overly complicated with "features" that only serve to increase the complexity ad reduce reliability. I would rather pay more for the car up front and pay slightly more for the fuel if it was easy to repair and had parts available.
How much of a $50 item would you pay to repair it?
Depends on what's broken, probably $25. I have actually repaired a couple of broken PC power supplies where I paid about the same for the new parts as I did for the PSU itself. The reason is that now the PSU has a fan with ball bearings and proper capacitors.A PSU like that would cost more compared to the original or the cost of the new parts.
I have noticed a consumer mindset in some people though. "My $x is broken, it would cost $40 to repair it, I might as well add $300 more and buy a new one for $340".
Is the IC something I can go and buy at an electronics store, like a capacitor? No problem then. If the IC is something that cannot be bought in a store, for example, a microcontroller with firmware, then the manufacturer should be forced to sell them to anyone who has bought the complete product. The manufacturer should also be forced to make service manuals available to anyone who has bought that product.
But if the product then lasts much longer, then it is better for the environment. If a cell phone can be made to last 10 years, it would affect the environment less than a cheaper cellphone that lasts 2 years.
Taken to the illogical extreme, if we declare that SoC's and IC's are not allowed because they're not "repairable" we'll have to go back to room-sized computers that require dedicated power plants to operate.
How about this: Manufacturer has to publish the service manual for the device, available to anyone who has bought said device. Manufacturer has to sell custom parts for the device (parts that cannot be bought from another store, including programmed microcontrollers if you do not want to publish the firmware) for at least 10 years after release of the device.
If one of chips cracks or burns out, the most expensive part of the iPad is toast. The PCB cannot be unsoldered and repaired for a reasonable cost, you may as well buy a new iPad.
It depends, even BGA chips can be replaced by someone who knows what he's doing and has the right equipment.
But the question is will the change caused by global warming/climate change cost you even more than doing something about it.
As long as high frequency trading is a thing, it won't matter. After all, what matters is the stock price in the next millisecond, maybe the next second. Well, if you are real careful and planning, you would look a whole minute in advance.
Also, if the really big climate problems are 30 years away, then an 80 year old billionaire doesn't care. If the huge problems are 100 years away, then even I don't care. Also, I'd bet that when those huge problems do appear, they won't affect the wealthy.
Is that good? Probably not. But people avoid doing cheaper things to prevent more expensive problems all the time. How many people don't change the oil in their cars as often as they need? After all, if you don't change the oil, nothing bad happens immediately. The problem may come up 10 years later, maybe you'll have a different car by then...
Nah, it's like a seatbelt or airbag. Both will reduce injury to you in an accident, but since the car will need straightening out anyway, nobody drives around bumping into things just because (well, that's why I use a seatbelt and an airbag).
A collision avoidance system that requires consumable parts would help to prevent an accident, but people would still drive the car like it doesn't have that system. So, the system would save you when you make a mistake, but you are still encouraged to not make the mistake.
As it currently is, someone could start relying on that system ("oh, the car stops automatically, I do not need to use the brakes") and then the system fails or the person drives a car that doesn't have it and boom.
And there is no additional decision making - if you see the obstacle (stopped car, tree, pedestrian), you stop the car yourself or go around. If you don't (and the collision avoidance stops the car), then you didn't decide anything.
In my country, it is mandatory for passengers to wear seatbelts. However, if a cop stops you, the passenger without a seatbelt has to pay a fine himself.
But I know of a more weird practice. USSR made cars have seatbelts that do not retract, so a lot of people just put the seatbelts on and did not fasten them. That way it looks like you are wearing a seatbelt to the cop. I never understood this - I mean, you do 99% of the work, so just finish it.
In my opinion, the only place for a menu system in a car would be for completely non-essential functions. Stuff like AC, temperature, fan speed, volume, radio presets, next/previous track (or ff/rw for tape) etc should have dedicated buttons, so that the driver can use them without looking at the screen.
I saw this in one car: 1. If it's cold outside, a message "it's cold outside" pops up every so often on the screen. Unless you dismiss it, you cannot change the station, adjust the fan speed etc. Not only the message is kind of pointless (if the car is outside, then I'll know it's cold when I get to the car, if the car is in a heated garage, then when it cools down enough to display the message, I'll be far from home and not dressed warm enough anyway. 2. If the windshield wash fluid gets low, a light turns on. That's much better than having to check the fluid level every once in a while or finding out that you have no fluid when you need it. However, not only the light comes on, a message appears on the screen every few minutes as well. Why?
I think that the collision avoidance systems should require consumable parts for each activation. If you know that activation of such system prevents a crash, but still costs, say, $20, you would not start relying on that system.
As it is right now, it can be relied on to stop the car in time, until it doesn't.
Yes, the Party does not owe you anything. If you want a personal car, pay 5000 rubles (monthly salary around 300 rubles for a good factory worker, 100 rubles for not-so-good one) and wait in line 5-10 years to get it. No, borrowing money from a bank is not allowed.
But why do you want a personal car anyway? The bus picks you up right near your home and delivers you at your work place at the correct time. After your shift ends, the bus will pick you up and deliver you home. There are food shops near your apartment, you can walk there. All approved destinations have bus routes to them. Why would you want to go anywhere else anyway?
So, yea, the people in my country have lived trough 50 years of this. As soon as cheap used cars from the West became available (after the fall of the USSR), everybody bought one. And even while in the USSR, anyone who was able to get a car did so, even if it meant waiting in line for 5 to 10 years if you wanted a new car (and that's after you got a permission from your workplace etc).
Also, in the USSR, you were provided with an apartment for free, however, the size was limited - it was determined that 5m^2 is enough room for one person, so 5 people would live in a two room 25m^2 apartment. There was no option to move to a larger apartment without having some connections (even if you had the money you saved for, say, 20 years).
Also, in the USSR, the government provided a job for everyone. When you finished university, you had a few choices provided for you - you could usually stay in your home town or you could move to another town. If you chose to move, then you would get an apartment for free. If you chose to stay, then it was assumed that you will continue living with your parents so you do not need an apartment.
The alternative of planning your life entirely around public transit, biking and walking has huge downsides in that you are prevented from going anywhere a lot of time. +30C outside? Stay at home - too hot to walk, bike or sit in a bus with no AC, hope you don't have to go to work today. -30C outside - stay inside, since it's too cold now, hope you don't have to go to work today. A rainstorm - stay inside as the bus stop has no roof, hope you don't have to go to work today. Want to take a two 4U servers (40kg each) - hire somebody to move them, as sure as hell you won't fit them on your bike or carry them even to the bus stop in one go.
If I decide to go to a certain place, I can go to my car NOW (no need to adhere to any schedule), which is a few meters from my house. While in the car, I have AC, heating (if I need either) and the music of my choice at the volume of my choice without having to use headphones. I also can carry more items in the car than I could carry to/from a bus. I can usually drive very close to my destination (especially if the destination is another house or a shopping mall, meaning there's parking very close to it). I can even keep some items in my car all the time in case I need them - no need to carry them to/from my house each time. I can also sit in the car - no need to give up my seat for an old lady etc. And in my car I am either alone or with people I know.
To use public transport, I first have to go to the bus stop etc - the bus does not stop near my house. Then I have to wait for the bus. I can only carry as many items as I can physically carry to the bus in one go - the bus is not going to wait for me to bring 5 2U servers from the office (even if I was trusting enough to leave 4 servers unattended in the bus while I go and bring the fifth one. The bus may not go directly to my destination - I may have to get out at some intermediate bus stop and wait for another bus. Even if it goes directly to the destination, it may take more time than driving (if there is no traffic jams or the area does not have dedicated bus lanes). While in the bus (and waiting for the bus), it may be too hot or too cold. After the bus arrives at the bus stop that is nearest to my destination, it may still be far from the destination.
The only advantages of public transit IMO is that in some limited cases (peak traffic) it may be slightly faster than driving and it may also be cheaper than paying for parking or maintaining/fueling my car.
I guess that's profit protection. I mean if I repair my iPhone, Apple doesn't get money from me. The company that makes the replacement parts gets some money, the person who repairs the phone (if I don't do it myself) gets some money, but not Apple.
And when I get a welder to patch a rust hole in my car, the welder gets some money, the companies that make the welding materials, paint etc gets some money, but the car manufacturer doesn't. Since the welder lives locally and probably spends the money on food etc, the local companies get part of that money and not all of that money leaves my country.
If I bought a new car, most of my money would leave my country and end up in the pockets of various managers and investors, with very little money going to the workers.
I am such a horrible person in that I do not pay the manufacturer continuously for an item I bought and already paid for. Think of the profits and the investors!
Slashdot Mirror
Slowing down like this is unacceptable IMO.
Yes, you can have a setting that slows the phone down to make it use less power. Hell, you can enable it by default. As long as I can go and disable it. If I find out that the battery then does not last long enough, I'll get the battery replaced - even if it takes special tools to take the phone apart, the phone is not potted and the battery can be replaced.
If the phone is deliberately slowed down with no way to undo it, then even if I replace the battery the phone will be slow (though probably last longer than new).
Over draining a single cell Li battery is not as dangerous as overcharging or reverse charging (happens when you over drain a multi cell battery). However, even for an old battery the cutoff voltage is the same, and I presume that none of Apple and Samsung phones work right down to 0V.
So, having an old battery and full speed phone will only result in the battery discharging faster and the phone turning off. If the battery is really weak (internal resistance too high), the phone might start shutting down when there is higher CPU usage or during a call, but work OK after your turn it back on (this usually is when I replace the battery).
So, what Apple is doing is obfuscating the real and noticeable problem (old battery) which can be fixed by replacing the battery by creating an artificial and less directly noticeable problem of the phone just working slower, which causes the owner to think that the phone is just slow and go buy a new one instead of replacing the battery.
Also, it seems that the self-driving car proponents really dislike owning stuff as usually the next proposal is no personal cars, but only rented time on state (or company) owned cars. So, almost like public transport.
And I can tell you about this, as my country had something like this for 50 years. Personal cars were not common in the USSR, as they were expensive and you also usually had to wait in line for something like 10 years if you wanted to buy a new car (after getting the permission to do so from your workplace). We still see the echoes of that in the overcrowded tiny parking lots for old apartment buildings (at the time, it was expected that there would be one car per 3 - 10 apartments).
And, I guess, people did not need cars. After all, you can take the bus to work and back and take the bus or the train if you wanted to visit some other city. You can even use a taxi if you can afford it. Why would you even want a car?
After the USSR collapsed and cheap used cars from the West became available, everyone bought them.
So, every time when someone brings up the "cars are bad, use public transport" in my country, they forget that that we already had that system and did not like it.
It seems to me that most people who work as programmers make software worse than someone drives while texting and with 0.2% BAC.
Would you put your life in the hands of the programmers who produce Windows 10 updates?
Intersections may still be human controlled in my country. I haven't seen a cop controlling traffic around an accident, but I have seen a cop control traffic after a basketball game.
We can pretty much assume that when you take your driving test, you're performing the best that you can.
I really doubt that the stress of the test makes anyone perform their best. Also, people gain experience over time, so, someone who has been driving for a while might be better than someone who may still have to think about how to shift gears.
The principle is simple: people behave better when they're being monitored.
Stick a camera behind me and I will perform worse, because I'll constantly think how to make it look better for the camera rather than drive normally.
There's also the liability issue. If I am not in control of the car, then I should not go to jail if the car runs over a pedestrian (and it WILL happen, at least once somewhere). But who will go to jail for that? The programmer? Would the manufacturer just have to pay a fine?
Because if I am held accountable for something then I want to be in control of it. Why should I pay a fine or go to jail if the programmer fucks up?
Yes, so much better. You just get in your car and it automatically takes you to the gulag.
If the self-driving cars have internet access or remote update capability, I would love to see (from far away) what the terrorists can do with them after hacking the update server.
1. Rent a virtual server or infect a PC in China, use that to hack whatever. The logs will show a China IP. (available for anyone)
2. Spoof the IP at the ISP level (available for the ISP of the server)
3. Mess with routing and make the traffic for the Chinese IP go to your device (available for ISP of the server, a transit ISP and/or national agencies).
How many times have you had your car fixed only to have the problem return soon afterwards.
Maybe it's because I know competent mechanics, very rarely - pretty much only if the problem is very intermittent and the mechanic was not able to reproduce it at all.
Or it maybe that my cars are old and not very complicated. OTOH it takes a bit more competent mechanic to diagnose the problem as there is no port to connect the scan tool.
It also may be that I do some of the repairs myself, especially for the intermittent problems (as I can be there when the problem occurs to try things out instead of going to the mechanic and finding out that the car worked perfectly for him).
1. Primarily use common, standard parts instead of custom ones unless there is a really good reason not to.
2. Make the firmware available for download, so the MCU or the flash chip can be replaced and then flashed.
3. Use standard li-ion batteries, there are various flat li-ion batteries available if one is needed.
4. Whatever custom parts used, make them available to buy or make specifications/drawings available so that others can make those custom parts.
And yes, it may make the device slightly bigger etc. However, I always try to buy devices that are repairable, because I usually intend to use them for a long time.
I currently do not need a different car, but if I needed one, I would primarily look for one that is easy to repair and the parts are widely available and would not buy one that's overly complicated with "features" that only serve to increase the complexity ad reduce reliability. I would rather pay more for the car up front and pay slightly more for the fuel if it was easy to repair and had parts available.
How much of a $50 item would you pay to repair it?
Depends on what's broken, probably $25.
I have actually repaired a couple of broken PC power supplies where I paid about the same for the new parts as I did for the PSU itself. The reason is that now the PSU has a fan with ball bearings and proper capacitors.A PSU like that would cost more compared to the original or the cost of the new parts.
I have noticed a consumer mindset in some people though. "My $x is broken, it would cost $40 to repair it, I might as well add $300 more and buy a new one for $340".
Is the IC something I can go and buy at an electronics store, like a capacitor? No problem then.
If the IC is something that cannot be bought in a store, for example, a microcontroller with firmware, then the manufacturer should be forced to sell them to anyone who has bought the complete product. The manufacturer should also be forced to make service manuals available to anyone who has bought that product.
But if the product then lasts much longer, then it is better for the environment. If a cell phone can be made to last 10 years, it would affect the environment less than a cheaper cellphone that lasts 2 years.
Taken to the illogical extreme, if we declare that SoC's and IC's are not allowed because they're not "repairable" we'll have to go back to room-sized computers that require dedicated power plants to operate.
How about this:
Manufacturer has to publish the service manual for the device, available to anyone who has bought said device.
Manufacturer has to sell custom parts for the device (parts that cannot be bought from another store, including programmed microcontrollers if you do not want to publish the firmware) for at least 10 years after release of the device.
If one of chips cracks or burns out, the most expensive part of the iPad is toast. The PCB cannot be unsoldered and repaired for a reasonable cost, you may as well buy a new iPad.
It depends, even BGA chips can be replaced by someone who knows what he's doing and has the right equipment.
Why update the printer at all? I mean it's not like the printer is accessible from the internet and could be hacked.
But the question is will the change caused by global warming/climate change cost you even more than doing something about it.
As long as high frequency trading is a thing, it won't matter. After all, what matters is the stock price in the next millisecond, maybe the next second. Well, if you are real careful and planning, you would look a whole minute in advance.
Also, if the really big climate problems are 30 years away, then an 80 year old billionaire doesn't care. If the huge problems are 100 years away, then even I don't care. Also, I'd bet that when those huge problems do appear, they won't affect the wealthy.
Is that good? Probably not. But people avoid doing cheaper things to prevent more expensive problems all the time. How many people don't change the oil in their cars as often as they need? After all, if you don't change the oil, nothing bad happens immediately. The problem may come up 10 years later, maybe you'll have a different car by then...
Nah, it's like a seatbelt or airbag. Both will reduce injury to you in an accident, but since the car will need straightening out anyway, nobody drives around bumping into things just because (well, that's why I use a seatbelt and an airbag).
A collision avoidance system that requires consumable parts would help to prevent an accident, but people would still drive the car like it doesn't have that system. So, the system would save you when you make a mistake, but you are still encouraged to not make the mistake.
As it currently is, someone could start relying on that system ("oh, the car stops automatically, I do not need to use the brakes") and then the system fails or the person drives a car that doesn't have it and boom.
And there is no additional decision making - if you see the obstacle (stopped car, tree, pedestrian), you stop the car yourself or go around. If you don't (and the collision avoidance stops the car), then you didn't decide anything.
In my country, it is mandatory for passengers to wear seatbelts. However, if a cop stops you, the passenger without a seatbelt has to pay a fine himself.
But I know of a more weird practice. USSR made cars have seatbelts that do not retract, so a lot of people just put the seatbelts on and did not fasten them. That way it looks like you are wearing a seatbelt to the cop. I never understood this - I mean, you do 99% of the work, so just finish it.
In my opinion, the only place for a menu system in a car would be for completely non-essential functions. Stuff like AC, temperature, fan speed, volume, radio presets, next/previous track (or ff/rw for tape) etc should have dedicated buttons, so that the driver can use them without looking at the screen.
I saw this in one car:
1. If it's cold outside, a message "it's cold outside" pops up every so often on the screen. Unless you dismiss it, you cannot change the station, adjust the fan speed etc. Not only the message is kind of pointless (if the car is outside, then I'll know it's cold when I get to the car, if the car is in a heated garage, then when it cools down enough to display the message, I'll be far from home and not dressed warm enough anyway.
2. If the windshield wash fluid gets low, a light turns on. That's much better than having to check the fluid level every once in a while or finding out that you have no fluid when you need it. However, not only the light comes on, a message appears on the screen every few minutes as well. Why?
I think that the collision avoidance systems should require consumable parts for each activation. If you know that activation of such system prevents a crash, but still costs, say, $20, you would not start relying on that system.
As it is right now, it can be relied on to stop the car in time, until it doesn't.
Yes, the Party does not owe you anything. If you want a personal car, pay 5000 rubles (monthly salary around 300 rubles for a good factory worker, 100 rubles for not-so-good one) and wait in line 5-10 years to get it. No, borrowing money from a bank is not allowed.
But why do you want a personal car anyway? The bus picks you up right near your home and delivers you at your work place at the correct time. After your shift ends, the bus will pick you up and deliver you home. There are food shops near your apartment, you can walk there. All approved destinations have bus routes to them. Why would you want to go anywhere else anyway?
So, yea, the people in my country have lived trough 50 years of this. As soon as cheap used cars from the West became available (after the fall of the USSR), everybody bought one. And even while in the USSR, anyone who was able to get a car did so, even if it meant waiting in line for 5 to 10 years if you wanted a new car (and that's after you got a permission from your workplace etc).
Also, in the USSR, you were provided with an apartment for free, however, the size was limited - it was determined that 5m^2 is enough room for one person, so 5 people would live in a two room 25m^2 apartment. There was no option to move to a larger apartment without having some connections (even if you had the money you saved for, say, 20 years).
Also, in the USSR, the government provided a job for everyone. When you finished university, you had a few choices provided for you - you could usually stay in your home town or you could move to another town. If you chose to move, then you would get an apartment for free. If you chose to stay, then it was assumed that you will continue living with your parents so you do not need an apartment.
If the only place to get off the road to is the ditch, then sure as hell I can stop on the road. Unless you say that I shoudl try to run over a moose.
The alternative of planning your life entirely around public transit, biking and walking has huge downsides in that you are prevented from going anywhere a lot of time. +30C outside? Stay at home - too hot to walk, bike or sit in a bus with no AC, hope you don't have to go to work today. -30C outside - stay inside, since it's too cold now, hope you don't have to go to work today. A rainstorm - stay inside as the bus stop has no roof, hope you don't have to go to work today. Want to take a two 4U servers (40kg each) - hire somebody to move them, as sure as hell you won't fit them on your bike or carry them even to the bus stop in one go.
How about this:
If I decide to go to a certain place, I can go to my car NOW (no need to adhere to any schedule), which is a few meters from my house. While in the car, I have AC, heating (if I need either) and the music of my choice at the volume of my choice without having to use headphones. I also can carry more items in the car than I could carry to/from a bus. I can usually drive very close to my destination (especially if the destination is another house or a shopping mall, meaning there's parking very close to it). I can even keep some items in my car all the time in case I need them - no need to carry them to/from my house each time. I can also sit in the car - no need to give up my seat for an old lady etc. And in my car I am either alone or with people I know.
To use public transport, I first have to go to the bus stop etc - the bus does not stop near my house. Then I have to wait for the bus. I can only carry as many items as I can physically carry to the bus in one go - the bus is not going to wait for me to bring 5 2U servers from the office (even if I was trusting enough to leave 4 servers unattended in the bus while I go and bring the fifth one. The bus may not go directly to my destination - I may have to get out at some intermediate bus stop and wait for another bus. Even if it goes directly to the destination, it may take more time than driving (if there is no traffic jams or the area does not have dedicated bus lanes). While in the bus (and waiting for the bus), it may be too hot or too cold. After the bus arrives at the bus stop that is nearest to my destination, it may still be far from the destination.
The only advantages of public transit IMO is that in some limited cases (peak traffic) it may be slightly faster than driving and it may also be cheaper than paying for parking or maintaining/fueling my car.
I guess that's profit protection. I mean if I repair my iPhone, Apple doesn't get money from me. The company that makes the replacement parts gets some money, the person who repairs the phone (if I don't do it myself) gets some money, but not Apple.
And when I get a welder to patch a rust hole in my car, the welder gets some money, the companies that make the welding materials, paint etc gets some money, but the car manufacturer doesn't. Since the welder lives locally and probably spends the money on food etc, the local companies get part of that money and not all of that money leaves my country.
If I bought a new car, most of my money would leave my country and end up in the pockets of various managers and investors, with very little money going to the workers.
I am such a horrible person in that I do not pay the manufacturer continuously for an item I bought and already paid for. Think of the profits and the investors!
Or, you know, get a mechanic to weld the required places and it will be good. Probably no different than patching a rust hole.