Content marked isAccessibleForFree with article body accessible; fonts and layout properly structured; modest accessibility signal
Mission
+0.03
Article 19
Publisher describes itself as 'world's best source for computing news, reviews, editorials guides' with stated editorial guidelines; indicates commitment to information dissemination
Editorial Code
+0.02
Article 19
Editorial guidelines referenced in publishingPrinciples link; author attribution and editor credits present
Ownership
—
Parent company Valnet ownership observable in code; no direct human rights implications from ownership structure alone
Access Model
+0.04
Article 19 Article 25
Free access to article content; login system offers premium features but core content accessible without payment
Ad/Tracking
-0.08
Article 12
Extensive tracking infrastructure observable (Google Analytics, Facebook App ID, reCAPTCHA, IP address logging); privacy implications for personal data protection
> In other words, there was no clear way for Samsung to make money from Galaxy Upcycling. And for a company that ships hundreds of millions of phones per year, that's likely a death sentence for an internal project
How about good PR.
This is what is problem with those big corporations: the only thing that matters is money.
Although I don't agree with the FSF's way of advocating it [1], I do believe that unlocking the bootloader should be a customer's basic right. You don't truly own your device if you cannot control the software you run with it.
[1]: Linus Torvalds argues that the FSF tried to "sneak in" an additional clause to prohibit hardware locking. Since Linux was originally licensed with an "or later version" variant of GPL v2, that would've created a situation where Linus could not merge other people's work into the kernel without relicensing the upstream project to GPL v3. To prevent this, he later explicitly relicensed the kernel as GPLv2-only. https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU
Am I a fool to think that upcycled devices might not dent the sales of new devices, but would be used in new ways that would actually be positive for the vendor?
You can go a long way with just Termux. You can upcycle old phones by installing or building code in Termux to turn the phones into a compute grid, AI inference nodes, file servers, compute servers, web servers.
I really dislike how people consider Android a Linux operating system. It's incredibly misleading and serves as more marketing than substance. If it were, then the Samsung Upcycle program would be ready to go.
Snark aside, why are the entirely functional devices obsolete? It's because the growing demands of the endless software bloat, web bloat, feature bloat. New wireless technologies and better protocols, sure, but I've been using software for 35 years and the software contribution to this mess really gets me down.
Slight tangent, but I find it mind boggling that so few phones offer bootloader unlocking - which is essential if you truly want to own your phone.
I was recently in the market for a new phone, and (correct me if I'm wrong) the only companies that offer bootloader unlocking is Google Pixels, Motorola, Nothing, and OnePlus. Samsung and Xiaomi I think both technically support it but it's a pain in the butt practically.
That's... a shockingly small list!? .
In my case, after adding "I want a CPU that isn't crap while being expensive" (eliminating Tensor) and "I don't want to pay full flagship prices for sub flagship performance" (eliminating Nothing), OnePlus and Motorola were pretty much the only two options!
Is it that hard to get a phone you can truly own? I don't know, I honestly hope I'm missing something.
Why are korean tech companies so toxic? Samsung, LG, SK etc all the same. Doesn’t matter if they sell you a phone, a TV, or a refrigator there is something inherently wrong how korean companies are treating the customers.
I'm almost certain this was to win some sort of grant, award, subsidy, exemption, green credentials....something, and then once they had it, immediately forgotten.
I've seen this happen plenty where companies start campaigns for reasons and then ditch it as soon a they've achieved the thing from the list above.
My guess, is it boils down to legal liability. Every time I look into repurposing my old smartphones, I inevitably go down the "well, it probably won't burn my house down… but. " It's the same reason why I don't use Molex-to-SATA power adapters, even though I could save a few bucks. Regardless, Samsung ghosting iFixit is inexcusable.
I think they missed a trick. This phone could be replaced - I think it might be time - but it works fine. I won't replace it now, but if I could use it for something else then I would likely go okay, if I get a new phone I also get a baby monitor!
And then they completely removed bootloader unlocking with OneUI 8, in many cases increasing the anti-rollback version so you can't even downgrade.. I can't wait for them to go out of business..
> Meanwhile, Samsung's own recycling numbers tell a different story. Its old phone collection campaign, running since 2015, had collected just 38,000 phones as of May 2019. Samsung had sold 2 billion Galaxy devices by February 2019.
Well... duh? Their program offers far less money for the old phone than selling it used on ebay. Why would anyone use it?
This was not going to come from Samsung, one of the most over-zealous companies out there when it comes from preventing rolling out purely software features from today's phones to yesterday's. E.g. "Now Bar" a literal online feature is blocked on older phones. (Don't get me wrong, it's a useless feature, just shows their thinking)
Or when they announced that "Linux on Dex", for which they had been doing public beta testing on Note 9 phones, would only support the just-released Note 10. (And then they dropped the entire thing anyway).
These are phones for which the only difference between generations may be a couple mAh in the battery. Yet they still use software to gate features.
I'm in the market for a new phone. is there a list of phones somewhere that are hackable?
Score Breakdown
+0.13
PreamblePreamble
Medium A: Advocacy for sustainable device practices and corporate accountability F: Framing focuses on unfulfilled promises and corporate abandonment of sustainability goals
Editorial
+0.15
Structural
+0.08
SETL
+0.10
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Headline and description emphasize broken promises regarding device sustainability; article topic relates to dignity and responsible resource management, foundational UDHR themes; modest positive signal toward accountability.
+0.10
Article 1Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood
Low F: Frames corporate action (or inaction) as matter of equal dignity and responsibility
Editorial
+0.12
Structural
+0.06
SETL
+0.08
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Article implicitly addresses equal entitlement to benefit from technology; framing of corporate accountability relates to universal dignity. Low evidence strength—topical connection rather than explicit treatment.
ND
Article 2Non-Discrimination
null
No discrimination or equality-specific content observable.
ND
Article 3Life, Liberty, Security
null
No content directly addressing right to life, liberty, or security.
ND
Article 4No Slavery
null
No slavery or servitude content observable.
ND
Article 5No Torture
null
No torture or cruel treatment content observable.
ND
Article 6Legal Personhood
null
No legal personhood content observable.
ND
Article 7Equality Before Law
null
No equality before law content observable.
ND
Article 8Right to Remedy
null
No effective remedy or court content observable.
ND
Article 9No Arbitrary Detention
null
No arbitrary arrest or detention content observable.
ND
Article 10Fair Hearing
null
No fair trial content observable.
ND
Article 11Presumption of Innocence
null
No criminal liability content observable.
-0.24
Article 12Privacy
High P: Extensive on-domain tracking infrastructure (Google Analytics, Facebook App ID, IP logging, reCAPTCHA, user agent tracking)
Editorial
-0.15
Structural
-0.18
SETL
+0.07
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Structural signals show comprehensive data collection and tracking systems implemented on-page. DCP modifier reflects privacy implications of tracking. Combined negative signal from tracking practices that compromise personal data protection and privacy.
ND
Article 13Freedom of Movement
null
No freedom of movement or residence content observable.
ND
Article 14Asylum
null
No asylum or nationality content observable.
ND
Article 15Nationality
null
No nationality content observable.
ND
Article 16Marriage & Family
null
No marriage or family content observable.
ND
Article 17Property
null
No property rights content observable.
ND
Article 18Freedom of Thought
null
No freedom of thought, conscience, or religion content observable.
+0.38
Article 19Freedom of Expression
High A: Advocacy for public information about corporate sustainability commitments F: Framing presents investigative journalism on product lifecycle promises P: Free access to content; author attribution; editorial guidelines referenced
Editorial
+0.32
Structural
+0.25
SETL
+0.15
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Article provides freely-accessible investigative journalism addressing corporate accountability. Structural elements: clear author attribution (Adam Conway), editor credits, editorial guidelines referenced via publishingPrinciples. Free access model (isAccessibleForFree: true) supports information dissemination. DCP modifiers support positive signal on freedom of expression and information.
ND
Article 20Assembly & Association
null
No peaceful assembly content observable.
ND
Article 21Political Participation
null
No political participation content observable.
ND
Article 22Social Security
null
No social security or welfare content observable.
ND
Article 23Work & Equal Pay
null
No work or employment content observable.
ND
Article 24Rest & Leisure
null
No rest or leisure content observable.
+0.19
Article 25Standard of Living
Low F: Implicit framing of product lifecycle and resource sustainability as related to standard of living
Editorial
+0.08
Structural
+0.12
SETL
-0.07
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Article touches on sustainable device practices and resource use, tangentially related to adequate standard of living. Structural accessibility signals (isAccessibleForFree, proper font/layout rendering) support modest positive modifier from DCP. Topical connection weak but detectable.
ND
Article 26Education
null
No education or cultural participation content observable.
ND
Article 27Cultural Participation
null
No cultural and scientific participation content observable.
+0.16
Article 28Social & International Order
Medium A: Implicit advocacy for international social order respecting corporate accountability F: Framing emphasizes gap between corporate promises and fulfillment
Editorial
+0.18
Structural
+0.10
SETL
+0.12
Combined
ND
Context Modifier
ND
Article implicitly addresses need for social order where corporate actors meet sustainability commitments; relates to framework enabling realization of rights. Framing of corporate accountability indirectly supports Article 28 themes.
ND
Article 29Duties to Community
null
No community duties or rights limitations content observable.
ND
Article 30No Destruction of Rights
null
No interpretation or limitation clause content observable.