I used to agree with you about the reusability of things. It&#x27;s sad to throw away a powerful computer&#x2F;camera&#x2F;phone&#x2F;etc just because the latest app doesn&#x27;t work and it&#x27;s too difficult to repurpose the old components.<p>Nowdays, I consciously rationalize and think that tiny camera only cost a few cents to make. It&#x27;s not actually a valuable item worth preserving. Sure it would have been an amazing treasure a few decades ago, but now it&#x27;s common and worthless. Perhaps quite similar to parts of a human body - very powerful when they&#x27;re working together but utterly useless when they&#x27;re removed or broken. Even long lasting parts like bones have very specialized shapes and internal structure that make them hard to re-purpose.<p>I still don&#x27;t understand what you mean by quality. What makes this guy&#x27;s photos mediocre? The one on the Donald Trump website looks exactly like I&#x27;d expect a photo of a politician to look. How can it tell a story? Does he need a sequence of photos showing something changing with time? It&#x27;s just a person, not an event. The guy&#x27;s just a stock photo photographer taking pictures for people who don&#x27;t need context around them, not a journalist telling a story about a specific event.