I'm sorry that you expect each unknowing consumer to have the intellectual capacity to understand the geopolitical consequences of each product they by based on the environmental damage and human rights violations during its production.

It's almost like you're the fool for expecting such a flawed system to work. Saying, "well, you paid me to do it!" does not absolve you of guilt.

Source?

"It's not our fault, we just produce cheap goods, the pollution is the fault of the people buying the goods"

If your products are cheap because you're polluting, you are the problem. If you weren't polluting, your products wouldn't be as cheap. If your products weren't as cheap, they wouldn't be competitive on the capitalist market. If they weren't competitive, they wouldn't be bought.

Native English speaker here. Option 4 "sounds" more acceptable than 2. Maybe it's because you can more easily imply where the flowers are?

I'm a fan of it but wish there was a Linux app and an easier way to sync my data between devices. I have the backup files synced with Nextcloud but it's still not intuitive.

Welcome to Linux, friends

2. Bash scripts which updates my system (not completely, snaps and flatpaks seem to be immune to this). I am pretty sure you can't do this on Windows.

Can't you just add a line in the script

flatpak update

I hate it. It's pointless, it slows me down, its a risk of theft, and it costs me money.

Exactly this. Most G20 countries had reduced coal emissions but China and India (plus Indonesia and Turkey) had increased coal emissions per capita. Because those countries account for ~3 billion people, nearly 40% of the world population, and an even greater percentage of G20 population, the total coal emissions of G20 has increased.

I'm agreeing that depleted uranium weapons are a bad idea. I'm disagreeing that someone is illiterate for not believing an opinionated source.

I could easily quote Wikipedia just as the prior comment quoted OP's article:

The U.S. Department of Defense claims that no human cancer of any type has been seen as a result of exposure to either natural or depleted uranium.

Surely the DoD has at least some scientific research, no? It would be foolish to take this quote and believe that depleted uranium is safe, and it would be even more foolish to insult someone's intelligence for not doing so.

What are you on about? @rogrodre@hexbear.net was doing exactly the thing that you're describing. Treating statements from an organization called "The Coalition to Ban Something" as fact, without any other review, is only believing information that confirms your beliefs.

That's not the same thing at all.

The comment above mine is more akin to wanting to ban water because the Coalition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide said so. Or wanting to ban abortion because Americans United for Life said they're immoral. Or to increase fossil fuel usage because OPEC said it isn't bad for the environment. You're citing an opinionated secondary source without even considering the other side.

If you want facts, you go to unbiased, peer reviewed primary sources. Or at least hear both sides. If you want opinions, go to a "coalition to ban something."

The comment 2 above mine was saying that depleted uranium's effects are up for debate. The next commenter provided only one side of the argument and claimed that it was fact, even mocking their literacy for not seeing it.

If only the world were so simple that we could trust the organization tasked with banning the substance rather than reading primary sources.

I agree that depleted uranium shouldn't be used, but your quote from the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons means nothing.

Who the fuck uses instagram for group chats?

Just checking: this is using a different PrivateKey and Address than the Windows and Android devices?

Fairphone sounds great but currently has a poor price to performance ratio

Yes, but what does race account for that income and location do not? Unless you're a racist, not very much.

Why not use income and where you live rather than race, then?

As opposed to....? Are you saying that collective ownership over the means of production would solve this problem, or that under communism people just simply wouldn't be able to have cars?

I agree with your edit. Those below the poverty line shouldn't/can't finance an EV battery. Combustion cars can be purchased for ~$500 and are usually fixable for only a few hundred dollars with enough time and tools. Most engine problems are more expensive in labor than in parts, so almost anyone can fix for cheap with YouTube tutorials. If all else fails, junk yards are full of parts, including engines and transmissions.

Even if EVs may have better reliability, when it comes time to sell it, someone in poverty can't afford to buy and fix it. The raw materials in the battery are worth too much, and the batteries don't last forever.

People may not have (or have access to) banking, financing, etc and shouldn't need to finance everything in their life. Financing is like a tax on the poor.

Hopefully these things change in the future, public transit improves, we make combustion cars cleaner, or batteries get cheaper, but right now it's the poorest that will be paying most for this environmental crisis.