CarbonIceDragon

Honestly I like it. I really like that kind of wood paneling as it just gives me very cosy vibes for some reason, the ceiling contrasts that and feels bright, and the floor, while tacky, adds color in a way that I feel looks interesting. Red's not exactly the color I would have chosen, but I do think I'd have gone for a similarly bright color given the option. Carpet in the bathroom though, is just gross.

That's a pretty ominous name for a png file to be honest

I dont know the details, but Ive heard of companies that do this, or kits that can be used for it, existing, though I can only imagine that changing a car that one's business has not manufactured and was never designed for such a conversion must take a lot of manual work, which would be expensive before even considering things like the cost of batteries.

To be fair, the delivery really is handy if you're shopping for something niche enough that it isn't sold locally, or if you don't have a car and are trying to buy something not sold within walking distance/within easy access to transit if available, or which is too heavy to carry without a vehicle. There's definitely a point here about local stores not being able to compete or with Amazon's monopolistic business practices though. The ideal thing I suppose would be some sort of website that local stores could sign up with to let people order stuff from to be delivered by the store or by a service the store uses, run as a non-profiting venture just at breakeven to avoid a motive to exploit stores that use it and have less individual power, combined with some kind of law against averaging shipping costs into the base costs of products and making shipping seem free, so as to ensure that local items are generally cheaper due to less needed transportation. In such a scenario, the central online shopping area wouldn't end up as a competitor to smaller local stores since it wouldn't actually sell anything itself, customers would be encouraged to buy items that take less transportation and thus fewer carbon emissions, and the convenience of having an online space in which almost everything for sale can be found and delivered can be preserved.

They think they have defeated the United States by wiping it from the map, but in their hubris, they have foolishly forgetten about Puerto Rico.

That just looks like the French took a cheeseburger and fries meal, stuffed the fries inside the burger, then replaced the bread with their own to make it slightly more french.

What about Flanders fries then?

To be fair, carbon capture does not have to entirely offset all of global emissions to be useful, it only does if you're trying to use it as a single solution to climate change by itself. But if you were using it to augment a reduction in emissions you'd need less of it, or if you do eventually reach net zero global emissions someday, but want to slowly reduce carbon already there to bring the world back to the temperatures that used to exist, you could do so more slowly as a long term project.

Might it depend on the specifics? Im unsure what the relevant laws are here, but it's easy to imagine that offering a special discount to, say, non-smokers, would be considered far more acceptable than offering a discount only to men

Lemmy, sure, but probably not the fediverse I'd guess, since the most popular fedi platform is mastodon, meant to recreate Twitter rather than Reddit

Id imagine the issue isn't "not showing some people ads", they probably just got different ads instead if these are the regularly placed ads being talked about.

The article mentions something about this being started by someone who went to Facebook looking for an insurance provider though, so this sounds more like if Amazon didn't show certain product listings to people of some specific category for one reason or another- those listings are technically advertising a product, but they're something one actually does want to see, when shopping for something relevant to the listing at least. If, say, some company wanted to offer a product at a discount, but only wanted to offer that discount to a certain category of person for some reason, it'd be pretty scummy of the online retailer to comply and only show other people that product at the more expensive price, or not at all.

Is it actually? As far as I'm aware, it doesn't really make any statements that anything is moral or immoral, nor is it a framework that could be used to determine such things by itself, more so a statement on the validity of such things. Or in other word, is it really a moral thesis, or is it a thesis about moral thesis?