there is no ethical consumption under capitalism is only really a defense when the acts are otherwise necessary in some way. a fake image for b roll in your post is hardly a worthwhile use, and takes away from artists whom could have been asked for their piece.
they didnt strike gold, they are trying to inflict their value crash on the public market. effects will be far reaching, including but not limited to people's retirement plans.
Enshittification names the problem and proposes a solution. It’s not just a way to say ‘things are getting worse’ (though of course, it’s fine with me if you want to use it that way. It’s an English word. We don’t have der Rat für Englisch Rechtschreibung. English is a free for all. Go nuts, meine Kerle).
Also, as a note, enshittification being a process it can still be pretty clear when you are in the midst of it, rather than just valid to use at the end. this is most likely where you see most of the "misusage" of the term. regardless, the rot is absolutely visible to people, and a dictionary's job is to catalgue woros as they are used.
nah it's actually pretty low, toothpaste isnt in your mouth for a huge amount of time and it needs to be a certain level of nontoxic for edibility. this is why dentists still do fluoride soaks. the fluoride in the water also accumulates in and hardens bones a bit, though not a ton.
yes fluoride diffuses into enamel and chemically and mechanically hardens it. this effect is strongly linked to better dental outcomes for children and adults. also, tons of places actually remove fluoride to the needed levels because it is naturally higher.
the "always conquered" thing, this is a fatalism only justified by it being what happened, not what always must happen. this is an incredibly important distinction.
that's not how that works, we cant regrow (most) vital organs (liver says hi) because of "engineering problems" not because evolution is random. we personify adaptations to understand them, it can lead to issues but yours is a massive overcorrection.
there is not a single thing that could wipe out a deep sea habitat that wouldnt also wipe any space colonies. but i dont see anybody arguing for that, despite being far more achievable and practical. also, there is no feasible way for space colonies to be self sufficient anywhere in the near future, so wiping out earth also wipes out space colonies relying on it for supplies. this argument aboOt survivability is absurd.
the us largely does not charge for bags directly, they are a consumable that is part of the store's customer overhead. At cost each bag is around 3 cents, and probably holds 15 to 50 dollars of merchandise that is being sold at around 2% net profit generally.
people often keep the bags and use them for other stuff, like trash bags or plastic linings or makeshift gloves. not everyone does. it's wasteful, yes, though on net carbon impact it's probably lower than plastic reusable bags and many plant fabric ones given a plastic industry exists anyway.
well you can define when the efficiency is impressive or not to you, now people can go look at the numbers. 20% is pretty substantial, but if you are disappointed it's not 90% then i dont know what to tell ya
you'll notice that by capacity chest freezers are more efficient. There are a lot of factors stacked in their favor though:
cold air sinks as mentioned above, while not the majority of the thermal mass in a fridge you lose quite a bit every time anyway.
convection is a lot stronger than people often realize, and upright freezers are more prone to unforced convection, especially because of the aforementioned air loss (replaced by warm air flowinginto and out of)
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism is only really a defense when the acts are otherwise necessary in some way. a fake image for b roll in your post is hardly a worthwhile use, and takes away from artists whom could have been asked for their piece.