I can't even remember the last circus I went to that had performing animals - not sure if I've ever seen one. It's been a couple of decades now that the main spectacles of circuses has been acrobats, clowns (slaptstick acrobats), and various types of stunts/daredevils. All human.

I think the only reason I know about the role animals have played in circuses is cultural history...

Attenborough's documentaries over the last few years have often included a special episode at the end of the series, highlighting the deterioration of the environments they've been filming in. I recall reading that these "bonus" episodes aren't usually included in the American broadcasts as they're considered too "too political".

His series didn't used to be like that, however he is literally the person who invented the nature documentary format, with his first program being being broadcast in 1954. He's 96 now, and he's one of the few people who has witnessed first-hand how the world's biomes have been transformed by our hand. As he's gotten older, he's become more and more of a campaigner for protecting the environment.

Rather than yearning for feel-good Disney fluff, perhaps you should consider the decliing positivity of our nature documentaries as a warning that our world's ecosystems are also in decline.

GP referred to government control, not nationalisation. In this case, as a majority shareholder the government got the right to make its own nominations for the board and have a proportional influence on day-to-day operations.

It worked in the UK. They didn't just bail out the banks for free, the gave the money in return for equity & became major shareholders. Within a couple of years the banks managed to buy out all the equity and the Government even ended up coming away with a profit.

The Russians presumably have more control over GLONASS, perhaps even being able to perform some sort of tracking - which an aggressor certainly wouldn't want.

Making economic predictions is more akin to trying to predict the weather. Both have a waaaay higher number of variables that impact the outcome. Orbital mechanics is comparatively simple - everything's a spherical cow in a near vacuum.

Considering the cost of a comparably large ESX installation, with all of the the extra licenced features that you could achieve with OpenStack, employing a qualified team dedicated to running it becomes a very viable option.

It's one of the things we frequently complain about with corporatism, where "manager types" prefer to spend large amounts of money on providers so they can outsource responsibility/blame, instead of simply investing the money in quality engineers who can hold their shit together.

No, the problem is that Apple wasn't including any charger in the ticket price. The charger is extra, and in Brazil it's not cheap.

Taiwanese companies are not Taiwan. And Chinese threats are forcing those companies to invest less in Taiwan and more in other countries. That ultimately hurts Taiwan: less exports, less taxes, less jobs.

TSMC isn't Taiwan, it's a private company. Taiwan benefits from TSMC (among others) choosing to base their operations there, manufacturing high value exports, creating jobs, and attracting world-class talent.

It together with the rest of the semiconductor industry constitutes about 15 percent of Taiwan's GDP, and the company makes up about one-third of the value on the Taiwanese stock market.

As I tried to make obvious with my addendum, a point that many appear to have missed, I don't believe in any malicious intent or planned abandonment here. But it's an undeniable fact that China's threats are making the industry nervous about the security of making further large investments in the country and incentivising its core industries to start diversifying into other countries. Something that ultimately hurts its bottom line: less exports & less jobs.

1. Threaten tiny island;
2. Wait for their industry & economic powerhouses to flee;
3. Watch as the world abandons the tiny little island that no longer has anything of value;
4. Profit!

Okay, distorted and massively oversimplified, however just by shaking its fist at Taiwan, China is forcing the world to become less dependent on it - weakening both its economy and its political influence.
Once the world no longer needs Taiwan's services & industry, it'll just become another territorial pawn.

I was only explaining the rationale behind the system, I defend neither. I lean towards proportional representation, however that does come at the cost of (losing) local representation.

I just checked on the term limits and we're both wrong! It's 5 years. Although elections are often held earlier, to allow the controlling party to choose the most opportune moment.

Coalitions are more common in other, representative, democracies. Those break apart far more easily, and when they do, it causes the Government to lose its majority. If the Government is then unable to negotiate another majority coalition, it forces a General Election.

The UK uses First-Past-the-Post (like the US), which is designed to try to ensure the winning party gets an outright majority and avoid parliamentary gridlock.

For a general election to be forced in the UK, it'd require members of the ruling party to withdraw their support from their own party and effectively hand the reigns of government to the opposition. The members would then face the stark choice of either defecting, quitting politics, or getting kicked out of the party.

The difference in the UK is that we don't elect the leader/Prime Minister, we elect the party. The party won its 4 years in power in 2019.

Now, there are genuine questions on the party's mandate, as it was elected on the manifesto of two leaders ago, however for as long as they're able to cobble together a leader & cabinet, there's no mechanism to force the party to call a general election early.

And of course, they will do whatever's possible to avoid a general election because it's an almost forgone conclusion that they'll lose.

Amphetamines can hardly be described as having a doping zombie effect.

ADHD is caused by a dopamine deficiency.

Kids on amphetamines, with ADHD, are able to sit still & concentrate more easily without having to seek stimuli externally.
Kids on amphetamines, without ADHD, will become over stimulated & turn the house upside down.

Stop this misinformed rhetoric, it's harmful!

(See my earlier comment.)