leicsmac

That's a possibility, but I would think it's also a pretty drastic move that the Trump team would only take if they really felt they had to IMO.

Fair points, so much better since the Lotto funding. Just a little disappointing at all the near-misses - this Olympics might be team GB's lowest gold count in 20 years.

If they do lose in November, I expect their respective egos will take over and they'll blame each other.

...have team GB got some longstanding investments in silver or something? Seems to be all they're gathering right now.

Well, fvck. Another missed opportunity. Edit: I'd make that around five(?) golds that GB have left out on the field of play now? This one, Kerr, Rutter, Peaty and at least one more?

I agree, self interest is the guiding star. However, if that enlightened self interest can then be used as a tide to also raise all ships, then that's a solution to the problems that lie ahead as much as sole altruism would be. And the efficiacy of the solution, rather than the method, is what's important imo.

I agree, but then out there I also saw many examples of selflessness and community. They need to tap into that more. For their own sake and for the sake of everyone else.

Nor do I, but Harris becoming the nominee and Walz becoming VP has boosted the Dem odds, that's a matter of record. Whether it's enough to actually win in November and how it all plays out I have no idea, but I do think they're giving themselves the best possible shot at it.

... and in a sane world, any association with January 6th 2021 would easily surpass all of that in terms of public distaste. I guess with that considered, it will come down to just how sane a world we have.

After a certain amount of shuffling about (mostly from Biden because you know, he's old), the stage is now set. Harris/Walz vs Trump/Vance. The latter, at the present time, with a narrow lead in the betting markets, and polls make it pretty much a coin flip. Can't help but feel that this is one of the most consequential US elections in terms of the effect it will have on the future in... well, ever.

Perhaps not Gibraltar, but the Chagos Islands certainly shouldn't be under UK/US control.

Personally I think the issue really isn't political but the form the response to it takes might be. However, I think it's been well mannered enough for the most part so I'd be OK with leaving it where it is, unless you feel it should be moved.

Two observations: - Firstly, thanks for the considerable show of trust in trying this route once more. I for one appreciate it. - Secondly, just for the record, Sci/Tech and CC discussion remain in Gen Chat?

Aussies starting to pull away in 3rd place in the medals table. Really need to beat them in the velodrome final tonight.

And so it proved, in that event they are kings. We'll see how the rest pan out.

GB running things in the velodrome, but the Dutch and Aussies worthy rivals.

Or if the world is flat. Or if the global average temperature isn't increasing commensurate with emissions of various gases including carbon dioxide directly attributable to human activity. There certainly are situations where a dialectic circle jerk is both unnecessary and directly counterproductive to survival.

In this digital era, it's becoming extremely difficult to reconcile this idea being valid in a lot of cases, and then the opposite (where a world where no one is invalidated but no one is right will inevitably eat itself) being valid in others, and being able to parse between the two.

Yep. And then you have Farah, Hoy, Daley, Kane and many others on the flip side of the ego coin despite reaching the very top themselves. It's a real duality.

There's a lot of that goes on, yeah. That being said, I (and no doubt other people) have seen, more often in recent times, obvious examples of people framing what is obviously their own viewpoint as a hypothetical because they know that viewpoint is abhorrent and so will get less justified pelters that way. Can't be having with dishonest people hiding behind a veneer of deniability and "that's not what I said" like that - if you really believe in your worldview, own it and the backlash it gets. Or change. Of course, striking a balance is tricky though and it would be nice to think that the vast majority of people approach these things in good faith.

While I agree with this, again I don't really see her as much worse as other athletes and sportspeople who have become the very greatest at their chosen sphere. There seems to be a pretty even split between humility and egotism at the very top, from what I can tell.

As mentioned in earlier conversation to another poster, you're welcome on the Sci/Tech thread any time.

Perhaps that's a little better/ more fortunate than not having had the chance to contribute to it at all. Perhaps not so biased? (Incidentally, I don't think it's petty, either, the mods have a difficult job to do.)

Think that's the case most often with the very, very best tbh. The ego goes with the territory.

Gold medal. World record. Well done, ladies.