This is the claim from the Guardian article about this:
Puberty blockers and hormone treatment had been given to young patients despite a lack of research into their impact
Frankly I find that hard to swallow, given that puberty blockers existed long before they were used to treat trans people. Puberty blockers were used to treat children with extremely early puberty, their effects are generally well known. Sure, there's always the classic "more study is needed" line in academia, but this almost presents it as careless implementation of a new drug, rather than a known and approved drug given to more people.
There may be times when the sun is eclipsed by the earth, but this will be infrequent.
This will happen once per day lol. For a geostationary orbit anyway, as the orbital period is 24 hours.
The point, as you mentioned before, is that the nighttime/eclipse part of this period will be very short and the day very long. Our night lasts hours, a geostationary satellite's night is minutes (maybe a little over 1 hour for the longest ones).
This website calculates eclipse periods for satellites: https://www.satellite-calculations.com/Satellite/satellite_eclipse.htm Apparently it's a seasonal thing, like 3 months you get daily eclipses, 3 months you get no eclipse, then another 3 months on and another 3 off. The 3 months with eclipses are the around the equinoxes, so Feb-Apr and Aug-Oct.
Also the current government are entirely to blame here, the main reason water companies dump so much sewage is that they've been less able to get the chemicals they use to treat the water since Brexit.
No they haven't. Did you even read what that treaty is about? Countries that already have nuclear weapons get to keep having nuclear weapons, and countries that don't have nuclear weapons will agree not to develop them in exchange for receiving peaceful nuclear technology. Aside from that, countries must "pursue" disarmament, but the treaty does not actually require it to happen.
Given the recent stirrings of Russia, and our proximity to their main path to the Atlantic (where most of the world's undersea internet fibres are), disarming would be incredibly foolish.
At Distribution level, there are a variety of companies that each serve a specific region. These companies own and operate the networks from LV to 132kV) WPD was brought back under UK ownership and is now called NGED - National Grid Energy Distribution - which is the only distribution operator that's a part of National Grid PLC. NGED cover south Wales and parts of England stretching east from there.
At Transmission level (132kV and above), it's owned by NGET - National Grid Energy Transmission - for England and Wales, with SPT and SSE owning the transmission infrastructure up in Scotland.
The operator is NGESO, National Grid Energy System Operator. They operate the entire transmission network of the mainland UK, covering England, Wales and Scotland. They manage generation and demand and ensure they match. Apparently they're changing their name to NESO, in line with being made fully independent of National Grid.
But yeah, all of these (including all the DNO's I didn't list) are private companies.
The bigger issue however is that our consumption market is completely detached from the generation market. With renewables taking over, our electricity should be getting much cheaper - generators no longer have any fuel costs to pay, which was always the dominant cost over the life of the plant. Instead, we get consumer sellers advertising "We use 100% renewable energy!" as if that's justification to pay a little more and go with them.
I'm gonna go against the grain and no doubt be downvoted, but surely this is overblown compared to the level of actual harm it causes? They're not real images, almost everyone is aware they're not real images, they don't have a negative impact on the lives of the victim beyond them being creeped out that people are perving over them (but again, everyone knows it's not really them).
I can see it has the potential for leading to actual harm, eg a stalker developing worse behaviour, but I don't really see that it meets the threshold in and of itself. It's only slightly worse than doing something someone else doesn't like or saying something offensive.
My example was off the mark now that I look at it, but your statement is equally flawed.
A sociopathic killer would be one that kills through careless and irresponsible behaviour, it's just there's no use for such definition as it's already suitably covered by manslaughter. A better political example might be: Boris Johnson is a sociopath, and as the result of his careless and irresponsible behaviour many more people died during the pandemic. Meanwhile a psychopath might be seen as someone who intentionally kills with a similar disregard.
So, to fix my example, Boris and Trump killing through reckless policy would be sociopathic killing, while Trump killing his political opponents is probably more psychopathic killing.
Technically though, there's no such thing as a psychopathic killer either, as in clinical terminology both psychopathy and sociopathy refer to people living with Antisocial Personality Disorder.^1 Most mental health professionals won't differentiate between the two nor use either as a diagnosis, but some psychologists or researchers consider psychopathy as an extreme form of Antisocial Personality Disorder.^2 However the actual diagnosis used these days is apparently Antisocial Personality Disorder.
30 years ago, France, Germany and Italy were about as wealthy as one another. Now, Italy is markedly poorer. That is the direction they've taken the UK, and it's probably too late to fix that.
Aren't we supposed to help defend our allies, and vice versa?