Here is a question about this article: During Andrés López Obrador's administration a political slogan was introduced: la Ciudad de la Esperanza ("The City of Hope"). This motto was quickly adopted as a city nickname, but has faded since the new motto Capital en Movimiento ("Capital in Movement") was adopted by the administration headed by Marcelo Ebrard, though the latter is not treated as often as a nickname in media. Since 2013, to refer to the City particularly in relation to government campaigns, the abbreviation CDMX has been used (from Ciudad de México).
What is the answer to this question: What is the nickname of the city that the government is trying to push now?
****
So... Capital en Movimiento


Here is a question about this article: A great power is a sovereign state that is recognized as having the ability and expertise to exert its influence on a global scale. Great powers characteristically possess military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence, which may cause middle or small powers to consider the great powers' opinions before taking actions of their own. International relations theorists have posited that great power status can be characterized into power capabilities, spatial aspects, and status dimensions. Sometimes the status of great powers is formally recognized in conferences such as the Congress of Vienna or an international structure such as the United Nations Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States serve as the body's five permanent members). At the same time the status of great powers can be informally recognized in a forum such as the G7 which consists of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America.
What is the answer to this question: What do great powers usually have?
****
So... military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence


Here is a question about this article: Law professor, writer and political activist Lawrence Lessig, along with many other copyleft and free software activists, has criticized the implied analogy with physical property (like land or an automobile). They argue such an analogy fails because physical property is generally rivalrous while intellectual works are non-rivalrous (that is, if one makes a copy of a work, the enjoyment of the copy does not prevent enjoyment of the original). Other arguments along these lines claim that unlike the situation with tangible property, there is no natural scarcity of a particular idea or information: once it exists at all, it can be re-used and duplicated indefinitely without such re-use diminishing the original. Stephan Kinsella has objected to intellectual property on the grounds that the word "property" implies scarcity, which may not be applicable to ideas.
What is the answer to this question: Having no natural scarcity makes IP different from what kind of property?
****
So...
tangible