[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What would happen if the Earth stopped spinning but continued about its orbit?

What would happen socially and politically as I'm assuming that the day/night cycle would become a year long affair.

All of this is assuming that it is at all possible that it could happen.

*edit: I feel that I should word me question better.  My question above is in the scenario where the doomsday tsunami didn't happen. So what would society become with the change in the day/night cycle.

[Assistant]
If it stopped instantly, you'd smack into the nearest wall at lethal speeds and die, all buildings and most infrastructure would fail and collapse.

Massive tsunamis would occur as inertia of the water drags itself over the coastline, that said; pretty much your only chance of surviving this is to be under water, close enough to the shore that you can make it back without a boat, but far enough awy that you werent dragged onto land and dumped by the wave.

So now the world is entirely populated by scuba divers, they could scavenge food for a while but eventually the human race is doomed. The 6 month day/night cycle would likely destroy all natural life between the tropics of capricorn and cancer, polar bears and penguins wouldn't give a fuck, they already deal with that. Trees and plants wouldn't be able to cope with being starved for so long, new breeds of hibernating plantlife evolve, small animals thrive where they can eat the tubers these plants use for winter fuel. Birds would probably survive, they could migrate with twilight, feeding on these rodents.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: If anyone can access the "Deep Web" by downloading Tor, how are illegal sites not getting shut down immediately?

I recently watched season 2 of House of Cards and learned about the "Deep Web," and from the little I've read about it, it's mostly used for things like drug and weapon trading.

The thing is, apparently literally anyone can access the deep web just by downloading a browser called Tor.  If this is true, how have all these sites been able to last for years?

EDIT: Wow, this kinda blew up overnight.  Thanks for all the responses, interesting stuff!

[Assistant]
Just because you can access a site on TOR does not mean you can find out where the server(s) hosting the site is.  That's actually sort of the whole point of TOR:  no one knows where anyone else is but everyone can still communicate.

If you can't find the server the site is hosted on, it's very hard to shut it down.

Add to this, that even when you do find the server, you're unlikely to find more than a few of the people operating it.  Since they don't know who each other are, you get one or two people and the others just get a new server and are back up and running within a week or two.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why do we get the 'spins' after drinking?

There are times I don't even think I'm drunk but as soon as I Iay down I'm suddenly on a roller coaster. Why do we get the spins and why do they sneak up on us when (while standing) we don't feel dizzy ?

[Assistant]
Your sense of balance is based on 3 systems. Your vestibular system in the inner ear, your sense of touch and proprioception, and sight. Your brain takes those 3 inputs and together creates a sense of balance. You need at least two active and working correctly at least, your brain can function without one, though it can take a few weeks to adjust if your vestibular nerves are cut.

Ok, but then what causes the spins? Alcohol creates fluid density changes in the inner ear, so it's messing with the vestibular system. But you've not got the spins yet right? You might be a bit off balance but you're doing ok. So what if we took the other two systems out of commission as well. The spins creep up on you once you turn off the lights and close your eyes (losing sight), and lay on a soft thing on the floor instead of feet firmly planted on the ground (losing some touch/proprioceptive information). Now we've got incorrect and unusual information coming from the inner ear due to the fluid changes, and the other two systems aren't sending much useful information either. Welcome to spin-city.

If you want to avoid the spins, you should not smoke and drink. If you're cool though, and still want to avoid the spins, open your eyes, look at static things (so not your ceiling fan), and plant a foot firmly on the floor. Get those other 2 systems working.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [District 9] How did the humans who worked for MNU understand what the Prawns were saying?

[Assistant] Most likely a rough translation is made. They don't understand every word but know enough to get the jist. Something like 90% of prawns are barely above domesticated animals and will follow any authority figure so it's just the leaders that would even speak more than a few sentences or phrases.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why do objects turn black/brown when they're burnt?

[Assistant] The black is basically elemental carbon. Most organic material like wood is made up of compounds of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. These combine with the oxygen in the air, producing carbon dioxide and water. Excess carbon gets left behind as soot.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why can't babies drink water until they are six months old?

I have read that babies shouldn't drink water until they are six months old. So what changes in babies from infancy and six months later?

[Assistant] Newborns receive all their nutrition from breast milk or formula. They also have very small stomachs, and if you fill the stomach with water, they won't be hungry for milk or formula and thus might not receive adequate nutrition. As they grow, their stomachs become larger and their digestive system better equipped to handle mushy foods and water in addition to breast milk or formula.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
How do you actually wake up?

My question is when you are asleep, when your wake up response is triggered, are some chemicals released to force you body to wake or is something else going on?

To go along with it, how would waking up from a distraction, such as light or sound be treated by your body differently than if you went to sleep in a quiet, dark room and just slept until your body woke up naturally?

[Assistant]
Propensity to sleep is regulated by both circadian rhythms and homeostatic sleep pressure, which interact in what we call the "two-process model." Waking up is not due to just 'circadian cycles.'

The actual wake response consists of multiple brain regions, particularly brainstem wake-promoting regions, which release a variety of neurotransmitters (eg. acetylcholine, norepinephrine, glutamate, etc.). These 'wake-on' regions can target the cortex through intermediary structures like the thalamus or basal forebrain.

Waking up from an external stimuli is possible because there is still rudimentary sensory processing during sleep, but the actual 'waking up' part is likely mediated by at least some of the same circuitry that causes 'natural' waking up.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Could someone please give a scenario in which the cardinality of an infinite set becomes important?

Could someone describe for me a case in which it would be necessary to denote the cardinality of one infinity as opposed to that of another, and what branch of mathematics this falls under? I'm having trouble thinking of a practical example other than the ring of natural numbers compared to the set of real numbers.

[Assistant]
Here's an example from computer science: Let's say a real number *x* is "computable" if there exists some program that prints out its decimal expansion to an arbitrary degree of precision.

It turns out that the computable numbers are countable, which means a real number chosen uniformly at random (from some arbitrary interval) is uncomputable with probability 1.

Along the same lines: Cantor's proof that uncountable sets exist is very similar to Turing's proof that there exist yes-or-no decision problems which are undecidable by any algorithm.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: How did they resize photos before computers

Before computers, how did they resize photos to be bigger than they originally were? Like taking a small negative from a camera and enlarging it to be almost poster size.

Or taking a drawing and resizing it to fit a book cover or album cover.

[Assistant] A photo enlarger beamed a high powered light through a negative or slide onto photo paper.  Raising or lowering the enlarger changed to size of the photo protection, just like a shadow is bigger when closer to the light source.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[D&D/General Fantasy] Do Paladins need to be genuine in their faith?

Can a Paladin (or a person powered by some otherworldly being) just do things their god likes because it gives them power, or do they have to actually believe in/want to do the action?

Like, could I not give a rat's ass about the poor and hungry, but take care of them because a benevolent god grants me power to kill bandits better if I do?

[Assistant]
Depends on the world of course.  Generally speaking they have to be genuine in their faith, their patron Diety can tell the difference.

Take Dragonlance for example.  In Krynn's history there was a time where the Gods got pretty pissed off at this one very powerfull Cleric who thought himself Godlike himself.  He called upon the gods to destroy all evil essentially.  Now during this time all the true clerics of faith were raptured essentially and removed from Krynn and all the "clerics" who were not pure of faith remained and continued to not have any real powers.  Instead of destrying all evil the Gods threw a mountain at the land, and fucked its capitol in particular.  What followed was a period of time where no true clerics existed, but many false ones were around.  They had no powers because they did not genuinely believe in the true Gods (or even acknowledge they existed).


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why are cameras so inferior in low light compared to our eyesight?

I'm not even talking about extreme low light. For example, at home in the evening, I have a few lamps on. I can see everything clearly. Yeah, it's dim, but by no means dark. I whip out my DSLR, and even with a 1/60 shutter speed, a ginormous aperture of 1.8, and a very noisy ISO of 1600, images are very dark.

What is it about sensor technology that is so inferior, and what are possible technologies that could replace what we're currently using?

[Assistant] There's a -lot- to it but the overly simple answer is that you're not really seeing the 'light' but your minds reconstruction of the data provided by your eye.  This is why we see in the dark so well, your mind is really, really good at filling in the blanks.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why when I tilt a cup to slowly pour liquid out, does the liquid not fall straight down but seems to grab and runs down the outside of the cup instead?

I presume it's got to do with path of least resistance and the liquid itself is holding some sort of resistance...but I'm sure some high school physics would explain this better.

[Assistant]
It is a combination of surface tension and van der waals forces. Surface tensions keeps small drops of water in a spherical shape and van der waals forces will gently make it adhere to most surfaces. These forces are relatively weak and not very noticeable on large scales.

Edit: It's a combination of hydrogen bonds and VDW forces and surface tension is a product of this.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: DJs are brand management and equipment logistics experts, not skilled musicians

Having seen a couple of "big name DJs" at raves, I don't see any evidence that they're doing anything up on stage that couldn't be learned in a couple of weeks.

Now, that doesn't mean they haven't worked extremely hard to get to where they are (if the road to that level of fame didn't require a lot of hard work and lucky breaks, everybody would do it).  But I submit that most of that hard work went into building their following and managing their brand, not learning how to do anything particularly difficult while they're up on stage.

\[Edited to clarify: I am not talking about when DJs *produce* original tracks.  I believe that it takes years to get good at producing tracks that people like.  I'm talking about what DJs do when you buy a ticket to see them live, which usually means mixing pre-produced tracks.\]

Of course to some extent every famous musician's success is a result of their brand management (and lucky breaks along the way) in addition to their musical skill.  The most famous musicians are not the most famous because they scored the best in some worldwide purely meritocratic competition where everybody is judged for their songwriting and instrument playing on some double-blind test.  But usually, I think they are at least doing *something* which takes several years to learn to do well (which is to say, if a newbie were to challenge Elton John in a double-blind piano skill competition, it would take several years to learn to play as well as Elton John).

By contrast, DJs are just controlling machines that play back pre-recorded sounds, that doesn't look like the kind of thing that takes a long time to learn, as long as you know which buttons to press.  And if a "big name DJ" agreed to submit to a double-blind test, where the challenge was to see if someone could tell the difference between them and someone else doing the same job, would it take more than a few weeks to learn how to work the equipment just as well?

Now I've heard some people say that they think the DJs real skill is "reading the crowd" and modifying their performance accordingly.  But I don't know what they think is the evidence for that.  If a famous DJ is performing and the crowd is having a good time, the much simpler explanation is that everybody came there because they knew everybody else would be there, they're inclined to have a good time after spending $100 per ticket, and so they're going to feed off of each other's energy and have a good time no matter what the DJ does, unless the DJ really screws it up.

So, I think big name DJs are people who are good at building a following and got some lucky breaks along the way, not people who are exhibiting any skill which couldn't be duplicated in a double-blind test by someone who spent a few weeks learning.  CMV!

[Assistant]
There are different types of DJs.

If a DJ is making a beat for a song, that is musical. Premier, DJ Shadow, Kid Koala or Dr. Dre for example.

Likewise, if a DJ is playing only parts of songs (breaks etc) but blending tempos and seamless fades, that is a highly skilled talent. In addition, playing the right song at the right time and in the right order to influence the crowd is also a skill.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why is it that we're able to connect to the Voyager in interstellar space using 20th century technology, and yet it can be rather difficult getting a WiFi signal to my room?

[Assistant]
Your WiFi signal is coming from a very low power signal (a few milliwatts) through a very small (a few inches) antenna.

Voyager is using a nuclear-powered transmitter through an antenna several feed in diameter to talk to an absolute huge (many tens of meters) antenna here on Earth.

If you had the power and antenna from Voyager on your WiFi, you'd have no issues getting WiFi in your room.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Daft Punk] Are the Robots the transhuman vessels of the minds of Guy Manuel de Homem-Christo and Thomas Bangalter, are they androids built by the dj's, or the cyborg remnants of the men?

Also, you think Interstella 5555 will ever play Earth again?

[Assistant]
While they are human constructs they do appear to be stronger faster smarter than their human creators. They came to bring music all around the world in a way a human never could. Their suits are designed to be aerodynamic while at the same time providing nightvision basically making them superheroes.

After a bender at an unknown location in the solar system the duo woke to find that they had been uploaded to a computer simulation named Tron. Hoping to get lucky on this motherboard of digital love they began to play their way to freedom. They were hoping to make contact with the son of Flynn and began creating music to their random access memories. They then transcended their programming after giving life to music they said to each other "theres something about us" after their robot rock journey they left Tron becoming human after all.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Powers] What would you call an ability that has the power to see so perfectly into the future with 100% accuracy so much so you can change it?

I like writing powers and the thing the intrigues me the most is how precognition can be so overpowered to the point of Manipulating fate.

[Assistant] If you can accurately predict the future, how can you change it? If you did, the future you saw would then be inaccurate. To change it, you need a *less* accurate view - you need to be able to see a *possible* future, or to see what would happen without your interference. Then, as long as it is permanently active, you simply keep acting to change the future until you see the result you desire.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Avengers AoU] How could Ultron have won?

I mean what little tweaks in his plan (which you have to admit was a pretty damn good plan in context and was really close to succeeding), could he have made either from the beginning or amidst the battle that would have had things turn out in his favor?

A weak example, I think if he had had a wider variety of troops he might won. So more than just those simple disposables one punch robots. Maybe a robot hulk?!

[Assistant]
* Completely assimilating JARVIS at the onset instead of crudely ripping him apart. Saves the trouble of the nuclear codes being protected, Vision turning against him, and keeps the element of surprise.

* Not bragging about his plan before he put it into action. He could have raised an army before the Avengers realized who or what was responsible. Staggering out with that leaky robot body was creepy, but completely unnecessary.

* **HACKING IRON MAN'S ARMOR.** Seriously, Ultron superseded JARVIS, who remote controls every suit. Why did he not lock in Tony and force him to do his bidding, or make his suit suicide bomb a building? This was a frustratingly huge plot hole for me.

* Design each robot body to absorb Thor's lightning in the same way Iron Man's suit can. Ultron's seen the designs and Tony's notes.

* Never allying with Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. He never needed the help, and it only widened the circle of conspiracy enough to give away the secrets that undid him.

* Scarlet Witch's contribution of "darkest fears" could be replicated--Ultron has full access to the team's files and histories, and the intelligence to make inferences. It would be child's play for him to design Joker-like scenarios to test each member's limits. If they refuse to play, people die.

* Using his worldwide control of the internet and electronic systems, hold the world hostage unless each Avenger submit themselves (at separate locations, lest *teamwork!* save the day) for execution. Every hour they refuse is another hospital's life support gone or another plane falling out of the sky. Even if neither of those options are available, simultaneous attacks on eight or so small towns will ensure that the death rate keeps rising.

* Have each and every one of his troops emit an earsplitting cacophony of overlapping voices through their speakers. Ultron doesn't need audio to communicate with himself, but the Avengers do.

* Similarly, burn all farmland, poison all water. Ultron needs neither.

* Any sort of strategy on the part of his Sokovia troops besides "charge." At least he didn't follow the one-at-a-time minion strategy, but any military commander would give their stripes to have a hivemind army. Separate the Avengers. Dig the ground out from under Cap and Witch. Push Hulk off the edge of the city. Snipe Hawkeye and Black Widow. If he hasn't hacked Iron Man already, bury him under sheer numbers--his suit can only carry the weight of seven others. If Thor's lightning isn't just recharging the troops, then...just try and keep Thor busy.

* Using some troops to keep civilians hostage. The Avengers waste time trying to extract innocents who are holed up in shelters and guarded.

* Spare troops scattered all over Sokovia not engaging in the fight. As soon as the Avengers move on to rescue civilians, have the hidden troops move in.

* Taking potshots at the hover rafts. If nothing else, it'll force the Avengers to once again protect the civilians.

* Have the repulsor reversal switch be wirelessly (radio, etc.) activated. No need for physical bodies to turn it.

* **DON'T TEAR UP THE V1 ULTRON PRIME JUST FOR THE SAKE OF A PUN.** How many times would having two Big Bad bodies have saved him?

* Spare troops scattered and hidden all over *the world.* Even if everything goes wrong with his master plan, he's only back to square one.

**TL;DR: Make it like the comic "Age of Utron," where everything was so shot to hell that they had to go back in time twice to fix it.**


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: How much damage would a nuclear weapon the size of a bullet do?

[Assistant]
None. You can't make a nuclear weapon the size of a bullet.

To make a nuclear weapon, you need enough weapons grade fissable material to create a fission bomb.

Fusion bombs still need a fission stage to cause the fusion.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Dragon Ball] how is the weighted clothing goku and piccolo wear legal?

Although it does make them slower and they aren't able to hit as hard, it also makes them difficult to move and lift. Considering a huge part of the competition is ringouts, it would make throwing or pushing an opponent out of boundaries harder. There's a difference between gaining weight and artificially increasing one's weight. Now one can say that the added weight is negligible when it comes to z fighters but the competition isn't made for solely them. Both of them should've been technically disqualified.

[Assistant]
I suspect it's just one of those things that are legal because there isn't a rule against it, and there probably isn't a rule against it because none of the organizers took into account that competitors would *want* to wear performance *debilitating* gear in a tournament against the best of the best - for the vast majority of competitors, if it's heavy enough to give you that much of an edge against ring outs, it's also going to be more of handicap than it's worth

>There's a difference between gaining weight and artificially increasing one's weight.

That'd only be relevant if the tournament had weight classes, which they clearly don't have seeing as kid Goku fought *a fucking dinosaur*


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [MCU] Why is the Earth the centre of pretty much everything?

[Assistant]
Both Marvel and DC have earth as the center of the universe. With marvel at the very least it's the center to the entry point of the universe, hence why the magical protection against dormammu/shuma gorroth is on earth.

In DC it's where life began and where the white light of creation was found during the Blackest Night.

In both canons it's why so many superheroes and exceptional individuals live on and come from Earth.  Most major things happen on earth, major villains and entities are drawn there.  Humans in almost all science fiction are usually the race that excels in adaptability, free will and have the widest ability to grow and change with circumstance.  Whereas a lot of other alien races are general set in certain ways/goals/ideas/behaviours.  Humanity always has that capacity for good/evil and whatever other spectrums that exist.

For whatever reason comic writers make Earth the focal point instead of other science fiction which kind of puts the focus on rest of the unknown.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[The Matrix] What happens when you get drunk in The Matrix?

Do the machines pump alcohol in to you? If they don't, what would happen to an alcoholic if you pulled them out, would they no longer have any dependency?

[Assistant] You drink alcohol in the matrix. It simulates drunkenness in your code. It doesnt do anything your body, the living D-cell. The machines wouldnt want you to develop a fatty liver. It might impair your performance as a battery.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why is it that our voices seem normal in our heads but when we hear it from another perspective it sounds so gross and cringe-y?

For example hearing yourself on a video or a voice recording.

[Assistant]
When other people hear your voice, the sound gets transmitted to them through the air.

But when you hear your own voice, much of the sound gets transmitted to your ear by bone (your jaw and skull) rather than through the air. Because bone transmits sound differently to air, the way you hear your voice is different to how everyone else hears it.

When you hear a recording of your voice, you are hearing the same as everyone else hears. You don't like it, though, because it's unfamiliar, it's not the way you think you sound.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: The Red Wedding was Justified

Spoilers ahoy. Be warned. Book and show.

The war was already over. Robb Stark had no chance of winning the war as soon Moat Cailan was captured. His supply lines were gone, his army was going to be forced to forage, and was going to starve to death. That doesn't even count the fact Lannister-Tyrell forces would outnumber. Some people claim he never lost a battle, does not mean he is a good strategist, just that Tywin decided to bleed Robb out of the war. And most of the victories Robb has were with him outnumbering his opponents. Not to mention the fact Robb had Winterfell for like a year, before it burned to the ground (don't give it someone else fault for this, it's his home he should be able to defend it or find people who can).
Robb Stark was a terrible leader. He failed to gain any allies. He couldn't get support for Stannis, Renly or Balon. Why because he wanted to be King in the North. Eddard, the person he fighting this war to avenge, didn't even want that, he backed Stannis. He willing gives over the only hostage he has that might detter Ironborn aggression. Then he honor kills Lord Karstark losing half his army.

Robb Stark was not honorable in the slightest. Remember when I mentioned Moat Cailan? The second his home land was under attack, Robb should have sued for peace with Lannisters (or at least try to make peace with Stannis), and gone back up North to rout the Ironborn. For all his do the honourable thing talk, he doesn't defend his subjects well. Not to mention he uproots the entire population of the North right before winter. So now not only is population being pillaged, they are going to starve in the Winter, even if Robb wins, you think he'd know Winter is coming given that is his family's words. He also has a bad case of double standards. His mother removes the most critical asset Robb had in the war, and he essentially slaps her on the wrist for it. Additionally, his marriage. Book or show, his marriage shows a complete double standard to him and his men. Robb has his wife with him, while on this journey and battle, none of his common soldiers get that, they are all forced to be alone.

So given the facts, you are in a losing war, you leader is incompetent and unhonorable, who wouldn't betray him? The leader was not performing the needs of the people so, much like Eddard did, Roose decided to remove a mad king. And thank the gods for it. Now, there is a hope that the North will be free from the Ironborn raiders, and might be able to feed itself in the coming winter.

Edit1: formatting

Edit 2: Hey guys this has been a lot of fun. I believe my view has been changed at least with regards to the book version of the events. Ramsay in the show is psychopath, but his damage is actually very small, he doesn't really salughter Northern en mass, and I would believe him better than Ironborn rule, and he is not the intended warden of the North. In the books however, he is and he is much more dangerous to Northerners, and the intended heir. As far as Guest Rite violating, I just don't really see the issue, yes long term consequence, honour holds the kingdoms together, but there are plenty of instances of unhonourable behavior not being punished in the real world and in Westeros (I think one of the Targaryens fend their sister to a dragon and violated the guest rite, and the black dinner it was bassed on was quite successful). If your liege is going to bring your kingdom to ruin you pull a Jaime Lannister and end them. I think you forgo caring about what other people think of you when you put a flayed man on your banners.   The unanswered questions are what is the state of the North during Winter, and will their be starvation there or not and how much. Also it is hard to know what the effects of the Stark armies movements are on the countryside. While Robb probably would not condone pillaging and rape, it is hard to know how effective he is at stopping it. I still believe Robb Stark blunder his way into losing the war, how many victories he got it didn't matter, he refused to have a strategic focus, and while he might be tactically brilliant, strategy wins wars. Thank you all for the responses, now lets all sing a round of the Rains of Castamere.

[Assistant]
The issue with the Red Wedding wasn't that Robb was betrayed or assassinated - both are pretty common in Westeros (e.g., basically anyone who ends up on the Iron Throne, or Hand to the King, is betrayed and killed). No biggie.

What makes the Red Wedding (which is separate from the broader idea of assassinating Robb, which is fine) *unjustified* is that it violates the guest rites at a wedding feast, which is basically an unheard-of transgression. *That* is what makes it so shocking (both to reader/viewers and to the people of Westeros): it's the line that you just don't cross, because it's the moment at which you acknowledge that your word of honor cannot be trusted, and your enemies can never find accord with you.

I don't think Robb would have been a particularly great king (though he was young, and might have grown into it in time), and there's nothing wrong with the Tywin Lannister arranging to have him betrayed and killed. Happens all the time. But the *way* in which Lannister arranged his assassination was a miscalculated overreach, a move of desperation that largely set in motion Joffrey's parallel assassination at *his* own wedding and, indirectly, Tywin's own death.

Oops.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [DC Comics] What are some time management/productivity/efficiency techniques that Bruce Wayne uses? What is his schedule like?

[Assistant] Delegation. He does not do everything himself. He lets Lucius Fox run the company, he is little more than a token figurehead. He does not build or repair every Bat vehicle himself every time. He has also learned to streamline a lot of his efforts through experience. All the skills it took him 15-20 years to master since childhood, he has taught Robin those same skills in a fraction of the time. (In the DC Super Heroes RPG, he even has a skill of Tutor, which reduces training time for others).


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: What is actually happening inside your body when you itch, and why does it happen?

[Assistant] There are thousands of nerves all over the surface of your skin which are meant to feel pain. If something that should be painful happens, those nerves tell the brain to localize a pain response to that area. Loose dead skin cells sometimes touch those nerves and activate them. Since it's only one nerve being activated, you don't get a "pain" response, but more a "wow, that's annoying" response. Itching removes the dead skin cell and fixes the problem.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] If I take a phone with a camera and aim it towards a picture for 6 hours with nothing on the screen but the picture its aimed towards. Then I do the same exact thing but aim it at a TV. Will the phone drain more battery watching the TV because the picture was moving on the phone screen?

[Assistant] Electronic engineer here. From the camera/sensor/data-processing there is no difference. The camera preview keeps acquiring data without compressing it using information from previous frames, and the sensor is stimulated in the same way, so the device doesn't know if what is watching is changing or not. However for the display point of view this might be different, It depends mostly on the screen technology and the kind of picture/video used. AMOLED displays will consume less power power showing dark images than bright ones, and in the same way red color over green and blue. In a transmissive LCD  there is no such difference (or at least is neglectable). So a changing image consumes more power than a still one? Not really if the different frames are similar in hue and brightness to the still one.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: If rifle barrels are rifled, made to fit 1 type of bullet and last a long time, how come shotgun barrels arent destroyed after having a bunch of metal shot bouncing around in them?

[Assistant] Most shotgun barrels are smooth bore, meaning that they are a straight pipe with smooth sides. The shot is held together by a "wad" which is like a little cup that separates the shot from the powder. Rifled shotgun barrels are available for slugs, though.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: (NSFW) Using one's hands is better for bringing one's partner to orgasm than using one's penis.

I'm basing my argument on the premises that partners prefer sexual stimulation which is varied. Manual stimulation allows up to 10 different apparatus to be used, in any combination, while stimulation using one's penis only allows one. Moreover, one can expand the girth of one's hand at will, one can't do that with a penis. Girth is a factor in leading to orgasm. One can be much more forceful or delicate using one's hand for sex, and one has a wider range of motion with wrist and finger movement aa well. One might argue that using one's penis has the advantage of warmth,  but one can simply rub one's hands together before beginning in order to compensate. Fingernails can be clipped. Lastly, one's arm length allows one more range of motion and therefore more variation in positions.

[Assistant] You use what best works for the partner. That could be a penis, your hands, your tongue, their hands, a vibrator or other toy, etc. There is no blanket "best" that applies to everyone, or even most people like you claim.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELIF: how is time relative?

[Assistant]
When you move fast (and by fast we talk about significant fractions of the speed of light -- 100mph isn't "fast" here), there are 2 things that happen:

\- for you, you experience time moving at the same rate you always experience time.  The second hand on your watch would still tick once a second.

\- for someone else who is standing still watching you, they see your time as going much slower than their time.  If they could see your watch, the second hand would be moving much slower.

The faster you go, the slower your time appears to an observer looking at you.

Interestingly, when you look at the person who is standing still, you will see their time as moving much slower too -- if you could see their watch, the second hand would also be going slow.  This is because, from your perspective, you are completely still and they are moving very fast.  (This is relativity)

Time, speed, and relativity are interesting, but very strange, phenomena.

One consequence of this is that anything that travels at the speed of light (a photon, for example) basically experiences no time passing.  So a photon that leaves a star 100 light years away would take 100 years to get here, as we would observe that photon.  From the photon's perspective, no time passed at all!


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why haven't the colors on Jupiter all mixed together yet?

Shouldn't it just be one big grey ball by now? What's separating the colors?

[Assistant] The core of Jupiter is very hot. As a result, there is a significant temperature differential between the upper layers of Jupiter's atmosphere, and the lower layers. This causes convection, which moves the atmosphere around (similar to our own atmosphere regarding global wind patterns and ocean currents). Additionally, the different gasses in Jupiter's atmosphere react relatively differently to heat and pressure, and so stratify into different layers. Each of these layers has a different color and behaves differently from one another and generally won't mix without outside influence. The rotation of the planet additionally affects the structure of Jupiter's atmosphere. All of these effects constantly acting together creates the banding and storms we observe on Jupiter.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [ELI5] Why were early metal body planes shiny and why aren't there shiny new planes anymore?

[Assistant]
Early jet engines were actually quite inefficient compared to what we have today. Not painting the exterior was one way to shave off a surprising amount of unnecessary weight and thus save fuel and increase payload. Paint is surprisingly heavy and, while this was primarily done to military aircraft, the weight saving on commercial passenger jets was considerable, think 100s of kg each.

The trade off. Of course, was that this increased maintenance costs but as early jet aircraft had fairly simple airframes this was acceptable. Modern airframes are considerably more complex and whilst less easy to damage they are much more expensive to maintain. This flips the trade off firmly in favour of pained exteriors in every case.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5 - How do "clearing throats" actually clears our throats?

Im currently down on a fever and my throat hurts so i keep coughing it out. How does it actually helps my throat feels better?

[Assistant] Phlegm/mucus is normally a layer of protection in our lungs and breathing tubes, but when we are ill our bodies often produce too much of it. It can then collect in the throat around the vocal cords which are the tiny folds of tissue that vibrate together when we speak or sing. Coughing or throat clearing is basically slamming the vocal cords together so they push the excess mucus away and back up into the mouth so it can be either spat out or swallowed down and got rid of using our stomach juices. So it generally feels good to get rid of it, but unfortunately until we get better, more mucus quickly arrives to take its place and that's why we keep on coughing.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Marvel/DC] Peter Parker gets adopted by Bruce Wayne. How different does he turn out?

Peter got bit by the spider. Let's it's a Kryptonian spider or something from Luthor's Lab. Whatever the scenario his powers manifest the same, his Uncle Ben dies the same only this time there is no Aunt May. Bruce Wayne adopts a teenage Peter Parker who has just begun to get powers he doesn't understand.

Now raised by a billionaire and his butler, how does Peter Parker turn out?

[Assistant]
They made this show - It's Called Batman Beyond.

Seriously - Terry McGuiness is a Dye Job, a spiderbite, and an Aunt May away from being Peter Parker.  He's a fast talking kid with responsibility issues.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: How did 'baby' become a word of endearment when society agrees that pedophilia is repulsive?

[Assistant] It is not an attempt to project the idea of an actual "baby" or wish of the person receiving the dote as a personification of an actual child no more than calling someone pumpkin is a desire for them to be a gourd. Babies are seen as sweet, innocent, and full of life. When in all actuality they are eating, shit-monsters that morph into wallet-vampires. So even that is kind of applicable.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Marvel] Does the Venom Symbiote hate Peter Parker or not?

Because whenever it has the opportunity to bond with Peter it seems to go for every time.

[Assistant]
In that kind of Helga-hates-Arnold way.

Actually the symbiote itself is fairly neutral by default, and has mostly been corrupted by exposure to turbulent, toxic human emotions from its previous hosts.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Holes] A few questions about Camp Greenlake

- How did no one ever learn the truth about the camp? It seems that the impression going into it was that it was a physical lake, how did no one know it was a dried up desert?

- How did those boys work on so little water? Intensive physical labor in the Texas heat would require far more water than they held in those water bottles which didn't even seem to hold a gallon.

[Assistant]
They most likely perpetuated the image that it was a nice place, not a dried up lake. This wouldn't be hard since the parents never go there and the children seem to be threatened into silence.

The boys worked from before sunrise, finishing mid-morning, by far one of the coolest parts of the day. After which they seemed to be given free reign to rest.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Injustice] What if, after killing the Joker, Superman did not jump off the slippery slope into villainy? Would Batman still have tried to take down Injustice!Superman?

Instead of forming the One-Earth Government and ruling the Earth with an iron fist, Injustice!Superman properly grieve the loss of his wife and unborn child, after killing the Joker. After doing so, Injustice!Superman continues to be the hero he should be, with an even greater (but pure) conviction against killing.

How do the events of Injustice play out? Furthermore, what if Wonder Woman decided to form the Regime, while Superman joined Batman's insurgency?

[Assistant]
If Superman stayed in character after he would probably turn himself in at Batman's request. He'd go on trial for Joker's death, and be given a light sentence because of who he is and who the Joker was. He'd sit in jail for a month or so (while Dick Grayson covered Metropolis for him) and then be released on parole at the first major threat that only he could handle.

Batman wouldn't speak to him for a long time. Likely until the Joker inevitably returns.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Santa Claus] Dear Santa (or appropriate Santa's Workshop Media Relations Director): what COVID-19 precautions are you taking for your annual December 24th worldwide toy delivery?

[Assistant]
Elf Flackery writing for Santa Claus industries:

The COVID-19 Pandemic greatly saddens the entire Claus family and business. We send hope and sympathy to the entire world.

Due to our remote location at the North Pole, and the swift action of our Chief Operations Officer, Mrs. Claus, Claus Industries established a bubble and has been free of the Coronavirus for the entire year.

Santa has always maintained a safe social distance while making his rounds, and will take extra precautions this year. For the first time, he will wear an N95 respirator during his rounds. To accommodate the extra weight on the sleigh due Santas anticipated hand sanitizer use and the extra coal for all the anti-mask folks across the world, six extra reindeer will be added to the team.

Santa will quarantine for 10 days, per the CDCs recommendation, before returning to the North Pole bubble.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5:What are bugs, in a game?

What are bugs in a game, and what makes them happen. If a specific event is happening according to the codes, and then a bug appears, what goes wrong? Is it the game itself that decides to not follow the codes or is it the code that is poorly written?

[Assistant]
You tell Timmy (your computer):

>"Run to the store and buy a gallon of milk, and if there are eggs, buy a dozen."

Timmy runs (literally) all the way to the store, buys a gallon of milk, checks to see if there are any eggs, and because there are eggs there he buys 12 more gallons of milk. He then runs home (again, literally) and drops several because he can't hold them all.

This is, of course, not what you wanted. The problem is that computers need to be told *exactly* what to do, for everything. It's not easy to control how the computer will interpret your commands and sometimes it acts in unexpected ways (buying 12 gallons of milk instead of a carton of eggs).

So when you're playing a video game a bug will occur because the computer did something unexpected. You tell the developers and the programmers will go find where the program went wrong and will write (or remove) code to ensure the computer will better know what to do in the future.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] If it only takes the Earth 23 hours and 56 minutes to rotate on its axis, why doesn't the sun eventually set "in the middle of the day"?

[Assistant]
You're thinking of the sidereal day. That's how long it takes the earth to rotate 360 degrees with respect to the stars. A solar day is a 360 degree rotation with respect to the sun, or the amount of time between two successive "noons."

Because we made a little progress in our orbit today, the earth needs to spin a little extra to get to noon in order to account for the fact that the sun has moved relative to the earth while we were going about our day.

This little extra spin is about four minutes, making the solar day right on to 24 hours. Sometimes we add leap seconds to keep everything working smoothly.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Why does rain come down over the course of minutes or hours instead of all at once?

[Assistant] For a couple reasons. Rain happens when warm air carrying a lot of water vapor meets cooler air, and the temperature drop causes the water to condense out and fall as rain. The mixing isn't sudden, it happens over time as the air masses collide and mix together. Also, for the water to condense out it needs a surface to condense upon, usually a tiny piece of dust; so it can only condense out as fast as surface area becomes available.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Were things actually cheaper "back in the day?"

Once in a while, you'll hear the old chestnut of "things were cheaper back in the day."  They'll bring up 50 soda bottles or $1 for a loaf of bread.

However, I always wondered, if you adjust all the economic variables that goes into retail prices & wages of your average spender, were things actually cheaper back in the day?

[Assistant] Certain things were cheaper. Despite controlling for higher incomes housing was much more affordable. However, most other things, when controlling for either quality or incomes, are more affordable in aggregate to the everyday person.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Why do mints in your mouth make water and air seem so much colder?

[Assistant] Menthol activates the receptors in your mouth that sense "cool" temperatures. Cool water and air activate even more of these receptors, making the cool sensation more intense. The same effect happens with hot receptors and spicy peppers/alcohol.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: why is it that if you go in a 15 foot pool and reach the bottom the water pressure hurts your ears, yet scuba divers go hundreds of feet down and they don't feel a thing, shouldn't they be crushed under the weight/pressure ?

[Assistant] Every few feet you (ELI5) pinch your nose and blow through your nose which balances the pressure in your ears. You can try it right now, outside of water. Divers also have timers and depth readers to make sure they do not descend or ascend too fast without balancing their ear pressure.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
For a superconductor of a certain size, is there a limit to how much current can run through it?

My thoughts are that with normal(copper, aluminum) conductors, the main current limits come from resistance in the conductor causing the conductor to heat up when too much current is passed through it.  If the conductor had no resistance, however, what would that limit be, if there was one?

[Assistant]
The problem with trying to pass huge amounts of current through a superconductor is that any flowing current creates a magnetic field circling around it (Ampere's law). A superconductor also expels all magnetic fields from inside itself (Meissner effect), so what you get is a lot of magnetic field lines all bunched up just outside the surface of the superconductor, which makes a strong magnetic field there.

Magnetic fields kill superconductivity. Every superconductor has a "critical field" at which it stops superconducting (which actually depends strongly on temperature). So at some point the magnetic field produced by the current will be too much for the superconductor to handle, and it will "quench", which means it abruptly stops superconducting, and then the energy in the flowing current is very rapidly turned into heat.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [ST/40k] What would an average Federation engineer think about the designs of the Imperium vessels?

[Assistant]
"Mister LaForge, can you get this craft running again?"

"Not unless you're willing to commit some crimes against humanity, sir."

They'd probably consider Imperium ships a nightmare even before they turn on the engines. Crude, nasty, cripplingly dependent on brute human labor, and comes with a manual (*if* it comes with a manual) telling you to pray to a machine god and perform a holy ritual to activate the turn signal. And not even Q's worst day has prepared them for the Warp.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Is/Why is postmodernism bad?

Everytime I hear someone refer to postmodernism,  it's usually used with negative context preceding it. I looked up the definition and pretty much what its telling me is postmodernism is art, literature, and architecture that contradicts widely accepted theories, believes, and ideas. Why is this bad? Postmodernism from its definition seems like something that could benefit us. Society gets caught in widely accepted ideas all the time. Without change, we wouldn't know if we as a society are living wrong. Maybe I'm not understanding the definition.

[Assistant]
Usually, the sense of "postmodernism" that you're asking about is a boogeyman which conflates a number of notions that people find threatening to society: obscurantism, relativism, irrationalism, identity politics, etc.

Most of the time, this is an expression of anti-intellectualism that cites a few French philosophers to paint a portrait of a vast intellectual movement that is the root of whatever the author thinks is wrong with contemporary society, from college student activists to gender studies to whatever else. While this is a frequent target in conservative circles, it's also present, though likely to a less degree, in centrist, liberal and Marxist circles.

As for the actual literature, there's no such thing as a philosophical view called postmodernism. At most, it refers to a number of various critiques, within the resources of modern philosophy, of other aspects of modern philosophy that took place in France in the mid 20th Century. Gary Gutting's *French Philosophy in the Twentieth Century* is a good resource if you're interested in this period and the various projects therein.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Frozen] If Anna had frozen solid a second earlier, Hans managed to kill Elsa and Anna didn't come back to life, would Hans really have won, or would his story fall apart based on Anna not already having died in the castle like he'd claimed?

Could he have come up with an adequate explanation for the situation of Anna having made it outside and tried to stop him; if so, how/what?

If not, then I'd say it would be safe to say he would have been straight-up executed for *actually* killing the sisters as opposed to just being deported for merely *trying* to do so as it actually happened.

[Assistant]
I don't remember- are people watching when Anna is frozen? Or is Else's ice storm still there?

If people aren't watching, well, ice shatters.

If people are, he could say that Elsa conjured up the statue/illusion of Anna to sway him, but it was only another of her icy tricks.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why do TV channels sometimes show just a second of a commercial, then go to another one?

This is always irritates me. They'll show a second or two of a commercial, then go to another. Why is that, ELI5?

[Assistant] quite often if you notice the second commercial will be for something local (a lawyer, or some local store) this is because the local cable company is over-riding the commercial being broadcast by the TV station and they got their timing off.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What's happening in my brain that makes me want one food over another?

For example why would I be more driven to an apple than an orange and other days I'm driven to an orange instead of an Apple?

Or hot dogs over a salad.

[Assistant]
I once saw some Discovery show (back when it was actually a learning channel) where they explained that sometimes you crave certain foods because your body is hungry for whatever nutrients that food has to offer.

If you're craving something spicy, your body might be low on Vitamin C. If you're craving chicken or something meaty, your system might need a boost of protein.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Mistborn]Could a Feruchemist extend his life by spending it as a 70 year old?

Sazed mentions that the Feruchemical ability to store and draw on age is mostly used as a way to disguise oneself, since becoming older in order to become younger balances itself out.

But what if I'm a Feruchemist and I spend every day storing enough age to appear to be 70, and I do that all day, every day, until I'm actually 70?  Then, once I'm 70, I tap my stored power to appear 70, all day, every day, until I run out of stored power at about 130 years old?

[Assistant]
Yes you could totally do this. The reason most don't is that it is quite difficult and isolating. Who wants to spend their twenties as a senior? You could totally do it, if simply extending your life was your primary goal, but that's not how many people live.

Feruchemists have always been rare, as has Atium, so not many people get the chance to do this, and those that have the chance may prefer to live in the moment.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Why is Assad allowing humanitarian Aid into besieged Madaya when his regime is responsible for that siege?

Also, why is Assad's role downplayed in most of what I've read on the matter (admittedly not a whole lot).

In my understanding, the u.n. has been waiting for permission from Assad to aid those besieged by him. This seems counter-intuitive. Wouldn't Assad's role in abusing his citizens' basic human rights make it obvious that their well-being is no longer (if it ever was) in his interest, and doesn't this necessitate some sort of international humanitarian intervention? Why did the u.n. have to wait for permission?

[Assistant]
There's a difference between besieging them and wanting to take the territory over, or planning to eradicate the whole area of any population. Apparently, Assad is more interested in the first option than the latter. On one hand because he is simply interested in staying in control, not wiping out a certain group of people - on the other hand his supporters would probably change their stance if he was to starve his own population to death on a large scale like this.

> Why did the u.n. have to wait for permission?

Even if it's the UN, they can't just waltz into foreign territory and expect to not be shot at or get into diplomatic trouble - which in turn would've turned this conflict into even more of a clusterfuck than it already is.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Wars]How did the Galactic Republic manage to fund such a fast military build up?

And also how was it feasible to maintain such a massive military? I mean between losing such large tax paying corporations to the seperatists, and constant warfare that would affect trade for several decades. It seems difficult to maintain a economy under these conditions.

[Assistant]
The initial buildup of manpower and hardware was conducted over a period of at least a decade by a third party contractor outside of Republic space.  This Grand Army of the Republic was built in secret, creating the illusion of spectacularly rapid militarization when this military asset was finally revealed and deployed.  Securing such a deal before the economic blow of the substantial tax losses would be eminently feasible; the corruption prevalent in the Republic at this time would also allow it to be done in secret.

After the Supreme Chancellor received Emergency Powers from Sen. Binks, he was in a strong legal position to secure defense taxes from planets which had remained (often coerced) within the Republic's fold.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Groundhog Day] What happens to everyone not stuck in the time loop?

This could apply to basically any time loop plot line, but what does everyone else experience when the day ends? Phil will go back to the start of the day. Do they all reset along with him but just forget? Or do they continue on with the next day completely normally?

If everyone else continues to the next day, what happens to Phil? Does he exist in the next day world, or does he vanish as he is stuck in the time loop?

[Assistant] Theyre all also looping, but as far as we know Phil is the only one who is conscious for the loops. Ultimately to everyone else, they just remember his last loop as one normal day in their life where an awesome dude named Phil was around.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: How do we know that conservation of energy is a law? How have we proved that energy cannot be created or destroyed?

[Assistant]
A scientific law is simply a statement that holds up under repeated experimentation.

The law of conservation of energy has held up with every experiment ever thrown at it across all parts of the universe we can observe. It is verifiable with math, measurements, and tests. Is it *possible* that it's wrong (or incomplete)? Sure, but just try to prove it.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: Even if we can't access them, do all memories remain stored in the brain throughout life?

I mean every single sight we've ever seen, every emotion we've felt and at what time, the links between the two, all of it. I'd really like the answer to be yes, so that one day, if technology reaches that point in my lifetime, I'll be able to relive it all in some way.

[Assistant]
No. Although we know that some memories exist but are difficult to access, we also know that memories can fade away.  This seems to be particularly true for memories that aren't accessed often.

In fact, studies show that when a memory is accessed, it is virtually "wiped away", but then re-stored.  This seems to strengthen the memory again, but there's a downside. Each time we do this, the memory can be disrupted. It can be changed. We can end up "remembering" things that are very different than what actually occurred.

So when you access an old memory, you aren't really dredging up the original events that you stored away in your brain. You are remembering the memory of a memory of a memory....


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Whats the difference between a Z distribution, T Distribution, and F distribution?

[Assistant]
A Z distribution arises naturally from the sum of i.i.d random variables as per the central limit theorem.

Let's also the define the chi-squared distribution, which is the sum of squared Z distributions. We call the amount of Z distributions that we sum up the degrees of freedom of the chi-squared distribution.

Now, the T distribution is a Z distribution divided by the square root of a scaled chi-squared distribution (scaled meaning that the chi-squared distribution is divided by its degrees of freedom).

The F distribution is the ratio of two scaled chi-squared distributions.

All of these distributions pop up in a variety of different contexts. There are no rules like "you have to use this one when comparing means and this one when comparing some other thing and this other one when your sample size is at least 30", although intro stats classes do tend to give that impression. They're used whenever we can show that a statistic or any other quantity of interest follows one of these distributions.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Dune] Why are there only humans in known universe?

[Assistant]
In Dune, they find an acceptable answer to Fermi's Paradox: Humans colonize dozens, hundreds, maybe thousands of worlds and yet, outside of truly alien creatures like the Sandworms, never find intelligent life, because there *is no other intelligent life*.

Space is vast, so vast that our human experience, our sapience, is just an island in a cold, dark ocean. Which is precisely why it must not stagnate, but must spread and evolve.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[MCU] We saw in the movies that kids have toy superhero figures. Who gets the royalties? What does Thor need with money?

Do Thanos figures get made? Could Thanos sue for copyright infringement if his likeness is used without permission? Does Hulk give his profit to charity, whereas Rocket Raccoon would be like...no way?

[Assistant] Traditionally, Tony Stark handles the merchandising rights to the Avengers, with profits going to the Maria Stark Foundation, a charity that helps the survivors of superhero attacks. He strongarms most of the heroes into going along with it.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why is it that Home advantage in most sports is a seriously considered factor. Example soccer where teams are notorious for not loosing at home regardless of opposition.

[Assistant]
There are few factors that give a team home field advantage:

1) No travelling - When you play at home, you do not require to travel a large distance to get to the game.  You get to stay at home with your family and friends.  This generally allows the players to be more rested.

2) Field dimensions - In soccer, the size of the pitch does not require to be an exact size, but just with certain parameters.  So, some fields are skinnier while some are longer.  This can give you a large advantage.  Depending the team's strategy, you can adjust your field dimension to give you the advantage.  Teams with fast wingers for example might prefer a longer, thinner field.

3) Climate - Sometimes, teams withing a league play in very different climates, especially for American football.  Teams the practice in the heat will play better in the heat.  So if a team that is used to colder weather comes to play in hot weather, then they have the disadvantage.

4) The fans - The fans do play a part in the game.  Some plays in the game work better for the players if there is silence.  So naturally, when the away team comes to a critical play where they need a bit of silence to communicate and concentrate, the fans make as much noise as possible.  Also, in soccer for example, the fans sing a lot of chants.  These chants may sometimes distract the opponents and they can inspire the home team.

EDIT: Another factor is the influence of refs.  Refs are human and sometimes their decisions are based on the reactions of others, especially the fans.  They may be more willing to make a call if they hear 50000 people shouting at them to do so.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: the Bah' Faith

An old friend of mine recently posted on Facebook that she went to a Bah' school for a retreat. After googling, I realize this is a religion. But the wikipedia page is... dense. Care to pare it down?

[Assistant] IIRC, the Baha'i faith holds that there is one true God, and that every "prophet" or founder of major world religions was a messenger of God providing an incomplete message, but one that would be understood by the people of that time. Krishna, the Buddha, Abraham, Jesus, and Muhammad were all revealing the True word of God, but God intentionally left the message incomplete. Sayyid Ali-Muhammad claimed that he knew the Mahdi was coming, and that he would be able to identify the Mahdi. The Mahdi is a messianic figure in twelve Shi'ite Islam who will bring a new age in which the world will be in union with the law of God. Mrz Husayn `Al Nr  was the one who the Bab "prophesied," he claimed to be the Mahdi. His teachings were written by his son, and Ali Nuri was proclaimed to be, all at once, the Mahdi (messianic figure of Islam), the Matreiya (messianic figure of Mahayana Buddhism), and the Messiah (or Second coming of Christ). Basically, because all "universal" religions claimed that a Divinely Inspired figure would appear sometime in the future to bring forth a New Age, the Baha'u'llah (Ali Nuri) and the Bab asserted that this was proof that all religions were in part correct, and furthermore claimed that Ali Nuri possessed all of the qualities of this figure. According to Baha'i, the teachings recorded by Ali Nuri's son encapsulate the complete teaching of the One True God. In other words, all of the other Holy Scriptures are incomplete revelations of the Word of God, while Ali Nuri's teaching fill in the blanks and provide the full and complete Word of God.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: What does it mean to die of "natural causes?"

[Assistant]
It's mostly a distinction used in the legal profession. Technically being eaten by a lion is a very natural way to die, but we wouldn't call that natural causes.

A cause of death can be accidental, murder, disease, or natural causes.

Accidental is you fall off a bridge.
Murder is somebody pushed you.
Disease would be something like cancer.
Natural causes would be something like heart failure due to advanced age or declining health.

We have a limited life span and as you get older, the chances of you not recovering from an illness go up. A 40 year old may have the strength to fight off a cold, but an 80 year old may not.

From a legal stand point, natural cause is a blameless death where as accidental, disease, or murder would have a cause and somebody or something to blame (even if it's yourself).


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
[Star Wars] How are the Wookies so frequently/easily subjugated?

Wookies as a whole seem to be just as intelligent as any other sentient race in the galaxy, and it has been stressed that you *really* don't want to fight one. They seem to have  access to the same technology everyone else has and are engaged in the galactic community enough to muster aid when necessary. So how come throughout the various settings in games, shows, etc they seem to be viewed as an easy to enslave race?

[Assistant]
It's not so much that they're *easily* enslaved, so much as *usefully* enslaved- they're one of the strongest and toughest species, seemingly rivaling droids.

People who wants slaves go for them, and enough of them succeed that the reputation grows.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Does pubic hair have a specific function?

Does it have any beneficial effect or is it just there to run wild and free?

[Assistant] I don't yet see anyone mentioning that pubic hair can act as a visual signal of sexual maturity. Of course, we don't use it as such today, when we wear clothing and prosecute people who go after young people who might even yet have had pubes for several years (and rightly so). Nevertheless, it does serve as an external signal positively indicating the hormonal prerequisites for reproduction.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: why is it that when we get really hungry/haven't eaten in a while food no longer seems apetizing?

[Assistant]
After you've run through the carbs in your bloodstream you revert to 'starvation mode' when your body begins to convert fat into usable energy. In order to make this manageable your brain shuts down the digestive tract and you are no longer 'hungry'.

Right after you run out of carbs you get very, very hungry. A few hours later you aren't hungry anymore because your brain has shut down that part of the body. You will remain not hungry until you eat food (and subsequently run out of blood-stream carbs again) or you run out of fat, in which case you'll get so desperate you'll literally eat babies.

A low-carb diet aims to keep you in fat-burning not-hungry mode until you reach your desired weight, at which point you stop dieting and/or start eating babies.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: Incest should not be as taboo as it is.

First some context:

I had a brief incestuous relationship with my older brother after a serious sports related injury left him with two broken arms.

We never had penetrative sex, but I did help him masturbate both orally and with my hands over the course of a few months.

Both of us view the experience in a pretty positive light looking back, and there were no negative long term effects to speak of.

If anything, it just brought us closer together. It didnt (and still doesnt) feel like some dirty taboo thing we should feel ashamed of.

Which brings me to the point of this post.

I truly dont believe incest should be villainized so long as its consensual and birth control is used.

If those conditions are met, whats REALLY the harm?

Whether its legal or not, adults are going to do what they want.

[Assistant]
Your argument is basically that if incest is fine, then it's fine. Well, yes. It is.

The whole point of the argument against incest is that there's a very high chance that will not be truly consensual because of family dynamics, hence why society is usually against it. Not because it's completely impossible to have a positive incestuous relationship.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] How can chemicals like CO2 acidify water if they don't contain H+?

[Assistant]
Hello there,

Carbon Dioxide, when it dissolves in water and becomes what is known as an *aqeuous ion* in chemistry, essentially splits a water molecule thanks to its higher electronegativity in relation to the water molecule.

The new molecule that forms is known as *Carbonic Acid* with formula H2CO3.

The equilibrium equation looks like this :

CO2 + H20 <==> H2CO3^- + H^+

Carbonic acid is a very weak acid, with a equilibrium pH of 5.7 at one atmosphere of pressure at room temperature.

Carbonic acid also rapidly decomposes, given time, into CO2 gas and water. Its acidic equilibrium is maintained by keeping solutions at pressures only slightly higher than 1 atmosphere.

The very best examples of carbonic acid in every day life are :

* A can of carbonated soft drink.
* Respiration

In a can of carbonated soft drink, the fizzyness of the liquid comes from being a solution of carbonic acid, kept in equilibrium by being canned at a pressure greater than 1 atmosphere. When we open the can, the pressure of the can is brought into a new equilibrium with the outer atmosphere, at 1 atm. As a result, the CO2 dissolved in the water now starts to escape, and the drink is saturated with bubbles of escaping gas - which is very pleasant on the tongue of the person drinking it. Eventually, all the gas escapes out of the water, and we say that the drink is 'flat', and contains no escaping gas.

In our blood, and in the blood of all other animals, cellular respiration produces CO2 as a waste gas by product of glycolysis and other metabolic energy processes. To keep this from poisoning the cells, large animals (like us) dissolve this CO2 into the blood in the form of Carbonic Acid, H2CO3. The solution is very dilute (blood does not, after all, fizz when we get a small cut of a vein), but the solubility of CO2 in water as Carbonic acid is good enough to allow the gas to escape into the alveoli of the lungs, and then be exhaled into the air in the process of respiration.

The small amounts of CO2 from soft drinks and human&animal respiration are taken up by plants in the sea and the land, to make new plants, food, and biological material for the animals - this is the biological carbon cycle.

As rain drops fall through the air, they have enough time to interact with CO2 in the upper troposphere to form weak carbonic acid solutions. In areas of extreme CO2 concentration in the air (though this is typically a little over the mean atmospheric CO2 concentration 0.25% on average), the result is what is known as *Acid Rain*, which in turn can have effects on lakes and rivers, but only over a very short time.

By the way, this naturally occurring acid rain is not related to the more desctructive Acid Rains created by human industrial pollution of the atmosphere by sulphur chemistry, where rain combines with Sulphates in the atmosphere to form the very corrosive Sulphonic Acid, a close a relative of the very corrosive Sulphuric Acid. Acid rains, in general, are not very destructive unless sustained over incredibly long periods of geological time.

Hope this helps.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
How do flu/cold viruses survive lockdown?

I live in New Zealand where the coronavirus is nearly eliminated because of the lockdown. However we are being advised to get flu shots. How is it that the lockdown eliminated covid but not all the other cold/flu viruses (which have a lower R naught value)? Where are the viruses being introduced from if no one is entering the country without going into two week quarantine?

[Assistant] Animal transmission and long-term surface transmission do occur, also some people manage to not beat an illness in the average time and stay a carrier longer than average, but the easiest example is also the simplest.  Even under lockdown some portion of the population is still required to do work and move around among others and some of them get infected.  On top of that long distance travel is likely to resume eventually, probably within your normal flu season, and there are many areas where the lockdown didn't align with others that will still have passed on and picked up new strains.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: What's to prevent me from shooting down a blimp with a sniper rifle from far away?

EDIT:

I have no intention of shooting down a blimp. Reason I asked is that I saw the news of the multi-million dollar military blimp going loose and thought: "Gee, all it takes is one terrorist to shoot a bullet into the blimp to bring it down"

[Assistant] I suppose the same thing that prevents you from shooting pedestrians with a sniper rifle. Either a sufficiently developed human conscience,  a healthy fear of legal repercussions, or at minimum a better hobby.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Evangelion] If all the student in class 2-A are unknowingly candidates for being an Eva Pilot, has no one noticed that not one of these kids has a mom?

[Assistant] No, the kids are all aware of that. Kensuke brings up the fact that they don't have moms. (A few have step-moms mind you.) They just don't see it as being anything out of the ordinary, since many people lost loved ones in the wake of Third Impact.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Game of Thrones]could people in the seven kingdoms use rags soaked wild fire as the explosive charge for cannons & muskets?

[Assistant]
Theoretically? Possibly. It will need to have just the right amount of explosive potential to launch the projectile, but not turn into a bomb in some poor sap's hand.

Practically? No. Wild Fire has the property of 'keeps burning for a long time', it's a great property for something to have near your enemies, not in your hands.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Is creation not a form of change?

Aquinas' prime mover argument argues for the existence of a first mover, an unactualized actualizer, which actualises the potential of other objects without being actualised or moved itself. Aquinas concluded this being to be God.

This God is pure act. It does not have any dormant potentials awaiting actualisation. And yet, this God also created the universe. **It had the potential to create the universe, and then it actually created the universe.**  Surely, this counts as a form of change. And if this is a form of change, then God would require a changer of its own - contradiction.

How do you avoid this contradiction. Why is it sufficient to conclude that creation is not a form of change? Isn't God's potential to create being actualised here?

[Assistant]
When Aquinas says that God is purely actual, he does not mean that God lacks active potency (the potency to act on something else). Aquinas very explicitly says that there is active potency in God (ST I, Q. 25, A. 1, ad. 1). Rather, Aquinas means that God lacks passive potency (the potency to be acted on by something else).

>It had the potential to create the universe, and then it actually created the universe.

Yes.

>Surely, this counts as a form of change. And if this is a form of change, then God would require a changer of its own - contradiction. How do you avoid this contradiction.

Again, "the potential to create the universe" is an active potency, not a passive potency. So, God does not change by creating the world.

>Why is it sufficient to conclude that creation is not a form of change?

Creation is a change on the part of the thing that is created. Creation is not a form a change on the part of the one creating.

>Isn't God's potential to create being actualised here?

No. The things in the world are being actualized by God.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
What are the best papers on the subject of transgenderism?

I'm more interested in metaphysical perspectives, i.e., arguments on the question of whether trans individuals are or aren't the gender they identify as. Not really looking for ethical/political perspectives.

Thanks!

[Assistant]
>  the question of whether trans individuals are or aren't the gender they identify as

Not a direct answer but might be worth mentioning. When the question is posed like this, I'd be careful in posing it as a question of metaphysics or only metaphysics, because there is also an epistemological question there that is very important for both metaphysical and political implications of gender; i.e., the question of whether a person can be mistaken about their gender, and how important a person's geniune word is to the epistemological justification of gender-claims about said person.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why are old "religions"(norse, pagan etc.) are not considered religions today, when Christianity, Islam etc. is and they have pretty much the same proofs for their beliefs?

[Assistant]
A religion isn't just the things people believe, it's the institution to act in accordance with that belief. That is, Christianity isn't *just* the belief that Jesus lived and taught in Galilee, was crucified by the Romans, and was resurrected, liberating some or all people from some or all of the consequences of sin. It's the whole apparatus of believers and churches and Mass and revival meetings and Bible study groups.

Norse or Greco-Roman paganism doesn't have that in the modern world (except for a few revivalist movements, which most people would agree are religions, even if they think they're silly). The Elusinian Mysteries aren't performed. No one goes to Delphi or Cumae or Dodona to consult with an oracle. There are no Vestal Virgins. The last vestiges of the actual practice of Roman paganism died off in the five or six hundreds.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: During exams, what actually happens in your brain that causes your mind to go blank?

[Assistant] One possible explanation is the stress of exams makes your body go into fight or flight mode where stress hormones such as cortisol diverts glucose (energy) away from the hippocampus and thus decreasing your ability to recall memories. For our ancestors, this gave them the extra punch needed to survive, as it was more likely for their survival to be hinged upon beating the predator threatening them than beating the test curve. Sadly, this means when you're stressed it'd be harder to recall specific memories.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [Mission Impossible] What is Ethan Hunts X factor? Lucky? Athletic? Preparation? Tough? Supporting cast? In a world of talented spies and villains, he always comes out on top.

[Assistant]
Honestly, all of the above. That's basically it. There's times he's beaten nearly senseless and gets by just barely. He's been straight up a second from death and been rescued. He's saved himself. Sometimes his athletics save the day, sometimes his training, his gadgets, his team, sometimes all of the above.

The mark of a good agent is getting the job done, and the one thing Ethan is the best at is always, always getting the job done.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
ELI5: How come sleeping too much makes you feel tired?

To clarify: I'm not asking for a cure to this problem, but a scientific explanation as to why.   Thank you.

[Assistant]
It all depends. Your body goes through 90 minute sleep cycles, and if you so happened to wake up in between these sleep cycles, you'll be alert and refreshed. If you wake up during a sleep cycle, you'll be groggy and sluggish. For example, if you go to sleep at 10:30 PM, your sleep cycles will end at midnight, 1:30, 3:00, 4:30, 6:00, 7:30, 9:00, 10:30, etc. So if you wake up at 7:30, you'll be more rested than if you woke up at 8:15, despite getting more sleep if you woke up at 8:15.

I hope this clears things up for you :)


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why do we drool when we sleep? More specifically during daytime naps...

[Assistant]
Drool isn't produced when you're completely asleep... however, it is stimulated by the parasympathetic nervous system (also known as the "rest and digest" half of the nervous system, the calming half).

One of the main reasons for drool is to keep your mouth wet, your airway lubricated, and components in it have a germicidal effect, killing off some of the bad bugs that like to colonize your mouth.

When you're falling asleep, these factors are still in play - and also, due to your horizontal position, less saliva goes down your throat.  The combination of the parasympathetic nervous system being stimulated, the change in posture, and the general relaxation of muscles.

Once asleep, however, the drooling stops - which is why your mouth tastes bad when you wake up!  Your mouth has dried out and new bacterial colonies have popped up, leading to a nasty taste/smell.

IF you are still drooling while fully asleep, this can point to underlying issues in sleep, such as sleep apnea.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: what are prion diseases? Are they like other diseases or are they completely different?

[Assistant]
Prions are protein-based disease and are quite different than most common disease you're probably familiar with.

Most common "diseases" are caused by viruses or bacteria. Bacteria are small biological cells that do all the normal stuff of most living things (grow, replicate, eat, etc). When certain ones get where they're not suppose to they can have harmful effects like attacking healthy stuff we need or creating a bunch of stuff that's bad for us. Examples of bacterial disease are tetanus, salmonella, and meningitis. Viruses are basically little particles that can break into host cells and trick them into making more viruses. This generally kills the host cells which is obviously bad for the host! Examples of viral diseases are the common cold, ebola, and chicken pox.

Prions are basically misfolded proteins. So there's no "living" element. It's just a molecule that's somehow in the wrong shape. Why is this important? Well proteins form the basis of some pretty important cellular and bodily functions and their shape is very important to make sure these functions happen correctly. Proteins in the wrong shape can either stop doing what they need to or actively start doing bad things. Think about an egg white. When eggs are "raw" the egg white is this clear jelly substance. When you cook eggs you are essentially unfolding that protein and it tuns into a solid white substance. So you can see how simply unfolding the protein (in this case by heating it) you can change something quite dramatically.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: why does the queen still have royal riches and fame even though she has almost no authority over the British people's?

[Assistant]
The British Monarchy is, for both Britain and the whole United Kingdom, a sort of living monument.  People usually talk about figureheads dismissively, but in the case of the Queen it's a very serious job, and it makes a real difference in the life of the country.

A country's monuments and other symbols (flags, anthems, etc.) give its citizen a way to think about loyalty to the country separately from the country's politics. This lends stability to the country's politics, and a sense of unity to the citizens, because everyone understands that the country is bigger than just whatever people are arguing about right now.

The fact that Queen Elizabeth II is a human being makes a her even more effective monument, because people like her as a person. This personal connection ties very powerful and positive human inclinations together.

The whole thing also strikes me as incredibly british: as a "living monument", as I've called her, Elizabeth II's job is to be the most respectable and polite person in the world.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] If time was frozen would the air particles prevent you from being able to move/breath?

[Assistant]
If time was frozen entirely, you would be frozen as well, and have no need/ability to breathe.

Most people with the ability to stop time for the rest of the universe, but stay moving themselves, either are simply moving so fast that everything appears to be stopped, (in which case they would theoretically be able to metabolize air and move it aside at what seems like a normal speed) or they actually stop time, but keep objects directly in contact with them in motion, so that they can interact with their environment.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Why are there common food allergens?

Peanuts, tree nuts, soy, shellfish.

Why are people more likely to be allergic to the above and not other things? Why peanuts and soy but not other legumes?

[Assistant]
A theory of why people seem to be developing so many more food allergies is not just because or food sources are more globalized than ever, but due to the inflammation response. Your microbiome (all the bacteria living in your body) have a big effect on your immune system and how it responds to external factors. Breast milk selects for very specific bacteria in your gut that aid with development and your immune response. Many mothers have gone towards formula with "prebiotics" in them which enrich for bacteria, but are no where near as specific as human milk oligosaccharides.

Also, the diversity of the mother's diet can also have a big effect on food allergies. If the mother is a picky eater and tends to avoid certain foods or food groups, it is more likely that the offspring will have allergies to those foods. Again a lot of this stuff comes down to the antigens you are exposed to early in life, your microbiome, inflammation response, and how your immune system reacts to foreign antigens.

TL;DR Breast feed your children, eat a balanced diet to maintain good bacteria in your gut (also drink Kiefer)


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [The Cabin in the Woods] What was the purpose of destroying the world at the end, when the Titans could have benefited with partial sacrifices every year?

[Assistant]
They weren't *benefiting* from the sacrifices, they enjoyed watching them.

If a tv show starts making crappy content, you don't sit around and benefit from the not quite as good shows. You switch it off and find something else to watch.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: What happened to the Spanish Empire?

[Assistant]
Napoleon, Simn Bolvar and Teddy Roosevelt happened to it.

Actually it the process that led to the decline of what was once one of the largest and richest empires in the history of the planet to what Spain is today is really complex and multifaceted.

It took a long time and lots of causes. Chief among them were internal troubles, trouble with the neighboring France and the rest of Europe, trouble in the colonies that wanted independence and finally as a sort of nail in the coffin trouble with the United States of America which ended up showing the world that what was left of the Spanish military might was far less impressive than everyone thought which brought on even more troubles with everyone else after the Americans were done with them.

Nowadays all that is left of the Spanish Empire is a lot of people outside Spain especially in the Americas speaking Spanish and some small residual territorial claims in the form of two tiny enclaves in North Africa and some islands popular with tourist in the Atlantic of the cost of Africa.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] Where do failures lie in autodidact-ism for philosophy?

[Assistant]
From what I've seen:

1. Lack of dedication \(works for a while but people give up\);
2. No secondary sources \(people generally stay within the classics\);
3. Misinterpretation \(sometimes philosophers write within a certain context that you are not aware unless you know the surrounding literature and such, which professors generally point out to you when you start\);
4. Specializing too early \(autodidacts generally focus on a specific area, but in philosophy there's something to learn even when you study something else that you might not enjoy so much\);
5. No writting \(writting forces you to re\-evaluate your points of view and arguments and strengthen them\).


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
CMV: Tech monopolies should be banned as a class

A monopoly is a company no longer affected by the competitive pressures of its market.

In the previous decades monopolies were rare and expensive to build, mostly related to public infrastructure. It made sense to regulate and/or break them up on a case-by-case basis.

Tech platforms are cheap and easy to create, and they start their own markets. Their status is not justified by the nature of the market: a decentralized solution is always possible.

Tech platforms should be banned from obstructing interoperation, and should be forced to support popular new open standards even when those standards directly compete with the platforms.

Change my view.

[Assistant]
Are there any modern day tech monopolies that you think should be banned?

Can you name them?

Because it sounds like you have some companies in mind/but don't name anyone which makes it hard to argue if tech monopolies exist at the moment or not...


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User]
Where does the energy difference between absorbed and emitted photons go to?

My teacher told me when a photon is absorbed and emitted again, it has a lower frequency. So it loses energy. Where does that energy go to?

[Assistant]
Typically, when we talk about photons being absorbed and emitted, we're talking about electrons in an atom doing the absorbing and emitting. An election in an atom is attracted to the positively charged nucleus, which causes it to "orbit" in the closest possible position to the nucleus. (I put orbit in quotes because electrons don't literally orbit like planets, but it's a useful image.)

In order to move an electron away from its nucleus, you need to add energy to it. It's similar to pulling two magnets apart: if you don't touch the magnets, they'll stay connected, but you can pull them apart, which uses the energy in your body and adds potential energy to the magnets (the potential energy turns into kinetic energy when you let go of the magnets and they snap back together).

So when a photon is absorbed by an electron, the electron gains the photon's energy, causing it to jump to an orbit further away from the nucleus. If the photon has enough energy, it can even knock the electron clean off the atom.

Now, due to quantum mechanics, an electron can only orbit at certain distances around an atom, and these specific distances correspond to certain amounts of energy. After a little bit of time, an electron that has been bumped up to a higher energy orbit will re-emit a photon, losing some energy and jumping back down to a lower-energy orbital. Most of the time, it will re-emit a photon of the same energy that it absorbed and jump back to the same energy level it was at before. But if the photon was energetic enough to knock the electron up by a few energy levels, it is possible for the electron to only drop partway, and release a photon with less energy. That photon will have the energy equal to the difference of the two orbitals that the electron moved between. A short time later, the electron will drop again, emitting *another* photon with less energy than the original, again equal to the difference in energy between the electron's old orbital and it's new one. This process can happen as many times as there are empty orbitals between the electron's current orbital and the one it wants to get back to (which is the lowest-energy orbital that is currently unoccupied), but usually an electron just drops the whole way in one step, and less frequently drops in smaller steps.

In any event, when an electron drops some number of steps at a time back to its minimum energy orbital, the energy of all the photons it emitted will add up to equal the energy of the original photon that it absorbed!


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] ELI5: Why are car keys usually two-sided, whereas house keys are usually one-sided?

[Assistant] Car locks become harder to pick as they have pins on both sides of the tumbler. More specifically, it's pretty much impossible to single-pin pick a car lock. Since it turns out that more people look to break into a car than break into a house, it's worth it for that little extra security.


[System] Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:

[User] [DC] If Batman so smart,Why doesn't he find a more permanent solution for the joker ?

[Assistant]
The only permanent solution is to kill the Joker. Batman doesn't trust himself to make that call and Gotham's justice system is notoriously corrupt.

If the Joker has human contact, he'll weasel his way out of any cell. If he doesn't, Harley and his gang will break him out.