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

[User]
ELI5:Difference between "Starring", "Also starring", "Guest/special appearance", "With", "And", "And X as Y" in a TV show intro.

Sometimes an actor is credited as "Special appearance by..." yet their character is seen in a lot of back to back episodes or even the majority of a certain season. Is this somehow money related? Do actors have a special clause in their contract for this? If there are a lot of superstars in a TV show, how does a network decide whose name comes up first/last?

[Assistant]
The order that the names appear is called billing, and it's a very big deal in Hollywood. Generally, the top stars are listed first, and that's a negotiating point with the agents and the studios.

Sometimes if there are multiple big names, one or more might be "last-billed." While first-billed is best, no big star wants their name lost in the middle of the credits. So they might negotiate to be last-billed, where it says "With ..." or "And X as Y" after the main cast.

The network doesn't decide it at all. The *studio* determines that as a result of contract negotiations with the actors.


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

[User]
ELI5: If it's possible for animals to be born with instincts and behaviors (like bees knowing direction using the sun) could there be some advanced civilization somewhere that is born knowing calculus (for example).

I was wondering this since I've been thinking about all the animals out there that sort of just "know" how to survive already, coupled with the fact that there are planets out in the universe that have existed many times longer than earth, and likely have civilizations that have evolved on them as well.

On another note, do you think the technology to create a baby with all this information already in it's brain will come about sooner than a similar evolution would?

[Assistant]
Sure, it is possible, but it would likely be quite a burden on the poor creatures. The great advantage that humans have had over other organisms on Earth is our tremendous adaptability through our ability to learn brand new ideas which our genetics don't provide. If this generation calculus is useful, but next generation flying airplanes is useful, we don't want to have big chunks of our brain dedicated to calculus from birth.

What seems to be more useful to us are structures which make learning different things easier, but not too pre-programmed in something specific. For example, we have a tremendous in-built capacity for language, but nobody knows a specific language, so if a person born to German parents grows up in Japan, that child will be able to learn the contextually appropriate language. Similarly, we have in-built capacity for understanding numbers, but not to nearly the same degree. Presumably we could increase this capacity through bio-engineering, but we wouldn't be stuck with one particular way of thinking about math.

For evolution to result in an organism with this much specific information would require an environment which selects rather heavily for it and an organism which has a reasonable capacity to move into the niche. Our more generalized approach to learning seems much more likely to occur as these capacities are well suited to a greater variety of circumstances. For an organism to not develop technology capable of self-engineering, but be in the genetic ballpark of behavior such as differentiation seems quite unlikely.


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

[User]
I believe that the only way to end world hunger is to allow those suffering to starve. CMV.

I'm not saying that it's fair or that we shouldn't try to help other countries as much as we can, but an influx of relief (i.e. food and other supplies) from an outside country usually sees a raise in the population of that region. Aren't we ensuring that people are able to reproduce and raise the next generation of starving villagers when we send OUTSIDE sources of food? If the region were able to reach a self-sustainable population (whether by being able to produce food to feeds its people or to afford to import the food itself) would this not solve the problem of world hunger?

[Assistant]
This is your argument:

1. Sending food to poor countries exacerbates overpopulation which is the root cause of hunger.
2. Therefore, the only way to end world hunger is to allow those suffering to starve.

Even if we accept that your first premise is true, there's still a big leap in logic here: isn't it possible that *other things* could work?


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

[User] If salt raises the boiling temp of water, is there additive that will let water freeze at a higher temp also?

[Assistant]
Adding salt depresses the freezing point of water - thats why municipalities salt the roads in the winter where it is snowy and icy.

Both the boiling point elevation and freezing point depression are types of colligative properties (in case you want to read more - use that term).

Colligative properties are about how the properties of a solvent (in this case water) can be changed by an added solute. It doesnt matter what the identity of the solute is, it only matters how many particles are present (the particles essentially get in the way of the interactions between the water molecules).

Fundamentally what occurs is that you lower the vapor pressure curve of the solution relative to the pure solvent. This causes both the boiling point elevation and the freezing point depression. So there is no way to add a substance to water and increase its freezing point, because the solvent is still water.


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

[User] ELI5: Where did the social expectation of only girls wearing dresses come from?

[Assistant] About three thousand years ago, when the fashion was robes (because technology) men who were going into the field to work, or going to battle would "gird up their loins" by taking the hems of their robes, and tying them up around their legs like pants. This continued for quite a while, the styles started to change, robes became dresses over time, and pants became the norm for those that went out to work and fight. Being that peasant women stayed on the homestead for a majority of their lifetimes, there was no need for pants.


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

[User] ELI5: Why in some species of animals is the female typically larger than the male, and vice versa in others?

[Assistant]
It depends what the purpose of the male actually is. Females are the staple members of any given sexually reproducing species, because they're the ones that can have the babies. The males have a much more flexible role. In species that have quite small males, the male typically only exists to act as a sperm bank. In species where the male is a *lot* smaller, such as some spiders, there's also other pressures. In spiders, the male tends to be eaten by the female, so a small size is selected for because it makes the male seem less appetizing, which helps it to stay alive long enough to actually fertilise eggs.

In species where males are quite large, this is often because the males are competing for mates, where large members are more likely to beat small members. Alternatively, the males may play a role in raising the offspring, rather than existing solely to fuck, which is often the case in mammals. In a lot of species where the males are substantially larger than the females, it's because the men have another purpose beyond sex and child raising. For example, in some species of fish, the females spawn inside shells, and the males become much larger because their role is to find the shells - big male can move bigger shell than small male.

Basically, there are a huge number of different reasons, and you're best off googling the species you're particularly interested in.


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

[User] ELI5: Why, when you rub your eyes really hard, you are transported into a swirly pattern galaxy?

[Assistant]
You stimulate your retina when you rub your eyes which causes it to produce some sort of visual noise.

Try looking to one side as far as you can with your eyes closed. Then slightly touch your eyeball through your eyelids on the edge of the opposite site for some circular visuals. :)

Edit: eyes closed all the time.. It ia not neccessary to touch your eyeball directly ;)


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

[User]
How valuable is sterilization of a knife used to cut raw chicken?

The guidelines for cleaning a knife after cutting raw chicken typically advise to sterilize with something like a chlorine bleach solution after washing with soap and water. Conversely, the guidelines for washing your hands after handling raw chicken are to thoroughly wash with soap and water for 20-30 seconds.

If washing with soap and water is truly sufficient to ensure your hands are not a significant disease vector for something like salmonella, why does the same not hold true for a knife blade?

[Assistant]
I think what the CDC, FDA, WHO etc. are attempting to accomplish with guidelines is really just the best balance they can come up with to statistically reduce (not eradicate) the occurence of food borne illness.

Why dunk a knife in bleach solution to sanitize it? Because you *can* - the knife doesn't care, and bleach will obviously eradicate more gram negative bacteria than just soap and water so why not suggest it.

They can't tell you to bleach your hands though, and even overuse of alcohol based hand sanitizer is going to irritate skin eventually, so soap and hot water is the optimum safe and effective recommendation for your skin. It won't eradicate all food borne bacteria, but it can at least reduce the bacterial load to below seriously infectious thresholds.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do I need more dish-washing liquid for greasy plastic kitchenware than for metal/glass/ceramic?

Does the plastic make the dish-washing liquid less effective? Does grease stick better to plastic? Or does the plastic just feel more "greasy" for some reason?

[Assistant] Plastic is like grease - it's hydrophobic, so grease sticks to plastic like grease sticks to grease.  Detergents are amphipathic, ie they have a part that likes water, and a part that likes grease.  So, the part that likes grease sticks to the grease, and the part that likes water pulls the whole thing into the water.  In order for grease to come off the plastic, there must be enough detergent to convince it to come loose.  Metal and glass are hydrophilic.  They like water, but don't particularly care about grease.   So it's easier for the detergent to get to the grease and solubilize it.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do browsers re-download an image when you click "save-as"?

[Assistant] Poor programming. Whatever browser you are using, the developers just found it easier to implement the feature that way. The big browser makers are competing with each other with more and more features, they aren't as much concerned with making sure the basic features work better, so minor stuff like this will go unfixed for a long time.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] How did the wampa get Luke attached to the ceiling of its ice cave?

Wampas don't seem to possess any kind of advanced heating / cooling technology. Luke appeared to have his feet embedded in ice. Affixing a fully grown human to the ceiling, using nothing but ice, seems like a fairly delicate process: just mashing handfuls of snow in around his feet while holding him up there doesn't seem likely to do the job. So how do wampas attach their prey to ceilings?

[Assistant] Wampas urinate at extremely high pressure, and in great volume. A jet of wampa urine can easily reach the ceiling of one of their lairs, where it will flash-freeze. They can use this remarkable ability to "glue" their prey to the walls or ceiling of their larder.


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

[User]
ELI5: How does a country lend money to another country?

 I've been reading about national debt, so I wonder, when a country lend money to another, I picture trucks loaded with tons of money, since it is millions or billions of dollars, so it's really like that or just a E-transfer?

[Assistant] Countries rarely set up specific loans at all. Most debt is that the country creates a treasury bond and says "buy this for 100 dollars and in 5 years you can turn it in for 105 dollars" type deal. Then one country just buys a bunch of those. Very rarely is it set up as a specific loan like you'd take from a bank.


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

[User]
[40K] How strong are the Chaos Gods?

Are they as strong as the Emperor? Stronger? How many primarchs does it take to kill one?

[Assistant]
The Chaos gods are inconceivably vast amalgamated intelligences created from the thought and emotions of mortals reflected into the immaterium.

They can be hurt, diminished, and changed, but so far as we know they can't truly die.  No more so than you could kill a portion of the night sky.


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

[User]
ELI5: How can someone be a director and star in the same film?

Forgive me for my ignorance, but I always pictured the director behind the camera, not in front of it.

[Assistant] They are behind the camera - they have an idea of how they want the shot to look like and can provide director guidance to the other actors, work with the cinematographer (the guy who actually aims the camera, frames shots etc.) and the rest of the crew.... once the shot is set up exactly how they want, they can step in front of the camera to act in the shot. While some directors give their cinematographers a lot of leeway in how they want the camera aimed, how it is to track or pan, zoom etc., directors usually work with the cinematographers they know well, who can just "know" what the director wants - which makes it easier for the director-actor to step out in front of the camera. And of course everyone is in constant communication and discussion.  But even so, its not that onerous; back to the monitors (the screens that show what's visible in the camera), back onto the set, back to the monitors...


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

[User] [ghosts] can ghosts levitate things or can they just pick things up when we can't see them so it looks like they're levitating?

[Assistant]
I would think it's actually a bit of both. The concept of a body that can move and move things is actually just the ghost projecting what they think they should look like into reality. They are of course a formless conciousness given form by their own expectations on how they should look.

Since ghosts are basically all mind and no body, there's no practical difference between levitating something and actually physically moving things.

tl;dr since telekinesis is reaching out with your mind and since ghosts are all mind and no body the answer is both things are true.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] What happens if a wizard and a muggle get divorced?

How is it handled logistically? Does the muggle get their memories altered to forget Wizards exist? Or are they closely monitored by the ministry? What if kids are involved?

[Assistant] If someone came up to you right now and said that their recently divorced partner was a wizard from a centuries old secret community hidden across the world who trained in a magic castle to cast spells and brew potions and who travelled via broomstick, teleporting fireplace and magic toilet and who has encountered dragons, unicorns, centaurs and giants would you believe a word they said?


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

[User]
[DBZ] If someone during the DBZ saga actually had the chance to wish for immortality or ultimate power how would that have affected the tournament of power? Would they let him/it compete?

Lets say frieza or Vegeta actually did get all the DBs and wished for immortality would they be eligible to compete?

[Assistant] Sure. In a timed battle where killing is an automatic disqualifier and you can just be thrown out of bounds, immortality by itself isn't a major asset. At best, the regeneration would help your stamina so that you could keep fighting hard longer, sort of like how the androids had infinite energy.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] How many Wizards know of the true extent of Muggle technological progress?

Do they know about Fighter Jets, Nuclear weapons, space travel?
And how would the majority of wizards react to knowledge of these inventions?

[Assistant] This is one of the reasons the harry potter world is hard to take seriously. There's just no justification for the strange apparent lack of knowledge about normal society. In fact, if that was the case it would read almost more like a dystopia. People with understandings and probably ethics indicative of the middle ages have lethal force and live among regular humans while clinging to this weird archaic dogmatism and refusing to learn about advancements in society. The people who live in western countries cut off from normal understanding of society are cults.


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

[User]
(How) Can morals exist without religion?

I've recently left Christianity, and this is the main question I'm grappling with.
Take what are, at least in my opinion, the two basic "moral" standards most people hold: the golden rule and justice/fairness. From a religious perspective, actions in line with these principles are objectively good because they please god. But without religion, are there any real grounds for saying that a just act is somehow better than an unjust one? Or that serving others is better than serving self? Couldn't these principles be reduced to modes of behavior people tend to like?
I am familiar with plato's argument in the republic that justice is beneficial to the individual and society as a whole, but I don't really find it all that convincing (as grounds for cleaning that justice is "good" and injustice is "bad"), so I am more interested in theories that don't rely on self-benefit (Or perhaps something more convincing than plato).

[Assistant] Most philosophers believe that even if God exists, morality would not depend on God, because either morality is just what god wants, in which case it is arbitrary and so there is no reason to follow it, or God knows moral truth/the correct moral standard, so it exists external to him and we could presumably find it.  The question of what this standard is though, and how it is justified, is the fundamental question of ethics, so there arent easy answers.  Some philosophers appeal to intuition, or intuition refined by formulating principles by abstracting from (some of) our individual moral intuitions and then testing those same  principles against (other) intuitions, ultimately bringing them into harmony   (this is known as reflective equilibrium).  Some (mostly Kantians) argue that morality is entailed by the standards of practical reason, or reasoning about our actions.  Some try to analyze/reconstruct the logic of moral language  or moral argumentation and develop moral theories based on that.  There are many different theories.


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

[User]
[Chosen Ones] Private McNobody accidentally touched an ancient Mcguffin of power, and now it only works for him. What do we do with him?

The exact details aren't quite in yet; there was apparently a giant incident at the location of the claiming, and accurate reports are still trying to be pieced together. Whether it was a gun, a sword, a robot, or some fancy android, we aren't sure. What is clear however, is that said item got them out of an otherwise lethal encounter, and now they're trying to make their way back for a debriefing.

The PR Department and it's political backers want to plaster him on every promotional media item; something about being divinely favored. Have him on the front lines so he's always visible, and doing very showy diplomatic posturing jobs.

The R&D boys want to get their hands on it as soon as it lands, and try to mass produce it for everyone else to use. Naturally it's probably going to be confiscated ASAP, and he's going to be accompanying them until they can work it out.

Military higher ups have got it in their heads to use him and his new toy as part of a custom covert ops unit; make a big show of force, but keep him moving and unpredictable to strike at key points.

Lenny's taking bets in the break room as to what's going to happen. You guys want in before the new celebrity makes landfall?

[Assistant]
Were orders disobeyed?  A field-expedient execution might be necessary to separate Pvt. McNobody from the Mcguffin.

Was the operation a success, or was he an unlikely sole survivor?  *Corporal* McNobody has a slightly higher pay grade, and may sound better on the PR / PsyOps side.

If there item is entirely bound to Pvt. McNobody, then R&D will have nothing to work with.  They can't recreate its effects, or analyze it without destroying it or potentially killing Pvt. Dumbluck.

Depending on performance reports, Special Ops might not be exactly the best setting for conscript McJackass.

Any chance it was accompanied by a McGuffin Diary, user manual, third-party synthetic consciousness of guidance, or any other indication of function?


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

[User]
[Marvel/DC] How would people's feelings about heroes and vigilantism break down along party lines?

Recognising that the actual politics of the DC and Marvel comics universes are pretty well hidden from partisan identification, supposing Spiderman were real and were a controversial figure in the media, or supposing Batman existed in the same universe. Would it be the Republicans or the Democrats who are on the supportive side of the controversy?

Do the republicans appreciate heroes who represent hard work and personal responsibility thanks to individual liberty and minimal government involvement, against the Democrats who want to see power checked? Or is it the Democrats who are more willing to accept a new way of fighting crime while the Republicans favor good old fashioned police and military involvement?

What would Donald Trump say?

Thunderbolt Ross and J. Jonah Jameson both seem conservative to me, but so does James Gordon and Daredevil's supportive priest. Are there any apparent liberals who take sides on these issues? Any relevant cameo appearances by real-world politicians?

[Assistant] Well, in the context of the Marvel universe anti-superhuman activists like J. Jonah Jameson, Thunderbolt Ross, and William Stryker are almost always conservatives. Within the context of political policy, the Republican Party seems to push more for government regulation over superhumans, but many of these regulatory efforts are likely bipartisan. Ronald Reagan created the Commission of Superhuman Activities deal with superhuman issues and The Superhuman Registration Act was passed under George W. Bush's tenure. In contrast, Barack Obama gave Norman Osborn, and later Captain America, near autonomy in running their versions of the Avengers and repealed the Superhuman Registration Act, (though this was done in order to get Captain America to run the Avengers.)


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

[User]
[DC] Let's assume I'm some sort of God-tier being with potentially limitlessness power, does Batman accept my offer of resurrecting his parents if he quits being Batman.

Stipulations: Thomas and Martha Wayne will be brought back from the dead as they were the morning the day of their shooting to live out the rest of their lives (no bamboosles), if, Bruce agrees to step down in his vigilante role; he can either discontinue the Batman role or give the title to someone else, but can have no further involvement in crimefighting in any way.

Does he accept the offer?

[Assistant]
Can he still try and do good as Bruce Wayne though, as well as help out the Bat-Family in the background, or does he have to cut ties off completely?

If he had to basically completely abandon Gotham and the Bat-Family, he'd probably say no.

If he could still do social crusader stuff as Bruce Wayne, and act as a guide mentor to the Bat-Family, he'd probably be tempted to say yes, but it'd depend on his current mood and how convincing your intentions are to him.


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

[User] [Fallout - New Vegas] What's Benny's last name?

[Assistant] Since he was part of a raider/tribal gang before becoming part of the Chairmen, it's doubtful he has one. If anything, he might identify with his roots, and might consider himself a "Boot Rider". Or perhaps he takes more of an interest in old world American history, and calls himself "Benny Siegel", since that's the main man he modeled himself after. Either way, any last name Benny might have would be something he makes up himself, but it's unlikely he's ever thought of one.


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

[User] [W40K] Are Jesus Christ and The Emperor the same being?

[Assistant] The Emperor never hogged the spotlight prematurely. He wasn't Jesus. He was the teacher who whispered in Jesus' ear as a child. He was the voice that spoke to John the Baptist in the wilderness. He raised a cheer when the moneylenders were expelled from the Temple, and he howled for blood when Jesus and his fellow rebels were crucified. He nodded as Jesus sighed out his last breath and with infinite patience and compassion, he picked up his beggar's walking stick and vanished into the night.


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

[User]
Men and Abortion Rights

So, for my Sex and Love class we were given the exam questions to study. One of them is if men should have any rights in regards to abortion.

Such as cases where mother wants to abort, father doesn't.

I want to say in a theoretical world yes.

If greater utility is brought by keeping the child than aborting it is, and we forgo all other theories, then the abortion should not be allowed. Or, from another perspective, something like in a situation where if it's proven the mother is unable to think rationally due to mental illness or addiction.

Existentialism: since the father perceives the fetus as his child, then the fetus is in fact a child and not merely a fetus. So aborting would be to deny the father to project himself as a father and annihilating future value of life. I think I will abandon this though, it's not a very sound argument.

Obviously, we cannot impede on a woman's bodily autonomy.

So I was thinking, in the real world, allowing for a type of "financial abortions" where the mother or father can give up their parental rights, via court order. So long as abortions are available to the mother, so should a type of abortion for the father. And allowing the mother to have a type of financial abortion may help encourage her to go through with the pregnancy for the father.

I'm not sure though.

[Assistant]
>But obviously this can't work in real life.

You should reexamine your argument if your moral conclusions only make sense when starting with a "theoretical world" instead of the real one. It seems like you're starting with assumptions that abstract away from relevant moral considerations like a person's bodily autonomy and wellbeing of the child.


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

[User] ELI5: How do 2-party governments work? Surely one party would always have a majority in the goverment, and therefore win every vote.

[Assistant]
Not necessarily, especially in countries like the US. Here in the US, the elections of our executive branch are separate from the elections of our Representatives, which are again separate from the elections of our Senators.

What this means is that you can have a Democratic President, and a Republican controlled House, and a Democratic controlled Senate at the same time. The three are essentially forced to work together to get anything done. Neither party can force through anything without the support of the House, Senate, and President.

Further complicating things is the fact that a Democrat doesn't have to vote the party line. They can, and often do, choose to support the other side of the issue if they so desire.

Edit: didn't intend to single out Democrats in the last paragraph. Republicans can also  vote against their party.


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

[User]
[General] If someone is strong enough to wield an oversized sword, do they really need a weapon?

I recall watching a youtuber named Skallagrim who talks about weapons. I think in a video where he talked about Dark Souls or Berserk he said that if you're strong enough to properly use a sword like Dragonslayer you're better off ditching it and just tearing through enemies with your bare hands. Is this true? If so, what added use might there be in using a weapon anyway?

[Assistant]
More reach, for one. Your hands can only reach as far as the ends of your arms, a giant sword can reach quite a bit farther than that. It's very useful to be able to hit people before they can hit you.

Also, giant swords are generally made of tougher material than hands are. Your sword isn't going to bet bruised or bloody, it's knuckles won't hurt from punching armor, it won't get burned if your enemy is on fire (or made of fire). It might get nicked or lose its edge, but this almost never happens with giant swords, and even then a few minutes with a whetstone and it'll be good as new.

Finally, giant swords can potentially hit multiple enemies at once. Tearing people apart with your hands is a one at a time kind of thing, and will take significantly longer to tear through a group of chaff.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Instead of cloning a bounty hunter, why not clone a Jedi?

If instead of cloning Jango Fett, why not clone a Jedi? Would it not be more beneficial to have an army of Jedi vs an army of bounty hunters? Although Jango is a skilled combatant, I would have to imagine a one million Jedi army would be unstoppable.

[Assistant]
Legends have it that cloning a Jedi is a pretty bad idea and generally doesn't work out too well.
But we don't have to look to legends to get an answer.  The thing that makes a Jedi special is Force abilities, but Force ability isn't a genetic trait.  Force ability runs weirdly strong in the Skywalker family, but everywhere else it's not a thing that runs in families.
Your cloned Jedi would be no more likely to have Force abilities than any other random person.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] How to shift Hogwarts' balance of power?

3rd year Ravenclaw here. I can't help but notice some serious favoritism among the houses. It feels like all of the popular and powerful wizards are sorted into Gryffindor and Slytherin, like the Potters and the Weasleys, and even the goddamn Malfoys! I'm not saying this is absolute, I mean Hufflepuff had the a competitor in the Tri Wizard tournament, but Snape and Mcgonagall are ALWAYS walking with Dumbledore, but do you see Sprout or Flitwick? So my question is, is there anyway for Ravenclaw and/or hufflepuff to stage some kind of rebellion against the other houses? Maybe to give us some power for once?

[Assistant]
The Houses don't really mean anything. It's not like winning the House Cup gets you extra hall passes or better grades. Ravenclaws figured that out a long time ago, and Hufflepuffs are loyal enough to not question it.

It's just pridefully ambitious Slytherins and chest-puffing Grffindors who really give a damn about it.


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

[User] ELI5: How do big companies assess whether their TV ads were useful or not?

[Assistant]
When we do other market research we will sprinkle in questions about whether they saw advertising, what they saw, what was their impression of it, etc.

Other times we do specifics research explicitly about the advertising.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] Would Yoda have died to Order 66 if Palpatine called Gree first instead of every other clone commander?

While in these circumstances, he wouldnt sense the all the Jedis deaths, he could still be aware enough to kill the clones before they killed him anyway.

[Assistant] Most likely it would still be the same. Yoda was a master Jedi, and was a expert with defending from Blaster Bolts. Also he could sense a attack from a light year away, so I'd see good odds in him surviving.


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

[User]
[World War Z (book)] What were "those sick f*cks at China Lake* doing?

During one section of the book, a character mentions something about "those sick f*cks at China Lake" and their high suicide rate. In a footnote it's mentioned that China Lake was some kind of weapons research facility. What do you think was going on there?

[Assistant] Could be any number of things. Bioweapons, experimenting on people who haven't turned yet, trying to turn Zeds into living weapons, cutting them up to see what makes them tick. It's one of those "nothing is scarier" kind of things, all we know is it's *bad*. Like the Black Hills. All we know is that there were sucessionists and tanks involved. Whatever you can imagine is more messed up than anything that might have happened.


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

[User] [Power Rangers]What happened to the Dragonzord after Tommy lost his powers?

[Assistant]
Iirc it simply went back to its hiding place under the ocean off of the coast and lay dormant since there was nobody left to call upon it.

It is possible though that Zordon or his allies made an effort to retrieve it and use its power to grant Tommy access to his Green Ranger powers again since he is clearly in his Green Ranger form at the battle of legends where he led the legendary Rangers along with the Super Megaforce rangers in their final battle.


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

[User]
eli5: How does the linux kernel include so many drivers without having a gigantic file size?

I saw that the linux kernel includes many drivers in itself. How is this possible without the kernel file size being absolutely ginormous? Would it have something to do with every device being a file?

[Assistant]
Because drivers are usually quite small (small number of kilobytes).

This may be unexpected.  That is because most "drivers" for Windows are massively bloated things.  They include the actual driver, the installer for the driver, some useless documentation, a multi megabyte program to run constantly in the background doing things you don't actually want such as popping up advertisements, a really fancy control program for the driver that lets you see some numbers you don't really care about and lets you change some settings that you will never need to change, and a bunch of "bonus" applications that you don't need but will be installed automatically.


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

[User]
[General SciFi] How does one "hack" a door?

You've seen it in plenty of games and movies, with everything from recrossing a few wires to ripping the keypad off with a knife and shoving a device in it or even a wire to let them try and manually do it. My question is, what are they really trying to do? What would the steps be?

[Assistant]
There are two... maybe three methods of doing this, not counting the external device variant.

The first is controlling the mechanisms that open and close the door. Now, these can be code- or lock-controlled to stop anyone from opening them but by ripping off the panel and directly interfacing with the electronic controls, you're able to directly control the motor that opens and closes the door. it's actually a pretty simple mechanism of a motor which controls if the door opens or closes and this can be controlled by creating a current to go through one way or the other.

The second is actually a safety feature, one that is legally mandated in all modern electronically-closed doors. By destroying the control panel, there's no way to open the door or not in case of a genuine emergency, so OSHA mandates that if a door's control mechanisms aren't functioning properly then the doors *must* be able to self-identify that the controls aren't functional and open themselves up. Now, certain doors are exempt from this, such as those leading into open space in which case the doors will not open until the controls are fixed or those which keep something dangerous inside, such as radioactive materials.

Believe it or not, this is the reason for the Doors mechanic in the original *Five Nights At Freddy's*. As Freddy Fazbear's Pizzeria is legally a private business open to the public then the doors on the security room must follow this function... so if you run out of power then the doors automatically open up because legally it's the safest option (also because that room doesn't have any vents). What the lawmakers didn't take into account was that there would be homicidal robots walking around the restaurant late at night looking to murder the security guards, or that the owners were such cheap bastards that they power the whole place off of a car battery or whatever instead of the mains electricity.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why is Google abandoning an established brand and creating a new company called Alphabet?

I mean, it's one of the most recognizable brands in the world. WTH?

What are they trying to accomplish? What are the risks?

[Assistant]
Imagine you are running your own lemonade business, Lemon Party, and things are going fantastic. You expand into every neighborhood in your town. You start making cookies and they take off as well, as does the on-demand delivery business for your cookies and lemonade. Lemon Party is making consistent profits every year. You control the entire cookie and lemonade business of your town.

You have enough money that you've been able to buy a few other companies and start some internal initiatives. Some are related to it, like your Iced Tea and Cupcakes. Others have little to do with the core lemonade-and-cookies business. A hovering skateboard, a robot that'll do your homework, everlasting bubblegum.

Most of these new efforts are going to fail, and thats fine, but if they do succeed they'll be really profitable. The trouble is that everyone knows Lemon Party, and people sometimes associate your hover-skateboard business with the lemonade business. If hoverskatebaords fail, it has nothing to do with the strength of the main business. Further, while you are a terrific CEO, the original Lemon Party company is pretty mature and soaks up a lot of your time in day to day meetings.

So you decide to reorganize Lemon Party into a couple separate companies.  At the end of the day, you'll sum up their revenue and costs when reporting to mom and dad. You'll keep lemonade and cookies (and a few smaller supporting businesses, like delivery and Iced Tea) as one company, then a separate skateboard company, a separate homework robot company, etc.

If you need to layoff everyone from your skateboard business you can, and it wont affect the Lemon Party brand. You can focus more as CEO on these high-risk projects, and less on the core, profitable business that is pretty mature at this point. Reporting structures from the separate new businesses are more clear and you can evaluate each business more clearly and give it more or less resources as needed.


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

[User]
If we were to discover life on other planets, wouldn't time be moving at a completely different pace for them due to relativity?

I've thought about this a bit since my undergrad days; I have an advanced degree in math but never went beyond basic physics.

My thinking is this: The relative passage of time for an individual is dependent on its velocity, correct? So the relative speed of the passage of time here on earth is dependent on the planet's velocity around the sun, the solar system's velocity through the galaxy, the movement of the galaxy through the universe, and probably other stuff. All of these factor into the velocity at which we, as individuals, are moving through the universe and hence the speed at which we experience the passage of time.

So it seems to me that all of those factors (the planet's velocity around its star, the system's movement through the galaxy, etc.) would vary widely across the universe. And, since that is the case, an individual standing on the surface of a planet somewhere else in the galaxy would, relative to an observer on Earth at least, experience  time passing at a much different rate than we do here on Earth.

How different would it be, though? How much different would the factors I listed (motion of the galaxy, velocity of the planet's orbit, etc.) have to be in order for the relative time difference to be significant? Celestial velocities seem huge and I figure that even small variations could have significant effects, especially when compounded over millions of years.

So I guess that's it! Just something I've been thinking about off and on for several years, and I'm curious how accurate my thoughts on this topic are.

**Edit**: More precise language. And here is an example to (I hope) illustrate what I'm trying to describe.

Say we had two identical stopwatches. At the same moment, we place one stopwatch on Earth and the other on a distant planet. Then we wait. We millions or billions years. If, after that time, someone standing next to the Earth stopwatch were able to see the stopwatch that had been placed on another planet, how much of a difference could there potentially be between the two?

[Assistant]
Celestial velocities may be huge, but at least for orbits in the galaxy they top out at hundreds of kilometers per second. Since the speed of light is about 300,000 km/s, the stars' velocities relative to us introduce only a very very very miniscule change in the passage of time.

The amount of time dilation is proportional to the Lorentz factor, 1/sqrt(1-v^(2)/c^(2)). Even for an object traveling at 10% of the speed of light relative to us, this means that the time dilation we see for that object is only about a 0.5% change.

To clarify: in any object's own reference frame, time passes at a normal rate. It's just that when objects are moving at high speeds relative to each other, e.g. trains moving past each other, a passenger in one train will look at the clock on the other train and see it ticking slower than the clock on her own train, and vice versa. This goes both ways.


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

[User]
If a nerve in your body is severed, can it grow back
together?

I really don't want medical advice or anything, something just got me thinking recently... can a severed nerve repair itself? I really know very little about the nervous system of the body, but if someone were to cut their arm bad enough that it slices through a nerve and perhaps makes their hand partly numb, obviously the ER would be step one, but after that, would the nerve begin to re-knit itself and give the hand feeling once again?

[Assistant]
The axon of a nerve cellthe long part that travels through nerves and conveys signalscan indeed regrow. There are some caveats. (Boy are there caveats.)

* The axon gets all its cellular nutrients from the cell body.
* The part of the broken axon no longer connected to the cell body lacks nutrients and gets disintegrated.
* The axon has to regrow from the point of injury.
* The new axon sprout has to find its way through the same pathway of Schwann cells to get to its original target.
* The further it is from the target, the less likely it is to make it there.
* Also, regeneration occurs at about 1mm/day.
* Without the guidance of the old nerve structures like Schwann cells and whatnot, the axon ain't gonna make it.
* Plus, slicing through a nerve disrupts those supporting structures, too.
* And, when talking about a whole nerve, you need _all_ the axons to sprout and regrow into the proper places through the right maze of supporting nerve tissue (which has also been damaged).
* So in the case of having a peripheral nerve actually severed, regrowth is basically impossible; a little less unlikely if the nerve is "reattached" surgically.


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

[User]
[Batman] I'm a generic thug looking to affiliate myself with one of Gotham's established villains/crime lords because I make poor life choices. Which villain to I benefit most from joining?

To be clear, I'm essentially asking which villain would be most beneficial to provide henchman services to before I'm inevitably taken out by the Bat?

At the very least, Joker seems like one to avoid. I've heard a good number of his staff have died for lols.

[Assistant] Penguin is by far the most normal and has the most amicable relationship with the Bat. He is the most likely to give you  relatively safe job prospects with actual opportunities for promotion within his organization.


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

[User]
ELI5: How does Google search such massive amounts of data and return results in less than a second?

I get they are probably doing some optimized caching and their algorithm is proprietary but at a high level, how does Google work with such good performance numbers?

[Assistant]
>I get they are probably doing some optimized caching and their algorithm is proprietary but at a high level, how does Google work with such good performance numbers?

They do not perform live-searches on websites. They search their own **index** which is basically a collection of cross-referenced dictionaries compiled from all the internet's content they ever crawled. In a sense they have everything *pre*-searched.


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

[User] ELI5: If bad posture is so bad, why does it feel so good?!

[Assistant]
Because your body is used to it. if you slouch all the time and then try and sit up straight, you're forcing seldom used muscles to work. If you sit up straight all the time, slouching will hurt because your back muscles will stretch awkwardly in an unfamiliar way. If you sit for a long period of time, you'll probably be a little sore regardles, but more so if you're slouching, which puts pressure on your spinal nerves.

when you'd sit straight all the time and have the muscles to support yourself,  you realize that slouching actually doesn't feel that good.

tldr slouching feels good because you haven't experienced truly comfortable sitting, maaaaaaan.


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

[User]
Will putting the end of the garden hose underwater slow down the rate at which the pool fills?

Is there a difference between letting the water fall into the pool from above the water line?

[Assistant]
The discharge pressure will affect the flow rate, yes, assuming a constant-pressure source.  Keeping the end of the hose in the air ensures that the discharge pressure is atmospheric; submerging the end adds the hydrostatic pressure of the pool, meaning that the flow rate will decrease.

Now, you're not likely to see much of a difference unless you have a very low supply pressure or a very deep pool, but it will make *a* difference.


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

[User]
ELI5: Nietzche's philosophy

Specifically, what his stance on suffering is, please?

I know this is kind of a weird request, so thanks to anyone who wants to answer!

[Assistant]
There is a direct correlation between suffering and joy. If you're not willing to experience and grow though a lot of suffering, you won't experience as much joy. If you always try to diminish displeasure and suffering in your life, you're also going to diminish your capacity for joy.

"[N]o one is able to produce a great work of art without experience, nor achieve a worldly position immediately, nor be a great lover at the first attempt; and in the interval between initial failure and subsequent success, in the gap between who we wish one day to be and who we are at present, must come pain, anxiety, envy and humiliation. We suffer because we cannot spontaneously master the ingredients of fulfillment."


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

[User] ELI5 The difference between JPEG and PNG.

[Assistant]
Ok, pretend that you have a book, and you want to make it smaller.  The JPEG way to do it is to read the book and summarise it, so for example, you say, "On the first page you're introduced to the main character, Joe Bupkins, who is a retired mechanic.  There are two paragraphs about his childhood, when he broke his leg falling out of a tree..." and so on, and you do this for the whole book.  Then on the other end, someone reads the summary and tries to re-write the book from the description of it.  It's not perfect, but the general story will be correct (ignoring writing style and so on).

The PNG way is to look at each word, and then write the word and the number of times it occurs.  For a novel, that will almost always be 1 -- so for example, "It occurred to Joe Bupkins" translates to "It 1 occurred 1 to 1 Joe 1 Bupkins", and what you get will actually be longer than the novel you started with!  But if you had a text that looked like "Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo Badger Badger", that becomes "Buffalo 5 Badger 2", and you can make it much shorter.  Also, PNG allows you to get back the exact original text.

An image like a nature photo is like a novel -- just as every word is different, every pixel in a nature photo is different.  So if you encode it with PNG, it will actually make it bigger.  But PNG works great if your image is, say, a solid black circle on a solid white background -- because there is a lot of uniform color, PNG compresses it exactly.


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

[User]
Why does paper feel different after it has been wet and dried?

This may seem pretty basic, but why does paper, after absorbing water and drying, have a much harder/brittle texture than normal paper? I'm not sure how to explain it properly, but the paper is often slightly warped and crustier. Is this a chemical reaction in the paper?

Preemptive thank you for your time.

[Assistant] Well, in the paper making process, the pulp is strained to create the initial textured/brittle paper, but the process doesn't end there. The textured paper must be put through high pressured steam rollers to create the smooth paper you've come to know. This setting process causes all the fibers to be pressed flat and packed together evenly on the surface. When paper gets wet, it "unsets" itself, breaking up the tension that held the fibers together, again causing the uneven texture it initially had.


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

[User]
[Skyrim] Why is the dawnguards weapon of choice against vampires the crossbow?

Like, I understand wanting to keep distance from the vampire, but it seems like it'd be easier to just use a normal bow instead of basically inventing(I actually dont know if the dawnguard invented the crossbow Tes lore is not my strong suit) a new weapon which requires new ammo not sold anywhere. Plus, a big appeal of the crossbow is ignoring armor, but vampire armor is more form over function so that point seems moot too.

[Assistant]
The dawnguard didn't invent the crossbow. They perfected it. The main appeal of using it over a bow is stopping power and minimum range.
 A bolt can punch through plate armor fairly easily and requires almost no training beyond point and loose. Against a vampire it can knock them off their feet and back against a wall or through any hardened hide and armor they may be using. Really the only thing that stops a bolt is a wall or gravity.
And the second reason they prefer crossbows is how closely they can used in combat. It's the difference between a long barrel rifle and a pistol by comparison. You can use a crossbow in a tomb or tight space that a bow just isn't going to cut it in. A skilled archer can use a bow at point blank range and knock and draw an arrow in seconds. An unskilled crossbowmen can do the same. And the point of the crossbow is to merely stun or pin the vampire long enough for a hammer or sword to pierce or behead the monster.


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

[User]
[Mad Max] Why did Max make Furiosa and the many mothers turn back when they could have made it?

After watching Fury Road for the 4th time, I realised something was a bit off about the many mothers and 5 wives travelling when they set off. In a nutshell, I think Max convinced them not to go because he knew they would reach land and wanted to go alone. More info below.

Intro/backstory

In Mad Max: Fury Road when he reaches what's left of the many mothers, they invite him to leave and cross the salt flats with them, saying they have enough supplies for 160 days. Max follows them and stops them, telling them they won't have reached anything by the time the supplies run out.

Speculation about location:

We know this takes place in Australia from past films, and is somewhere on the East Coast because Furiosa says they go east, and the many mothers say if you came from the West you already past it (the green place). It could be near Sydney, since we see clips of the children he led at the end of Mad Max 3 Beyond Thunderdome living in abandoned buildings, and if they walked there then it can't be too far. Regardless, it must be on the East Coast.

Max knows what the world looks like:

Max was around before The Fall, and has seen pictures of world maps. He must also have known that the Americas existed to the East of Australia, since he seems like a bright guy and I would certainly hope that kids would know about the existence of other continents in Australia before The Fall. Max also know distances, as he asks Furiosa to take the war rig half a kilometer away before dealing with the leader of the bullet farm. It follows that he would probably have a rough idea of how far away America is.

Maths:

Assuming they can ride their bikes at 50mph cruising speed for 12 hours a day, then in 160 days they would have covered 96 000 miles, which is enough to go round the world just under 4 times, in which time they would definitely have run into land. It may well be the case that they can't ride for 12 hours a day, so what if its only 8? Thats still 64 000 miles. The distance as the crow flies to Santiago, Chile is around 7 000 miles. Assuming they take an indirect route because the ocean floor isn't flat, lets call it 20 000 miles just to be sure. They only need to average 5.2 miles per hour over 24 hours, while is 10.4 over 12 hours,15.6 over 8 hours, or 62.5 for just two hours, which I'm sure their bikes can manage.

Attention to detail:

I know how much effort is put into every detail in Mad Max films, especially Fury Road. If they spent so much time and effort on parts of the film that we don't even notice, then why would they be sloppy about something as prominent as the script, especially when there was so little of it. They could easily have come up with a shorter time which their supplies would last for, say a week, which would be equally believable. But they said 160 days. Max also guarantees they won't make it after 160 days after leaving them to go and having plenty of time to think about it. The maths isn't hard, average speed x hours travelling each day = distance travelled. He would have had some uncertainty in his mind even if he thought they wouldn't make it.

Why would he lie:

We know he likes to travel alone, and is always searching. Maybe he too is desperate to travel the salt flats in search of a far away land, but he would want to go alone. Sure he could just leave a couple of days after the many mother, Furiosa, Nux and the 5 wives, but he would know that he wasn't fully alone, that he was copying someone else. Maybe his pride gets the better of him and he leads them to a much nearer and possibly superior life than they could find, while he is free to travel alone? I'm not really sure on his motivation and there's likely a lot of things I haven't considered, but it seems obvious that he would know they could make it.

What are your thoughts on this?

tl;dr: 160 days is a long time to cross the dried out Pacific Ocean, Max would know this and persuaded Furiosa to head back to the citadel knowing she could make it across the salt.

Side note at the the end he really should have stuck around long enough to take one of their vehicles instead of disappearing into the crowd. I know it wouldn't have been as cinematic but still.

[Assistant] Going off piecemeal information from the video game and director's own words here.  Max was planning on committing suicide by just going east into the Silent sands iirc the name or the Pacific Ocean.  He knew you'd have to be insanely lucky to hit one of the island chains or land masses between the two continents and that if you headed into Australia proper you'd be facing radiation exposure as well as droughts and god knows what else.  Heading off the coasts was much worse as the terrain is incredibly brutal and wouldn't be a straight line or even passable at most points.  160 days of supplies would get you across but that's assuming you don't lose a bike which takes weeks worth of supplies with it if you can't bring it with you and assuming you could carry enough guzzoline to even travel that far.  160 days could have been just food and water and only 3 days of gas.  Why risk heading into the region max specifically planned to die in when you know there's a better option behind you.


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

[User] ELI5: How can helium be a liquid at absolute zero, if absolute zero is the point where the molecules stop moving (theoretically)?

[Assistant]
The answer requires accepting that according to quantum mechanics, atoms and molecules can only have specific energies, called energy levels. You can be in energy level 0, 1, 2, etc, but higher energy levels require the atom to take in energy from the surroundings such as from heat. At absolute zero there is no heat, so every atom or molecule will be in energy level 0 at absolute zero (we call this the ground state). But the funny thing about quantum mechanics is, it teaches us that everything has what is called "zero-point energy". This is the energy of the ground state, and you can never have less energy than this. For a very light atom like helium, the small amount of zero-point energy is actually enough to make the atoms move around a lot. This is called zero-point motion. (All things experience zero-point motion, but for bigger atoms or molecules these motions may be too small to make any noticeable difference). For helium, these zero-point motions prevent the atoms from coming close enough together to solidify, so even at absolute zero it exists as a liquid.

However, if you compress the liquid helium enough, you can form a solid,  but only at pressures above about 25 atm (25x atmospheric pressure) for helium-4, the most common isotope. Even in the solid form there are still large zero-point motions, so it doesn't behave like a classical solid where every atom has an exact fixed location. Because of this, solid helium is referred to as a quantum solid.

Source: 5th year graduate student using quantum calculations to model solid helium.


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

[User] ELI5: How come we can enter a password for years but forget it just when thinking about what it is?

[Assistant]
Because you enter the same password every time it is required (if you use the same password for everything, which most people do), eventually it becomes part of your muscle memory, where you don't even have to think about what you are typing, you just do it because you have learned that it will get you to where you want to be (logged into whatever program/website required the password).

Because of this, pretty much the only time you really think about what your password is was when you created it initially, which for most people was several years ago, which is why it can be hard to remember when you aren't actively typing it.


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

[User] [Warhammer 40k] The Eldar never create Slaneesh. How does the WH40k universe change?

[Assistant]
No eye of terror?

Well fuck me rotten like the Eldar do, things are nice.  The Human Empire doesn't Fracture, the Emperor arises without issue, no Primarchs probably, maybe no Space Marines, Humanity goes a' conquering.  Maybe an alliance with the Eldar.  Maybe even the first friendly encounter in 40k every.  Probably not though.

Maybe LVII can meet up with his bae.


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

[User]
Moving countries... is it worth doing a PostDoc in the new country before going into industry?

My long term plan after my Masters and PhD is to move from the UK to Canada.

Basically, because i'd be moving countries, would it make any reasonable impact on my ability to get a research job at a company like Microsoft or Google if I had some experience in Canadian academia? Or would I be better off just applying for jobs straight after my PhD?

[Assistant]
I would have thought to hedge your bets it would be better to apply after a PhD, then if you don't get the job do a postdoc, then reapply.

At least this way you maintain a sense of what they're looking for and can further focus yourself through the postdoc.


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

[User]
ELI5:how hot is it in space?

i was just thinking about how weather, atmosphere, area of the world etc you are in determines how hot it is, so how hot is it if you had nothing but the rays of the sun on you in space? for examples sake.. whilst orbiting earth?

[Assistant] Deep space is at roughly -269 degrees centigrade, four above absolute zero, but without any air or other gases around you it's very hard to lose heat. We naturally radiate some heat in the form of photons (light), but this effect is not very noticable for cooler objects - that's why only really hot objects glow visibly. This means that in space any heat added is very hard to get rid of again, so if you were near a star the side of you facing it would heat up very quickly, while the side facing away slowly froze. If you can avoid generating too much heat of your own, and keep turning to distribute the heat from the sun you would liely find that it would still be hotter than Earth - astronauts need special cooling systems in their suits.


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

[User] Which is worse for the environment: driving an average car powered by gasoline, or driving an electric car powered with electricity that was obtained by burning coal?

[Assistant]
gasoline is worse.   the pollution in inner cities causes respiratory and health problems that aren't even accounted for properly.   Estimated 10,000s of deaths every year.

electricity need not be generated by coal, but eve  if it is, we can confine the environmental damage better, and it's easier to keep tabs on that, than emission standards for a billion cars.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do peanuts and tree nuts cause more allergies than other foods?

There's always so many people with allergies to nuts but not as many people allergic to other foods. Is there something specific in nuts that makes more people allergic to them?

[Assistant]
If we knew the definitive answer to this, we'd be in a much better place.

The probable answer here is: chemistry. Peanut proteins are especially allergenic chemicals. This means they bind very easily to the antigen receptors on cells, because of their chemical properties. The antigen presenting cells are the first step in the cascade of chemical reactions that results in allergy symptoms.

The storage proteins that make up peanuts come from several protein families known to be very allergenic. It's not just one protein that makes peanuts troublesome, it's a whole host of them. Peanuts share these proteins with tree nuts and legumes, so there is a lot of cross-sensitivity (meaning, if you are allergic to peanuts, you're more likely to be allergic to nuts, because they share some of the same ingredients).


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

[User]
[DCEU] Why didn't Superman get involved in post-battle reconstruction?

In Dawn of Justice, the main reason why everyone, especially Batman, was so angry at Superman was due to the battle in Man of Steel that left Metropolis levelled and hundreds, if not thousands, if not millions of innocent people dead in the process. Afterwards, Superman seemed to just move on from the fight, not bothering to stay behind and clean up the mess that he inadvertently helped to make. Why not? Why not try to rebuild the destruction or assist in rescue and relief efforts, especially if he wants the world to like him and see him as a guardian? For that matter, why did it shock Superman that everybody was so pissed off about not only the accidental carnage and mayhem in Metropolis, but his seeming refusal to take responsibility for it?

[Assistant]
He probably did. Dawn of Justice's hate towards him wasn't that he just left a huge mess, but that his presence brought the conflict there to begin with.

It was exacerbated by Lex Luthor, of course, just as the anger towards Batman was.


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

[User] ELI5: why are there no conservative hosts on npr?

[Assistant]
If you listen to NPR you find that politics is a very small portion of their programming.

They play news morning noon and night for about an hour, but in between are shows about all sorts of things.  Science, art, literature, entomology, cooking, car problems.

When they do talk politics, they bring in pundits from both sides for a civilized chat.


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

[User]
How can I be a good leader if I'm just as unexperienced as everyone else?

I'm a current undergrad in a research experience position in physics. Myself and the other undergrads are all being sent to our country's telescope array to spend 24hrs taking observations and then a week analysing the data. Since there are about 12 of us in total, they're splitting us into groups with separate projects to do, and I have been appointed a kind of 'PI' for one group since the observations directly relate to the work I'm currently doing.

None of the supervisors are going on the trip, so I could very likely be the only person at the telescope compound who has *any* knowledge of this particular niche field of astronomy. My knowledge is obviously very limited and likely incorrect in places, so I'm worried that I won't be able to effectively lead my group in both observation and data analysis. At least one group member actually has no physics background at all, and is instead doing mechatronics with a project involving some of the telescope systems and data storage.

I'm quite a bit of a perfectionist and I enjoy working long hours, which I suspect will be a little at odds with some of the team members' preferences, after having already worked near them for over a month now. I also have trouble explaining things effectively, because the things that are obvious to me, are not to others, and vice versa.

Generally, I'm concerned that I'm not really 'leader' material. I have no qualifications or real experience to warrant having a position of power over my peers, and am in fact the youngest. I'm worried that the other students might resent me for this fact, as they're incredibly competitive and were not happy that I was given the job, or that my project was chosen over theirs. However, having me lead this project is incredibly important to both my supervisors here and my professors at my home university, and I understand that not only is this an opportunity for priceless experience, but that I'll likely have to take a leadership position some time in the future. As such, relinquishing the position doesn't seem like a good move, and I imagine I'd only be disappointed in myself if I did.

So what kind of things should I focus on when trying to lead this group, keeping in mind my general inexperience?

[Assistant]
First, it's a really good sign that you're self aware enough to seek insight on how to lead people.  Many terrible leaders are that way because they lack empathy and self awareness; you've already gotten past the first step.

There are so many books and articles on leadership and many of them are terrible.  I'll just cover a few high level points.  First, people have different interaction frameworks and different skill profiles.  Recognizing that there are differences and working to allow different frameworks opportunities to contribute is key to maximizing the capacity of a team.  For example, some people are intuitive and quick.  They see "the solution" immediately and want to get working right away.  This framework, if left unchecked, will likely prevent quiet, thoughtful, individuals from participating completely.  Be conscious of these differences.

Second, it's a good idea to formalize some rules for the group to keep that thoughtfulness present.  Ground rules can go a long way towards keeping groups happy and effective.  For example, how are decisions going to be made?  How will discussions be structured?  What are the expectations around contributing?  An example of this in your case is what are the work hours?  If you want to work from 7 am until midnight every day is there going to be a feeling that is expected of everyone?  Will people who need more rest feel excluded?

Feel free to ask any additional questions you have as well.  Good luck!


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

[User] ELI5: How do very young or verbally challenged children get fitted for glasses if they are unable to verbally indicate that their vision is much clearer?

[Assistant]
With normal vision, an object from the world should focus to tight spot on the back of the eye, known as the retina. One way to check this is to shine a beam of light and see how big of a spot it is on the retina. Someone with bad but correctable vision would have a large spot rather than a tight one.

By adjusting the properties of the beam, you can modify it so that it bends similarly to how it would go through a glasses' lens. By figuring out the necessary changes in the beam to make a tight spot, it's possible to recover the lens refractive power needed to correct their eyes!

This method is more complicated and expensive than just swapping lenses and asking a if it's clearer. But it's definitely worth correcting major errors in a baby or young child's vision or else their brain will stop using the nerves from the eye, causing irreversible vision loss.


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

[User]
[ELI5]: Why do pigs go through a big transformation if they're introduced into the wild?

How does a domesticated pig turn into a wild boar when released to the wild?

[Assistant]
A creatures phenotype (physical manifestation) is dictated by its genetic code. There are actually different ways in which genetic code will be expressed depending on the environment that the creature finds itself; this phenomenon is called epigenetics. There is another phenomenon called neoteny in which creatures retain juvenile characteristics depending on their environment, and will quickly mature given certain conditions.

So just as an example to illustrate the point, say that a pig is in a farm and is fed and shielded from predators. The chemical profile of this pig might show low levels of testosterone because there had not been any circumstances that would have precipitated the production of excess testosterone. When the pig is let out into the wild, it is suddenly in danger of predators and starved of nutrients, so the relevant chemical cascades kick in which will be conducive to its survival, and these may actually change the way it physically appears (testosterone --> greater hair production, etc).


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

[User]
ELI5: A couple days ago, a 300 year old Stradivarius violin was stolen (and later found.) What would be the point of stealing something so famous that anyone who can afford the million-dollar price tag would recognize as a stolen item?

This question really goes for any rare, famous, and/or expensive item, but I found the violin case particularly intriguing.  I would imagine that anyone with loads of money and knowledge of violins would want an item that can be played without the neighbors calling the cops.  What, then, is the market for very expensive stolen goods such as this violin?

[Assistant]
Theft by contract.

A millionaire decides that he wants something his money can't buy in a conventional way, so he pays someone to steal it for him.

He doesn't care if people know that he has it or not; the satisfaction of possession alone is worth the price he pays to have it stolen.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do (most) toys targeted at young girls incorporate pink and purple in their design, whereas boys seem to have a much larger choice of colors to choose from when it comes to toys?

Whenever I got to the shopping mall, if I walk past the 'girls' aisle my eyes will see nothing but pink. I understand that western culture has assigned the different genders various colors, but they could at least get some variety in.

[Assistant]
Marketing reinforcement - companies, especially established toy companies, are unwilling to try something new.

You teach girls from a young age to like pink and purple but not like "boy colours". Then suddenly you start releasing things in "boy colours" - uh oh, now the girls don't want it! You'd need to switch your advertising to target parents instead, because even if *you* change your colours, all your competitors haven't, so those young girls are still getting convinced that they need to buy pink.


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

[User] [Guardians of the Galaxy] Rockets Moon Destroying Bomb?

[Assistant]
This is the one he was trying to find a box for, right? Not the BFG like weapon they use on Ronan?

Anyway, Rocket is a genius when it comes to weaponry. Like, one of the brightest creatures in several galaxies. Not EVERYONE can build a bomb to blow up moons out of scrap on a ship.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] What would have happened if they didn't know Harry was a horcrux and took out Voldemort anyway?

Basically, what if they never knew Harry was a horcrux and he didn't go willingly to his death but they still somehow took out all his other horcruxes and then him, perhaps by reflecting his own killing curse back at him somehow again?

[Assistant]
Voldemort's shade continues to cling to this world, seeking a host for possession or else being available for the resurrection ritual.

You could get a soft win against him by killing every last Death Eater and trying to make sure nobody is tempted by his shade, but Voldemort is a one-man army and is going to keep trying to take over Britain until he gets lucky.

Also, Harry *might* be secretly immortal until you remove the horcrux.


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

[User]
Do humans instantly die when the heart stops?

As someone who is not expert in biology *but* has a know-how in mechanics (totally unrelated, I know) I find it strange that in movies, when someone's heart stops they instantly collapse like a ragdoll. Why? Only the "fuel" line got severed, not the nerves. The muscles have internal oxygen reserves as well.

They say that if you can restart a heart within 5 minutes, the brain does not suffer damage. So why can't we move for 5 minutes after the heart stops?

[Assistant]
Your brain and other organs don't die instantly, but you do go into shock immediately. When your heart stops, your blood pressure collapses, triggering a wave of biochemical responses. Your body has a strict hierarchy of organs to protect, and skeletal muscles are not high on the list. They get shut down while all of the body's remaining (rapidly dwindling) resources are focused on saving the brain, heart, and other internal organs starting with the lungs, liver, and kidneys.

Heart tissue is extremely resilient, so if something happens that causes it to stop, it is probably severely damaged and will be difficult to get started again. Possibly it has been operating at a lower capacity for quite some time, which would mean that the other tissues in the body would also be suffering from lowered blood flow -- wastes and toxins build up, nutrient caches (including oxygen and glucose) run low, electrolyte balances are off, etc.

With no oxygen delivery at all, you have about 2 minutes before brain damage begins, and another 4 or so before parts of your brain begin to die. If your brain is getting some perfusion, you can last longer, although you may still have some damage. If your heart is still partly functioning, you can live a lot longer, although you'll still probably experience damage to lower-priority organs/systems such as the gut.


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

[User]
ELI5: What do animals actually do during hibernation?

Do animals actually 'sleep' for such long periods of time? If so, how do they stay asleep for so long?

[Assistant] Hibernation means the animal literally just sleeps. It cannot get any meaningful amount of food during the winter so instead he just kinda skips it. He sleeps all the way through to conserve energy instead of walking around and doing stuff, and the fat it put on right before winter is whats being broken down and consumed to keep him alive and fed. He then wakes up again in spring when hunting is viable again.


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

[User] I've heard about efforts to eliminate mosquitoes by genetically modifying them to be sterile. How would the gene spread if the individuals with this gene couldn't have any offspring?

[Assistant] Im not sure if this is exactly what you are referring to, but there is a method used called Sterile Insect Technique where large numbers of insects (usually male) are irradiated in order to sterilize them, then they are released in the wild. Females who mate with the sterile males will produce no offspring, thereby reducing the number of insects. You are right that the sterile insects wont become established in the population, so the process has to be repeated to obtain the desired effect (either population suppression or eradication).


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

[User] I have anosmia. Is it still possible for me to be able to smell, even for just a minute (or less)?

[Assistant]
Well, is it nerve damage, or is it b/c of compression of the olfactory nerve? B/c if there is nerve damage, the peripheral nerves have some capability for regeneration, depending on the extent of the damage.

Have you been to a doctor about this?


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

[User]
[Portal] How would radiowaves and gammawaves work with portals?

Say I have a WiFi box in my house. Next to it, I place a portal. I place the other portal in the middle of the Sahara Desert. Does that portal have WiFi?

Also, if a nuke went off near my house, would the Sahara be irradiated too?

[Assistant] Mass and energy can pass through portals, so you will definitely have WiFi in the Sahara. However, high energy particle emissions from nuclear fission may interact with the portal itself. Or it could act as a pinhole lense, firing a shotgun blast of plasma into the desert. The implications are interesting.


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

[User] ELI5: So I know that when you feel something cold or hot, it's your skins particles exchanging their kinetic energy with the particles of the other medium. So how come in space, where there is no medium to exchange heat, your body heat can't just keep you warm instead of instantly freezing?

[Assistant]
First of all, you wouldn't instantly freeze.

Secondly, there are multiple ways of transferring heat. You described the process of conduction, which is indeed not possible in a vacuum. However, heat transfer in space is dominated by radiation.

All objects radiate thermal energy, and how much and what kind is determined by their temperature. When an object starts to glow "red hot" its because its temperature is high enough that some of its thermal radiation has shifted out of the infrared and into the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum.

In space, if you were in the dark, like in the shadow of the earth, you would radiate away heat until you were the same temperature as empty space, only a couple degrees above absolute zero. However, the sun is very hot, and radiates a lot of energy, so if you were exposed to it, you would rapidly heat up to perhaps hundreds of degrees, precisely because there isn't any material to conduct that heat away. This is a major design consideration for spacecraft and spacesuits.


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

[User] [startrek]Suppose I walk into a holodeck and say "create an interactive Sherlock Holmes simulation about solving the Piltdown Man hoax" or "show me a version of John Fletcher's Valentinian play with the setting changed from Roman to Mayan". Is there a limit to how specific & esoteric you can get?

[Assistant]
Not really a limit, no, beyond the computing power behind the holodeck and its available database of information.

That said, it also can't really be assumed that the holodeck or computer will understand every request or always get things right.  This is, essentially, the difference between typing "Fruit," or "grapes," or "red grapes" or "Vitis vinifera" into a Google Image search and hoping for the result of a picture of red globe grapes.

So you may have to answer follow-up questions on your request, and/or tweak things a little bit.

This is also why there is a large market for holoprograms and holonovels.  In the better novels and programs, all those esoteric details done for you by the author/programmer.


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

[User]
How does diet affect the risk of heart disease?

There is a lot of conflicting information out there. The common story is that (saturated) fat and cholesterol in meats are the primary culprits, but now a lot of (pop) science seems to claim that those are relatively harmless and sugars are instead the main culprits. What does the actual scientific evidence support?

[Assistant]
I don't have a lot of time to go into an in-depth answer, but cholesterol and fats were vilified mainly because when you looked at the hearts and blood vessels of people with cardiovascular disease, you see a lot of plaques which grow and harden and constrict the blood vessels around the heart and the rest of the body. And what are these plaques largely made of? Fats and cholesterol (and a bit of calcium). So naturally scientists looked into does the amount of fats (particularly saturated fats) consume affect the amount of fats and cholesterol blocking up their arteries? And they found that yes they did.

But fairly recently a group decided to look at weather a diet with increased saturated fats was worse for your health than a diet high in refined sugar. And surprisingly what they found is that actually the high sugar diet produced much a much more profoundly negative affect in the heart in just a few weeks. The high fat group had increased ldl levels (the "bad cholesterol"), they also had increased levels of hdl (the "good cholesterol") which would mitigate a lot of the bad consequences of the ldl cholesterol. The high sugar group on the other hand showed higher levels of total cholesterol, higher ldl levels and lower hdl levels. This is likely due to the sugar causing the liver to release a lot of harmful fats into the bloodstream.

Large amounts of sugars can also lead to insulin resistance and eventually can contribute to developing type 2 diabetes, which (amongst a lot of other things) increases your chances of developing heart disease. Sugar also increases your blood pressure.

So what about the studies before that linked high levels of fats in the diet to cardiovascular disease? Well it is true that people who eat more saturated fats are more likely to develope heart disease, what the researchers didn't take into account is that people eating a lot of saturated fats are much more likely to be consuming a lot more sugar, especially refined sugars.

So really the bottom line is to moderate your intake if refined/added sugars but you probably shouldn't load your diet up with high saturated-fat foods either, everything in moderation. Really avoiding any heavily processed foods which are usually very high in fats and sugars is a safe bet.

Sources: Undergrad in biochemistry, currently doing a PhD in Diabetes Complications.


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

[User]
A 2-prong question: what was the highest temperature achieved in a lab? Is there a universal limit on how high temperature can go? (we all learned about 0 Kelvin as being lowest possible, but I never heard about the highest)

What happens to matter at the highest temperature extremes? (if possible, please keep in mind that I love science however my science education level is "amateur" at best).  Thank You!

[Assistant] In some theories, such as string theory, there is a maximum temperature possible called the Hagedorn temperature. As the system approaches this temperature, heat put into the system excites more states more than it increases the temperature.


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

[User] Eli5: why arent busses designed to be more aerodynamic, like cars and SUVs?

[Assistant]
Because they don't tend to move at high speeds so aerodynamics are less important and square shaped are better for packing more passengers into, you can't put seats under a sloping roof.

Coaches or long distance buses fall in the middle so do tend to be a bit more aero.


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

[User]
Are there ways to make historical/dialectical materialism compatible with religion or spirituality?

I know most hardcore marxists are atheists, but still are the two things reconcilable?

[Assistant] This is arguably what Walter Benjamin was trying to do. You might also find Mark Fisher on materialist spirituality interesting. In the last instance, Terry Eagleton will probably have something to say on this as a major Christian Marxist.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why Does curly hair stay curly?

I understand *why* people have curly hair, but why/how does it go back to being curly after using a straight iron, or after being pulled straight in a ponytail all day?

[Assistant] There are actually a lot of different things that factor into making your hair curly. If i remember right the amount of Sulfur-Sulfur bonds or "disulfide" bonds. These are from the tertiary structure of the protein in your hair. The more disulfide bonds your hair naturally has, the more curly.


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

[User]
CMV: Violence is a perfectly acceptable method of protest when peace has been repeatably proven to not be effective.

I have seen so much condemnation for violence and looting from the media and politicians, but I just see this as the next logical step. If you hold one protest after another about the same thing and the people in power continue to do nothing to acknowledge let alone alleviate your concerns then it only makes sense that if they are apathetic to peaceful protests then you have to move on to civil disobedience to get them to care. If that doesn't work then it escalates to violent protests and eventually actual war/ revolution. If anything the fact that a protest escalates to violence is indicative of a systematic problem in governance where the governed feel no hope of a peaceful resolution to their concerns. While I'm not saying anyone who resorts to violence is in the right I am saying that if a peaceful protest escalates to violence then the people who were protesting should not be shamed and  their cause considered wrong because of the violence. Instead we should look to the leaders who caused the escalation because violence is only a natural response to a feeling of being powerless to change an injustice in the world.

[Assistant]
I get that you're talking about police brutality and whatnot, but do you think this argument still holds water when you apply it to *other* issues?

Climate change - peaceful methods haven't worked and we're still burning fossil fuels. Let's burn down a Walmart to expedite the process.

The school system needs more funding and peaceful methods haven't achieved that - let's throw bricks through windows instead.

And so on and so forth.


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

[User] ELI5: Could a new eye color come bout?

[Assistant] Yes, but no. While DNA usually doesnt mutate as much as, say, RNA, There is a *tiny* chance the genes that controls eye color could mutate, resulting in a new eye color. for example, blue eyes are a genetic mutation, and while it doesnt have any effect on us or give us an adaption we could use to defend ourselves, it still exists. So while the gene controlling eye color COULD mutate to form a new eye color, the spreading of the gene is the hard part. If the gene is recessive, you would have to find someone else that has the recessive eye color gene. If the gene was dominant, there would still be a chance that the dominant eye color would NOT get passed down, making it incredibly hard to pass the gene along when it first comes about.


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

[User]
[40K] Are there any stories relating to the origins of the Chaos gods other than Slaanesh?

Slaanesh has a pretty fleshed out backstory relating to the Eldar while Khorne, Tzeentch and Nurgle just sort of "are". Papa Nurgle is said to be the oldest, so there has to be at least some sense of their beginning.

I've also seen it said that Slaanesh is distinctly Eldar in nature and thirst for souls. Do the other gods have racial tie-ins as well?

[Assistant]
I've always been under the impression that the other 3 gods had always existed in one way or another, due to representing 3 universal constants: Decay, Death, and Change. Stuff has been doing those three things constantly forever, so they've always had a powerbase to build on.

But Slaanesh was different. It wasn't till the height of the Eldar Empire that decadence was practiced on that scale. Sure, everything fucks but that's not really what Slaanesh is about. It's about excess, and it took an entire Empire's worth of murderboning to make him all at once, rather than gradually growing stronger like the others. That's why she tore open the Eye of Terror, rather than just forming in the Warp.


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

[User]
ELI5: how do rich people with massive net worth(Ranging from $10 million to hundreds of millions of dollars) manage their money?

I am curios to see how do they manage such a large amount.

[Assistant] I would have to say most if not all hire professional money manager and let them handle it. It's kind of like retirement. They get an amount to live off of each month and they can tell the money manager to give them more if they want to buy a new Gulfstream.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] What would Palpatine's plan be if Anakin's potential wasn't restricted?

As we're aware, Anakin's role as Darth Vader was to effectively become the Emperor's attack dog in his cyborg suit. The Emperor knew that he was no real threat to him any more, and that without some element of divine intervention (enter Luke), he had no reason to fear him.

However, how would things have played out if Vader wasn't toasted like a whiny marshmallow?

Lucas stated that Anakin had twice the force potential of Palpatine, and Palpatine himself acknowledges that Darth Vader will become more powerful than him (and Yoda) in his fight with Yoda at the end of Episode 3.

On the other hand, Palpatine is hardly the type of fellow to just let someone become more powerful than him, especially given the work and planning he put into everything with his Rule of One, almost. But if Anakin wasn't restricted in his suit and his potential not tempered, what could the outcome of their dynamic been?

[Assistant] Anakin may have been stronger with the force but Palpatine would always be wiser. Palpatine would manipulate Anakin to achieve his goals through politics and as a mentor. Palpating would operate even further from the shadows always on the move where nobody could harm him. One way or another Palpatine could always keep Anakin in line through the manipulation of events.


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

[User]
CMV: Beauty Pageants do not need a 'brainy section' where contestants are forced to answer supposedly brainy questions

There is nothing wrong with beauty pageants simply being beauty pageants; a beauty pageant is merely a contest to see which contestant is the most beautiful, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Is it superficial? Yes, but it is no more superficial than literally any other contest or sport; we don't demand Usain Bolt to answer a question about world peace for him to win gold medals for his sprints, or LeBron to solve the middle-east crisis in order for his dunks to count, yet apparently beauty pageants in a contest of beauty is supposed to answer dumb questions absolutely unrelated to the contest itself.

[Assistant]
Beauty pageants don't really "need" any part of the way they currently operate: it's an arbitrary panel giving arbitrary titles to contestants based on arbitrary subjective judgement to generate publicity for everyone involved.

I suppose that for the contestants, a couple of minutes where they're seen speaking, regardless of the content, serves to diversify the types of pictures / clips of them that can be retweeted, plus maybe add a slight feminist whitewash, or other PR-related benefits.


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

[User]
ELI5: Is intelligence entirely determined in the early stages of life or is it something that can change later on?

Whenever I read about influential scientists and mathematicians, I notice how their upbringings had a similarity: their curiosity and intellects were all nurtured as children. Do people farther down the road of life still have the ability and potential to grow their minds to reach the same heights?

[Assistant]
Your genetic code mostly determines how your brain will form and develop, but environmental factors (nutrition, injury, etc) during the growing process play a big part in this. But most healthy brains end up similar to each other in most ways, so barring disabilities, that's not that important.

Most people have the capacity to learn whatever they want, they just need to put effort into learning. Therefore, capability for knowledge is common among people, but actual knowledge is a consciously acquired thing.