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

[User]
When does a fetus become a person?

I don't really know where to draw the line. I personally don't view an embryo/fetus as a person in the first trimester... But that isn't really an argument, right? Because someone else could view it differently. Hell, someone could view the sperm and egg as persons... And I technically couldn't say they're wrong in doing so. Point is, I don't have a good way of determining when a blob of tissue becomes a person. Thoughts?

[Assistant]
This question is frequently asked with the hidden premise that personhood is binary, in that one either has it (and is deserving of moral consideration) or does not have it (and is not deserving of  moral consideration.)

The Gradient Theory of Personhood suggests that this may not be the case, and rather than being like a on/off switch that is toggled at some point (which we have yet to agree on, if it exists at all) personhood is a quality which one can have in varying amounts.

This may be unsatisfying in the goal of defining some 'hard boundary' which delineates personhood, but also can provide guidance to who may be *more deserving of moral treatment.*

Based on the premise that the genetic material which develops into a person starts out as a non-person, and if we accept that personhood can be granted *gradually*, one could argue that an expecting mother is *more of a person* (that is to say she has more personhood, and therefore is more deserving of moral consideration) than the fetus she carries. This is not a complete account of the concept, but illustrates an alternative view of personhood which, while unsatisfying from a 'line in the sand' perspective, may be useful when faced with moral decisions.


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

[User]
ELI5:Why do Americans feel special about freedom considering almost entire developed world has it?

I am an American and I am asking this seriously, with no offence.

[Assistant]
During the 1950s -- 1980s the Soviet Union (the only real challenger to American world dominance) was demonized for being Communist and 'freedom' was cast as the opposite.  This was hammered into us with a lot of popular culture and propaganda.  Often 'bringing people freedom' was used to explain why the USA was justified in attacking various other countries around the world, including more recently Iraq.

To a lessor degree the USA's National Rifle Association also promotes 'freedom' as the justification for our love of firearms.

Americans are flooded with these concepts starting at a young age and it never really stops.


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

[User]
CMV: -The purpose of free speech is to allow the stupid, the vile and the dangerous to freely self identify so that we can avoid and shun them. Anything that suppresses that very public self identification process only drives such speech underground where it is harder to guard against.

Lets face facts- Alex Jones is an occasionally entertaining idiot. I am convinced that a significant fraction of his fan base follows him for  purely entertainment purposes. But banning him from social media  platforms has only made him front page news and significantly increased  his  news letter subscriptions. His jackassery is still available on the  internet. He has in no way "gone away" by de-platforming him.

Suppressing - by deplatforming or shadowbanning or banning- free speech only drives it underground where it cannot be monitored -is counterproductive. I have no problem with mockery or downvoting a submission or comment to the very bottom of a conversation (there are subs where my opinion is un-welcome and no useful conversation comes from it but I simply stop wasting my time there).

When power- whether it be government power or corporate power or community power- is exercised to exclude someone, anyone from a conversation, the opportunity to persuade, to convince, to educate is not just lost but deliberately thrown away.

[Assistant]
>Suppressing - by deplatforming or shadowbanning or banning- free speech only drives it underground where it cannot be monitored -is counterproductive.

Is monitoring speech which you find troublesome better?  The point of free speech isn't there because we know people with different ideas will out themselves and we can shame them.  If that were the case, wouldn't people with hateful ideologies just take their ideas underground anyways?

Free speech is designed to protect your ideas from government oppression.  The problem we have today is a free speech issue not related to the government.  It has to do with a businesses tolerance of free speech in an era where a previously unknown employee can be put on blast around the world for any opinion he might hold.  Before this point the people who suppressed speech were governments.  With the ability to let the world know your opinion on the internet free speech has become something of concern for private companies.  In either case, free speech isn't there so we can trick people into exposing there true racist intentions, but to protect their ability to speak freely and contribute more to public discourse.  We decided as a society that this public discourse was more beneficial to society than the lack of open discourse brought about by suppressed speech.


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

[User]
ELI5:Why do we still have a need for hundreds of separate sovereign nations?

I can understand how different areas of the world developed separately. I'm not advocating this situation; but sharing resources, advancements, surpluses, etc. just seems to make sense.

[Assistant]
It makes perfect sense.

It wouldn't work though. The French wouldn't want to be ruled from Berlin; the Japanese from Beijing; the Zimbabweans from Pretoria; the Americans from Ottawa.

There is too much national pride for it to happen in our life time. Governments wouldn't want to give up their power, and citizens of a small country wouldn't want to be ruled by a big or vice verse.


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

[User] After a nuclear detonation, why do rings appear sometimes around the mushroom cloud?

[Assistant]
They're called Wilson clouds, and they're caused by the shockwave of the explosion.

The pressure front of an explosion causes a decrease in pressure to occur behind it. This is intuitive to anyone who has ever made a wave in their bathtub: in a closed system like the atmosphere, any increase in density somewhere has to correspond to a reduction somewhere else. With a gas, a decrease in density translates to a decreased temperature: this is another effect that you can witness for yourself by playing with compressed air: as the pressure inside the can is reduced by venting the compressed air, it rapidly cools. This is the same mechanic used by refrigeration systems across the planet.

On a large scale explosion like a nuclear detonation, the power of the shockwave can cause *substantial* cooling of the atmosphere, dropping it below dew point. When this happens, the humidity of the air condenses into water droplets, forming the ring clouds that we see around the explosion.


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

[User]
[Resident Evil] Why do the villains keep intentionally turning themselves into horrible monsters?

Specifically I'm thinking of Saddler but there are numerous other examples of this trope. At some point the villain decides they need to "power up" and trigger some form of violent body horror mutation to kill the heroes. Aside from the obvious desire to kill the protagonists, why in hell would anyone do this? It seems incredibly unlikely these things are reversable, and it doesn't seem like it's worth it to spend the rest of your life as a monstrous crab/insect thing with a giant eyeball forever blocking your trachea.

What's weirder is that some characters who end up turning into monsters (Gionne, the arms dealer in V with the absolutely hilarious voice acting) react normally with fear and confusion, but other times it's Alexia Ashford over here turning into an ant queen that certainly isn't going to be able to move from her chosen position...in a maintenance corridor of an exploding Arctic base. Even if these people win they've inflicted a fate worse than death on themselves, so why do they keep doing it?

[Assistant]
In the case of Saddler, who clearly has the most advanced form of the Plaga, it's not entirely clear whether or not changing back is impossible for him.

I mean, the dude already has a giant ass tentacle available to him in his human form, can change his arms from normal to tentacle then back, and otherwise have some limited transformation abilities separate from his final boss mode.

For all we know, if he had killed Leon, he could have shed his giant monster form and resumed being humanoid. The Las Plagas as a whole is a lot more versatile than other viruses/parasites in the series.


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

[User] [Kool-Aid Commercials] What the hell is the Kool-Aid man anyway? And why does he bust through walls?

[Assistant]
What is he? A giant, sentient pitcher of cool, refreshing, cherry flavored Kool-Aid.

Why does he bust through walls? Well let me ask you this, how is a giant pitcher of Kool-Aid going to fit through a door?


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

[User]
[X-men] Why is Mystique not harmed when Wolverine cuts off Mystique-Wolverine's claws?

Mystique takes the form of Wolverine and fights against Wolverine, who promptly cuts off her claws. She shows expression of pain, but when she morphs back, she is fine. The claws must have come from somewhere, so her fingers, bones, or something must have been hurt when she cuts them off.

Furthermore, after getting stabbed by Wolverine, she still carries the scars in her later form of Jean, so we know that injuries and damaged tissue gets carried from her original form to morphs, and probably vice versa.

[Assistant]
Looking at S.H.I.E.L.D. files...
>**Subject:** Raven Darkholme(A.K.A. Mystique )
>**Mutant Powers:** Metamorph, Can psionically alter the formation of her biological cells at will. As a result she can cause herself to look and sound like an exact duplicate of any human, humanoid, or semi-humanoid being of either sex, wearing virtually any kind of clothing. Her control is so exact that she can precisely duplicate another persons retina pattern in her own eyes, finger, palm and skin-pore patterns on her own hands and skin, and vocal cords to match voices to the point of corresponding voiceprints.

This gives her certain level of accelerated healing, also means part of adopted forms may be made of bone, nail, etc, meaning even if it hurt her, the claws weren't living tissue, but organic matter easily recycled during transformation. And since her powers are psionic, it also means the scars are more mental than physical, her scars remained 'cause she though they were something important, or literally scarred her mind.


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

[User]
ELI5: Melanin and aging

Mostly in India and near neighboring countries, kids are born with lighter tone or colour and with aging they turn dark or brown and become more closer to their parents skin tone. What changes in the body causes this to happen? Normal parent talk is this happens because teens run around in the hot sun, i suspect that's not the full story.

[Assistant]
Certain genes that control melanin production are not activated until the babies grow older or during puberty.

You will see this with people with lighter hair or eye colors as these children may be born with blond hair that darkens with age or with blue eyes that eventually changes to a darker color. The same would happen with someone with someone born with a lighter color skin which gets darker with age.


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

[User]
ELI5: If Almonds contain all of the essential Amino Acids to form complete proteins, why are they considered incomplete protein sources?

Almonds contain all 9 of the essential amino acids, obviously in very different levels. In a 95g serving, the lowest amino acid is Methionine, at about 143mg, and the highest amino acid is Leucine, which is 1414mg. Couldn't you, in theory, eat a bunch of almonds, and have your RDA for all 9 essential amino acids and have complete proteins?

[Assistant] Technically yes you could eat 1000 calories worth of almonds to reach your essential amino acid requirement across the board. However it is much more reasonable to combine almonds with a grain which is higher in methionine and leucine, this is called complementary protein intake. So when they are talking about a complete protein they are limiting it to a certain amount of such a protein and it's ability to meet the necessary requirements. With animal protein (complete proteins) it is very easy to reach the needed amount of the 9 essential amino acids but using the equivalent amount of almonds would not be possible. This is why they stress for vegetarians to pair complementary proteins to fulfill their essential amino acid requirements. However as mentioned theoretically since almonds do contain all 9 essentials in varying amounts it would be possible to consume a great deal of almonds to fulfill that need but not really necessary when certain grains are available to complement.


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

[User] [Star Trek] Does Chief O' Brien just stand at the transporter console ALL day?

[Assistant]
He only as to stand there during his 8 hour shift. There are two others guys with less seniority who get the other 16 hours.

That is until Jellico switches them to a 4 shift rotation and he only has to stand there 6 hours a day.


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

[User] ELI5: How does gravity bend light if light is massless?

[Assistant]
Because gravity bends space-time itself.

The light is still going straight,  by its own point of view, but the space-time is curved by the gravity,  so something traveling straight through curved space-time alters its direction relative to an observer outside the curved region.

Black holes basically curve space-time inward to the point that there's no getting back out of that gravity well.


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

[User]
[Babylon5/MassEffect] What if: The Systems Alliance had access to Shadow Tech?

In the year 2150, the Systems Alliance uncovers buried in the surface of Mars a Shadow Vessel from the B5 franchise. With this discovery of a highly advanced species how will the SA adapt these new technologies? How will the rest of the series play out with the discovery of Shadow technology? How will the other races view the SA? Will they be able to survive the Reapers?

[Assistant]
This depends on a few things:

- Is the Shadow technology well understood and can be made functional, given the lack of telepaths in the Mass Effect universe?

- Assuming it can be activated, will the Shadow Battlecrab either go berserk (as it did in *Messages from Earth*) or summon another Battlecrab to finish freeing it and depart SA space?

- Assuming it can be activated and does not flee or go berserk, can the Systems Alliance can replicate the technology involved in it in time for First Contact and/or the Reapers?

If it can be made functional, but goes berserk or escapes, nothing the Systems alliance has can functionally stop it.

If it stays in place and the Systems alliance can replicate its, however, the Systems Alliance is now developing tech based on a ship whose weapon that is capable of exceeding a Reaper's primary armament by *over two thousand times* and phasing in and out of hyperspace at will. The Systems Alliance promptly becomes untouchable in a direct confrontation, easily overrunning the entire Turian Hierarchy when the First Contact War happens (if it even does) and earning the total fear and perhaps even reverence of other Citadel races.

Needless to say, if the Reapers do turn up - even if Sovereign's original plan succeeds - they're in for a *very* bad time.


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

[User] ELI5 how are gps ETAs calculated? Does every traffic light get the same amount of time? Do left turns get the same amount of time as right turns?

[Assistant]
Navigation software that's internet-based such as Google Maps on a phone and some newer nav units in cars base their calculations on how long previous drivers using such a device have needed to travel along a certain stretch of road, so their information is very up-to-date.

Offline GPS units that don't have an internet connection such as standalone nav units and older systems in cars just do a rough approximation based on what type of road it is. So they may figure that 1 mile on the highway takes on average 1 minute, 1 mile in the city takes say 4 minutes and so on. That's why they're a lot less accurate, and why some of them give you the same estimate at 3am as during rush hour, which is obviously not realistic.


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

[User]
Why does water pouring make that weird folded shape?

I was pouring water from my water bottle into another to combine some halves I had left out and I noticed it came out in a specific foldy shape. It changed depending on how hard I was pouring it. Why does it do that?

[Assistant] The water coming out is not just experiencing gravity pulling it down, but also inertia (from it spinning around the top before coming out) and cohesion (a result of hydrogen bonding) between water molecules. Because the water molecules have a strong degree of cohesion, the faster water bits pull along the slower water bits. This can result in some interesting patterns or water appearing stretched out.


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

[User]
Why do we have "baby" teeth?

What is the purpose of baby teeth? Why don't we just keep them and have additional teeth grow in?

[Assistant]
Actually, you're asking the wrong question.  Let me explain.

We have two sets of teeth, like most mammals (some mammals, such as rodents, only have one set of teeth, and still others, such as baleen whales, have none at all).  But our distant ancestors, hundreds of millions of years ago, had the ability to grow endless sets of teeth.  Today, we see this ability retained in modern fish, amphibians, and reptiles.

Now, replacement teeth seem to grow in a really stereotyped manner.  There's a layer of cells in the mouth that lay just medial (tonguewards) of the tooth, called the successional lamina.  In mammals, the successional lamina is  contained within the cavity that holds  the root (the alveolus) but in reptiles and amphibians, the successional lamina will often be part of the medial gumline.  The successional lamina contains stem cells as well as epithelial cells.  Periodically, the successional lamina will form a pocket, that will then fold up in various ways, then differentiate into an enamel organ and pulp cavity, which will then produce a tooth.  The remainder of the successional lamina will then proliferate to create more successional lamina, and will later repeat the whole cycle.

In mammals, this is disrupted.  The successional lamina forms a replacement tooth (your adult tooth) but it does not form a new successional lamina.  This is not the case in all people; some people are able to produce a third or even a fourth set of teeth, but this is the case in most people, and indeed in most mammals.

So now we know how humans came to have only two sets of teeth.  But why?  It's kind of ridiculous, considering that a tooth really doesn't last very long, even with modern dentistry.  However, our early mammal ancestors were small and likely had short lifespans, much like modern shrews, rodents, possums, and other small furry creatures.

This was, of course, probably also the case for many of our early nearly-mammalian ancestors, and our early somewhat-mammalian ancestors, and before that our early almost-amniote (egg-laying) ancestors, our early almost-amphibian ancestors, and so on. But our early mammalian ancestors did something special; they fed their offspring milk.  The benefit of milk is that it doesn't require an adult dentition to consume, and it contains a lot of energy, minerals, and other things the body needs to grow.  So baby mammals grow up really, really fast.  Furthermore, as soon as a baby mammal reaches sexual maturity, it stops growing.  So, a baby reptile or amphibian or almost-mammal might take a few years to reach adulthood, and during that time, it's going to be using its teeth to eat plants, or insects, or other reptiles, amphibians, or almost mammals, and once it becomes an adult, it's going to *keep* growing for a while longer, although it will slow down considerably.  So, a reptile, amphibian, or almost-mammal is going to need to keep on replacing those teeth as they grow, because the teeth that were good for catching small insects when they're a few months old won't be all that good for catching small amphibians or reptiles when they're a year or two old, and so on, so they need to keep on making more teeth and larger teeth as they grow.  A mammal, however, doesn't need to do that.  That first generation of teeth (baby teeth) are good enough to get it through the growing stage of its life, and when the mammal reaches adulthood, it gets its adult teeth, at which point it's as large as it's going to get, and thus will never need to replace its teeth.  And because our early mammal ancestors probably only lived a couple of years at most, they didn't have to worry about cavities too much, because by the time their adult teeth were too damaged to use well, they had likely produced plenty of little baby early mammal ancestors, and, more importantly, had probably been devoured by a small dinosaur anyways.  So our early mammal ancestors did away with additional replacement teeth, because they simply didn't need them.  They still needed those baby teeth, and they still needed adult teeth, so that's why we have two generations of teeth.

**tl;dr: "baby" and "adult" teeth are holdovers from our reptile-like ancestors, who replaced their teeth continuously throughout their lifespan.  We lost the "continuously" but still kept the "replacement."**


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

[User]
ELI5:Why use a primary language and a scripting language in game dev?

I've noticed that a lot of games are coded in both a primary language (eg, C++) along with a scripting language (eg Python).

As someone who only knows scripting languages, I sort of know the difference thematically but not completely functionally.

Basically, my question is: if you're already coding in a primary language like C++, what is the point/benefit of also having code in there that was written in a scripting language like Python? Why not do everything in C++?

[Assistant]
Scripting languages are usually faster to work with. They don't need to be compiled, changes can be made on the fly. They don't have hard to debug memory leaks and corruption. The downside is they usually have lower performance.

The performance critical graphics engine is written in C++. The game logic is written in a scripting language.

It also allows modders to modify the game logic while keeping the source code to the engine secret.


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

[User]
Why do so many tarantula species contain the word "Baboon"?

"king baboon spider"
"orange baboon spider"
"horned baboon tarantula"
"blue baboon spider"
Are they related or do arachnologists just like the word baboon?

[Assistant]
The thing to keep in mind is that these are vernacular names, in English. They are not the taxonomic names for the various species. For example, *Pelinobius muticus* is simply referred to as the "King Baboon Tarantula" in English-speaking countries, including Kenya and Tanzania where it is often found.

There are a number of theories regarding why "baboon" was included, but as you're really asking about the etymology of non-scientific terms, that isn't surprising.

The theory that often gets repeated (I had two professors repeat it in separate classes) is that many species of tarantula have legs that are reminiscent of a baboon's fingers. And many certainly do, when you compare.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why did(does) China lend so much money to the USA?

From what I hear everywhere these days and on articles that America is in debt with China for 1.23 approx trillion dollars.

What I dont understand is, how is China lending this much money to America or Why in the first place?

China is enjoying a decent economic growth and all though I am not well educated in these matters, it seems to me like China could be using its own money to invest in its own country and on its own population to further increase that economic growth.

People in America dont really give a shit about developing a relationship with China, especially with China being a communist power and also supporting and defending North K-o-r-e-a from western interference. Most of the world still considers China to be a developing or a 3rd world country. Again I might be ignorant about these as I dont know a lot about international politics or have a finance background.

[Assistant]
Sovereign debt isn't really lending as most people are familiar with it.

Nobody is "lending" America money. They are purchasing American treasury bonds. A T-bond is basically a promise from the US government that in X number of years they will pay you the value of the bond plus a small percentage of interest. People buy these bonds because the US government *always* pays. They are a super-safe way to invest money.


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

[User]
Professor asked me for letter of support

Hi all,

My professor asked me for a letter of support for a teaching award he is being nominated for. I had two neuro classes with him (I graduated in Spring 2013) and he was one of the best professors I've had. He made neuro very enjoyable and was probably the main reason I declared a minor in it.

I have something written, but would just like some feedback (I'd love a professor's feedback or somebody in graduate school). Could one or two people give me their thoughts?

Many thanks.

[Assistant]
Just in general: specific, personal anecdotes are very powerful. It's far better to relate a personal story that illustrates one or two of a nominee's strengths than it is to shower the nominee with unsupported accolades.

It's also helpful if you include one or two succinct, quotable sentences -- sound bites, if you prefer. The principal nominator will be looking for support for the letter he or she will need to write, and having a few powerful quotes to use makes that job easier.


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

[User] ELI5 - Why do communications companies make themselves so impossible to get hold of?

[Assistant]
Customer service is an expense. It doesn't generate any revenue for them and so it's a low priority. The only reason it gets any attention in most companies is because good customer service can prevent a customer from moving to a competetor but in most places communications companies have monopolies or duopolies so there's little risk in loosing a customer due to bad service.

So they set up the bare minimum number of people to answer questions, they force customers to answer their own questions and set up automated systems with technology that isn't anywhere near maturity with the idea that they can answer enough customer questions to get by and avoid most formal complaints.


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

[User]
[Hobbit] How did Sauron or the Nazgul not see/sense Bilbo when he uses the ring in the Hobbit?

Or for that matter Gollom for all the time he had it. When the dwarves are captured by the wood elves in the Mirkwood forest, Bilbo spends days if not weeks wearing the ring. Yet every time Frodo even *thinks* about putting on the ring he is instantly a target and everyone knows where he is?

[Assistant]
The films are... different. Sauron only knew where Frodo was on Amon Hen, and when he claimed the Ring inside Mordor. Amon Hen was sort of a weird place, which encouraged farsight but also apparently made you "stick out" more to those with farsight of their own. That plus the Ring meant that Sauron found him -- albeit not enough to identify him, thanks to the intervention of either Galadriel or Gandalf. And claiming the Ring was directly challenging Sauron in his own land, so it was more the claim than the use of the Ring that drew the attention of Sauron.

Bilbo never outright, knowingly claimed it as his own and challenged Sauron for its ownership. Neither did Gollum (though he likely would have done so given the chance). Use of the Ring never functioned as a homing beacon for Sauron. The films changed this to make some things easier to show visually and enhance the menace of the Ring. But, for example, Sam uses the Ring for an extended period in the Pass of Cirith Ungol, following around orcs and evading Shelob. Sauron never notices that.


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

[User]
ELI5: Difference in "Sell By," "Best by," and expiration dates?

How long does food usually last, and in what quality, up to these dates? I feel like they all mean something different if not similar, yet I only ever see one on something that I buy.

[Assistant]
* A "Sell-By" date tells the store how long to display the product for sale. You should buy the product before the date expires. It is a stock control system for the stores.
* A "Best By (or Before)" date is recommended for best flavor or quality. It is not a purchase or safety date. It is a guarantee for the consumer that if you use the food on or before the date listed, it should taste fresh. It is advisory only and says nothing about the safety (or lack thereof) of the food on or after a certain date.
* A "Use By" date is generally a date at which food is no longer considered safe to eat. You might see something like "Keep refrigerated and use within 5 days of opening" on a carton of egg whites, for example. You should not get sick if you eat within 5 days - you may get sick after 5 days.


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

[User] ELI5: When you "sell" stocks, who is buying them? What if nobody wants to buy them? What if nobody wants to sell them? How do they work?

[Assistant]
When you sell a stock, as in you've hit the "sell" button on your trading platform or called in an order, you're selling it to someone who has hit the "buy" button on his trading platform for the same price.

If you sell and no one wants to buy, then your order will just not be filled at that price. Then, depending on your choice of broker or personal settings, your order will be canceled, wait to be filled at the price, or fill at the next available price(s).

So pretty much, when you sell a stock, you're selling to some guy who happens to be buying at that moment. If no one's there to buy from you, you'll be left hanging. And vice versa.


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

[User]
The film Arrival hints at b-theory of time. Does it actually support it?

I have done a lot of searching, and all I can come up with is a Quora answer that Im not sure answers my question.

The film Arrival involves individuals ability to experience time differently. Does this only work in a world where b-theory is correct?

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I searched both through Reddit and Google without any luck.

[Assistant]
Yes, pretty much. It's based on a short story called 'Story of Your Life' which brings it out a bit more clearly.

>'The physical universe was a language with a perfectly ambiguous grammar. Every physical event was an utterance that could be parsed in two entirely different ways, one causal and the other teleological, both valid, neither one disqualifiable no matter how much context was available.

>'When the ancestors of humans and heptapods first acquired the spark of consciousness, they both perceived the same physical world, but they parsed their perceptions differently; the worldviews that ultimately arose were the end result of that divergence. Humans had developed a sequential mode of awareness, while heptapods had developed a simultaneous mode of awareness. We experienced events in an order, and perceived their relationship as cause and effect. They experienced all events at once, and perceived a purpose underlying them all. A minimizing, maximizing purpose.'


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

[User] ELI5: How do miners know when a mine is tapped out ? Or how they know where to mine in the first place?

[Assistant]
> **when a mine is tapped out ?**

they rarely know it that specifically but when they can't bring out enough valuable ore/cost they lose interest fast. there might still be good stuff down there and there might be nothing so you keep going until you start to lose profit and then you bail.


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

[User] [DC] Martian man hunter don't look a like human so why doesn't he just use his real form?

[Assistant] At first, J'onn adopted the more humanoid and superheroic Martian Manhunter look to put humanity at ease, and would only revert to his natural Martian appearance when he was relaxed in private, or under significant stress that couldn't maintain the 'transformation'. But after enough time on Earth he subconsciously started to feel like the Martian Manhunter appearance everyone came to know him by reflected his true current self and that became his default natural appearance which he didn't need to consciously maintain at all.


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

[User] ELI5: Why did Sega die so quickly? Their systems often seemed superior to the ones that were out during the time.

[Assistant]
Personal thoughts:

* Primary reason that Sega hardware and some games where superior was Sega had excellent Arcade machines. When Arcades died off so did this advantage.
* Hardware strategy all over the place and costly, Genesis had too many add ons that no one would develop for because not enough people had them
* Saturn was a flop
* even though the Dreamcast was a good system it was crushed by the Playstation 2 and Xbox
* Unlike Nintendo who had several first party mega series to keep people purchasing even in slow times, Sega had... Sonic, and we all know that there haven't been very many good Sonic games.


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

[User]
ELI5: How does food in the fridge stay good for a few days and then one day just go bad.

Some food seem to be fine one day and the next just smell or look weird the next.

[Assistant]
Bacteria multiply by binary fission, which means they double when they reproduce and therefore exhibit exponential growth. When you first put the food in the fridge there are only a few bacteria, and when they double there are only a few more. By the time there are a few hundred thousand, this exponential growth means it wont take long for there are millions then billions spoiling your food.
E.coli, for example, has a doubling time of 20 mins under ideal conditions. Refrigeration will slow most bacterial growth increasing the doubling time.


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

[User]
ELI5: How is a computer programmed to *not* play a game optimally? (Chess, for example)

For reference, on lichess.org, you can play against the machine. You must choose a "level" to play on from 1-8. How is the programming different between each of these levels?

[Assistant] Many programs work by searching through  thousands or even millions of possible moves.  Not just what move is next, but what will happen after that, and what will happen after that. When you reduce the computer's level, you tell it to examine fewer possible moves, less far into the future, before making its decision.


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

[User] [Eli5] Why are wind turbines on a horizontal axis like a traditional windmill? Do they turn into the wind? If at a slight angle from wind direction doesn't efficiency drop? Wouldn't a tower-style set up, with blades spinning around a vertical axis spin regardless of wind direction?

[Assistant] Horizontal axis wind turbines do indeed turn into the wind. On some older smaller systems this was done by the help of a rudder so the wind would push the wind turbine in the right direction. However modern turbines use motors to turn them into the wind at all times. This would obviously not be needed with vertical axis wind turbines. And this style is being researched as a possible better alternative. However a big problem with vertical axis wind turbines is that the blades are only catching the wind perfectly once per revolution and is even going against the wind at times. While the blades on a horizontal axis wind turbine always have the perfect angle into the wind.


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

[User]
How do I get better at philosophy without majoring in philosophy?

I'm a politics major. I'm almost done but I'm realizing how important philosophy is. I'm assigned snippets of political philosophy but I'm realizing how all of philosophy is important.

It's honestly amazing how much the humanities overlap. I need a deep understanding of philosophy to perform well. I kind of regret my major but it's too late, I see now why philosophy majors score higher than politics majors on the LSAT.

I spent much of my teens engaging in "scientism" (Dawkins, hitchens, Harris) and I'm realizing how incorrect that is.

My professors are helpful but I feel like I'm really lacking. So my question, who are the most influential philosophers that I must read and what philosophers are most involved in political philosophy?

I was taught history, math, science in highscool but not philosophy. I feel like I barely have a foundation.

[Assistant] The philosophers you need to know to understand politics are the major historical ones like Plato, Hobbes, and Locke. Reading contemporary academic political philosophy will have a smaller payoff in that specific respect, because it has had less time to influence the culture.


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

[User]
[DC/Marvel] do other nations Heroes feel jealous that the American Based heroes get all the fame and glory?

So given that it always seems that an American or American based superhero or super team  is the one who always beats the biggest bad or its at least portrayed as such does that make supers in other nations jealous or upset that they seem to be second string?

[Assistant]
Interesting question! It's a mixed bag, but by and large the answer is yes, though not for the reasons you're thinking. At both Marvel and DC, most non-american heroes tend to exist as *extensions* of their country's government rather than operate *in* their country as freelance vigilantes.  They're mad about the American heroes doing everything because they view it as an infringement of their sovereignty.

  Over at DC, The recent crisis crossover *Doomsday Clock* was built on this idea. Basically, the plot is that various world governments notice that while America has an *incredible* number of superhumans created by freak lab accidents, most non-american superhumans are created by their *respective governments,* usually as a direct response to the American supers. (pick a foreign cape at DC and the odds are good this will be their backstory.) This leads the world at large to assume that the U.S. Government is secretly behind most of the "freak accident" heroes, with Russia spearheading an anti-U.S. Coalition to try and frame the Justice League as an out-of-control extension of American Foreign policy.

Marvel had a similar Arc where the core Avengers team went, "Hey, we're getting kind of sick of constant U.S. Government plots to destroy or enslave all the superheroes- we've got enough resources between us to count as our own nation. Peace!" They then relocate to Antartica and throw in with Black Panther for whatever funding they can't get from Iron Man. On top of royally pissing off the entire U.S. Government, pretty much every nation capable of fielding a superhuman program *immediately* starts churning out capes in order to make sure that they'll have a way to keep the Avengers off their property if need be- because *nobody* wants a superhero team that's on America's shitlist butting in if they can avoid it.


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

[User]
[Dungeons And Dragons] How does the world of Torill have such incredible biodiversity

Seriously, there's over 100 sentient races, hundreds of apex predators. how does the world support this level of biodiversity?

[Assistant]
Alien invasions and immigrations mostly. Mindflayers, everything fae related, Dragons, Genasi, and many others come from other worlds or realities.  Others like Gnomes were artificially created.

A lot of flora and fauna also comes from other realities as well. Just glancing through the Monster Manuals you'll see some cone from the Faewild, others from the Far Realm, others from Elemental Planes, and so on.


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

[User] If I put helium in my rectum, will my farts be high pitched?

[Assistant]
Short answer: yes.

Long answer: the reason your voice is high-pitched when you inhale helium is that the speed of sound in helium is faster than the speed of sound in air. When the pressure waves that make up the sound of your voice move from the helium in your lungs and throat and into the air, the change in speed also changes the wavelength and thus the pitch of the sound.

As long as the source of the sound is in a helium-rich environment, it will be higher-pitched when it is heard in air. If you actually filled your rectum with helium, your farts would, in fact, be higher pitched.


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

[User]
[Marvel Universe] If Bruce Banner proves himself to be worthy of wielding Mjolnir, would the Hulk be able to wield it as well?

I'm asking in terms of before the two personalities merge into one. This is strictly the doctor and giant green rage monster scenario.

[Assistant]
I think the answer is no.
In movies, we've seen hulk beat his enemies but he dont care if anyone else got smashed under his giant foots.

If Bruce Banner became worthy, the Professor Hulk can become worthy as professor hulk has the body and strength of hupk but Bruce is fully conscious in him.


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

[User] Should we be worried about SF6 as green house gas as it has ~20,000 time more global warming potential than CO2?

[Assistant]
It's much more potent, but much, much less common. SF6 exists at about 7 parts per *trillion* in the atmosphere, CO2 is measured at 400,000,000 parts per trillion (400 ppm).

So, the effect would be roughly equivalent to 140,000 ppt of CO2, less than a thousandth of what's actually there.


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

[User]
how can birds like parrots or ravens be so intelligent ; given their small brains ?

Also , even though other birds have brains similar in size to the parrots and crows , they're not as intelligent . why?

[Assistant]
>even though other birds have brains similar in size to the parrots and crows , they're not as intelligent . why?

Just a quibble  -

We recognize  certain  things that corvids and psittacines do as  "intelligent",  partly  because  they're  similar  to things that we do.  (E.g.  "Manipulate physical objects")

But  we  should  keep in the back of  our minds the possibility of  different  kinds of  intelligence that  aren't obvious to us  -  for example  many  birds  make  multi-thousand-kilometer migrations,  through  different  sorts  of  environmental  conditions, and  doing navigation that most  humans  would  find a challenge  with  training and  high-tech instruments.


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

[User]
ELI5 - When people lose weight, where does it go?

So, you go out, you exercise a lot, you eat less food and what you do eat is healthier.  At the end of the week, you are 5 lbs lighter (just a guess).  What happened to that 5 lbs of fat?  Is it converted directly to energy?  Do you have to wait until you next defecate to actually "lose" the weight?

[Assistant]
The way your body uses food is that it burns it with oxygen, much like wood in a fireplace burns.  The reaction in your body is a lot more controlled, which is why you don't go up in flames.  But it does produce some of the same byproducts, namely heat, carbon dioxide, and water.

The same is true for your fat stores.  They get burned up with oxygen as well, just like if you ate a piece of fatty meat.  So where does the fat go?  You breathe it out as carbon dioxide, and urinate it out as water.  So imagine that next time you're in the gym.  Every breath you exhale is some of your fat leaving your body.


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

[User]
Are photons "immortal"?

If a beam of light doesn't hit anything, does it just keep on going forever?

[Assistant]
This question is kind of hard to answer.

To say whether or not a photon is "immortal" implies, that there is some kind of reference frame of the photon in which time passes at a measurable rate.

It turns out, though, that we cannot do that. You may know, that the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference. Thus, photons move at c relative to **all** valid frames of reference. However, this renders it impossible to define a frame of reference in which the photon is at rest.

Since the rate at which time passes depends on the relative velocity between object and observer, it really makes little sense to talk about the passage of time of an object that has no rest frame.

Thus, photons have no perspective. Not even theoretically. Since photons have no valid "perspective", it is not possible to define a rate at which time passes from their perspective. Without a rate at which time passes, it is impossible to say how "old" they are.

I suppose they are immortal in the sense that they travel at a straight line until they hit something. Space is not a perfect vacuum though, so they will eventually interact with a hydrogen atom floating randomly through space.


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

[User] ELI5: Do plants get cancer? Why or why not?

[Assistant] Plants get tumors, but it's debatable whether they qualify as cancer.  Examples of a tumor on a plant include a burl or crown gall. The tumors are uncontrolled and abnormal growth of cells, which is one definition of cancer. But tumors don't spread throughout the body (called metastasizing) in plants like they do in humans because plant cells have cell walls that make the structure rigid and lock cells in place. Some definitions of cancer include that it spreads, so in that sense the term wouldn't apply.


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

[User]
[DBZ] How can the collateral damage be so low?

All fighters are ridiculous strong. Even at the beginnings of DBZ people are strutting about destroying planets without even trying very hard.
Even Piccolo could do it and he was nothing compared to Goku or Vegeta.

How the hell is it possible that people that can do something like that spend their time fighting each other with punches or their standard ki-attacks.

If you have the power to vaporize a planet why hold back so hard?

[Assistant] They're not holding back. Their powers revolve around Ki. Having more Ki makes someone stronger, faster, more durable, and more powerful. When they fight they enhance their physical/energy attacks with Ki and can control the size/power of their blasts. So instead of just using huge beams/balls of energy they can put all of the energy into a smaller beam and still cause maximum damage in a smaller area. Check out Vegeta 's sacrifice against Majin Buu for an example of this -- when he expends all his ki he reduces the area of effect to avoid collateral damage but still delivers almost all his damage output in that area. If he didn't control the explosion it would easily have destroyed the planet but decreasing the area/size of the blast avoids that damage but still allowed him to concentrate his maximum damage output in a smaller attack/area.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do some people's personalities completely change when they are drunk?

I am a very easy going guy but when I got blackout drunk I had the tendency to become an overly aggressive jackass. I have since quit drinking but the question remains; why do some people become different when they are drunk?

[Assistant]
Alcohol basically has an anti anxiety effect. A person's level of anxiety is a huge part of their personality. Some people (I am one of them to an extent) are extra nice because they feel if they are even a bit rude, people would stop talking to them. Now, when one gets drunk, this filter disappears, and they lose the need to try to impress people and be honest about what they feel.

For someone who has a higher anxiety level, this sudden loss of anxiety can be a new and unnatural state and causes a "too free" or aggressive behaviour. While someone who doesn't have huge anxiety levels in regular life will be more comfortable in this state.

Simply put it depends how much anxiety you have in your sober state.


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

[User]
[DC] What would Joker think of Joe Chill, if he found out that Chill was the one who caused Batman to exist?

Joe Chill cannot reveal that Batman is Bruce Wayne because the other criminals would kill him for creating Batman, but what about Joker, who loves Batman as an archnemesis?

[Assistant]
Joker isn't going to "respect" him or anything. Joe Chill is just a common street thug so Joker can't get anything of value out of his skills.

If Joker can use Joe Chill in some sort of way to torture Batman, he will. Otherwise, he's just giving him a sarcastic thanks and shooting him in the head.

In the Three Jokers, the Jokers kidnap Joe Chill and plan to dump him in Joker Venom to transform him into an Ultimate Joker but Chill is saved by Batman.


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

[User] ELI5 When a beverage is advertised as "More hydrating than water," how could that be physically possible? Or is that just marketing nonsense?

[Assistant]
This is marketing nonsense that stems from a tiny grain of truth.

**The grain of truth**

To be properly hydrated, you don't just need water, you also need salt and other electrolytes. As an example, when you sweat, it is salty, so if you sweat a lot, just drinking water won't fully replace what was lost, you also need ~~sweat~~ **salt**. Realistically, the vast majority of people do not lose enough electrolytes to need to use these "extra hydrating" electrolyte beverages. But if you are exercising super, duper hard, or if you have really bad food poisoning, they can help.

**The marketing nonsense**

Not sure how it works elsewhere, but in the US, companies are allowed to say anything about their product as long as they are not claiming it treats a specific disease. If you look closely you will notice lots of vague but healthy sounding statements such as "more hydrating than water" or "supports (body part/system) health." These are meaningless phrases.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do we feel compelled to hit/break stuff when we are angry?

[Assistant]
fight or flight response

humans when confronted with problems have a fight or flight response - animal nature. You choose to fight and tackle the problem, or flight and avoid it.

When you  get down to the most basic instinct, you want to solve the problem by destroying it. If you're angry at something you can't hit or break, you still want to break something.

TL;DR; ELI5;

HULK SMASH.


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

[User]
ELI5: What does the Arkenstone actually do?

Everyone wants it. What's it for?

[Assistant] If you read the Silmarillion, you find out just how old the Arkenstone actually is. Basically, it's a family heirloom over a couple of millennia. It also glows of its own accord, which suggests that it was formed in the ages before the sun and moon.


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

[User]
I believe the dream that freer markets will solve all our problems is flawed. I believe hoarding defeats the system. CMV.

I'm no expert on economics or ideologies, but...

The point I keep hearing is that all problems come back to price manipulation in one way or another.  "The government interfered, artificially inflating..." and so on.

I don't see how a private entity hoarding resources (money) isn't price manipulation.

* I've heard the argument that you eventually have to stop hoarding to buy stuff that you need, but that only ensures a trickle.  If you love money (resources) more than good food, you can save $10 and spend $1.

* Allowing some inflation, as I understand it, is price manipulation and not a free market.  Im not sure some inflation is even a barrier as investment vehicles keep up with inflation.

* I've heard that hoarding money doesn't hurt the economy and everything still works regardless, the values just shift.  But if that's true, that's just acknowledging that you can manipulate over time.

Heres my analogy: Let's picture a small island with a few thousand people.  They use a commodity standard so that money approximately matches resources, is finite, and government isn't assigning any monetary values.  Let's call this time "A".  Then, one guy comes along who is good with the free market and very committed, hard working, etc.  He loves nothing more than to own more money and resources, a money hoarder.

He piles up 10% of the money on the island before anyone notices through diligent saving (or hoarding, depending on your perspective) and sacrificing anything but basic needs.  Eventually, 10% of the money is out of circulation, so the price of everything falls by 10%.  Nobody cares because all prices fell together.  Let's call this time "B".  However, one person is different.  Our beloved hoarder can now buy goods using his stockpile at 90% its previous price.  This makes collecting more even easier, and eventually 10% becomes 20% becomes 90%.

He can control prices over time.  Price manipulation, by a private individual.  He has power of coercion over other individuals granted to him entirely through the free market.

Finally, to relate to our world: Consider that most wealthy individuals keep only a tiny fraction of their wealth "liquid" and a slightly larger fraction "semi-liquid".

**Edit**: I'm not precluding investing as part of the hoarding, but I was trying to keep it simple.  A large percentage of our real world wealth is owned by a small fraction of individuals, which I believe proves that it is plausible - although the real world is much more complex than Thought Experiment Island.

[Assistant]
You cant "hoard" money unless you have a stack of bills in front of you that you do not touch. As this is not what happens, "hoarding" is a ridiculous reason to not believe in markets.

If you out money in a bank the bank lends out that money. It is invested. It doesnt just sit in a vault looking pretty. This is the entire concept of fractional reserve banking.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does it feel warmer when it's snowing outside, compared to it just being cold without snow?

[Assistant]
Bunch of wrong answers here...

Snowfall implies negative degrees celcius (otherwise it would rain). As the temperature drops below zero, the humidity in the air quickly drops aswell. Dry air is much easier to shield yourself against than humid air.

This is why 1 degree celsius above zero is such an awful temperature. You get all the cold with the humidity.


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

[User]
Too deep of a function hierarchy makes debugging difficult?

I was talking with a more junior developer on my team last Friday, and we were having a discussion about some code that he had written (Javascript in React).  I was concerned that his function was a little too big and was trying to do too much, so I recommended moving functionality pieces into their own functions.

He pushed back some, basically saying that if the function hierarchy gets too deep, it's difficult to debug and understand, whereas if the logic is all in the same place, it's easier to debug and understand.

I had never heard anyone push back against breaking functionality out into separate functions, and off the top of my head, I didn't really have anything to come back with.  I've thought about it over the last few days, and I'm still not sure how I can impart what I'm trying to.

Is there a better way to explain the importance of what I'm trying to get across, or perhaps I'm not looking at this the right way?  I'd appreciate any input.  :)

[Assistant]
I think the junior dev's view is simply due to inexperience.  The whole point of moving common pieces of code into a function is to *reduce* cognitive load by wrapping that chunk up into a single call the programmer no longer needs to think about.  The logic is still all there but now it's in a single (testable!) place and can be re-used anywhere.

Maybe come at this from a maintenance perspective.  Take some code you've recently worked on, manually inline as many function calls as you can, and ask the junior dev to debug it.  Then show him the original and ask which he prefers.


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

[User]
What about an actively burning star prevents its mass causing it to collapse in on itself?

Was wondering about this last night at the Paramount Science Summit featuring Michio Kaku, Brian Greene, and S. James Gates Jr.

When a star of sufficient mass dies it collapses in on itself to form a black hole (or other things).  What prevents this from happening while the star is still burning?

[Assistant]
*Pressure.*

When the star is still alive, there is fusion in the core, producing thermal energy which creates a thermal pressure, which pushes back against the pressure from gravity which compresses it.

Imagine it like a concert, where everyone wants to go to the center of the dance floor. They're all squeezing *inward.* The people in the middle might be crushed if they stand still. But suppose they are moshing. The constant bouncing and shoving pushes back against all the people pushing in, and so they can keep the mosh pit open. If they stop moshing or slow down or the song ends, then without anything to push back the crowd the other people will come in and the crowd will compress.

In the same way, fusion in the core of the star is like the moshers. They get the energy to push back against the crowd from fusion. Once they've exhausted the fuel, they can't push back, and they get compressed.


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

[User]
[Mad Men/Batman] The Gotham tourism board go to Sterling Cooper to create an ad campaign to attract more tourists and visitors. With the very public battles Batman has with his rogues gallery, what kind of ads does Don Draper create that brings people to Gotham?

Since the 60's I'd guess with go Adam West Batman or the Batman comics from that time but Batman and his biggest villians are well known.

[Assistant] The 60's show with Adam West was the brain child of  Don Draper and produced by Sterling Cooper to make the borderline psychotic vigilante fighting a wave of costumed supervillains who were bent on the subjugation of the city seem like harmless, campy fun.


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

[User] ELI5: Why did crypto (in general) plummet in the past year?

[Assistant]
People are mostly interested in crypto to make money. They pile in while it is going up in price and run away when the price stops going up. You can look at the price history of bitcoin and see every 4 years weve gone through a clear bubble.

The last year has been a combination of the crypto bubble popping again, the interest rates rising and some shady crypto exchanges going down.


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

[User]
Why does it take our eyes longer to adjust from light to dark than from dark to light?

Turning off lights in a room, will take eyes a few minutes to adjust and start to make out objects. turn light on and after initial sudden flare in eyes we can see everything.

[Assistant]
The pigment protein in the rods of our retina, rhodopsin, is responsible for our low-light vision capabilities. When it absorbs light, it photobleaches, becoming inactive, until it is recharged by the biological processes in our eyes. When we are in bright light, all of the rhodopsin is photobleached and the rods no longer function, and our vision is dominated by the cone cells (which work in bright light). So, when dark conditions occur, the rhodopsin has a chance to regenerate, but this takes time (around 30 minutes or so to fully regenerate). Thus it takes some time before our ability to see well in the dark begins to work well again.

Photopsin, the pigments that work in our cones, have a similar process but they are much less light-sensitive. However, with really bright sources of light they can photobleach too, which is why when you see something really bright, it can leave a dark spot in the place where the bright image was for awhile. All the photopsin pigments in that area have photobleached out and need time to regenerate to re-enable normal vision.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why if prostitution is illegal, hookers do not simply go through a motions of 'borrowing' money upfront and then pretending to want have sex afterwords?

I know it obvious what they're doing, but it still would technically be within the law. Is there something else I should know?

[Assistant]
The legal loop hole I've seen is to hire the girl as a 'model' for nude photos.

That way there is a legal excuse for a exchange of currency, and you can tell if the girl is an undercover cop if she doesn't agree to the 'photo session' before any talk of sex beings.


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

[User]
How was the Euro's initial value determined?

A lot of charts I see of EUR/USD go back to 1979 even though (I thought) the Euro didn't become a currency until 1999. What's the reason for this? Did the Euro supersede another currency? And how was the Euro's initial value determined? Or did it just adopt the value of the currency it superseded?

[Assistant]
Before the Euro, every country has its own currency - e.g. French franc, Deutsche mark, Italian lira, etc. However, there was something called the European Currency Unit which was part of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism or "snake in the tunnel".

The ECU was a basket of European currencies (including currencies which ultimately did not join the Eurozone like Denmark and the UK - and not including currencies which did join the Eurozone like Austria and Finland) used to effectively peg every European currency to each other, and the Euro replaced the ECU on a 1:1 basis. In practice, due to relative economy sizes, it was heavily dominated by Germany, France, the UK, and the Netherlands - with large contributions from Belgium and Italy.

It was called a snake in a tunnel because each currency (the snake) was meant to fluctuate within an upper and lower limit (the tunnel) vs the ECU. The range was quite small at 2.25%, except for Spain/Portugal/UK which was allowed 6%. The ratios of each country's weighting was fixed, so this effectively kept them fixed to each other within the range. The ECU never actually traded and was never used for anything else other than determining this mechanism.

This system actually worked decently well at limiting the variance of each currency vs the other currencies. One major issue was that it required countries to defend that range, which was easier when countries were actually part of an integrated European economy, and very difficult when they weren't. The UK joined the tunnel in 1992, but had a much worse economy than the rest of Europe, featuring high interest rates and high inflation. Ultimately, within just 2 years it couldn't afford to defend the bottom end of the range and was forced to leave, triggering Black Wednesday.


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

[User]
[Jurassic World] [Spoilers] How powerful is Indominus Rex's bite force?

The pod vehicle's glass can stop a 50 caliber bullet from penetrating. How powerful would Indominus' bite have to be to break it so effortlessly?

[Assistant] Considering the Indominus' base genetic code was said to be that of a T. Rex, it would probably be safe to assume that Indominus had a similar bite force; somewhere between 35 and 57,000 Newtons, if not more.  Compare this to the high end of .50 caliber ammunition at around 18,000 Newtons and it's obvious why the hamster ball would break, even discounting the damage our had already taken from being smacked by an ankylosaur and the Indominus' claw.  It wasn't designed to stand up to larger predators. A few bumps from a triceratops, maybe. A bite from something tyrannosaurus size, not so much.


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

[User]
ELI5: Would an overweight person or a skinny person last longer without food? Does stored fat have an effect on lasting more without food intake?

I'm talking about an abrupt stop in food consumption.

[Assistant]
Assuming they have water and no food the overweight person would last longer.

When you enter starvation mode your body begins to burn fat for energy. The entire reason we get fat is for this situation, our body has more fuel than it needs so it stores it for emergency use.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] When Vader caught the blasts from Han Solo, was he using the Force, or was his cybernetic hand just powerful enough to absorb blaster shots?

Me and my friend are debating whether it took more power to do that, or if it took more power to do what Kylo Ren does in Episode 7, blocking a blaster bolt with the Force in mid-air. She thinks it was just Vader absorbing the hit with his cybernetic arm, but a DL-44 is a pretty heavy blaster pistol, and Han wasnt too far away either, so I doubt his hand would have been as fine as it was.

[Assistant]
Vader's armor is very strong, capable of even partially deflecting a lightsaber. Recall that in Return of the Jedi, Luke struck Vader in the shoulder with a lightsaber and it did not cut Vader in two. A similar lightsaber strike at Mos Eisley in the cantina resulted in someone else instantly losing an arm at the shoulder. Thats the difference Vader's armor makes.

There's that plus Vader's force powers. He was looking directly at Solo when Solo fired the blaster at him. And its just a robotic hand as well, so if it takes damage its not that big of a deal.

Had Vader survived the events of Return of the Jedi he'd have replaced his lost hand as soon as he had downtime and access to a machine shop.


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

[User]
Has all of the earth's land been discovered?

With the vast oceans and cartography been around since people could make them, have all lands been discovered and charted? Could there be a biome in the middle of nowhere with prehistoric plants/animals?

[Assistant] There are new islands forming regularly from volcanic activity, but none would contain prehistoric life. There are certainly cave systems that we have not discovered that may contain various animals and fossils. There is an island, North Sentinel Island, where the native inhabitants have developed their own society and they attack anyone who attempts to make contact with them. It is probably the closest thing fitting the description in your question.


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

[User] What percentage oxygen would mars need to have to support humans at its current atmospheric density?

[Assistant]
No percentage would be enough at the current atmospheric density of Mars.

The atmosphere on Mars has less than 1% of the density of our own atmosphere at sea level. Our atmosphere has about 20% oxygen, so even converting the entire Martian atmosphere to oxygen (100% oxygen), you wouldn't come close to the oxygen density that we have on Earth.


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

[User]
[DC] Does Batman Fund the Entire Bat-Family?

I can see him setting up the various Robins with funds both above and under the table, but how is he supplying Batman level gear to all of Batman Inc?

[Assistant]
I think you're underestimating his own personal wealth. He's a primary stock-holder of Wayne Industries, which is a conglomerate worth trillions.

To put it simply, Wayne isn't Jeff Bezos level of rich, he's *beyond* Bill Gates and Warren Buffett levels of rich.

In some continuities, he funds the entirety of the creation of the Watchtower (a *massive* space station with all sorts of crazy tech even by DC standards) by himself. And it's a blip in the operational budget of Wayne Technologies, which is just one of the many subsidiaries of Wayne Industries.


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

[User]
Faculty co-author stole my (PhD student) idea/project. What should I do?

I started working with a junior, tenure-track faculty member in my school from a related department (we are both in social sciences).  We came up with an idea together, and jointly decided I would be first-author on the project and we would aim to publish in a journal in my field (hers is close, but people care which journals you publish in).  We were meeting weekly and everything was going well.  I then ran a pilot study, which didn't work, but the results were still promising.

She stopped responding to my emails, and after a few attempts at emailing her, she sent me this response: *"Hi! Thanks for checking in. Really sorry for being unresponsive. Could we pause this for now? Im pretty stretched with upcoming teaching and a new phd student."*

I though working with another phd student was a weird excuse to be busy, but didn't think much of it because I figured she might be the primary advisor for that student (she isn't mine).  I emailed her back that is was no problem and to just let me know when she was ready to pick our project back up.

Fast-forward 7 months later (to last week), she emails me a question, and I email her back a response and ask if she is ready to pick back up our project together.  Her response was: *"On the [research topic] stuff, Im actually pursuing a related set of questions with a [her field] graduate student, geared for a [her field] journal, so I worry there would be too much overlap."*

I send her back a nice response trying to gauge how much her project is overlapping with my ideas and whether it is okay to still pursue my own ideas.  She responds to my email with one word *"Sure"*.

I then tried to set up a meeting to *"make sure I am on the correct page with everything"*.  It has been over a week and she hasn't responded.

She does not seem like a malicious person at all, but I find it hard to believe that she is completely oblivious to the situation.  Also, there is a small possibility that her related project may not be that related, and she is just bad at making up excuses not to work with people.

What should I do?  If I try to force myself onto the paper (which I have no idea what stage it is in) there will be two problems: 1) it's targeted for a journal that I don't get credit for, 2) schools that might try to recruit me in the future will see her as a coauthor and probably will reach out to her to ask what my contribution was on the paper.

On a related note, I am much closer than her to the senior/administrative faculty in our school.  She has only been here for two years (I have been here for 3), and my primary advisor (who I am very close to) is the director of research for our entire school.

**tl;dr: Faculty coauthor told me to pause our project together because she was too busy, and then proceeded to do the project on her own without telling me.**

[Assistant]
I doubt there would be so much overlap that you couldn't continue to pursue your project and publish it in a journal in your own field. She likely wanted to have her own student and publish it in a journal in her field. It's kind of shitty on her part, but it *doesn't* impact in you any way except that you can't get her help.

Go ahead with your work, ask her to send you any grant proposal draft etc, and don't work with her again - she's unreliable if anyone asks.

tldr Unless you happen to be Kahneman your idea isn't big or original enough that it matters that two possibly similar studies get published in unrelated journals.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can't alcohol commercials actually show anyone drinking the product?

[Assistant]
Legally, they can show it, however unofficially, it is banned based off previous agreements and  codes of conduct and network guidelines.

What does that all mean? It means while the govt hasn't specifically prohibited commercials  from showing alcohol consumption, among advertisers and tv stations/channels its an official (but not legally binding) agreement that they simply do not show people drinking alcohol in a commercial, if you want your commercial to air.  There is not much demand to change this, so it goes on.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] Who decided what creatures where magical and not muggle?

So when the Wizards and muggles war split the world's and the Wizards went into hiding, how did they decide what creatures should be hidden as magical? Before they split dragons would have just been dragons, not magical dragons?

[Assistant]
Magic isn't a subjective judgement in the Harry Potter verse: it's a concrete force that can be detected and studied. Dragons were always magical dragons, because they used magic.

The boring answer is the magical creatures are the ones that are magical. It's no more subjective then if we listed all the flying animals. Magical creatures are the ones who can use magic, and muggle creatures are the one that can't.


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

[User] ELI5: Howcome when I drink salty sea-water I vomit but drinking water while eating heavily salted popcorn is fine?

[Assistant] There is much much much more salt in salt water.  When you eat popcorn then drink water you are essentially diluting the salt content.  When drinking salt water you aren't diluting anything,  but you are increasing your body's salt content. (edit to fix auto correct - lol)


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

[User]
ELI5: Does having a prosthetic leg make it easier to run farther since it won't get tired?

Perhaps someone with some first-hand experience can enlighten me. I was wondering since the leg won't get tired, once you get used to having a prosthetic leg, is it easier to run farther distances? Or does it hurt more in the upper leg area? I get shin splints all the time and wonder if I would run farther if I didn't have shins...

[Assistant] You get a lot of strain on the thigh and some pretty rough chafing at the contact areas. It's hard to *walk* long distances with standard prosthesis, and nearly impossible to run(unless you have that springy thing, but that's more bouncing than running?).


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

[User]
[Sherlock Holmes/Limitless] What would happen if Sherlock Holmes took NZT-48?

Would it enhance his deductive skills even more, or would it have little to no effect since he's such a genius anyways? I remember someone saying that it works better if you're already smart.

[Assistant]
Holmes mind is operating at close to the limits of human cognition. NZT-48 allows you to operate an order of magnitude beyond. Holmes' already exemplary deductive skills would become so fine as to appear psychic.

The real issue is that he would quickly, and irrecoverably, become addicted.

Holmes already uses cocaine, both medicinally and recreationally. It gives him an extra bump when he's having trouble with a case, and lifts him up when his melancholy gets him down. Watson has had to intervene in Holmes' drug habits on more than one occasion.

NZT-48 would be the best thin Holmes ever snorted. He would be an absolute fiend, ingesting as much as he could, as quickly as he could.

And it would kill him. NZT-48 is fatal, eventually, and the vast majority of users were not, despite the cognitive advantages it provides, smart enough to figure out how to mitigate its negative effects. Nothing about Holmes' personality suggests moderation, and NZT-48 would almost certainly be fatal to him.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] What would happen if a wizard joined the IRA?

On that note, how much of a shit storm would it cause if a wizard died in Bloody Sunday?

[Assistant]
Assuming they were using magic to assist the IRA you can bet both the Ministry and the international wizarding community would shut that shit down as soon as possible. Breaches of the Statute of Secrecy is serious business and there's no better way to get the Muggle world involved than killing their citizens.

As for what would happen if a wizard was killed in an IRA attack, likely there would be a protest amongst wizards and perhaps a few would 'try to get revenge' but ultimately nothing huge would come of it.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do very high resolution images/videos look "sharper" than reality ?

[Assistant] Reality is moving all the time.  Your eyes can only handle so much resolution and your brain can only process so much at once, but with a high res picture you have a frozen image that you can study up close, so it looks razor sharp.


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

[User]
what is the problem with the syllogism "all B are A, all B are C, therefore some A are C"

my professor said something about going from a universal generalization to an existential generalization. i still don't understand why this is an issue. any answers are greatly appreciated!

[Assistant]
Just because all B are A and all B are C doesn't mean that any B actually exist.

All unicorns are animals.
All unicorns are rainbow coloured.
Therefore, some animals are rainbow coloured.

The conclusion is only true if unicorns exist, but our premises don't tell us that.


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

[User]
ELI5: When the twin towers fell, what types of paper records were lost?

They called it the 'World Trade Center'.
Surely back in 2001 not much, if any, was backed up on computers (outside of the building).
Both buildings must have had hundreds of miles of paperwork that was lost and unrecoverable.
Did many businesses lose records? Did anyone's credit card debt disappear? Did the US government leave their bills to China in there?

I'm very curious as it seems to be a topic that is never covered.

Edit: Perhaps I phrased it badly, is it bad etiquette to change the title?
I was also thinking about whether there were offsite backups for the computer records.

[Assistant] You are mistaken about how computerized things were in 2001. All major businesses were deeply computerized by that time. In fact, you may recall there was something called the y2k crisis, in which businesses were terribly afraid their computers would go down when the year switched from 1999 to 2000.


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

[User] [Green Lantern/Marvel] Who would a ring choose to be the GL of Sector 616 (the Marvel Universe)?

[Assistant]
Unassailable will, powerful imagination, great builder, honest, dutiful, and noble: Victor Von Doom.

Before people start with "but he's a bad guy" lemme just say one thing, Thaal Sinestro of Korugar.


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

[User]
[D&D/Pathfinder] Why don't dragons rule the world?

Basically as above.

True dragons are- by a pretty overwhelming margin- stronger, tougher, smarter, richer, more skilled, more magically capable, longer lived and generally better then basically anything else in the setting short of the Gods. There are very few beings that can take them in *any* conflict, from combat to rap battling (genuinely- charisma of 16+ and huge social skill bonuses across the board)

So, why are they still sitting in caves eating sheep? Where are the dragon empires, or noble dragon kings? Where are the dragon mansions? Hell, where are the dragon *farms*?

Why are the most powerful beings in the world content to sit in a dungeon and roll around in coins all day?

[Assistant]
They don't want to, for the most part. They like caves. They tend to sleep a lot, so ruling isn't really feasible if you're going to disappear for 150 years.

That said, plenty of areas live basically at the whim of a dragon, sitting in fear of the next random demand of sacrifice or gold. Why farm when the humans are already doing it for you?


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

[User]
ELI5: What happens if two people with Down's Syndrome have a child? Does their child also have Down's Syndrome? If they do, is it worse than their parent's?

I'm very confused. Pls help.

[Assistant]
Downs is where you have 3 x chromosome no 21.
2 people with downs can produce an offspring with either 2, 3 or 4 no21's.
2 results in a normal child. 3 results in downs and 4 is incompatible with life so results in an early miscarriage.


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

[User]
How does vasoconstriction reduce blood pressure in haemostasis?

I'm a nursing student, and I'm currently studying my second physiology unit. My materials all say that when a blood vessel is damaged, vasoconstriction occurs to reduce the pressure and flow of blood, so that the platelet plug is not dislodged. This mostly makes sense to me, however it's my understanding that vasoconstriction means the same amount of blood flows through a smaller opening, thereby INCREASING blood pressure. Is there a different mechanism in place during haemostasis? Is the constriction occurring proximally to the clot, reducing the volume of blood? Is the heart output of blood changed? I can see the heart rate increasing in major injuries, thus lowering blood pressure, but what about for minor injuries?

[Assistant] The blood can go through more than just that blood vessel. If you have 2 vessels in parallel and one gets injured and constricts, the resistance in that vessel will increase. In that way, more blood will flow through the other vessel and less blood will flow through the injured vessel.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is it uncomfortable to stand with both legs straight for extended periods of time?

[Assistant]
Muscles in the legs massage the veins when you're walking. This helps the veins return blood back to the heart.

If you're standing still all your muscles are tensed to keep you upright. This means they're not in a cycle of contraction and relaxation, like when you're walking. No cycle, no vein massage, which in turn leads to less back flow of blood to the heart. This causes your feet to swell with fluid that pools in your legs (if you've ever wondered why the elastic bands on your socks leave imprints on your skin after a long day, it's the same phenomenon).

Besides, your muscles don't particularly enjoy being contracted for very long amounts of time, because when they contract and tense up they tend to shut off parts of their own blood supply.

All of this contributes to the uncomfortable feeling you're describing.


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

[User]
[MCU] I have an objectophilic desire centered on my wife, a chair I have purchased from IKEA. Can I trade her life for the soul stone?

The Avengers felt it necessary to call me into action, and last night Captain America showed up to tell me that the only way we might save humanity and perhaps existence from Thanos would be if I brought my wife, Chairen, to the planet Vormir and sacrificed her to retrieve the soul stone. Apparently, only a love as strong and pure as ours can be sacrificed, which is why he needs my help.

Can I actually help the Avengers, or should I tell him to find someone else who might be of more use to them? I desperately love Chairen, and I'm not sure if I could withstand the emotional toll of losing her, though I suppose I understand the necessity.

[Assistant]
Well, the soul stone needs there to be soul lost in the process. So if animist theories are correct, you will indeed be able to help the Avengers.

That being said, that does mean that you risk throwing Chairen off the cliff only to both lose the love of your life and learning that she really wasn't a person after all. Which is not the sort of one-two punch I'd wish on anyone.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can we imagine images in our heads but we cannot see it but know every single detail?

[Assistant]
You might remember it in detail, but it's not as relevant to your survival as the data that your sensory inputs are currently taking in.

In other words, your brain doesn't give it the bandwidth (or focus) you want it to, because hearing what's around you, feeling with your fingers, thinking logically, tasting, seeing, digesting, etc. are all much more important to your survival.

And because they're more important to your survival, your brain will expend more resources on those things.


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

[User]
what are the rules for emailing a professor at a university I do not attend?

I am currently a politics student who has applied for a history masters at another university. Whilst writing my dissertation I have come across an academic whos work has helped me massively and I have discovered theyre a professor at the university I want to attend. What is the general consensus if I wanted to email their university email (which is their profile on the university website) and say I appreciate the work you have done and also low-key mention I wanna study at their university?

[Assistant] Professors get tons of emails. Don't "low-key mention [you] want to study at their University". Reach out, tell them you appreciate their work and why and tell them you are interested in working with them (assuming you're doing a thesis-based master's).


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do some people stop liking something when it becomes popular/mainstream?

Nirvana, Game of Thrones, Punk;

They all seem to have had fans who were passionate, and then as soon as these things became mainstream, some of those people just jumped off the ship.

Does anybody know the psychology behind it? Why do we often place emphasis on something being exclusive and 'alternative'?

[Assistant]
Some people identify themselves as 'alternative' or 'underground' or whatever you want to call it, and things like music and clothing can be part of that identity. They can feel smarter or more 'involved' in the music scene if they listen to non-mainstream music. If something becomes popular it doesn't fit that identity anymore, so they stop liking it.

In the end, liking a band because they're popular (which also happens a lot) and not liking them because they're popular is pretty much the same thing; you let its popularity influence your opinion. Other people just like music because they like it, popular or not. One is not better than the other, people are just different like that.


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

[User]
[Death Note] I write someone's name into the Death Note and set his time of death to 23 days later. A week later I get tired of waiting and decide to just shoot him myself. Am I able to?

Writing someone's name into the Death Note guarantees that they'll die according to the time and method written down. If it is impossible for them to do so, they just get a heart attack and die 40 seconds after as usual.

In this situation I only make the decision to kill them a week after I've written their name down. Would a bunch of coincidences prevent me from doing so? Or is there some sort of determinism that causes my victim to die 40 seconds after I write their name in the notebook regardless of the extra stuff I've written because my future actions are destined to occur and have been accounted for by the Death Note?

[Assistant] you are indeed able to, the things written only happen as written if possible, it's impossible for a dead person to take any actions so nothing happens and it's changed to a heart attack, his heart is already not beating so that also doesn't happen.


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

[User] ELI5: If an autonomous car, while driving, parking, etc. hits a person or another car, who is held responsible?

[Assistant] No one really knows.  There is no established case law to settle the issue.  The fact is that the first truly autonomous accident will likely make it's way to the supreme court before we have an answer to this question.


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

[User] Since the Sun is converting mass to energy, its gravitonal pull should be reducing. What kind of effect does this have on our orbit?

[Assistant]
Not that much.

The sun emits a bit under 4 * 10^26 W of power. Dividing that by the speed of light squared shows that about 4.4 * 10^9 kg of mass is lost per second. That's 4.4 billion kilogram per second. That sounds like a lot. In fact, WolframAlpha conveniently tells me that that's about 2% of the total amount of trash produced by the US in one year. But that's besides the point.

How much is this in the grand scheme of things? Well, not so much it turns out. That's a fraction of 2.2 * 10^-21 of the total mass of the sun. But that's per second. Looking at it per year gives you a fraction of the total solar mass of 7 * 10^-14 . Still extremely small.

In fact, in its lifetime of about 5 billion years, the sun has only lost 0.035% of its total mass through emission of radiation.

Note: This assumes that its luminosity was constant throughout all this time, which it most likely wasn't. But that's a matter for someone with more experience in stellar evolution. There's probably also some mass gained by objects falling into the sun. Either way, it doesn't really matter for the main conclusion anyway: Mass-loss through radiation has a negligble effect on the gravitational pull of the sun.


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

[User] ELI5: Why, when I'm horny, do I have questionable thoughts and make questionable decisions as to the things I would do and who I would do them with? When I'm of normal (not as horny) mindset I many times would write those thoughts or decisions off completely.

[Assistant]
Priorities.

When your horny the only thing you really want at that time is sex, everything else is deemed much less important. So you tend to make questionable choices and have questionable thoughts as our brains try to satisfy this desire.

Once satisfied it isn't really important to us anymore so our priorities change and our brains turn to the next important thing beside food and sex, sleep and thus our brain stops having all these dirty thoughts since it has no desire for sex anymore.

As smart as brains are, there shitty at multitasking, so we tend to only focus on what is most important to us at that time. Also even tho humans seem to be complex creatures, we were really only built to have three main functions; eating, fucking and sleeping.


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

[User] How do the temperature receptors in our skin work?

[Assistant]
The nerve endings imbedded in the skin have an array of receptors that detect different ranges of temperature. Molecularly, they are temp-sensitive ion channels, and their opening/closing regulates ion flow across the membrane, and this current produces an electrical signal in the nerve, that will travel to the central nervous system.

Fun fact: some of these channels are both sensitive to temperature and to certain chemicals, and that is why some substances "taste" hot or cold (think mint, peppers)


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

[User]
CMV: Conservatives aren't being unfairly censored.

Conservatives aren't being censored. Racists, misogynists, homophobes, transphobes, conspiracy nut jobs, and (recently) insurrectionists are the ones being censored. There is nothing in the terms of service of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Reddit, or any other platform that explicitly discriminates against conservatives. If conservatives weren't any of those things I listed, they wouldn't be be banned. You can be a fiscal conservative, you can believe in the border wall and stricter immigration, you can be a Christian and hold traditional values and you won't be banned from these platforms on that basis. Even known white nationalists like Nick Fuentes are verified and remained unbanned from Twitter because they do their best to dogwhistle and stay within the limits of the TOS.

In addition, liberals and progressives aren't immune to censorship. If they break the TOS, they will be banned. And it has happened; notable left wing streamers and content creators have been banned from Twitter. The YouTube algorithm once unfairly demonetized LGBTQ content creators because it falsely flagged them as sexualized content.

My point is that political affiliation isn't something that any social media company takes into consideration for their terms of service. If anything, conservative companies like Parler are the ones using political affiliation to ban users. Any disproportionate censorship that conservatives face on Twitter, YouTube, etc. is their own fault.

I'd also add that these companies are almost purely driven by profit motive. They don't care civil rights, they don't care about LGBTQ, they don't care about cyberbullying, they don't care about disinformation. All they care about is their bottom-line, and conservatives pose a huge risk to it by jeopardizing their ad revenue. Facebook only started to crackdown on QAnon and antivaxx communities on its platform when they started posing a risk to their public image and ultimately their bottom line.

[Assistant]
>  Racists, misogynists, homophobes, transphobes, conspiracy nut jobs, and (recently) insurrectionists are the ones being censored

First of all: Why should this be censored?

Secondly, conservatives get called these things all the time. Since you seem to imply that the average conservative is not these things then this should make you realize that conservatives can get banned even tho they are not these things just cause Twitter thinks they are these things.

> I'd also add that these companies are almost purely driven by profit motive.

Censorship can happen for profit reasons. It's still censorship.


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

[User]
How to read difficult philosophy books?

I'd like to delve deeper into philosophy, but as I read recommended text, I begin to get frustrated by how mentally taxing it is to comprehend. Often times I will get discouraged and stop reading. Given this, what kind of approach should lower level readers take when trying to understand philosophy?

[Assistant] I began by reading books that cover many philosophies by way of overviews and then you get a feeling for where your inclination lies. Your ability to focus on what you naturally relate to will make it more accessible. Plus you obtain a synthesis of different teachings.


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

[User] eli5: What exactly is a spark, and how does it occur?

[Assistant] It depends on what kind of spark you're referring to. If you mean the sparks you get from a firework or from striking steel and flint for instance, the spark from a firework is a small mote of burning chemicals and the spark from the steel is a small piece of very hot steel. If you mean a spark like what jumps from your hand to a doorknob and gives you a shock; certain conditions can cause your body to pick up a static charge, essentially loose electrons from the environment. When you touch a conductor, like the metal doorknob, the electrons jump from you to the doorknob, causing a visible (and tangible) discharge.