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

[User]
CMV: There is nothing wrong with being right leaning

Before I begin, letting you all know I don't consider myself to be right leaning overall, more of a centrist, social left, economic right. Doesn't matter, point is, I'm not a right wing conservative.

Recently, in past years, with a lot of conservative political figures rising to power in a lot of countries (Brazil, USA, Hungary, Poland, etc), and gaining popularity in others, a lot of these recent right wing governments have been envolved in scandals, and have associated their side of the political spectrum with Racism, Homofobia and a bunch of other negative mindsets.

This, merged with a political climate in western culture where the LGBTQ+ and anti-racism/ethnic equality movements have risen up (the US quickly comes to mind as the prominent holder of this problems, but other western countries have them too, in smaller or equal proportions) wich made progressive left-leening parties seem morally superior, made right-leening views be regarded as old fashioned, racist and homophobic.

That is totally not the case, and imo, our long term exposure to "comical" politicians and their fanatical and vocal followers that don't nearly represent the whole picture has influenced our view of an otherwise normal part of a countries policltics. Being right-leening doesn't make you a bigot, racist old white man, and being left-leening doesn't make you a stoner who works part time at McDonalds.

Plus, in countries like the US or Australia, where a 2 party system is in place, most people don't align with most of the ideas of the party they voted for, but instead they voted for them because it's the the One with wich they disagree the least, or that shares ideals with the voter the he deems more important than the ideals that he shares with the other party.

[Assistant]
>This, merged with a political climate in western culture where the LGBTQ+ and anti-racism/ethnic equality movements have risen up (the US quickly comes to mind as the prominent holder of this problems,

This sentence makes it sound like you believe support for LGBTQ+ people and anti-racism movements are a problem. Do you mind clarifying your view just so its clearer to everyone what you believe?


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

[User]
ELI5: What was the process like to land over 4,000 planes on 9/11 after that order was given?

That many planes needing to land almost immediately...was there a plan in place for that? (I assume there was/is). What about international flights inbound to the states?

[Assistant]
US domestic flights got grounded so there were none taking off.  Everyone else landed asap.  It was not that significant an operation because the airports were closed to departures.

All US airports were immediately closed to all International flights.  The flights were turned back, or if low on fuel routed to Canada.  There were around 500 in the air at the time and about half could not turn around.  227 aircraft (33,000 passengers) landed in Canada in Operation Yellow Ribbon.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] What's stopping the Kaminoans from using the clones to conquer the galaxy themselves?

They could even make different kinds of clones, not just bounty hunters. Like jedi/medics/engineers etc.

The kaminoans have demonstrated how swiftly they can make the clones, they've made them completely obedient. What's stopping them from being masters of the SW universe?

[Assistant]
Why would they want to?

And it's not like it's some kind of spontaneous generation of clones, it requires ridiculous amounts of resources. The republic fielded the costs for the Clone Army, and that was a few millions used to support the major power player. Breaking into the scene as a new player would've required so much more.

Like a proper planetary defence. And a space navy. Cloning ground troops on an ocean world honestly doesn't get you very far, come to think of it.


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

[User]
[Ocean's 11] What was the job that Danny and Rusty did for Reuben "with the thing and the guy and the place"?

Apparently it had something to do with Belize.

[Assistant] Willy Bank wasn't the first time Reuben had gotten involved with...*questionable* business partners. There was a complication in the building of a new casino/resort, Reuben needed to teach the guy a lesson, so he got Rusty and Danny to run their shtick after he offered the guy a Billy Martin.


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

[User]
CMV: America's two-party system splits the American people and decreases the chance that the most qualified candidate will win

Okay. This is something I have been debating recently. A lot of people have said that the 2016 election had two bad candidates for presidency, and that got me to thinking: why do we even have the two-party system? I think that having two defined political parties with almost no other viable (I say viable because everyone knows the third-party parties aren't nearly big enough to win anything right now) options causes people to "choose a side" and stick to it, even when another candidate for a different party may be more qualified. This two-party system also creates an "us against them" mentality that is splitting the U.S. apart. I think in a perfect world there would be no parties at all, only the candidates and their ideas and promises, but at the very least I think the third-party candidates should be allowed into presidential debates and get more coverage on the news. I understand that having too many political parties could lead to a problem of achieving a majority, and may just make more people angry that "their side" didn't win, but I sure as hell think it'd be better than what we have now.

[Assistant] The point of the president is not to be the most qualified.  They can appoint multiple advisers to help them in areas they are unfamiliar.  The people want someone who will put what they want first, whether it is the economy or social issues etc.


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

[User] ELI5: North Korea seems pretty weak, why hasn't anyone toppled their government or declared war with them yet?

[Assistant]
First of all there is China. They don't want US military at their borders. It won't cause WW3, but perhaps a proxy war..

Second problem is that NK is fucked. No country has money to fix it and no country would want to deal with refugees. People of North Korea are unskilled labour.

Third is "why?". Why would anyone want to deal with it? They are mostly harmless and destroying it or merging back with SK would create more problems than it's worth. There is little to no benefit, expect for feeling morally superior. No country is qualified to play "world police".


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

[User]
ELI5:What exactly is a "confirmed kill" and how are they confirmed?

Obviously I know what a kill is, and obviously the definition of confirmed means they verify that it actually happened. But, what is the process for confirming a kill?

[Assistant] Confirming kills varies by military branch and by country, and also by time frame (ie; confirmation was different in WWII than in Vietnam or today). Many just need it to be witnessed by a spotter, some have to actually retrieve proof of death. For the most part, however, nowadays "confirmed kills" are only kept track of within sniper teams. The term gets thrown around a lot in the media because it sounds super awesome, but most modern military branches are not keeping track of their soldiers' kill tallies.


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

[User] [LOTR] If Bilbo had slayed Gollum, how would Sauron have discovered the location of the ring?

[Assistant] Saruman found out that the ring was in the possession of a halfling of the shire from Gandalf. Even if the nine hadn't been sent, Gandalf still would've brought/sent Frodo to rivendell since the ring was required to stop Sauron.


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

[User]
ELI5: What is the psychology behind microtransactions and how effective they are for the monetization of games?

In the past, I've generally just assumed that microtransactions prey on people who are bad at math, have poor impulse control, or are just loose with their money.

What is the business perspective? How do they craft the monetization system to extract money from consumers? What psychological quirks are they trying to use or take advantage of? What are the strategies?

[Assistant]
>I've generally just assumed that microtransactions prey on people who are bad at math, have poor impulse control, or are just loose with their money.

This is pretty much correct. In short, they're targeting the same group of people who are likely to have gambling addictions, or those with huge amounts of disposable income. The latter group doesn't care how much they're spending, but the former group will irresistably crave that chance for hitting the jackpot. They're taking advantage of the fact that winning makes you feel good (by releasing dopamine), and the buyer's brain will chase that rush.

Have you ever noticed how few clicks it takes to get more microtransaction currency in these games? Once you've made your first purchase and saved your billing info, you can typically purchase more in 3-4 mouse clicks at **maximum**. They streamline the process to such a degree that there's no time to have second thoughts. You're never typing in your credit card information *over and over* while considering if it's worth it. You just click two buttons, click "approve," and it's done.


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

[User]
[Hitman] Why does anyone try to make an enemy of Agent 47?

Seriously, there are lots of people, including (SPOILERS AHEAD) plenty of people in the ICA who have tried and failed to kill Agent 47. Considering that he is not only well-known as the ICA's best asset and top assassin, but is also regarded as a legend across the globe who never fails a contract, why does anyone think that they'll ever succeed against him?

[Assistant]
Because at the end of the day he is only human.  An exceptionally skilled, intelligent, and fit human, yes, but still only human.  The ICA, the Franchise, and other underworld elements tend not to be the type to invent bogeymen for themselves to fear.  If Agent 47 represents a thorn in their side, then they're going to eliminate him. The fact that they haven't succeeded so far does not mean, to them, that 47 is some sort of superhuman ubermensch, it just means he's been lucky enough to survive, and they just need to try again.

It's probably also worth pointing out that Agent 47 has come very close to death a few times.  He was ambushed and shot after the opera house mission in Paris, and nearly died from his wound. He was also nearly cremated alive by Alexander Leland Cayne, and was only saved by the timely intervention of Diana.


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

[User]
ELI5 - what is it about wood glue that makes wood glue specifically made and perfected for wood?

Also, why does it smell so good/weird?

[Assistant]
It penetrates into the fibres a little better and then it expands a little bit to hold tight. Assuming you glued it correctly, it will be able to use the grain structure and the pressure generated while curing a little bit like liquid in an aluminium can, the pressure from the liquid makes it hard to crush. Plus, it now has a MASSIVE amount of surface area that it's holding onto.

Properly done, the wood will break before the glue fails. You can glue things incorrectly and have only a surface bond, which can be ok, but can be pried apart by hand.

An additional feature, you can achieve similar effects to the above with epoxy and other glues, is that it dries transparent, and can also be found in forms that dry close to the colour of the wood, making it less obvious a repair was done or the wood was glued.


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

[User]
[Thomas the Tank Engine] What do the train drivers do, exactly?

Normally, a driver's job is to operate the controls of a train. But Sodor's trains clearly control themselves. They also don't appear to be directly supervised or even advised by the drivers - Sir Topham Hat gives instructions to the trains, not the drivers. And when the trains run off on some childish whim, the drivers say nothing, even if it's a very dangerous situation. Yet the drivers are always present. So what's going on?

My only guess is that it's some kind of a mind meld situation, where the driver surrenders his free will and identity to act as a kind of symbiotic extension of the train's will. But that's super dark, isn't it?

[Assistant]
They feed the engine, do minor mechanical repairs, can pull levers to act on brakes.

Of course as the series goes on they have less and less control. The story is an example of benevolent self modifying AIs slowly taking the reins of control from human hands and moving towards great automation and autonomy.


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

[User] [WH40k] Is it possible for eldar or humans to create The biggest ork warboss using their technology? Just so they could manipulate the ork Waagh for their own purposes.

[Assistant] Yes, in theory, but 'using their technology' means providing things for the orks to fight, orks are a biological weapon designed and developed to fight necrons originally.  What you have to do is provide orks with the capability to get to the fight you want them to be in, and persuade them that it'll be more fun than just attacking you, which is very difficult indeed.


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

[User] ELI5: How can large companies that have been highly profitable for several years, suddenly be declaring bankruptcy after no income for just a few months?

[Assistant]
>How can large companies that have been highly profitable for several years, suddenly be declaring bankruptcy after no income for just a few months?

Because the companies aren't designed to be able to idle; they're reliant on an inflow and outflow of money that comes with doing business. Most companies aren't socking away money in case of rainy days because doing so makes them significantly less profitable, to the point of just not being worth it in the first place.

Further; just because the company shuts it's doors temporarily doesn't mean they stop spending money. They'll still have people on payroll, and they'll still have bills and debts to pay.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does a company like Tesla or Uber have such high valuation (over 50 Bn) despite have low sales or losing money yearly?

[Assistant] Valuation is not simply a product of sales/revenue/net. It also has a growth component to it. The hope is that these companies will grow into profitable companies. So the value of the company today, is it's current value + its expected value at some point in the future.


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

[User]
[It's Always Sunny] Who is the smartest person in the main crew?

Frank would be my first guess, since he was a successful businessman and arguably knows how to work with people much more effectively than the others do. Then again, Dennis is pretty clever and manipulative when he needs to get something done, but he also has his fair share of failures. Maybe one of the others has some hidden depths that I glossed over and would shine brightly if given an opportunity away from the rest of the group.

What do you guys think?

[Assistant] How do you define smart? Because the answer is Charlie. Trundle is an illiterate, paint drinking janitor that has managed to outsmart the gang on several occasions, deconstruct their schemes with minimal contextual information,and even kind of win a court case by solving the curious case of the missing eyeball. He could literally be elected president if he learned to read a little gooder.


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

[User]
When applying to Faculty positions, is it reasonable to limit your search to one State for a partner?

Hello! I am a 2nd year PhD student and am seriously considering pursuing a professorship once I graduate. Please forgive my ignorance around this topic as there's not much conversation about this in my department, and I've really only been in academia for a year now since I went straight into my PhD.

From what I understand about faculty positions, people usually apply to as many positions as they can nation wide, and frequently end up moving to the university that gives them the best offer. However, I am in a serious long term relationship, and since I've brought up the idea of a potentially needing to move after my PhD, my partner has emphasized that they want to remain in the state that we are in now (Michigan) long term, maybe indefinitely.

So my question is, **is it reasonable to only apply to faculty positions in one state, especially if my goal is to conduct research? How have people navigated having to move around with non-academic partners in the mix?**

The moving thing seems like it may be a deal breaker for my partner, but I've heard horror stories of some women looking for faculty positions around their partners and it stagnating their careers which I don't want to do. Any contributions are extremely appreciate as right now I feel like I need to choose either my career or my partner!

[Assistant] Give them the best offer is optimistic. Give them *any* offer is more like it. Youre definitely limiting yourself, but how much is going to depend on your field and research and desired teaching load. Everyone needs people to teach CS courses, or Psych 101! Michigan has some big universities. In general though, the trailing spouse thing is a real tough situation and its going to depend a lot on your personal situation.


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

[User] ELI5: French politics. Why is there both a President and a Prime Minister. What is the point of there being a doubling up?

[Assistant]
The president is head of state, the prime minister is the head of government. This reflects the distinction made in a constitutional monarchy with a parliament--David Cameron heads the government of the United Kingdom, as representative of the largest party in parliament, but Elizabeth II is the head of state. Most European republics with this system did so in emulation of the system they had as a monarchy.

One of the beneficial aspects of this is that the head of state is relatively stable and is not as deeply involved in politics. In a parliamentary system, the cabinet can lose power if it loses the support of a majority of parliament. If you look at the United States, an example of a presidential republic, this is not a factor because the president holds his position for a full term except in case of misbehavior.

Imagine the nonsense that would occur if Congress could unseat the president and call a new election. It'd be terribly inconvenient, particularly on the international level. A system with separate head of state and government allows for a consistent leadership while retaining the traditional tight control of parliament on the cabinet ministers.


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

[User] Why do sonic booms happen at the speed of sound specifically? What does the speed of wave propagation have to do with the compression of air in front of a moving object?

[Assistant]
The speed of sound is the speed at which infinitesimal oscillations in the density and pressure propagate through the fluid.

If an object moving through the fluid at or above the speed of sound, there's no way for any of the fluid upstream of the object to "know" that the supersonic object is coming.

And as a result, in order for conservation of mass, momentum, and energy to be upheld, you find that there must be discontinuities in the density, pressure, etc. at some point between the fluid upstream of the object and the fluid downstream of the object. These discontinuities are called shocks, and they first start to form specifically as the object reaches the local speed of sound.


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

[User] ELI5:Why manual car drivers change gear at a very high rpm (6k+ rpm typically), while automatic cars shift up at a rather low rpm (below 4k)

[Assistant] Manual car drivers can change gears whenever they want, but if they change at a high RPM, it is because they want to accelerate as fast as possible, because peak power is usually produced towards the top of the RPM range.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do politicians and celebrities always "regret" something rather than say they're "sorry"?

[Assistant]
Because it sounds vaguely like an apology, without actually admitting they did anything wrong.

They get to say "I apologized, what more do you want?" without having to specifically identify or even admit to bad behavior.  It is kind of a weasel thing to do.


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

[User] [Greek Mythology] If one of the twelve Olympians stepped down, who would replace them?

[Assistant]
Another god would likely take their place, like what happened when Hestia stepped down to let Dionysus have a spot.

That said... *everyone* loved Hestia, so it might not go as smoothly if someone else was to do it.


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

[User]
What is happening to the economy?

There is massive shortage of CPUs, video cards and other computer parts. There shortage car parts and massive shortage of playstation 5.

The price of food is going up and the price of electronic are going up. The computers and TVs the price is going up and price of vehicles are going up.

The US dollar is weakening.

With everyone going back to work the economy should be getting better not worse. Why is the opposite happening?

[Assistant]
There's two answers to this.

First, the economy *is* getting better, not worse. Unemployment has fallen to 4.8%, around where it was in 2017. GDP, which is roughly a measure of how much money people make, has gone up a bunch too (even after you account for rising prices). Most economists consider these two statistics to be the most important for understanding the economy.

That being said, prices are definitely going up, which is a major problem. As usual it's a supply+demand thing.

On the supply side, ramping up production takes a long time for some goods. For instance, a new fab (computer chip factory) takes about 7 (!) years to build, and finding a new hire to fill a position usually takes months.

On the demand side, people are spending more because they're more optimistic about the economy and because COVID stimulus put a lot of money in peoples' pockets. When aggregate demand increases, the economy grows and people get put to work, but prices go up.

Right now, the Federal Reserve thinks the price increases are temporary. They think that as the supply problems get sorted out, prices will fall back to normal, so they don't have to try cutting back demand and risking a recession.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does food stick so strongly to plates or frying pans after its sat out a few hours compared to when it's fresh?

I was doing dishes today and had a couple particularly old stubborn smears I had to clean off. Even food items that were never hot (like guacamole or sour cream) seem to bond abnormally strong to dirty dishes after a night's rest in the sink. Why are they so stubborn!?

[Assistant] When food is wet, it tends to be soft and goopy.  In this liquidy state it can seep into microscopic cracks and such.  As it dries out, it loses moisture and both shrinks and hardens.  As it shrinks and hardens, it solidifies its grip on the surface as if it were clenching its fists.  Once it's hard, as all hard things are, it becomes difficult to move and thus to clean.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do we see black spots after looking into a bright light?

[Assistant]
The spots aren't, strictly speaking "black", they are "no signal" areas.

Sight is basically a chemical reaction. The rods and cones of your eyes produce dyes. (See "Rhodopsin" and/or "visual purple" et al.) These dyes are how your eyes see.

Photons come in, intersect, and change these dyes. This is what produces the initial chemical stimulus that becomes the nerve impulse response to light.

The photon(s) intersecting with the dyes "uses up" the dye.

Your body is constantly making new dye and cleaning up the used-up dye.

When you look at a bright light it uses up a lot of dye. Then those rods and cones don't have enough to really generate a good signal.

Similarly, if you've been in darkness for a while, you've got a lot of dye built up and you can see really well in the very dim light. Further the very dim light uses up very little dye and so you continue to see well in the dimness.

So this whole mechanism is why the room looks "darker" right after you turn off the lights, and then "your eyes adjust". It's also why the "blue spots" move with your eyeballs, because its the individual sensors that are exhausted.

(EDIT: yes, your eyes also _physically_ adjust to darkness or brightness by opening or closing the iris, but that's a different level of responsiveness. After two or three seconds the dark room will be somewhat more visible because of the iris thing, but it can take minutes for the dye levels to get good, and after half an hour the room might be really quite visually available. etc.)

So your eyes work on eye-fuel, and the more light they process the more of that fuel is exhausted. As it gets exhausted the cells that are exhausted put out less signal for the same light and "dark patches" seem to appear in your vision.


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

[User]
[X-Men] What happens to Iceman's bridge when he travels?

Does it just fall down on people or somehow disappears?

[Assistant]
Iceman is an omega level mutant with control over the kinetic energy of water.

Dissipating his structures when he's done with them, even at a distance, is so simple he may actually do it subconsciously.


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

[User] Eli5 How/Why do calluses form?

[Assistant]
Your body has evolved, on a microscopic level, to adapt to repeated damage by repairing itself to be stronger than it was before.

In the case of callouses, your skin responds things like pressure, friction, tiny abrasions and breakages by building tougher surfaces using keratin (the same protein that your hair and nails are made of).

This sort of action apples to many kinds of cells, including muscle tissue. For example, bodybuilders grow so large by inflicting controlled amounts of damage to their muscle tissues on a precise schedule. Then, they feed their bodies important proteins and amino acids which encourage regrowth. This causes their muscle fibers to heal and grow in order to adapt to this new stress. As far as your cells are concerned, this must be what is necessary to catch and eat food. So we have to adapt to this new normal. If that stress is removed, the muscle tissue reverts back to its previous state.

Most of the time, this is good, but sometimes repeated stress and damage can cause scar tissue to develop in places you might not want it which can cause long term pain and in some cases increase risks of cancer later in life. Callouses are a pretty mild form of this, some people think they're rough and unsightly, but if you play guitar or work with your hands, those thick callous pads can protect your sensitive nerve endings and soft tissues from damage as you keep on doing the things you love.


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

[User] eli5: What is the meaning of a Ouroboros?

[Assistant]
It's a very old symbol, and the meaning it has depends on who you're asking.

As a dragon/snake eating its own tail, it sometimes symbolizes eternal cyclical/repeating behavior, as the reptile sustains itself by eating itself and can continue to do so for eternity.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter] How would Tom Riddle have gotten along with Harry/Ron/Hermione/Malfoy/etc if he had been students with them concurrently?

Obviously, this changes a lot of things (namely that Harry is no longer an orphan), but if we assume that everyone's personalities are basically the same, how would Tom Riddle have interacted with Harry, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny and the other students/faculty of Hogwarts if he had been 11 years old in 1991?

[Assistant]
Malfoy and others in Slytherin would probably be the new proto-Death Eaters just like their fathers were in the "real" timeline.

Riddle was unlikely to interact with others from Gryffindor except for very basic interactions, as he didn't really care for them. He would just be the same well-spoken good-looking guy that he was in the real timeline.


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

[User] [LoTR] Why was Sauron so much more powerful than Gandalf if they were both Maiar? And how much more powerful were Valar than Maiar?

[Assistant] Gandolf was extremely limited in what he is allowed to do, he's in Middle Earth to inspire win through his own might. The only time in LotR where he used his full power was fighting the balrog in Moria and that is done offscreen/off page, though we know the battle took several days and the final confrontation looked like a major storm on the mountain top that lasted days. Sauron is more powerful than Gandolf but they are much closer than the stories would make it seem.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does Haiti get hit so much harder by natural disasters than the Dominican Republic?

[Assistant] All else being equal, a poorer country will suffer more from natural disasters than a rich country will. Building structures to withstand things like earthquakes and hurricanes costs money. Enforcing building codes takes money. Having redundancy in infrastructure so that some will survive a disaster- you get the picture. Rebuilding after a disaster also costs money. A country that has more money is going to deal with all of this better than one that doesnt.


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

[User]
[Spider-Man Homecoming] Why would a video featuring a known fugitive like Captain America be shown in a high school gym class?

As far as they're concerned, Steve Rogers is a rogue agent who helped the HYDRA assassin known as the winter soldier and even fought against the other Avengers. Your opinion on the specifics of this may be different but that is at least what the general public would know about the situation.

So why would they show a video of him in an American high school?

[Assistant]
Public schools are underfunded.

 Based on his Avengers style uniform in the video, that educational material had to be purchased sometime in the last five/six years.  Why waste the money to replace functional material when it's still relatively workable? I've seen public schools that still use Atlases with the U.S.S.R. still in them.

Aside from that, Captain America was a beloved hero for nearly a century. He's from New York himself! He participated in saving the very same city from the giant alien eels that came out of the sky a few years ago. Why would a poorly funded school in the Bronx care what some "global accords" have to say? That council tried to nuke the city anyway. 'murica!


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

[User]
ELI5: How does software interact with hardware? At which point does software 1s and 0s become electrical outputs? And how does electrical inputs become 1s and 0s?

I have searched ELI5 and the previous answers have left me more confused than before I was wondering how this works. Thanks for being willing to answer.

[Assistant] It is all really hardware.   The difference between a 1 and a 0 in hardware is the voltage in the circuit.  A 1 is usually ~3 to 5 volts and a 0 is 0 volts.  A software instruction is just a configuration of the voltages that tells the hardware exactly how to move all the voltages around to the next state.


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

[User]
[AMA] [Overwatch] IT'S PARTY TIME! Junkrat here to answer your questions! With associate.

This will be a blast! Figuratively and quite possibly literally! I got conked on the head in a breakfast incident and misplaced 47 pounds of dynamite. Never you mind that, ask a question!
I know that Tracer lassie had one of these last but I says to myself I'm not gonna be boring like her, no sir!

I am joined by Mako Rutlidge. He's in desperate need of a tech upgrade, something about his meaty mitts and a small smartphone, so I'll be helping the boy out. What's that ticking noise?!

[Assistant]
In the mugshots of you, your hair seems to be on fire. Is there some kind of a story behind that? I'd expect they'd extinguish it first.

I've noticed you seem to be pretty into DIY stuff. Do you know any good legal way to get materials for it?


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

[User]
Have any other organisms colonized Earth's landmasses at a faster pace than humans?

By humans I am referring to behavioraly modern humans that emerged c. 50,000 years ago. I consider colonization of the globe to have been complete about 9000 years ago (the date of the earliest evidence of human life in South America).  That gives a global saturation time of 41,000 years.  Is this a global first?

[Assistant] Bacteria.  We live in The Age of Bacteria, not humans.  Not only did they colonise the planet but we find them at incredible depths and in harsh environments.  They are arguably the most successful organism ever.


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

[User]
ELI5: With sharp increases to the price of goods and services, where's all this extra money I'm spending going?

Don't try to tell me my wages are sharply increasing either, because they're not! Nor are my friends, family, or neighbors.

[Assistant] I work for a FTSE 100 and the extra money is going to pay for 2 things: utilities and materials. In food there were multiple harvest failures and/or lower yielding harvest which has increased the scarcity of raw materials. Utilities for consumers has risen fourfold in the UK and so have those costs on the production line that runs 24 hours to produce consumer goods. Businesses are unwilling to decrease their dividend or profits significantly so the cost of the goods rise to support this. Logistics costs will also rise the next time contracts are due.


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

[User] ELI5:What is earwax?

[Assistant] Your body balling up what is bad with something that it doesn't consider a threat and slowly pushing it out.  Don't fuck with it unless you can already see it with a mirror... aka, don't use cuetips expect for stuff that's already pushed out, you'll be pushing some stuff back in.


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

[User] [Star Trek] I've contracted a virus that makes the depths of my hunger a bottomless void. I return home to my replicator to attempt and resolve this problem. How many pizzas can I replicate and consume in my home before my war on replicated pizza is stopped?

[Assistant]
Are you in a Star fleet vessel where weird shit happens every couple of days?  If so, no one and no system will notice until youve drained the energy of the ship enough to A:Cause the holodecks to malfunction or B:Start an antimatter containment failure.

If youre anywhere else... after a few hours some automated system will kick in asking what the hell youre doing and send some doctors to you when you answer.


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

[User]
How many encodings are there?

This is a pretty basic question but I am considering how binary is the actual representation form of all data in a modern digital computer.

There are different character encodings which may represent a character such as a letter with a seven bit, eight bit or large binary sequence.

Similarly, colors can be encoded with the RGB encoding, which is 8 bits, which means there are 256 possible colors.

I am just curious roughly how many encodings exist in an average modern computer?

Is it a pointless question like there are as many possible encodings as there are data formats and programming languages?

In other words, if you read in the entire memory of a computer, what can you imagine would be the correct decoding of all sections of binary there?

Some might be encrypted data using a number of types of encryption.

Much would be data in a variety of encodings - video, audio, photos, etc.

Much would be text files and programs, in various character encodings.

There would be machine executable compiled binary of programs.

Is it possible to estimate all in all how many different binary formats you would find present on an average modern computer?

[Assistant]
It isn't possible to answer this question.  There are an unlimited number of "encoding" because anyone can create their own encoding for just about anything.

Even something as simple as "text" has numerous encodings:  ANSI, ASCII, UTF-8, UTF-16, EPCDIC.

Hell, even binary (which is strictly ones and zeros) has big endian and little endian.  Then you have the encoding for data types (integers, floating point numbers, fixed point numbers, binary coded decimals).


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

[User]
Peanuts in a shell: are they twins?

What's the genetic similarity of two peanuts sharing a shell?  I don't really know too much about plants, but wouldntheir genetic similarities be relatable to family relationships we have? If so, how close would their genetically similarity back them in the familial sense?

[Assistant] Each peanut is a separate set of cotyledons and the radical of an individual baby pea plant.  Each new peanut carries genes from the 'father' plant's pollen grain and from the 'mother' plants ovary.  There are multiple ovaries produced in the ovule of the pea plant (at the base of the flower).  Each peanut arises from a separate pollen grain and a separate ovary (in the case of a multi-peanut shell there are multiple ovaries per ovule).  Thus each peanut (within a multiple-peanut shell) could be thought of as being fraternal twins (not identical twins!).


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

[User] ELI5: What's happening inside our bodies when we get jump scared.

[Assistant] Your animal brain reflexively initiates your fight or flight response due to a perceived danger. Your rational brain takes a split-second longer to recognize that it isn't actually a threat and start shutting it down.


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

[User] [General fantasy] What's so special about first born children?

[Assistant]
They get the dibs on the land and goods of the father. massively cuts down on intrigue within the family because it is isn't up for question, and most don't kill their brothers.

Sure, sometimes the later children are more competent, but the focus on education the firstborn gets usually evens it out.


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

[User]
Why has no theory on baryogenesis considered that particles in the early universe could've collided in more than pairs, explaining why there is more matter than antimatter in the Universe?

In the early Universe there should've been an equal amount of matter and antimatter particles, as matter and antimatter particles always form in pairs as we've learned from experiments at the Large Hadron Collider and elsewhere; yet there appears to be more matter than antimatter in the universe.

No one, it seems, has been able to figure out why this imbalance, dubbed the baryon asymmetry problem (or the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem) occurred, and many proposed theories, from hypothetical X and Y bosons that can violate the symmetry and lead to baryogenesis (the creation of matter independent of antimatter), to entire areas of the universe dominated by antimatter that are too far away to see, explaining away the missing antimatter; all of which so far have fallen flat in the search for experimental evidence.

Yet all those theories, to my understanding, seem to take a strange assumption: that particles can only collide in pairs.

What if in the early universe some of the matter and antimatter particles collided in groups of three?  In my amateur research into the topic, I've read up that particle and antiparticle collisions are 100% efficient, and produce their entire mass worth of energy when equal amounts of particle are collided.  Under a collision of three particles, however, there seems to be little research I could find, most likely because such collisions are so rare in nature and experimentation (which as a side note could explain why so few matter particles, about one in a billion, survived).

Extrapolating what I know of how matter collisions work (please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't do this for a living), if a collision of 3 particles, let's say a certain particle *P* and two identical antiparticles *Q* such that the two *Q* particles' properties "add" up to be equivalent to the properties of the antimatter counterpart of *P*, then shouldn't all three particles get converted into energy just as if the particle-antiparticle pair of *P* would've collided instead?  The example may be a ways off from how it works, I'm no physicist, but I hope the gist of it comes through.

If such a scenario that I've described above is impossible, then is there another scenario such that an odd number of particles and its associated antiparticles can collide and completely be converted into energy with 100% efficiency?  If so, then could such three-particle collision be common enough to result in the slight difference in the ratio of matter to antimatter from baryogenesis?

[Assistant] If you have a process as you describe, you also have a process of the 3 antiparticle partners of those particles undergoing a process that destroys an antiP and two Qs annihilating to create energy. That process would provide the opposite contribution youre imagining, unless the process itself is symmetry violating.  But there isnt enough symmetry violating strength in standard model processes like those you imagine.


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

[User]
CMV: Suicide is a fundamental human right for all people regardless of their situation, and forcing people to live is a form of slavery.

You can't truly have the right to life without having the right to end it. Your life is first and foremost owned by you, and thus you have the right to destroy it. Anyone else stopping you using your own life how you want when it doesn't affect others is abusing you.

Yes there is the "irrationality" argument that suicide for generally physically healthy people can only be a decision when they are not in a rational state to decide. This is problematic for multiple reasons

- There is no reason for suicide to be an irrational decision if it is a cost benefit analysis between the net expected benefits and suffering of life for a person. That's as rational as any analysis can get.
- It is a completely subjective value judgement to decide if someone's preferences or conceptions of benefits and suffering is rational or not.
- There is no way to rigorously justify that society knows what is better for an individual than they do themselves. In fact since the individual is the one with first hand experience of their life, they are likely to be more informed.
- People may be irrational in short periods of time where they haven't conducted a cost benefit analysis of life but some people are suicidal their whole lives and you cannot state that they are constantly in a state of irrationality, especially if they are functioning members of society which most of them are.
- Reasons for supposed suicide "irrationality" may be untreatable mental illness brain chemistry, or untreatable physical chronic illness. This is not irrationality and represents a suffering a rational individual may chose not to want to live with.

It is not automatically true that everyone snaps out of wanting to be suicidal or will eventually be glad they didn't do it. Plenty of suicidal people will die of other causes, and also plenty of the people who would likely not snap out of it will go to extreme (stressful and even more unpleasant) lengths to kill themselves whatever barriers are placed in front of them so it is not the case that everyone does snap out of it.

But the most compelling reason that suicide is a human right isn't to do with rationality at all, it's to do with consent. In every other decision people make, we value consent and the fact that we don't value consent with the right to live vs die is hypocritical. No one can be forced into a job they don't want. No one can be forced to date someone they aren't interested in or associate with people they dislike. So why can we force people into a life they don't like? That is violating their consent of the experiences they are willing to undergo. I don't owe it to anyone to date or associate with them or to work for them. So I don't it to owe anyone to live for them.

Therefore, forcing people to not be allowed to commit suicide is forcing them into a form of slavery, where they have to work in a life, live with people, and live in places they don't want to. Forcing people to live is as bad as forcing people to take up certain activities they don't want to. And if there is no activity a person wants to take up then so be it. They fundamentally deserve autonomy.

Edit: Just for clarification I am pro people undergoing a set duration of therapy in order to make them "see the light" and not act "irrational", but if beyond that people are still suicidal they should be allowed to die.

[Assistant] Should people have this right no matter what age they are? Suppose there's a four year old, who wants to exercise this right. They understand the difference between existing and not existing, that this decision is permanent, and that they might change their minds if they waited long enough. They understand that, and they'd still like to go through with suicide.


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

[User]
[Marvel MCU] What would the Avengers tower be worth, not counting the value of its contents?

Just as a normal building, located in the center(?) of New York, as big as it is in the movies.

Bonus question: Word the Baxter Building cost about the same?

[Assistant] The Metlife building, which is what is in Avenger's tower place in real life, was estimated to be valued at 3 billion dollars by Bloomberg 3 years ago.  Given that Avenger's tower is slightly larger, it's probably worth slightly more than that.  However, most importantly, the iconic design of the tower probably gives it significant worth.


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

[User] [MCU] Ivan Vanko has to make sacrifice to obtain the soul stone. In tears, sacrifices the thing he loves the most: his burd. Instead of falling to the ground, the bird just flies away. Does he still get the soul stone?

[Assistant]
Yes! The stone requires the petitioner show that they have discipline and the will to deny themselves sentimental attachment, and the integrity and faith to not try to "cheat." in this case, (and Thanos', since he sacrificed Gamora,) the actual "sacrifice" is not important as the soul stone governs life and death the weilder can still be reunited with their love, assuming it was a living being.

Its a test of worth or resolve, not a transactional payment to the stone. If Vanko tearfully releases his precious burd, fully expecting that he will lose her, then he has shown that he understands the value of the stone and is worthy.


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

[User]
What is the highest number of beats per minute that the human ear can discern?

How many beats can the human ear discern before it just sounds like one, continuous note/sound. And is it different for different sources of sound?

[Assistant]
Not a scientist, but a musician. 20Hz is about the lowest tone most people perceive as a, well, tone.  Lower than that and you hear the individual cycles as beats (or you hear nothing at all). Similarly, if you take a percussive beat and play more than about 20/second, it will transform from a beat pattern into a tone. There's electronic music that uses this to great effect.

I believe this 20Hz cutoff is independent of the source or type of sound - it's more a result of how our ears work.
Maybe a scientist can chip in on *why* this happens?


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

[User] What exactly does Wall Street and the Financial Market do for the country and the economy? And is it necessary?

[Assistant]
Wall Street creates "markets" which increases "liquidity."

Say you buy a used video game for $20.  A few month later you want to sell it.  How much is it worth?  Perhaps you could list it on Ebay and get $20 for it.  However, it will take a lot of your time to list, it may not even sell, and if it does sell, it will take weeks to get your money.  Used video games aren't very "liquid" because you can't easily turn them into cash.

You could trade it in to a video game store, but they'll probably only give you $5 for it.  That's because the store has to do the work of selling it, and they also want to make money.  They also take on the risk that it won't sell.

Buying games for $20, but only getting $5 when you sell them is a sigh of an ill-functioning market.  Wall Street fixes that for stocks, bonds, commodities, and various other things.  They create huge, efficient systems for buying and selling, and thus they can do it very cheaply.  Moreover, the big companies are always willing to buy whenever someone wants to sell.

If Wall Street traded video games, you could probably buy the game for $20 and resell it for $19.98, and it would only take a few seconds to do it.  Imagine how much more freedom you would having in playing games if you knew that you so easily get your money back.

If Wall Street traded video games, there would probably be other problems: high prices (more people would want to play games and then resell them, which would cause the prices to rise).  And wild price fluctuations (based on how many people want to buy or sell the game in a given day).  This would lead to speculators who don't play games, but they just buy them in the hopes of reselling them later.  This then leads to other people who do all sort of weird things like selling games they don't have ("shorting").  Or buying a large amount of games and reselling an a fraction of the games (it would be as if they sold one byte from a million games, rather than a single game, but it's all done on paper so you don't actually get anything.  That sort of wizardry is said to be one of the causes of the 2008 recession.

Is Wall Street necessary?  Yes, for how our economy is currently structured.  Is it worth the problems? That's much harder to say.


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

[User]
[Borderlands] Everyone talks about how difficult it is to leave Pandora. Why is that?

Gaige seemed to have an easy enough time getting a shuttle ticket to take her to Pandora, but once on the planet, everyone around seems to go on and on about how they have to find a way to leave. One Goliath gives you a side quest about it, and the Crimson Raiders moan and bitch constantly.

So why is it so easy to get to Pandora, yet so hard to leave?

[Assistant] Because it's a stop along the way, not a departure point. Most ships that go to Pandora are just dropping off supplies, criminals or charter tickets, they don't make regular visits nor do they operate flights FROM Pandora. Once you're there, you basically need to hope you hit on a ship that's in the process of unloading, and negotiate transport off then.


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

[User] In a house with no air conditioning, would it be better to keep the windows closed or open during the day?

[Assistant] I actually designed systems for passive cooling.  Option 1 is correct, but there's another big angle to this... if you want the house to keep cool, don't let sunlight in.  Radiant energy from the sun still passes through those windows, but if you shutter them, a lot less gets in.  A house that's more reflective of heat is best, but either way, if you have patches of sun, that's heat getting in.


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

[User]
[Marvel] If Bruce Banner were given the option to be "cured" as in become a regular human with no more transformations, would he accept it?

Is Bruce willing to let go of Hulk if given the option? Or does he still consider it to be a power he can use for the good? I've read a few comics where Bruce goes as far as trying to kill himself to rid the world of Hulk, but you cannot deny it also lets him protect earth when teaming with the Avengers.

But what does Bruce truly think? Would he love to live life as a normal man again?

[Assistant]
His whole story is him trying to find a "cure" for the Hulk, it's what drives him.

However, as we have seen with the Ghost Rider, who had his curse lifted just to have it restored again, it could be too late to separate him from the Hulk.

Subconsciously, he might be sabotaging his own efforts.


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

[User]
ELI5 Why restaurants do not like to split bills for tables.

Why don't restaurants like to split bills for tables? Is it a POS thing? Something else?

[Assistant] Because it can be a ton more work. If it's 3 people on a slow afternoon, no problem. When it's a table of 20 on a busy Friday night, the extra minutes spent splitting up a check can take a toll down the line because it takes you away from your other tables. A good idea is to tell the server before you order that you will be splitting the check. That way they can go ahead and enter them into the system ahead of time.


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

[User]
[Star Wars AOTC's] So where did all the military hardware come from, the gunships, weapons, walkers, speeders, tanks and massive starships? They didn't clone those on Geonosis.

We all know where the Clone Army came from but what the hell, where did all that massively expensive years to build hardware come from?

[Assistant] Kamino contracted out development of the GARs equipment, weapons, ships and vehicles to various corporations like Kuat Drive Yards, Rothana Heavy Engineering, Sinear Fleet Systems, Kuat Systems Engineering and Incom.


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

[User]
what is the best economic path that a newly industrialised country like brazil or Mexico should take

for example, do you consider the privatization of PEMEX a good approach?

[Assistant]
This is a sincere response.

I think you're asking the wrong question. The language you use is laced in neoliberalism and ethnocentricism (global north). You consider economic growth an evolutionary and hierarchical path. You ask as though Brazil or Mexico should take a path suggested by US/EU models. Furthermore, you see privatization of public goods as something outside the confines of globalization, capitalism, and neoliberal policies pushed by capitalists, not the individuals with a stake in the health of the national economies of Brazil or Mexico.

I highly encourage you to do some research on Structural Adjustment Programs from the IMF from a critical perspective. You might start asking different questions altogether.


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

[User]
CMV: Many on the left focus too much on white privilege

I believe that white privilege does exist, at least to a degree. Some amount of ardent white supremacists still exist, and a larger number of people who hold discriminatory views without being hostile also exist. This is a problem, and I support efforts to address this problem as we can.

However, a growing trend since the 2010's has been to place white privilege as one of, if not the, biggest problems in society. Scarcely can leftists even mention another issue without making it about race, too. It's not enough to say "10,000 people are homeless in x city", they've also got to say "a disproportionate number are black". Does that really change anything? Is it not enough for some people that they're homeless? Why does their race factor at all? You see this on issue, after issue, after issue. If it's not made about race, it's as if some people don't care.

I'm a leftist. I live in a deep blue state. I've voted Democrat or further in every election I've ever voted in. I want to feel less agitated about this topic. But I do, and for a number of reasons.

1) Class is more important than race. In just about any scenario, a rich black man lives a better life than an impoverished white man. Given this alone, poverty should be considered the most important issue with regards to privilege and power, and yet race so often seems to distract from this. Talking about white privilege as such a central issue implies racism is a bigger problem than poverty.

2) It misses the trees for the forest. Any generalized statement like "white people are privileged" is going to have a million caveats to it. You can say, for example, black people are disproportionately killed by police, and this is a fact. Some go the extra step and say that whites don't know what it's like to fear police. Sad to say, it's also a fact that police kill thousands of white people every year. This fact is, for some reason, very rarely ever mentioned in discussions of police brutality. Plus, on an even more basic level, there's just people who are exceptions to any rule. Assumptions, in that way, are kind of inherently toxic when taken uncritically.

3) It's counterproductive. Focusing on race is inherently divisive. It reinforces that race is something that matters, which moves us further away from the goal of a colorblind society. Some reply to this by saying we're just not ready for a colorblind society. To that I say, how exactly will a colorblind society ever come about on the path we're headed? At what point do we get to say enough is enough? The historical realities of discrimination will never truly go away, and focusing on race only strengthens it.

My biases: I'm white, I grew up in a low income family in a racially diverse minority-majority community in a blue state, I'm Irish by ethnicity, my dad would probably go further on all this than what I've said here.

Alright, tldr, basically I think white privilege is real but it's secondary to class and toxic to focus on so much besides.

If you want a delta, be respectful and try to build off what I've written here.

CMV.

Edit: To anyone going around downvoting this conversation, you are part of the problem.

[Assistant]
> which moves us further away from the goal of a colorblind society

Do you think having a classblind society would address class based issues (homelessness, access to healthcare, ect)?

If not, then why do you think willful blindness to race based issues will solve them?


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

[User]
Question involving use of sizeof() to get the size of an array in C

Hello; sorry if this is a silly question, but I don't get why sizeof(ptrtoArr) returns 8 (instead of 7?) within the binsearch() function I'm creating.

    #include <stdio.h>

    // Linear search
    void linsearch(int *ptrtoArr, int target){
        for (int i = 0; i < sizeof(ptrtoArr); i++){
            if (ptrtoArr[i] == target){
            printf("Target is element #%d.\n", i+1);
            }
        }
    }

    // Binary Search
    void binsearch(int *ptrtoArr, int target){
        int size = sizeof(ptrtoArr);
        printf("The size of this array is %d.\n", size); //why 8?

    }

    int main(){
        int array[7] = {-2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13};
        int target = 11;
        linsearch(array, target);
        binsearch(array, target);
        return 0;
    }

Edit: Ok thanks everyone! Haven't read through everything in detail yet, but I'll just pass the array size for now.

[Assistant]
Sizeof() probably doesnt work the way you think, it will not even give 7 as correct result, but 28. Sizeof returns size of the array in bytes and since you have 7 integers with 4 bytes each, this snippet

    int array[7] = {-2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13};
    printf("%d", sizeof(array));

Will print 7 \* 4 bytes = 28. You can often get the correct number by dividing by size of integer:

    int array[7] = {-2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13};
    printf("%d", sizeof(array) / sizeof(int));  // prints 7

So why is it 8 then?

When you pass the array to a function, you cast the array from `int[7]` to `int *`. This is called "array decay" and you lose the information about the size of the array. The result 8 you see is actually size of int \*.

    printf("%d", sizeof(int *));  // prints 8

This is why so many functions that work with arrays use extra argument where you provide the length of the array, because you can not work out the size after the array has decayed to just a pointer.

Edit: That also means that the first function is wrong, even if it may work. Since the upper limit in the for loop is 8, the biggest index you access is 7, which is not valid in the array.


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

[User]
Would Newtonian Black Holes be black?

Recently I've been wondering about black holes and noticed something that I haven't before: while black holes as in bodies, whose escape velocity is greater than the speed of light could exist in Newtonian Mechanics, would they be black? The escape velocity is bigger than that of light's, yes, but light as a massless particle should not be affected by gravity, anyway. Therefore you could see every body, no matter how much its mass had been compressed.

Does this mean that the idea of a black hole was only conceived after GR had come to be and then the formula for the most basic Schwarzschild radius was then also derived from Laws of Gravity? It seems to me like the speed of light is hardly a special speed in Newtonian Mechanics, so having an object with such an escape velocity wouldn't be anything special.

[Assistant]
Newtonian mechanics cannot handle massless particles - they lead to divergences.

Newton himself thought light was composed of massive, though very light, very fast particles. They would be affected by a gravitational field, and Newtonian black holes in this sense would be black.


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

[User]
Why do manufacturer to consumer direct business models often fail?

I work in an industry where manufacturers sell product to wholesale distributor at markup, then distributors sell to retailers, then retailers sell to consumers.  The markup from wholesalers to retailers alone is 100%.  Why don't manufacturers sell directly to consumers at a lower price, but higher profit?

[Assistant] Access to consumers directly requires a differentiating business model that most manufacturers don't have or want. Logistics and the ability to capitalize on choice is a speciality that many companies also don't want to focus on. They'd often rather focus on innovation and brand quality in their own space.


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

[User] [Star Trek]whos closer to being sentient, an NPC in a holonovel or Spot the cat?

[Assistant]
Barring outside intervention, it pretty much runs on a time scale, with 'zero' being the moment the holo-NPC is turned on. At zero, Spot is much closer to proper sentience, being capable of feeling and perceiving the universe, and able to learn from experience. The holo-NPC at zero is just very sophisticated code which can do a good job of faking sentience (a well written holo-NPC essentially being a P-Zombie), but isn't really internalizing anything. Every time you reset the program, the NPC returns to zero. Spot, meanwhile, persists.

But that's at Zero. From there, things start getting *weird*. If left on for a sufficient length of time with no interruptions or resets, a holo-NPC will start to grow. It will learn and remember, and potentially 'evolve' past it's original design, developing preferences and eventually reach the point of being an effective 1:1 simulation of a human mind. Much like Data, it's hard to say where the threshold lies, but a sufficiently long lived program (like the Doctor from Voyager, or Vic from DS9) is close enough to the 'real deal' to invoke serious ethics issues.

And then there's the supercriminal-shaped elephant in the room; one James Moriarty. Due to Data's fuck-uppery, Moriarty pretty much went from 'stage prop' to 'real boy' in no time flat. Hypothetically, other high-functioning holo-folk could be created in a similar fashion, but the universe has little incentive to do so (the Federation would see it as morally disturbing, the Klingons would be insulted at the notion of replacing warriors with photons, etc).


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

[User] [Harry Potter] Why is everyone using a quill, can't I just use a biro?

[Assistant] You know those scenes in Karate Kid where Daniel paints the fence, scrubs the floors, and waxes the cars wondering what the hell he's doing it for?  Same principle.  Yeah, quills are tedious, but using them helps you with fine motor control of your hand, and fine motor control with your hand helps you swish and flick more accurately.  Most adults (though not the really old adults who *are* stuck in tradition) use pens.


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

[User]
Could a happiness-pill ever be equivalent to the Buddhist answer for the cessation of suffering?

Suppose this pill works in a similar way to the concept of enlightenment; i.e. it somehow allows the person who takes it to remain in a state of bliss happiness no matter what life throws at them. It works, hypothetically, by always releasing the right chemicals to sustain this state perpetually. In a practical sense, it provides a cessation to suffering.

What value would enlightenment have over this, if the path to enlightenment is so onerous?

[Assistant]
You would die and then be reborn in hell.

There, that's an actual Buddhist answer. Buddhism makes no sense without rebirth for this very reason. If enlightenment were just freedom from suffering in a single life, few would want it.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why are there US military bases in different countries like Japan. Is there Japanese military bases in the US?

Text (optional)

[Assistant] The US does not allow it. In instances like Japan and Germany part of the agreement at the end of ww2 was that we would maintain a military presence there to assist in their national defense. Much is the same with South Korea and various other countries, to assist in our allies defense. We (the US) on the other hand feel there is not enough for us to gain, to much risk versus reward, from a country by letting them have a base on our soil.


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

[User]
[LOTR] Are there wizards who aren't angels (Maiar)?

In the Lord of the Rings we meet some wizards. Gandalf, Sauruman, Radaghast. But they're all Maiar.

However, the concept and practice of "magic" seems to be understood by most as a rare profession, not "oh Wizards are what we call the five demigods who've been wandering around forever". Gandalf warns frodo that he is "not some conjurer of cheap tricks", which implies that that is a thing.

Are there other, non angel-incarnate practitioners of magic? Is there books on it? Or schools? Is it something someone can learn to do?

[Assistant]
There are other magics. But no, no books or schools. It's incredibly rare to have that kind of power.

Now, the elves have something like it... but they would be offended if you called it magic. To them, it is just superior craft. Magic is what they call the works of the enemy.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do white people have more variety in eye and hair color than other races?

It's a fact that race is not a biological concept. It is a social construct and the idea that any race is "pure" is nonsense. But how come it's mostly whites (specifically people of European and to a lesser extent, people of Middle Eastern, North African, and South Asian descent) who have a much greater variety when it comes to physical traits? Eye color ranges from light blue to dark brown. Africans, Native Americans, and East Asians usually only have black hair. Hair color also ranges from light blonde (in some cases, almost white) to black. In other races, it's black hair that usually predominates. White people also have very straight hair to very curly hair. And lastly, when it comes to skin color, white people are also have a much broader range (think of Scandinavians compared to Greeks and Sicilians).

But what makes no sense to me is that I learned in my human biology class is that Africans have the most diverse gene pool. But then when it comes to physical traits, it sure looks like white people are the most "mixed race". I'm confused.

I'm curious about this because my family on both sides is Indian (specifically from Gujarat, which borders Pakistan). Even though we're all from the same area in the world, I have relatives whose skin ranges from light as some Europeans to very dark. A bunch of people, including my sister, have green eyes. Most people have black hair but some have dark brown. Same thing goes for straight hair vs. curly hair.

[Assistant] Actually you could argue that the race divisions are so arbitrary that what could be considered races never were. For example, people who live in china do have noticeably different face shapes (in general) than Japanese people. Nepalese people looks sort of between Tibetans and Indians. Mongolians look a bit like Inuit but a bit like Chinese people. Nordic people specifically could be considered a race, but further than that, the Danes (commonly blond, blue eyed, and very tall) could be a race. Slavic people could be considered one and Semitic and Mediterranean people are often thought of as being so. Lebonese people are a bit more mediterranean looking than people who live in Afghanistan, and the farther north and east you go in africa, the more people look like Egyptians. Black people could even be further divided than they are. The Massai tribe (tall gangly running hunters) are very very different from the Kalahari bushmen (short with pot bellies), and you can't tell me the first time you saw an ethiopian man you weren't like....okay wow, that guy is actually BLACK.


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

[User]
ELI5:How do Persian rug shops stay in business?

I understand that rugs can cost in the tens of thousands but I pass by these places in my city and they always look shady and empty. The rugs always cover the windows so you can't see inside the shop. Are these places fronts for back door dealings or legit businesses? How often does someone walk in and drop $20 000 on a rug? How do these store fronts afford thousands a month for rent?

[Assistant] High end retail stores such as rug shops, expensive antique stores and so on have very high markup.  300% minimum, and up to 1000% in many cases.  These rug shops are selling 20 rugs a year at $20,000, unlike a high volume discount stores which might sell 20,000 rugs at $20 each a year.  You don't have to sell a lot of rugs a year if you are purchasing them at $2000 each, and sell at $20,000.


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

[User]
I don't think the movie Captain Phillips was the least bit racist. CMV.

I actually found Aamer Rahman saying he thought the movie was racist on his Facebook page, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why his fans and he find it racist.

I thought it was quite fair to the hijackers. They were portrayed as being otherwise normal human beings, in very tough circumstances, in a complex situation (I never knew that these pirates had 'bosses' so to speak). I thought the pirates were portrayed with great, and very sensitive, equanimity. They weren't portrayed as monsters, and the white crew weren't portrayed as morally superior heroes.

The US military was portrayed as the technologically superior, faceless, heartless, precise killing machine that it is (though not always so precise, but in this instance it was). Maybe some fan-boys of military tech might get off on this, but that definitely didn't feel like the point of the movie. Captain Phillips may have been portrayed as perhaps more stoic and level-headed than maybe he was in real life, but I don't know. And that's what we expect from any protagonist.

I think it would certainly have been silly and disingenuous to portray the pirates in any different light, given the actual events, and the actual background to those events. The pirates didn't kill anybody, but they got killed and captured. How were they supposed to be portrayed? Like a modern version of Saladin and his heroes? Come on.

Anyway, I can only concede that the movie focused more on the actual hostage taking and US military response, and not as much proportionately as the background to the pirates themselves. However, I think it provided as much background to the pirates as was necessary to the narrative to make the audience understand that these pirate guys weren't evil, but human, and there but the grace of God go you were you to be born under those circumstances.

[Assistant] I think they could have mentioned that the pirates only became pirates when large companies intentionally dumped waste into their waters and killed all the fish - at which point it became impossible to fish, but very possible to kidnap and hold ransom the same type of people who killed all your fish.


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

[User]
What makes a surface "sticky?"

Also, are all kinds of "sticky" the same, or is it broad label that defines many different kinds of phenomena? And why is stickiness so heavily associated with filth?

[Assistant]
Weak atomic bonds form between the surface and whatever touches it. The stickiness you feel is the mechanical force necessary to break the bonds and separate the two. These happen with just about any surface, it's just stronger on some surfaces (like complex carbohydrate chains in sugar residue from dried juice) than on others (like the loose hydrophobic lipids of wet soap). The strength of the bonds can also vary depending on the chemical composition of the two objects.

This is the force that causes friction, which is the result of bonds being repeatedly formed and broken (and everything that entails).

Very often the two objects will not directly touch, and instead will be bound by a third material that adheres to both of them (glue is the most simple example). Since the bonds formed between the two objects are weaker than the forces holding them together, the objects will still be in one piece when their bonds seperate. Except in the case of weak materials like paper, which you would know if you ever tried to remove a sticker. This is why the weak glue in post-it notes is so useful, it isn't strong enough to tear the paper.


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

[User]
[Starship Troopers] The invasion of Klendathu

WTF was I thinking joining the federal service?! I was supposed to be at some school in the Arctic for a year and now I'm on this God forsaken rock trying to kill bugs! How long am I supposed to be here for? What am I even looking for?

tl;dr: Supposed to be in school, instead on another planet knocking over ant-hills.

[Assistant]
What? Do you want to live forever?!?

You wanted a chance at franchise, son. This is the only job you are capable of doing that we can't give to an actual invalid. You've been trained to be an expert killer. You even volunteered for this mission, twice!

Now get out there and squash those bugs! For Buenos Ares!

*Would you like to know more?*


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

[User]
Do large asteroids have a max velocity? Or could one be traveling towards earth at relativistic speeds?

Say a typical asteroid with mean radius of 10 km or so.

[Assistant] Basically an asteroid will not exceed the escape velocity of a solar orbit, or else it will not orbit the sun. This is about 600 km/s for an orbit grazing the sun, but asteroids are much farther from the sun so tend to travel much slower, typically 20 km/s give or take.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does the wind make so many different noises?

Like whistling, howling... how come they all sound so different in terms of timbre and pitch?

[Assistant]
Imagine it like the air blowing inside a flute: if you close or open more holes, the geometry of the tube changes. Therefore the air vibrates with a different frequency, thus creating a new note.
Wind is similar, except that there are so many frequencies mixed together that it is unusual to actually hear a precise note. We typically hear different noises. They are many and they are different because the geometry in which they are developed changes anytime, and the direction of the wind changes too, creating even more variability.


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

[User] Why is a lump of coal black, but a diamond is clear?

[Assistant]
Coal is a sedimentary rock composed of many minerals. Diamond is a mineral composed of a carbon-based crystal structure. If impurities are present in that structure, the clarity of diamond (or any mineral) can be altered. That is why we see varying colors of diamonds.

A better question would ask why graphite (also a cabon-based structure) is gray/black and diamonds are clearer. Both are considered allotropes of carbon with different crystal structures that propagate light differently, which varies their appearance.

Fun fact: Diamond is not stable at our atmospheric temperature and pressure (think ground surface and areas we inhabit) and will eventually break down to graphite. Although, this could take a few billion years.


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

[User]
[The Hobbit] What in Eru's name were those sandworm-looking things at the Battle of the Five Armies?

I've read Prof. Tolkien's writings extensively and I haven't seen anything like them. They seem right out of science fiction!

[Assistant]
They were supposed to be were-worms, which Bilbo mentions as a far-away creature which is presumably part of hobbit lore.

Peter Jackson ain't give a fuck about or the fact that they've been calling dragons "worms" for 6 hours before that, so he decided to make giant worms that dug plot holes through mountains.


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

[User] How does new printed money enter the market?

[Assistant] Banks buy it from the Federal reserve when people withdraw more than they have on hand. When people deposit more than the bank will keep, it sells it back to the fed. The fed can then decide to send the bank new or used money depending on how worn it is.


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

[User] ELI5: Whenever you have a condition that makes you itchy (e.g. bug bite, dry skin, fungus), scratching typically makes the problem worse. So why is our urge to scratch so strong?

[Assistant] First instinct is to get rid of whatever is biting you which is an advantage (slapping it etc.), irritating the surface can actually bring white cells and other defence mechanisms to the site of the injury. Finally the normal (pre clean plumping) way of cleaning a wound is for blood from the inside of the body to wash away any dirt or other things at the site of the problem.


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

[User] ELI5: What is in soap that makes it able to kill germs and bacteria?

[Assistant] Regular household soap or cleanser does not kill germs (as you asserted)  rather, it suspends (or lifts) them off the skin surface, allowing the microbes and soil bits to be rinsed down the drain. This property of soap explains why its more effective to use soap when washing hands, rather than just relying exclusively on warm water. Additionally, people tend to scrub their hands more thoroughly when using soap, which further removes germs.


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

[User]
What physically happens to the body in a morphine overdose?

I know that its used in regulation to negate pain but what physically happens to a body when a large amount of morphine is given to kill someone.

[Assistant]
Painkillers (such as morphing, heroin, OxyContin, etc) relax muscles as well. In large enough doses, the person is literally unable to move a muscle, voluntarily or otherwise.

This means that the diaphragm, which is the muscle used to breathe, cannot contract. The person suffocates because the brain can not activate the diaphragm muscle to contract(breath in).

In even larger doses, the heart can stop as well, though most people die from suffocation rather than their heart stopping.

Dont do drugs, kids.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do cars make relatively typical engine sounds when driving forwards, but sound like giant battery-powered RC cars in reverse?

[Assistant] In a manual transmission the reverse gear is a different style of gear that have strait teeth called a spur gear compared to the other gears (1st-5th for example) that have angled gears.  The noise you hear is the reverse gear is the teeth of the gear colliding which only occurs on the spur gear where the regular angled gears slide into place.


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

[User]
Is there anything extraordinary about our location in the universe that isn't tied to the fact that life is possible here?

By "extraordinary," I mean a property that is highly uncommon in the universe.  There are a few obvious ones: we're well above the 99.9th percentile in terms of how hot and how dense the space we occupy is.  Our planet is also unique among others, insofar as it has liquid water, which most planets don't.

But we would expect these properties to be present in an environment that can harbor life, so it's not tremendously interesting that they're present.  Once you ignore the conditions necessary for life, there isn't anything obvious that remains that makes the space we occupy particularly out-of-the-ordinary.  We seem to live with some run-of-the-mill neighboring planets, orbiting a main sequence star that sits in a relatively quiet part of a galaxy that is one of many Sb shaped galaxies in the observable universe.

There are astronomical bodies that just so happen to have some cool properties that wouldn't appear to affect the capacity for life.  Some planets have nonspherical moons, or moons with a particularly elliptical orbit, or live in a star system with an unusually large number of planets.  Some star systems live inside nebulae.  Some are on the very outskirts of their galaxy.  Some galaxies are irregularly shaped, and some live in intergalactic voids.  Our planet *could* have had any of these properties and life would still be possible (though it may look different).  But it doesn't.

But I'm not convinced that there aren't any interesting properties about where we are that aren't tied to life existing here in the universe.  Is there anything about our planet, our star system, our local group, our galaxy, or our galactic cluster that is extraordinary merely by coincidence?

[Assistant]
The angular diameter of our moon in the sky is in the same range as the angular diameter of our star. That is not necessary for life, it should be quite rare, and it's a coincidence both in place and time - it wasn't true in the past and will stop being true in the future as the orbital radius of the Moon increases.

We live in the first ~0.1% or even 0.01% of the time where we expect habitable planets to exist. Stars should be around for something like 100 trillion years.


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

[User] [The Matrix] Why doesn't anyone seem to talk about their "life" in the Matrix before they were freed?

[Assistant] Freed people's brains never accepted the program, even if they didn't know it at the time, mostly zombied around with a huge depression (or what they might have thought was a depression) without feeling a real connection to anything. Their life was meaningless, that's why it is so easy for them to leave everything behind, and what makes them different from the people who are so attached that would even die protecting the system.


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

[User] ELI5: Why can a human float on their back in water if they relax, but sink when they tighten up there muscles. How does it change our buoyancy?

[Assistant]
Well, the density of humans varies from one person to the next, but assuming that the human in question is an average person (slightly less dense than the water) then a little bit of that person's body is going to stick out of the water.

When a person is on their back, the highest part of them is their nose and mouth. When a person is upright, the highest part of them is the top of their head.

Secondly, when a person is relaxed and spread out (as they are when they are floating on their back) they are more stable, because most of their body is close to to the horizontal point of neutral buoyancy. When a person is tensed and angular, they will bob more, because different parts of their body are at very different places in relation to that point of neutral buoyancy. (Compare rolling horizontally across a trampoline vs walking across a trampoline)


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

[User]
ELI5: Why carbonated drinks get "agitated" by shaking

Everybody knows that a bottle of coke will turn into a spray of foam when shaken. But why?

[Assistant]
Ok, this might get a bit complicated.

Carbonated drinks are carbonated because they have something in them called carbon dioxide.  This is a gas, a lot like air.  The carbon dioxide doesn't like being in the drink, and it wants to escape.

Now here's where it gets a little weird.  The carbon dioxide can't easily escape from the drink without an 'escape route'.  Smooth surfaces and a clean drink (without bits in it) don't give it any escape routes.  We call these routes "nucleation sites", but that's a big word that you don't need to worry about.  It's just a place where it's *easy* for bubbles to form.

Now think about a can of coke.  It will be mostly full of coke, but at the top is a small layer of carbon dioxide that has already escaped from the coke.  If you open it, the liquid inside is still clean and the walls are smooth, so most of the carbon dioxide stays in the drink.  It does still slowly escape, which is why you see little itty bitty bubbles.

If you instead shake that can, what you're doing is creating a whole lot of bubbles inside the liquid, and they "stick" to the walls of the can - just like if you pour it in a glass.  Those bubbles create "escape routes" for the carbon dioxide - so now it can escape from the drink much much faster.

But here's the problem, the carbon dioxide is escaping from the drink at the sides and bottom, and there's still drink on top of them.  As the carbon dioxide is bubbles, they try to all rise to the top of the can at once.  This is why you get a big foamy explosion and a flat drink.

Here's how you can use this to save your drink.  You can "fix" a shaken can or bottle by tapping it before opening it - not on the top, but all around the sides and the bottom.  This knocks the bubbles off the walls, and they go back up to the top where they can't help more carbon dioxide escape.


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

[User] ELI5: If oil is made from decomposing algae breaking down in the seafloor from millions of years ago, and Algae is constantly growing, dying, and decomposing, why isnt oil being constantly produced as more decomposed algae is ready?

[Assistant]
A lot of fossil fuels were produced in an era where living things didn't decompose as easily as they do today, because many of the decomposers hadn't evolved yet. This is especially true of coal, which dates to an era before fungi figured out how to break down the lignin in wood.

But even insofar as fossil fuels are being produced today, they are produced **very** slowly. Think about it: in basically a century, humanity has used a big chunk of the total oil available on Earth from *hundreds of millions of years* of oil production. In other words, we're using oil ~a million times faster than the Earth has historically produced it.


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

[User] [A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones] Before Robert's Rebellion, would Tywin be content if Cersei was betrothed to a hypothetical older second son of Aerys II or did he really wanted Cersei being paired with Rhaegar?

[Assistant]
Dude wanted the throne under a lannister thats all. If there was an older Targaryen then he would want her married off to him.

Im sure he would settle for a second son and the lands associated with it but its called a game of thrones for a reason.


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

[User] ELI5 if color ink is so expensive, how do companies afford to send me so many full color HD ads and coupons in the junk mail every day?

[Assistant]
They probably don't print those on shitty inkjet printers, but on large professional printers that are much more expensive to buy and maintain but  have a certain economy of scale when it comes to raw materials consumed.

Printing these ads and coupons is likely a lot less expensive for them than it would be for you.


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

[User] [Pirates of The Caribbean] How old Captain Jack Sparrow is supposed to be in the latest film?

[Assistant] Jack Sparrow was born in the year 1700 and Henry Turner was born in the year 1730. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales occurs 21 years after the birth of Turner, meaning that Jack Sparrow would now be about 51 years old in 1751.


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

[User] ELI5: Why are BBC produced nature documentaries like Planet Earth and Frozen Planet given a new narator for US audiences? Why not keep David Attenborough in the US version?

[Assistant]
Like every TV network decision, it's based on what they think will appeal to the widest audience and thus make them the most money.

Maybe they think that having a British narrator will make the show be perceived as a "stuffy" documentary and therefore too boring. Maybe they just think that people will be more comfortable listening to a narrator who shares their accent.

They do the same thing in reverse with shows like Mythbusters, cutting out the American narrator and inserting a British one.


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

[User] [Eastenders] Why hasn't Walford been gentrified like most of East London?

[Assistant] Because of all the history of murders, stabbings thefts & general criminality of the place, plus the fact everyone there is so permanently miserable that the only people who want to move there are the desperate and insane.


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

[User]
[Star Trek]Advanced but not warp capable species and the Prime Directive.

So lets say the federation enters a solar system.  This solar system is home to 4 inhabited  M-Class planets/moons.  All of the species are sapient.
One species is fairly advanced, and has space ships capable of reaching .9c.
One of the species is around the level of early 80s Earth.
One is around 2010 Earth.
And the last is fairly primitive, somewhere around medieval Earth levels.
The first species has already established contact with the two advanced ones, and uses their ships to run various trade routes.  The three have decided to leave the less advanced one alone for now, although the 2010 one is itching to plunder them for resources.
Unfortunately, seems some calamity is going to wipe out this solar system in a few months.  What can/should/will the Federation ship do in this situation?

[Assistant]
Nobody we've seen has sublight engines capable of 0.9c. The relativistic effects would be a serious issue. Full impulse is 0.25c.

Since they had no FTL technology the Federation would not contact them and do nothing to prevent any catastrophe from occurring.

In fact, even if they did, they wouldn't do anything unless formal relations had been established and they asked.


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

[User]
Could a blood transfusion spread cancer to another person?

Let's say that a person who didn't know they had a malignant tumour gave a blood donation which happened to contain cancer cells. Ignoring the processes of cleaning and keeping the blood fresh, could it cause cancer if it were transfused into another patient or would white blood cells just destroy it?

[Assistant]
There are cases of transmissible cancers in animals, but these are mostly in highly bottlenecked populations with low genetic diversity (i.e., the cancer is less likely to seem foreign to a new host).

The few cases in humans involve a degree of immunosuppression.

So like the other poster said, it's not impossible, but it's pretty unlikely.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Who was more important to Palpatine, Vader or Tarkin?

[Assistant]
Vader by a mile.

Tarkin was incredibly effective and efficient, and an excellent asset to the Empire; he ruled the Outer Rim as Grand Moff, and it was his Fear Doctrine that led to the creation of the Death Star.

But in the end, he was ultimately expendable. His position could be filled by others, or broken into subsections by lesser ranked officers. Vader however, is a one-of-a-kind enforcer and military leader, who could do the Emperors dirty work better then anyone else. Palpatine could always get another political head, but not a super powerful apprentice to do his bidding.


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

[User] ELI5: What physically happens to your body when you get a second wind?

[Assistant]
IIRC it's a combination of your body switching off non-essential functions such as digestive processes to redirect that energy to the muscle groups you are using and a blast of natural drugs released into your blood stream in order to facilitate your ability to 'escape' whatever it is you're running from.

Mostly the drugs/chemicals though.


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

[User] ELI5: As a non-American, what is the purpose of The Senate, Congress and House of Representatives, and how do they work in relation to each other?

[Assistant]
Congress is the name for the whole legislative branch; it includes both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The House of Representatives is meant to be the people's voice in government. Each representative covers roughly the same population and they're voted on every two years, meaning they're theoretically more responsive to their electorate's desires.

The Senate is the states' voice in government. Each state gets two senators, regardless of population. A third of them are voted on every two years, so they serve six year terms in total. They're supposed to be more stable and interested in the big picture.

The reason for the two house structure was because small states were afraid they'd have no voice in a purely by-population legislature while big states felt they deserved more say given their bigger size. Creating one house to serve each need and making them compromise with each other to pass laws was a way to balance these competing interests.