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

[User]
[Harry Potter] Are Muggles more advanced and more powerful than Wizards?

My question may at first seem stupid, as many would automatically assume that the Wizarding world is far more advanced than the muggle world due to Magic. And due to magic, the Wizards will always stay ahead of the powerless muggles...

However, let's think about how little change there has been in the Wizarding world over the course of a century (or even millennia) and compare it to the advancements in the Muggle world. Muggles have achieved so much within the space of a few decades (Nukes, Medicine, Science, War, Space Exploration and now Artificial intelligence), whilst it seems that Wizards are backwards and refuse (or are unable) to progress.

So here's my question: Are Muggles overall more advanced and more powerful than the Wizards and Witches of the Wizarding world?

[Assistant]
Yes, muggles are generally regarded as more powerful than wizards in the modern era.  The tipping point was centuries ago,when the statute of secrecy was first established.

Since then, the gap has only gotten wider.  Rowling is on record somewhere saying a muggle with a shotgun would be a pretty good match for a powerful wizard in a straight fight.  In fantastic beasts 2, Grindlewald rallied his followers by showing them the muggles would eventually create nuclear weapons, with the implication that such a thing is more powerful than wizarding.  Indeed, too powerful to be allowed to exist.

Meanwhile, wizards may even be *less* powerful as a society now than they were in the past.  Relics like the philosopher's stone, Deathly Hallows, or sword of Gryffindor can't be recreated today.

Wizards have a lot of neat tricks they could use to control muggles (perfectly hiding such that muggles can't even perceive magical things, apparition, imperious curse), but a wizard needs to be very clever to surpass muggles.  Muggles have an overwhelming advantage in raw power.


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

[User] [LOTR] What would have happened if the Watcher in the Water was actually able to take the ring off of Frodo? Would it have kept it? Tried to take the ring to Mordor? How?

[Assistant] Who can tell? There are things that have no desire for the Ring. Gollum is certain that Shelob (whom he served for a long time and knew well) would discard it with his clothes if she killed and ate Frodo.


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

[User] Psychology wasn't really an established field before the fin de sicle, so what did Nietzsche, Kant et al mean by "psychology" or "psychologist"?

[Assistant] Undergraduate psychology textbooks usually say that psychology started with Wilhelm Wundt in 1879, but if you look into the fine print, its because Wundt specifically started the first laboratory dedicated to the scientific study of psychology. And therein lies the rub: what started in 1879 was a separate discipline which saw itself as scientific; *the study of the mind* definitely did not start in 1879. After all, plenty of the concepts used by the scientific psychologists to explain their experiments have origins in, or predecessors in, the Enlightenment psychology of Descartes, Hume, Kant, etc. So someone investigating psychology in 1812 was investigating many of the same topics that a modern psychologist would; they just were using a philosophers tools - logic and argument, conscious experience and theorising - rather than putting statistics into SPSS and having different control groups, etc.


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

[User]
Do I need to read Wittgenstein's earlier work to understand his later work?

I understand that, in the _Investigations_, Wittgenstein rejects many of the conclusions he comes to in the _Tractatus_. But, I'm not gonna lie, it's his later philosophy in particular that interests me. Do I need to read the _Tractatus_ to understand _Investigations_ in context or can I read just read _Investigations_ by itself?

[Assistant]
It depends on what you mean by "understand". Will you be able to understand the logic of W's arguments in PI by only reading PI? yes, with qualifications about how hard that is.

but will you understand the motivation that W had for writing PI, or what he is trying to argue against with the arguments in PI? probably not.


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

[User]
ELI5: When did some foods become associated with meal-times, and why? Example: eggs, bacon for breakfast.

As the title says, when did certain types of food become associated with eating at certain times of day? When did steak become associated with dinner, for example? When did soup become a lunch meal, as opposed to a hot breakfast dish? Etc, etc.

EDIT: Thanks for the responses. I'm now going to eat eggs and bacon because eggs and bacon.

[Assistant]
Time needed for preparation. Eggs take a little bit of time to cook, so they're a breakfast food. Something like lasagna takes longer to cook, so it's a dinner food.

There's another factor, too. Back in the early second millennium, breakfast was seen as a necessary evil, and the sign of either a glutton or a working peasant. Seeing as peasants were more common than gluttons, breakfast was mostly a way to get the energy they needed for their work. Food that was high in quick energy took priority.


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

[User]
[What If] What makes a Watcher watch? *spoilers*

What exactly peaks the interest of a Watcher? Is it just the fact that the Avengers are more interesting/universe altering that he watches them across the multiverse? We know he's directly watching because Strange noticed him in episode 4, twice.

[Assistant]
The watcher watches events that will lead to major changes in the world- they appear at focal points in history,

On modern day earth, these tend to involve the same few guys. So they tend to watch those same few guys.


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

[User] ELI5: Signatures, how does 1. It bind me to an agreement 2. How does one prove it's actually your signature 3. What stops someone from forging my signature by being close enough and 4. What if I start writing my signature differently? is it still valid?

[Assistant]
The primary purpose of a signature on a contract is not to establish identity, but to establish intent -- namely, a signed contract is a contract you have agreed to abide by, rather than something you're still negotiating, and the best way to signal that you agree to a contract is the sign it.

Typically, the way your *identity* is established in contract cases -- that is, you are the person who signed the contract thereby assenting to its provisions and it wasn't some one else trying to run a con -- is that they ask you in court and you tell the truth, because it's a felony to lie.

Therefore, any mark you make which is meant to signal assent will count as a signature, even if it is different than one you've made in the past.


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

[User]
ELI5: How big is the divide between sleeping and not sleeping?

Ever since I was a child, I would think about how I could never pinpoint the exact moment that I fall asleep. What exactly is the separation between being awake and being asleep from a neurological standpoint.
Is it a sudden switch, or does it happen gradually? If it's gradual when can we label someone as asleep rather than awake?

[Assistant] Sleep researcher here: there is a short transitionary phase which lasts about ten minutes when you first go to sleep known as stage 1 sleep (associated with a hypnagogic state) after which you then go into deep sleep (stages 2-3).


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

[User] ELI5: Why were armies in the Middle Ages smaller than those in ancient times?

[Assistant]
Because from the fall of the Roman Empire onwards, Europe saw the rise of a system of governance called Feudalism, rather than the state-based systems of the Roman, Makedonian or Assyrian Empires, for example.

A feudal system is one in which, instead of the government being absolute sovereign of the country they govern, the king is placed at the top of a heirarchy of nobles and officials each with responsibility for their own territory *within* the kings domain. So the king of France may be 'de facto' king of all of France, but in the area around Orleans, the Duke of Orleans is absolute sovereign and there isn't anything that the King of France can do with Orleans or the people there.

The King is only the King because each of the nobles swear alliegence to that king. That means they'll usually provide him some money, and will fight for him if war breaks out. In return, the king doesn't mess around with their territory. Because of this, the king typically only owns a small assortment of towns or even just his own palace. (His demesne) and so can't raise an army of his own. Instead, he'll entrust his nobles to raise their own armies out of the villagers in their individual areas.

This means armies can be raised quickly when war breaks out, but because there is no single 'State Army' which owes allegience to the government, the armies are usually much smaller and under the control of many people. The lack of a centralised governing authority would make it completely impossible to clothe, feed and pay an army of Roman sizes in the middle ages.

Also, throughout the middle ages a huge amount of fighting was done by mercenaries, because the state couldn't train its own soldiers, people who already knew how to fight were in high demand. Because demand was so high, prices were too. It just wasn't practical or affordable to pay a Roman-sized mercenary army.


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

[User]
CMV: A college education is not a right its an investment.

I hear lots of democrats saying that a college education is a right and therefore should be free. However I think that it is a privilege and that the taxpayer should not be paying for it.

A right is something that is essential to life, e.g. Freedom, right to thought, right to religion. My first point is that 70% of Americans do not have a college degree but still manage day to day life and to earn an average salary of $28 000 a year. More than enough to live on.

My second point is that it increases potential income dramatically and therefore should be considered an investment. The average college graduate makes $51,000 a year and clearly can pay off their student debt. If the taxpayer paid for it we are essentially paying for other people to make more money.

[Assistant]
Well, it's an investment, but the real question is who should be making that investment, because individuals are not the only ones that benefit from that investment.

In a country with decreasing need for unskilled labor, and increasing reliance on higher skilled labor, it is a worthwhile investment for that country make to have a higher percentage of their citizens have a college degree.

At that point, the question of "rights" comes in, because there are a lot of ways that social problems create inequalities in who gets to benefit from that "investment", whether the investment is primarily individual or primarily societal.

Having *equal opportunity* to benefit from the investment in college educations seems like a very important "right" that we should protect.


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

[User]
[Fallout New Vegas] What did the NCR run into at Big Mt.?

When speaking to Joshua Graham about the NCR's supply routes, he mentions how Big Mt. was a major obstacle, because it "might as well be a wall to men". What did he mean by that? Did the radar fence keep people out, or was it all the lobotomites and rogue TOHs? I don't recall anything keeping The Courier from leaving except his tesla coils.

[Assistant]
It's a shit place to run caravans through, for several reasons.

1) Shit terrain: the area around it is more mountainous than most parts of Zion or lower Nevada. Hard to get Brahmin up the side of a cliff with gear on their back.

2) things that go bump in the night: Lobotomites and the tRoboscorpions tend to eat whatever shows up. No caravan gets through alive.

3) lack of resources in the area: The Big MT is...pretty empty. The area was made by blowing the top off a mountain and thus has little plant life or surface water. Not much to scavenge.

So there you have it. Bad land, bad inhabitants, bad resources.


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

[User] Are there any animal species whose gender ratio isn't close to balanced? If so, why?

[Assistant] A colony of honey bees are made up of about 90% all females. They're all worker bees except the queen bee, and the males are all basically her reverse harem. The males just lounge about and eat honey all day until it's their turn to do the business.


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

[User]
[Marvel/Spider-Man] Why does Peter continue to act like a pushover after getting powers?

He finally has the means to stand up for himself like he likely always wanted, so why not use it?

[Assistant]
You know how with Batman, the Bat is who he really is, and Bruce Wayne is the mask?

With Peter Parker, it's the exact opposite.

Peter Parker is actually a geek, genuinely a nerd. He is shy, awkward, and nervous. He doesn't see himself as powerful or commanding or cool.

But he *does* see Spider-Man as all of those things. When he puts on the mask, he becomes someone else ... some*thing* else. He becomes the person he wants to be.

That's also why he cracks so many jokes when he's fighting; it's not just to throw off his enemies - though it does - it's because he's actually terrified of the insane situation he finds himself in, and running his mouth is a nervous reaction to that.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why does static electricity seems to increase in cold weather?

Sorry if it was explained already, searched for static electricity but didn't find anything.

[Assistant] Colder weather tends to be *drier*.   Static electricity produced by friction tends to increase under dry conditions. Humid air tends to conduct electricity better than dry air, so it is able to drain charges from things before it builds up.


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

[User]
How powerful are GPUs really? Should I expect them to always outperform well written vectorized code?

In my computer architecture class my professor said that even well written and optimized SIMD code is usually going to be outperformed by just doing it in cuda instead. How true is this?

[Assistant]
It's just obviously true, because they're not even in the ballpark.

A GPU can have up to 1000s of cores.

So he's right, even a naive CUDA implementation would beat all the work you put in to optimize the same workload with SIMD instructions.

At some point, the big bottleneck would definitely be memory bandwidth, GPU cores aren't pulling all their data from main memory, the GPU has it's own RAM optimized to work with those parallel cores, whereas for the CPU you are eventually going to bottleneck on how fast data can be pulled from main RAM as you optimize for how fast you process it.


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

[User] ELI5: Places like Michigan were logged of their native pines in the late 1800s - early 1900s. Leafy trees largely replaced them. On a long enough timeline, would the forests return to their original state, or is the change in composition permanent?

[Assistant]
If you look at forests in the Rocky Mountains, they go through this kind of transition every 30 years or so.  The quick growing Aspen trees shoot out of the ground and form a protective barrier for the pine seedlings as they get a foothold.  Just as the pine trees are getting big enough to start needing more space, the Aspens get old and die off, leaving growing room for the Pines to get big.

Overall though, there's evidence that forests aren't the 'natural' state, and the loss of large animals like Mammoths led to an expansion of forested areas.  It's probably better to think of the leafy trees as a transition point until the next ecology change hits.


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

[User] [Star Wars] I have read that a handful of star destroyers could kill all life on a planet, and render its surface uninhabitable within a matter of hours. If that's true then what's the point of a Death Star?

[Assistant]
So, first of all there are some caveats to those feats. Although three Imperial-class Star Destroyers could execute a Base Delta Zero (total annihilation of everything on a planetary surface, and much of the upper crust to a molten slag) in "a matter of hours", there were also planetary shields that could hold off such bombardments for a sustained period of time. Time, in which enemy reinforcements could be called in, evacuations could be attempted, and things could go generally wrong.

But even more important than that was the sheer implied power of the Death Star. It didn't just "atomize the surface" as ISDs could, it overwhelmed a planet's shields and blew its  apart the entire mass apart instantaneously.

The entire Tarkin Doctrine was based on the implied power of Imperial Forces, and the fear they could induce in a target. This, at times, called for production of vessels which were not always the absolute best strategic option but carried strong psychological impact in them. The Death Star was one such result.


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

[User]
CMV: Nala from The Lion King is a Disney Princess.

Hello debaters! My daughter asked me who my favorite Disney Princess is and while I normally answer Anna from Frozen we watched TLK and I feel Nala is right up there.

Shes royalty. Shes in the end married to The King and she has a whole journey typical to a Disney Princess even if shes not the focus of the movie.

Now yes, shes a Lion but its not like Ariel isnt also a Fish right? And shes canonical a Princess.

Nala is awesome because when the shit hits the fan and everyone is starving she goes hunting, finds the true King and brings him back and kicks ass alongside him.

Anyways. I think she should be considered a Disney Princess.

[Assistant] One counter to this is that Nala is not biologically a "princess" at the beginning of the film since she is not the daughter of the king - and since her and Simba only become an actual couple after Mufasa dies, she is really more accurately described as a queen than a princess. However, this logic may also disqualify Cinderella, so you'd have to be comfortable with that.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why have sharks and alligators remain "unchanged" in hundreds of million of years, when humans have evolved immensely?

What prompts evolutionary stagnation? Is it an exaggeration to say they've remained unchanged?

[Assistant] There hasn't been drastic changes to their environment, whereas humans have seen major changes, and changes to their features have allowed them to fight ahead of the competition. If you think about it, there isn't much that would make a shark drastically better at catching fish.


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

[User]
Prof declined to write LOR...thoughts?

Some background: last year I took both semesters of organic chemistry with the same professor. I got A's both semesters and won a departmental award for my performance in the courses. It's a small department and the instructor knew me personally  (e.g. I wasn't the guy who gets A's but never participates).

This past summer, I did an REU. I had letters of recommendation from former gen chem professors. I did not ask the organic professor for a letter that time because I was still not even finished with Organic 1 when I started applying.

Now I'm starting the process of applying to REUs for the second time. This time I asked my organic professor for a letter of recommendation...and he declined, saying instead I should ask people I've had classes with more recently.

Is last semester really that long ago? I know for a fact he recently wrote an REU recommendation letter for another student who had already finished the year of organic.

The only professors I've had classes with more recently are the ones I'm currently taking classes with. I definitely can plan on asking them, but I feel weird about requesting a letter of recommendation before final grades are in.

Any thoughts on this instructor's decision not to write an LOR? Is it normal?

[Assistant]
I'd say the most likely case is he can't write a letter that's any more in depth than "this student did well in class". No matter how memorable you feel like you were, nothing really stood out to them.

Therefore, they're (softly) recommending that you get someone "more current", or rather, someone that knows you better because they don't feel like they know you well enough.


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

[User]
[General] Are there any heroes who fit our definition of peak human yet are somewhat effective at heroing?

As in, no lifting 3 tonnes, Olympic level abilities max and only in a few skills.

[Assistant]
The Punisher is not even peak human yet is effective at heroing (in the loosest definition) because he won't hesitate to fill criminals with bullets like candles on your grandmother's birthday cake.

Imagine that "The floor is ____" meme but the floor is moral conflict about killing bad guys, and that is Frank Castle.


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

[User]
[Harry Potter/General Fantasy]What makes one wizard more powerful than another?

If magic just involves saying the right words and making the right gestures, how is anyone more "powerful" than anyone else? I vaguely remember Moody (well, the fake Moody) saying none of the students were powerful enough to kill him with avada kedavra, but... why not?

[Assistant]
Much of magic is based on skill - saying the right words and making the right gestures are harder than they sound. There's unquestionably an element of skill, as Neville Longbottom demonstrated when he went from trash to a very skilled fighter from fierce dedication and intensive practice.

Some spells have emotional or intentional components; the Killing Curse and Patronus Charm both have *very* different mindsets that are required to use effectively.Voldemort, one of the otherwise most powerful wizards to ever live, couldn't cast the meanest Patronus because he'd never been happy, while Harry (a fairly talented teenager) cast an extremely powerful one because he spent his whole (thoroughly non-magical childhood) clinging fiercely to joy. The Imperious Curse seems to be remarkably easy to cast, but is experienced as a sheer battle of will.

More generally, though, there's enough variety and types of magic that "more powerful" isn't a very meaningful phrase. Natural inclination plays a part here; there's a reason a wand that's good for charms picked Lily Potter, who was known for charms.

Blasting off killing curses with raw force of hatred is one type of power.

Brewing finicky potions that confer extraordinary luck is another.

Clever and well-executed utility of Charms was a huge component of Britain's First Wizarding War - the clandestine, ever-shifting battlefields of the conflict needed powerful Charms to conceal, uncover, communicate secretly, hide objects, and otherwise fight a war in the shadows.

Gilderoy Lockhart secured fame and fortune by having the charisma to get stories out of better wizards and the skill with memory charms to steal them, which is a type of power.

Even Neville (before he got good), renowned for being fucking terrible at magic, was so gifted with magical plants that he was quietly assisting a decades-long expert in the background. There was so much crazy shit in those greenhouses. Dark Herbologist Neville could have easily maimed or killed Malfoy by putting on a pair of earmuffs and lobbing a mandrake into the bathroom just in case the Devil's Snare Neville left in the toilet didn't choke the life out of him first. And that's just from what *first and second years* studied. That's fucking *power* without even touching a wand.


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

[User]
ELI5: How come when you drop a totally untangled cord and then pick it up two seconds later it always transformed itself to the Gordian knot?

For example earphones.

[Assistant]
This had been observed for many years - but never described as a scientific phenomenon until about a decade ago.  So this is relatively new knowledge for humans!

Raymer & Smiith wrote in *Spontaneous knotting of an agitated string* (PNAS October 16, 2007 104 (42) 16432-16437):

* A average string (diameter 3mm) of length less than 46 cm (or 1.5 feet) will *almost never* tangle itself up, even if you put it in a sealed box and shake it for an hour
* The stiffer your string, the less likely a knot; headphone wires, for instance, are less likely to knot than a soft string, but more likely than thicker steel wire.
* The longer your string, the higher the probability of a knot... but it tapers off quickly at around 50% (under their conditions)!  Longer strings do *not* always mean higher chance of knotting.
* The knotting happens because a knot-forming crossing is roughly as likely to happen as a knot-undoing crossing; but if a string is coiled (and thus touches itself in many places), there are *multiple chances* for a knot to form, and it's very likely that at least one will occur.


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

[User]
ELI5: How are humans so much more energy efficient than robots?

A human can eat two 1000 calorie meals (around 2 KWh) and then move around all day and run its brain and all other systems. A robot needs a lot more energy to perform the same tasks even if it's plugged in and doesn't need to carry a battery. There are sophisticated robots now that are as agile as humans if not more (like Boston Dynamics' Spot) but they need 2 KW every hour just to do what a human can do with 2 KW in 16 hours or more. Why do robots need to eat so much?

Edit: Correction, Spot has a 605 Wh battery which is good for 90 minutes of active operation.

[Assistant]
Human body efficiency is usually quoted at around 20%, meaning 80% of energy input will be lost to waste heat, while 20% will be converted to useful work, as defined by the task. A brushless DC electric motor will usually end up between 70% and 95% efficiency - let's go with 80%.
A human could convert 2KWh of meals into 0.4KWh of work. A purpose-built robot for a task solvable by electric motors could convert 2KWh of electrical energy into 1.6 KWh of work.

Consider the possibility that some of the numbers or assumptions in your question might be faulty.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do companies like Google and Microsoft spend so much money on, and care so much about you using, their web browers they give you for free?

[Assistant] You are not their customer. Their customers are the advertisers who spend money to get access to data about your browsing habits to serve you customized ads. For Google, getting people interested in Chrome is like  a mining company looking for more veins of gold.


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

[User]
What is Zarathustra's deal with laughing?

"never yet on earth had any man laughed as he laughed!" says after the Overman bites the snake's head and spits it away.
"This crown of the laughter, the rosary crown: to you, my brothers, I throw this crown!" says to the higher men.

This are the best examples I could quote from the text. What's the meaning of it?

[Assistant]
Because he's an immensely happy and good spirited man, and laughter is an important part of saying yes to life.

John Lippitt published an essay about the nature of laughter in Zarathustra, *Nietzsche, Zarathustra, and the Status of Laughter*


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

[User]
CMV: Piracy is not comparable to stealing in most circumstances

When pirating something, you create a copy which you then use. When stealing you take something from someone else. They're not the same thing.

Let's say, for instance, you had a cloning machine. If I had a thing, let's say a sandwich, and you put it in the cloning machine so you could have one, then I wouldn't consider that stealing in any way. However, if you just took the sandwich, I would consider that stealing. It's similar with piracy.

I am in no way saying that piracy is moral, it's copyright infringement and is limiting the profits of the seller by copying it, but it is in no way stealing. I understand why it's illegal, but calling it stealing is, in my opinion, wrong.

[Assistant]
But when you purchase something that you could be pirating, in a lot of cases, thats just making a copy digitally, right? When you buy a song on iTunes, youre not taking the song from the artist in a physical transfer of goods like you are with a sandwich. Youre paying money for a legal copy.

If you take your copy without purchasing it, youre depriving the artist of the money and thus stealing from them. Unless you want to change the definition of purchase as well, to only include physical things.


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

[User] ELI5 how those magic erasers for cleaning work so amazingly well?

[Assistant] Magic erasers are made of melamine foam which acts as a very fine sandpaper. Melamine is a hard plastic substance, notably used for "unbreakable" kitchen utensils and furniture laminate. When made into a sponge, the melamine becomes a microporous reticulated foam, meaning that it has very very tiny bubbles whose walls are open instead of closed which allow it to absorb water and feel soft. So you essentially have very tiny particles of a hard substance that can be squished into the tiny crevices of a surface to scrub it clean. This makes it a very good stain remover.


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

[User] ELI5: Why is war not a war crime? Where do you draw the line? Torture? Mustard gas? Why not killing? Nukes?

[Assistant]
In theory, war itself is a diplomatic state between two nations, where in those two nations will use their respective militaries to sort out what ever disagreement brought on the state of war.

War crimes are, in theory, defined by a breach of the Geneva convention, which are the rules by which nations are required to make war (  pretty much, leave the civilians alone, and don't nuke, gas, or use any weapon that will cause unnecessary suffering.), in theory.

In practice, the worst offenders tend to win the wars they're involved with, rendering the Geneva convention useless as a tool to restrain the excesses of powerful nations at war, And reducing it to a tool to further punish people who have lost a war.


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

[User]
ELI5: How are successive generations of data standards (USB, HDMI etc.) able to pack more features (data speed, quality etc.) into the same form factor ?

For example, HDMI generations appear to have the same connector, yet the new generation has more features than the older one.

[Assistant]
They key is almost always that they become more able to put the same amount of data in a smaller physical space, either die to precision in reading or writing mechanisms.

Imagine taking a 1st grader and having them write out a whole page about their day. Their writing will be rather large, so the amount of information they put in there will be limited. Ask someone in college to do the same task and they will be able to write cleaner and more precisely, allowing them to actually put more information on the page.

The same is true with most evolving standards. They can either write or read more precisely (or both), allowing them to do things like send signals in shorter pulses, which allows for more data over the same time.


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

[User] ELI5: Football/soccer hooliganism: why it exists, and why it's so much less common than with other sports even in the same geographic/cultural setting?

[Assistant]
On why it's less common in other sports:

It's self-reinforcing. Hooligans do not go to a sports game to enjoy the spectacle. They go there to get into a fight. They know that there will be other people there looking for a fight, and so it's the sensible place for them to go.

Those who have tried going to curling matches to pick fights have wound up discovering that nobody wants to fight them there, and so they have stopped going. But if you find the right football/soccer game, you can get your itch scratched.

There were riots in Vancouver 2011 when the Canucks lost the Stanley cup. Thing is, this was not a reaction to the result. The word on the street and even in the media, damn them, was that there would probably be a riot after the game. And so all the worms came crawling out of the woodwork and there was a riot. Friend of mine told me about his teenage son coming down from his room dressed in very tattered clothes. Where are you going? Oh, he was going to go downtown to watch the game. Nuh-uh, you're grounded, young man.


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

[User] ELI5: Why cant we just make blood? Or better yet why cant we make a blood replacement that is more efficient?

[Assistant]
It's too complicated.

Blood is made of live cells:

* Red cells handle the transport of oxygen and carbon dioxide, and they do this by reacting, one atom or molecule at a time, and taking the oxygen and/or carbon dioxide inside the cell, to transport it.  Oxygen specifically it's very reactive, it rusts materials, it burns them, it reacts very easily, so the red cells use complicated organic chemistry to "transport it safely" and deliver it to the cells in your body.

* White cells deal with intruders and infections, detecting all sorts of foreign bacteria, and eating them, and otherwise identifying the cells in your body correctly, and not hurting them.

* Blood has platelets and other organic compounds that make it clot, when you get a cut the blood clots / hardens, blocking the cut and more blood from seeping out.

* Blood transports hormones, nutrients from your digestive system, byproducts of digestion to be taken out by your kidneys, etc.

It's just too complex; we don't have chemistry that's complex enough to handle all these functions with just chemicals, and we don't have the biology that's advanced enough to create designer blood cells to handle these functions.


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

[User]
CMV: Elderly people should have to take another driving test at a certain age

For the safety and well-being of all other drivers I think it makes sense to retest/reevaluate if an older aged individual is still capable of driving safely.

Im not sure at what age I would suggest the retest takes place, but I believe it should be done.

My main point behind this is that it would make the roadways a safer place, not just for other drivers, but for older folks driving as well.

In addition, Id like to give ~~3~~ 4 personal anecdotes which explain my position:

1. Earlier this year I had a neighbor (in his late 70s) who was killed in a car accident where he pulled out in front of an 18 wheeler. His physical health had been deteriorating for a while now and although this could happen to anyone at any age I believe it to be a result of his age and physical decline.

2. My grandma has Alzheimers and in the earliest stages of it she ran a stop sign and t-boned another vehicle. I find it unlikely this would have happened had she been retested, because she probably wouldnt have been declared fit to drive.

3. I was cut off while traveling 45MPH and tboned a car very violently. Both our cars were totaled and although I escaped with minor injuries, the driver (elderly) who cut me off suffered a few broken bones. Both the witnesses who pulled over and the police very quickly determined it was his fault. (Also he tried to sue me after wtf!)

4.  I got cut of today by an older gentleman and was about 2 feet away from slamming into his bumper had I not been paying attention, it wouldve been a pretty bad accident.

This incident is what reminded me about how I think we could make the roads safer for all by reevaluating who in our elderly population is still fit to drive.

[Assistant]
Why just elderly people? Why not make EVERYONE take a test periodically? Maybe every 10 years? That seems reasonable to me. It's very possible for a younger person to not drive for a long period of time and get out of practice. Or they can get used to bad driving habits which get ingrained, etc.

I think you run into too many problems with ageism if you say only old people have to take tests. Just say everyone has to take a test every 8-10 years, or so.


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

[User]
[Marvel] What exactly is the Green Goblin?

In *Spider-Man* and *No Way Home*, the Green Goblin is just a regular guy with super strength suffering from dissociative identity disorder, and the Green in his name comes from the color of his suit; but in *The Amazing Spider-Man 2*, the Green Goblin literally has green skin. Ive also noticed that he doesnt look human in the comics, and hes giant in *Into the Spider-Verse*. So what *is* the Green Goblin, exactly?

[Assistant] The Green Goblin is generally a human altered by some form of chemical enhancement. The specifics of the alterations vary from universe to universe. Sometimes his appearance changes, sometimes it doesn't.


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

[User]
Photoelectric effect and electrons explanation?

From what I understand, solar panels are made of materials that can be used with the photoelectric effect. Light reaches the object, and eventually the atoms receive so much energy that electrons break-off the atom and start moving freely. An example of these materials is silicon, a semiconductor. My question is, don't the silicon atoms eventually "ran out" of electrons to release, or where do they get new electrons from? I feel like I am lacking knowledge about this area nd would like someone to explain this to me, if the silicon atoms are constantly losing electrons which we are using for our electricity, wouldn't the silicon eventually "wear out"? Lose all its electrons?

[Assistant]
So silicon doesn't have free electrons. You dope it with something like phosphorus called N-type doping to add electrons and boron that adds an electron-hole in the silicon lattice called P-type doping.

If you stick these different types of doped silicon back to back, then you have a diode. Which is basically what a solar cell is, just lots of diodes with electrons at the edge, a.k.a the depletion region.

So usually you'd shine light at silicon, and it absorbs enough energy that electronics become excited and move around, but now they can only flow in one direction. And you're right, and the electrons have nowhere to go, thus cannot flow.

So what you do is attach one side of the cell to the other side, so the electrons flow back into the other side, round and round. Seems a bit silly until you realise you can attach something like a transformer to the circuit as a means of extracting the electronic flow, a.k.a energy.

And that's basically how solar cells work, you string them together in series and connect it to an inverter as a means of generating AC power.

I've spent the last couple of weeks working on a solar farm testing their kit.

TL;DR, they don't escape. It's a closed circuit and they flow back into themselves.


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

[User] Would aliens understand a message from Earth that relied on prime-numbers if they used a base other than 10?

[Assistant] Prime numbers don't depend on the base used. It is a mathematical fact that you can't rearrange IIIIIII or IIIIIIIIIIIII into smaller equal groups, while you can do it for IIIIII (III-III or II-II-II). That's independent of if you call IIIIIII 7 (in decimal) or 111 (in binary).


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

[User] ELI5: Why do we use the term "Put your back into it!" when doing so is an unsafe physical practice for lifting heavy objects?

[Assistant]
The safety concern is when you are trying to lift things entirely with your back, as opposed to engaging your legs and core, which is healthier.

"Put your back into it" is a way to admonish people who put even less than their backs into it - whether "it" is digging, rowing, whatever. Compare someone rowing lazily with one arm and someone rowing with their entire body, back included.


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

[User]
[Marvel] Why does Matt Murdock choose the persona of "Daredevil" ?

How'd he'd get that name ? Why doe she decide to dress up like the devil,Especially if he's a raised Catholic ? Is it the "Criminals are a superstitious cowardly lot" reason ? Hell,he should just call himself "BatMan" since he uses sonar and is blind, Just like a bat...

[Assistant]
There are four overarching reasons; the fist two were developed more in the Netflix series, the third is canon across iterations, and the fourth is still, IIRC, canon in the comics.

First, his father, Battlin' Jack Murdock, was a boxer. He was strictly a journeyman, basically paid to get beaten up by other people. But every once in a while, something would snap in him, and he would "let the Devil out." He would almost go into a battle trance, and just stalk toward his opponent, not even defending himself, just dealing out punishment. Jack did this during a fight he was paid to throw, and was murdered as a result. Matt blamed himself for this, and when Matt became a vigilante, he patterned his costume after his father's ring attire; that's the reason his original design was yellow with red accents.

Second, the media gave him the nickname "the Devil of Hell's Kitchen." This was combined with his fearlessness - Matt is often tagged "the Man Without Fear" - to become Daredevil. Matt's courage is one of the cornerstones of his character. His willingness to throw himself against impossible odds borders on the reckless.

Third, Matt is an old school Catholic, and carries a ton of Catholic guilt around. He is absolutely filled with rage, the living embodiment of wrath, and *that* is one of the deadly sins. To Matt, his career as a costumed crime fighter is simply the least sinful outlet for his anger. Matt considers himself unworthy, more a child of the Devil than the Angels. His costumed identity reflects that.

Fourth, "Daredevil" was a pejorative nickname some bullies gave him in grade school. His was bookish even before his accident, and the bullies made fun of him for being a weakling.


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

[User] [MCU - Iron Man] How much money has Tony Stark spent on his Iron Man armors, between research, development, replacements, etc.?

[Assistant] I think it depends on how much you consider his time worth and how much you consider Jarvis time worth.   The physical materials of the suit aren't that expensive and he did almost all the R and D himself with the help of Jarvis.  He also had his own custom fabrication machinery built so he can prototype for just material costs.


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

[User] [MMORPG's] Why does every single animal try to kill me if it thinks I'm weaker than it, including herbivores? What has spawned this twisted ecology and how does any animal reach adulthood here?

[Assistant]
You see, it's a common misconception with adventurers that the only wildlife you have to worry about is the carnivores.

But if you took the time to ask a shepherd, or someone else who makes a living with them you would quickly find out that it's the herbivores you really have to worry about.

You see, carnivores will attack you when they are hungry, but most of the time they will try to avoid you as they know you are likely trouble. But herbivores? Herbivores will attack you to defend themselves because they think you are a threat that will try to kill them.

You spook one of them and they know that they would have issues running, so they will fight to tooth and nail to not die themselves.

...it doesn't help any that all of them have learned that you adventures like to hunt as many as you can for their skins.

These days the ones that live longest are those that stay out of sight.


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

[User]
[The Dark Tower] Does Walter O'Dim know that Roland's quest is nigh-infinite? Does he retain his memory between incarnations?

Did the unique nature of the Man in Black's powers and his relation to the Crimson King allow him to realise the nature of Roland's nigh-infinite quest?

Messages he leaves during the flight across the desert in the first book, and the palaver at the end, make it seem as though he knows full well that Roland is repeating his journey and knows each time it 'resets'. Possibly due to his meandering in the other universes. Is this correct, and have i Missed any other references to it in the books?

[Assistant]
Walter didn't consciously serve the King until relatively late in his life. Over the course of his wanderings in and around the worlds, he may well have a better understanding of Roland's eternal quest than any of the other players in it. However, with this comes an understanding that it will play out identically every time, and he is bound by this knowledge - *ka*, in a word. Why else his alternating hysteria/cynicism? He's seen this arc before and will do again, and neither the Red nor the White seem intent upon changing it.

The Crimson King himself, however, is very much a pawn in ka's scheme, and is likely less aware of the repetition than Roland. He is an agent of but one story, whilst Walter appears in some form in many of the Tower's tales.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Why did Luke feel like Dagobah was familiar, or "something out of a dream"?

[Assistant] Dagobah is a world absolutely steeped in the Force. The lines of reality are blurred. Force Sensitives are extremely attuned to the energy there and those who train in the ways of the Force while planetside often see their powers increase tenfold.


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

[User]
[The Walking Dead] How is Rick Grimes so strong?

How strong is Rick. Ive seen him beat the shit of dudes like twice his size. And he looks pretty skinny to me. Granted he is a cop, but hes not like an expert in hand to hand combat either. How does he manage to beat up almost anyone?

[Assistant]
Its all about the economy of violence.

Met guys like Rick in the Army. Southern boys, scrawny, maybe a little short, but tough and mean. They werent the biggest dude around, but they were the meanest and that meant that they would react with more focused violence quicker than anyone else in the room.

Rick isnt going to win a rules-based boxing match, but to quote Ras Al Ghul: Training is Nothing. Will is everything.


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

[User]
CMV: If the Abrahamic God does exist, he is not necessarily perfect

To start with, I am an atheist but for the purpose of this I would like to assume that the Abrahamic God does exist, this shouldn't derail into a debate about the existence of God.

The Abrahamic God is considered to be perfect. Everything the does is good because he cannot do wrong. But as people, how would we actually know this?

We know he created us. We know he is powerful and knowing. For what reason, other than just trusting what he says, do we have for believing that he is perfect? Within the bible he clearly shows human emotions, is it not possible he is extremely egotistical? If he is all there is, he has no one to question his authority, anyone with that status maybe go on to believe they are 'perfect'. There is no reason to assume he can't make mistakes, particularly when you look at the flaws in the world around us.

It seems that Christians/Jews/Muslims not only take a leap of faith in his existence but also faith in that he actually is as perfect as he says because he is our creator.

[Assistant]
TL;DR: The term "perfect" implies that there is some objective standard to which a thing is being held. If there is a singular being which creates literally everything else in existence, then that being is, by definition, the only standard to which the rest of existence can be held, because nothing else exists.

Though you only used the term "perfect" in your question, you seem to be meaning moral perfection specifically. In which case: on what grounds do you base your idea of morality? There are only a few options.

One: there is an ultimate moral standard which is above God, against which someone could judge God's actions. This seems to be the view you're taking. But in the Abrahamic traditions, nothing exists other than God and what God creates, for lots of philosophical reasons that tie into why they believe God exists at all.

Two: the ultimate moral standard is defined by God's actions - ie, whatever God does is morally good by definition. This is basically the view of the Abrahamic faiths. That is: our conception of "perfection" is based in the nature of God. We think compassion and love and justice are good because God is compassionate and loving and just.

Three: there is no ultimate moral standard at all - in which case the whole conversation becomes nonsensical because neither perfection nor mistakes exist.

Your question implies that a standard of perfection exists - however you'd define it. The important question to ask is where that standard comes from. If God is the standard, he is perfect; if God is not the standard, you're no longer talking about the Abrahamic God. You cannot separate the *existence* of god or gods in any religion from the *nature* of the god or gods they believe in. Every religion is built on a particular understanding of what the universe is and how it functions - and that determines how they conceive of the Divine (including whether or not a personal God even exists - ie Hinduism or Buddhism, in which everything is part of the Divine). For the Abrahamic God to be the ultimate creator of literally all of existence necessarily means there is no standard of perfection beyond him with which he can be judged; he IS the only standard.


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

[User]
[Captain America: Civil War] How did so few people die in the battles Ross shows the Avengers?

In Civil War there's a scene where General Ross goes through the destructive events the Avengers cause, specifically the Battle of New York, the Battle at the Triskelion, and the Battle of Sokovia. In this scene, it's shown that 74 people died in New York, 23 at the Triskelion and 177 in Sokovia: less than 300 total deaths.

How is this possible? New York is one of the most populous cities in the world, and an army of aliens was raining down on it; 77 would be a miracle.

S.H.I.E.L.D. did evacuate the Triskelion when the Helicarriers crashed, but surely there would be some who didn't make it out, let alone all the people who would die afterwards as a result of the debris and smoke.

Sokovia was also evacuated, but Novi Grad (the actual part of Sokovia that Ultron sent flying) was an entire *city,* plus the Ultron bots flying around killing everyone and, once again, the people who would die afterwards from the wreckage.

[Assistant] Well for the Triskelion, its only civilian casualties, probably caused by stray helicarrier fire, falling debris, and apparently water from when they crashed. Sokivia, the avengers evacuated the city first as best they could, and Ultron let them. We see their main focus throughout the fight is damage control and stopping civilian casualties. Not like Ultron was actively killing anyone anyway, what are a few thousand survivors when billions will die in a few minutes. Plus it kept the Avengers busy, which worked to his advantage. New York is... baffling. The military was there and the Avengers and police were all trying to evacuate, protect, and contain, but even if we assume a best case scenario the casualties should be in the thousands, or tens of thousands if things go really bad.


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

[User] ELI5: How can shelf stable milk be kept at room temperature for months without going bad?

[Assistant]
Milk spoils because microorganisms start eating it & exposure to oxygen in the air air causes it to break down.  Refrigeration just slows down the growth of microorganisms & the chemical reactions - it doesn't stop them completely.

Shelf-stable milk will be pasteurized at super high temperatures - this kills all the microorganisms rather than just "most" of them like regular pasteurization would.  It's then sealed in a package that prevents any air or new microorganisms from getting inside to start the spoiling.

As soon as you open it, however, it's going to spoil about as quickly as regular milk.


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

[User] ELI5: How does a turbo charged engine in a car work? How do cars with smaller engines that are turbo charged go faster than cars with bigger engines?

[Assistant]
None of these answers are ELI5 so I'll give it a shot.

Your engine eats two things to make your car go: air and fuel. If it eats too much air and not enough fuel, the engine gets cranky and could potentially break itself. If it eats too much fuel and not enough air, the engine becomes lazy and ends up wasting fuel and making less power.

So when your engine is pulling in as much air as it can on its own, it eats a certain amount of fuel and reaches its peak performance. The only way to make more power is to eat more fuel but without more air it can't eat any more fuel or it will get lazy

That's where the turbocharger comes in. The turbocharger force feeds the engine more air than it could ever eat on its own. To compensate for all this extra air, your engine eats more fuel and it's peak power is now higher than it could achieve without the turbocharger.

So even though your engine is small and normally has a smaller appetite than the bigger engine, the turbocharger shoves extra air in so that the little engine can eat more fuel and make more power.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do streaming services owned by studios have to pay their parent companies for their own content?

It's like how Peacock paid NBCUniversal $500M for The Office, even though Peacock is owned by NBCUniversal. Or how HBO Max paid Warner Bros $425M for Friends, even though HBO Max is owned by Warner Bros.

If a studio owns a streaming service, how exactly is that streaming service paying that studio for the content? Is the studio just paying itself? How exactly does that work and why do they have to do it?

[Assistant]
It is complicated. TV shows and movies have things like syndication rights and some of the actors are due payments from selling these rights.

Friends, for example, is a series where the main actors have contracts stipulating that they get some percentage of the payment received by the studio selling these rights. So there would definitely be major legal proceedings brought by the actors if HBO Max didn't pay Warner Bros. The actors would definitely claim that Warner is trying to avoid paying them their cut.

These kind of contracts are very common (actors, directors, screenwriters especially famous ones negotiate them). So firms try to have "arms length" contracts even between related entities.

Even within a big company, there are divisions and typically each division is held to their own financial goals. The head of one division is not likely to subsidize the operations of another division.

There are issues of taxes. Especially when it comes to subsidiaries that have operations in multiple geographies. Although a parent company may elect to file a single tax return, this isn't necessarily tax efficient. A company wants to report profits separately especially if taxes in foreign jurisdictions are lower than domestic ones. This gets complicated very quickly.

Then there is long term strategy - the parent company might want to spin off subsidiaries in the future. This could be to have a separate IPO or to bring in money from a separate investor. In that case, keeping relatively separate accounts helps tremendously.


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

[User]
ELI5: Do water pipes contain a nasty film inside of them?

ELI5: What stops the inside of pipes and water lines from getting coated in that nasty film that collects on containers that has water in them to long?

[Assistant] Usually its due to the constant supply of fresh water running through. Think of it like the difference between a river and a stagnant lake. Rocks in the river will be smooth and clean and the lake might be murky and sedimented. The small impurities we dont otherwise notice will gather and settle.  If you have ever seen an old fire sprinkler line burst, youll have seen some of the blackest, nastiest, foul smelling water.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] If a Jedi is already in justified combat, is there a difference between using a lightsaber to kill vs. using some other force power, like a force choke?

Force choke and force lightning are considered to be dark side powers, but if a Jedi is forced to kill in combat, why would the method matter?

[Assistant]
The Jedi will only kill as a last resort, as intent to kill involves quite a lot of dark feelings like fear and anger. Of course these feelings can lead to the Dark Side, so it's preferable to remain calm and go for the incapacitation where possible. Dismemberment is preferable as it leaves the enemy alive but unable to harm them.

But let's say the Jedi is unable to achieve a non-lethal outcome one way or the other. Killing the opponent with the lightsaber is preferable for a number of reasons.

Firstly, Jedi mostly train for **combat** with a lightsaber, and *not* with the Force, especially not with Dark Side techniques like Force Lightning and Force Choke. Using the lightsaber is just better for most Jedi and Sith who prefer to duel with the blades.

Secondly, using these techniques requires a lot of training to use effectively, which most Jedi will never practice as they are *Dark Side* techniques. To practice them or even witness them in action who would you learn from? "Not from a Jedi" says Darth Sidious, and correct he is. (Thanks Yoda) Straight up it wouldn't be in the repatoire of most Jedi combatants and thus they couldn't use these darker moves with intent to kill.

This leads me to the final point, the *intent*. Lightsaber combat culminating in being forced to kill the enemy involves much less fear and anger, instead focusing on regret and precision to end the fight quickly and reduce the suffering of the foe if possible. Utilising Dark Side Force abilities like Force Choke and Force Lightning are the opposite. They feed on malicious intent and anger, and pour those feelings into pure destructive forces designed to kill the foe. Who cares if the foe is left standing? If anything you use these powers because you're hellbent on killing someone *and are possibly scared of them surviving*. Only Dark Siders use these powers because they don't care about the prospect of the emotions tied to use of the powers leading them down the path of the Dark Side. Frankly they're used to it, and they enjoy the unrestricted lifestyle and raw power. Jedi and light-siders typically avoid these powers and the associated feelings because they lead to the Dark Side, and so they wouldn't (from a philosophical and moral viewpoint) risk using the abilities unless confident they could remain in the light.


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

[User]
ELI5: Dark Matter

What is it? What's it use? How does it work?

[Assistant] Physicists studying the movement and structure of galaxies, and the universe in general, have seen evidence of large amounts of unseen mass interacting with galactic structures, and the unseen mass is called "dark matter". What exactly dark matter is still speculation. Whatever it is it seems to only affect gravity and not interact with electromagnetic radiation (light) or carry a charge. Dark matter is something that should be there according to what we know about gravity, but we can't otherwise detect its presence yet, so we have no other way of analyzing what it is.


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

[User] [Civilization series] Where and how did the barbarians develop such advanced technology? I recently came across a barbarian destroyer and paratrooper.

[Assistant]
The press and the public may call them barbarians to push the narrative of their evil deeds. Some people may even call them terrorists. But they don't see themselves that way.

In their own eyes, they're paramilitary companies, revolutionaries, freedom fighters, insurgents, mercenaries, or whatever small army that tries to make its point through violence. The full might of any organized nation could crush them, so they hope they can send their deadly message before it happens.


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

[User]
[Star Wars] You are a little child on a desolate planet minding your own business when you unknowingly come upon an injured Sith lord. You try to medicate him, is he kind to you?

You just found this dude under a bunch of debris, he's alive, but needs care. You have a tough time pulling him out of the wreckage, he looks like....a Jedi! But he looks different at the same time. You bandage him up the best you can and splash some water on his face and then offer him a bit of your food.

The first thing you notice when he opened his eyes that they're yellow. Clearly, the man does not look like the heroic Jedi, he seems much scary now.

But what of the Sith? Will the sith be grateful to this child? Will the Sith behave like a "normal" person? I mean, they won't be a dick to the kid for no reason right? He saved you, after all.

Tl:dr :  How will a Sith lord react to a kid pulling them out of a wreckage and tending to him?

[Assistant]
He will show you kindness, even consideration, the better to trick you into trusting and aiding him. The young are foolish, and easily led; he will do what it takes to make you his servant.

It will not occur to him that you do not need to be tricked into helping him. That a stranger might give him aid and expect nothing in return is quite alien to his way of thinking.


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

[User]
[LOTR] Why are there no guards posted outside the entrance of Mt. Doom?

I feel as though Sauron, being as determined to survive as he was would put some sort of heavy fortifications or even guards around Mt. Doom so as not to allow anyone to enter. I'm sure as the creator of the ring he would know that someone would attrmpt to destroy it by tossing it into the fire. Or is he just that careless?

[Assistant]
It simply never occurred to Sauron that they would attempt to destroy the ring.

The ring, for all the ill it does to its bearer, is still an artifact of great power, greatly expanding the power of anyone who manages to wear it and force it, even a little, to their will.  This makes it a very tempting tool.


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

[User] ELI5: How does a brain pick out what memories are traumatic enough to block out?

[Assistant]
When a developing brain is flooded with enough of the neurotransmitters (the chemicals we use to think and feel) most strongly associated with negative emotions like fear, sadness, and pain, it triggers an instinctive reaction to cut off the connections with the memories formed in that section of brain cells. A brain has a lot of trouble finding memories that are cut off this way, like a blockaded section of a city.

This is a survival instinct selected by evolution, which means that kids who didn't tend to do it died off from not being able to deal with all that trauma. Those who happened to respond this way survived and grew up to have their own kids, passing on a tendency to react this way. That's also why adults don't do it as readily: we've developed better ways to cope with trauma over the decades of our lives, so we're less likely to die from it (also that adults are more likely to have already bred).


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

[User]
How is the human gut microbiome established in infancy or earlier on?

Since we have a whole plethora of microorganisms living in our gut system, I was wondering how early/how that is developed in humans? Does it develop while were in the womb and if so, how? I hope this question makes sense and thanks in advance!!

[Assistant]
Put simply, babies are most often born in blood and shit. It's messy. And that shit (or thin liquid, or mucus) contains gut bacteria which the baby needs to survive. All it takes is brief contact. Even a birth in water is not free from this issue, the bacteria get into the water. Gut bacteria are crawling all over the anal/genital region all the time, as well.

Babies born under overly-sterile conditions often suffer digestive problems; that messy birth is actually helpful.

They also get some gut bacteria from the mother's mouth, breasts, and any other part of the body they suck or lick.

Fecal bacteria - gut bacteria - get all over everything in such situations, and some of it gets into the babies mouth. Welcome to biological life; it's disgusting, but it works.


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

[User]
[WH40K] Is there any place that is actually nice?

Look, i have lived my entire existence in this hellhole of a planet. If its not Orks, its Tyranids. If its not Tyranids, its Necrons. If its not Necrons, its some form of Chaos. I have seen friends, family, pets, one guy lost a fern that he was really fond of just last week (he was kind of a kook) and to be honest, i am getting kind of tired of it. So, I must ask: Is there anywhere in this galaxy that could be considered "Peaceful"? you know, nice, clean, quiet, approximately 0 chance of invasion or death by something that wants my skull and blood?

[Assistant] There is this gorgeous little lake somewhere on a mountain on Charadon, about 4m wide. It has 5 fish, a little white flower and a sort of bird-like creature that takes a drink every 4 or 5 days. Shame it's on an ork-infested planet, but i highly recommend a weekend just sitting on the moss covered rock next to it.


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

[User] [Star Wars- Canon or Legends] I know Palpatine wanted to keep his Sith identity a secret, but did the average person know Vader was a Sith?

[Assistant] Vader was known as a Lord of the Sith, yes. Though the average person might not know what that was, him being one was at least knowledge known to Imperial military command - there's even a cut scene from the original film, the meeting room with Tarkin, Tagge, Vader and the others where he's mentioned as being a Sith.


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

[User]
CMV: The Matrix Revolutions would be MUCH better received today than it was in 2003.

Here's why.

While its true the story is convoluted and has some poor writing, especially the whole coma thing where Neo is stuck between the two worlds and has to be rescued after fighting the merovingian, the film is also somewhat of its time.

Here's an except i took from wiki where it quotes Rotten Tomatoes:

> A disappointing conclusion to the Matrix trilogy as characters and ideas take a back seat to the special effects.

This was an issue almost 20 years ago but wont be a issue today because of one thing. Something called the MCU has repeatedly used fairly average storytelling with just stunning special effects and has done it so successfully that every other company wants a piece of that success. So had the Matrix 3 released today, it wont be such widely criticized for using special effects so much at the cost of some story elements

Secondly:

>Some critics criticized the film for being anticlimactic.[19][20] Additionally, some critics regard the film as less philosophically ambiguous than its predecessor, The Matrix Reloaded.[21][22] Critics had difficulty finding closure pertaining to events from The Matrix Reloaded, and were generally dissatisfied.[23][24]

I think critics misunderstood what The Matrix series is. Its not a philosophical film with some action. Its a ACTION film with some philosophy. Its a series where the big money elements were great fights and not a Oscar level story.

Overall, had the Matrix 3 released today, it would be much much more popular than it was back then.

And i believe thats what will happen with Matrix 4. The industry has changed completely. People are more accepting of huge CG elements than just 2 decades ago.

[Assistant]
Not all movies are the same. You go into a comedy looking for something else than going into a thriller.

The MCU gets away with at times lesser story telling because its a series of comic book movies. You go for the over the top characters, the punches, and to see the ensemble cast all interacting. And the storytelling is either straightforward or with things like time travel in  Endgame, they lampshade the fact that it doesnt make any damn sense.

Whereas the Matrix tries to have a clever story and fails. You can call it an action film all you want, thats not what it tries to do.

And if you want to say the great fights are the selling point. It fails at that too. Matrix was revolutionary with its bullet time. The second had some cool elements but missed the mark a bit. The third just had the giant mech suits shooting the sentinels in a battle that based on what we had been told should have been much more one sided for the machines.

Meanwhile Marvel built on its fights. It has the benefit of the various powers and being able to team them or match them against one another. Whereas you can only watch Neo fight agents so many times.


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

[User]
[General] Why are sealed crypts/tombs/rooms/caves filled with spider webs?

Spiders make webs where there is good airflow and food for them to eat, why do they make so many webs in caves, rooms, crypts, chambers with seemingly nothing to eat and very little if any airflow.

[Assistant]
Crypts and tombs generally have rotting corpses, and caves are often inhabited by creatures. All these things attract pests that spiders enjoy.

After a point you're dealing more with cobwebs, the remnants of spider-webs burdened by dust, than more "active" spider-webs.


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

[User]
[Warhammer 40k] What is the possibility and cost-efficiency of making an all-female Space Marine chapter through 'False' Astartes surgery and operation? Would there be a forseeable benefit of False-Astartes Space Marines over normal Sisters of Battle?

So as it turns out, some time during the Great Crusade, a number of individuals were made Space Marines without having to be picked up as children/adolescents. These adult men would undergo bionics, surgery and gene-forging (players of Rogue Trader will find something about this) to give them 'bodies' that closely mirrored that of an actual Astartes. They did not often receive the traditional gene-seeds of the Primarch, and often, most of the these false Astartes were generally adults while the Primarchs were children of infants.

The most notable are: Kor'Phaeron, the adoptive father of the Primarch Lorgar Aurelian.

The other being Hasik-Noyan Khan, who was one of Primarch Jaghatai Khan's close childhood friends/mentors.

Certain older members of Leman Russ's viking warband, were eventually turned into 'False Astartes'.

Since False Astartes do not need to undergo gene-seed therapy, a majority of their enhancements and operations are not actually gender based, so THEORETICALLY, female 'False Astartes' would be possible.

Before cries of HERESY: Remember that a number of existing Space Marine legions tend to break their own rules all the time, such as the Black Templars going above the 1000 man limit, while others take more extreme philosophies and traditions. Female Space Marines are the extreme end, and it is unlikely they would be formally considered as true Space Marines.

[Assistant]
We don't know how it worked, that was very high tech science to begin with. During the Horus Heresy we lost a lot of technology.

Secondly, why?
Let's say we can create False-Astartes, why would we priorities females over males? Males do make better fighters in general and Astartes are crafted to be perfect Warriors-Weapons.
The only reason we even have the Soritias as a large organization is because the Ecclesiarchy is no longer allowed to keep "Men under arms", hence keeping women under arms instead. Having the state church as a sponsor tend to be beneficial to your numbers and equipment.


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

[User]
If everything is changing, what is the object of our knowledge?

Everything is constantly changing, if everything is changing, then what is the object of our knowledge if not the rational constructs of the mind?

[Assistant]
*Most* would say your premise is flawed because e.g. 2+2=4 is not changing; it's always true and always will be, and thus can be a constant object of knowledge.

To tease out your question further, do you think 2+2=4 is not true, or that it will not be true in the future?  Or are you asking about a particular *kind* of knowledge?  If so, what sort of things are you thinking of?


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

[User] [Groundhog Day] What if everyone else in Punxsutawney was caught up in Phil's time loop, remaining aware of events between them just like he was?

[Assistant]
I imagine that life would more or less move on. If you think about it, you could have lifetimes of relationships with everyone you could meet in the day.

The town would fall into chaos at first, until they calmed down. They would develop a familial relationship over time, negating the need for currency transactions. Just as Phil mastered many skills, so too would everyone else.

By the time the loop closed, if ever, many geniuses would seem to have appeared overnight, and the town would become immortalized from the contributions they gave to the world, with the groundhog being suddenly the least of them.


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

[User] When someone increases their flexibility (via stretching/yoga/exercise), what is actually happening at a molecular level?

[Assistant] Flexibility is increased by reducing the reflexive muscle tension that occurs when a joint is flexed past a certain point. For example, there is no connection travelling across your groin that prevents you from doing the splits. It's muscle tension in each leg that automatically kicks in. This means that increasing your flexibility is to some extent a psychological exercise.


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

[User]
Does sending a text to someone in a stadium full of people take longer to deliver due to the mass amount of devices being used in such a concentrated area?

For example, I sent a text on my iPhone today to my sister, who was at a football game. I noticed it took a bit longer to say "delivered", when usually it's nearly instantaneous.

[Assistant]
Yes, indeed it does. Which is why some providers, such as Verizon, has things called COWs which are mobile cell tower trucks. Verizon goes to major games, such as the Superbowl, with a COW for the sole effort of getting their customers better reception.

Hurricane Katrina, Verizon deployed a lot of COWs to the disaster areas to ensure coverage.

All very good reasons to switch to Verizon, where good coverage is ~~our~~ their most important goal.

P.S. Totally not, nor have ever been, a Verizon representative.


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

[User] ELI5: Is it true that the world is running out of sand to produce concrete, and if so, why is that?

[Assistant]
Yeah, but no.  Yes the desert sands of Saudi and UAE etc are not great for concrete, but we do have a near infinite supply of material that can be made into sand.  Eg you can crush rocks down to a particle size / shape for use in concrete.

Source: thats what Im doing now.

We are not running out of sand for concrete, but maybe cheap naturally occurring sand in the right shape? dunno, but whatever the issue, its localized.  Its a big world.


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

[User] ELI5: Why do people see Vladimir Putin as controversial/a bad guy?

[Assistant]
Putin has consistently acted very aggressively towards opponents and neighbours; sometimes even breaking international law.

You can imagine having a very aggressive neighbor, who has several times thrown eggs at your neighbors houses. When questioned, he denies that he did it, and blames you.  When his son is caught with a carton of eggs in front of someone's house, putin first denies the accusation, and later claims that the son was acting alone, and that house looks better with egg on it anyway. Sometimes he even moves his fence and takes some of the other neighbor's land!
At the weekly neighborhood meetings, everyone gets angry with putin, but they cannot kick him off the block because he is on the board for the neighborhood committee.


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

[User] eli5 Why does pot make you hungry?

[Assistant] It makes you produce a hormone called ghrelin (gr-eh-len) that is normally released when you are hungry. It also increases the sensations of taste and smell, making food even more ~~appetizing~~ appealing.


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

[User] ELI5: why animals can eat each other raw easily, but if we humans do the same, we get into trouble?(as in poisoning, death, viruses etc)

[Assistant]
There are a lot of connected reasons people and other animals do what they do.

Other animals literally cannot cook their food. So they don't really have the choice. And they absolutely do get parasites and viruses from their meals.

Once humans figured it out, our guts got used to cooked meat. Even then, humans can still eat raw meat and be perfectly fine. But most people don't need to do that.

But in addition to that, modern meat farming and processing introduces some different disease vectors that aren't really present in wild hunted animals, because wild cows and chickens didn't hang out in enclosed spaces.


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

[User]
I'm interested in the social sciences (political science, sociology, social psychology, etc.) but get the impression that all the social science fields are very competitive without great career prospects for many PhD graduates. Is this true, or are certain fields/specialties exceptions?

I have an undergraduate degree in Anthropology and a MA in International Political Affairs with several research methods courses. I'm potentially interested in applying for further study but I'm now in my mid-30s and don't want to stop earning money for further studies that I'd regret in the end. For awhile I was thinking I was most interested in studying dialogue around gender and politics online, the way different online communities form and how that influences politics, but the more research I do it seems there are already lots of people studying these issues and I'm not sure how much demand there is for more of this work, realistically. I'm wondering what the job prospects are like for all of the fields I named above, along with other social sciences (since in my experience I've been interested in fields across the social science category)?

[Assistant]
Currently in sociology and studying a very similar topic.

Don't. Unless you get into a top 5 (not even top 10 anymore really) department dont bet on getting a job. And if youre not doing quant work its even worse.


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

[User]
Trying to reverse engineer POST requests, how do I 'catch' them?

I can see the response in Developer tools, but I can't see the POST request being sent.

Do I really need to MITM myself to see this?

[Assistant] You should be able to see the contents of POST requests in dev tools. Assuming you're talking about Chrome, under the "Headers" tab of the request detail, there should be a section "Request Payload" which contains the request body.


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

[User]
Is the Earth's rotation, and its orbit around the Sun, influenced at all by the Magnus effect?

I was reading up on external ballistics in order to brush up my understanding of how spin-stabilized projectiles fly through the atmosphere, and I noticed there is plenty of mention of the Magnus effect.

After reading a little bit about it, I wondered if our planet experiences similar changes in its spin and trajectory because of the Magnus effect.  I eventually arrived at the Wikipedia article describing the Magnus effect, and it briefly mentioned its relation to astronomy.  So, it got me thinking;

Is the Magnus effect used at all to calculate, describe, or predict the trajectory of our planet as it rotates, and orbits the Sun?  Is it influential enough to have an effect on the planet's axial tilt, or any other peculiarity in motion our planet has relative to the Sun or the stars?  Do other concepts relating to external ballistics, such as the Etvs effect, play significant roles in our planet's motion relative to the Sun or the stars?

For disclosure, I should mention that I have only a basic understanding of the concepts I have mentioned.

[Assistant] The magnus effect requires that an object be in a medium. Since the earth is in space, there is no surrounding fluid for this to happen in. You could think about the sparse gas in the solar system, but there is no way that is dense enough to allow for a magnus effect on the earth.


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

[User]
[DnD] Can we turn a lich's ability to resurrect itself against it?

My friends and I recently fought and defeated the evil lich Larry. Unfortunately the lich didn't go down easily, one of our companions was killed and we want to make Larry suffer for what he did!

We have the lich's phylactery in our possession and I'm thinking that we should be able to exploit this. There's a large, active volcano nearby, what would happen if we suspended the phylactery on a (magically reinforced) chain over the middle of the vent? Larry the Lich reforms within a few feet of the phylactery, falls into lava and is destroyed. Repeat forever, maybe sell tickets to people who want to see. What could possibly go wrong? To my knowledge liches don't possess any inate ability to fly, right?

If this doesn't work, is there anything else we can do? What about just burying it? What happens when a lich is brought back by the phylactery buried 100 feet underground?

[Assistant]
He can teleport, become invulnerable, or shift planes.

In the time it takes him to fall he can, kill/disintegrate you.

Falling into the lava will not instantly kill him, giving him plenty of time to escape and wreak havoc on you.


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

[User] ELI5: Why does caffeine sometimes not work in keeping you awake?

[Assistant]
Your brain is filled with keyholes, adenosine is the key that fits to tell you you're tired.

Caffeine has the same shape as this key and fills the keyholes instead, so your body never gets sleepy signals.

If the adenosine has already gotten in the hole, the fake key (caffeine) can't bind.

When you first wake up caffeine is mostly working by causing a small adrenaline boost, same with that 2pm coffee.


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

[User]
CMV: Communism doesnt work

Ive seen a growing trend especially among the younger generation that seem to love the ideology of communism, socialism and marxism. I fear that forms of social media have brainwashed them into believing capitalism is bad and it only benefits the economic elite.

Dont get me wrong there a range of negatives that capitalism brings into society, but the main positive comes in the form of innovation, communism stops innovation. If no one could benefit from financial gain, then technological advancements wouldnt be widespread as they are today, in western settlements. I think its safe to say we wouldnt be living with most of the things we take for granted today if capitalism was replaced with communism say 100 years ago.

[Assistant] You may be confusing what the younger folks believe. A lot of them believe in Socialism in the sense of social equity and a safety net like the nordics, not communism. However in a lot of US right wing media socialism is exactly the same as communism, which is wrong.


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

[User]
[DC/Marvel] Given that the Avengers and Justice League both regularly fight dictators like Black Adam and Doctor Doom, what's stopping them from deposing other totalitarian regimes like in North Korea?

Is it because those two have superpowers and Kim Jong-un and Gaddafi don't? Would they intervene if it was found that Latveria or Kahndaq sold them high tech weapons or magical artifacts?

[Assistant]
Doctor Doom is the rightful ruler of Latveria. The Avengers and Shield only intervened in Latveria only when Doom schemes results in him invading other countries like Wakanda to steal their resources or tech.

Black Adam overthrew the government of Kahndaq and ruled with an iron fist.

The other countries were a result of human action, not by superhuman action. Therefore, outside the jurisdiction of both the Avengers and Justice League.


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

[User] [Star Trek/DS9] Why the hell do the Bajorans keep Odo around after the end of the occupation? Isn't he basically a fascist collaborator?

[Assistant]
Because he was lawful, able to maintain Order.  He was not corrupt and the Bajoran Government was in transition.  They didn't need more chaos.  Kinda like what happened to Tallyrand in France.  He had both an indispensable skill and impeccable character.  He kept   Deep Space Nine together.  He simply had the respect of both Bajorans and Cardassians.

So replacing him is more trouble than it's worth.


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

[User]
[Doctor Who] Which Doctor is in the lead for temporal paradoxes caused?

Eleven has caused at least two Bootstrap Paradoxes, by inventing both pasta and the quadricycle using prior knowledge of pasta and the quadricycle, and of course, there are episodes devoted to paradoxes, but which Doctor has caused the most?

[Assistant] Taking the extended universe into account, then probably the Eighth. A version of him founds the organisation Faction Paradox - a ritualistic time-travelling guerilla cult who thrive on paradoxes - and leads them, taking the title of Grandfather Paradox himself.


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

[User]
ELI5: Why do humans laugh? How did it originate and for what purpose?

How did laughing develop among early hominids, and what purpose does it serve now, sociologically and biologically?

[Assistant]
Chimps grin and snuffle as submissive expressions or when they're nervous. It's likely our ancestors had something similar going on, which over time became a response to humour, as opposed to tension. We still find awkwardness and tension very effective as components of humour, and the 'nervous laugh' is a trope for a reason.

The response to tickling, for instance, is instinctive and submissive. It's a mock attack, and our first experience of it is generally at the hands of our big giant pack-leader parents. As we develop, it's a mock fight with familiar people; think of how you'd react if your girlfriend/boyfriend tickled you, and then think how you'd react if a stranger randomly started doing the same thing. Again here, laughter grows out of a defence/submission instinct. Being tickled is not, of itself, particularly funny.

Much as words drift semantically, social mores can grow and develop. A shared response to tension becomes a more intimate expression of solidarity. That's why we find things funnier in groups, too. Think of how often you laugh at a funny TV show when on your own versus how often you'd laugh at the same show when watching it with friends.


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

[User] ELI5: How come if fat is stored up excess energy, why can't heavier people do more athletic activities than skinnier people?

[Assistant]
Two reasons:

1. fat is long-term storage, which means it is used to slowly release energy when you are low on food, not quickly release energy when you are doing exercise.
2. fat is heavy, moving heavy objects is hard

EDIT: heavy in the sense of: you carry around like 20+ kg on you if you are fat, not in the sense of "dense"


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

[User] If the testes are on the outside of the body because they need to be at a temperature lower than the body temperature, how come men living in deserts or other hot climates aren't sterile?

[Assistant] Sweaty balls. In hot climates your balls can still be lower than body temperature because sweaty balls. Your surface temperature can drop lower than body temperature with the cooling effects of sweat. Hotter balls do result in lower fertility though.


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

[User]
ELI5: Car crash specialists, mechanics, etc.: Is it true that after some types of collisions, a car will never be the same again? Is there really such a thing as damage that cannot be fixed?

You hear every now and then about cars that were involved in some colisions that would not be suitable for repair, or owners complaining that their cars were "never the same again".  Apart from the obvious economic reasons (fixing it would be more expensive than buying another car), why is it that some types of damages are beyond the possibility of repair?  Isn't anything fixable?

[Assistant]
Yes. Imagine you break a stick and then put pieces back together with duct tape. Is repaired stick same as new? Of course not. It's the same with auto parts. They are prepared to deform in specific ways during collision but they only can deform once. During that process internal bonds between atoms inside part are broken,  rearranged, moved and twisted. And you can't put them back in place, just like you can't make crumpled paper look pristine again after straightening. Even if part is straightened and looks OK visually, it's broken inside and won't perform OK.

Edit: it's especially important for parts that are designed as crumple zones during collisions. Crumpling is way to dissipate energy during collision. But part that was crumpled and straightened won't dissipate energy at all-it will just get back to previous, broken shape. That means other parts of the car - like passengers - would have to get that energy on themselves...


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

[User] [Pokemon Anime]Could Ash have won the Kanto League if Charizard listened to him in the final battle?

[Assistant]
Doubt it. That was the round of 16; still the round of 8, final four, and final rounds to go. In addition,Ash was still a very inexperienced trainer. Even with Charizard's obedience solved he would probably run into someone stronger and more experienced than him. We may never know, though.

In the original series he still made beginner's mistakes like not knowing the types tables--that goes poorly for him in a tournament setting.


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

[User]
CMV: Thanos plan would basically accomplish nothing

So I've seen lots of people talk about Thanos plan to kill half the population and most arguments around it makes it sound like his solution is immoral, but might still work.

But the thing is, he basically accomplished nothing. Human population growth is exponential. 50 years ago the human population was half of what it is today! So at best he delayed everything for 50 years at the cost if 3.5 billion lives! That has got to be the worst deal imaginable!

What's even worse is that he killed half of all **life**. That's right. He also killed **half of the food**. So not only did he halve the population, he put them at the exact spot point in terms of resource scarcity.

Thanos plan was utterly stupid in every single way with 0 redeeming qualities. CMV.

[Assistant]
I think the big slip up people have when analyzing his plan is assuming its coming from a place of logic.

It isnt.

Remember his backstory? He pitched the same plan that he uses when he conquers a planet to his homeworld originally, and saw everyone on his home planet die off when they rejected him. He virtually has confirmation bias combined with his survivors guilt that form his messiah complex and mission. Because of that, he can create whatever logic he wants to justify the horrible things hes seen doing in pursuit of it.

Thats the thing about his plans and the logic behind them. Its never *supposed* to accomplish anything, because its based on the same emotion that Thanos claims to be above in the movies. To Thanos, hes just trying to prove his theory was right to the ghosts of his fellow Titans.


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

[User] [Star Wars] Would Galen Marek and Ashoka Tano get along?

[Assistant]
No.

Ahsoka is a career jedi, no matter how much she tries to deny it, and is a selfless hero.

Starkiller is a tykebmob with a chip on his shoulder who was molded into a living weapon, and only really turned on his masters after they repeatedly stabbed him in the back. Literally. While he ultimately did turn a new leaf in life, it wasn't out of kindness of his heart, but because of him growing attached to people and fearing to lose them. Ultimately, all problems encountered by Starkiller are resolved with staggering amount of violence.


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

[User]
How are tunnels maintained? How do are they kept from collapsing over time?

If a tunnel cracks then how is it fixed? Do they have to be repaired from above?

[Assistant]
The arch shaped crown of a tunnel matches the shape of the stress pattern induced naturally by a cavity within the ground, so a tunnel tends to be stable other than for spalling of small chunks from the roof.  Spalling causes progressive deterioration of the tunnel, and needs to be controlled, such as with bricks, cast concrete, reinforced shotcrete or other tunnel liner system.  A tunnel through hard, strong, weathering-resistant and unfractured bedrock might not need to be lined.

Cracks alone do not hurt a liner system;  cracks normally occur in most concrete and brickwork due to shrinkage or during local stress redistribution.  However, physical displacement of cracked portions of the liner would be a more serious symptom.

The other main purpose of a tunnel liner system is to control groundwater seepage.  Some liners include a drainage layer that conducts seepage down to drains near the floor.  A crack that occasionally drips would likely be considered normal.  A crack that is spraying or gushing groundwater into the tunnel would become problematic due to erosion and serviceability issues.

Cracks can be repaired by low-pressure grouting of cement mortar into the cavity behind the liner, with care to avoid interfering with drainage.  Another method is to bolt steel plates onto the cracked liner.  However, a liner that is merely cracked (but not displaced) might well be stable and functioning in a satisfactory manner in accordance with its design.  Tunnels should be routinely inspected by a tunnelling engineer.