post_title
stringlengths 5
304
| post_text
stringlengths 0
37.5k
| post_scores
int64 15
83.1k
| comment_text
stringlengths 200
9.61k
| comment_score
int64 10
43.3k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
[Pokémon] What is the devastation from which the Rocket Team want to protect the world and to denounce the evils of truth and love?
| 18 |
Team rocket don't actually want to protect the world. We can see that with it's leader giovanni , when leading team rainbow rocket he leads the joined forces of other villains of the series from other world's where they have won. Each owning a legendary pokemon which caused destruction plus Lysandre's ultimate weapon. So if anything they would want to cause more destruction and gain from it.
Also Jessie and James messed up the motto.
| 19 |
|
[General horror] How to pick a Final Girl/Guy
|
Hi, everybody. How are you all doing?
As a hideously deformed monster who was raised in a root cellar by his possibly insane grandmother, I was thinking I’d spend my summer stalking a random group of generically attractive high school seniors, brutally murdering them one by one in various creative ways – possibly involving farm equipment, I haven’t quite worked out the details yet.
Obviously my hideous spree of carnage will end when one of the last couple of survivors, ideally a wholesome yet emotionally troubled youngster who has managed to overcome past trauma in order to survive the horrors I have perpetrated, finally gets lucky, discovers my weakness (hint: there were no mirrors in the root cellar), turns the tables, and kills me.
But there’s a problem. Modern youth culture isn’t something I’m exactly in touch with, and I'm not sure how best to pick out which of the teenagers I should be stalking and menacing, but not actually killing until all the others are either dead or injured. I mean, according to grandma (who was kind of old-fashioned about stuff in general, and especially sex stuff), it should be a beautiful virgin, but that seems weird and sexist and all kinds of gross to me. Plus these days, at least if the media are to be believed, the odds of *any* of them being virgins are pretty slim.
So what kind of qualities should I be looking for in the teenagers while I'm watching them from the woods, following them to their cars, hiding in their attics, etc? What behaviors would mark somebody out as having the necessary qualities to be my Final Girl (or guy. I mean, I'd prefer a girl because I'm an old-fashioned kind of freak of nature at heart, but I don't want to narrow the field unnecessarily).
I don’t want to suddenly find I've dismembered the one member of the group with the right combination of moral purity and personal courage to finally end my reign of terror, but I also don’t want to hold back on the brutal slaughter of his or her less likable, but undeniably more interesting, friends.
| 114 |
It might be hard to spot, but pick The one that has The biggest potential for self growth. That way, you will make them discover their own badassery and will to live, and If you both survive this, it will make The next time you meet that much more intressting, when this battled harden survivor must try and protect The next group from your attacks, which will most likely take place is a asylum. People dont want helpless virgins saved by luck anymore, they want heros that stand victorious against The odds! It also gives you The opportunity, as a monster, to improve yourself and push your limits. If you are lucky, you and your newfound nemesis will get locked in a cycle of battle and growth, which just makes both of you more and more powerful.
No, dont find a virign, find a Ripley.
| 67 |
The idea of getting a sex change is ridiculous. CMV
|
Gender isn't a real thing. There are human beings with penises, and human beings with vaginas. The whole idea of boy/girl and man/woman is just a product of gender roles and stereotypes. You can't be a man (person with a penis) and "feel" like a woman simply because you like to shop and play with barbies and wear dresses. You can't be a woman (person with a vagina) and "feel" like a man just because you like sports and beer. It doesn't make sense.
While these people deserve to be treated equally, just like anyone else, I think it's insane to get a sex change operation just because you don't conform with societies idea of a man or a woman. Yes, there may be difficulties, such as discrimination or finding a partner, but that's something that you just have to deal with. To me, it seems like the equivalent of a black man getting surgery to become white because he is discriminated against/wants to be with a white woman who does not want him because he is black.
I think getting a sex change is extreme conformity, something that these people advocate against. Because they don't agree with the way society portrays their gender, they change their anatomy to match the one society says they should have. These same people preach that conformity is bad and it's okay to be different. If it's okay to be different, why do you feel the need to get a sex change? I don't hate them, I just cannot agree with or understand their ideals at all. If someone could better explain to me the reasoning behind a sex change, and help me see it in a better light, then please do so.
Edit: I'm going to give a final round of ∆'s to the people who gave the most helpful answers. I'll be honest, I wasn't aware of the fact that trans people do in fact have differences in their brain function. Some other good points have been brought up, so my view has been changed for the most part. It's kind of led me to a different view which is probably more controversial than this one, but my view has been changed nonetheless. I can't keep up with the responses anymore so I'm gonna be leaving the thread now. Thank you to everyone who responded!
| 42 |
People don't get SRS to conform or to have people view them differently. They get it so they can feel whole. Look the concept of being trans and the dysphoria and discomfort that goes with it is difficult to understand without being trans, but seriously, they do it to feel whole and comfortable with their body.
| 36 |
There is a news alert in my city that ozone levels are predicted to be dangerously high this afternoon. How are ozone levels predicted for a particular day and place?
| 417 |
Almost all ozone near ground level is formed by reactions happening in the atmosphere. The most common pathway is for NOx gasses (NO or NO2), mostly produced by vehicles, to react with volitile organic compounds (VOCs) coming from a variety of sources. That reaction needs energy from sunlight, so a high ozone concentration is predictable if there are high NOx and VOC levels, and a sunny day is predicted.
There's some more complexities involving atmospheric temperature dynamics, but those tend to be more seasonal.
| 121 |
|
ELI5: How wine is made.
|
Also, is making champagne much different?
| 31 |
Yeast is the real secret. It's used in a lot of things, and it loves to eat sugars. When it eats sugar, it poops out alcohol and burps carbon dioxide. Some kinds of yeast make more carbon dioxide and some make more alcohol. The kind in bread makes mostly carbon dioxide and that's what makes bread rise. The kind in wine makes a lot of alcohol. The kind they use to make beer is in between (usually).
To make wine, they take grapes (which have sugar in them naturally) and crush them up to get the juice out. Then they add high alcohol yeast to the juice and let it go to town. The yeast turns the sugar into alcohol and you have wine. If you let the yeast eat sugar until the alcohol concentration is high and it kills them (the same way hand sanitizer kills germs) and then bottle it you get wine. If you have a yeast that can stand a lot of alcohol before it dies and bottle it when the yeast hasn't eaten all the sugar you end up with sugar in the bottle with yeast. The yeast left in the bottle eats the sugar left in the bottle and their carbon dioxide burps carbonate it giving you champagne.
| 19 |
Is a twin born through in vitro fertilization more likely to give birth to twins?
|
As I understand it, twins are more likely to have more twins. Does this hold true if the twin was a twin because of in vitro?
| 53 |
In a word, no.
There are two kinds of twins. Identical and fraternal (non-identical).
Identical twins form from one fertilised egg. So two babuea from one egg. We dont know why this happens in most cases, but the chances of it happening are uniform across populations.
Non identical twins are the result of two eggs being fertilised. This can be because the mother has released more than one egg at ovulation, which has a genetic factor. Women with non identical twins in the family and older mothers have a higher % of this happening.
This is the most common cause of multiples in IVF. But in this case it is artificial, rather than the mother releasing multiple eggs, multiple fertilised eggs are implanted to,increase the chance of taking. So any female children concieved, would not inherit the genes for multuple egg release unless the mother had it.
| 41 |
[Star Wars] Why don't more Jedi wear armor in battle?
|
I mean robes are really stylish, and traditional, but there have been times in the galaxy when the Jedi are forced to go to war. Why don't more of them opt for armor, especially the lightweight variety that does not hinder their movement or agility while providing protection against explosions and blaster fire?
I noticed that Obi Wan once wore modified clone trooper armor in one battle in the Clone Wars, but why didn't more choose this option?
| 42 |
Some did, especially during the Clone Wars, but you gotta remember that Jedi are primarily peacekeepers, and aren't warriors. Their primary purpose when traveling to a conflict is to defuse that situation. Showing up in full battle rattle isn't a great way to convey peaceful intentions (even if it might seem most practical at the time), and honestly, the Jedi have little need of it. Most situations they get into can be resolved through negotiation, the Force, or a lightsaber. The only time it would really be practical is when they are in a serious war zone where they are constantly under attack from numerous types of threats, like shrapnel, where armor would be most prudent, and even then many don't wear it out of preference.
So, in reality, there's no real need for them to do so outside of extreme circumstances, unless they want to.
| 66 |
[Full Metal Alchemist] Can Edward just transmute his body to be bigger or to regrow his body parts?
|
As I understand the problem with human transmutation is the whole value of a soul problem; but if that's the case you don't need to even touch your soul to grow your legs out a bit or put a new hand on your stump. So why do that instead of the whole automail thing?
| 24 |
Amestris alchemy science flatly doesn't cover the transmutation of flesh, and research into chimeras is pretty much top-secret military branch of state alchemy.
Maybe if this happened in Xing, where alchemy took a different turn in development, it would be possible to somewhat alleviate the plight of amputees, but Amestris has to go with automails, unfortunately.
| 41 |
ELI5:How southwest airlines is relatively inexpensive and lets bags fly free without bankrupting the company
| 33 |
Southwest does not have the frills of other airlines. Think peanuts as opposed to meals. Also they do a good job of controlling fuel costs through a hedging program. Basically fuel hedging means that they buy fuel in advance when prices are low. Sometimes they do buy high and get burned when fuel prices drop, but generally they do a good job of figuring out when to buy fuel before costs go up. Fuel is a huge cost for an airline. Also, they have not had much in terms of labor disputes. Although they are heavily unionized, they treat their employees positively and can negotiate wages and benefits successfully.
| 23 |
|
[Comics & Manga] If Spiderman gained the Speed Force, considering his Spider Sense, would he pretty much be untouchable?
|
Also, how would a Spider Sense + Speed Force combination compare to Mastered Ultra Instinct (DBS), in terms of how untouchable they'd be?
| 25 |
Assuming speed equalized, Spider-Flash *would* be pretty much untouchable, but he'd still be inferior to MUI in a straight fight. Spider-sense is defensive and focuses on avoiding danger, while MUI is both defense and offense. They'd start off similar when defending, but the MUI user would dodge in ways that gave him an offensive advantage and help end the fight faster, while the Spider-sense user would be dodging in ways that maximize his safety and would have to do the offensive part on his own.
(Edit: to put it more simply: Spider-Sense lets you predict attacks and automatically avoid them. MUI lets you predict attacks and automatically give the *perfect response* to them. Spider-Flash only wins if Speed Force is so much faster that there's literally *nothing* the MUI user can do to defend himself. With speed equalized, MUI beats Spider-Flash.)
*However*, MUI appears to be a straight physical power up, while Speed Force breaks physics. A non-jobbing Spider-Flash could, eg, time travel to erase a MUI user from history.
| 22 |
[Dr. Strange/MCU] In this universe do sacred texts from various cultures contain contradictions?
|
The Ancient One proposes to Dr. Strange that individual methods of understanding the mind, the body, etc., taken from different explanations of reality, are only each of them a single piece to the same puzzle. This is fine, but I want to know if this strategy of thinking forces in-universe characters to overcome contradictions in their thinking, or if the methods of interpretation these characters use somehow lie in a place where contradiction doesn't matte or occur?
Thanks
| 24 |
Of course there are contradictions. There always are.
I like this exchange to explain it:
Strange: That doesn’t make any sense.
The Ancient One: Not everything does. Not everything has to. Your intellect has taken you far in life, but it will take you no further.
| 24 |
How do needlers work in the Halo universe?
|
I thought they exploded once they reached a point higher than a certain mass, but they're kept in the gun in pretty large quantities already, and in Halo Wars there are gigantic turrets that shoot massive ones at aircraft. I'm also pretty confused how they travel at such a low speed while remaining aloft and turning almost 90 degrees.
| 28 |
The projectiles are probably organic. It would explain how they steer and control themselves in flight and how they are able to identify a foe target and detonate when necessary. The crystals could also contain a form of plasma energy that requires several to explode, but has to be "armed" by moving at a high speed. Or is armed in flight like a 40mm grenade.
| 17 |
I believe murder is justifiable if there are no possible negative effects on society. CMV
|
First of all, please note that my argument is purely theoretical, due to the fact that the positives and negatives of any action are never clear. I would never condone murder, simply because it cannot be known if any negative effects are to follow.
That being said, I would like to construct a possible scenario. There exists a homeless person in a major city; this person has no friends, no family alive, and nobody depends on this person or cares for this person. This person does nothing to contribute to society or any individual, he merely exists. Given this situation, I would think that the murder of this person is entirely justifiable, based on the idea that his/her death will have no negative effects on any person or on society.
I don't even see this as a negative for the person- if the death is instant and painless the person will never even know what happened. In death you can't bemoan your lack of life or regret the things you never did, because you're dead. So I don't see this as a negative for the individual in question. Another issue: what if this person had gone on to make a positive impact on society in the future? I think it's equally likely that this person could have gone on to make a negative impact on society, in which case you would be doing the world a favor. I get that murder is simply morally wrong to basically everybody, but logically I see nothing wrong with the murder of the individual I've described.
Just to clarify, I really don't mean for this to sound cold-blooded. When I've brought this up to friends they've mostly just responded with disgust or disapproval. However, nobody has really offered a counterargument to my view. So, CMV.
| 15 |
There are two separate threads of logic going on here.
thread 1:
If no one is affected by this person's death then this person doesn't matter
thread 2: This person doesn't matter to themself.
Thread 2 is completely indefensible. People who think like this kill themselves. Therefore for any person who has not yet killed themself, the odds are statistically speaking extremely high that they do not want to kill themself. Who are you (or who is any theoretical killer) to decide for them? If it doesn't matter what **their** wishes are, then there is not even a reason to consider [thread 1] because you have already decided that what people's wishes are are irrelevant when you decide that a person's wish to live is irrelevant. Then what you are left with is the postulate that it is okay to kill any person at any time, no matter who is affected because people's wishes are irrelevant.
Besides that, you have no way to know if there is or is not a afterlife. You can't definitively say whether or not dead people have an opportunity to bemoan their lack of life.
| 15 |
ELI5: If your whole body is hot under the blankets at night, how does sticking one leg out from under the blankets reduce body temperature enough to make you comfortable again?
| 592 |
One leg has a decent amount of surface area that it can cool down when it's exposed to the cooler air.
If you're wondering why one leg doesn't get cold while the rest of you stays warm, that would be blood flow. The leg and the blood in it cool down, and the cooler blood circulates through your whole body, bringing the temperature down.
Kind of like opening one window in a warm room - the cool air that comes in the window can flow through the whole room and lower the temperature a bit.
| 489 |
|
Why are UHF TV antennas (almost) always loop antennas, vs. VHF antennas which are usually whip antennas?
| 179 |
The length of an antenna is related to the wavelength of the signal it is meant to receive, typically some fraction (1/2 or 1/4). UHF wavelengths are less than a meter, so loop antennas (antennae?) work fine. VHF wavelengths are longer, 1m - 10m, so they need longer antennas.
There is math involved, so someone else will have to get into that.
| 56 |
|
[General] What universe is the easiest (or most difficult) to start as a low rank and work your way to a commendable rank?
|
For example, in FMA universe, everyone can learn alchemy but it'd take years of studying to do it. So, if I was an ordinary person, I'd take a few months to years to practice alchemy and get the hang of it, then a few more years to hone my skill. Depending on how difficult it is, I may or may not reach the required skill to become a state alchemist however.
Another example can be Konosuba. Register at the guild, pray you have a decent class, do quests (push through the low supply of low level quests) or do other objectives that can help progress you if you have an adventurer class (same class as Kazuma), level up, get stronger. Of course you aren't immortal in this world, but I guess as long as you get into the good side of the goddesses, you'll keep on reincarnating
I'd imagine universes currently in war or medieval eras would be one of the more difficult ones due to the lack of powers or plot armor to save you.
| 39 |
I'd probably go with the Warhammer 40k universe for hardest. The casualty rate for "guys at the bottom" is so high you'd have a better chance of winning the lottery at the exact second you got struck by lightning than surviving, much less advancing all the way to the top.
| 39 |
[ELI5] why do spiders tend to build webs in the same places when they get destroyed every day?
|
For some more context, I park my car under a pine tree every day. Every morning when I leave for work there's always a couple of spiderwebs going from my car to the tree. Naturally I destroy them. Why do spiders keep insisting on building webs in places when they're consistently being destroyed?
| 337 |
During the time right before dawn to right after dawn, nocturnal insects head in to sleep, while diurnal insects wake up and head out to do... insect things. Spiders often set their webs to catch this transitioning prey.
After the sun has risen, the spider has gotten all the food he expects to catch from this web, has had a good meal, and has stashed any extra in a safe place.
Now you come along and destroy his webs. No big thing, mealtime is over, he's well fed and happy.
Next night, he spins his web to catch another breakfast.
tl;dr: Spider has gotten use out of it, it's a good spot, so doesn't care if it got destroyed during the day.
| 332 |
ELI5: Prime numbers and encryption. When you take two prime numbers and multiply them together you get a resulting number which is the “public key”. How come we can’t just find all possible prime number combos and their outputs to quickly figure out the inputs for public keys?
| 7,899 |
The number of all possible prime number combos is simply too large.
Public key encryption relies on asymmetric mathematical operations - operations that take much, much longer to perform in one direction than the other.
Prime factorization is one of those. 12503 and 16187 are both prime numbers. If we multiply them - something you can do manually in less than a minute and in nanoseconds on a computer - we get 202,386,061.
Now try to factor that number without knowing what the prime factors are. The most basic method - a sieve - involves just running through prime numbers from 2 to the square root of your number and seeing if there are divisors.
The number of prime numbers less than 12503 is approximately 12503 / ln(12503) = 1325. So to factor our number, you'd need to do 1325 divisions vs. 1 multiplication to create it in the first place.
Moreover, as you create larger and larger numbers, this disparity between time-to-encode and time-to-decode grows without limit. No matter how large of a prime you pick to start, you'll never need more than a single multiplication - but you'll need an increasing number of divisions the larger the number goes.
Note: There are ways to make prime factorization more efficient, the sieve is just the easiest to explain.
| 6,756 |
|
Will I generate more power if I focus sunlight with a magnifying glass onto a solar panel?
| 111 |
If your magnifying glass is bigger than your solar panel you will get more power. The lens would collect over a larger area than what the panel is able to do on its own.
However there is a couple of things to consider. First the solar panels efficiency drops with temperature. So usually a 2m^2 panel would produce more power than a 2m^2 lens focusing light on a smaller panel. Moreover panels have a maximum operating temperature before the semi-conductor stops to work.
| 81 |
|
[Star Wars] When did the bounty hunter profession get turned into being a hitman/assassin?
|
Boba Fett in ESB seems to be the correct usage of the bounty hunting profession. He was hired by someone (an actual authority if you want to get technical) to bring in a criminal. He fulfilled his contract, he got paid.
When did this turn into these ideas of Boba Fett icing tons of people, scalping Wookies, disintegrating people left and right, and being a cold, ruthless killer? That's not a bounty hunter at that point, it's a hitman/assassin. Especially Jango Fett, who was hired to kill a senator.
And in the Clone Wars, bounty hunters do everything. They steal holocrons, kidnap politicians and children, protect villages, deliver cargo...like what in the world is the definition of a bounty hunter in Star Wars??
Or does it just mean something entirely different in the galaxy far, far away. I don't speak Basic.
| 27 |
A bounty hunter is really just someone who finds/receives open contracts and tries to fulfill them while working as little as possible. The galaxy's most infamous bounty hunter probably had informant networks in almost every system that would give him lists of the best bounties. That way he could execute multiple bounties on each leg of every trip in order to make the most money. He would probably have one huge but risky contract from the empire and many smaller hits/intimidation jobs from other crime syndicates, corrupt politicians, oligarchs, and whoever else had money going at the same time.
In conclusion, Boba Fett was not only a bad ass motherfucker, but a savvy small business owner.
| 27 |
ELI5: what makes ankle joints withstand age-related wear and tear, comparatively speaking?
|
Hip replacement surgeries are commonplace, especially due to age-related damage. But ankle joints don’t seem to suffer the same amount of damage / require replacing as much as either hips (or knees) do, despite being smaller and more delicate constructions. What in the construction of ankles makes them more resilient than other weight-bearing joints?
| 22 |
The magic of the ankle biomechanics is more-so in the synergy it has with the foot than simply the ankle itself. The ankle-foot complex (AFC) is an extremely intricate & complex structure with a high concentration of bones and muscles, connected by very supportive and flexible Connective Tissue (Tendons, ligaments, fascia).
With the AFC being the first load-Bearing system of the body, we expect these Connective tissues to be far more responsive and adaptable to the stressors imposed from our body and the changing terrain. While the hips may have stronger ligaments than the ankle, the ankle has an uncanny ability to adapt to the changing environment because of the foots ability to evenly distribute the load evenly before sending the force upstream.
Summing this up, the Ankles ability to alter its compliance based on the terrain it’s interacting with may cause it be more resilient to the less compliant hip joint.
| 10 |
[2001: A Space Odyssey] Why wasn't the crew of the Discover briefed about TMA-2? Why brief HAL, but not the crew?
|
I don't understand. I can see the need for secrecy prior to launching the Discovery mission, but to keep it secret the entire time?
I mean, HAL really didn't need to know about it until they got to Jupiter/Saturn either... or they all could have learned about it.
| 15 |
They were juat the pilots and didn't need to know about it. The plan was for them to go into hibernation once Jupiter (Saturn in the book) was reached, and for the science team who had been briefed to wake up until it was time to go back.
| 10 |
CMV: Laws should be strictly enforced
|
If there's a law on the books and someone is discovered to be breaking that law, it should be strictly enforced. That doesn't mean a police state where we have cameras everywhere to catch everyone, but it does mean that we shouldn't "de-prioritize" crimes or let people off with a warning.
If a crime is a burden on the police department or the civil courts, then the legislature should change the law. If the penalties are too severe, then change the penalties. If you want to give people some leeway, then create a formal warning system where everyone is warned equally.
The problem with selective or de-prioritized enforcement is that it's unfair to citizens that continue to follow the law. It's also unfair to the small number of people who police choose to arrest or ticket. De-prioritization is also not a clear set of standards. It means that you can still be arrested or ticketed, but probably won't be. Laws should be clear and consistently applied to everyone.
| 40 |
I think even well designed legislation will run into hurdles where common sense needs to prevail. For example, it is unlawful in New York City to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. This makes sense, since NY sidewalks are quite heavily used by pedestrians and bicycles pose very real hazards to pedestrians.
However, it is obviously the case that we want to allow some people to cycle on the sidewalk. For example, a young kid with training wheels and their parent supervising should be able to use the sidewalk to cycle, and indeed it would be *way* more dangerous for them to be cycling in the street where it's legal.
But you can't write every exception like this into the law, and sometimes you just need to use common sense to decline to enforce laws in particular ways when those ways make no sense.
| 34 |
CMV: Opinions can be wrong, and wrong opinions should be unacceptable.
|
In other words, having an opinion does not make that opinion valid. You can be *of the opinion* that a square is not a rectangle; yet, a square is, in fact, a rectangle, whether you think so or not.
Of course, the waters get a little muddier with more complex and controversial issues where reasonable cases can be made for multiple sides. But the point is that opinions in contradiction with evidence or reason can be provably incorrect or invalid.
Additionally, such opinions shouldn't be given a free pass just because they're opinions. Opinions based on cherry-picked evidence, poor reasoning, or *nothing at all* can lead to the people that hold them making bad decisions that have bad consequences. Say, for example, that *in your opinion,* drinking heavily while driving is okay. Then you get in your car, get on a highway, drink heavily, and smash headlong into another car, killing not only yourself but several others.
I should say that I think discourse is very important and opinions shouldn't wantonly be declared "wrong," but it shouldn't be okay to stare right at evidence or logic and deny it under the guise of "everyone is entitled to their opinion."
It may be your opinion, but it's a bad one. Just because you *can* have it doesn't mean you *should.*
So, then, should I have this opinion? Is this opinion wrong? I'm interested in seeing what other people think.
| 26 |
No, you cannot be of the "opinion" that a square is not a rectangle, because that is a statement of fact, not subjective opinion. It has an objective answer. In the same way, you cannot be of the "opinion" that 2+2=5. That isn't an opinion. It's just being wrong about something.
On the other hand, saying "drinking and driving is okay" IS an opinion. It is a moral statement that people can disagree about. Your disagreement with that opinion is ALSO an opinion itself. Neither of you is "wrong" because you didn't make a statement of fact. You just disagree about something.
You can SUPPORT your opinion with actual right/wrong facts, like statistics involving drinking and driving, etc. But at the end, you are still expressing an opinion. The only thing that makes it a "good" opinion is someone else's opinion lining up with it. It is not objectively right or wrong.
| 25 |
[Harry Potter] How significant was Lord Voldemort's escapades to the wider wizarding world?
|
We know that the magical world exists beyond England and Hogwarts. I was wondering how much impact Voldemort had on the wider community?
Did they not 'speak his name' and feared him? Or was it something they read about in the news?
| 19 |
He was barely know outside of Britain and not much of a threat to outside powers. The big name that everyone feared was Grindelwald that supposedly conquered part of Europe.
Voldemort was just small fry and even thought as a rebel and a hero in other countries for fighting against the stagnating English wizard society.
| 15 |
ELI5: Why does concentrating on falling asleep keep you from actually falling asleep?
| 221 |
If your brain easily fell asleep when focused on a task you'd never succeed at any task related to staying alive and passing on your genes. We've evolved to stay conscious when actively trying to do something, even if that something is to fall asleep
| 95 |
|
[MCU What If] Why did Killmonger....? Spoilers
|
Why did Killmonger reactivate the drones? He already defeated them, and he had gained the trust of the Wakandans by deactivating them. What was the point in reactivation them inside the shield?
| 48 |
Simple. Bringing them the corpse of Klaue and swearing fealty to T'Chaka proved his loyalty. But fighting the drones and saving the queen and the Dora Milaje showed his heroism, thus guaranteeing that he, not Shuri, would become the Black Panther and T'chaka's heir apparent. Killmonger wants to be king so he can bring his revolution to the outside world.
| 88 |
[Star Wars] Why was Tatooine so diverse?
|
Tatooine seems to be a desolate planet mostly covered with deserts, yet as we saw at Mos Eisly it appears to hold countless races. Did Jabba the Hutt as a crime lord bring in a diverse cast? Or is Tatooine just weirdly diverse?
| 22 |
Well, you have to remember that Mos Eisley is a spaceport, so you are naturally going to attract a wide variety of individuals from various places. Yes, some of them work for Jabba, but many others were just traveling and were currently stopped at that port.
| 43 |
ELI5: Why do we spell the country as 'Philippines' but the language as 'Filipino'?
|
So why are they spelt differently?
'Filipino' also describes the people, culture, cuisine etc.
| 305 |
Philippines is an old English name of the country. It was a Spanish colony, the Spanish name for the country is Islas Filipinas. Then the people of the Philippines decided to choose a new language to become the national language. They chose a language called Tagalog. Tagalog called the Philippines the same way as Spahish.
Subsequently they decided to rename Tagalog to Filipino to highlight its role as a national language. And English just borrowed the name.
| 107 |
Why does hair change as you age? ie in colour, curly to straight...
|
When I was younger I had straight blond hair. Now I have completely different curly ginger hair with the opposite texture. I have heard of hair going straight to curly, but not so much the other way round. Why is this?
https://imgur.com/a/2y6ec
Me for reference!
Edit: Front page! Thanks for all your insightful responses, I've enjoyed reading them.
| 2,859 |
Part of this is due to the changes in hormonal balance and the length you keep your hair. As you age the hormone levels in your body will change impacting your hair texture and sometimes the color. There are other environmental effect other than length as well. For example, humidity will increase the curl potential of your hair as it increases, etc.
| 1,053 |
When did the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) pass through the visible light spectrum? If we had been around at that time, would it have been bright enough to see it?
| 17 |
At its inception it would have been visible. During the early moments of the Universe it was still immensely hot, so hot that the atoms around where always ionized as a plasma. Plasmas are incredibly opaque because with the electrons and nuclei separated they can absorb a wide range of photon energies, whereas when confined in a neutral atom only photon energies that excite an electron to one of a small number of specific energy level will be absorbed.
At that time the entire universe glowed, everywhere in every direction because everything was hot. But the light from that glow didn't travel very far due to the opacity of plasma. But eventually at about 377,000 years old the Universe reached a tipping point where it finally cooled enough for neutral atoms to be able to form and stick around, which caused the Universe to become transparent fairly suddenly.
Now here's one of the little weird parts that might be hard to wrap your head around. When you look into space you're looking back in time, so when you see the cosmic background radiation from this era you are actually seeing the hot, dense plasma of the past through the transparent veil of the recombined atoms of the early Universe. Or, put another way you could imagine all the light bouncing around the early Universe when it was in its plasma stage and then the Universe suddenly going transparent and all the light that was in between being emitted and absorbed simply flying off in every direction from every point. Because of these conditions the "temperature" of this light must be very close to the temperature at which Hydrogen atoms (which dominated the early Universe) ionize, which is right around 3000 Kelvin.
If you happened to be magically transported to the Universe at that age and could see this light it would look mostly white with a slight yellow/orange tinge, similar to an incandescent light bulb. And it would be incredibly bright, the entire sky would look nearly as bright as a star, if Earth popped into existence there it would melt quite promptly (the entire sky would be bathed in 3000 K light, so everything in the Universe would settle to becoming that temperature).
However, at this period of time the Universe was expanding very rapidly so it didn't take long, by astronomical measurements, for it to cool off significantly. This is because as the Universe expanded the relative speed between any given part of the Universe and the sphere of points corresponding to the date and location where the big bang glow was still visible became larger, so that light became "red shifted", effectively cooling it to lower and lower temperatures. Another way to look at this is to imagine that you have a quantity of energy in photons in the Universe at the moment when it becomes transparent and then you stretch out the Universe, logically as you increase the volume the amount of photon energy in it must go down.
Anyway, today that once white-hot glow of superheated gas and plasma that filled the entire sky is now a very cold 2.7 K glow of mostly microwave radiation.
| 12 |
|
We are Leah Boustan and Ran Abramitzky, economics professors, and authors of *Streets of Gold* a book about immigration to the US, past and present. AMA!
|
Hi everyone! This is Ran Abramitzky from Stanford and Leah Boustan from Princeton. We are economics professors and economic historians. We recently published a book [Streets of Gold: America’s Untold Story of Immigrant Success](https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/ran-abramitzky/streets-of-gold/9781541797826/). [Proof](https://twitter.com/leah_boustan/status/1549397846247489536?s=20&t=57u_XPvV9-TBP_uQyip-oQ).
Immigration is one of the most fraught, and possibly most misunderstood, topics in American public life. [Streets of Gold](https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/ran-abramitzky/streets-of-gold/9781541797826/) uses big data and ten years of pioneering research to provide new evidence about the past and present of the American Dream.
Turning to the data provides a new take on American history with surprising results:
* **Upward Mobility**: Children of immigrants from nearly every country, especially those of poor immigrants, do better economically than children of U.S.-born residents – a pattern that has held for more than a century.
* **Rapid Assimilation**: Immigrants accused of lack of assimilation (such as Mexicans today and the Irish in the past) actually assimilate fastest.
* **Helps U.S. Born**: Closing the door to immigrants harms the economic prospects of the U.S.-born—the people politicians are trying to protect.
[Streets of Gold](https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/ran-abramitzky/streets-of-gold/9781541797826/) weaves together the data with powerful stories of immigrants from a century ago and today. In building historical data on immigrant lives, we acted like dedicated family genealogists – but millions of times over.
Happy to answer questions about immigration, past and present, or about our earlier work on the Israeli kibbutz (Ran) or the Great Black Migration (Leah). Also interested in your thoughts about US economic history more broadly, or about academia and career advice for younger scholars.
Ask Us Anything! We'll be collecting questions this morning and then start responding at 1pm Eastern/10am Pacific.
**Edit**: Ran and I have to log off at 3pm Eastern for another meeting. But we can come back later to check on any questions that are posted after we leave. Thanks for the great chat!
| 174 |
Given that the immigration suffers from the same issues as free trade (dispersed benefits and concentrated costs), it seems as if any real immigration reform is generally politically unpalpable to many voters. Are there any ways to mitigate those costs?
It's usually noted that within specific cities there are neighborhoods that immigrants tend to flock to (koreatown in LA, Ukrainian village in Chicago, Flushing in NY), is there any research that describes *how* these areas get chosen? Or even higher level which parts of the US they might tend to move to?
| 20 |
[Injustice League] They want to plan an all-out attack against the Justice League. Which hero do they need to plan the most contingencies against in order to have the highest success rate possible?
| 24 |
Plasticman. You wouldn't think so, but he's immune to telepathy, practically immortal, nigh-indestructible, and completely unpredictable. And that's if you get the *nice* Plasticman.
Superman you can hit with a kryptonite rod from orbit. Martian Manhunter can be taken down with a flare gun and a box of Oreos. Hit Wonder Woman hard enough and she breaks. Set up some wire ahead of time and the Flash will know what it feels like to run through a blender. Hawk-people can't fly if you clip their wings. Ring-people run out of juice eventually. Green Arrow is vulnerable to STDs. Zatanna has daddy issues. Batman is tricky, but only because you need to catch him by surprise. He probably has a million contingency plans, but this is a guy that regularly deals with fucking clowns and riddles; you get enough villainous screenwriters to keep him busy with weird shit and he'll be out of your hair for weeks, maybe months.
| 45 |
|
[Megamind] How did Hal not immediately kill Megamind?
|
So, Hal was granted with ALL of Metroman's superpowers right? Later on in the movie we see Metroman just casually walk around the entire city Quicksilver style in less than a millisecond. It was established that Metroman could have easily taken out/killed Megamind if he wanted to. What's stopping Hal from doing the same?
| 59 |
Could be that he's simply unaware that he can move that fast.
Hal was trained in how to use his powers by Megamind and he only found out that Metroman could move that fast when Metroman told him and Roxy.
| 100 |
ELI5: What is torque?
| 1,968 |
Alright so the easiest way to get the concept of torque is to look at a loooooong pole. This pole has a certain mass and nothing will necessarily change that. However if you hold it at the center you'll notice that it is incredibly easy to balance. Now try to hold that rod at the way end while also trying to keep it balanced: this is much harder especially with a very long rod. Alternatively look at an open door. First try to open the door way at the end where the handle is: pretty easy right? Now open the door from the way base of it close to the hinge. Notice the difference in force you have to exert to shut the door? That is the torque or the rotational force of an object which gets increasingly powerful the further it is from its center or hinge.
| 1,924 |
|
[Dragonball Z] If you were in Babidi's position, how would you control Majin Buu (in his fat form)?
|
It seems that Babidi made major mistakes in controlling Majin Buu by being a insufferable prick to him. How would you avoid making his mistakes, and if you were in his position, how would you get Majin Buu under your control?
| 30 |
Just be nice to him. Buu is basically a child, with a childlike mentality. It was shown with Hercule that so long as you are just a friend to him he's more than willing to listen to you and curb his more destructive impulses. Babidi's issue with Buu is the same issue he had with anyone; he was a destructive prick who was just using Buu as a tool, he didn't actually care about their "relationship" so long as Buu got shit done. He was a bad boss.
| 42 |
[Superman] How would Superman's story play out if he was Black and had landed in the US during the 1930's?
| 45 |
Probably *pretty* badly.
There was a similar-ish situation in Gods and Monsters (which is a pretty neat animated DC thing) where the superman of that universe, son of Zod, crash-lands and is taken in by an illegal immigrant family. He gets a different taste of Earth and it's people, what with all the living in humiliating, crushing poverty and being harassed by border patrol agents.
A big part of what makes Kal El the upstanding moral figure that he is, is the family and the experiences he had. Red Son's a good illustration of that. He's raised in the Soviet Union during the height/depths of Stalin's reign, so he's a big believer in Soviet values.
Baby Kal El is just that. A baby. He'd be shaped by his upbringing and his experiences the same as anyone else. Odds are that if he was taken in by a relatively decent family, he'd be a force against the rot of the American South and probably an enemy of the state for his actions, not that anyone could really do anything to stop him.
| 80 |
|
Are hemp plastics structurally distinct from petroleum-based plastics?
|
A friend the other day tried to tell me that hemp-based plastics are superior because they're biodegradable, but I don't know that I believe that. After all, it is still plastic... right?
| 99 |
"Plastic" is a term that describes a material that uses polymers as the main component. This covers an absolutely huge range of chemical structures, giving plastics a wide variety of properties. Hemp-based plastics, AFAIK, are cellulose-based, so they are absolutely biodegradable. Petroleum-based polymers include things like polyethylene and polystyrene, which are very inert and not biodegradable.
From a chemistry perspective, they are completely structurally distinct materials.
| 120 |
CMV:Using crazy parts of the Bible as an argument as to why it bad is a bad argument
|
_____
Note: I'm not Christian
A lot of times people point out very crazy things that the Bible says as to why the bible is bad. However a lot of people fail to point out that the bible is very old and has been translated a million times. Ever translated something a million times using Google Translate. It come out something different. The general idea is right but part are way off. Same with the bible. The general idea is right but some part are off. Is there something off to this logic or is there something i'm missing about the bible?
EDIT: And now my internet is going crazy.
| 58 |
Then all you're doing is cherry picking "Well that crazy thing they said was bad translation, but all the good stuff was translated correctly" . So either what's in the bible is true or it's all false. So if you argue against the crazy stuff saying "This book is no good for these reasons (from the book)" they have to either defend that crazy or deny the legitimacy of the whole document, lose-lose.
| 58 |
ELI5: Why do I get motion sickness when I'm in the car not driving but don't get motion sickness when I'm driving?
|
EDIT: Thanks for the explanation guys. I get motion-sickness very easily and I found driving to be a way to get around that while in the car.
| 32 |
When you are doing the driving your brain and body know ahead of time what movements be will occurring before they actually happen, like turning, braking, and accelerating.
When you are a passenger, you are kinda like a rag doll being tossed about.
| 24 |
If most of neutrinos were created during the big bang and neutrinos move faster than other matter, wouldn't big-bang-neutrinos be too far away to interact with?
|
Is it: because the universe is not expanding from a center, then big bang neutrinos are coming from all directions, not in an "outward direction" from some center?
Much of my confusion might result from a misunderstanding of the big bang, and assuming neutrinos travel linearly in space.
| 70 |
>Is it: because the universe is not expanding from a center, then big bang neutrinos are coming from all directions, not in an "outward direction" from some center?
That's it!
The Big Bang happened *everywhere*. It wasn't an explosion from a single central point that we can point to and say, "there it was."
| 29 |
CMV: Any free market, given enough time, will inevitably end up destroying itself.
|
Following a great discussion with u/joopface, I'll downgrade 'inevitable' to 'likely to inevitable, depending on specific sector and length of time'! (Can you tell I still hate markets?) Thanks for the discussion all, I'm going for the bike ride I wanted to take an hour ago :')
​
So, first things first, this is CMV, not "let's have a political shit-flinging contest in the comments," so please save us both the time and energy and don't throw stuff like "what are you, a commie?" or "if you hate freedom so much, why don't you go live in North Korea?" at me. I would *really* appreciate some insightful comments and actual debate about this topic.
​
So, to the actual point: from what I understand of politics and economics (though that division is rather arbitrary), any free market has a built-in self-destruct mechanism inherent to its construction. I think it's best explained with an example. I'm going to make assumptions that are as charitable for the pro-market stance as possible. I'm generalizing as much as possible here to show it's not, in my view, a problem with any specific market, but markets in general.
Let's assume we have a given market for an arbitrary good. In this market, there are an arbitrary number of producers with an arbitrary amount of starting capital each to bring their good to the market with. Let's be as generous as possible and say that the starting capital of each producer is identical to that of others, and they have no unique advantages like connections with investors or such, so there's a perfectly level playing ground. This is the Platonic ideal of a free market: just a producer, a demand, and a desire to make as much money as possible by supplying that demand as optimally as possible.
Now, the process of buying and selling goods obviously happens in real time, but let's simplify a bit to make it easier to understand and look at it in years.
In the first year, some producers will have made better investment decisions with their starting capital, had better ideas on how to offer the good to consumers, or just been plain lucky. They'll have made some profits. Hooray! Conversely, some producers will have made worse decisions, had worse ideas, or just were at the wrong place at the wrong time, and they've gone bust. Oh well, them's the shakes, that's how markets work. Let's see what happens in the next year.
Naturally, producers will want to make *more* money this year than they did last year. And what luck, the 'winners' of last year have the profits to reinvest into their enterprise, and offer more goods, cheaper goods, better goods, or any combination thereof! This in turn makes them more likely to make profits, so they are more likely to be able to survive into the next year *and* are more likely to have a bigger amount of money to reinvest into increasing next year's profits! All the while, customers keep getting better service, better goods, more goods, and cheaper goods, while the 'bad' producers exit the market and have to find something else to do. (Almost) everyone wins!
Now, fast forward a couple years. A couple decades, maybe. Every year, those that won had more capital to reinvest and expand, they became less likely to fall out of the market, and they kept producing more, better, and cheaper. But we're hitting a point where improving your good becomes prohibitively expensive - not impossible, perhaps not even unprofitable, but it's no longer the most optimal way to increase revenue.
If offering a better good isn't the best way to make more money, what is? Simple. Monopolization.
Having amassed a large amount of capital over the years they've been in business, the 'winning' companies can now start to engage in practices like price wars, cartelization with the other 'winners', massive advertisement campaigns their smaller competitors can't hope to keep up with, or just flat-out buy out their opponents. This not only forces consumers to buy the goods from fewer producers and thus makes them more likely to buy them from you, it also reduces the risk of your company losing its dominant position to some upstart with a far superior version of the good than yours - they can't sell they revolutionary take on the good being sold and push you out of the business if they get undercut out of the market immediately upon entering it, after all! With fewer and fewer competitors and a higher and higher bar for entering the market, we end up with a monopoly, or (more likely) an oligopoly. Not only do they no longer seek to provide a superior goods, they're likely to want to start offering *worse* goods, since hey, where else are they gonna buy your good? Might as well start cutting some corners to save on expenses. Sic semper mercatis.
Now then, you might think we can solve this by regulating the market - antitrust regulation, banning anti-competitive practices, IP law, et cetera. The problem here is that eventually, companies will have amassed the necessarry capital from legitimate business to start lawyering and lobbying against these laws, allowing them to roll back the regulations preventing them from increasing their profits by destroying the market. I've already written a behemoth of an argument here, so I'll keep it short by saying that regulations are a temporary band-aid and not a cure, and if you want an expanded take on that argument I'd highly recommend Douglass C. North's *Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance*. He doesn't explicitly make the argument as above, but he does explain how at a certain point it can become more efficiently profitable to push the boundaries of legality than it is to optimize your production within said boundaries.
And all of the above is with ***extremely*** generous assumptions, both explicit (a truly free market) and implicit (companies actually bother to abide by the laws set for them and only change them legally instead of just fucking doing illegal shit and bribing politicians to get a slap-on-the-wrist fine when they get caught). If we take a look at the real world - Amazon, Uber Eats, Tencent, you name it - the situation is significantly less charitable towards markets being functional over any long enough timespan than I have been.
TL;DR once you have 'won' in a free market you no longer benefit from said market being free and I do not see how any free market can exist without eventually destroying itself. CMV.
| 239 |
>Not only do they no longer seek to provide a superior goods, they're likely to want to start offering worse goods, since hey, where else are they gonna buy your good? Might as well start cutting some corners to save on expenses. Sic semper mercatis.
You've been correct up until this point, however the thing you missed is in a free market at this point new competitors start to appear offering a superior product and break into the market and then the existing companies that started to cut corners either end up slowly rotting away and get replaced or get their shit together and improve their product to destroy their competition.
The issue actually comes through regulation that makes the buy in to start a small business simply too expensive to bother.
| 90 |
[The Hunger Games trilogy] I am the Head Gamemaker for the 100th Hunger Games, AKA the fourth Quarter Quell. How would you guys feel about this addition to this year’s 100th Hunger Games?
|
Greetings ladies and gentleman. I’m Claudius Trajan, Head Gamemaker of the Hunger Games for the past few years now. Next year will be the 100th Hunger Games and the fourth Quarter Quell, an excellent time in celebration of our decisive victory over the Rebels in both the Dark Days and Second Rebellion. The 100th Hunger Games will truly be a special one. That is why I am going to try something new, something that no other Head Gamemakers have ever done before: introduce **firearms** as a weapon in the arena. Yes, it’s insane. This sounds weird I know. You might say “that breaks with tradition” or “it’d be too easy”. But hear me out.
Obviously if everyone had a gun, the QQ would end way too quickly and it’d be boring since everyone would have an equal shot (pun intended) at winning. Scrawny, barely-fed 12 year old Timmy from District 11 could easily shoot and kill a strong and extremely athletic 18 year old Jimmy from District 2 (who’s training to be a proud and noble Peacekeeper). So instead, here’s the twist to the twist: **the guns themselves are extremely rare** and **the guns aren’t going to be at the cornucopia**.
When the tributes run for the cornucopia, they’re not going to find a single firearm there. Instead, they’ll find some ammo (I’ll touch more on this later) and the guns themselves are scattered throughout the arena. It’ll essentially be a normal start to a typical Hunger Games with the blood bath and everything. They’re free to pick up whatever they want from the cornucopia or run away but after that, if they want to shoot guns, it’s up to them to find both the guns and appropriate ammo. And there will absolutely not be enough guns to arm every single tribute. There will be I’d say 12 individual firearms of varying calibers and types. Of those 12, four are rifles of some sort (e.g. an M16A4, M4A1, C7, and AK-74), four are pistols (e.g. a Glock 19, Beretta M9, 1911, SIG P230), and four are shotguns (e.g. a Benelli M4, Mossberg 500, Remington Model 11, and Winchester Model 1912). Again, **every single gun is scattered throughout the arena**. It’s up to the tributes to find them on their own. The thing is though, one gun from each group above is purposefully rigged so that it either jams, explodes, or is otherwise inoperable.
But then I know some of you are probably thinking “if they have ammo and the gun(s), then what’s stopping them from just killing everyone unopposed and going home?”. That’s exactly why **25% of all of the ammo is rigged in some way**. Those 25% could do anything from being blanks, jamming the gun, and/or up to and including blowing up in people’s faces/destroying their gun. The ammo is also separate from the guns themselves and they’re also scattered around the arena (the cornucopia will only have like maybe 150-175 rounds in total) except the guns will only have a small token amount of rounds to give the finder some sense of safetysnd security (so if Molly stumbles upon a Benelli M4, she’s not going to find any ammo save for like maybe four or five shells at most that’s just enough to give her some sense of safety and security).
Somewhere on the guns themselves, an extremely bright and reflective paint will also be painted on them. For example, the M16’s muzzle could be coated with this extremely bright and reflective paint that’s able to be seen from VERY far away. This gives unarmed or outgunned tributes a fighting chance while also giving some pros and cons to the tribute wielding the gun. You can’t scratch the paint off and even on a bright sunny day you can still clearly see it. You can try and camouflage it with dirt and stuff but it’ll still be visible.
| 18 |
The people are going to be unhappy, they will root for a crowd favourite and that crowd favourite gets randomly blown up? Right after receiving a parcel of support goodies? You are gonna lose your job man.
| 30 |
CMV: Schools should start at a time that allows them to get out 15-30 minutes after the average worker is done with work
|
The average high school starts between 7:45am and 8:15am, and releases between 3:00pm and 3:30pm. This is wrong for a lot of reasons, but I think that the focus should be more on the release time than the time that kids get to school. A lot of the articles I've seen that critique the start and dismissal times focus on the start times because kids need that extra hour or two in the morning to sleep.
1. School is functionally child care for a lot of families, especially as kids get older. Currently, the child care requires parents to arrange for a ride for their kids 2 hours before most people are even packing up their offices for the day.
2. Time and time again, [studies](https://www.washington.edu/news/2018/12/12/high-school-start-times-study/) [show](https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-later-school-start-time-gave-small-boost-to-grades-but-big-boost-to-sleep-new-study-finds/) [that](https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/shpps/pdf/shpps-508-final_101315.pdf) [sleep](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6430a1.htm?s_cid=mm6430a1_w) is increased with later start times.
3. Kids getting out of school 2 hours earlier than most adults gives them an unrealistic view of the amount of time they have outside of their job when they reach the workforce.
4. Kids having two hours of separation from their parents after school lets them get into all sorts of shenanigans. I'm a big fan of shenanigans on an individual level and got into lots of them as a teen but it's bad policy on a governmental level. We shouldn't base our government policies on what is most fun, but on what keeps people most safe and leads to the least conflict.
5. Getting students a good dinner is important. So is giving students a good breakfast, but [most studies show that kids don't eat breakfast even with a free option](https://www.sph.umn.edu/news/grab-go-carts-increase-breakfast-consumption-among-rural-teens/#:~:text=When%20it%20comes%20to%20teenagers,all%20days%20of%20the%20week). Beyond that, dinner is important as well, [maybe even more important than breakfast](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181126-is-breakfast-good-for-your-health#:~:text=through%20the%20roof.-,While%20it%20seems%20breakfast%20is%20the%20most%20important%20meal%20of,our%20blood%20sugar%20is%20worst).
Therefore, it would be better to have school start whenever allows it to get out around 5:15 or 5:30 even, to give parents the ability to get to their kids school for pickup time.
| 727 |
>Therefore, it would be better to have school start whenever allows it to get out around 5:15 or 5:30 even, to give parents the ability to get to their kids school for pickup time.
But you have the same problem on the front end, then. The school day is not as long as the work day.
So, either kids are going to be home after school without adult supervision, or at home before school without adult supervision (and with the added responsibility of getting themselves to school on time).
| 408 |
ELI5: Why can’t Drs lubricate or cushion your joints to cure arthritis?
|
I’ve seen some operations where they replace joints like the hips completely, why not some car tiles he replacement to cure it?
| 17 |
They can and it is a simple in office procedure that many orthopedic offices do offer. It’s an injection called Joint Fluid Therapy. The problem is that they haven’t found a lubricant that lasts, so the procedure is more of a relief from the pain/ a way to delay the need for a joint replacement.
| 23 |
[Bojack Horseman] Where did the "horseshoe" come from?
|
Horses have hands with fingers and feet with toes just like everyone else. So why are horseshoes made out to be something special, and why are they shaped like some kind of half-ring that would never fit on any horse's foot?
| 53 |
Horseshoes are for playing Pitch. How else would you play Pitch? They aren't literally shoes for horses that is ridiculous. Horses wear Adidas, Nike, and other typical brands. It's like how foxgloves are flowers, not something foxes wear and crows feet are wrinkles, not literally feet on your face.
| 61 |
CMV: the age of adulthood should be the same for all rights and responsibilities, and all restrictions thereof
|
It is my view that the inconsistency in the way we treat the age of adulthood (for the purposes of administering people's rights and responsibilities) is causing undue harm in society, both due to collateral damage of allowing people too young to engage in risky activities, and due to the pervasive acceptance of blatantly irrational and inconsistent policy distracting us from the real issues while we get bogged down in debating different age restrictions for different activities.
There is a massive 10-year period (ages 15-25, approximately) during which a person in the United States is considered somewhere in between a totally dependent and incompetent (legally speaking) minor, and a fully competent and independent adult.
I'm interested in changing my view particularly because of the gun control debate. Raising the age requirement to purchase a gun to at least age 21 universally at the federal level seems like one of the most common-sense and uncontroversial reforms we could potentially make. However, considering this policy makes me uneasy in relation to our other age-related policies.
Guns aren't the only thing that's potentially dangerous. A car can harm and kill a lot of people too (remember Waukesha? 6 dead and over 60 injured, by an attack using an SUV at a Christmas parade). And that's just one of the intentional attacks; fatal traffic accidents remain among the leading causes of death in the US - higher than gun homicides in most years. And young drivers are disproportionately involved in traffic accidents. Yet we let kids operate these killing-machines-on-wheels provisionally with a permit at age 15, and fully licensed unrestricted at 16. Why?
The ballot box can be harmful too. Your vote matters; it can be the difference between economic prosperity and poverty for millions of people, between expanding civil rights and restricting them, between peace and chaos. In the extreme case, your vote can have consequences even more harmful than any single weapon, if your vote enables the rise of authoritarian tyranny and oppression.
We let people vote at 18, along with the majority of other "adult" rights and responsibilities - right to do what you want with your body (tattoos, donate blood, get married), responsibility to do jury duty, draft eligibility (for males), ability to be legally bound by contracts, etc.
However, despite holding that people are not competent do do all these things until 18, in many states people are considered legally competent adults for the purposes of consenting to sex at age 16 or 17. How can I consent to share my body with another person in sex if I cannot consent to be bound by a legal contract, or to pledge to use body to serve my country in the military?
And despite being considered a full legal adult in most ways at age 18, especially in terms of your responsibilities to society (jury duty, the draft, taxes, etc.), some rights are still restricted for several more years. No drugs or alcohol until 21. Potentially no right to keep and bear arms. You can't rent a car or hotel room in some places until age 25.
If anything, age 25 is the most "rational" place to set the age of adulthood, because [neuroscience research has found](https://www.inverse.com/article/33753-brain-changes-health-25-quarter-life-crisis-neurology) that the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for executive decision making (risk management) is not fully developed until 25. That's a big part of why young people are so heavily disproportionately involved in traffic accidents, in violent crimes, and other incidents involving risky behavior.
I'm on the fence whether I would actually support fully raising the age for everything to 25, but still...if we don't believe a person is mature enough to wield a firearm or consume alcohol responsibly until age 21+...why the hell would we let them get behind the wheel of a car or vote? It doesn't make sense to me that these age limits are different. Driving and voting are just as potentially harmful to society as drinking or owning a gun, so it feels weird to talk \*only\* about raising the age requirement to buy a gun and not any of these other potentially deleterious activities.
I just wish there was more consistency. It's really tiring and distracting having to debate and defend these issues with people on a case by case basis. If we just agreed "okay, nobody is considered a fully responsible adult until age x" and all rights and responsibilities kick in at that age, and not a day before or after, we would be better off. CMV
| 1,030 |
Why is consistency an inherent good? Sure cars are dangerous but that's hardly enough similarity to say they must be treated the same as guns, just because guns are also dangerous. These things should be treated differently because they are different.
| 307 |
ELI5: What makes cleaning/sanitizing alcohol different from drinking alcohol? When distilleries switch from making vodka to making sanitizer, what are doing differently?
| 12,019 |
CAUTION: Ethanol that is sold for cleaning has been denatured, i.e. made poisonous to drink. It is pretty close to impossible to purify denatured alcohol to make it safe for drinking. Isopropanol (rubbing alcohol) is also sometimes used for cleaning, but it is also toxic. Ethanol for drinking has been distilled or fermented from plant sources.
A distillery could easily switch from vodka to sanitizer by making sure the percent ethanol is high enough (above 60% or 120 proof) and adding one of the many solvents that is used to denature ethanol.
Retired organic chemist here.
| 6,642 |
|
CMV: People should not be able to purchase soda with SNAP benefits
|
The idea of SNAP is to supplement nutrition, but soda has no nutritional value. A candy bar would at least offer satiation for a short period of time, soda won't even do that. Soda barely, if at all, can even be defined as a food. Google definition for food: \*" any nutritious substance that people or animals eat or drink or that plants absorb in order to maintain life and growth. "\*
​
Some people living in a "food desert" isn't relevant when it comes to soda. It'd be better for them to have nothing at all rather than soda. There is no practical scenario in which a person would need soda (every day) because there isn't any water around.
​
If one thinks the government shouldn't tell people what they can and cannot purchase with money provided by the government, then why restrict cigarettes or tobacco?
​
I don't believe this is a matter of offering people dignity. But even if it were, drinking multiple sodas a day isn't going to help a person be more dignified in the long term.
​
If there are "some sodas" which may offer nutritional value isn't enough reason to me to just allow all types of sodas to be purchased. Also if energy drinks and sports drinks are just as bad isn't relevant either.
​
I don't see a slippery slope issue here either. The line is just "it needs to offer nutritional value"; which soda does not, therefore it should not be eligible for SNAP purchases.
| 31 |
The problem is with how items are restricted/categorized by the government.
Soda has a nutrition facts label. It is considered a food by the FDA. If it is considered a food (has nutrition facts), it is eligible to be purchased with SNAP benefits. End of story, no debate to be had.
The other side of this is that things which are far more healthy than many of these things considered 'foods' (meal replacements shakes/bars, protein powders that could hell fill out breakfasts, Ensure type shakes, etc) don't have a nutrition facts label. They have a supplement label. Are these things actually healthy/good use of money? Debatable, but they are a far sight better than soda and chips.
The way the US government defines 'food' is what needs fixed, and it's just not going to happen.
Past that:
If you go the route of excluding things more specifically, every existing product has to be reviewed. Every new flavor stemming from these existing products has to be reviewed. Every new brand, every minor formula change.
You can't just say 'no soda' because then why are sunny d, Hawaiian punch, and kool aid ok? You have to find the breaking point of 'does this meet the cut?' If none of those do, what about fruit juice cocktails? Probably not. Well then, what about fruit juice with additional sweetener? Also probably not. But fruit juice itself isn't great either. So ok, no, nix all sugary beverages.
Oh. Coffee only has minimal nutritional value too. No coffee or coffee drinks. And tea. Why would tea be okay?
Let's just... Only water and milk then! Those are the only beverages that are SNAP eligible! Waittttt! Hold up! Soy milk? Chocolate milk? What about coconut cream for cooking? Sweetened condensed milk in the baking aisle?
It is just not possible to actually limit by item without massive issues and debate that will never actually end long enough for such a reform to happen. Recategorizing is more feasible, but also, lobbyists and debate.
| 26 |
CMV: Solving a Rubik's cube in the fewest moves is far a more impressive intellectual feat than solving it quickly
|
I will preface this by saying that I have nothing against speedcubing and speedcubers. It is highly impressive that people can solve scrambled cubes in a matter of seconds, and I respect all those who dedicate their lives to mastering the art of solving them quickly. There is no denying that it takes a huge amount of training, skill, and manual dexterity to become a competitive speedcuber.
That being said, I believe that being able to solve any given permutation of the cube in the fewest moves is a far more impressive intellectual feat (and one that should be valued more in competitions). Speedcubers are fast because they can recognise patterns quickly and are able to apply memorised algorithms. This takes a lot of practice, but is ultimately a question of experience. As you become more familiar with different permutations of the cube, you develop a 'feel' for which algorithms to apply and can rapidly execute them as a result.
On the other hand, I am under the impression that fewest-move solves are much more difficult to master, since there are no fixed 'solving methods' for any given arrangement of the cube. It becomes an exercise in trying to develop your own algorithms on the fly so as to minimise the number of moves you will need, as opposed to an exercise in quickly applying algorithms that you have already memorised. In a sense this makes it more like solving a Rubik's cube 'au naturel' - without having read up on algorithms at all - a task that very few would be able to accomplish. In my view this makes it much more intellectually stimulating and challenging than speedsolving, and is why I believe that fewest-move solves should be the centrepiece of Rubik's cube competitions. CMV.
EDIT: I've just woken up and have received a tremendous number of replies, from cubers and non-cubers alike. Thank you all for your input; I've really enjoyed reading your replies even though I haven't had the chance to respond to all of them. The replies I have received from those experienced in both events have been the most enlightening. I gather it looks like I'm underestimating the amount of algorithmic thought required for fewest move count solves and oversimplifying the process of speedsolving. I'm not sure I've reversed my opinion just yet but it does give me something to think about. I also no longer think there is a valid basis for valuing what is perceived to be the more 'intellectual' event in cubing competitions.
| 2,731 |
If you tell five experienced cubers to solve a cube as quickly as possible, then you have one obvious winner at the end. That guy looks impressive and spectators are entertained.
If you all give five experienced cubers a Rubik's cube in the same order with infinite time to think, then they'll all give you a solution with the same number of solution steps. So then how do you determine who has won? It's also not really exciting from a spectator standpoint to see five guys think really hard for an hour and then all come up with equally good solutions.
| 757 |
[Marvel Universe] Why isn't the Purple Man (Zebediah Killgrave) one of the most powerful villains in the world?
|
Killgrave has the ability to control most people through his pheromones. Basically, people are obligated to do anything he asks, as long as he's physically near them. He could easily talk his way into the upper ranks of every government and superhero allegiance in the world. So why doesn't he?
| 91 |
Because he is in fact literally a purple man who needs to be present for his powers to work. He's easy to spot and his powers are defeated by anyone with an oxygen mask. His influence wears of pretty quickly once he leaves.
All in all it means he's pretty easily defeated when people realize what he's doing, which is hard to hide considering his identity isn't much of a secret and his appearance is hard to hide.
He's much more suited to staying hidden and using his powers for smaller misdeeds. Like a criminal kingpin.
| 115 |
[Fantasy] What's the difference between a golem and an elemental?
|
They're often depicted as two different things in fantasy, but they both basically hulking masses of earth right?
| 17 |
A golem is animated earth where an elemental is the spirit of [insert element here]. Elementals are completely natural things and can be manifestations of earth, water, air, fire, and possibly other elements. Golems must be created and are commonly done by either ancient druidic cultures to protect an area or by accident through leaking magic.
| 37 |
ELI5 How do the medicines like paracetamol or ibuprofen work? Do they help the brain by making it ignore the pain (suppressing) or by actually fighting the cause of pain?
| 38 |
Ibuprofen works by stopping an enzyme from creating chemicals called prostaglandins that can cause pain and inflammation. Paracetamol does that a little bit too in your brain, but we don't completely know how it works.
| 36 |
|
[Death Note] Can the death note kill people with diseases that take a long time?
|
If there's a limit of about 20 days before the death note gets bored and defaults to heart attack does that mean that it's impossible to use illnesses that normally take longer? For example let's say that a 20 year old man's name is written in the death note and the cause of death is specified as dementia. Does that mean he'll just die of a heart attack or that his brain will just rapidly fall apart over the course of 20 days?
| 21 |
Death Note Rule 27:
> If you write, "die of disease" with a specific disease's name and the person's time of death, there must be a sufficient amount of time for the disease to progress. If the set time is too tight, the victim will die of a heart attack after 6 minutes and 40 seconds after completing the Death Note.
> If you write, "die of disease" for the cause of death, but only write a specific time of death without the actual name of disease, the human will die from an adequate disease. But the Death Note can only operate within 23 days (in the human calendar). This is called the 23 day rule.
Death Note Rule 28:
> If you write, "die of disease" like before with a specific disease's name, but without a specific time, if it takes more than 24 days for the human to die the 23 day rule will not take effect and the human will die at an adequate time depending on the disease.
> When rewriting the cause and/or details of death it must be done within 6 minutes and 40 seconds. You cannot change the victim's time of death, however soon it may be.
So if you specify the disease, they'll contract it right away, and killing them takes however long it normally would for that disease.
| 38 |
[Marvel] Has Deadpool ever sought an adamantium skeleton
|
Has he ever tried to find someone that could reproduce the bone coating process?
| 26 |
No, and he wouldn't.
First of all, Wade is a victim of the Weapon X program as much as Logan is. They lied to him, used him, and when he didn't turn out the way they wanted, he suffered horrible tortures at their hands and wasn't even allowed to die. Doubt he's going to sign up for more.
Second, he probably wouldn't survive. Deadpool actually has a stronger healing factor than Wolverine, even though he was given it from Wolverine's DNA - Adamantium is toxic, and while the invincible bones make Logan a deadlier combatant, he'd die if his healing factor wasn't constantly fighting off his own poisonous skeleton. That's why they can't go around just giving *anyone* adamantium skeletons - even if they could find a way to safely install it, it would kill the subject in short order. A part of Wolverine's healing is always dedicated to letting him survive his toxic bones, so it's weakened.
Deadpool on the other hand has cancer. Or *is* cancer at this point, basically 100% of his tissue is malignant, including his brain (explaining his madness). The healing factor has sort of merged with the cancer, so while he has infinite cell regrowth, well, not all cell growth is a good thing. That's what cancer *is* after all. His cells aren't just recovering from injury, he's in endless flux. Wade's body is a warzone. His healing factor protects him from the cancer, but also replaces everything with *more cancer*. It's not just a skin condition, every organ, bone, muscle, is in an endless battle with itself.
So let's just coat his bones in an indestructible, toxic metal, shall we? Either the poison will weaken his healing factor enough that the cancer will kill him, *or* the constant death and regrowth of cells, including bone cells, will now be encased in adamantium which will impede its shifting nature, and he'll exist in agony.
| 56 |
ELI5: How come sometimes when we look at words they look like they're spelled wrong even though they're not?
| 71 |
This is the phenomenon called “wordnesia”
It is a brain glitch where words don’t look like words. And sometimes become scrambled or you can’t understand what they mean or how they’re spelt.
Reading words is pretty much just on autopilot in your brain-so when you actually try to look at the words-and overlook at them-your brain gets a bit confused.
Like how driving becomes natural and actions eventually become automatic. Then when you think about driving, you suddenly can’t remember quite what to do.
| 42 |
|
[Star Wars/Rogue One] Did the Empire/First Order ever find out the Death Star I was sabotaged by Galen Erso? If yes, did they adjust the Second Death Star and/or Starkiller Base?
| 27 |
Yes.
The second Death Star improved on its predecessor's design by incorporating millions of millimeter-sized heat-dispersion tubes in place of the two-meter-wide thermal exhaust port exploited by the Rebel Alliance at the Battle of Yavin.
| 46 |
|
ELI5 What Calculus is, and what it's used for.
|
I've heard of it, and the most I understand is that it's advanced maths, insanely hard, and some of the stuff I learned at GCSE (Age 14) can be done much faster with it. Unfortunately, past age 15 (I'm now 22) I didn't learn any more maths - I did French, Spanish and Politics A Levels, and a degree in the same. I'm not asking to learn it, just wondering what the deal with it is.
| 59 |
Imagine someone is walking, but according to very strange rules. On their first step they travel one meter. Every step after that is then half the length of the previous step. That means the second step is 1/2 a meter, the third step is 1/4 a meter, then 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, etc.
It's not too hard to figure out how far the person has traveled after a certain number of steps. After 1 step, the person has traveled 1 meter. After two steps 1 1/2, three steps 1 3/4, four steps 1 7/8, and so on. With a little patience, you could figure out the distance for the 158273877629th step.
But what would happen if that person were to take an infinite number of steps? How far would he go? Would he go an infinite distance, or would he actually stop somewhere? This is the kind of thing calculus helps you figure out.
There is a *limit* to how far this strange walking man can travel if he adheres to these rules. In this case that limit is 2 meters. No matter how many steps he takes, he will never travel past 2 meters. Any finite number of steps he takes (i.e. any number like 5, 10 or 837626, no matter how big) he will be short of 2 meters by some amount, but once he takes an infinite number of steps he will "arrive" at 2 meters.
Normal math can't handle things like infinity very well. In many cases, where to get your answer you would have to add an infinite number of things, or divide by zero, calculus lets you get around this in clever ways, and it's all based on the idea of *limits*.
Let's call the number of steps the man takes "n", and the distance he has traveled "x". As the number of steps the man takes (n) increases (as n approaches infinity) the distance he has traveled gets closer to 2 (x approaches 2). If we put those mathy terms together we get, "As n approaches infinity, x approaches 2". This means the *limit* of x is 2. As long as n is finite, x is less than 2. If n becomes infinite, then x becomes 2.
| 27 |
ELI5: Why is different kind of beers served in different kinds of glasses?
|
I've always wondered if the different glasses actually effect the taste in any way, or if it's just a cultural thing.
| 23 |
Much the same reason wine is served in different glasses.
Glass shape and size changes how aromas are presented to your nose. Smell is a huge part in the taste of things. Hops is very aromatic and the type of beer has different volatile compounds from the type of yeast used in fermentation that affect the flavor and smell.
| 15 |
[Halo 2-3]How would the battle for Earth have played out if the Master Chief succeeded in assassinating Truth aboard the keyship?
| 26 |
Not sure if you're aware of the comic series *Halo: Uprising*, but there was a segment in the comic where the Chief had the Prophet in his ironsights with a Carbine. A sneaky Jackal stopped him and the Brutes almost killed the Chief.
But had the Chief successfully killed the Prophet, it would probably had a destructive consequence for Earth. In retribution for his death and figuring out that Earth was humanity's home world, they would have called for more reinforcements. And glassed the planet clean. Since Truth is dead, he wouldn't have ordered to go to the portal. The remaining Chieftains would have commenced the glassing process. Only with the arrival of the Elites would the human forces have a chance to retaliate. But Brutes, are, well brutes. Their savage nature would have ripped their numbers apart. They would have start to fight among one another as chieftains try to claim their place as the leader of the Covenant. With the arrival of the Elites, they would have been finished off or pushed away. Then they would have to destroy the portal.
| 24 |
|
CMV: Restaurants should list lettuce as an ingredient
|
I hate lettuce. I hate it so much.
I hate the texture and the taste, I hate how quickly it spoils, I hate how it ruins leftovers by turning yellow and slimy, and I hate how it is often used as a filler, and I hate how when it is shredded it is inpossible to pick out of what I am eating.
I will often go to a restaurant, and select my choice of burger/wrap/pita/taco/sandwich/other based on the ingredients listed. Many times I have selected an item that did *not* list lettuce as an ingredient, only to have ny order come with a big heaping pile of shredded lettuce.
Restaurants would never include unlisted meat or cheese ingredients due to dietary restrictions, so why is it okay to do the same with lettuce? I should not have to specify "no lettuce please" on an item that doesn't list lettuce as an ingredient.
I would even accept "all menu items come with lettuce" written somewhere clear on the menu, but again, this is not always the case.
Lastly, I want to reitterate that it should not be *assumed* that lettuce will come on a certain item. A meatball sub, for example, is usually (in my experience) made with no lettuce. And yet, every so often a restaurant will put lettuce on their meatball sub without specifying it on their menu, but all the other ingredients (meatballs, marinara, cheese) *are* listed.
This is wrong.
CMV!
| 35 |
>Restaurants would never include unlisted meat or cheese ingredients due to dietary restrictions
Due to allergy or potential religious conflicts*
>burger/wrap/pita/taco/sandwich/
Ever one of these it should be assumed that lettuce is a standard possibility.
| 18 |
CMV: Capitalism is a greedy killing machine and it's not okay.
|
The Left vs right politics war waged on humanitarian leaders by greedy elites (oil billionaires mainly) who need extensive therapy and mushrooms (and quite possibly a hug)
Let me explain
Mental health awareness is purposely suppressed in America because it's "bad for business". The more people that become aware of their own mental health and sense of self-worth, allowing themselves to focus on what they (and the rest of society) actually need to be doing for the betterment of ourselves and everyone around us, the less and less people are okay with scummy behaviour exhibited by greedy corporations, the big guys on top realize this and are now actively suppressing this stuff rather than just passively and it's time we did something about it.
Oil billionaires use radicalization to fund political wars so the big companies that can mass produce can sell resources for wars. This way all the misguided but intelligent greedy souls in need of therapy can stay rich and keep getting richer. They also use lobbyists to create bought-out congress members who can gear the country towards bailing them out and keeping them in power. Artificial intelligence is going to a world of terror in the name of Capitalism and I fear for our future.
| 28 |
In the past two centuries, capitalism has raised more people out of poverty and into middle class prosperity than any other system of economy. Yes, it is the worst system, except when you compare it to all the others.
| 69 |
ELI5: How does a Photon have momentum if it has no mass?
| 178 |
Because energy and momentum are proportional to each other.
Einstein's full equation is:
E^2 = m^2 c^4 + P^2 c^2
Note that if you simplify it for a non-moving particle, the second term goes away (P is momentum, and no movement means no momentum), you get:
E=mc^2
However, if you simplify for a particle with no mass, you get the following:
E=Pc
Because photons have energy, they therefore must have momentum.
Edit: This is just the math behind it, /u/corpuscle634 has a great explanation below.
| 134 |
|
How high would punitive damages have to be for it to no longer be profitable for landlords to illegally withhold security deposits?
| 33 |
There’s obviously no single number to give you that would answer this question. In deciding whether to take any illegal action, you weigh the chances of getting caught, chances of getting punished if accused, and the actual retribution for your actions.
In a civil-suit situation, as this would be, you also have to consider incidental things like time and legal fees, which are often daunting enough that few victims actually consider court in civil matters like this. Additionally, think about how a plaintiff would weigh the amount of the deposit and the amount that it would cost to go to court- usually the deposit amount is already low enough that you would rather just take a loss.
You could, for example, set punitive damages at $15,000 per day that your deposit is withheld, but with a low probability of having to actually pay such a fine, there’s little deterrence.
Rather than question what the fine should be, it would be better to wonder how to improve the efficacy of the legal system that’s already in place.
| 14 |
|
ELI5: How does a hand drawn animation company keep drawings of people, places, and things consistent with a big animation team.
|
Companies like Disney create movies with 50,000+ hand drawn frames. How does every animator drawn the same character/place like every other animator on the team?
| 283 |
You are touching the surface on why hand drawn movies are so difficult to make and why the Disney productions were so loved.
They reuse the still after it is drawn once. If they need another angle the original still is used for reference. These stools are larger than the frame and you can move them with the shot to get different backgrounds.
| 166 |
Why don't I get an infection when I bleed from my ass?
|
If shit touched a cut anywhere on my body but my ass, I would be incredibly likely to get an infection.
If the tiniest bit of shit gets in my urethra I get a UTI.
Why don't I get an infection when I pop a hemorrhoid, or just rip my ass taking a ridiculously large dump?
I just realized today that all I do when I bleed from my ass is dab off the blood as painlessly as possibly (Read: Probably not very well) and my body somehow wards off a horrible blood infection.
How?
| 36 |
You're assuming that your own fecal bacteria would infect you in other locations. That's usually not true, those bacteria are "known" to your immune system and are already present in huge numbers in your body.
They're mostly docile decomposers, not aggressive pathogens like Staphylococcus that will start attacking exposed tissue.
| 21 |
ELI5: Why do most foods taste terrible while going through chemo, but others have no change at all?
| 138 |
"Everything changed for me"
"I'll never forget the day that everything tadted like tofu. Everything tasted like nothing."
Source, wife who went through chemo last year.
Tastebuds are fast turnover cells that regenerate and die quickly. Chemo kills the tastebuds before they can develop and mature. What taste you lose is specific to you individually.
Source, same wife who is also a doctor.
| 123 |
|
[Harry Potter] The mystery of the Heir of Slytherin.
|
Spoilers...
In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets a monster is unleashed at Hogwarts because the Heir of Slytherin has RETURNED.
To me it would seem that the heir would, to have made the beast active simply by their return(at least to the eyes of the trio), be a first year student or even a new faculty member.
So why/how could Harry and Malfoy be considered the Heir if it was their second year at Hogwarts and no one was petrified and there was no sign/activity involving the chamber of secrets/a basilisk during their entire first year?
| 16 |
There are a lot of reasons not to make that assumption. For example the heir may have needed to find the chamber then prove their cleverness to open it and claim their inheritance, that could have taken years. Next there is the idea that it was voldemort that passed down the knowledge, they knew he was active so he may have told anyone associated with the death eaters who could have passed it down to their children.
| 19 |
What are Schopenhauer's views on suicide? Did he support and justify the idea given his views on reality?
| 21 |
He was opposed. He thought that 1.) suicide was an optimist's view-point, since it was based on the expectation of something better that ought to have happened to one having happened, and more substantially 2.) since representation was just a manifestation of will mediated by the intuitions and causality, any attempt to escape it on a representational level as opposed to attempting to quieten the will itself was still caught in the veil of representation.
| 34 |
|
ELI5: Why does adding n number of odd numbers yields n^2? What theory is being applied?
|
For example 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 = 4^2
| 16 |
Imagine a square of one unit by one unit. This has a total area of one unit squared, or 1^2 = 1
Now imagine adding one layer to the top and right side of the square (not forgetting the corner, so it stays square shaped). This is now 2 units to each side, and a total of 4 unit squares. This is 3 more than before. The total area is now 2 units squared, or 2^2 = 4. This is because it is now 3 units larger than before: 4 = 1+3
+1 +1
1 +1
Notice how the original 1 unit is surrounded on two sides by the 3 new units? So 2x2 = 2^2 = 1+3 = 4
If we extend the sides to 3 on each edge, we get this:
+1 +1 +1
+1 +1 +1
1 +1 +1
This is the same as our previous result, plus the number of units needed to extend the two sides again to make it square. This number is 5 units.
3x3 square = 3 squared = 3^2 = 2^2 +5 = 1+3+5
From this you can see that to get to 4^2 you need to add 7 to 3^2 (3 on top, 3 on the right, 1 in the corner), and so on.
4^2 = 3^2 +7 = (2^2 +5)+7 = ((1^2 +3)+5)+7 = ((1+3)+5)+7 = 1+3+5+7
This is easy geometry. Geometry is why n^2 is called "n squared."
| 31 |
I think increases to minimum wage would INCREASE profits for low margin businesses. CMV.
|
Recently, while reading another post, someone stated that low margin businesses couldn't survive an increase in minimum wages, and gave the following 2 numbers.
Typical Grocery store has 1% profit margin.
Typical Grocery store runs a 'sales per labor hour' of $150.
It seems to me though that if this is the case, then if the grocery store is currently paying $10 per hour, and it increased this to $20 per hour, then their 'costs per labor hour' go up just $10.
This means the price of the basket of goods sold in a typical labor hour would have to increase from $150 to $160 to maintain the grocery stores current levels of profitabillity. **note that I'm not saying they have to sell an extra $10 worth of stuff, I'm saying they need to charge an extra $10 per $150 of stuff. This corresponds to a small, one time 7% increase in prices.**.
So far then, this shows that for a low margin business such as a grocery store, a 7% increase in prices would allow a $10 per hour increase in the cost of labor, from say, $10 to $20, or from $7.50 to $17.50.
I think that if we had an across the board increase in minimum wage by $10, the following would happen.
1) A dramatic increase in the spending power of minimum wage employees
2) An increase in prices - in this case, 7% for said grocery store, perhaps as high as 20% for other businesses - would allow the businesses to make the same profit per item as before
3) An increase in items sold, due to the general population having more spending money, would increase the overall profits of low-margin businesses.
CMV.
EDIT: created a spreadsheet showing what happens to a supply chain as the cost of labor changes. It turns out that the 7% number above is understated, however it's also the case that the increase in price is dramatically lower then the increase in wages. Link here: http://imgur.com/JZwtxFM. If you want a copy of the actual spreadsheet, pm me.
EDIT2: Note that in the spreadsheet included, I assumed fixed margins for the business, while before, I assumed fixed profit for the business. EG: If something costs the business $100 to create, and their previous margins are 20%, then they sell it for $120. If their costs increase to $150 to create, they maintain the 20% margin and so sell it for $180. This results in LARGER price increases with added steps to the supply chain, and more net profit for the business, assuming the same number of goods sold. Even with this assumption, price increases still seem to be dramatically less then wage increases.
EDIT3: Better way to view spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AranNX_5SYsBdHJnYlVjVlRwMXdSOWZtYndHeXk3dlE&output=html
| 47 |
**Costs**: Increasing minimum wage by $10 increases costs per hour to the employer by *more* than $10, as there are costs that increase with the wage of the employee (such as worker's comp and unemployment insurance). The usual rule of thumb is it costs about twice an employee's yearly wage to keep them for a year, so figure costs have gone up about $20 per labor hour.
**More costs**: But that's not even close to the whole story. The cost of *good* to a grocery store is going to go up too, because ... where do they get the goods from? Places that employ people, *whose cost of labor has also gone up*. So the $20/hour increase doesn't begin to capture it, because all of the goods have now gotten more expensive for the grocery store to get to sell in the first place! This effect is zero for raw goods, of course, but the more layers of supply you have, the bigger the effect, and general-public stores (like grocery stores) are at the very end of the chain, i.e. are hit the hardest. So cost of goods goes up considerably as well. (A quick estimate might be the roughly 15% we're looking at above compounded for *every step in the supply chain*.) At this point we've obliterated the 1% profit margin of the store, so let's talk about the store's price increases.
**Price increases**: Let me ask you a question. If the store could just raise prices 7% and still sell the same amount of groceries, why hasn't it done so already? That'd be 7% more profit without any extra cost. ...the answer, of course, is it would reduce sales, and they'd wind up with *less* revenue than before. They've already raised prices all they think they can get away with -- that is, they're pretty sure that raising prices more will *hurt* them.
| 40 |
ELI5: How do earphones produce adequate bass despite their size?
| 107 |
Proximity to your ear. The volume of air displaced by a large subwoofer is large, but it is many feet / several hundreds of feet away from your ear. If you are too close to something of this size, you will be doing damage to your ears because the volume of sound waves hitting your eardrum is too large.
Similarly, small earbuds produce a bass sound with a very tiny volume, but that earbud is mere millimeters away from your eardrum. Change that even to a few centimeters and the bass sound waves diffuse too quickly for them to affect your eardrum.
| 77 |
|
ELI5 : Why is it illegal to fire a professional athlete in "work at will" state?
|
Why is it illegal to fire a professional sports athlete and not pay the remainder of their "contract" if state law says they are employed in a work at will state? Employers in "at will" states have the right to terminate any employee without having to prove just cause. How is this any different?
For example, I live in the great state of Michigan. We love our Tigers. Verlander has been terrible lately since his multimillion dollar contract signing ... why can't we legally kick him to the curb and not owe him a dime?
Edit spelling *
| 148 |
"work at will" doesn't mean that employment contracts are void. It means that there isn't an implied contract. Just because you get hired doesn't mean the employer has to prove just cause to fire you.
But if your employer **chooses** to sign a contract which requires they pay you if they fire you than of course they have to follow the contract they've signed.
| 161 |
Where do the abs go during a pregnancy? Up, down, front, back?
| 26 |
The uterus is posterior (beneath) and inferior (below) the abdominal muscles. So during the period of pregnancy when a woman is "showing," those muscles and their connective tissue get stretched out in her abdomen, just like the skin on her belly does. They don't really go in any one direction, they just kind of "inflate" around the fetus as it grows, radiating out from a point generally a few inches above the navel. The "abs," in the sense that you can see muscles like a six-pack, aren't visible at this stage because they've been so thoroughly stretched, and because most women don't have much abdominal muscle mass anyway. It's not uncommon for this stretching action to damage the woman's muscle tissue and tear into a small separation, a condition called *diastasis recti*.
During delivery those muscles play a big part in actually pushing the fetus out of the uterus. Because of the extreme stretching of the muscles and connective tissue, it can take weeks or months for them to heal and settle into their original position. Without vigorous exercise, most women find that their abdominal skin and muscle tissue is more loose after pregnancy.
| 39 |
|
[MCU] Are Ironman's Nano tech suits more powerful that solid suits?
|
We see that the Nano tech suits are powerful and adaptable but do they have more raw power than a suit made of solid plates with purpose built guns?
| 39 |
That depends a bit on how you measure “powerful”.
First is the output of the generator / battery. It’s safe to assume that is higher. But we don’t know if the nanotech suit is more energy intensive in rest. So actual usable energy might be lower. It id be inclined to say it’s higher because…
Efficiency. Nano tech will require less power to do things. And it can direct power to where it’s needed.
Which brings us to the last point, the weapon. Punching with nano tech means the armor can reconfigure itself to optimally guide the energy of the blow to the fist. Solid plate is limited by its shape and resultant mechanics.
In case of laser/ repulsor we see that it can be targeted to a smaller point. So to a person a blunt low energy blast can be delivered knocking them out. But the same energy focused to a small area could burn through tank armor.
So even if the nanotech armor has less total energy output, the way it uses that energy will still lead to more powerful weapons and blows
| 60 |
CMV: I think it is ridiculous for one ethnic group to be indebted to another based on the actions of people who've been dead for hundreds of years.
|
~~For example - government funded benefits to people with even small traces of Native American genetic makeup. Is this really justifiable? Are the taxpayers who are funding these people's free income really responsible for the actions of men who lived hundreds of years ago - who they may not even have any genetic relation to? It gets even more complicated when we start talking about percentages - for instance, a person who is maybe 1/4th Native and 3/4th Anglo would qualify for these benefits despite the fact that the majority of their genetic makeup represents the people that they are claiming victimization by. But this is really not a relevant piece of the original topic - so don't feel obliged to include it in your arguments.~~
Edit 2: This example has done nothing but misrepresent my original thought, and I clearly do not have a strong enough understanding of Native American history to justifiably use it. Thanks to rigoding90 for making me realize this.
Note: My view extends far beyond any controversy involving Native Americans, to include any instance of this phenomenon.
Change my view.
Edit 1: It's currently 1am and I just realized that there are several very detailed replies to this post. I need to get to bed so I can get up in time for work tomorrow, but I will be reading through them in the AM. Thanks for taking the time to reply if you did.
| 132 |
The actions of people who have been dead for hundreds of years can have lasting effects if not adequately remedied. Don't think of it as necessarily a debt tracing back hundreds of years - think of it as an attempt to remedy a current inequality, the reason for which we acknowledge to be some past cruelty.
| 64 |
What would you call the class of people who are low on cultural capital?
|
Terms like working class and proletariat originate in, and are better suited for, class systems divided by access to economic capital. However, I think that these days class is more defined by access to cultural capital (e.g. education, elite culture). What would you call the new lower class in such a system?
| 65 |
Why do you feel that this concept of "cultural class" is more relevant today than economic class when one can still so distinctly associate social power, influence, and wealth with how a person makes money (Selling labor-time vs owning capital)?
| 33 |
ELI5:What would it take for a rocket shuttle to use electricity and not fossil fuels?
|
Im playing space engineers currently and it struck me weird as to the fact that the rockets in that game dont seem to use any actual fuel other than electricity in battery packs, so i wanted to know that if we ever get far enough to use anything other than fossil fuels, what would it take for a single rocket carrying the bare necessities to get to the moon and back if using electricity?
*addendum: it doesnt have to be limited to electricity, water power, or hydrogen can be used to
| 32 |
The issue comes down to Newton's Third Law of Motion.
> "If two bodies exert forces on each other, these forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction."
Simply put, if you want to thrust your spacecraft forward you are going to need to throw something backwards. In order to get more thrust you are going to need to either throw more mass or throw it harder/faster backwards. The latter is obviously preferred in spacecraft because it needs to be carrying all the mass it is going to throw later (called "reaction mass").
Normally the conventional fuel is combusted to release the chemical energy in it, heating and expanding the exhaust which then forms the reaction mass thrown backwards. Typically a hydrogen rocket engine will have an exhaust speed of 3000 to 4500 meters per second.
But if you have another source of energy such as a nuclear reactor or a battery you can use something called an "ion engine". The general idea is that charged particles of gas called "ions" are accelerated using electric fields and thrown out the back of the engine. This exhaust can reach speeds of 20,000 to 50,000 meters per second, but they don't use nearly as much reaction mass.
Less use of reaction mass means the ion engines are much more efficient, producing far more thrust for the reaction mass consumed. But they don't produce nearly the strength of thrust that a conventional hydrogen rocket can, making them useless for launching into space for example. Instead they are more for steady acceleration over a long period of time when a constant supply of electricity can be provided. Using them for an entire mission to the moon would require an insane amount of power generation onboard the spacecraft, something that is entirely fictional at this point.
| 36 |
ELI5: Why are untested medical treatments not allowed to be used when no known treatments work and the patient is sure to die?
|
If a patient is suffering from an illness, all available treatments have failed, and death is imminent, why can't the patient consent to be treated with untested treatments or drugs that may save them? Are there laws against this, and if so, why?
| 25 |
Terminal patients are allowed to take part in clinical trials using experimental medication. The catch is that these trials need half the patients to be secretly given placebos so there is a control group to compare against. Some states have passed "right to try laws" which allow terminal patients to have access to placebo free experimental medication. The problem is that the lack of placebos makes it much harder for doctors to develop effective therapies, so these laws probably cause more harm in the long run.
| 10 |
ELI5: Why do white Lego bricks turn yellow-ish over time?
| 90 |
Some plastics are not UV stable (ultraviolet light damages or degrades the material), look at stuff that sits in display windows hit by sunlight for extreme and obvious examples.
This causes discoloration over time (and/or cracking), either fading of the color or whites yellowing.
| 71 |
|
[star wars: revenge of the sith] what was happening on the surface of Coruscant during the battle above It?
| 24 |
Mostly a running battle between CIS intrusion groups hitting strategic targets, and disoriented and ill-prepared Republic and Jedi forces. The battle was largely over by the time the holotape begins. It was always just a raid, the Separatists didn't even get around to bombarding the planet properly.
| 34 |
|
CMV: Uber is an unethical company, and should be avoided
|
1. They severely undercut prices to put taxi companies out of business so that they can have a monopoly on the market, and eventually increase fares and cut wages for their employees
2. They regularly oppose legislation that would force them to provide their full time drivers with health insurance and other essentials that come with full time jobs
3. They underpay their employees
Based on these 3 facts, Uber is an unethical company and goes beyond the pursuit to acquire customers, but this company is actively harming the livelihoods of employees that work with them and will eventually hurt customers as they gradually start to increase fares
Edit:
Thanks everyone for the insight.
I have given at least 2 deltas that poked serious holes in my premise.
1. In many states/cities taxi drivers were also independent contractors just like Uber drivers and therefore not eligible for health insurance
2. Taxi cabs were essentially government run monopolies, so while this may be better because at least the the money flows back to the government, it was still a monopoly which does not allow for health competition for smaller taxi players (until Uber came along). So in a sense I am glad that these rideshare companies disrupted this monopoly.
3. There was a couple people who said that Uber actually did report a profit in recent years. I promised to give a delta if they can provide a source for this but I have not heard anything back yet.
Unfortunately the following argument does not change my view: "customer service experience in taxi cabs is worse than Uber", "are you really going to boycott everything, that's not feasible", "this is just how business works". They either don't address what the main point of the CMV is or aren't relevant.
I'm going to end it here, never expected this to blow up
| 6,334 |
1- They're creating a cheaper market. Taxis have been overpriced and not worth it for longer than I've been alive. No issue here
2- it's not intended to be a full time job, it never was. This is a deliberate decision to lower costs to customers, let people earn extra money. Of course they're going to oppose that legislation because it would harm their business, and instead of everyone being able to work for them suddenly the number of people they can employ drops exponentially. Again it isn't intended to be a full time job, if you can employ 100 people with no benefits but 10 with benefits which one is better for the most people? Seems like a giant fuck you to the 90 other people now with no extra income.
3- they don't underpay the employees, you agree to monetary compensation based on the rides, number of rides etc. You're not being underpaid if you agree to the wage. If you don't like it go elsewhere. There's millions of jobs unfilled and anywhere uber is has jobs available.
They've forced other passenger services to drop their prices and compete for business. They've done nothing wrong.
| 1,223 |
We are in our most natural state as children. It is the job of educators, parents, governments, and other authority figures to beat the shit out of your inner child, so they can turn you into a mindless zombie who acts out some absurd idea of "this is what an adult is supposed to do." CMV.
|
Why are children so joyful and carefree, while adults are often such miserable sacks of anxiety, depression, or some other form of psychosis? I believe that decades of learned repression are responsible. It all starts in the classroom with "Sit down Johnny, stop throwing that pencil at Suzy!" But after being told over and over that acting on your desires is unacceptable, you need to shut up and do your work, you learn to repress those desires. "Yes, yes, I do really want to do this work. I want to get this A." In a sense, you learn to create in your mind a little teacher that is yelling at you to stop being an immature brat and instead be "responsible." "Growing up" is the process of fully identifying with that little teacher you've created, so that you do the "responsible" thing without the need for an actual teacher threatening to send you to the Principle's office.
Your conception of what it means to be an adult is not purely determined by teachers and parents either - this is bigger than that. It's also your culture (or subculture): how as a man/woman you are "supposed" to behave, or what is cool/uncool, for example. I believe that kind of pressure is equally (or more) powerful, and it also serves to repress your natural childlike state. We could say that in addition to the little teacher you created in your mind, you create an equivalent figure for the group of peers you're trying to fit into, and it yells at you whenever you do something uncool.
Ground between these two rocks, authority and peer pressure, I believe that little is left of your inner child by age 20 or so. Its kind of still there, but it's been badly abused, shoved into the basement and chained to the wall. Many people have forgotten its even there. They're too busy trying to act out some script that was given to them, that really has nothing to do with who they truly are. Who doesn't want to be accepted? If anything, that's the only part of the inner child still left intact: this desperate desire to fit in. No one represses that desire, because it is so essential for being a zombie.
Yes, you have to learn how to be responsible and how to interact with your peers. You have to learn how to function in the adult world. But is functioning living? I'd argue that you can only truly live by being in touch with your authentic desires, by stubbornly insisting on your right to be a child - that is, to be a natural development of the person you were when you were a child. This is probably one of the most difficult things you can attempt - a zombified adult insists that everyone around him be a zombie as well, so most likely you will have to go around pretending you are a zombie too most of the time. The only way to make this bearable is if you find some non-zombie companions, around whom you are free to be your true, 100% self around.
I welcome any challenge to my viewpoint.
| 142 |
What you're basing this post on is called an "appeal to nature" and in short is a fallacious valuing of the undeveloped over the developed.
The "untouched" nature of childlike consciousness is often misperceived as a type of heavenly state, where spiny defenses and general malevolence are not necessary because of the inherent goodness of the child's soul. In reality, those defense mechanisms have simply not yet developed in response to the real dangers that the world actually poses to the child.
>Why are children so joyful and carefree, while adults are often such miserable sacks of anxiety, depression, or some other form of psychosis?
because they don't know any better yet, and this is a very scary, hellish thing. This is why children get into vans with strangers and jump off roofs with superman capes on. we shold not desire to be more like children.
Instead, we shold desire to grow out of the naivete of childhood and into our various neuroses and psychoses, and then out of those and into a more flowing, harmonious unity with the dual nature of the world (dangerous/not dangerous). This is absolutely by no means a regression backward into childhood, but rather a massive leap forward into the kind of fluid, adaptive self-determination and resilience that exactly 0 children possess.
| 158 |
Since economics is often considered the “dismal science”, what are some truly interesting/fun facts about Econ?
| 23 |
There have been many strange applications of economic knowledge. Several books have been written about them recently. The most well known is "Freakonomics" (and it's sequels) by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt.
One of the things that book is Sumo wrestling. Economic methods have been used to detect cheating in Sumo wrestling and in some other situations.
| 12 |
|
Does sign language differ significantly from country to country?
| 22 |
Yes. There's also no necessary relationship between the spoken language of a place and sign language. British Sign Language is very different from American Sign Language, which is actually closer to French Sign Language.
| 16 |
|
[Sociology] What are more recent theories regarding elite opinion and opinion leadership? Is Lazarsfeld/Katz' "two-step flow of communication" model still the most prominent one?
|
As a historian, I want to make use of the "two-step flow of communication" theory. As it's over 50 years old now, I'm wondering if it hasn't been superseded or heavily criticized by now?
Also, can you point me to some more recent books or articles on elite opinion and opinion leadership?
Thank you!
| 29 |
well, lookey here, something i know about...
the two-step flow, which started the school of minimal effects was superseded in the 1970s by studies showing direct effects of media, e.g., framing, agenda-setting, priming by Iyengar, McCombs and Shaw and lots of others.
However, some believe we're re-entering an era of the two-step flow and the minimal effects as we increasingly rely on blogs, facebook, and elsewhere for our political information.
For that argument, see Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707-731.
But also, there is another argument: the one-step flow of information. advertisers, campaigners, and others directly target consumers nowadays with a unique message:
Bennett, W. L., & Manheim, J. B. (2006). The one-step flow of communication. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 608(1), 213-232.
| 15 |
eli5: How do historians know that ancient people actually believed in things like demons or spirits, and that it wasn’t just like the Boogeyman or Santa to them?
| 16 |
Mostly through ritual evidence. Believing in Santa is one thing, but sacrificing an animal or part of your harvest to appease him is another. Anthropologists will find alters or walls covered with figures or spirits. At the base they'll find things like animal bones or clay jars with evidence of decomposition in the soil around it. They'll find many layers and many different artefacts that date back decade after decade. All that is evidence of long term ritualistic worship.
| 18 |
|
CMV: When it comes to old games with no remakes or digital release, there is nothing wrong at all about piracy.
|
(This debate will keep out games that have a remake or digital release, or are new enough that they can be brought new from a retailer's shelf. That criteria pretty much excludes all modern generation games.)
Let's suppose you have an old game, like, say... 2002's Super Mario Sunshine. The game, as of now, has seen *no* remake and no rerelease. The only way to play the game is to get a copy of the GCN disc version.
But the game is over 13 and a half years old! So the only way to... "fairly"/"legally" buy it is to buy a likely-overpriced used copy (or sealed resold copy).
Now, the fundamental, most common anti-piracy argument is that "you're not supporting the game developers". But with older, GCN/PS2 and before games like this, there is **no way to buy the games in a way that supports the developers** -- buying these games the right way only supports the "used game industry". That won't support the developers.
So my conclusion is that there is nothing wrong with pirating the game, since buying it the "right" way would make no difference to the developers.
Again, this post is about old games that have seen no rereelases -- not modern games (which are a much more... difficult discussion).
So that's my opinion. Piracy on old, physical-copy-only games that have no remake or digital release is entirely acceptable. I challenge you, CMV!
| 95 |
>But with older, GCN/PS2 and before games like this, there is no way to buy the games in a way that supports the developers -- buying these games the right way only supports the "used game industry".
Healthy used game industry benefits the developers in the long term. That is because it is easier for developers to charge higher prices up-front when day-one purchase gamers know that they will be able to re-sell the game later on a secondary market.
If there were no secondary market, less people would be willing to shell out high prices on day one - thus hurting the developers.
| 18 |
[YU-GI-OH] How does ,,created during a duel" cards work?
|
I'm not taking who creates them (Industrial Illusions), but there are times when during a duel player pretty much creates a card that wasn't in their extra deck. I could buy that when paranormal powers are at work when Jaden dueled Yubel possesed Jessie and created Rainbow Neos, or in some matches with Numbers. But in some matches there it's more muddled. When Yusei dueled Primo, Yusei used Accel Synchro to summon Shooting Star Dragon, but he had a Blank card. And there was also Yuya Pendulum. Was this ever brought up, like Duel Disk system didn't recognized card and it stalled? When Joey fought Espa Roba and used High level monster, without tributing it didn't worked, so they have anti cheat measurent. Could be that they are ,,hacked" by universe and card are added to database? I propably put too much though into it, but I was curious.
| 17 |
Magic overpowers technology in all instances but one - that being Kaiba's AR tech, which managed to throw off the (not quite) all-powerful magic of the Quantum Cube. Though whether this is because of him being a reincarnation of the ancient Priest Seto is unclear.
In all other cases, technology is completely dumbfounded and entirely fooled by magical occurrences. So when a new card magically appears, the system perfectly understands it as if it were a card that existed all along.
The card likely wouldn't show up in a database search, but the system would act as if it was there anyway.
| 15 |
[Babar] Is Babar's Kingdom (Celesteville and surrounds) essentially a puppet-state for the French colonial interests?
| 29 |
Not exactly. Babar isn't directly controlled by the French, but the fact that he has been "civilised" by his time spent among them gives him a skewed worldview which leads him to believe that the interests of his people are best served by close collaboration with their foreign "allies".
The French are able to take advantage of this, but have to be careful not to be too obvious about it - they are keenly aware that an elephant never forgets.
| 17 |
|
ELI5: I didn't cough while i was smoking but now I've quit for a week and i can't stop coughing. Why?
| 39 |
There are little hairs in your lungs that help clean by moving mucus in the lungs. When you smoke these hairs stop working as effectively, but when you stop they start to heal and clean, so you'll experience coughing/tons of mucus as your body catches up.
| 64 |
|
ELI5: What happens between the gap of about the 5 or 6 months when a movie trailer is first released, and the opening theater date?
|
At this point is it just building hype or is there any strategic way the producers collect feedback and change stuff prior to the release?
Just curious.
Thanks!
| 385 |
Actually in many cases, when you see the trailer, the movie isn't anywhere near done.
It looks like they finished the whole 2 hour movie and you're seeing a selection of 2 minutes of it.
In reality, they might have 200 hours of footage and they're nowhere close to editing it down to a cohesive film. They haven't finished figuring out the soundtrack, the postproduction / visual effects, they might not even know which ending to pick.
There have been lots of cases where the trailer shows a scene that doesn't end up being in the final movie.
| 723 |
I believe engagement rings are a sexist and outdated practice which perpetuate harmful gender roles. CMV
|
I'm passionate about gender studies and gender equality (for both men and women).
There's a lot of things I could post but I want to start with a smaller issue: I think engagement rings are sexist (towards both men and women).
A man is expected to put a significant amount of money towards the purchase of an engagement ring, at least three months' salary. "Expected" by traditional society -- yet also by most women, some of whom fight for gender equality.
In a world where single, childless women between 21 and 30 (i.e., those most likely to be getting married) currently outlearn their male counterparts, [1] I think it's completely wrong to expect the man to make such a big financial contribution towards what is supposed to be an "equal" relationship.
Additionally, I believe that when a man gives a woman a $3000++ ring in exchange for her hand in marriage, he is in a way "purchasing" her and therefore "objectifying" her.
Thus, I believe it's hypocritical to want gender equality yet support something like engagement rings, which holds men to their traditional value (i.e. their wealth) and holds women to theirs (i.e. their passive objectification).
----
[1] "Women now outnumber men on college campuses, and single, childless women out earn their male counterparts." (Forbes, "Why Are So Many Professional Millennial Women Unable To Find Dateable Men?", 2012)
----
EDIT 2/12/14 8:36 AM EST: Have to run to work. Will comment more when I return. Thanks for the responses so far.
| 42 |
I agree that engagement rings have many bad practices associated with them, but is there anything fundamentally wrong with giving someone a wearable symbol of your commitment to them? If you are opposed to the sale of a Hummer for environmental reasons, do you have to be opposed to the sale of all cars? Yes, a large, gaudy ring can represent all the negative traits you describe, but if both partners decide to buy each other small, tasteful (relative to their own perception) rings to symbolize their love for one another, what's wrong with it?
Rings, especially when evenly valued, can convey love and commitment without also symbolizing a sexist tradition. Many gay and lesbian couples give marriage or commitment rings to one another in this way. It is all about context. Just because sexists give/wear wedding rings doesn't mean they ruin the beauty of it for everyone else.
| 14 |
CMV: If White privilege does exist, then so does Asian privilege
|
Hello,
I would like to make the claim that if White Privilege(compared to blacks and Latinos) does exist, then Asian Privilege does exist as well(compared to blacks and Latinos) in America.
First off, to define "White Privilege":
* **Economic achievement**
White people have an easier time in achieving economic mobility or achievement. It is thought that employment practices are instituted to give advantages to white people.
* **Systematic racism**
White people have an easier time with the cops and are not profiled as much as Latinos or Blacks
* **Educational**
The education system is systematically against Latinos and Blacks, and that White people have it easier
* **Housing**
Black and Latino are subject to discriminatory housing prejudice that White people are not exposed to
While it is clear that white demographic does better in these categories, once taking a quick look it is very clear that Asians do just as well as whites, if not better. So this bodes the question, is their Asian privilege compared to Blacks and Latinos?
Some statistics:
* **Economic achievement**
Median weekly salary earnings by male race:
-Asians: 952$
-White: 845$
-Black: 621$
-Hispanic: 569$
Asians are no.1
* **Systematic racism in the judicial system**:
Black people are 13% of the country and constitute 28.3% of all crime.
White people are 69% of the country and constitute 68.9% of all crime
Asians are 5.6% of the country, but constitute 1.2% of all crimes
If you want to look at it from a proportionality standpoint, Asians have the best(as in least) amount of crime performed proportionally
* **Education rates**
I can't find the national statistics, but if you look at state graduation high school rates it's the same pattern, for example for Texas HS graduation rates:
* white: 91%
* black: 74%
* latino: 83%
* asian: 94%
If you look at virtually any academic/education statistics(college or HS), Asians will be number 1.
* **Housing**:
Home ownership rates:
* whites: 74.8%
* Asians: 59.3%
* Latinos: 48.4%
* Blacks: 46.2%
Asians have a pretty large statistical advantage in home ownership rates compared to Blacks and Latinos.
Looking at the data, it is clear that Asians perform just as well or better than Whites in categories that we traditionally define as "white privilege". So my question statement is essentially: If White privilege is to be acknowledged, so does Asian privilege.
One counter argument is that one can only have privilege if they are the majority of the demographic, I do not agree with this point but would be willing to discuss it with people.
To add on:
The definition of privilege is " a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people."
The statistics would seem to indicate that the system gives an advantage to Asians over Americans, so I would like to understand how that is not privilege.
_____
> *Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to* ***[read through our rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules)***. *If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which,* ***[downvotes don't change views](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/guidelines#wiki_upvoting.2Fdownvoting)****! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our* ***[popular topics wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/populartopics)*** *first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to* ***[message us](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/changemyview)***. *Happy CMVing!*
| 114 |
Counter hypothesis: it's not that Asians are more privileged in America, but that privileged Asians in Asia are more likely to immigrate to America (and Asian immigrants and first generation Asian Americans account for a much larger proportion of Asians than White immigrants do for Whites). Asian privilege in America may be an illusion that's actually reflect filtering and inheritance effects for Asian privilege in Asia, and not their American experience (a reflection of past not current conditions). Would your statistics hold if we only considered second, third, and older Asian Americans?
| 86 |
ELI5: What is jihad.
| 3,236 |
The literal meaning of Jihad is struggle or effort, and it means much more than holy war.
Muslims use the word Jihad to describe three different kinds of struggle:
1) A struggle to live as a good Muslim
2) A struggle to build a good Islamic society
3) A holy war to defend Islam.
| 3,309 |
|
[Warhammer 40K] what if God Emperor of mankind descended at this era?
|
This is a it of a pet peeve of mine? When God emperor declare he will lead humanity, why there's none that oppose? I mean there is this guy, super strong, charismatic want to become emperor. What the world leader will do? Fight? I don't think they would just give the position and submit to him.
Thus my question, if he do it on the current era where there are the like of Putin, Obama, Xi jinping. Will he succeed? Or will it just invite a massive global resistance?
| 16 |
The God Emperor is literally superhuman.
In addition to an impressively superhuman physique, he also has psychic powers.
In addition to that, he's immortal and has in-depth information on humanity's history, including the ways he's already influenced it.
In addition to that, he has the combined wisdom and knowledge of the Great Shamans of earth's past.
He's not above demonstrating his power either. So striding into a public broastcast of world leaders and forcing them, through his Will alone, to kneel before him, would be a good start. Speaking and projecting his words and thoughts to everyone on the planet is probably a good round two.
Then he'd start Leading us, fixing problems, guiding humanity to reach its destiny among the stars. Smear campaigns wouldn't really work once he abolished the pettiness that allows children to starve, for men to be tortured, for women to be enslaved.
That is if he didn't take advantage of the pettiness, allowing the world leaders their small fiefdoms in exchange for fealty. Which he'd be fine with as he is more than capable of outliving the world's leaders and taking over in their stead when they pass.
| 35 |
Why doesn't the glass inside optic fibers break?
| 62 |
The individual optical glass fibers used in cables are very strong and very flexible because they have a large tensile strength and small diameter. This is the same material used fiberglass boats, ladders, etc.
When bundled together inside a coating, along with strengthening components such as Kevlar, and then wrapped in extra material (the cabling) to protect against dirt, bending, crushing, etc. you have a very tough fiber optic cable.
Having said that, breaks and faults in fiber optic cables are not unheard of.
| 57 |
|
ELI5: In the USA, why does the FCC allow all of a female breast to be shown on public TV, except for the areola and nipple?
| 19 |
It's because cleavage, and even side boob, are apart of normal clothing for women to wear. Showing the whole nipple however is not and is very preventable. It's like how you can say "dammit" or "shit" on regular tv, but only "fuck" on TV-MA.
| 16 |
|
[Jojo’s Bizzare Adventure] If Okuyasu was actually creative with his stand, what are some of the more OP things he’d be able to do?
| 17 |
He'd be an extremely dangerous assassin if his Stand can move independent of him as well as targeting non-Stand users. Imagine the coroner's confusion when they open up a victim to find that they're missing some of their heart valves or that a crucial set of arteries are just *missing*.
Also, erasing the space between some guy and a car in the middle of a street. The other guy has no idea why a car suddenly flew towards him at fifty miles an hour.
Or even as a rudimentary healing skill; erasing the bullet wounds from your body, although this could use practice.
| 17 |
|
Do I apologize to my professor? How can I get over this?
|
I normally do very well in school (3.5ish GPA) but this semester was absolute trash. I had an class that had a lab report each week that took me roughly 20 hours to complete from start to finish (the professor required perfection, or he would simply give you an F). I also work as a tutor for our college, roughly 28 hours a week
This meant that I wound up skipping lecture in my microbial genetics class. I know the professor from prior semesters and I've always done very well in her class, but I basically submitted garbage the entire semester. I actually had a panic attack during her final, which I left 1/3 of blank.
For some reason, I felt the need to ask her if I could re-take that final. She, of course, declined. I wound up with a C in the class.
TLDR: My questions are ...
1. Do I apologize to my microbial genetics professor? I never should have asked her if I could re-take the exam. I also feel SO BAD for how horrible my attendance was.Edit: Okay! my plan is to reduce my academic workload next semester and endeavor to do better in this professors class next semester. I might apologize when I see her again in the summer, long after grades are put in.
2. How can I recover emotionally from this semester? I will have a 2.5 GPA for this semester, which removes me from the Dean's list. I basically want to die. I probably won't make it to physician assistant school now, and I'm having trouble coping. EDIT: Upon reflection, this second point is not based in reality. I'm gonna be fine, it just feels bad right now.
Edit: I want to thank everyone who responded. I definitely feel better now that I have a plan. For the most part, you guys were level headed and kind, and I really appreciate it.
| 101 |
That tutor work of 28 hours a week is, well, sort of nuts. That's over half of a normal work week, it's not really a surprise you won't keep up with the top of the class, assuming you're not a part-time student. I'd say halve that, preferably twice if you can, and just do your best in classes going forward. Going into some debt is quite preferable to not being able to complete your studies properly.
| 168 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.