Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
View
Sort
Coming soon

It is one of many, many pieces of evidence.

You shouldn't rely on it too much, however. When you present one piece of evidence as a silver bullet, the implication is if it can be explained, then you must be wrong. Apologists have an answer for this. It isn't a good answer, but it is a detailed and complex answer, enough to bog you down in minutia they are likely to know better than you do, given the appearance of correctness.

Score hidden · 8 hours ago

It is just the latest term conspiracy theorists use to describe the shadowy forces really in control of the government. It is intentionally vague to it can be tweaked ad hoc to support any opinion they happen to hold. It works the same way the abilities of aliens and ghosts can be changed on a case by case basis to support any evidence of them that is presented.

Score hidden · 8 hours ago
  • not everyone knows how to swim or is strong and healthy enough to swim
  • even a good swimmer can get bogged down in wet clothes
  • it was stormy and it can be hard to swim in rough waters
  • some may have been trapped in the boat and unable to get to open water
Score hidden · 9 hours ago

When two sound waves combine, the result is a complex wave. When those wavelengths (and thus the frequency) are a simple ratio of each other, like 2:1 (octave), 3:2 (major fifth), and 4:3 (perfect fourth), the resulting complex wave is simpler, and sounds more pleasing to the ear. But when the ratio gets more complex, like 6:5 (minor third), the wave is more complex and the sound is less pleasing.

As is usually the case, a picture. Note that the simply the wave, the shorter the time it takes to return to its starting point. That is what the ear finds pleasing.

Score hidden · 10 hours ago
  • convert each letter in your message to a number, 1-26, corresponding to its position in the alphabet (A =1, B=2, etc.)
  • add the first number in the message to the first in the one time pad, the second to the second, etc.
  • if the number is 27 or greater, subtract 26

And you are done. If you and your recipient are the only ones with the one time pad, and if the numbers in the one time pad are generated randomly and have to pattern to them, your code is unbreakable.

Score hidden · 10 hours ago

It is possible, it is just such a pain in the ass for businesses (not to mention the person in line behind you) that they aren't going to do it. Often their point of sale system doesn't even allow it. Business has the right to refuse service, so just like then can refuse someone who pays in pennies, many choose to refuse mixing and credit cards.

Score hidden · 20 hours ago

If you consume the same amount of alcohol, you will get the same degree of drunkenness, more or less.

However, you can only consume beer so fast, and after a while, your bladder becomes the limiting factor. Whereas you can get wasted on shots in a matter of seconds. Finishing with beer is a good way to put the brakes on and tail off gradually, whereas switch from beer to the hard stuff is more like to ramp it up.

-1 points · 1 day ago · edited 8 hours ago

MDs practice medicine based on science and evidence. Just about anything an MD suggests is going to be based on rigorous double-blinded studies.

DOs are pretty much the exact opposite of that. It revolves around joint cranial and spinal manipulation, and there is little to no hard evidence it is effective.

It was founded in 1874 by Andrew Taylor Still, who claimed to be a doctor but may not have had any formal medical training. He made extraordinary claims, like growing three inches of hair in a week on a bald man and that he could "shake a child and stop scarlet fever" (direct quote from his autobiography).

3 points · 1 day ago · edited 19 hours ago

Bill Maher. He is nice and glib and talks some good smack about religion, but then he will turn around and do the same about vaccines and GMOs. Same with Joe Rogan and the moon landing.

When you issue stock, you dilute the value of the existing stock. If you issue a little, the stockholders are usually ok with it, because you are raising money to grow the company, which in the long run will make their shares worth more.

But if you issue too much, shareholders get upset, sell your stock, and the value goes down. Especially if half the stock you are isn't raising money, it is just going back into your pocket. If you issue a million shares to the public, you might raise $10M, but if you issue half to the public and half to yourself, you only raise $5M...less actually, because the shareholders will have less faith in future growth.

2 points · 1 day ago

First of all, the recent US Supreme Court ruling does not allow business to refuse service based on sexual orientation. It does allow them to not perform services they find morally objectionable. They couldn't refuse a gay couple's order for a birthday cake, because that cake is morally neutral. A cake for a same sex wedding is not (according to the court, not me). It is about the service, not the customer.

Even if a law like you suggest were passed, it would be unworkable. A business would have to anticipate and list all the situations where they would refuse service. If they didn't list "no cross burning KKK cakes", not being listed would imply they would be required to make such a cake.

Original Poster1 point · 1 day ago

What if the law put into certain categories such as if you refuse service based only on race, religion, age, sexual orientation, would disclosure then be required?

see more

It is likely any law that allowed unwarranted discrimination based on race, religion, age, or sexual orientation would be found unconstitutional, regardless of any additional provisions.

2 points · 1 day ago

I doubt it.

There is simply no upside to being non-religious. There are millions of people who will vote against a non-Christian president out of general principle, and very few who would be more likely to vote for one.

It is trivial to portray yourself as a Christian despite your actions or beliefs, so there is no reason to expect anyone wanting to become president doing this.

Most insurance is term, meaning you buy coverage for a certain period of time, like a year. When that term expires, you renew your policy and pay again.

The insurance company is betting that you won't need to make a claim against your insurance over that time. If they have 100 customers, and project that only 3 will make $1000 claims over the next year, they know they can charge everyone $40/year and come out ahead. Of course, they have to gather and analyze a lot of data to make that kind of projection, to strike the balance between charging enough to make a profit, but not so much they are no longer competitive.

The monkey types Shakespeare because it eventually types everything that can be typed.

Does it? It could also just press the letter A for ever as monkeys don't avoid repetition (In contrast to pi or e).

Also the probability for two different, same length words to show up can be different due to the placement of the keys on the typewriter. Maybe the monkey is inclined to press letters close together.

Maybe at some point it might've invented its own words and is inclined to type those instead of English ones.

see more

It kind of does.

We are talking infinity here, so the concept only exists in theory, practical considerations are largely irrelevant. This is a well-known thought experiment, and the "monkey" is understood to be a perfect random letter generator. If it is not, there is no meaningful way to discuss what it might produce, mathematical randomness is the entire point.

the "monkey" is understood to be a perfect random letter generator.

There's the thing that always bothers me about this thought experiment: The "monkey" is not in fact a monkey. I get that the thought experiment wouldn't work otherwise, but why call it a monkey if it's not?

see more

Monkey strikes the right balance between a creature capable of operating a typewriter, yet mindless enough to be essentially random.

Part of the purpose of a thought experiment is to evoke the imagination to try to produce both intuitive and intellectual understanding. They all are going to fall apart if you get hung up on practical minutia.

0 points · 1 day ago

China is a big exporter, and a lot of those exports are paid for in US dollars. Both Chinese companies and the Chinese government have plenty of US dollar in reserve they can use to purchase things in the US with.

2 points · 1 day ago

Kudos for realizing the importance of staying it the closet at your age. Many teens come here expecting to find the magic words that will make their parents accept their non-belief, but no such words exist.

If you really wanted to quit, here is how I would go about it. Instead of quitting, find some new activity to graduate to. Maybe a different kind of volunteer work, so you can say you are trying to get exposed to different things and not arose suspicion. Working in a soup kitchen or taking meals to shut-ins, even if it through a church, likely would not be nearly as odious, and no one could really fault you for dropping the sunday school. You aren't quitting, you are moving on to something else.

Also, don't worry about the resume stuff, three years is plenty for your college applicaitons, and honestly, the only reason you put volunteer work on a resume is to fill space. And two entries about volunteer work take up more space than just one. :)

Those fireplaces are going be from abandoned homes on land no one wants to live on. The wood rots, burns down, or is scavanged, and the brick remains.

There is no particular reason to leave them up, but there is no reason to go out of your way to knock them down, either.

Depends on how the atmospheric pressure suddenly disappeared.

The pressure is caused by gravity holding the atmosphere in place. If the pressure was gone becasue gravity was gone, water, and a lot of other things, would float of into space.

If the pressure was gone because the atmosphere disappeared, that water would turn into gas in the near zero pressure and become the new atmosphere.

There are a number of techniques, but it typically boils down to weighted probabilities.

Somewhere in the code there might be something that says "jump 1% of the time when you see a green pixel". If that leads to a good outcome, the next time that is upped to 2%, then 3%, then 4%, until it reaches some optimal value. That, combined with dozens of similar statements, allows the algorithm to eventually dial in those values to what will win the game. The learning is the process of figuring out what those values should me.

How does the computer understands an outcome was good? This is specially confusing when I thing about a complex game like Dota and bots learning to defeat the best in the world. Feels like it's easy to misguide the computer.

Don't humans need to add the objective and the tools? "You will use keyboard key inputs to go right until none of your controls respond" finishes a mario world stage.

The "jump when you see a green pixel" was randomly generated based on all data the algorithm could gather? Pixels at the screen + sound effects. Doesn't the algorithm needs a human to input where it needs to look for data, therefore limiting it's capabilities? Feels like if not we would have bots trying to browse the internet while supposed to finish mario world.

see more

How does the computer understands an outcome was good?

It is part of the programming. It might be along the lines of run the program 100 times, look at the result that got the furthest, look at the jumps it made, and increase their likelihood by 1%. Then look at the worst result, and reduce those jumps by 1%. Then do it again. And again. After a billion rounds or so, if you set things up right, it will find a strategy that works well.

Load more comments

First, a lot of Christians don't support Trump, it is primarily evangelicals.

They support him for two main reasons. First, he ticks the right boxes, says pro-life things, makes pro-religious gestures, opposes gay rights, etc. In the most cynical sense, they support him because he helps them advance their causes.

Second, he is not Hillary Clinton. Since 1992, the religious right has make the Clintons, and Hillary in general, the poster child for everything they are against. The conspiracy theories they have built around her are astounding, she has people killed who oppose her, she's a lesbian, she's a satanist, she's a witch, she is going to turn the US over the UN, she wants to turn everyone gay, she is going to ban religion. Given the caricature most of them had for her, many would have voted for Bin Laden before voting for her.

Why is it such a pervasive belief that children should be raised with some... doesn’t matter which... any religion?

Most people follow some variation of this general pattern:

  • < 12 - belief everything your parents say
  • teen - reject everything your parents say
  • 20s - have lots of adult fun that your parents will say is irresponsible and immoral
  • 30s - oh shit, I am married and have kids now, maybe my parents were right after all

That last transition is the important one. When people start raising a family, they want stability and to be a good example for their children. This means less sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll, and a return to their parents' values to become good, responsible people. Save money, take your job more seriously, less drinking and going out, etc. Religion gets lumped into what good people do, it is often less about faith and more about conformity.

Drilling down a bit, there is a big emotional difference between being a bad believer and rejecting your faith. You might break commandments and not go to church when you are younger, but that is just the wild phase everyone goes through, you will eventually outgrow it. But not raising your child in your nominal faith, that is crossing a line, but for yourself, and those around you. Many people never muster the courage or motivation to step across it.

Or you can say it's greed :)

see more

Of course it is greed.

But greed still follows the laws of economics. The greedy don't want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg, they want their money machine to keep running.

Surly it's not possible for earnings to continue to grow forever?

see more

Forever, no, but for the foreseeable future, yes.

It is the same way that the oceans might someday run out of water, but it isn't something we will be worrying about anytime soon.

Also, some companies do reach a saturation point. You can only build so many Walmarts or Starbucks until all you are doing is cannabilizing sales from your existing stores. Companies like that tend to move from a growth phase to a dividend phase, where investors are ok with growth that only paced inflation, in exchange for a greater share of the profits.

Load more comments

Have you asked a Christian why Islam is wrong and a Muslim why Christianity is wrong, for example? They're not gonna say that it's due to a lack of evidence and a scientific understanding of the natural world and due to the history of the creating of gods and religions by man. No, they'll say the devil corrupted the other text or they really do experience the true god but interpreted it wrong. These reasons are completely different than why I, at least, believe both to be incorrect.

see more

I have, and sometimes it is exactly as you describe. But it is still a useful exercise to ask them how they know it isn't their version that isn't the corrupted one. How is it that you are right when there is someone in Tehran who is just as smart as you who believes just as strongly in Islam.

Also, religious people often choose to get offended by the suggestion they and their entire religious community is living a lie. They often shift the argument from evidence and logic to "are you calling me a lair?!!" Pointing out they are doing the exact same thing to other religious helps to defuse this tactic.

Is there going to be a funeral? Funerals are about loved ones celebrating the life of the deceased, trying to do that with an infant makes the tragedy sting that much more. Often there isn't much ceremony, just a quiet burial.

The reality there is almost nothing tangible you can to do make a difference here. Just be there and provide the occasional distraction and let them say and do what they want with you.

It is the same reason cops let people get away with speeding. By having everyone be technically guilty, they can selectively enforce the law whenever they like. For cops, it is to create probably cause on demand, for a bishop, retaliation.

u/kouhoutek
Karma
224,320
Cake day
April 10, 2008
Moderator of these communities
r/explainlikeimfive

15,776,409 subscribers

r/rant

46,692 subscribers

r/icon

14,197 subscribers

Trophy Case (11)
Ten-Year Club

Secret Santa

2016

Secret Santa

2015

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.