Datasets:

tomekkorbak

/

shp_with_features

like 0

pzqdk2

explainlikeimfive_train

Explain like I'm five years old: How can dishwashers at restaurants clean dishes in two minutes where a home dishwasher needs an hour?

hf3tdor

hf2m3sm

Also note that your home dishwasher needs to cope with days old dried in food while restaurants plates and such has only been used for the duration of a meal and probably not much longer. My dishwasher has a program for recently used items that takes around 30 minutes. To shave of minutes from that add pre rinsing with those overhead hose things and the dishwasher itself has higher pressure and temperature,as well as preheated water.

Because the machine just desinfect the dishes and gives them the glare we clean them by Hand First to get everything off the machine wouldnt be able to or just isnt worth because youd have to clean it after every second use.

e4jdmo

asksciencefiction_train

[Star Wars] Could Palpatine have just eroded the Jedi council's political power while working to disillusion the younger generation of knights instead of purging them from the Galaxy? Obviously, his plan worked, so it's hard to argue with the results. But it seems as though Palpatine's plan was needlessly convoluted. I imagine that discrediting and undermining the council probably would've been easier and more full proof than starting a war that you're running on both sides, trusting that an entire army is brainwashed enough to carry out your orders, and banking that one guy would switch sides in such a way as to convince an entire galactic Senate to cede it's power.

f9by00i

f9cg9bk

No, because that would still leave them open to act against him. In creating the war, he set the Jedi up to fail as public opinion turned against them, and then with Order 66 he made sure that they wouldn't be able to resist his new regime.

The war was an inescapable trap for the Jedi. In chess one of the aims is to ensnare your opponent so that all their move possibilities lead to losing. War was the lose-lose scenario for the Jedi. Peaceful warrior is a contradiction, and the Jedi had lost their way to the extent of not being able to see the true and patient path. They went the quick and easy route: win a war by overcoming your opponent. That is the sith way, the dark side. As soon as the Jedi entered the war as soldiers, Palpatine had won. The most effective downfalls are the ones we elect for ourselves. A devious individual only needs to set the board so all the choices are bad ones, and then watch their target self-destruct. It's what Helmut Zemo did to the Avengers, what Iago did to Othello, and a long time ago what Palpatine did to everyone: loved ones & Anakin, Windu & Anakin, Vader & Luke, War & Jedi, etc. Nullifying these devious entrapments requires the nimbleness, an ability to be like water and respond to the calls of the Force. Rigidity and certainty are catnip for the lose-lose trap. To endure one must open up and reach out, but at the time the Jedi were a closed community of stoics. Palpatine picked the perfect weapon for the job.

u2tq3m

askhr_train

[AL] Can my boss really ask me to buy a new car for work? Hi all, To start my company is a fairly small firm. We have no real HR and the boss is always right. I had a weird conversation with my boss today. I have never gotten an official title change, but I represent my company in some capacities after a few years here. I often drive within the city and represent us. I am a graphic designer. Today boss called me into his office first thing, 8 am. Said "Good morning N. I received a complaint about your vehicle and it made me realize that I agree it is inappropriate for someone representing our company. I know it's a little difficult to get cars right now but I need you to make the effort. I need you to have a new car by the end of the month. We pay you enough. You can have Friday as a paid day off to go shopping." I feel this is very inappropriate. My vehicle is a 1983 Honda Accord hatchback. Pristine paint job and interior. Absolutely nothing wrong with this car -- I have put more into making it look nice than I initially paid for it. It's not tacky or flashy in any way -- just a clean white car with tan leather interior. I think it's a cool car. I deliberately chose it because I think it's a cool car. I am a graphic designer and appreciate aesthetics. I have no need for or desire to own a second car. I asked my boss if a company car was an option and he said "You buy clothes that are appropriate for work. Your car is the same thing." Thoughts? How common/appropriate is this? It feels insane to be told I need a new car to keep a job, but I do enjoy my job and have had a good relation with my boss so far. I am trying to figure out how to neutralize the situation and resume status quo if at all possible.

i4mig9p

i4ms9dn

Telling you he pays you enough is awful. He has no idea what your bills are and how you spend your money. SMH. Sorry you're dealing with this, I'd find a new employer ASAP.

Go tell him you bought a Tesla and have to wait 6 mos. Use that time to find a new job.

u1d38w

asksciencefiction_train

[DC] Why is Batman so convinced he'd become evil if he were to ever kill for any reason?

i4cp7wj

i4cbn31

If Injustice has taught us anything, is that when Supers decide to take the matter of justice into their own hands and start playing judge, jury and executioner, then things will go very, very badly. Batman is not a superhuman, but his intellect, wealth and connections still make him a VERY powerful person nonetheless. So powerful that if he decided to kill criminals, no one in Gotham could stop him... and given how deranged and despicable a LOT of Gotham criminals are, he'd be very tempted to kill them all. The Joker may be the most straightforward example, but he's just the tip of the iceberg really. If Batman decides to kill him, then for the same reasons he'd have to kill Scarecrow, Riddler, Zsasz... all vile killers who are almost as irredeemable and dangerous as the Joker. And after that, he wouldn't be able to stop either, because he'd need to kill those who'd try to fill the power vacuum in Gotham's criminality. And after killing so many, the act of extinguishing a life would most likely become banal and easy, and instead of a line he would never cross it'd turn into Batman's go-to solution for dealing with criminals. Hell, it might even get addicting for the Cape Crusaders to do so. So yeah, Batman doesn't trust himself to become judge, jury and executioner, because he doesn't actually answer to a superior power and he knows how it would likely end up. Keep in mind that Batman is basically a vigilante, which means he's technically a criminal himself, and the only thing that make him "acceptable" for the police forces and most gotham denizes is the fact that he CLEARLY doesn't kill. That said, I think that if Gotham instated the death penalty and the state decided to lawfully execute the Joker or any other such criminal, Batman would not save them. He'd hunt them down, give them to the authorities and watch as they are killed.

I think the simple answer is that he's a vigilante citizen who works with the police. While he may not operate under police protocols, he is still respected by law enforcement and seems to have a sort of unofficial agreement with them. Back in the day the character Batman was known as "The world's greatest detective." He's basically a super cop. If he murdered someone it would destroy any goodwill he may have with the police, and likely the feds would be brought in. Since he's so high profile, not to mention his documented skills and general ability to kick ass, they would probably hunt him mercilessly.

wc33kf

explainlikeimfive_train

Explain like I'm five years old: Why do we still use concrete and asphalt for our roadways? Why have we not found a better material that is less prone to potholes and always feels smooth to drive on?

iiab8za

iiagkl4

Money. Think of how many square km of the Earth is paved - the area of ALL the roads and parking lots in the world is GIGANTIC. That means cost is going to be a high-priority factor in deciding what material is "best" to use, because whatever we use we're going to need a LOT of it. Concrete and asphalt actually do a darn good job of resisting damage and potholes given the abuse they face (we take this for granted but hundreds-to-thousands of multi-ton moving weight loads per day is formidable wear and tear on *any* material. A material would have to be remarkably strong AND flexible to do the job any better than what we use now. And concrete and asphalt are mostly made of regular rocks, meaning they're also incredibly cheap per area covered. It's been impossible to find a material that's any better that wouldn't also be several times more expensive. And nobody wants all roads to be 5x (or 50x) more expensive to have fewer potholes for a little longer. It's just not worth it.

>less prone to potholes and always feels smooth to drive on This is more of a maintenance problem. If authorities devote the necessary resources to find and fix the occasional cracks before they snowball into bigger problems, asphalt roads can be kept in excellent condition.

buyfd7

changemyview_train

CMV: Tipping as a practice should be done away with and restaurants should instead pay their workers a living wage A lot of restaurants, as you may know especially if you’ve worked in the service sector, do not pay their employees minimum wage. Instead, they rely on tipshares to make up for whatever they are not paying their employees. This is effective in keeping costs lower than they would typically be, but it seems like a failed practice elsewhere. Some people just don’t tip, or don’t know how to tip appropriately. Servers are under a lot more pressure and stress than they might be if they knew they would have a guaranteed steady wage. Overall, it’s a strange practice and I think it’s ineffective. Some of the arguments against this are that it keeps prices lower, but hypothetically you’re just adding what you would normally pay as a tip onto the price of a meal. The amount you spend won’t necessarily change (given that you’re tipping properly). Another is that servers will be further incentivized to give good service if they are being tipped, but restaurant work shouldn’t be different that types of work where you’re not being tipped; if you’re a good employee, your performance should be good. The level of service you provide won’t necessarily change because you aren’t dependent on tips. I think the levels of stress and duress would also be lower, and the atmosphere of working in a restaurant would be far more pleasant without that added pressure. I think, overall, abolishing the practice of tipping seems the most efficient and logical thing to do.

epjbecb

epk52bl

When tips are accounted for the large majority of servers make way more than minimum wage and those working in "nice" restaurants can make damn near $100k/yr. The possibility of making a comfortable living that is mostly in cash (tax-free) is why so many people become servers and if we stopped tipping and made them make a set wage (i.e. placed a wage ceiling on their earnings) we would have much less people willing to do the job and those who were willing with no incentive to do it well. Given that 70% of our GDP comes from consumption and our entire economy is held up by our service industries, disincentificing people to work in said industry and provide consumers a great experience that they will be willing to continue to consume is a recipe for economic disaster.

TL;dr - lots of people will lose out while new employees and new owners may see a benefit and a raise Working on sales allows for us to pay waiters more per hour **Back of the napkin math** Based on the average redditor waitstaff, * a good waiter can easily handle working 4 table top set * An average per person ticket at olive garden is 17.50, * the average 2.5 person family per table * spending an hour eating and camping at the table * plus giving the 15% min tip Means a waiter can make 26.25 an hour in Tips how much a Friday and Saturday or Sunday with a 5 top schedule with a higher tip amount is * Let's say more per table rounded to 3 * Higher Tips 18% * 47.25 an hour https://www.reddit.com/r/TalesFromYourServer/comments/4xjaqy/how_many_tables_can_you_handle_comfortably/ ---- As an example lets compare the costs at Olive Garden * The largest Italian eatery 7 times bigger than its next competitor and half of Darden Restaurants * Olive Garden rules limit servers to 3 tables, but glassdoor list hourly pay at $4/Hr, so cost to business would be higher and lower impacted * Adjusted tip would be as low as $19.69 or up to $28.35 An average Store | Total ---|---|---- Sales | $4,769,000 Food | $1,346,000 Labor | $1,528,000 Equipment | $828,000 Admin & Marketing | $665,000 Profit | $401,000 vs. An average Store | Total Spending | ---|---|---- Sales Tips Included | $5,666,000 Food | $1,346,000 Labor @ 15/Hr Waitstaff | $2,765,000 Equipment | $828,000 Admin & Marketing | $665,000 Profit | $60,275 Sales include 20% price increase for Tips Included * Other things to consider are who else will get a wage increase. In the above example waiters went from making $4 an hour to $15 from the business. * Are cooks now expecting a raise, * Hostess and Table Bus Service > The “Farm Bill of 2008 authorized a $20 million pilot study USDA The Impact of Food Prices on Consumption: A Systematic Review of Research on the Price Elasticity of Demand for Food examining the use of price incentives to promote consumption of fruits, vegetables, and other healthy foods among food stamp recipients. On the basis of our mean price elasticity of 0.70 for fruits and 0.58 for vegetables, a 10% reduction in the price of these foods would increase purchases on average by 7.0% and 5.8%, respectively. > **And of course the opposite is true**. Price elasticities for foods and nonalcoholic beverages ranged from 0.27 to 0.81 (absolute values), with food away from home, soft drinks, juice, and meats being most responsive to price changes (0.7–0.8). our estimates of the price elasticity of soft drinks suggest that a 10% tax on soft drinks could lead to an 8% to 10% reduction in purchases of these beverages. * Based on this, since the price is similar, but is a price increase we'll assume a 1% drop in customers who do believe its to expensive * Non-Tippers or Price Reflexive Consumers * Some Businesses won't include this and the biggest competitor being fast causal won't have to increase their price making them 20%+ cheaper edit double numbers

nb7qx5

explainlikeimfive_train

Explain like I'm five years old: why do we say “uhm” when we’re thinking? I’m multilingual and it seems to apply to most languages. What makes it so “universal”?

gxy3npi

gxykcjs

In Khmer, “uhm” could be interpreted as the word “suckle”. Like a baby feeding. It may also be the reason why Ma or mom or mama is also so universal. We probably learn to create that “M” sound early because we use the same facial muscles to suckle. A skill we need to learn quickly to survive. Therefore it is our most common word and would make sense that it’s our default word for filling in the spaces.

If your mouth is completely relaxed you just make this shwa sound, also called the neutral vowel. When you close that completely relaxed mouth it will make an mm sound. So uhm is about the lowest effort sound you can make, ideal as a filler.

cmhqbv

askengineers_train

What small things have you put in projects just for giggles Today I was labeling parts on a picture for work institutions on Microsoft word. I decided to use comic sans as the font because, well, everyone hates comic sans. What small things have you done at work just to entertain yourself?

ew2ta58

ew2rjqd

Not a project but I built an excel calculator last year, and if something wasn’t input right it spat out “you forgot something, dumbass.” I was really the only one using it so it was more of a check for me. And a giggle

Sometimes I wrote dirty jokes in binary under where the ics mount on the silkscreen. I also worked on a project where we were making a little rov submarine, and my son loved these little green lantern action figures, so for all of the tests I would put one in as the "captain". The first one that came off the production line I dropped one in and he's out there today :)

f0u90p

changemyview_train

CMV: Ties serve no purpose. We should get rid of ties. Ties suck. It's a piece of fabric we wear, around our neck, one of the more *uncomfortable places* to wear clothes, because... why? seemingly because other people are wearing them. I don't identify with idea that it "looks professional", because I don't believe that's a good justifcation. I believe so much of our view of others appearance is socially constructed, and Ties are the nexus of all that nonsense. ​ I mean can you imagine anybody volunteering to do this if nobody ever had? I'd be happy to have my mind changed.

fgyaxei

fgyq3qy

It ties the whole outfit together. Its professional because everything was done deliberately and that is all. The more deliberate the more professional.

It's an opportunity for some color. Most sports coats are one color. Most people match their sport coat with their pants. Undershirts can be a second color, but is usually a boring color. Pocket squares exist, but are uncommon and can readily fall out. Ties, can be as colorful as you want without violating tradition. They are centered as to attract attention to their colorfulness. Ties don't just fall off like pocket squares (also more centered than pocket squares). If your pants are black and your coat is black and you undershirt is dark gray, it's somewhere to go nuts with that red/blue/yellow pocka dots - without violating social customs.

pn4tgq

askbaking_train

Is it possible to add pockets of honey in my cake? Basically I make this honey cake that’s really good. But I want to make it better so that when I cut into it, there are “bubbles” of honey that leak out of it. So if I add half my batter to the pan, make little dents into the batter, pour honey into the dents and cover that with the rest of the batter would that work?

hcmwvi3

hcmx463

I'd guess you'd be better off freezing it and embedding, but there's a good chance the honey will get absorbed into the cake, or not be honey texture by the time it's done baking. It's worth trying though!

You could try freezing the honey in a small sized ice cube mold (or something similar). Toss those frozen bits in flour and fold into the batter. That may work. Sounds delicious, hope it turns out awesome.

8g2dhr

askacademia_train

Addressing Professors By First Name If a professor signs their emails with just their first name when replying to you, is that an invitation to address them by their first name or should you keep calling them Dr. Lastname? Particularly in emails, where you open with “Hi Dr. Lastname,” or “Hi Firstname,”. I’ve done both and thus have probably offended half of my professors...

dy8gu8z

dy8sahp

As a grad student, despite my professors signing their first name....I just don’t feel comfortable saying “Hi, Dan.” It feels weird and unprofessional to me. Maybe it’s because I am his/her subordinate....but I would much prefer to address a professor as “Dr. Lastname.” I always wondered about this too, op!!

Just ask "How do you prefer to be addressed?" Convention varies a lot by campus, department, and individual. On my campus \*most\* faculty are on a first name basis with students, but there are exceptions. I've always been a first\-name person, and I find it mildly annoying when students continue to call me "Dr. Albino" when I have asked them multiple times to use my first name. Email is even more casual, but if you haven't asked or been told to use first names, it's fine to use "Hi Professor" as a salutation. Some of mine do both, "Hi Professor Albino," while other just use my first name. The key, in any case, is to ask. Then there will be no confusion.

ubu42p

askphysics_train

I posted something saying Kilowatts is a rate, not an amount on energy it every comment is saying I'm wrong. Can someone confirm that I'm not going crazy? I posted this: https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/ubtfe7/thats_not_how_electricity_works_kw_is_a_rate_its/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share I am quite confident that kWh is the total amount, not a rate. But every comment is saying the opposite. Am making a mistake?

i66hvp4

i66lnyl

Watts = Volts \* Amps, measured instantaneously Watt Hours is a quantity, accumulated over time

You're right, they are idiots.

oideno

askbaking_train

Best sugar substitute for banana bread? I've been making a loaf about once every other week, it's kinda the only "sweets" or sugary food I make at home. Regular recipe, cardamom recipe, coconut recipe, today I'm gonna make a chai one. My only issue tho is I realized every slice had like 20g of sugar and I was thinking is there a better way I can make it have less sugar? I don't need no added sugar at all, a few grams is fine with me but 20g means like 2 slices and I'm over the daily limit. Based off my googling it seems stevia or Splenda or honey would be good substitutes, does anyone have a good overall recommendation that I can use for every new recipe I try?out? Since bakings a science I'm sure substituting could really change things so I figured to ask for help.

h4w05jn

h4vcirk

Bananas are one of the higher sugar fruits. So, a certain amount of your daily value of sugar is coming from the bananas themselves. Stevia has an aftertaste. It works well for some things, but I think it would make banana bread taste kinda funny. I've never heard of someone baking with Splenda. I'm not sure how it reacts to heat, but my gut instinct is that it's not really intended for baking. Swerve is a sugar plus sugar substitute blend. It works really well for baking and would fit into your desire for lower but not necessarily no added sugars. If you're open to a straight up sugar substitute, I strongly recommend Lakanto's monk fruit plus erythritol sweetener. It has all the same baking properties as regular granulated sugar, and every time I do a head to head taste test, people can't tell the difference when it's used in my baking. In terms of chemistry, erythritol and Splenda are similar, but the number of people who get an upset stomach from erythritol is much lower than with Splenda. As for honey, I don't know why it is suggested by so many people as a way of "lowering sugar." Honey is a very concentrated version of sugar and it absorbs into the body quickly. It tastes great and I'm all for using it for its flavor and sticky qualities, but honey isn't a sugar substitute, it's just another version of sugar (with all the unwanted effects on our waistlines).

I use Alton Brown’s recipe for banana nut bread. I find that I can cut the sugar in half and still have something tasty with a good texture.

a5djk3

askengineers_train

theoretically, could companies afford to directly train and hire would be electrical and/or mechanical engineers off the street without the hirees attaining any formal engineering degrees just like they used to do through apprenticeships? why or why not?

ebm0k7d

ebltwfk

I used to live in the UK where Engineering apprenticeships are common. I also used to teach and coordinate a civil engineering programme. The students would come in at the same level as University undergrads. They would work 4 days under a mentor and come to us for formal classes once per week. This continues for 4 years until students had a level 5 HND, which allowed them to transfer into their final year of university for their bachelor's. They got paid 13,000 pound per year, had a garaunteed job at the end of it all and had all their university fees paid too! A pretty good deal if you don't mind the extra years.

In Canada no they couldn't. Here engineer is a protected term and to be able to call yourself one and be able to stamp engineering work you need to be registered. You can't register without a Batchelors in engineering.

j09kkz

askbaking_train

Highlighting Vanilla bean paste I received some vanilla bean paste as a birthday present. (I asked for it). I haven't really used it before. I'd like to try it in a recipe that really highlights the vanilla bean paste and brings it to the forefront. I have heard that it enhances the flavor of just about everything, so even if you use it in like chocolate chip cookies, it just makes the cookies taste better, but I would like a couple basic test run recipes that really show off the ingredient. Any ideas would be welcome. Either of specific recipes or of types of baking to try. Thanks

g6piarn

g6pthhz

I find vanilla as a flavor is fantastic in anything that's not baked. Custards, ice cream, mousse...the works. Something like a pound cake isn't going to be as strong, as the high heat and long baking time will drive.off much of the volatile compounds in the vanilla.

I'm also going to say pastry cream, but make it MOUSSELINE. It will change your life.

gx8uzk

askengineers_train

Book recommendations for an engineer graduate? What books should every engineer read??

fszy7vr

ft09zdp

The existential pleasures of engineering - Samuel Florman - a pleasant walk through how an engineers mind works.

*How to Win Friends and Influence People* by Dale Carnegie *To Engineer is Human* by Henry Petroski *Letters to a Young Scientist* by Edward O. Wilson

raf79y

askculinary_train

Could I have recovered my mashed potatoes? I made the worst mashed potatoes of my life on Saturday. The taste was fine; well seasoned, added pepper, a little bit of brie, and some chives. But they were gluey pasty mess, barely edible. Here's what I did and where I think things went horribly wrong. My plan was to try using baked potatoes for the mashed. But because of some holiday bazaar gift buying events, I needed to get the potatoes prepped ahead of time. So I baked the potatoes in the morning, let them cool and fridged 'em until later. Several hours later I tried peeling the (now) chilled baked potatoes by cutting in half and using a spoon to scoop out the cooked potato flesh. That ended up being a horror show and didn't work. Next I tried putting the baked potato chunks through my ricer and that didn't work either; potatoes were too hard to push through all them tiny holes. At this point I'm slightly panicking because everything else is done and I just need some damn potatoes. Next I put all the potatoes in a food processor and just chopped them up as much as I could, followed by trying to whip them up with an electric hand mixer and then transferred to a pot on the stove. Added melted butter and then warmed cream slowly and kept trying to whip, kept adding butter and milk hoping that it would cause the mash to loosen up. No luck, just gluey lump awfulness that tasted actually pretty all right, but worst texture ever, basically inedible. I'm assuming that my biggest mistake was letting the baked potatoes cool before scooping the flesh, but was that really my mistake? And was there any point in this process that I could have done something differently and saved this whole mess?

hnhw2ci

hnhucgo

1. Letting potatoes cool makes everything harder but doesn't ruin them necessarily. 2. Working potatoes to much causes them to become gluey, cold potatoes higher that risk by making them harder to process. I would recommend to peel and mash them before cooling and only stirring in hot dairy to warm them back up and then finish them with butter seasonings etc.

Were the baked potatoes fully cooked? I'm curious how they got too hard to push through the ricer. Just being room-temp shouldn't make them too hard to scoop out or process in the ricer.

50mvsr

asksciencefiction_train

[MCU] Would whispering "Hail Hydra" into somebody's ear actually identify undercover HYDRA agents? Question was inspired by the Winter Soldier HISHE.

d75rnko

d75wjck

Well, before The fall of sheild, only hydra agents knew that hydra still existed. Everyone else thought it died 70 years ago. After The fall of sheild, hydra agents became a lot of careful. In aos, some hydra agents doesnt trust ward when he says hail hydra, and Hunter uses it to infilitrate hydra at one point

Probably.

pl4ahc

legaladvice_train

I've just been informed my ex wife is moving across the country. We have joint physical 50/50 company of my 16 year old son in California. How does this work? Just like the title says, my ex wife just informed me via email that they're moving to Idaho, from California, with our 16 year old son. She says he picked to go with them and wants to avoid a legal battle, as she has to be at work on Oct 25, 2021. I'm aware that when he turned 14 or 15 he was allowed to choose which parent to live with. I'm a stay at home dad with my new wife and kids, I do not have a job, that is my job, to take care of the kids. How does any of this work? I can't afford a lawyer, she says she wants to do mediation. Will I have to pay child support now? Do I agree to anything? This is all very sudden and came out of nowhere and we're scrambling to figure out what to do now

hc7x6nd

hc7snfy

Don't agree to anything. Don't sign anything. You need to beg or borrow money for a lawyer, and you need to do it quickly. >I'm aware that when he turned 14 or 15 he was allowed to choose which parent to live with. Unless you have a court order that explicitly says that (which I doubt), that isn't true. The child has a say, but the court makes the decision.

Don't agree to anything you don't want, you're going to have to figure out how to afford a lawyer and look into what local resources you may have available, Look at your divorce paper work to see what it says about this kind of stuff. That's pretty shitty of her to do this to you. Good luck.

wajbct

explainlikeimfive_train

Explain like I'm five years old: What would happen if you put regular gasoline in a diesel engine or vice versa?

ii1ntgj

ii1jmek

The answers here are I think missing something important, which is that the engines are specifically designed to run fundamentally differently. A diesel cycle compresses the air; as it compresses the molecules bounce off each other more and more, getting hotter and hotter, until they ignite the fuel. Then the fuel burns off. However, a gasoline engine doesn't compress the fuel/air mixture nearly as much, and uses a spark to do the igniting. This is because gasoline is far more volatile than diesel and ignites much easier. There are benefits to each: gasoline is cheaper and easier to ignite, but then the timing of the ignition is much more important to keep from tearing up the engine. Diesel has more energy per gallon (138 kBtu/gal vs. 124), but must be compressed and warmed up significantly (\~150 degrees) before it ignites. So diesel is more expensive and worse for cold-weather startups, but also much more energy efficient and cleaner-burning. ​ When you understand that, you can guess some of the problems. Put gasoline in a diesel engine, and it will likely explode under compression, causing major engine damage. Put diesel in a gasoline engine, and you will likely be unable to get it started, or certainly to keep it running (because of the higher vaporization point), and even if you do you will probably muck up your engine as it won't efficiently burn off the diesel. ​ In many cases, modern car sensors will stop the car in its tracks if you get it wrong...but I wouldn't bet money on it. Be careful which pump you choose.

from Experience: VW Jetta Went to a full service gas station, got it filled up. They put in diesel... Results, the car did not make it 1000', gas station denied any responsibility... had to get the tank drained. didn't have trouble with it afterward.

1ja9vt

asksocialscience_train

What would be the positive and the negative economic effects of abolishing patents?

cbcrj82

cbcuxyh

I think you'd see an immediate end to all pharm research. The R&D costs of bringing a new product from first discovery to FDA approval is in the hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars and easily takes a decade. The only way to recoup these costs is the temporary legal monopoly on production that a patent provides. This is true for really any R&D intensive product, from microchips to aerospace. These things, or the processes that make them, are often fairly easy to copy by an expert who can observe the process or the product. If you can't ensure legal ability to prevent people from using them or requiring that they pay you for the advancement, any type of costly, long-term research by private investors is off the table. For more on this, and other problems of commercializing advanced innovations, check out Scott Shane's book Academic Entrepreneurship

I had the privilege of seeing Alex Tabarrok, an economist from GMU, give a presentation on innovation. He has made the argument that patent laws and innovation follow a similar relationship to tax rates and government revenue, as demonstrated by the Laffer Curve] (http://i.investopedia.com/inv/dictionary/terms/laffercurve.gif). That is, that patent laws (measured by patent strength) increase innovation up to a certain point of efficiency, and past that point of efficiency they decrease innovation. Calling it the [Tabarrok Curve, he agrees that protection of intellectual property (patents) is useful in promoting innovation by guaranteeing that hard earned intellectual innovations will be protected by property rights. But he also argues that past a certain point innovators will start to use patents in a socially costly way. That is, they will use patents as a defensive measure. For example, under the first-to-file law, a competitive firm has the ability to claim and purchase patent rights to a certain product that their competitor is developing and tuck it away. They have no intention on developing the product themselves, just keeping it away from their competitor. Here is a fictitious example: Google can purchase the patent rights to a certain software development that Yahoo is working on. So long as Google claims the rights first, they legally own the software development. Google will then have the ability to prevent Yahoo from coming out with the development and keep a competitive advantage. The result is bickering in lawsuits, wasting time, money, paper and intellectual pursuit. The point is, that at a certain point, patent laws become too restrictive. Yes they are useful, but as most things in economics, there is a point of diminishing returns. So to answer your question, economic activity would slow to a halt with no patent laws. BUT patent laws that are too numerous and complex (as many believe they are) do the same to economic activity, as explained by the Tabarrok Curve.

lvjl0k

askdocs_train

Could taste buds be permanently damaged through child abuse? This is about a 14 year old foster kid. Otherwise healthy. We suspect his parents may have tortured him when he was younger by burning his mouth or other ways. He’s hinted at it and now he says food doesn’t taste like anything or doesn’t taste good. Is it possible that damage to the mouth could permanently damage the tongue or will taste buds always regenerate?

gpcinsx

gpcn3of

Get him tested for COVID if this is a new development.

Not a doctor. Could it possibly be psychological. A defense mechanism built to shield his taste (and possibly other senses) from his abhorrent upbringing/punishments (e.g. soap in mouth... ). Is there any oral scarring/discoloration/receding or damaged gums?

evfi11

askphilosophy_train

Is math actually related to science? We've all seen the interaction between Katy Perry and Neil de Grasse Tyson about math and whether it's related to science. She's still getting flak for it because people make a direct link between those two concepts, but the answer to that question just doesn't feel that obvious to me. Neil's answers sound unwarranted, especially when he says we invented math. Is being a Platonist not an option anymore? I'm posting this question on this specific sub because I feel philosophy is the best lens through which we can entertain it. It seems egregious no one bothered to ask "what is meant by 'related'?", for example. Would that imply all sciences use math, and do they?

ffwmg11

ffvzclv

Well, I would say that here you are facing a big problem, namely The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences. Take a look at the article by Eugene Wigner; it might be interesting to you.

>Is being a Platonist not an option anymore? Lakoff and Nuñez argue in 'where mathematics comes from' that being a platonist is something that we just can't prove.

oavmnn

askengineers_train

Settle a debate: better to leave the air conditioning on when you’re out for a few days or off and re-cool the house? HVAC types- I’m in New England and it’s hot but not Portland OR hot. We’ll be out for 2 days and the temps will be in the 90s. We have several mini split systems in the house. When we leave it off for for a few hours the house gets up to the 80s but seems not to go above 83/84 inside. It’s fairly humid so the dehumidifier aspects are one of our concerns. If we do turn on the A/C we leave up pretty high but enough to cool a little. So on or off?

h3jv8kl

h3jvkuu

what the hell? you leave the AC on h24?

I live in FL. We always have the AC set at 80 during the day or off if I'm home. Our house is poorly insulated and it can't keep up. Never run no AC to prevent mold but we haven't had issues when its in the 80's.

lz1rcm

changemyview_train

CMV: Nuclear Power is the only means of producing energy that is reasonable to pursue in developed countries, until we have 100% clean fusion power. I live in Sweden, a country where fossil fuels stand for less than a percent of the total electricity production. In order for the world to turn green, every country must follow this example and minimise their usage of fossil fuels. Sweden is currently phasing out all of its Nuclear Reactors and investing in what the government believes are safer options, Solar, Hydroelectric and Wind energy. The problem that we have faced just this winter and many winters before is that it is rarely sunny, there isn't always wind and sometimes there isn't even enough water to go around. This creates an unstable effect in the energy grid and to compensate for that, the government are making multi million investments in infrastructure to make the grid more tolerant to these changes. Not only would it be cheaper to continue operating existing nuclear power plants but it would also provide more reliable electricity and more of it when it is required. Because thats the thing with nuclear energy, as long as you have fuel you can get A LOT of electricity out of it. When the grid demands more electricity, simply pull out the control rods and produce more. When the grid requires less electricity, put in the control rods and slow the reaction. Nuclear energy as it exists right now and with the second and third generation reactors that are most commonly in usage around the world are the most reliable, the most powerful and the most cost effective alternative to fossil fuels.

gpyzl6l

gpya4nj

I would love to try to change your view here, because I used to hold almost exactly the same view myself. It wasn’t until I spoke with a friend who had some expertise in the field that I was able to see why this strategy wouldn’t work. Now that’s not to say I’m anti-nuclear power, it absolutely has a place in our networks, but it’s not as practical a solution as it might seem. The reason for this, which conversely is the reason why we should invest more into renewables, comes down to two main factors: flexibility and cost. A nuclear plant can produce massive amounts of fairly clean energy, but they also are hindered by many restrictions inherently to their design. First of all, given the extremely high cost of building a reactor, they only really make sense for serving areas of relatively high population density. Cities are great candidates for nuclear power, but for more sparsely populated rural areas, which are common in the US, this simply isn’t a practical choice. Secondly, nuclear power plants have geographic and environmental requirements that aren’t always easy to meet. They need access to a source of fresh water for coolant, but that water needs to refresh enough that the power plant won’t cause it to warm excessively, which can be catastrophic for the aquatic environment. You also need to either build on land where waste will not pose a risk of seeping into groundwater, or you need to essentially seal the foundation off, which can be prohibitively expensive. Compounding matters further, you have to take weather and seismic events into consideration, which means more money spent protecting your reactor from unlikely, but potentially devastating, natural disasters. When combined, this actually significantly shrinks the number of areas where nuclear power would be appropriate in many nations. Conversely, while less efficient in producing energy, renewables face extremely few limitation. They’re incredibly cheap when compared to other ways of producing electricity, and can easily be scaled to accommodate different population densities. Renewable energy sources, and in particular solar energy, also tend to be very cost effective to upgrade as technology improves, thus increasing their flexibility. Redesigning a reactor might cost billions, upgrading a solar farm is literally just a manner of swapping out panels. Renewables also tend to be much less constrained by geographic prerequisites. Anywhere that has adequate sunlight is a candidate for solar, and anywhere that gets a decent amount of wind is good for wind power. The need to spend large amounts of money preparing for averse weather or seismic events is also lower, as the loss of any individual solar array or wind turbine has a far lower impact on the grid than an even partial output reduction from a nuclear plant. Given how easy they are to implement into power infrastructure, their cost effectiveness, and their capacity to be regularly upgraded, renewable power sources are something of a win-win for many nations, even if they aren’t able to completely eliminate need for other forms of power generation. To make a long story short, power generation is dependent on the population it serves and the geographic context in which it operates, with no one size fits all solution. Sweden, with relatively high population density in the south of the country, plentiful water sources for coolant, and few local extreme weather or seismic concerns is an unusually good candidate for nuclear power generation. Using renewables to supplement the grid, and perhaps even switching fully to renewables when that technology outpaces nuclear, is a good idea, but for now it makes sense for you guys to keep investing into nuclear power. For us Americans, nuclear power is a far less consistent solution. It might be a good option for replacing coal or natural gas plants in certain parts of the country, but in many areas it simply wouldn’t be practical. Instead, using quick and cheap to build renewable energy solutions is often a much better fit, even if this means some degree of fossil fuel generation is still needed. It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s one that’s affordable enough to actually be implemented, and flexible enough that it can easily accommodate further improvement.

Your argument makes sense for Sweden but does not apply globally. Because Nuclear is complicated and expensive technology, it is usually more economical to use a mix of wind hydro and solar. Solar energy in particular is much simpler and easier to scale. For example, I live in Phoenix Arizona, so it makes much more sense to build solar plants rather than nuclear. I will agree that Phasing out existing nukes is stupid: these plants are very expensive to build but cheap to operate, so it’s simply a waste of money to close one any earlier than necessary.

cjjmr2

askengineers_train

Is there a reason to get a PhD if you don't want to teach? I'm about to start my final undergrad year as a mechanical engineering student. I'm not super sure what I want to do yet in terms of career and I'm thinking about grad school. I was thinking of just getting a masters but one of my previous professors keeps trying to convince me to go for a PhD. He even said he would take me as a student in a heartbeat. I know I don't want to teach (I would not make a good professor), so I don't see a reason to go for a PhD. Can anyone, specifically engineers who have gone to grad school, give any advice or share your thoughts? Or for engineers who did not go to grad school, how did you know what specialty/industry to go into?

eve3lz1

eve21ei

If you're not sure, I personally would recommend working full time for a bit to see what you really like and get to know yourself more in a professional context. Then, you can specialize with a Master's or PhD if you want, but the key is understanding yourself better, and working full time really helped me understand myself before getting my Master's. Also, you can get your company to completely pay for it, so that's cool.

You can do pretty much whatever you want with a phd cuz you are trained to do something start to finish on your own with increasingly less help until you are the expert. Have a phd. Run my own projects on top of my normal day job.

c8xim5

changemyview_train

CMV: Making “coming out” such a big deal is actually holding back the ability for homosexuality to be 100% normalized in our society. Like with many other things that are considered *taboo*, shining a spotlight onto something, in a way, isolates it from everything else. The LBTQ community is constantly making an effort to normalize all sexualities and identities by using “coming out” videos, posts, etc. as a form of empowerment, but in doing so it points out to people, whether consciously or subconsciously, that they’re different and that accepting them is manual process instead of an automatic one. I understand why they do it. They want others to know that it’s okay and that everyone should be accepting of one another, and that you’re no different from me, but announcing it with flair makes it seem like you’re trying to be special and it contradicts your goal of wanting to be no different than anyone else.

esqwle5

essek12

It’s not LGBTQ people who wanted to make coming out a “thing,” it’s a heteronormative society. Either gay people can stand out or they can not exist. But they didn’t push themselves out of the mainstream, and it’s unfair to chastise them for not “fitting in” now.

I am gay myself so Ill just tell you my own situation and why I came out of the closet. I am quite masculin and almost all my friends are dudes. When you are 15, they make a lot of gay jokes and innapropriate comments. Ive heard people say that they wouldnt ever want to have gay friends, my dad always used to joke that gays are not allowed in his house, if I did something femenine it was considered "gay". This makes you scared and makes sure you feel alone. I was getting depressed not being who I wanted to be. I wanted to colour my hair, but was afraid that "they would find out I was gay" and a lot of things like that. So one night I just said it to my mom to get rid of the fear that kept mentally beating me down. And when you tell one person, you kinda have to tell a lot of them. Now, for me this was a big deal because this was a total shift in what I could and couldn't do. To my friends it was a huge deal since they didnt even understand a lot of aspects of it. My dad also had trouble accepting it. I wanted to kill myself for quite a while, but coming out helped me in the long run. Even if it is not a big deal for you, for your family and friends it often is. Its not the gays who make it a big deal, its circumstances and the people around you. Its a huge adjustment a lot of the time. Hope that helped.

jhp5re

askdocs_train

Period blood is pouring out of me 24F, Caucasian, 116 lbs, 5’8”, non-smoker, quit drinking in July, never been sexually active, went off BC (to control hormones) almost year ago due to clotting concerns (family history of multiple strokes), yes I am anemic. Current medications: Ondanestron, Wixela, iron supplements, Vitamin B,C supplements. Also, just had blood work done and thyroid panel and CBC all came back normal. Yesterday was the worst day I’ve ever experienced having a period. I soaked through 3 tampons in just under four hours. Decided to full stop the tampons and put a pad on, whilst doing that decided I need to use the restroom. To my surprise, instead of urine, blood poured out of me for a good ten seconds. I’m not just talking a little bit, I’m talking if you stood over the toilet with a full glass of water and poured it all out. When that was done, I wiped and was met with a clot the size of almost a golf ball. I’ve never had a period like this before. I have no energy, the blood coming out is not a familiar consistency of periods past, and I’m feeling so nauseous and fatigued. I’m calling on Monday to schedule a gynecologist appointment, but would like to hear opinions on what this sounds like to others.

ga1h24y

ga1nywn

Thanks for posting this. This is how most of my period are and have always been. Gonna make a call to my doctor now.

Any update?

wz55ab

legaladvice_train

Allstate deposited ~$20k to my bank account as a claims payment. It isn’t mine. Bank won’t reverse it, and Allstate doesn’t know why it was deposited but wants me to give them my account and routing #s to authorize them to pull it back. That seems wrong to me. What should I do? It seems risky to provide my bank details to Allstate to authorize them to “pull it back” because what if the original transaction subsequently gets reversed? Then I would be in the negative for authorizing them to pull funds that already got reversed. They are saying though that they can’t pull back the funds themselves because they don’t know the account they went to- that it was likely done by an Allstate customer fat-fingering account info when trying to transfer their claims payment off their claims debit card into their bank account. My current stance is that I will not give them my bank details and that they (and their customer) need to figure it out and reverse the initial transaction, and until then the $20k will sit untouched where it is. But they tell me that is stealing and will result in legal action being taken against me. What should I be doing? I’m obviously not trying to keep the money and not going to move the money or otherwise touch it, I just don’t want to initiate a transaction to move money that shouldn’t exist in the first place.

im0u6hp

im0zw66

Whoever you talked to at allstate is wrong. It is not theft. They deposited the money into your account all by themselves. Calling that theft is like saying "I parked my car in your front yard, therefore you stole my car." But that only means that you haven't committed a crime -- the money isn't yours. So, if Allstate wants, they can sue you for the money, and that's a lawsuit they would win. (So long as they don't wait so long as to be beyond the statute of limitations.) However, that lawsuit is a long way off and before it happens, Allstate would have to figure out how they accidentally paid you and, when they do, they're likely to reverse the transaction. After some period of time (I don't know how long), reversing it may not be possible and, in that case, they'd reach out to you again. So, you're doing the correct, and the reasonable thing. You've told Allstate that they accidentally gave you some money. Allstate has the ability to reverse the transaction, but hasn't done so. You don't have to give them your account information (after all, they ALREADY HAVE IT -- that's how you got the money.) And, your instinct is correct -- you don't want to initiate a new transaction when there's a possibility that the old one could be reversed, leaving yourself $20K in the hole (and having to go back to Allstate to get that $20K back -- good luck with that!) Somebody is missing their $20K. Eventually, the right people in Allstate will figure out the mistake and will reverse the transaction or will reach out to you, probably though your bank. THAT SAID, you may be able to get information from your bank about the initial deposit (like a reference number) that doesn't include your bank account information, but that Allstate could use to track down the errant transaction and reverse it.

Not a lawyer. Worked in banking bor 10 years. Every banking transaction, especially electronic transactions, have a unique transaction code that can be traced. People in branches and Customer service do not have access to this data, but investigators can request IT conduct a trace on the transaction that ended in the deposit to your acct. With the transaction code, Allstate (rather, their bank) will then be able to search their billions of transactions for that particular code, and will be able to help Allstate determine what claim brought about the payment and where the error was made in entering routing/account numbers. Make an appointment with your local branch manager. Bring your documentation. They should refer the matter to the appropriate investigator, who will work with IT to trace the transaction back, and will be able to contact Allstate regarding the errant transaction. Until then, do not move the money or change the account number. Changing that would make it impossible to 'reverse' the original transaction, which puts you in a position of having made the funds unavailable to Allstate. Not a good idea.

xzdez6

explainlikeimfive_train

Explain like I'm five years old: Why is the venom of a snake an essential ingredient in the anti-venom used to treat a bite from the same species?

irntpdh

iro4pal

They don't anymore, anti venereal is synthetic now and they don't need to know what sort of snake it was.

You basically need to train the immune system to fight the venom, so a tiny amount of it is used as training dummies. You put it into another animal's system (like maybe a horse) and then wait for its immune system to practice fighting it. Once it's produced a bunch of customized immune weapons (antibodies) that target the venom, you can collect that and deliver it into a human to help their system fight the venom.

xf0x8v

changemyview_train

CMV: Weapons of Mass Destruction are the worst creations in the history of Mankind. As the title says, Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are the worst and most worthless creations in the history of humankind. Things that serve no purpose except a threat to the existence of humans, nations and ultimately humanity itself. Though I believe it's a fairly accepted and popular opinion, I have heard some arguments in favour of WMDs. The main one being that the creations and purpose of these weapons is based mainly on deterrence not actual use, and i disagree. We have in a span of 70 years, already used these weapons of multiple occasions. And a system with a potential to wipe out nations, and even humanity itself in a matter of hours and days, is nothing but worthless danger, no matter how small the probability of use at any instant, if it happens the subsequent probability of destruction is very very high. A same argument stemming from this is that these weapons stop wars. But do they? Maybe yes maybe no, but keeping wars in check in the present, with the possibility of occurrence of an event (no matter how miniscule the probability) that might ensue a destruction at unimaginable scale in future is idiotic at best. Also this technology through spread is now out in the open, in the hands of tyrants such as Putin and Kim Jong Un, who in the face of their own adversity have the power to wipe of everything by the click of a button. Any such power, even in the hands of wisest of women and men is dangerous, let alone tyrants. My views are pertinent to WMDs, not the technology behind them. Per say development of nuclear technology is pivotal in meeting the energy needs of modern day society. Use of some chemicals is essential to many industries which were previously used as chemical weapons. My view is specifically concerned with the destructive use of the said technologies.

iok19v8

iojsckr

While the effects of their use are horrific I believe you could make a good argument that they have prevented many conventional large scale wars. If MAD wasn't a deterrent during the Cold War it is much more likely the USSR and NATO would have engaged in direct conventional warfare instead of smaller proxy wars and likely would have resulted in World War III. Even today if not for Russia's nuclear capabilities NATO and the UN would have likely directly intervened in the war in Ukraine which would likely result in direct conflict between NATO forces and Russia.

>A same argument stemming from this is that these weapons stop wars. But do they? Maybe yes maybe no, Yeah, maybe yes, maybe no. So let's ignore that, given that it's a draw, and focus just on how many people have been killed by them. I don't know what you count as a WMD, but let's just go with nuclear weapons for now. They killed a few hundred thousand directly, and perhaps that number goes in to the millions when you consider long term effects. That's total. *Ever*. Millions die from smoking alone, *every single year*. Let alone refined sugar, and other processed foods. Really, in the catalogue of human misery, weapons - of all kinds - are but a footnote.

3ywdkb

asksciencefiction_train

[Star Wars] Why is Palpatine desperate to get a powerful, young apprentice - first with Anakin, then with Luke? The obvious answer is that "If I don't turn them to the Dark Side, then they will grow to become powerful enemies as Jedi". Which is fine, I get it. But, in a world where the Emperor wishes to set up his Rule of One, seeing himself as the culmination of the Sith, why does he NEED a powerful apprentice? When Vader became a cyborg, surely he was perfect for the Emperor. Still exceptionally powerful (at around 80% of the Emperor's power, or thereabouts) and fully under the thumb to do his bidding. He had no need, in the Rule of One, to have someone to teach all of the Sith secrets to. Just subordinates to exercise his will. And yet, at least in the old EU, the Emperor demonstrated nothing but disappointment that he was robbed of a powerful apprentice that 'could have been'. So much so that he kept trying to get him killed off. But a fully powered Vader may well have grown strong enough to defeat the Emperor, and therefore undo all the good work in setting up the Rule of One. With Luke, he finally saw the opportunity to get the Anakin he initially wanted. And as mentioned above, yes, if he didn't turn him, then he would've grown as a powerful Jedi. But then he still would've faced the issue of potentially being overthrown. The need to search for a powerful apprentice falls in line with the Rule of Two, to ensure the progression in power of the Sith. But in a world where the Emperor intended to be the final master, why?

cyhb4iy

cyh7pja

Years and years of success causes one to grow complacent. Even the force can't guard against getting into ruts. The man was arrogant enough to PERSONALLY preside over the construction of an as-yet completed Death Star full of potential security openings. He probably just thought that Luke was another success in the making. (Out-of-universe, Rule of One is no longer Canon anyway right?)

I think this is some kind of competing behaviour from the emperor. He believed while he is better than his apprentice, he is a worthy sith master and as a proof of this, he kept the failed Vader as a leashed beast. When Luke came into the picture, he knew they can turn against him, so he turned them against each others to get the better apprentice, a new challenge to be conquered and used.

iz1aq8

askacademia_train

Yo professors, do you ever get annoyed at students that visit you every day during your office hours? Taking my discrete math class this semeseter, easily the hardest class ive ever taken. im a junior ​ im literally visiting my professor every day (he says if his office door is open, hes open to meet). ​ Am i annoying him by visiting him every day? I need a C+ in this class and this class is FUCKING HARD. ​ so do yall get annoyed at students that meet every single day? ​ he did tell me im the only student that visits /meets him on teams via online during office hours..

g6gwie1

g6gl7bi

I have several ‘regulars’ who attend almost every office hour. I have never once been annoyed by them. To the contrary I enjoy getting to know them and how they think about the topic. It helps me communicate better with the class as a whole.

I wish some of my students visited this often because they need it!

t4eyzj

askengineers_train

Why do piping come with tolerances instead of exact sizes ? I’m ordering some piping and I notice the manufacturers usually have a +-10% tolerance Why can’t they guarantee me a certain diameter and thickness ?

hyykgu4

hyyii1a

Everything has a tolerance. Literally everything. If someone claims otherwise, they're lying.

this is why shop guys hate us engineers...

qnu5lt

askacademia_train

Department forcing me to teach a course even though my advisor has funds available to fund me from a grant TLDR: My department is forcing me to teach a course even though my advisor has funds available to pay me from a grant. Is this even legal? Should I contact the dean of students or graduate school? My advisor has funds for me to use for research from his grant so that I don't have to teach in my final semester. Unfortunately my department is denying the request and forcing me to teach a course to be funded since they are low on teachers. 75% of other students are being allowed to use research funding in my department, and I am one of the 5 who is not being allowed. The reasoning is because of timing and a change of policy that once the department determined they were running low on instructors they started denying requests for research funding. I have exhausted avenues within my department and have still been denied. I do have a lot of savings and could afford not to be funded at all. Honestly, I am tempted to deny teaching altogether. Of course I would not earn my 10-15K + health insurance + tuition benefit that I would get for research funding or teaching or being on the grant for research, but it is doable and honestly tempting to me right now. I am really upset about this. Teaching takes 20-30 hours a week of my time. I am going into my last semester and need time to finish my thesis, find a job, and everything else that comes with graduating. I simply do not have time to teach and have been counting on this funding from my advisor. I think it is completely ludicrous that the department is telling my advisor he cannot fund me using the grant money which was set aside for me. Can you think of anything I can do to fight this? It seems both immoral and illegal to me. Should I contact the graduate school or the dean of students? Do I have any legal recourse for this? It just feels they are stealing the grant money from me because they won't allow my advisor to give me the grant money meaning I am forced to teach if I want to get paid. If anyone has any ideas, I am open to hear them. I can also clarify things if anything is unclear. Thank you.

hjkgxl5

hjjfd37

You sound more angry than freaked out. How much of this is genuine concern and how much is anger at being told to do this? Many programs require their PhDs to get some teaching experience, and teaching should not take 20-30 hours per week. Perhaps you can negotiate for a teaching assistant to offload some of the work. Bottom line: unless you truly believe this will genuinely derail your graduation, my advice would be to find ways to minimize the workload and just do it.

What are your career plans? If they include teaching, you should teach the course. If you plan to go to industry or a lab, you should use that as a reason they should look elsewhere.

xtx8gi

askacademia_train

Professors and PhD supervisors, what do you look for in "cold emails" and supervision enquiries from potential students? Im in the biology field, but I think this question applies to every field. Im currently looking at cold emailing a few professors on some phd grad programs I love the look of or enquiring about supervision on their uni websites, but I suffer bad with imposter syndrome and have absolutely no clue what is expected from me in these "cold emails". im very worried about annoying any potential supervisors and ruining my chances, and also coming across as being full of my self and overconfident of my abilities. But I also dont want to downplay myself. Questions like "what makes you an outstanding applicant" scare me. Im sure a lot of potential grad students feel like this and any advice would be helpful!! I know im overthinking hahaha

iqshy8o

iqshqzu

If you can tell that a professor is annoyed by your cold email, you probably wouldn’t want to work with them anyway 😬 Just be yourself, keep the email short, and ask to meet virtually (or in person if you’re in the area). *Also, if you don’t hear back from them in a week or two, just resend the email cause it probably got lost in the shuffle.

Keep in mind that professors have very very limited time. Most professors I know don't reply to cold emails at all, or have a standard reply they can copy and paste. I myself also send a standard reply, which explains that we have a set procedure for hiring PhD students. In my case that means I can only hire someone if they respond to a vacancy, and that they should periodically check the website for such vacancies. After that, I forget about it. I don't have the time to consider individual emails when I don't have the funds to hire someone. All of that is just to set your expectations, so that you don't take it personally if you receive no response. Personally I don't think any less of someone who cold emails me, it neither hurts nor helps their chances in a future application. If you're going to send emails, make sure to keep it brief and be very clear about what you want from the professor.

pixwy0

asksciencefiction_train

[Final Destination] If death really wanted Alex and his friends to die because they cheated death why couldn't it just gave them all random heart attacks or strokes or cancer instead of all this elaborate crap it does

hbtiwhg

hbtmpjs

I'd imagine it'd turn into a comedy. Death comes as a gust of wind and his victim winces in the direction of a brightly colored candy store. Fascinated, he enters the house of sweets entranced. This is the beginning of his descent into childhood obesity. A montage follows of Death manipulating nature to give this guy a snack or a drink for over 30 years. One day, the victim grabs his tenth fried chicken from Kentucky when suddenly he feels a tightening of his chest. He tries to call for help but he is alone. He falls to his knees in pain and dies. A totally different story. Haha.

Death's list has their cause of death as "violent accident." Sure he *could* change it, but he has already changed the date because they survived, and every change upsets the balance of his list further, thus, Rube Goldberg death accidents.

u7dt6s

askculinary_train

do you salt your scrambled eggs before cooking? I see lots of conflicting info on this, just curious what others do in a professional kitchen.

i5fr6my

i5etymh

Yes, it's fine. Ignore Gordon Ramsay.

Nope but I’ll use a little salted butter in the pan

qh0n7j

askbaking_train

Is it possible to make a birthday cake with minimal ingredients? I turn 14 next week and want to make a cake for myself but the recipes I found online call for buttermilk and heavy cream and I don’t have those. Can I still make a cake that still taste alright? We have butter and dry milk, I might use these instead?

hi9ov0r

hibhlf6

This one is really close. https://www.allrecipes.com/recipe/15391/one-bowl-chocolate-cake-i/

Google Wacky cake. It’s a simple ingredient cake

gnd6xd

askbaking_train

Does is make a difference if you knead your cookie dough by hand instead of with a kitchenaid? I will be making chocolate chip cookies for my mum's birthday coming up, but want to keep it a surprise. So i will have to make them during the night whilst she's sleeping, this means I won't be able to use the kitchenaid since it is too noisy. Now I am a bit afraid that the cookies won't come out good. So my question: Does is make a difference if you knead your cookie dough by hand instead of with a kitchenaid?

fr9q8do

fr94p7p

I have a choc chip cookie recipe that doesn't use an electric mixer at all (it's a melted butter recipe so no creaming involved!) Does your recipe require creaming butter and sugar or not? The only thing an electric mixer is needed for in a cookie recipe is creaming. There should be no 'kneading' as you don't want to over develop the gluten. If you need to cream the butter and sugar, you can do it by hand, it'll just give you a bit of an arm ache. If you want to go with the melted butter cookie recipe which I never use a mixer for, I'm happy to share.

While you may not be able to get as fluffy during the creaming process, you can still make really good cookies doing the whole thing by hand. It may take a little longer, but there’s no reason you’d need a mixer for basic cookies.

m821ua

askbaking_train

Why do my hands look like they've aged 50 years since I began baking? Hi I am new to baking and I have mostly been attempting to bake breads of different types. Ever sense I have began I have started to get very dry hands that I never had gotten before. I assume its from working with the flour, but that is just a guess. I have tried a few different lotions but nothing seems to really help. Does anyone have similar experiences? What are some remedies for this? Any help would be great.

grg9vy1

grfuqlp

I bake and I brew beer. The combination of washing my hands a lot from baking, and using acid based sanitizer usually means that my hands get pretty bad sometimes. When they get their worst with skin flaking and peeling, I use an exfoliating face wash in my hands(mine has walnut shells in it as the particulates), and spend a good 90 seconds getting as much dead skin as possible, then I lotion up immediately. When I go to bed I actually use a foot cream on my hands because it’s super thick and seems to be more nourishing to the skin.

Have you considered you might have an allergy to the hand soap or lotions? I might try a scent-free dish soap for a bit.

w0f6az

explainlikeimfive_train

Eli5: Why do we use clean, potable water in toilets?

igdysu1

igdy63b

It's not cost effective. We'd spend more money and time managing extra water systems. It would be a little more practical to build new homes with a grey water system that is local to that home. So rain water or hand wash basins could be collected to water plants and flush toilets. There would still be extra maintenance to ensure they remain functional. Another gain you could make would be to reduce the amount of water being flushed anyway. Older toilets flush way too much water to get the job done.. But again the water, energy and cost involved in replacing the toilets may be greater than saved over the lifetime of the toilet... It's probably be more efficient at this stage to improve our ageing water infrastructure and stop leaks. A recent survey found that my local water company lost 58% of the water it put into the system through leakages. Let's sort that out first, then worry about the small gains from flushing toilets with grey water. Also stopping single use plastic bottles! You could probably fill a bottle 1000 times over for the cost of a plastic one... Plus that plastic bottle also costs water the make, probably more than it holds. EDIT: I had a look for stats... Apparently average plastic water bottle takes around 4-5 litres of water to make! So that's yet another reason to keep with tap water and improve the infrastructure for that.

Because we already have infrastructure in place for bringing clean water to homes. So why not use it when its already there?

gb2b69

askphilosophy_train

Contemporary philosophers who write books for a general audience that are not introductions to philosophy? First of all I am specifically not looking for introductory books, Instead, I am wondering if there are any contemporary philosophy books that are respectable, genuine, and original philosophy but written with a more general audience in mind? I think I remember reading that Descartes specifically wrote in French rather than Latin so that non-academics could read him too. Is there anyone who writes in that spirit today?

fp40w83

fp3wsm5

Ian Hacking’s *Representing and Intervening* is very readable, and contains some interesting and influential ideas in philosophy of science and experimentation. Though it is marketed as an introduction to topics in the philosophy of the natural sciences, it is opinionated and unorthodox enough to not really be seen as just an introductory book. (Hacking’s work is generally very readable!) For what it’s worth, I’ll also endorse the recommendations from other users, of Dennett and Blackburn.

I’d throw another vote in the Daniel Dennet column. I’d also throw in some David Foster Wallace, while he avidly didn’t consider himself a philosopher his novels and short stories carry a lot of philosophical weight, as well as being an incredible writer. I’d say specifically his short stories, like Good Old Neon, Suffering Channel, Incarnations Of Burned Children, and his Novel The Pale King. But that might be too far in the other direction from straight philosophy. It might help if you give a general philosophical interest you have? Are you looking for contemporary ethics or existentialism or phenomenology etc.

7gd18f

legaladvice_train

[MI/NC] Bartender took my (real) ID and passport and won't give them back! I'm a NC resident attending a MI 4 year college. I just turned 21 about a month ago, and I went to a dive bar/music venue to drink and watch a show. I look incredibly young in person, but my ID is up-to-date and so is my passport as well. The bartender confiscated my ID last night because it looked fake because: "it is out-of-state and your hair doesnt match." My hair is currently dark purple, but in my license picture it's black, it looks almost exactly the same in a dimly lit bar anyway! So I tell the bartender I have a passport and he is confiscating my real ID and he says he will believe me when I bring my passport. I retrieve my passport, which clearly shows my age, and this time I ask to speak to the manager. The manager REFUSES to give my ID back, saying he's going to call the police to confiscate it, AND THEN HE TAKES MY PASSPORT. No, I'm not kidding, I wish I was. He went on a rant about how I tried so hard to act "of age" and had all this fake proof and a fake life. By this point the venue is almost empty and the bouncers kick us out. I now have 0 forms of identification on me. What can I do here? I'm supposed to drive back home in 10 days for a wedding, and I'm worried that he did call the police, they told him it was real, and he threw them away or something. Please help!

dqi9ezl

dqicl88

call 911 and report that your passport and id have been stolen if you do not get it back right away, contact the state department and let them know it has been stolen, and they will cancel it https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/passports/lost-stolen.html you can get a replacement temporary NC driver's licence online https://edmv.ncdot.gov/DuplicateDriverLicense

Go to the police, ASAP as other's have said, Passport theft is a very very serious crime and since 9/11 most authorities have zero patience for that.

lzitqp

askculinary_train

There isn't any Rice Krispies where I'm from, and I wanted to make the puffed rice at home. Has anyone ever attempted that? I've always wanted to try Rice Krispy Treats! But I'm Muslim and there's gelatin and I can't have it but now I'm an adult and I wanted to attempt a homemade version.

gq317bi

gq3p1su

Ik if you look hard enough theres some kind of marshmallow without pork gelatin solely for people who cant have. Will update with link if i find one.

Is your question how to make US-style Rice Krispies at home? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq_zFo2v_XQ As others have pointed out, there are other halal methods of binding the cereal. Puffed rice is something different. In the US, the original ads for Quaker brand puffed cereals (rice and wheat varieties) said they were "shot from guns." The wet grain is cooked under pressure, then the pressure quickly released, and the steam expands the grain into a much larger airy puff.

z0utpd

askengineers_train

Is Elon Musk exaggerating the life span of his Tesla’s Li-ion batteries? “*According to Elon Musk on Twitter, Tesla car batteries are supposed to technically last for 300,000 to 500,000 miles, which is 1,500 battery cycles. That’s between 22 and 37 years for the average car driver, who, according to the Department of Transportation, drives about 13,500 miles per year.*” —energysage Is Elon exaggerating here? I looked up the average life span of lithium-ion batteries and it turns out to be, “two to three years or 300 to 500 charge cycles…” which is a lot less than what Musk claims Tesla’s modern electric vehicles are capable of (Tektronix). And then there is the problem of capacity loss for Li-ion batteries.

ix8grx0

ix8ba1c

Tesla EV batteries are covered by an 8 year warranty, and I think ~70% of original capacity is the cutoff for when a battery is considered defective enough to be replaced. Using those figures my guess would be the battery is probably serviceable for 10 years or more on avg.

Search "EV battery charge cycles". There are a few articles. Basically, you don't make the same battery for an EV as you do for a Gameboy. Also you have a more sophisticated control system for EVs (a lot of the degredation happens at the charge state extremes).