ComesInAnOldBox
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j9vg2bm wrote
Reply to comment by metaphorm in ELI5: Why do we only use 1 and 0 for binary? Could we create a trinary system introducing an extra '2'? by No-Mammoth-1638
Today, sure, but the original use of binary in computer systems came from "powered or unpowered," and binary data is stored or transmitted in a variety of ways and represents two opposing states: on or off, positive or negative, up or down, high frequency or low frequency, 0 degrees and 180 degrees phase states, black or white, etc.
Binary arithmetic is what it does with the information, while the binary itself is how the data itself is represented.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j9v8gm4 wrote
Reply to ELI5: Why do we only use 1 and 0 for binary? Could we create a trinary system introducing an extra '2'? by No-Mammoth-1638
It isn't actually 1 and 0. The 1 and 0 refer to whether or not a switch is open or closed, and therefore a circuit powered or unpowered. The symbols for closed and open circuits are | and O, the same as you've likely seen on your power switches. 1 and 0 just became the standard for typing.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j8y2xh7 wrote
Reply to comment by l__Scarecrow__l in ELI5: Why does a pilot and his co-pilots not eat the same food on a flight? by Electronic-Bend3263
Karma-farming bots.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j6ouwy8 wrote
Reply to After chatting amongst friends, we come to the Reddit community. If god is real, where is there any physical proof of his existence? by [deleted]
For the faithful, the fact that everything around them exists at all is the physical proof.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j6njtoe wrote
Reply to comment by Sparky81 in eli5: What’s the difference between Tylenol, Advil and Aleve, and what are the strengths and weaknesses of each medication? by [deleted]
Should also add that if any of these are taken in large doses for a long period of time:
Ibuprofen - trashes your kidneys
Acetaminophen - destroys your liver
Naproxen - eats a hole in your stomach
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j62hf2y wrote
Reply to comment by bimbles_ap in ELI5: How the hell did we go from "Bury your sword, gold, and food with you, and maybe your wife and horses", to "You can't bring money with you to the grave"? What cultural and societal event led to this shift of belief? by Preston_of_Astora
Talking about the opulence of the Catholic Church versus the whole "easier to stuff a camel through the eye of a needle than for a rich man entering heaven" thing, especially some of their tombs.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j62fi9c wrote
Reply to comment by FriendlyCraig in ELI5: How the hell did we go from "Bury your sword, gold, and food with you, and maybe your wife and horses", to "You can't bring money with you to the grave"? What cultural and societal event led to this shift of belief? by Preston_of_Astora
This is the answer, right here, especially Christianity (although the Catholic Church kinda missed the boat).
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j2a7wow wrote
Reply to found this box of tiny cigarettes by clichenoir
I'm not sure how tiny that is, you didn't use a banana for scale.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_j29us8d wrote
Reply to comment by veedizzle in Charles Lindbergh's POV flying from NY to Paris in 1927. by Dkoron
Hung his head out the window and eyeballed it. Dude got his start flying biplanes without instruments of any kind, putting it down on a field with his head to the side was child's play.
ComesInAnOldBox t1_jeeqt4b wrote
Reply to ELI5: Why does Southpark seem to be immune to cancel culture? by WhoDknee
When it comes to "cancel culture," most of the people doing the cancelling/boycotting are people who weren't consuming it, anyway. It's only a real problem for the person/act/show being cancelled when they get fired/lose their contracts, which only happens in instances where publishers/producers market to a wide-ranging audience and they're afraid that the cancelling/boycott will hurt their sales, like when Paula Deen lost book deals in 2013 because she admitted to using the N-word in the 80s. Her publisher didn't just publish her books, they also published things that pretty much covered anything and everything you could think of, and they decided there was a very real risk to losing more money to the impending boycott than they'd lose by not paying the publishing costs and just cutting her lose.
In South Park's case, the network knows full well what South Park is, as does their audience, and the show makes it obvious right up front that they're likely going to offend you. They took some real risks with the Scientology and Book of Mormon episodes, but the network itself is pretty well insulated from most of whatever legal action anyone can take (and Stone and Parker like it that way). Therefore, anyone getting upset at whatever they see there (and South Park has offended me more times than I can count, but I still watch it) have only themselves to blame for watching it in the first place, because that disclaimer at the beginning makes it clear that, "hey, we warned you." As a result, South Park doesn't lose a lot of viewers due to controversy.