DarkAlman
DarkAlman t1_jeg3du0 wrote
Reply to ELI5: The seemingly huge increase in Ticketmaster fee's and why there aren't competitors trying to cash in on the public backlash by undercutting them? by FIuff
Ticketmaster has been raising it's rates due to a combination of inflation and post-pandemic demand.
The cost of touring with a band has increased a lot, and many smaller bands just outright refuse to tour right now because it costs too much and they can't justify the ticket prices.
They also adapted a system of Dynamic ticket prices where rates change based on demand much like Hotels or Airlines do. So the more in demand a show, the higher the prices get.
Why aren't competitors undercutting them?
They are trying, but you can't really compete with Ticketmaster
Ticketmaster is a functional monopoly and also controls most of the venues so you can't compete with them. If you do they'll just buy you out or bury you.
Congress is long overdue to step in and enforce anti-trust laws again Ticketmaster
DarkAlman t1_jeg2n73 wrote
Tracking time is entirely a human construct
There's no reason we can use a Universal clock for the whole planet. Technically we have that UTC or Universal Time, also called Greenwich Mean Time or GMT.
The problem is that people base their day on the time. Noon is when the sun is the highest, you go to work for 8am, etc
If you use Universal time noon would be in the evening in North America and people don't like that. Which is why timezones exist.
Timezones are kinda, not really, but mostly just lines drawn on a map that says "for this area the clock will be X hours ahead or behind GMT so that noon is when the sun is directly overhead"
DarkAlman t1_je5kj7m wrote
Reply to comment by tyrion85 in ELI5: Everyone knows that Ticketmaster is the biggest scumbucket enterprise on the planet yet no band seems able to avoid their grasp. What's to stop a really major act (e.g. Taylor Swift) from performing in venues that are not controlled by Ticketmaster, or just setting up a parallel company? by havereddit
Libertarians don't factor in that companies conspire together against consumers, and actively buy out all their competition. Furthermore a lot businesses WANT to be bought out.
They also don't live in this thing we call reality
DarkAlman t1_je3lbzw wrote
Reply to ELI5: Everyone knows that Ticketmaster is the biggest scumbucket enterprise on the planet yet no band seems able to avoid their grasp. What's to stop a really major act (e.g. Taylor Swift) from performing in venues that are not controlled by Ticketmaster, or just setting up a parallel company? by havereddit
Ticketmaster has a functional monopoly, which isn't the same thing as a true monopoly.
They own and control so many venues that you have no choice but to deal with them.
If you decide to go around them you'll be forced to perform shows in small alternative venues and virtually every stadium and major venue in the US is under the Ticketmaster umbrella.
The only real solution to the problem at this point is convincing the US govt to enforce anti-trust laws and have the company broken up.
DarkAlman t1_je26ezt wrote
Reply to eli5: How did people build bridges over deep and/or dangerous water if they didn't have the equipment to go under water? by Internetscraperds9
TLDR: boats
Suspension bridges at a basic level only required a rope to be pulled across a river, and that can easily be done with a boat.
Larger footings could be poured from a boat as well.
While there's a lot of prep work and drilling down on a river bed for bridges today, it more ancient times they would likely have just floated a barge to the spot and dumped large quantities of gravel and large rocks to create a solid footing
DarkAlman t1_jdu3m01 wrote
Fried food is cooked in hot oil.
This causes the food to have a higher calorie count compared to food that's baked or grilled by comparison. That by itself isn't particularly unhealthy other that helping in weight gain, which has a lot of complications.
The main problem is deep fried food contains a lot of unhealthy fats. Saturated fat and trans fats build up plaque in your arteries that can put you at risk for heart failure, heart attack, and stroke.
Fried food is also commonly purchased at fast food restaurants that serve food with large amounts of sodium, fat, sugar, and few vitamins and minerals. So it isn't part of a healthy diet.
In moderation they are fine, but eating deep fried food constantly is very bad for you in the long term.
DarkAlman t1_jdszfkz wrote
Reply to Eli5: If we had steam powered trains back in the day, why didn’t steam become a common “clean” energy source? Why did it die out? by melatonin1212
Steam has to be generated by burning something to make heat. Early Steam trains burned wood or coal for that purpose.
Diesel electric trains (that we use today) are by comparison more powerful, pollute less, and have the advantage that you don't need to stop for water for the boilers.
Some form of electric train, or hydrogen powered trains have the potential of replacing diesel.
DarkAlman t1_jdsuf9c wrote
Reply to ELI5 Why did the nazis lose the war? by Avitailzzz
TLDR: They stretched themselves out too far, too fast, and fought too many enemies at the same time. They ran out of raw materials, and lost all of their best leaders.
The Nazi's needed to maintain a technological superiority to overcome their lack of natural resources. By the end of the war the allies had mostly caught up and had the industrial might of the USA backing them up and supplying them.
After some early successes in Europe they became over confident and began attacking on too many fronts at once.
Once the Soviet Union got involved the Nazi's couldn't compete with the massive weight of bodies and industry the Soviets could throw at them. While the quality of the Soviet Unions troops and equipment was very poor their sheer numbers overcame their disadvantages. The Nazi's highly trained personnel couldn't be replaced quickly enough and their advanced weapons could no longer be made in adequate quantities.
The Nazi's were also running out of key raw materials like metal and Oil. So even if they had the planes and tanks, they couldn't fuel them.
By the end of War Hitler had replaced all his competent generals with people loyal to him (yes men) and he had taken personal control over many military decisions. Hitler became deluded and was being affected by his addiction to various medications. He made bad decision after bad decision, and several failed attempts to kill him arguably made the Allies job easier.
The loss of the Battle of Britain is cited as the beginning of the end. If Britain had been captured, or invaded it's far less likely that the US would have stepped in to help them directly and instead would have focused 100% on the Far East.
That and the Italians were idiots. Some historians argue that the Italian military was so inept that they consider them to have been on the side of the allies.
DarkAlman t1_jdon16q wrote
DarkAlman t1_jcwy8qa wrote
Reply to comment by TF2CutContent in TIL: The British Ministry of Pensions distributed Invacars free to disabled people from 1948 until the 1970s. The Invacar was that vehicle. by buzz_uk
yup, Political correctness wasn't a thing back then
DarkAlman t1_jcv8838 wrote
Reply to comment by Oldenlame in TIL: The British Ministry of Pensions distributed Invacars free to disabled people from 1948 until the 1970s. The Invacar was that vehicle. by buzz_uk
Defense, Social Security, Health, Housing, Education, Silly Walks ...
DarkAlman t1_jcv41dl wrote
Reply to TIL: The British Ministry of Pensions distributed Invacars free to disabled people from 1948 until the 1970s. The Invacar was that vehicle. by buzz_uk
Often referred to by the derogatory term 'Spazwagon'
The program was ended in 1973 primarily due to safety concerns. The cars had virtually no crash protection, were notorious unstable due to the 3-wheel configuration, and the drivers did not have to take proper driving tests to qualify to drive one.
Most of them have been taken off the road and scrapped because they were owned by the Government program rather than personally owned. With the EU regulations on cars and motorcycles officially killing them off in 2003.
However like a similar fiberglass 3-wheeled car the Reliant Robin, they have a special place in British pop culture with many of the few remaining examples being tuned or modified. Remaining on the road under classic car licenses.
DarkAlman t1_jaeaxz0 wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in [eli5] Black plaque was not exactly cured, how did it just disappear from Europe in 1353? by Linzold
Trial and error
They discovered that people who kept clean didn't get as sick
The Pope famously hid in a circle of flame to keep him safe during the worst of the plague. The theory was to keep 'bad air' away, but in fact it was keeping him safe from the rats
DarkAlman t1_jadsuv7 wrote
Reply to [eli5] Black plaque was not exactly cured, how did it just disappear from Europe in 1353? by Linzold
The main reason for the end of the black death was the implementation of successful Quarantines that allowed pockets of infection to burn themselves out.
But it didn't disappear overnight, numerous smaller local outbreaks continued for a long time after.
Improvements in overall hygiene, sanitation, and dealing with the rats is what eventually got rid of the Black Death for good.
Although it is still around today, just very uncommon. Modern anti-biotics and sanitation is what prevents it from being a problem.
Another working theory is that the Black Death killed off so much of the European population that those that remained living were the ones that had a degree of immunity or were more naturally resistant.
DarkAlman t1_ja9oljh wrote
Ancient peoples mapped the sky. Being able to track the movement of constellations across the sky, and the height the sun would reach were key markers of when to plant, when to harvest, when the rains would come, etc in times before watches and calendars.
Going back further cavemen would use the stars to know when animal herds would return and when spring was upon them etc.
Constellations were an easy way for them to remember groups of stars, and oral traditions were used to pass stories of said constellations and that knowledge to the next generation.
So long as you figure out that the Sun rises to different heights during the year, you can figure out that the Sun reaches it's height on the Solstice, then you can count the number of days till that happens again.
The reason there's 360 degrees in a circle is because the Babylonians used circles to track the sun year round and assumed (incorrectly) that there were 360 days in a year because it was a nice round number.
It took centuries for people to realize that calendars were faulty and corrected them by adding extra days.
DarkAlman t1_ja9agm2 wrote
This is a misnomer, but it is common for periods of high profits to coincide with layoffs.
One of the biggest costs of running a business is staffing, by laying people off you can reduce the size of your payroll and increase your profits... at least in the short term.
The long term consequences of these actions are pretty obvious.
DarkAlman t1_j9v5qtg 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
Binary was chosen for computers because it was easy to represent with transistors, 1 and 0 represent on and off states for a gate or a transistor.
Creating computers that use 3 positions (trinary) or multiple digits for bit like 0,1,2,3 are possible but the limitation is the hardware itself. You need a single stage electronic device (like a transistor) that can exist in multiple different states to represent those digits.
Such a device could be called a transtator, a replacement for a transistor that can exist in multiple different states. A Quantum computer could be based on such a device.
In theory such a computer would be able to perform significantly denser calculations and have higher speed. But our entire ecosystem of instruction sets and operating systems would also need to be completely redone. So it would have to be worth the significant effort.
DarkAlman t1_j9v4um1 wrote
Off the record means the person is asking not to write that information in an article.
It's a matter of trust that the journalist won't compromise a source by revealing too much information.
DarkAlman t1_j977122 wrote
Reply to ELI5: What is syndication and why did tv shows used to pump out so many episodes trying to get it? by drillgorg
TLDR: Syndication is another word for re-run, and that's how major TV networks made their money on shows.
TV networks make money on ads, selling time on the air to run commercials. Without that revenue the network couldn't afford to pay anyone let alone the cost of making shows. But you can't rely 100% on original and new content, you need shows to fill time on the air.
Syndication meant re-airing the same episode of a show over and over again usually in less desirable time slots like during the day or after school.
In this way you could sell ads associated with those slots and make more money on a show that you had already paid for a long time ago. So even though you could sell a single Ad on a new episode during prime time for a lot of money, in the long run you would make far more money selling ads on re-runs of the show.
Syndicated TV shows could also be sold to other networks including foreign stations, getting even more money for the shows you created.
But to have a show available for syndication meant having at least 3 seasons worth so that you could air 5 episodes a week without repeating them for months otherwise it would get boring quick.
Even shows that did poorly would often get a 3rd or 4th lower budget season just to make sure they had enough episodes to air re-runs.
Star Trek is the quintessential example of this. When it was first aired it didn't do particularly well and the studio fought to get a 3rd season done just to have enough episodes to put it into syndication. Star Trek didn't become a huge hit until after it started being aired in the after school time slot. Unfortunately by that point all of the sets had been destroyed and they couldn't make any more episodes, leading the short lived animated series and it's eventual revival with the movies and new shows in the 80s.
DarkAlman t1_j6piilr wrote
Reply to ELI5: Wouldn't our brain work more efficient if we learn to stop verbalising everything in our minds? by [deleted]
It's estimated that only between 30% and 50% of people have an inner monologue or the ability to hear their own voice in their head.
Those without an inner monologue have to consciously think about associating words with objects or thoughts in their heads.
Exactly what impact this has on peoples ability to think, problem solve, memory, processing speed is unclear but is being studied.
DarkAlman t1_j6npffo wrote
There's two key movements that lead to the ban of Cannabis in the US.
The Temperance Movement and the War on Drugs.
The Temperance Movement started in the late 19th century worked to ban addictive substances which eventually culminated in Prohibition. But Alcohol usage was only one of many things the movement targeted. The US was also dealing with a serious problem of Opiate addiction in this era.
Prior to this drugs like Cannabis and Opiates were available over the counter and were frequently mixed with other products and tonics. Coca-Cola for example originally contained Cocaine. Laws passed in this era limited the availability of many of these drugs or outright banned them.
Cannabis specifically was effectively banned in the 30s due mostly to the efforts of Henry Anslinger the first Commissioner of the Bureau of Narcotics. He ran campaigns that linked Cannabis use to violent crime in the public eye, but most of his evidence was fabricated or heavily skewed with racist overtones.
But while banned, Cannabis was not yet a serious crime.
This changed during the Nixon Administration and his War on Drugs. Cannabis use became a serious crime punishable with mandatory sentences.
After Nixon's death several Cabinet officials in his administration came forward and confirmed that the real reason for the change in policy was so that Nixon could give Police carte-blanche to arrest certain troublesome groups, most notably Blacks and Hippies, that were protesting the War in Vietnam and the Civil Rights movement.
You couldn't arrest them for protesting, but you could arrest them for using their favorite drug.
DarkAlman t1_j658rbp wrote
There's a few possible reasons
-
If the person is laid off (the position is made redundant) there may be Government mandated compensation for that person. For example 1 week of pay for every year worked. This is to protect workers from being laid off on a whim, the company can't just let their workers all go without any penalty.
-
Some companies have contracts that offer severance pay to long time workers if they are terminated. It's a bonus of working there, and is meant to thank them for long time service and help them find a new job. Often this is a Union benefit.
-
Often unused vacation, pensions, and other bonuses accumulate and have to be paid out if the person is terminated.
-
High level Executives are notorious for including clauses in their contracts that they must receive payment based on the remaining time on their contracts if they are fired. These are referred to as Golden Parachutes and are the result of executives getting to effectively write their own contracts. So even if a manager fails at their job catastrophically, a company may be forced to 'buy them out' of their contract to be rid of them.
DarkAlman t1_j1xgoti wrote
It's primarily because corporations like Walmart are known for union-busting and create a fair amount of anti-union media to stir up controversy about them.
Unions aren't liked by big companies because it leads to better pay, stricter labor rules, and more benefits for workers, which translates to less profits for companies and their shareholders. Not having a union also allows companies to be a lot harsher on employees because there is little risk of an organized strike.
Union shops are also prone to following strict rules like shift ends, overtime, and who is allowed to do what, which can be incredibly frustrating when dealing with them.
It can make for an in-flexible organization making it very difficult to accomplish projects ahead of schedule or delivering excellence.
Unions can get in the way of hiring talented people from the outside in favor of promoting within, which is good for existing employees, but bad for the organization as a whole.
If you are a star employee you will often find yourself taking a backseat to long time employees. The Union favors seniority (gotta put in your time) and strict rules about pay grades, promotions, and seniority can hold back really talented peoples careers.
Unions are great for protecting the average worker, meaning they are great for mediocrity and large pools of average workers, but aren't so great for smaller companies and super talented employees that can do better at a more flexible company.
DarkAlman t1_j1qz97t wrote
Reply to ELI5: How do different humans like and dislike different food and drinks if we’re all the same biologically? by nathanthemidget123
Genetically we are all different, but experience also ties into it.
Humans have different concentrations of taste buds and tolerance for certain types of food.
Some people love spicy food and can eat things that's nuclear hot, while others hate it because it destroys their stomach.
Some people won't eat Cilantro because they have a mutation that makes it taste like soap.
Some people won't eat a certain type of food because it made them throw up once, or they were force fed a certain food by their parents and they refuse to eat it as adults.
Or they may have allergies. Severe allergies have a way of making foods very unappealing.
DarkAlman t1_jeg9wdl wrote
Reply to ELI5: How does salt seemingly hydrate you and dehydrate you at the same time. They always say you need electrolytes (salt?) for hydration, then why can’t we drink sea water? by TriCombington
Your body needs a small amount of salt (electrolytes) to operate, and the more you sweat and get dehydrated the more of these salts you lose.
So drinking fluid with an appropriate amount of electrolytes helps hydrate you.
The problem with ocean water is that it has waaaayyyy too much salt and your body reacts to this by trying to get it out of your system via your urine. So you use more water to get it out of your system that you are taking in.