Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    [–] Despite spending four hours & 22 minutes together on the pitch for England in total, Jamie Vardy and Wayne Rooney never created a single goalscoring chance for one another. Awkward bring_it_back 185 points ago in soccer

    ok which one of you fuckers did this lol

    In October 2019, British celebrity Coleen Rooney used the technique to identify who was leaking information from her private Instagram stories to tabloid newspaper The Sun by posting fake stories which were blocked to all but one account. When these details appeared in the press, she publicly identified the leaks as coming from the account of Rebekah Vardy, wife of footballer Jamie Vardy.[3].

    from wikipedia article

    [–] Feyenoord [2]-0 FC Porto - Karsdorp 80' bring_it_back -1 points ago in soccer

    Didn't know Lukaku plays for Porto now

    [–] How I keep track of my bipolar symptoms [OC] bring_it_back 3 points ago in dataisbeautiful

    thanks for sharing so much detail. I don't know why but reading this quantification of the range of human emotions kind of made feel more at ease about my own feelings and moods. It's so hard to define or figure out if one is depressed or in a depressing mood but your scale has a comforting effect on me. Hope the overall slope of your graph is always positive!

    [–] [BBC] Manchester City and tactical fouls - what do the stats say? bring_it_back 8 points ago in soccer

    late reply but I've seen this mentioned a few times here and there is always interesting discussion. One of the more plausible explanations I've seen given is "how do you decide who has possession at any given time?" With passes it's pretty clear, and you can make rules like if team A initiates the pass it counts for them regardless of it reaching the intended target. But for actual possession it's a lot more debatable and what makes it harder is the fact that you should never have a time where no team is in possession, since the total has to add up to 100%. But in reality there are tons of time where the ball is in no mans land, or up in the air with both teams contesting for it, etc etc. It then becomes up to interpretation as to which team actually has possession of the ball.

    [–] Friendship through the toughest of times bring_it_back 245 points ago in aww

    upvote for 'tripawd', made my day :)

    [–] Breakdown of the '50 companies responsible for 63% of greenhouse gas emissions' [OC] bring_it_back 2 points ago in dataisbeautiful

    Great graph. I feel like this is one of the few instances where a pie chart is informative and easy to read (despite the sub's hatred towards them). I'm surprised just how much bigger the impact of Chinese coal is compared to Aramco and Gazprom. Guess that's the cost of manufacturing almost everything the planet needs with little regulation.

    [–] ELI5: Why do some products say "known to the state of California to cause cancer" ? bring_it_back 1 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    That's so true. The warning doesn't tell me anything really. It just makes me more concerned as a customer.

    [–] ELI5: Is fracking as bad as it is being portrayed on the media? bring_it_back 1 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    is that directly due to the structural differences in shale vs sedimentary basin? or do they have to use very different techniques?

    [–] ELI5: Is fracking as bad as it is being portrayed on the media? bring_it_back 1 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    I think my main point is on the possible keyword here. Of course we continue to learn as we grow and more data becomes available, but everything is relative. If you have to make a decision right now, you gather all the data and evidence available to you at this point in time and base your decision on that. In my opinion I don't think it's right to say option A has very bad risks, so naturally we HAVE to go with option B. What if option B has greater risks? you have to compare the two. And yes these risks can be quantified and compared, that's why we have data scientists and statisticians.

    [–] ELI5: Is fracking as bad as it is being portrayed on the media? bring_it_back 1 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    very good point. As always the theoretical methods can be safe but what is actually happening can be very different from those. Reality vs. expectations.

    [–] ELI5: Is fracking as bad as it is being portrayed on the media? bring_it_back 1 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    right, every form of energy production inherently comes with risks. But an engineer's job is to calculate and quantify those risks, so the best possible action can be taken. Everyone in the media simplifies it to the overall potential risks. But I think we need to look at the risks per unit of energy produced, from start to finish of the process. As you said a gas or oil leak has devastating consequences for a large area, but they also produce a huge amount of energy way above what is possible currently with solar or wind. If you replace all the oil production with "green" energy, would that not have a worse impact on the environment as a whole simply because you need so much more units of it to produce the same amount of energy (and all those units require rare earth metals that have to be mined, processed, and manufactured, etc)?

    [–] ELI5: Is fracking as bad as it is being portrayed on the media? bring_it_back 5 points ago in explainlikeimfive

    Thanks for the in-depth answer. You raise some very good points about how political figures can and should do more to regulate the industry and ensure public safety, but then yea it's also very one sided because the oil companies have a lot of money to throw at lobbying efforts and campaigns. I feel like they can have more influence on politicians than the ordinary person, while green movements strike a cord with ordinary citizens. The only thing I'm still unclear about is this: we live in the real world. we need energy. That has to come from somewhere. We have a choice to switch to "green" energy, but I need to know that switching to solar panels and wind turbines isn't doing more harm than good. That part of it is never really discussed. Both choices have down sides, which is the lesser of the two evils?