q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
301
| selftext
stringlengths 0
39.2k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 3
values | url
stringlengths 4
132
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
eno3pg
|
why does a car not move when you leave it in gear.
|
When you have the ignition turned off and leave it in gear the car doesn't move, even when the handbrake us off. Why is this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eno3pg/eli5_why_does_a_car_not_move_when_you_leave_it_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fe2lofl",
"fe2mwa0"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"When it's in gear, the driving wheels are connected to the engine. An engine's crankshaft, when it's not running, is extremely hard to turn. Trying to push the car, or leaving it on a hill, won't be enough to make the wheels turn the engine over, so the wheels are effectively locked.\n\ntl;dr the engine acts as a giant brake.",
"If you're talking about a manual transmission, it's because, typically, the car is left in either first gear or reverse when it's parked. When you're driving in these gears, the engine turns a lot to make the wheels turn comparatively little, to get the car moving. This means it's really difficult for the wheels to make the engine turn.\n\nSo when the ignition is off, with the car in gear and all the resistance of the engine from the engaged transmission, the wheels have a really hard time of turning.\n\nI'm not too familiar with the specifics of automatics in this regard, but I imagine the answer is the same -- Park probably engages the transmission, giving the wheels resistance to stop them turning. I don't know for sure, though.\n\nI hope I've answered your question, especially in the case of a manual, because I've driven one for years and should hope I know what I'm talking about."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2z7kho
|
Can you cross breed sharks?
|
Could we ever see a great white hammerhead shark?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2z7kho/can_you_cross_breed_sharks/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cphbqbj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Can it be possible to hybridize sharks? Yes. That particular combination, no. In order to cross breed, the two species must be closely related. Even then, the offspring usually are sterile. Sharks are unlikely to breed outside their species, so it'd have to be artificially done."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
21yrkg
|
-how do ear candles work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21yrkg/eli5how_do_ear_candles_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cghpj2k",
"cghq944"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"By good feelings and well wishes.",
"They don't work at all, and are potentially dangerous. Here in Canada, they are actually illegal to sell, as they have no medical utility but have been shown to cause serious injuries. Don't use them... "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2h9yej
|
why do most forms say "caucasian" as an option for white if most white people aren't even from the caucus region?
|
i see it everywhere all the time and i don't understand.
or am i wrong and caucasian is a correct term?
*caucasus
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2h9yej/eli5_why_do_most_forms_say_caucasian_as_an_option/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckqqj3r"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Because a German man named [Christoph Meiners](_URL_0_) decided there were two races: Caucasians, who had the people of the southern Caucuses as their archetype, and Mongoloids, who were... everyone else. Christoph was something of a racist, so the defining traits of Caucasians were things like \"More beautiful because white\" and \"More altruistic\" among other things. He would later go on to subdivide the Caucasians to make such wonderful determinations like \"the Celts are the best race\" and \"Slavs are scum.\" These views were not uncommon for Germans at the time, but he offered a pseudo-scientific veneer to them.\n\nAs history moved along other people based their pseudo-scientific racial groupings on this initial one and this has continued to the modern day."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph_Meiners"
]
] |
|
9fvcob
|
what are extras in movies actually talking about in the background?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9fvcob/eli5_what_are_extras_in_movies_actually_talking/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e5zh7by",
"e5zr16k"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I had a friend who did that kind of work in NYC. She said they would sit there trying to make the other person laugh. Check out a cafe scene next chance you get and see how many people are trying not to laugh. ",
"Usually nothing . You’re just pantomiming . It’s usually dead silent on a set . I did extra work for about a year when I lived in LA , it was fun ! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
tfj6t
|
Are there any good books or documentaries about Japan's Sengoku Jidai period?
|
I've admittedly been playing quite a bit of Total War: Shogun 2 and I ended up spending an hour just reading the game's encyclopedia. I'm looking for any kind of introductory material on the subject, preferably documentaries.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/tfj6t/are_there_any_good_books_or_documentaries_about/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4m9zjq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"If you've been playing Shogun, I imagine you're looking for a military history. Sadly, I'm not aware of any authoritative military histories of the sengoku era. \n\nIf you're interested in the time period in general, Berry's [*The Culture of Civil War in Kyoto*](_URL_0_) is an excellent cultural history of the time, explaining what was going on with the rest of society while the Daimyo were fighting."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Culture_of_Civil_War_in_Kyoto.html?id=z6wudj2tvwUC"
]
] |
|
3eobwv
|
what exactly happens when you trade in your phone to get credit/upgrades with your cellphone company?
|
I've always been a little sketched out by trading in my phone to my cell phone company for credits/earlier upgrades, so I'm hoping someone can explain exactly what they do with traded in phones, especially older models that they maybe don't sell in stores anymore.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eobwv/eli5_what_exactly_happens_when_you_trade_in_your/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctgtt4e"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They aren't stealing your personal information if thats what you're worried about. One of the first things they do is wipe it. If you're really concerned about it you can wipe it yourself beforehand. They get them repaired/cleaned up to sale condition and then sell them. Even ones that aren't typically stocked for sale will be taken in and sold as budget options. \n\nThey may also be kept to exchange for the same model if someone brings in a broken one, or salvaged for parts.\n\nThey may be donated to organizations that give phones to the needy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4pp8hv
|
how does lightning "repair" the ozone?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4pp8hv/eli5_how_does_lightning_repair_the_ozone/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4mrlji",
"d4mrmrq"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The high Voltage Discharge of the lightning has enough energy to Ionize some oxygen molecules which then reacts to O3 (ozone).\nSo O2 + Energy = 2 O• - > O• + O2 = O3 \n Look at it as if you had magnets 2 stick together and you need energy (force) to separate them, now you can take each one and connect it to other 2 magents",
"Most oxygen is O2. Ozone is O3. Ozone is created when you run a lot of electricity through O2. Every time lightning strikes, some Ozone is created. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
agoq9c
|
why does old electronics produce a high ptched noice when turned on?
|
Plenty of old, and new electronics produce high pitched noices when turned on, is it the electrons somehow doing it, or are there small sparks in the circuits? Best example of this is probably old TVs.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/agoq9c/eli5_why_does_old_electronics_produce_a_high/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ee7rf9j"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"The specific component is called the \"flyback transformer\". The whine is mentioned in this section:\n\n[_URL_1_](_URL_0_)\n\nMore specifically, the high frequency alternating magnetic field makes the transformer core vibrate at whatever frequency is being made. Depending on the initial quality of the transformer, and how well it has aged (the varnish they coat everything in breaks down after a while) you'll get a louder or quieter unit.\n\nThe same thing happens with normal 60hz (household current) transformers too, it's just a much lower note, because of the 60hz cycle. Again, as the varnish breaks down over the years, you will get a louder and louder note. For the big ones, people will even sometimes have them re-coated for just that reason."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyback_transformer#Operation_and_usage",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyback\\_transformer#Operation\\_and\\_usage"
]
] |
|
ftndrh
|
If coronavirus is spread by people coughing and sneezing how are asymptomatic people spreading it when they don't do either?
|
I've heard a lot about asymptomatic people spreading it without realising they even have it - but the news says coronavirus is spread by people coughing and sneezing. So how are they spreading it when by definition asymptomatic people don't cough or sneeze?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/ftndrh/if_coronavirus_is_spread_by_people_coughing_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fm870bf",
"fm87nef",
"fm8baaf",
"fm8ekai",
"fm8jher",
"fm9r8l6"
],
"score": [
20,
34,
24,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"People that are asymptomatic don’t cough or sneeze due to the virus. They are still very much infected though, and coughs/sneezes happen to everyone all the time, not just symptoms of the virus. Also, some people are just nasty and cough/sneeze wherever without a care in the world, and that sure doesn’t help.",
"Spreading by bodily fluids such as saliva can even be passed through family if you share a drink or use the same spoon. Sometimes random coughing or sneezing (due to dust, allergies etc) without covering your mouth leaves droplets in the air or on surfaces and other people might come into contact with it especially in public places!",
"It’s actually also spread by breathing. In fact it’s MOSTLY spread by breathing instead of coughing or sneezing... this is how people can be transmitters for a week before they show symptoms. That’s how asymptomatic people are spreading it as well.",
"It spreads through drops of moisture in their breath. One thing I've been reading is that vaping can make the spread worse, since you're basically breathing out a cloud of moisture, and the virus rides the droplets through the air.",
"You are an asymptomatic carrier of SARS-CoV-2. You eat something and lick your finger, or you just touch your mouth/face. You don't wash your hands. You meet a friend or co-worker and shake their hand. They eat something or touch their mouth/face or rub their eye. Transmitted.",
"Per the World Health Organization, people with no symptoms are not a major driver of transmission. \n\n [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-similarities-and-differences-covid-19-and-influenza"
]
] |
|
5skv4z
|
does alcohol tolerance come from your body learning to metabolise it more efficiently, or your brain learning to function better whilst under the influence, or both?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5skv4z/eli5_does_alcohol_tolerance_come_from_your_body/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddft0re",
"ddfvv4o",
"ddfwo1n",
"ddfxlu1"
],
"score": [
215,
20,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Both. Alcohol is metabolized into its non-toxic (less toxic?) form by enzymes in the liver. Once your liver realizes that it is frequently encountering this thing, it starts producing more enzymes which allow it to break the substance down more quickly.\n\nFurthermore, since your brain *technically* doesn't want to lose motor control to alcohol, the system of neurotransmitters which are affected by the presence of metabolized alcohol eventually compensate to lose less fidelity when encountering it.\n\nEDIT: It might incorrect to say it is metabolized into a less toxic form. I'm a little shakey on that - acetaldehyde and acetate are toxic substances, but that is nonetheless what the body does to the ethanol as it processes and prepares to excrete it.",
"Down-regulation plays a part in most forms of tolerance related to psychoactive susbstances. Basically, your brain reduces the number of receptor sites on neurons when they are repeatedly exposed to an abundance of neurotransmitters, so future exposure has less effect. This system also explains withdrawal. Once the neurotransmitter levels drop from lack of use the reduced receptor sites take several weeks to regrow and withdrawal symptoms are worst. Until the receptors up-regulate and return to normal, the decreased receptor sites struggle to take up what little neurotransmitters are now present. ",
"I've always had an extremely high tolerance. It doesn't seem to be genetic considering the rest of my family and I've asked my dad about it. I can drink and realize I should not drive or do other activities that and such but there is no \"drunk\" feeling. Copious amounts of alcohol have been consumed to test this theory. I seem to process it quite quickly. On the one hand it's great, on the other I don't get to experience the fun.",
"I think tolerance comes mostly from your body. The liver is an incredible organ and can take a lot of abuse. Some people can drink incredible amounts of alcohol every day for years and still manage to function. That is until cirrhosis fully sets in and the liver can't metabolize anymore. When this happens (if I understand correctly) alcohol just goes straight into the blood stream. This is how you might see advanced alcoholics get completely trashed on relatively small amounts of alcohol like single serving containers of fortified wine, fortified lager or hard cider. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
66fcet
|
the venezuelan protests right now.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66fcet/eli5_the_venezuelan_protests_right_now/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dgi2u6k"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Power vacuum after the death of chavez. people don't have money for food, and their money isn't worth much globally anyway. intense violence in the streets over the past year (i.e. robbery and murder). a nation raised under a nationalist/socialist identity, but that has always been politically polarized. without chavez (for better or worse) the people are trying to work out the future of their beloved country. I think some of that is true...hopefully a venezuelan can give a better answer"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
28a64c
|
Are there any languages that a parrot CANNOT learn to properly mimic?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/28a64c/are_there_any_languages_that_a_parrot_cannot/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci8yh4l",
"ci8yngx"
],
"score": [
7,
23
],
"text": [
"I'll try and find a non-paywall soucre for this: _URL_0_\n\nIt touches a lot on African Grey vocal abilities. \n\nParrots can mimic a wide range of noises that humans make, but not all of them.\n\nSome sounds, like \"em\" or \"en\" or the ss in \"hiss\" are difficult if not impossible for most parrots to mimic. As such there are words in every language that a parrot cannot properly mimic, but there are also words in every language that a parrot can mimic. Some parrots like African Greys are also especially good at mimicking inflection, which is important in some languages as well.\n\nHowever not all parrots have this ability. ",
"Parrots certainly cannot mimic sign languages, which are just as much of a language as any other language. So that's something like 150 of the world's 7,000 languages that parrots are unable to imitate.\n\nIn terms of spoken languages, it depends on two things. First, what kind of bird do you mean? There are many species of parrots, some better at mimicry than others.\n\nSecond, what is close enough? Parrots seem to be able to imitate some of the phonetic qualities of human speech, but I wonder to what extent. I'm not so sure, for instance, a parrot would be able to distinguish between many of the [click consonants](_URL_1_), as they just don't have the correct oral structures for it. Similarly, I'm not so sure they could mimic some of the [coarticulations](_URL_0_) that humans are able to do.\n\nThat being said, I'm not aware of any studies on this topic."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10211-011-0106-9"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-articulated_consonant",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_consonant"
]
] |
||
2azqxj
|
how would it feel like to be a spider's prey? how long would you stay alive, and would you feel pain?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2azqxj/eli5_how_would_it_feel_like_to_be_a_spiders_prey/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cj0d2o8"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"You wouldn't live for all that long. First you would be caught, and wrapped up in the web. Then the spider would bite you and inject you with their venom. It would work its way through your body, melting your internal organs. You would survive until a vital organ was destroyed, or until neurotoxins stopped your heart/lungs/brain. I have to imagine you would feel an extreme amount of pain unfortunately. Even without giant spiders or miniature humans, there are some spiders that have the ability to kill a full size human in a matter of hours. So with a higher proportion of poison compared to your body size, my best guess would be that after injecting the poison, you would be dead within an hour or two"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2c5ogx
|
how can a corporation be considered a person in the usa (and therefore a usa citizen...?) if they move their company to a different country and do not pay taxes in the usa.
|
Thanks for the answers. This popped into my head at like 3 AM this morning so I wasn't really think I about the persons v citizens aspect.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2c5ogx/eli5_how_can_a_corporation_be_considered_a_person/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjc7gl9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"An important distinction: corporations are not considered U.S. citizens. Never before in American history has that ever even been considered.\n\nFor the purpose of applications of common law and protection under the Constitution, there is a concept of \"corporate personhood\" in the United States. This defines corporations as \"legal persons\" (in that they receive legal recognition) and extends to them certain rights and privileges under the Constitution. This allows for corporations to, amongst other things, enter into voluntary contracts with natural persons or other corporations and be sued in court. This legal definition dates back to 1819 Supreme Court case Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward. The precedent dates back to British common law.\n\nNow that it's been determined that they've never been and never will be afforded the rights of natural persons -- such as citizenship -- most of the issues regarding relocation should be cleared up. If they do move, they must incorporate under that country's law. If they no longer do business in the United States or with the United States, they no longer pay United States taxes. The same thing really applies to natural persons (citizens) emigrating from the United States. People who do not earn money in the United States don't pay United States taxes. Actually, when American sports players play games in Canada (Bills in Toronto or Raptors in Toronto) they pay Canadian taxes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2enkju
|
why do certain foods make me gassy? what the heck is going on inside me?
|
Seriously, I roasted and ate 3 garlic heads last night and I haven't stopped farting since 8am CST.
EDIT: Clarification: Why do certain foods make me ***MORE*** gassy than others?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2enkju/eli5_why_do_certain_foods_make_me_gassy_what_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ck15mha",
"ck1829x",
"ck19y3m"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Bacteria that lives in your stomach feeds on the food you eat and produces gas byproducts. ",
"OMG I had oatmeal this morning and yep... still tooting! ",
"Everyone has unique bacteria in their guts - different types and in different amounts. Some bacteria may thrive better on, say, meat and so produce more gas as a byproduct when they break this down. \n\nYet I may not have so many meat-loving bacteria in my gut, so I would get less gassy from eating it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
aiqmwv
|
When you drink caffeine, does it act like glucose and simply give your cells more energy, or is there something more going on?
|
I was drinking my morning cup and wondering what the hell it was actually doing to me. I understand that adenosine binds with its receptors to make you feel tired, but I can't seem to figure out how that would correlate to drinking an "energy supplement" like caffeine. That's why I assume that it has something to do with glucose production?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/aiqmwv/when_you_drink_caffeine_does_it_act_like_glucose/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eeq560t"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"What you've read is close to the truth. Your idea about glucose is not.\n\nVery simply put the action of caffeine is supposed to feel like you have more energy, that is to say, less tired. It does not provide any meaningful calories.\n\nSo how does caffeine work? Well blocking all adenosine receptors, specifically the A2A receptor is believed to be the main culprit, but the A1 receptor is probably in their too. Adenosine alters the activity of a variety of neurons in the brain, some directly related to sleep and wave (like the neurons which release histamine... yes, the same histamine that is blocked by antihistamines that make you sleepy). Some scientists suggest that this is the main way that caffeine promotes wakefulness: by increasing histamine release. Exactly where the adenosine comes from is a matter of debate. It is often released along side other neurotransmitters from neurons, but it may also be released by astrocytes (brain cells that aren't neurons).\n\nThere are also adenosine receptors in your heart, and your blood vessels, and these are probably responsible for how adenosine increases your heart rate and increases your blood pressure.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1xfnlq
|
why/how is the housing sector so important to nations economy?
|
The housing market seems to be mentioned far more than any other market when talking about the state of a nation's economy. Why is this?
EDIT: Wow, just realized that glaring grammatical error in the title. I guess that'll make it easier to treat me like a 5 year old, if anything.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xfnlq/eli5_whyhow_is_the_housing_sector_so_important_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfawpbf",
"cfaxn84",
"cfaz26m",
"cfaz299",
"cfazbrr"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
17,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"a House is a big purchase. it's probably the Biggest purchase for most people.\n\n* people are more likely to buy a house when they're confident about their future. (job/career security, economy stability, etc.)\n* The multiplier effect. a $200k house can pump millions into the economy. you've to employee people to design the house, have truckers truck over material to the house, then have construction workers to build the house, then an inspector will inspect the house to make sure it's safe, then you'll have people selling the house and bankers that loan you that mortgage. Then there's the furniture, insurance, decorations, etc. Then all those people have more job security and spend more money in the economy... ... ",
"You're actually asking two different (but related) questions:\n\n* Why/how is the housing sector important?\n* Why is the housing sector mentioned so often?\n\nTo answer the second, housing is usually a leading indicator. \n_URL_0_",
"A few reasons.\n\n1. Housing wealth is a very significant fraction of total wealth. Estimates vary, but the total value of US housing held by the \"household sector\" (i.e. not businesses) is roughly $20 trillion, out of roughly $70 trillion total net worth. See for instance table S.3.a here: _URL_0_\n\n2. The percentage of wealth in housing (almost 30% for the US as a whole) is much higher for the middle class. Poorer people are less likely to own houses, and richer people are more likely to own financial assets such as equities. I don't have a good citation for you, but the number for the middle class could easily be 60%. And of course there are many individuals with all of their wealth in housing.\n\n3. It's undiversified wealth, and therefore more risky. One doesn't own 0.01% of of 10,000 houses equally spread across the globe---one owns one house. If the housing market goes to shit in an area, everyone in that area suffers together and it can have a huge effect.\n\n4. Housing is important for other reasons, such as mobility. For instance, suppose something happens to make it hard to buy and sell houses---let's say that mortgages dry up. People need to buy and sell houses in order to move for jobs. If housing frictions make it hard for people to flow toward jobs the unemployment rate goes up, etc. \n\nI could go on. In short, housing isn't just any old asset---it's a very valuable, very indivisible asset that is very central to many other decisions in our lives, and is disproportionately important for the middle class.",
"Because housing is a huge undertaking, so housing is usually a pretty good indicator of how the economy is doing. \n\n1. Housing in and of itself is a huge economic transaction. There's the land itself (and subsequent regulatory assessment); utilities; architectural design; the actual construction (including buying all of the raw materials and then transporting them); and then the selling (real estate agents, loan officers, etc.) Building a new house encompasses at least four or five different industries.\n\n2. They usually differentiate between \"housing\" (people buying new homes from others as well as new homes) and \"new home construction\" (actually building a new home). As noted above, new home construction is a bigger deal, but simply moving existing houses is also an indicator. People generally don't buy a house unless they're confident and secure with their economic situation--so if more people are buying houses, it usually means people are making more money and/or are confident that they will keep making money in the future.\n\nOther \"big\" purchases, such as cars and consumer electronics, are also often mentioned for much of the same reasons. You'll also note that manufacturing inventory is often a common mention; it's kind of an \"instant\" snapshot of how the economy is doing (stuff gets out of warehouses months before the new home is built, so it's a good predictor of the future. If warehouses have depleted stock, that usually means in a few months people will start buying them.)",
"Some good answers in here already, but I will take a shot.\n\n1. For the average family, their home, and the associated mortgage, is the largest investment they will ever make, by far. More of the average household money, as a result, is tied up in housing than in any other investment. \n\n2. The mortgage market, as a result, is a huge, huge indicator of how the middle class is faring. Keeping tabs on the middle class is hugely important for the American economy, because they represent the vast majority of consumer spending - the middle class may save a fraction of its income, but by far, they spend the vast majority of what they earn. This is unlike the lower class, which spends all of what they earn and also has to be subsidized, and the very wealthy, who have more money than they know what to do with and hoard it. So the middle class is really the engine of the modern economy - and whether or not they feel they can buy and afford houses is a gigantic indicator of their overall financial health. \n\n3. Where people live is hugely determinative of what job they do. This is getting less important, but for the most part, you can tell the health of a local economy by its housing numbers. As a result, housing numbers tell a bunch about the particular area you are looking at - there is crazy development near the petroleum fields in the dakotas, but you can buy a city block in detroit for a few dollars. That tells you a lot about the local economy. \n\n4. A big bunch of financial instruments in the larger economy are tied to mortgages. When you make a mortgage with a bank, odds are pretty low the bank holds onto that mortgage. It will likely get sold to a larger fund, and those funds may be anything from rich billionaires speculating on boom-housing in florida to the aggregate retirement accounts of every teacher in Ohio looking to make sure their nest-eggs don't evaporate, and are hoping for modest but consistent gains above inflation. Because housing is so expensive, and represents a gigantic part of the economy, tons and tons of investment money from private individuals are put into third party mortgages. \n\n5. Construction employs a huge number of people, who may not be qualified for other work. So if housing is in a boom, it means jobs for millions. If it is stagnant, it means a whole shitload of unemployed construction workers. When you think this through to the associated payroll taxes, impact on local spending, you realize that it is a gigantic issue. Think about it this way: imagine if McDonalds or Walmart went out of business and fired every one of its workers tomorrow. The cycles of the housing market are on a similar level. \n\nIf you go to _URL_0_, you will find a whole bunch of really informative podcasts about mortgages. It is a huge industry."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/02/housing-best-leading-indicator-for.html"
],
[
"http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/z1r-7.pdf"
],
[],
[
"npr.org/money"
]
] |
|
1w9o71
|
how that dog from two floors down can continuously bark for two hours and not lose his voice
|
Also, what is wrong with that creature?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1w9o71/eli5_how_that_dog_from_two_floors_down_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf00dk4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"he has seperation anxiety. i assume that he mainly does that when his owners are not at home? seperation anxiety builds up tension, so everytime he sees his owners leave the house he starts to get desperate and all the build up tension has to come out somehow. some dogs release that tension by destroying the whole house...some dogs release it by barking. if i were you i would go and talk to your neighbours and tell them to excersise more with their dog. Physical excersise before they leave the house is going to make that problem a hell of a lot less of a problem if it doesnt completely solve it. they are obviously not taking the dog out enough"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
c9pxp6
|
how do bullets fired into the air come down fast enough to do damage?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9pxp6/eli5_how_do_bullets_fired_into_the_air_come_down/
|
{
"a_id": [
"et12rhw",
"et136vm",
"et13fjo",
"et13hwb",
"et1hl1h",
"et4ao4c"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
8,
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Bullets are propelled by gases from a gunpowder charge. Once it leaves the barrel traveling up, eventually the round reaches an apex, and heads back toward gravity. It will reach terminal velocity falling back down, which is much less than muzzle velocity firing up, but still enough to do damage. Case in point, a stray round coming back down in this manner took out the back window of my friends car a few 4th of Julys ago, it was found in the trunk after passing through the seat back.",
"It accelerates at 9.8m/sec² (minus wind friction) so if my math is close it would come down with a terminal velocity of around 175mph.",
"There's actually a myth busters episode about this. If you fire a bullet straight up in the air, perfectly perpendicular to the ground, it won't have enough velocity coming back down to kill you. It probably won't tickle but you won't die. If I remember correctly, their theory was that when people fire up into the air they don't do it perfectly perpendicular to the ground so the bullet continues to spin as it travels point-first (as it does when fired levelly), and thus maintains its aerodynamic-ness and speed enough to kill.",
" > what makes it go fast enough to kill someone?\n\nGravity.\n\nTheir terminal falling velocity may be a lot lower than their muzzle velocity, but it's still well beyond fast enough to do serious damage or kill.",
"Other situation is when bullets don’t go up at a steep enough angle to lose velocity and fall down. Instead they make more of a rainbow arc, not loosing THAT much speed at all before impacting something.",
"Mythbusters covered this several times. A bullet fired straight up will eventually stop and fall back down. Terminal velocity for a bullet is only about 100 miles per hour. Not enough to hurt you. \n\nA bullet fired at an angle will still travel horizontally at several hundred miles per hour. That is how people get killed."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dp30lh
|
My mother and grandmother keep saying that living in the Soviet Union was way better than it is now because during then there was alot of food with cheap prices and i hardly believe that,was it actually true or am I getting brainwashed?
|
I'm from Georgia btw so that can help you answer my question
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dp30lh/my_mother_and_grandmother_keep_saying_that_living/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f5sjdu4"
],
"score": [
1755
],
"text": [
"Adapted from an earlier [answer](_URL_0_):\n\n You can poke around the internet and easily find graphs that claim that the average Soviet citizen had a higher caloric intake than the average American until the Soviet intake plummeted in 1991.\n\nThese generally come from FAO data, but an [examination](_URL_1_) of a number of different sources will show a spread of estimates.\n\nA major takeaway is that the two big datasets available to international researchers on Soviet nutrition are through the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the US Department of Agriculture, as well as some official Soviet sources, such as Goskomstat and Torgovlya SSSR. A huge problem with the data sets available is that it's very much comparing yabloki to oranges. A lot of the official data is for Food Balances (food produced, plus food imported, minus food exported), which is not the same thing as food consumed by households. For one thing, such a data set will not capture the massive wastage issues in Soviet food production and transportation, and will erroneously capture Soviet food production that was actually used for livestock rather than human consumption. The Soviet data furthermore is in kilograms and not calories.\n\nSo most researchers have had to adjust the data to some degree. It's worth pointing out that Robert Allen (in his From Farm to Factory), when adjusting the data, comes to results that roughly match the FAO data.\n\nIgor Birman, who was a Soviet economist who emigrated to the US in 1974, attempted to compare the two countries' nutrition in Personal Consumption in the USSR and the USA (1981). Birman considered the FAO data (and similar results produced by the CIA at the time) to be too high for reasons noted above, and found that, while Soviet diets were adequate (ie, in general the average person wasn't malnurished), caloric intake was slightly below US average intake, and if anything should be higher, because of a colder Soviet climate and a younger and more physically active population.\n\nBirman also criticized the CIA's attempt to compare diets. He noted that the Soviet diet was much higher in bread and potatoes than the American diet, and higher in fish consumption, but much lower in meat and fruits. The average Soviet consumed more dairy than the average American, but this was mostly cheese (usually tvorog), as opposed to fresh milk. Some of these products, such as bread, were often considered superior to the American versions, especially by emigres (anecdote: this is true), but others, such as meat, were considered inferior. Soviet citizens also tended to spend a much larger proportion of their income on food purchases compared to Americans. Interestingly, much of the meat and dairy supply available to Soviet citizens came from private production by farmers, rather than from collective or state farms.\n\nBirman notes that there were significant inequalities in what was available in major cities such as Leningrad and Moscow and more provincial ones, as well as what was available to party members versus nonparty members, and that certain foods (say, pineapples or avocadoes) that one could find in US supermarkets were simply unavailable to anyone. Soviet citizens also often consumed fresh products much more based on seasonality. And I should note that Birman doesn't hold back in his criticisms of the US either: he notes that rural and urban poverty in the US has real malnutrition issues, and that just because US supermarkets have choices doesn't mean that everyone has the ability to exercise that choice.\n\nSo in summary: there are data sets that show the average Soviet citizen's caloric intake as higher than the average Americans. Some historians, notably Robert Allen, consider these more or less accurate, but all the data sets need adjustments in order to be compared to US figures. With that said, even when Soviet citizens were eating adequately, they were eating a very different diet from that of Americans, one that would, for example, include eating larger amounts of potatoes every day."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/akd6is/were_soviet_citizens_really_better_fed_than/",
"https://nintil.com/the-soviet-union-food/"
]
] |
|
bck6ju
|
how does flavored seltzer have 0 calories per serving but 10 calories per bottle?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bck6ju/eli5_how_does_flavored_seltzer_have_0_calories/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ekrbvvf",
"ekrbwmd",
"ekrc4nc"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You're not required to disclose under 5 calories per serving per the FDA in the US - it can be rounded down to 0. As each serving is only 3.333... calories, it can be listed as no calorie.\n\n_URL_0_",
"There are arcane rules on how those nutrition lables are regulated. IIRC, you can round anything to the nearest ten calories, so 3.33 calories per serving would be rounded down to zero",
"Rounding. Under 5 calories can be rounded down to 0 per serving. There are likely 3 or 4 calories per serving which rounds to 0 per serving but per bottle 3 servings combined rounds to 10 calories."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=101.60"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
37ws11
|
Why does the United States not have a parliament like the United Kingdom?
|
Almost every former British colony currently possess a parliament similar to that of the United Kingdom. How come the US didn't have its own parliament like the UK does?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/37ws11/why_does_the_united_states_not_have_a_parliament/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crqxiu4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It was Parliament that had tried to tax them, in their view unjustly. The Declaratory Act had declared that Parliament could pass any Act it saw fit in regards to America. This idea of unlimited parliamentary sovereignty was anathema to Americans. They were concerned above all to ensure that their Constitution safeguarded liberty and this could not be done if the legislative body could pass any law it saw fit by a simple majority.\n\nAlso, the fact that the Upper House of Parliament was composed of hereditary legislators struck the Founding Fathers as absurd. As the [Federalist No. 63](_URL_0_) stated:\n\n > But if anything could silence the jealousies on this subject, it ought to be the British example. The Senate there instead of being elected for a term of six years, and of being unconfined to particular families or fortunes, is an hereditary assembly of opulent nobles. The House of Representatives, instead of being elected for two years, and by the whole body of the people, is elected for seven years, and, in very great proportion, by a very small proportion of the people. Here, unquestionably, ought to be seen in full display the aristocratic usurpations and tyranny which are at some future period to be exemplified in the United States. Unfortunately, however, for the anti-federal argument, the British history informs us that this hereditary assembly has not been able to defend itself against the continual encroachments of the House of Representatives; and that it no sooner lost the support of the monarch, than it was actually crushed by the weight of the popular branch."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa63.htm"
]
] |
|
6ckesq
|
why is it difficult for us to recognize how annoying the annoying things we do are, when we're so quick to identify the annoying things other people do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ckesq/eli5_why_is_it_difficult_for_us_to_recognize_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhvcfgi",
"dhvdttw"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It is one of those things in life. We are all born with a million small bottles, each with a label. One is greed, one is lust, one for ambition, one for honesty. Every single trait has its own jar. Love, empathy, distrust, lying, amity, etc. each has a jar. In each jar is a bit of sand. Those who are greedy have the greedy jar overflowing, but their empathy jar might be empty, or their love jar overflowing. We all have the same jars with varying amounts of sand in each. \n\nThe kicker is that the jars are behind us, and while we can easily see the sand in other people's jars, we cannot see our own. ",
"Because you are living inside your own brain, that means that you know your own intentions, so the things that you do don't annoy you, because you're you, and you know exactly why you're doing that. Those intentions, however, do not always show through, and other people don't always put themselves into your shoes to try to figure out why you're doing those things. They get wrapped up in themselves and take everything personally and become upset over the things that you do that they find annoying.\n\nThat action of putting yourself into another person's shoes is called empathy, and its hard to practice, because it means making yourself vulnerable and opening yourself up to another person's emotions. that's a frightening thing to do, and its not something the people readily think of. so that car that just swerved right in front of you that made you have to brake really hard? maybe that's a parent in the driver's seat who just got hit in the the head by the toy that their kid threw from the back seat, or the kids are screaming at each other and one threw up. That text you sent that person and they didn't respond back to you within five minutes and now you're freaking out that maybe they hate you? maybe you texted them while they were in a cell phone dead zone and they literally didn't get it, or maybe they work someplace where they're not allowed to have their cell phones at all. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
17iv6f
|
can a programmer explain what a "delegate" is and why you should use it?
|
Language: c#
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17iv6f/eli5_can_a_programmer_explain_what_a_delegate_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c85woe1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_1_\n\ngives a good explanation.\n\nbasic answer: it's like a secure, typesafe version of C's function pointers. More simply put, it's an object which references a method. \n\nHere's a good example:\n_URL_0_\n\nIt's an easy way to pass a method you wish to invoke to a function, so the function can invoke that method without actually knowing which method is being invoked. (try saying that 10 times fast)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/71154/C-Delegates-101-A-Practical-Example",
"http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa288459(v=vs.71).aspx"
]
] |
|
8dgwhb
|
why does a phone without a battery break when dropped in water?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dgwhb/eli5_why_does_a_phone_without_a_battery_break/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxn1e3e",
"dxn1l8l",
"dxn1poe"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Electronics guy here.\n\nIt happens because it isn't the water that breaks the phone - *minerals* ***left behind by the water*** cause short circuits which cause parts of the phone to fry the next time any voltage is applied to them.\n\nIn theory an electronic device can be restored after getting dunked in water... as long as the minerals are thoroughly washed off beforehand.\n\nEdited to add: Professionals use isopropyl alcohol at as close to 100% concentration as they can find - among other things - to rinse away the minerals without leaving anything else behind.",
"If it does, it's because either...\n\n1. The device still has water in it when it's powered back on, creating unintended electrical pathways damaging various sensitive components when the device powers on\n\n2. Conductive residue (Mineral, other) from the evaporation of the water remained on the board, creating unintended electrical pathways damaging various sensitive components when the device powers on\n\nThis is why it's exceptionally important to make sure a device is THOROUGHLY DRIED OUT, COMPLETELY before attempting to power it back on. While rice might be an extremely mild desiccant (absorbs water), the old 'rice in a bowl/bag' trick is more useful because it gets people to leave their phones alone. ",
"Corrosion on circuits/coils/resistors. Completely dry it, replace the corroded parts and obviously add the battery back it should work okay. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
48cd4h
|
From Facebook: "Pineapples were a status symbol in 18th century England. They were so expensive that you could rent them by the night and take them to parties with you". Can I get more insight on this?
|
Why the pineapple representing a symbol of status? Why not something like a banana or a strawberry?
How expensive were they in 18th century English currency (Euros they used, was it?) and what's the equivalency to the modern English coin (or Canadian, since I'm Canadian).
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/48cd4h/from_facebook_pineapples_were_a_status_symbol_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0it9xf",
"d0j1jar",
"d0j6ugt"
],
"score": [
123,
26,
12
],
"text": [
"Collecting exotic plants of all kinds was quite a popular pastime for the landed gentry and aristocracy of 18th century England. By this I mean that people were devoting a great deal of time and energy to bringing back prized specimens to grow and cultivate in Britain. Such was the benefit of Britannia's increasing global reach. As you might imagine this was quite an expensive enterprise. Bringing both live plants and seeds from the Caribbean, South and Central America, Australia, and India required a great deal of effort. Live plants need sunlight, soil, and fresh water (something lacking on the open sea) while seeds need to be kept safe from insects and rats as well as requiring proper storage. A gardener named James Lee (1715-1795) wrote a meticulous guide on the subject of proper seed management whilst in transit. \n\nWith all this in mind, being able to get one's hands on some exotic specimen from a far flung corner of the earth and cultivating it on one's pleasant British estate was a great way to show off one's means. Pineapples were very much a part of this, as were other exotic fruits like mangoes and oranges. These were the best for displaying wealth as such things require a greenhouse in order to flourish. If you had pineapples then you were telling the world that you had the wealth to obtain and cultivate them. Some people went to absurd lengths to articulate this. The Earl of Dunmore's 1761 [greenhouse](_URL_0_) is a good example of this. \n\nFurthermore, pineapples were in high demand not only from aristocrats but from mariners as well. James Cook and others realized that pineapples were a great source of vitamins and could fend off scurvy. Pineapple patches could be found in harbors around the world in order to supply a good diet to sailors. This boosted demand and therefore the exclusivity.\n\nIn terms of cost I haven't anything on the specific price of pineapples but I can offer some insight on the money people spent on exotic flora. In Feb 1821 a visitor to the Duke of Marlborough's Whiteknights Park recorded that the Duke had sunk 40-50 000 pounds into his plant collection and was 10 000 in debt. That's an extreme example but it gives you an idea.\n\nSources: Chilean Trees and Shrubs: A History of Introduction to the British Isles by William Charles Noble, Hidden Britain by Tom Quinn, Foods that Changed History by Christopher Cumo, Daily Life in 18th-century England by Kristin Olsen ",
"Just as a side note to \"why not strawberries\", they're not really exotic or exclusive fruit - they grow wild in forests, and cultivated varieties are very easy to grow without greenhouses all over Europe, even in the far north (in Norway, the best strawberries are considered to come from Trøndelag, which is just about 300 km shy of the Arctic circle). ",
"Just to clarify, British currency was, and is, the pound. The Euro was introduced to some member states of the European Union a few years ago."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Dunmore_pineapple.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
14346o
|
What were the popular games during your period of expertise?
|
Was it Chess? Poker? Yahtzee? Maybe some other game that we don't play in modern times? If so, could you tell us more about the game?
Was your game popular during that time just because it was fun, or was there some cultural significance?
Was it more popular with any particular age group or profession?
Were there tournaments, championships, anything like that?
Looking forward to learning about some games!
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/14346o/what_were_the_popular_games_during_your_period_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c79gcsu",
"c79jtch",
"c79k1xv",
"c79k2v5",
"c79lja8"
],
"score": [
13,
5,
16,
8,
8
],
"text": [
"[Crambo](_URL_0_) and [Whist](_URL_1_) were common upper class entertainments that aren't very well known today. ",
"Marie-Antoinette and Louis XVI were apparently rather fond of backgammon. They played it while they were imprisoned and the account of the death of the Princesse de Lamballe states they were playing when Marie-Antoinette's favourite's head was being waved around outside their window.",
"In 14th century Japan, a poetic game called linked-verse *renga* came into prominence among poets at court. I'm sure most people are generally familiar with haiku, a poetic form consisting of 5-7-5 morae (syllables). One of the oldest forms of Japanese poetry is called waka, which is 5-7-5-7-7. Poets developed a game called renga (which grew into more of an art form as time passed) from waka. \n\nHow renga worked is a group of poets would get together (often 3) and would take turns composing links for a poem. The first poet would write a 5-7-5 section. The second poet would then compose a 7-7 section. The third poet would then write another 5-7-5 section, and so on. The most common length was eventually standardized as 100 links, although 30 and 50 were also common. However, the goal was not to make a unified poem with a consistent theme or story. There was an assigned topic that each link had to vaguely connect to, but the poem was no meant to be a fluid piece. Rather, each adjacent pair of links were to fit together as an individual poem. The first and second links were one poem, the second and third links formed one poem, and so on, each connected by a close or distant link of theme or word choice. The poets aimed at making the best connects between the pairs, often using clever wordplay.\n\nNow where renga really becomes interesting is the incredibly extensive and complex rules that developed over time, such to the extent that a book today that covers all the rules would be several hundred pages in length. The topics of the poetic links had specified lengths. For example, with the most common topics of seasons, spring and autumn themes could last no more than five links in a row, whereas summer and winter could only be three links long. The moon had to be mentioned in specific lines. Eventually, almost every important poetic word (chrysanthemum, willow, shrine, hut, etc) had a specific maximum mentions per renga. At the gatherings where the renga were composed, there would often be a judge who knew the rules particularly well to officiate the game.\n\nHaiku eventually developed from the hokku, which is the opening link of a renga, consisting of 5-7-5.\n\nThe Poets at Minase by Sogi, Socho, and Shohaku is probably the most famous example of renga. It first five links are as follows (translation by Steven Carter in *Traditional Japanese Literature*):\n\n\n Some snow still remains\n as mist moves low on the slopes\n toward evening.\n\n Flowing water, far away--\n and a plum-scented village.\n\n Wind off the river\n blows through a clump of willows--\n and spring appears.\n\n A boat being poled along,\n sounding clear at the break of dawn.\n\n Still there, somewhere:\n the moon off behind the mist\n traversing the night.",
"The Klan played baseball in the 1920s. [Here](_URL_0_) is an interesting example of one such game. As Ken Burns rightfully notes, everyone had a team in the 1920s, and the Klan appears to be no different. The reasons for why the Klan played baseball are left to speculation. My own educated guess is that the Klan viewed themselves as the pinnacle of American identity, and baseball, with its mythic roots in the Civil War, was an American game, so the Klan played baseball. I am currently working on what I hope to be an article about the Klan and baseball. ",
"The [Game of Twenty Squares](_URL_2_), which was a kind of predecessor to modern backgammon, was invented just before 2600 BCE and is still played today. A cuneiform tablet from 177 BCE provides an overview of the rules that are likely to be very similar to, if not exactly the same as, the game's original rules set, but sometime during the early Christian Era the game either evolved or inspired the game of Game of 12 Lines, which was a similar, intermediary game that would later become backgammon. Additionally, thanks to the discovery of that 2nd century BCE tablet, the game was reborn in the 20th century and is played in [numerous places](_URL_0_) all over the world today.\n\nThe game seems to have enjoyed wide popularity over thousands of years, and rough, [ad-hoc boards](_URL_1_) have been found in Iraq, Syria, and even Egypt.\n\nWe don't have any more information about who played it or if it was esteemed or just casual entertainment, unfortunately."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crambo",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whist"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://onlyagame.wbur.org/2012/05/26/monrovian-baseball"
],
[
"http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1602/the-royal-game-of-ur",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bm-royalgame.jpg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Game_of_Ur"
]
] |
|
1y0b3d
|
how are tangle-free headphones created?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y0b3d/eli5_how_are_tanglefree_headphones_created/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfgegvf"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"They use wide flat cable that does not really flex much along the width. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3bpwiu
|
What is the gold-colored wrapping on spacecraft and rover wiring?
|
[See Image](_URL_0_)
What is the gold wrapping on the wiring on Curiosity? Is it different from other, similarly colored coverings used on other spacecraft and rovers?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3bpwiu/what_is_the_goldcolored_wrapping_on_spacecraft/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csp4987",
"csp5db1"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nIt's a lightweight insulator that keeps it's properties over large temperature ranges and doesn't have problems with outgassing in vacuums.\n\nHere's some on Amazon\n\n_URL_1_",
"They have a similar function as the other reflective coatings: reflect radiation. I'm pretty sure those are a metalized polyamide or polyester film.\n\nSee this page for product details and a video that suggests this is the insulation in question: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/kvmXRXv.jpg"
] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapton",
"http://www.amazon.com/Gold-Kapton-Tape-Polyimide-36yds/dp/B0049KTIAU"
],
[
"http://www.dunmore.com/products/multi-layer-films.html"
]
] |
|
bfk3do
|
used oil? why is it considered bad for environment?
|
It comes from the ground anyway, why can't it be just dumped out on the ground?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bfk3do/eli5_used_oil_why_is_it_considered_bad_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"elea9g8",
"elecmwp",
"elefw8y",
"elek6yh",
"elephb1"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
5,
5,
3
],
"text": [
" > It comes from the ground anyway, why can't it be just dumped out on the ground?\n\nBecause it would seep into groundwater or other environmentally sensitive areas.\n\nIn its natural state it is contained within its own environment.",
"It comes from *really* far underground and doesn’t mix with water, or come into contact with plants/animals— until we extract it and use it.\n\nActually, there are a handful of natural places where oil does come to the surface, tar pits being one example. But these can be toxic to plant and animal life. They aren’t talked about as being bad for the environment because they are a natural *part* of the environment, and relatively rare, but are certainly something that would have negative effects if it existed in more or different locations.",
"1 gallon of used motor oil can pollute 1 million gallons of fresh water. \n\nThe problem is the water people drink is only a little bit under ground. \n\nThe oil is thousands of feet underground. \n\nYour oil that you dump in your yard can affect the neighbors who have water wells, or get washed into storm drains where there is no filters and it will end up in streams which get turned into fresh water.",
"Lava comes from the ground too. It's not exactly environmentally friendly, at least not in the short term.\n\nThis is an example of the Appeal To Nature fallacy. Just because it's natural doesn't make it friendly to life.\n\nIn fact, if you think about how inconceivably rare it is to find a place in the universe where life is possible, you'll realize most things and places in nature are better described as violently and spectacularly hostile towards life than benevolent towards it.",
"Its not “considered” bad, it *is* bad. Go drink a glass of used oil if you dont believe me. \n\nActually, don’t do that."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
gbuj3
|
Are the animals living in the city of Pripyat (the city that was devistated by the Cherynobil disaster) deformed from radiation?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/gbuj3/are_the_animals_living_in_the_city_of_pripyat_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c1mekcy",
"c1meodo",
"c1meqyt"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
19
],
"text": [
"Also why do the pictures of abandoned interiors show peeling paint and what not - It seems as if the buildings have aged faster than I would have thought, even without humans there to maintain them",
"As usual, Wikipedia and citations are a decent place to start:\n\n_URL_0_",
"Oh boy, my favourite topic! \n\nWhile the Chernobyl wildlife do have large degrees of deformities, they largely manifest in their internal organs, immune systems, and reproductive sucess-- no three-headed deer, just birds with smaller brains, fewer eggs, and fewer babies that are born alive and make it to adulthood. A lot of the animals there appear to be abundant, but actually don't have enough surviving offspring to replace their own numbers; the population is maintained through immigration from the surrounding areas. \n\n[Timothy Mousseau](_URL_0_) is the leading English-language scientist in the field and has spent over ten years publishing findings on Chernobyl's wildlife, check his papers out."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Nuclear_Power_Plant_Exclusion_Zone#Flora_and_fauna"
],
[
"http://cricket.biol.sc.edu/mousseau/mousseau.html"
]
] |
||
29b7v0
|
how do tilt shift filters work?
|
How does a filter make something look like a toy model
Example: _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29b7v0/eli5_how_do_tilt_shift_filters_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cij7rpi",
"cij83y3",
"cij85n9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Tilt-shift lenses are often used in architectural photography. Parallel lines that appear to converge due to perspective distortion can be realigned to appear parallel. Sometimes the terms 'perspective control' (PC) lens and 'tilt shift' (TS) lens are used interchangeably; perspective control lenses are often a specialised type of tilt-shift lens, often with shift-only movements.",
"You can't do that with a filter. You need a specialised tilt shift lens. They are commonly used for architectural photography, as it gives the photographer the ability to manipulate the lens, which changes the perspective of the photo.\n\nBy manipulating the lens in certain ways, you can change the way the camera focuses. Instead of being radial ( where the point of focus is like a circle ), the focus becomes lineal ( where the point of focus can become a horizontal strip ) which is what creates the model effect. ",
"In order to simulate a very shallow depth-of-field you can simply gradually blur the image before and after a narrow band of in-focus image."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://b4silio.deviantart.com/art/Tilt-Shift-I-St-Saphorin-62699186"
] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
jst5n
|
Is our sense of time affected by the rate of chemical reactions?
|
So if our biological chemical reactions occurred as quickly as nitroglycerin breaks down into gases, would our perception of time be different?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/jst5n/is_our_sense_of_time_affected_by_the_rate_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2euuf8",
"c2exui9",
"c2euuf8",
"c2exui9"
],
"score": [
40,
2,
40,
2
],
"text": [
"It is much more complicated than that, and is a very active area of research.\n\nA professor at my school, David Eagleman, studies this stuff. He's a complete badass, check him out: \n\n_URL_0_\n\nedit: \n\none of his famous experiments involves using magnetic energy to slow the propagation of some signals in the brain, and if done properly it can make you think cause and effect are reversed in some special circumstances. he also dropped grad students from a tall structure with a quickly-blinking watch to see if the fear of death would help them see what the watch was displaying. they couldn't.\n\nmany biological reactions happen just as fast or faster than nitroglycerin degradation. something like time perception that involves consciousness must by definition be related to higher-order neural networks in the brain.",
"I can tell you that your circadian rhythm has a low Q value, that is, that temperature doesn't speed or slow the rate or it very much. (this temperature compensation is one of the defining characteristics of circadian clocks) (also, as animals get more polar and temperature changes are less during a year, then there is more emphasis on temperature compensation in their clocks)",
"It is much more complicated than that, and is a very active area of research.\n\nA professor at my school, David Eagleman, studies this stuff. He's a complete badass, check him out: \n\n_URL_0_\n\nedit: \n\none of his famous experiments involves using magnetic energy to slow the propagation of some signals in the brain, and if done properly it can make you think cause and effect are reversed in some special circumstances. he also dropped grad students from a tall structure with a quickly-blinking watch to see if the fear of death would help them see what the watch was displaying. they couldn't.\n\nmany biological reactions happen just as fast or faster than nitroglycerin degradation. something like time perception that involves consciousness must by definition be related to higher-order neural networks in the brain.",
"I can tell you that your circadian rhythm has a low Q value, that is, that temperature doesn't speed or slow the rate or it very much. (this temperature compensation is one of the defining characteristics of circadian clocks) (also, as animals get more polar and temperature changes are less during a year, then there is more emphasis on temperature compensation in their clocks)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Eagleman"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Eagleman"
],
[]
] |
|
3vfq8o
|
why is a man participating in rape culture if both the man and woman were drunk and not able to give consent
|
I am not talking about when a woman is passed out and the man is drunk, but as if they are on the same level of intoxication
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vfq8o/eli5_why_is_a_man_participating_in_rape_culture/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxn4wdg",
"cxn5mvv",
"cxn5x4d",
"cxn60hg",
"cxn8jvv",
"cxnbb7w",
"cxndht5",
"cxny886"
],
"score": [
20,
3,
12,
3,
13,
2,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure you know what \"rape culture\" means... It refers more to society's treatment of rape than rape itself.\n\nBut as far as why the man is many times more likely to be charged with rape, I suppose it has to do with an ingrained perception that masculinity is active, and femininity passive, so people just just more likely to take accusations of rape seriously if a woman is the alleged victim.",
"it's not that easy to say men and women contribute the same amount to rape culture. however, to say rape is done mostly by males is a dangerous generalization. unfortunately, most rapists happen to be men. naturally, we become defensive when we hear such \"insidious and misleading\" remarks, because it is natural to deny any association with what is culturally repulsive to admit. ",
"I agree with /u/Thomystic but I also think most people outside a college campus would not agree that 2 drunk people having sex means the woman is being raped or that the man is participating in rape culture. I could be wrong but I've worked with tons of college age kids, some of whom were in college, many more who were not and this line of thinking was not the norm. ",
"The enlightenment period was when logic and science took over what was always ruled by emotion and superstition. Third wave feminism tries to bring more emotion into the workings of society, which goes so far as to advocate for Affirmative Consent laws. Affirmative Consent is the notion that rather than a person having the power to say no, the person has to say yes before anything happens. If consent is not gained, then a rape is deemed to have occurred (doesn't make 100% sense to me, nobody I've ever had sex with with needed me to ask a yes-no question, but whatever). Part of Affirmative Consent is the notion that one cannot have had anything to drink prior to consenting, lest the consent be void. So two drunk people cannot consent to sex, and are encouraged not to have sex per Affirmative Consent. \n\nThis still leaves the question \"Why does the man more often get accused if both were drunk?\" Honestly, it looks like prejudice based on fear, the whole reason \"No means no\" turned into \"yes means yes\". ",
"Two drunk lesbians having sex on campus, who the rapists is? - Yoda",
"If two people are drunk and have sex, the 'victim' is the only person who will be making any accusations. If the female is the one saying she was raped, then the male in that scenario should be charged with the crime. If the male in another drunk sex states he never gave consent then the female should be charged with the crime as well. \n\nJust how being drunk isn't an excuse to commit any other crime(like murder or theft) this is treated the same way. \n\nI just think it's important to note that it's generally thought that men are just less likely to report these crimes. ",
"What the hell do you think \"rape culture\" means? I would love to hear you explain that.",
"Regardless of its man-woman, man-man, woman-woman, man-man-trans.... I think the issue is who instigates sex. Drinking and driving is a crime - we don't allow it just because you're drunk. If the man initiates sex drunk, he isn't let off the hook simply because he was drunk. If the woman instigates sex drunk, she should be held to the same standard. Its just less likely, for whatever reason. More research needs to be done to better understand issues of consent when both parties are intoxicated. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6alvw6
|
Do gravitational waves add up or cancel each other out in amplitude like sound waves do when two run into each other?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/6alvw6/do_gravitational_waves_add_up_or_cancel_each/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhfv94s",
"dhfvocu"
],
"score": [
5,
7
],
"text": [
"Asked and [answered](_URL_0_).",
"_URL_0_\n\n > Of course they can. Gravitational waves carry energy and energy curves space in a non - linear fashion.\nOne example would be to make a spherical 1000 km in diameter shell of about 1000 of those LIGO Sept 14 events, and then at the center the gravitational waves might pile up enough to create a black hole.\nEven though gravitational waves are modelled quite accurately by the linear wave approximation, any two gradational waves that interact will always interfere with each other, at least in some extremely small manner.\nThe \"If so are there areas of the universe with less or more gravity as a result.\" question does not make as much sense to me - the areas of the universe with more gravity are those that have the most matter + energy in them, no matter what the source."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2361h3/do_gravitational_waves_exhibit_constructive_and/"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/47tgd3/can_gravity_waves_interfere_with_each_other/"
]
] |
||
ygh2d
|
a catch-22 situation?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ygh2d/eli5_a_catch22_situation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5vbpuz",
"c5vbrje",
"c5vbsfk",
"c5vd2jc",
"c5ve5ft",
"c5veycq"
],
"score": [
6,
17,
22,
3,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"In order to get your drivers license you have to present a copy of your birth certificate.\n\n\nIn order to get a copy of your birth certificate you have to show a valid drivers license.\n\n\n",
"In order to get a job, you need work experience. In order to get work experience, you need a jaaaaahb. ",
"Its named after the novel by joseph heller. And coined after this specific passage where a pilot tries to get out of combat missions by being proven mentally unstable\n\n---\n\n\"You mean there's a catch?\"\n\n\"Sure there's a catch\", Doc Daneeka replied. \"Catch-22. Anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy.\"",
"TO get a credit card, you need to have a good credit score. To get a credit score, you need to get a credit card.",
"Catch-22 situation is one where in order to get thing A you need thing B, but in order to get thing B you need to already have thing A.\n\nFor example: to get hired for some job you need a car, but to pay for that car you need to be already hired by that job.",
"You're damned of you do and you're damned if you dont"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
14cg77
|
I heard that orbiting objects are really just constantly falling, but they are moving so fast that when they fall they never hit the earth... How true is this?
|
Does that mean the spacestation, and anything else orbitting, is falling at a rate of 9.8 m/s2?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/14cg77/i_heard_that_orbiting_objects_are_really_just/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7c0c0e",
"c7c0c25",
"c7c0cxi",
"c7c20jv"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"This is exactly correct. For any object moving in a circle, it must be experiencing a force called centripetal force pulling it inward toward the middle of the circle. This is necessary for it to follow the curved path. In the case of an orbiting object, the gravity is pulling the orbiting object inward the center of the earth. However, it also has inertia that causes it to naturally move tangent to the path of the orbit. As long as this velocity is high enough, the object rather than hitting the earth will miss it wide and it will enter orbit.\n\nIn the case of an object in a circular low earth orbit, this speed is about 8 m/s.",
"Well, the acceleration in Low Earth Orbit (where the ISS orbits) is a bit lower than 9.8 m/s^2, but yes, orbiting objects are falling.\n\nTo illustrate this, consider a cannon on the moon (convenient because it has no atmosphere, but really any spherical body will do). It is on a platform a few meters above the Moon's surface, and it fires a projectile horizontally. The projectile will curve downward toward the ground and eventually hit it. \n\nNow increase the muzzle velocity on the cannon. At some point, the projectile will have enough velocity that the rate at which the moon's surface appears to fall away due to the surface curvature is equal to the rate at which the projectile curves downward. So yes, objects in orbit are always falling, which is the origin of the term \"free fall\".",
"9.8 m/s^2 is the acceleration due to gravity _on Earth_. If you look at [Newton's law of gravitation](_URL_0_), you'll see that acceleration is inversely related to the square of distance.\n\nSo while this description of orbits is absolutely correct, the acceleration is not necessarily 9.8 m/s^2 .",
"All orbiting objects DO experience gravitational force, so some orbits can be thought of this way (circular and elliptical orbits match this view well). The gravitational acceleration does NOT correspond the the 9.8 m/s^2 felt on the surface of the earth.\n\nHOWEVER not ALL orbits are circular. One example is an orbit about a Lagrange point.\n\nThe Lagrange points (there are five, one example is a point directly between the earth and moon) allow for a spacecraft to sit relatively stationary relative to the larger bodies (planets). This is where the forces on the spacecraft balance, so the spacecraft is not really \"falling\".\n\nAnd when going from one planet to another things get more complicated. Do do this (in a simplified way), a spacecraft must leave one planets sphere of influence, enter into an orbit about the sun, and then enter the destination planet's sphere of influence.\n\nSo falling can help you think about orbits... if you expand your definition of falling to thinking about the physics behind it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_gravitation"
],
[]
] |
|
3rv9f2
|
how there can all the gold ever mined only add up to three swimming pools worth
|
Maybe I'm underestimating the size of an olympic swimming pool but in this [TED Ed video](_URL_0_) they say that all the gold we've ever mined in all of history would fit into three olympic size pools. How is this possible?
I understand that a lot of the jewelery and things we see aren't made completely of pure gold, and most gold coins these days aren't gold at all, but surely like the treasures of egypt and israel alone would fill a swimming pool by itself right?
Edit: Sorry for the atrocious typo in the title. That's just how confused this makes me!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rv9f2/eli5_how_there_can_all_the_gold_ever_mined_only/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwrmx12",
"cwrn0ci",
"cwrn4ka"
],
"score": [
9,
37,
4
],
"text": [
"You probably greatly underestimate the size of an Olympic swimming pool. Such a pool is a minimum of 2500 m^(3), which is about a hundred million pounds of gold. At current gold prices of ~$1100 per troy oz, that's about $1.7 trillion of gold, which seems like a pretty reasonable number. Times three, it's $5.1 trillion of gold.",
"An Olympic swimming pool is 132,430 cubic feet. A standard gold bar is 44.4 cubic inches. You could fit 5,154,032 gold bars in *one* Olympic swimming pool.\n\nFort Knox has 147.3 million ounces of gold. With one bar weighing 400 ounces, that pool contains 2,061,612,972 ounces of gold. 14 times the amount held in Fort Knox. In just one pool.\n\nEdit: By the way, the value of the gold in that pool would be over 87 billion dollars, ",
"I remember that estimates about the volume of all mined gold ever are between a cube with side of 20m and a cube with side of 25m, therefore between 8000m^3 and 15625m^3. Let's say it was 8000m^3, since that's closer to the \"3 swimming pools worth\".\n\nThat is quite a big number, even in cube meters, but if we convert it to cubes of 10cm (which is somewhat more manageable size), we get 8000000 such cubes.\n\nAnother element of the puzzle is, that gold is very dense. It is 19.32 grams per cubic centimeter, so each of our cubes will weigh 19.32kg. So all the gold mined would weigh 154,560,000 kg.\n\nAnd yet another piece of the puzze is, that gold is very valuable. I googled it and found that currently it costs about $35,021.81 per kg. If we use this value, then all the mined gold in the world would be worth $5,412,970,953,600. Or about 5.4 trillion of dollars. \nThat's a huge number and we need to convert it to something we can (barely) think about. It's about a third - fourth of GDP of USA (or EU).\n\nSo I'd guess, that we often \"measure\" gold by its value, which is huge, because of its rarity (~value). Your initial question talks about volume and not weight, and there kicks in the huge density of gold and even the fact that volume raises cubically with a dimension (a cube with side of 1 has volume of 1, but a cube with side of 10 has volume of 1000).\n\nEdit: fixed the math error."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf_4z4AKwJg"
] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6cqwv4
|
is body language cultural, genetic, inherited and/or something else?
|
1. The way we move as we communicate, as we laugh, as we socialize - where does it come from?
2. Additional question which was what inspired me to ask this - why do we look down when we laugh?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cqwv4/eli5_is_body_language_cultural_genetic_inherited/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhwtsxf",
"dhwuuoj"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I would say 50/50. Laugh and clap seems to ve innate actions, while some gestures (Like the \"yes\" movement up and down with the head VS the \"no movement) are cultural.\n\n For example the military salute isn't something innate, it's social construct to express order, loyalty and discipline even in a sarcastic way. But I don't believe early humans do this, in fact its said the gesture come from Medieval times when a knight had to put off his eyes' protection to see his interlocutor with a similar movement. And then... well, we adopted it.",
"Six or seven basic facial expressions are instinctive, universal, and easy to notice.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.kairos.com/blog/the-universally-recognized-facial-expressions-of-emotion"
]
] |
|
3h786q
|
why are the blades on modern energy windmills so narrow?
|
It seems to me that you would want a thicker blade to capture more wind and turn faster.
Kind of what you think Holland's windmills were like.
Why are they so thin?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h786q/eli5_why_are_the_blades_on_modern_energy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu4u5n3",
"cu4u5xq",
"cu4xsot",
"cu4yr14"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
25
],
"text": [
"You want it to be as light and efficient as possible. If it could be three feet tall weigh 50 lbs and deliver 1500 megawats/hour would't that be preferrable to a massive wooden windmill?",
"The blades are made to catch the wind [like an airplane wing] They are also meant to be light and strong. They don't need to be fat and heavy like the ones in Holland.",
"Blades can now change their shape to balance the speed of the wind they are in with the optimal speed to generate electricity. Those giant sails you think of had to be stopped and broadened/narrowed to match the wind. Also giant blades take away from their own power by drag, which I guess you could describe as unnecessary use of the wind. fat sails work against themselves a little bit less that they work for themselves. That bit of work is a lot of waste in the long run. ",
"The design of a wind turbine blade seeks a balance between the mass of the blades and the optimal lift. The wider the blades, the more mass and drag they have, which counters any increase in lift they might afford. You want a balance between those factors. The blades on the turbine don't function like the sails of a ship. Rather they are more like the wings of a [sailplane](_URL_6_), which tend to have long thin wings optimizing lift. Lift is more a function of the length of a wing than its thickness. Airliners tend to have wide wings because they're heavy and need that extra structure for the weight they carry--to keep the wings from buckling--which comes at a cost in energy because of the increased drag. As materials have become much stronger, newer airliner designs have sought [more efficient wings more like sailplanes.](_URL_1_) \n\nNow, some wind turbines do indeed work rather like a ship sail. The simpler form of [Savonius rotor](_URL_7_) is rather like a pair of opposing [spinnaker sails](_URL_0_) or the cups of an [anemometer](_URL_4_), one side more streamlined than the other and so, in opposition, creating a differential force that makes the rotor spin. But these are not very efficient because that leading side is still experiencing drag, and so more efficient forms try to mediate this by using [helical forms](_URL_3_) or, again, switching to [thin airfoil blades.](_URL_5_) These are popular in very high wind applications such as on ships and lighthouses as they are physically robust. The most efficient so far [combine both approaches](_URL_2_) to get the most from very light winds. They still tend not to be as efficient as the horizontal axis turbines, but are often preferred for building and home use because they work well in low wind and produce much less noise and vibration. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.doylesails.com/images/j70_spin.JPG",
"http://aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/archive/www.aviationweek.com/Portals/AWeek/TWW/GrahamW/kd_AGA-33_highres%20crop.jpg",
"https://solarconduit.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/f/i/file_21_9_1_1.jpg",
"http://img.frbiz.com/nimg/a2/36/5170081a67d47921033d14716523-0x0-0/nice_design_300w_strong_style_color_b82220_vertical_axis_wind_strong_turbine.jpg",
"http://cdn4.explainthatstuff.com/anemometer2.jpg",
"http://cleangreenenergyzone.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/vertical-axis-wind-turbine.jpg",
"http://www.slopeflyer.com/artman/uploads/sailplane-video.jpg",
"http://www.energybook.co.uk/images/D/ii_154.gif"
]
] |
|
29jisl
|
driving a fwd car in the snow
|
I live in the northern US, and we see a couple feet of snow every winter. From what I understand, FWD is better than RWD for the snow, but I have also heard that you are supposed to drive differently in slippery conditions. I googled it but there are a lot of terms I am not familiar with. Help!
Edit: Thanks for all the replies so far, but I'm looking for a HOW not a WHAT. Apparently you're actually supposed to drive the car differently when you skid and the whole technique of that is confusing to me.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29jisl/eli5_driving_a_fwd_car_in_the_snow/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cilkzx6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Hey buddy, sounds like what you're getting at is understeer and oversteer. FWD cars are more prone to understeer, and RWD cars are more prone to oversteer. \n\n[This](_URL_0_) is the best image i can find to explain it simply.\n\nYou usually lose traction in a car when the driven wheels, (FWD vs RWD) are put under more load than the friction of the tyres on the road can maintain. Think of it like this: There is a finite amount of friction when a tyre makes contact with a road. This friction is being divided into a few uses; turning, acceleration, and deceleration. The friction you are using to decelerate cannot be used to turn, and so on. When you put too much force on the tyre, it will lose grip and the wheel will slide. This is why a basic driving technique is to brake before corners, go around them, then accelerate once you are straightened up. this is how you should be driving in snow with FWD or RWD anyway, because there is so much less grip.\n\nWhen a car understeers, the wheels are turned into the corner, but they lose traction and the weight of the car forces it to continue in a straight line, rather than going around the corner. This is more common in a FWD car, because you are more likely to break traction with the front wheels because they are often being used to turn and accelerate at the same time. It is also totally possible in a RWD car too. You could force a FWD car to understeer by flooring it in the middle of a corner, for instance. You will know your car is understeering, because the steering wheel will be turned, but the car will be travelling in a straight line, towards the outside of the corner. To counter the skid, all you can do is ease off the throttle and straighten the wheel until you feel grip come back into the tyres, then try again with less speed. You must not turn the wheel further into the corner, as this decreases the chance of grip returning on its own. Honestly though, if you're already understeering in low grip conditions, especially ice, the best thing to do is get real religious real fast. It is quite difficult to correct. \n\nWhen a car oversteers, the wheels are turned into the corner but the back of the car has slid to the point where it is beyond the desired rate of turn for the corner. This often happens in RWD cars, because you will lose traction from the rear wheels when turning whilst using the accelerator. The stress of the two requirements on the rear tyres becomes greater than they can handle, and the wheel spins. This means that the rear of the car is no longer gripping the road, so the rear of the car will slide away from the inside of the corner. To control oversteer, ease off the accelerator, and turn the steering wheel into the skid, away from the direction of the corner you are trying to go around. This will remove the stress on the rear wheels by causing them to no longer be needing to turn or accelerate. Once grip has returned, go about your business. with a little more care. \n\nSomething which is common to both these situations is the fact that it takes much more force to begin a skid than to maintain one. Once a wheel is sliding, it requires much less force to continue skidding than it did to start the skid. Because of this, you won't magically regain control the instant you ease the load on the tyre, you may have to ride it out a considerable way, or even simply come to a complete stop before you are in control again. To prevent understeer or oversteer before they happen, enter corners slowly. brake well in advance, ease off the brakes as you enter the corner, and only accelerate once you have straightened up the front wheels."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://autoweek.com/storyimage/CW/20070126/FREE/70122004/V3/0/V3-70122004.jpg&maxW=630"
]
] |
|
6k6hbr
|
when we type up an email and hit "send", how does the internet know where to correctly deliver our email? what does this process look like between two computers/email accounts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6k6hbr/eli5_when_we_type_up_an_email_and_hit_send_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djjoz00",
"djjp2un"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"It works kind of like the post office. Think of it like this. The stuff after the @ symbol is the city. The stuff before the @ is the street address.\n\nWhen you hit send the email gets given to the post office of the \"city\" you specified which can be google, yahoo, comcast or hotmail. The city then looks at the \"street address\" and figures out where to put it.\n\nYou then go and pull it out of your mail box.",
"When you hit send, your mail is delivered to the Mailserver of your mail provider. Your computer knows which one that is because it was part of your initial mail setup on your computer.\n\nOnce the mail reaches 'your' Mailserver it'll look at the domain (the part behind the @ sign in the mail address) and looks up the IP address of that domain using DNS (think of it as the phone book of the internet). Once the server knows the IP of the recipients mailserver it'll send your mail over there.\n\nThe recipients Mailserver then looks at the account name (the part before the @ sign in the mail address) and puts the mail in the correct mailbox.\n\nEdit: the recipients computer is set up to know the recipients Mailserver and thus checks there for new mail.\n\nSo in the end, the two computers themselves don't communicate directly at all but the servers do. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2ykfb6
|
why are snowden documents still being released, nearly two years later?
|
With the new revelations about hacking attempts on iPads and iPhones, I don't understand how or why are Snowden documents still being released.
Is he getting new documents? Or are these all part of the trove of documents he originally took?
Does it take two years to go through all the original documents?
Or are they being deliberately released slowly, because releasing them all at once would be too much to process? If so, isn't that ethically ambiguous? If he had evidence of iPhones being hacked, or something more serious that hasn't been released yet, doesn't that put people who still use those products in unnecessary danger?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ykfb6/eli5_why_are_snowden_documents_still_being/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpac0ws",
"cpaci7s",
"cpavwuk"
],
"score": [
6,
19,
4
],
"text": [
" > Or are they being deliberately released slowly, because releasing them all at once would be too much to process?\n\nSort of this. If he dumped them all at once, a lot of the controversial-but-not-really-controversial stories would be ignored. Also, by releasing them slowly, it keeps the whole thing alive and kicking.",
"I'll let Glenn Greenwald - the Guardian Journalist whom Edward Snowden contacted together with Laura Poitras - answer that one for you: ([source](_URL_0_))\n\n > We've been reporting continuously on huge stories without pause for 18 months, using editors, reporters, and experts from all over the world.\n\n > These documents are complex and take time to process, understand, and research.\n\n > If we rush the reporting and make mistakes, we'll be doing a huge favor to proponents of mass surveillance, and then people like you will be coming and asking - reasonably: \"why did you rush all this? Why didn't you make sure the reporting was accurate before publishing it\"?\n\n > Snowden expressly asked us to vet the documents carefully and subject them to the reporting process so that the public could be informed in a clear and accurate way. With an archive this vast and complicated, that takes time.\n\n > I hardly think anyone can complain that there hasn't been enough reporting done - it's been an unprecedentedly continuous and rapid stream of stories. The public needs time to understand and digest them, and good reporting takes time to do.\n",
"One reason would be because Greenwald and his team have to fact-check everything (which is great.) The other reason would be, and sometimes I fear they find this more important, to keep their own website -The Intercept, which they launched while their document-leaks were becoming big- up and running."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2wwdep/we_are_edward_snowden_laura_poitras_and_glenn/couqemk"
],
[]
] |
|
2xhmb5
|
I found this symbol in Palma, Mallorca just outside the Seu Cathedral. What does it mean?
|
Thank you in advance! [SOLVED]
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2xhmb5/i_found_this_symbol_in_palma_mallorca_just/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp05ozn",
"cp0f1b2"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Here is some pics\n_URL_0_\n_URL_1_",
"You might have more luck in /r/whatisthisthing. That sub is dedicated to answering these kinds of questions. Still, please report back here if you get an answer. :)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://i.imgur.com/3oVZPlH.jpg",
"http://i.imgur.com/XWXBTKm.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
2qpjn2
|
Were the Romans Really as Brutal and Cruel as we Think?
|
Lately I've been thinking about how brutal the romans are depicted, were they really that cruel? I don't just mean slavery and the other things they did im talking about mass infanticide, genocide, war rape, Massacres and other horrible things. Were they really THAT barbaric? if so why? What caused them to become so brutal?
Btw thanks for all the answers guys I really appreciate it.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2qpjn2/were_the_romans_really_as_brutal_and_cruel_as_we/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn8aqyp",
"cn8bmh5"
],
"score": [
2,
8
],
"text": [
"I've never heard anything about genocide by Romans, do you have a source for that because it sounds interesting.",
"They certainly had a mentality of ''might is right'' that led to brutally cruel things. I forget the exact quote, but Caesar wrote something along the lines of ''the victor is allowed to do whatever he likes to the defeated'', which gives you an idea as to how they generally thought. \n\nMass infanticide is not something I ever came across whilst studying my masters degree in ancient history - although you could potentially argue that they allowed their client king Herod to do something along these lines, depending on the accuracy of the events depicted in the New Testament. Genocide is perhaps a more difficult topic, as the Romans certainly eradicated cultures and civilisations in their conquest of the Mediterranean, Carthage perhaps being the most infamous example of this. However, enslavement was far more profitable than simple execution, which leads me on to the war rape you mention. Prior to Augustus' reforms in the late 1stC BCE, Roman soldiers received the majority of their pay from looting cities and being awarded farmland on retirement - this led to loyalty to popular generals who gave them these over the state. Therefore, on taking cities the raping and pillaging was usually widespread. I remember a site in Spain destroyed in a Roman siege (I forget which one, maybe Numantia) where a skeleton was excavated that had several spears inserted up every orifice going. Sieges were awful, but hardly typical events of life in the Roman Empire. The reliefs on Trajan's Column also depict plenty of awful scenes found in being defeated by Rome.\n\nThat being said, daily life in the Mediterranean was, by and large, at its most peaceful and prosperous until the modern era once the Empire was settled and stablised in the first and second centuries. The brutality that we hear about was usually extremely rare and acted as a deterrant. Basically, if you rebelled against Rome, they'd put you down with a hell of a lot of force to make an example of you (see the Jewish Revolt or Mithridates VI of Pontus, for examples), but by and large they certainly did not rule with an iron fist. Punishments such as crucifixion were definitely cruel, as were public executions in the arena, yet considering the Romans introduced organised law and prosecutions in many regions they can therefore perhaps be considered as advanced for the time. \n\nFor anyone interested, Luttwak's The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire is a thought-provoking (and controversial) look at how Rome operated, written by a non-expert. If I remember correctly Luttwak was an American diplomat during the Cold War. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
exgr7e
|
how does music royalty work? how do the music companies keep track of how many times a song is played?
|
Pun unintended
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/exgr7e/eli5_how_does_music_royalty_work_how_do_the_music/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fg84d3q"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Absolute speculation and close approaches, but with Spotify and YouTube (or any streaming platform) things change because you have more tracking. \n\nWhen it comes to tv/radios they send a list of the songs they've played and then, whoever pays the artists, measures that channel/radio audience and then they come up with a number. \n\nLive shows count attendees and bars/nightclubs pay a monthly fee that goes to these organizations. In these cases money won't return to the artists."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5iei6y
|
why is censoring on facebook, twitter, reddit, or even banning products on amazon, or ebay considered an assault on "freedom of speech"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5iei6y/eli5_why_is_censoring_on_facebook_twitter_reddit/
|
{
"a_id": [
"db7jhl1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The idea of free speech is often abused and misinterpreted. You can't say whatever you want on any social media site just like you can't walk into a store and start screaming obscenities. Facebook and Reddit and every other site owned by any company is free to limit speech in any way they see fit.\n\nWhether or not it's a smart business move is a different story.\n\nThe main point is, say Facebook hypothetically started banning everyone that likes the color orange. That's OK, because those people can go make their own social media site for people who like orange, and if they want to they can ban everyone that prefers green. There's nothing stopping people who are banned for expressing their views on social media from creating their own social media."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
63p9gi
|
Did people in ancient and medieval times have anything comparable to hobbies?
|
Obviously the living standard of most humans has reached a point where we are able to spend vast amounts of time on recreational activities. I am wondering however if people in the medieval era ever had the money or time to peruse interests other than their profession and taking care of necccesities such as feeding oneself.
I am aware that the wealthy have probably always had the time to pursue their own hobbies. In this case I am wondering about common folk and if they were able to have personal interests or if they were always confined to work/personal obligations.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/63p9gi/did_people_in_ancient_and_medieval_times_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dg40d4h"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Stitching patterns into fabric (embroidery) was something that both lower and higher class members of society participated in. this was considered more of a women's activity, however, and I don't recall any accounts of men (outside of tailors) doing this for leisure."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ce7s7t
|
why are laptop and tablet batteries often split into several smaller cells instead of having only one large cell?
|
Looking at teardowns of laptops and tablets, their batteries are usually comprised of several identical lithium ion cells placed right next to each other. Examples include the [iPad](_URL_0_) and the [Surface Pro](_URL_1_). To me, it seems it would be more cost efficient and more space efficient to have as few cells as possible, and in most cases having one giant cell will not only reduce the complexity of the device but also allow more "battery" to fit into the same space since less insulating material is needed. So why are laptop and tablet batteries made up of separate cells?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ce7s7t/eli5_why_are_laptop_and_tablet_batteries_often/
|
{
"a_id": [
"etzuokl"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If you hook multiple cells together in series where you put positive to negative that increases the voltage but keeps the amperage the same. Three 1.5 volt AAA cells connected in series become a 4.5 volt battery with 1000 mAh. \n\nHooking them in parallel puts their amperage together but keeps the voltage the same. Three 1.5 volts AAA cells become a 1.5 volt battery with 3000 mAh.\n\nYou could make the cell bigger like a AA cell which has 2400 mAh, but smaller cells can be more stable and reliable than larger cells. If a small cell goes bad it's less catastrophic than a large cell going bad.\n\nYou also have the benefit of being able to produce lots of small cells and help them together in interesting ways. A small 12 volt battery like would go in a garage door opener is 8 button batteries like from a watch hooked end to end. A small 9-volt battery like you would put in a smoke detector is 6 AAAA batteries wired together like would be used in a Microsoft Surface pen."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/ykGo1KW6mqKGDHRh.full",
"https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/kuXc5emf23tWYCnE.full"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
7md9x0
|
why do people pull their windshield wipers up during a snow storm?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7md9x0/eli5_why_do_people_pull_their_windshield_wipers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drt3v1s"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"To prevent the wipers from becoming frozen onto the windshield glass, if ice forms due to snow melting and refreezing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
u305c
|
Why didn't Asians build castles like the Europeans?
|
By Asian, I'm specifically talking about China, Korea and Japan.
In times of conflict, a castle seems like a pretty great thing to have and they're everywhere in Europe. However when I look at Asian castles, they look like palaces to my layman eyes and not as well suited for defence as their European counterparts. It looks like they spent more time on making them look nice, as opposed to the purely functional look of Europe.
Asia had plenty of conflict in it's past, and they're clearly capable of building in a similar style if they wanted to, so what's the reason castle quantity and style in the two regions differs so greatly?
It seems like there must be some big obvious reason I'm missing.
* Are they better suited to defending against attacks due to the region's terrain / weapons used?
* Were most of them destroyed?
* Am I looking in the wrong places?
I tried googling & searching reddit but couldn't find a satisfying answer.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/u305c/why_didnt_asians_build_castles_like_the_europeans/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4rvz8y",
"c4rwbtn",
"c4rxbps",
"c4rxqfu",
"c4s105x",
"c4s2fte",
"c4s5nhv"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
12,
19,
15,
6,
7
],
"text": [
"Not a Far East expert, but I know at least the Japanese did build and use military castles. Look at the famous [Osaka Castle](_URL_0_) for example.\n\nAlso - siege warfare was an important doctrine in medieval China. [Wikipedia](_URL_1_) refers to Chinese fortresses along with walled cities. \n\nHow do you differentiate walled city vs castle? Constantinople was a city rather than a castle, but look at those Theodosian walls...",
"PS - if you want a fun read set in medieval Japan just as the Europeans arrive, check out James Clavell's *Shogun*. It is \"based on a true story\" and the names are altered, but it is a nice, casual way to get some basic background.\n\nEdit: **t-o-k-u-m-e-i** weighed in an expert opinion to say that *Shogun* is even more fictitious than I had understood it to be.",
"used to take my lunch breaks at Osaka Castle Park. Read the Lord of the Rings trilogy there....\n\nFirst, I think if you saw these castles up close, you'd change your point of view about them not being well suited for defense.\n\nBut, yes, the Japanese, in my experience, do/did place greater emphasis on aesthetics and harmony in nearly eveything. Perhaps this is what you are thinking about?\n\n\nCampare a katana and a braodsword. The armor of a Crusader vs a Samurai. Tea vs beer. Silk vs wool.\n\n\nFinally, while there, I learned that, when Osaka castle was being built, each local lord/was responsible for supplying the stones. Naturally a competition broke out as to who could bring the biggest stone.\n\nAs a result, some of the stones I saw there were easily the size of a city bus.\n\nBut As far as I know, earthquakes were a real reason for keeping the castles squat by comparison.",
"I think part of the question here might be a the distinction between a palace (non-military) and a fort. European castles often combine the two into castles, but China seems to have kept the two concepts separate. [Palaces](_URL_0_) are more about projecting soft power through opulence and cultural symbolism. Forts, like [Jiayuguan](_URL_1_) look pretty militarily imposing to me.\n\nI don't know the real answer, but arguably the distinction might stem from China's long history of Dynasties that were more or less stable internally (until they fell) with \"barbarian\" enemies outside of the empire's borders. Thus, they might have perceived a need to militarize the borders, but not the capitals.\n\nJapan had military castles, like other people have mentioned. The thinking behind their architecture, as others have mentioned, is a point of debate.\n\nI know Korea had palaces, but I don't know of any forts, although I assume there must have been some. ",
"In China instead of building castles they built city walls. There are some famous fortresses in Europe like this - for example the city of Avila in Spain. Pretty much every major Chinese city was like this. If you want to look at a picture, look at Xi'an or Nanjing. Originally, the Great Wall was just a linking of individual city walls into bigger units.\n\nAt least in China, I think a lot of it has to do with how China is organized. The Chinese governmental system itself essentially lasted many thousands of years up until the communist revolution. Yes, they were conquered, and yes they had many dynasties and the country split apart many times, but essentially what was happening is that a new group would put themselves at the head of an already existing governmental system.\n\nThis contrasts with Europe, where people or families were important. In Europe, you would secure important people in a castle. In China, the person wasn't important - their job was. \n\nThe easiest way to take their job? Conquer cities, especially their capital, and tell everyone that you are their new boss. \nThus, city walls. \n\nChina also has always had a huge population and their armies were similarly huge. Castles would simply be too small to play a part in wars within China itself. Since the goal was to go to the city and take control of the government, castles would have just been sidestepped. \n\nThat said, there were lots of forts along the border. These were used less as defensive points than as landmarks, trading posts, and bases for more mobile units to leave from.",
"You need to change your perception from \"castles\" to \"fortifications\".\n\nOnce you do that, you realise Asia has had an extremely large amount of fortifications.\n\nThere in one in Korea called the Hwaseong:\n\n_URL_1_\n\nSeong is Korean for fortress. During the Imjin War, when Japan invaded Korea, many sanseong-dil, or mountain forts, proved very effective when resisting the Japanese:\n\n_URL_0_",
"I think an important point that's been missed here is that the rise of the castle in Europe came about largely as a result of the rapid devolution of authority following the viking raids and general breakdown of larger-scale organization around 1000 AD.\n\nAt least in France, where most of what we think of as European castles are, authority devolved to ever smaller polities ruled by ever-lower lords until such a time as it reached a point where the man responsible for defending you was actually close enough to do it when the vikings started pouring off of the ships. \n\nThese smaller rulers regularly quarreled, raided, and warred, even within nominal kingdoms, and thus needed places to house their peoples' livestock, grain, and families if need be in order to protect them from rivals. However, due to the low level of urbanization in Western Europe, walled cities were less of an option than in the East (both of Europe and Eurasia). As a result, they built motte-and-bailey forts on hilltops, and then gradually merged that concept with the concept of the lords manor, until they developed the modern castle.\n\nIn most of Asia, authority never really devolved to that degree, at least not for long, and thus no individual rulers needed to build individual manor-fortifications. Japan had the closest situation to that of Europe, and its castles most closely resemble Europe's. However, they were designed for a different style of warfare focusing less on forcing the enemy to use seige equipment to batter down walls, and more on using troops to fight delaying actions on successive levels.\n\nEdit: Also, I just graduated with my BA in history (along with an employable major), focusing on Early Modern Europe. Is that enough qualification I should ask for a tag?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_Castle",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_warfare#Chinese_and_Mongols"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_palace",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiayuguan_(pass\\)"
],
[],
[
"http://www.samuelhawley.com/imjinarticle2.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwaseong_Fortress"
],
[]
] |
|
400afv
|
What is the dominant strain of historiography in the People's Republic of China?
|
In particular, how are primary and secondary school students educated in history? I would imagine Marxist historiography has some currency, but like socialism, it has acquired some peculiarly Chinese characteristics.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/400afv/what_is_the_dominant_strain_of_historiography_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyqg55o"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Primary and middle-school students have Chinese history and World history classes.\nUntil recently, high-school students chose either an Arts or Science-based curriculum, with the Arts students continuing studying history, but I believe this has recently been made more flexible.\nStudents also study Politics, which includes some history of course.\nIn terms of the way it's taught, it's not particularly different from other countries in style, if slightly traditional (large amounts of rote-learning of dates, though there has in recent years been a big move towards analysis and critical thinking compared to the past; though it should be said that critical thinking about modern Chinese history is discouraged).\nThey don't really study things through a Marxist historiographical style anymore than other countries do. So class is mentioned a bit, as it would be in the West, for example the Landlords of the nationalist period, but when studying ancient China, it's a more traditional historiography of Emperors, philosophers, etc.\nThe big thing I think would be noteable to a western audience is the narrative that's pushed in modern Chinese history. Since 1989, there has been a big push of the narrative of \"national humiliation\" at the hands of western powers and Japan from the 19th century onwards. Prior to that, the narrative was more about the weakness and backwardness of the Qing government. The Cultural Revolution is barely taught, and the Tiananmen Square protests are hidden completely.\n\nI will say that Feminist historiography is studied a little at higher levels (probably about the same as in the west), but I don't believe post-Colonialism is popular. \n\nI should say that I'm semi-familiar with the way non-History majors are taught in University (because I teach English, and they have to do a semester of History), but I'm not familiar with the way History majors are taught. However, generally speaking I am genuinely shocked with how little knowledge of Marxist thought students have; these days, it's all Deng Xiaoping theory. I've never heard Chinese students, when discussing history, refer to class as a lense through which to understand it. It's generally a narrative of great men and women, and competing powers.\n\nNow, I've really been addressing your sub-question about primary and secondary students here. I have no specific knowledge of which types of historiography are popular amongst Chinese historians."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3d1pvz
|
As historians, do you ever feel burdened by your lack of knowledge certain histories?
|
To put it another way, as someone who is excessively aware of your particular field, do you feel very stupid/ignorant of everything else?
Seeing as history is so vast, and there is no way to understand *all* of it completely, how do you cope with that?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3d1pvz/as_historians_do_you_ever_feel_burdened_by_your/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct10l29",
"ct10o8x",
"ct13j8m",
"ct13vc2",
"ct18m9l",
"ct1949f",
"ct1n9tk",
"ct1non1"
],
"score": [
21,
10,
5,
7,
5,
7,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Personally? Absolutely! When you realise the sheer, absurd depth of your field, and then realise there are untold thousands of other fields just like yours, where people could study for decades and still not know everything? You definitely feel stupid, but it's an awe-inspiring thing too. As a field, perhaps the greatest gift that studying history gives you is that of common sense. You can't ever be a specialist on every field, but you can learn to navigate a lot of the pitfalls that turn up in popular history, even in areas that you never move into in-depth.\n\nHistory is a strange, fascinating, and overall *massive* field. No one historian can ever hope to know everything they'll need to in their field. For me, with a relatively niche topic, there are still areas I run into all the time where I simply don't have all the answers - and it's like that for most people. History is a complicated, interlocked study - and something that happens outside my area of knowledge can, and most definitely will, influence something I'm more specialised in. \n\nThere are two fantastic things about /r/Askhistorians in this regard. Firstly, there are thousands of curious, knowledgeable, passionate people here who can teach and learn from each-other. None of us will have all the answers, but specialists from different fields can work together to produce a larger picture than any one person could. Secondly, this sub encourages us to look at what we *do* know in fascinating ways sometimes. It's great not just for widening your knowledge, but encouraging you to re-examine what you've already learned from new angles!\n\n",
"Absolutely. I could give you an off the cuff presentation on the October Revolution and the subsequent transition into the Russian Civil War with ease; but ask me a question about Rome or Gaul or just about anything pre-1300's and I'm looking down at my feet and kicking rocks.\n\nI just kinda be blunt about it if someone asks me a question IRL. I vaguely know some of it, but there's also the fact that I find that the Roman era pretty boring.",
"I'm all for Classical Antiquity, but I barely know fuck all about anything after the 1300s AD. My knowledge just drops. I wish it wasnt like that, but after that it just stops interesting me. I feel like I SHOULD know more about it, but I just dont.",
"I've met quite a few people with History Master's or PhD degrees who focused on international/global history, but came to the unfortunate realization down the road that they \"had studied everyone's history but their own.\" ",
"Yes. I've been getting in the Early Republican America, and it's both a huge topic, and one that is neglected in most non-specialist literature (What Hath God Wrought and presidential biography aside). Moreover, women's history and African-American history is central to understanding the time period, and has only been studied for a few decades by the 'mainstream' of historians, and even then is often dealt with as a separate field.\n\nSpeaking to my flair, everything we know about European armour and weapons is shaped by survival bias. So little is left, so we have to extrapolate from artistic depictions (which gets into art history as we have to figure out when artists were being deliberately anachronistic!), written accounts that use imprecise period terms and the very, very few surviving pieces that we have. You can do a full survey of multiple museum collections and only cover a fraction of what existed historically, and it's not even a representative sample (non-Italian, non-German armour from the 15th century doesn't survive much).",
"Oh god do I ever. My specialization is in military equipment, battle literature, and mythology, but that puts me in a fairly small subgroup; the literature guys and linguists can run circles around me in a lot of parts of Old Norse.\n\nThat said, though, when I get the chance to inform people about stuff that's *in* my field, it's a hell of a rush.",
"I do feel it, but I do not feel burdened by it. It is asking too much for any individual to understand all of *any* field, and historians are no different. Human knowledge doesn't work that way. It isn't, in the end, about what one person knows. It's about the collected knowledge and work of everyone working on these topics. In that sense, historical knowledge isn't a \"thing\" but rather a *process*. Rather than being burdened by this fact, I think it is - to put it frankly - really cool to be a part of that process, even if just a tiny part.\n",
"The more you know, the more you realize how little you know. There really is no shame in that, it's actually what keeps me interested. I don't feel burdened by it though. Studying history is more about studying patterns and analyzing problems than it is about remembering every single event. Part of my skillset is the fact that I can easily find relevant academic articles, evaluate them, understand them and then place them within the bigger picture. Even if you would manage to be fairly well-versed in nearly all historical fields, after a few hundred years of studying and several aneurysms, you'd still know little about kindred disciplines like anthropologhy, sociology or economics. All which are just as essential to understanding history.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1054h4
|
what does economic freedom mean?
|
What is economic freedom? What determines which country has more economic freedom than another country?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1054h4/what_does_economic_freedom_mean/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6ah8eh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This question was [asked yesterday](_URL_0_). The short answer is that it doesn't mean anything, but a particular group uses the term in a particular way. They define it in their report."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/103ir7/eli5_what_is_economic_freedom/c6a53of"
]
] |
|
dh01rt
|
Were Romans broadly aware of the First or Second Triumvirates at the time they were active, or would they have sounded like conspiracy theories?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dh01rt/were_romans_broadly_aware_of_the_first_or_second/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f3hqovb"
],
"score": [
516
],
"text": [
"There's a great deal of misinformation that keeps appearing and disappearing on this thread.\n\nYes, the Romans were aware of the Triumvirate, and of the agreement between Pompey, Caesar, and Crassus popularly called the \"first\" Triumvirate. In reality, there was only one Triumvirate, that of Octavian, Lepidus, and Antony. This was a legally-defined collegiate magistracy, which though extraordinary nevertheless had a legally defined tenure of office, which was renewed several times between its creation and its eventual expiration prior to Actium. There was nothing to hide as far as the Triumvirate went, as it was a public office.\n\nCaesar, Pompey, and Crassus were known to be working together pretty much from the moment it happened. They did not make any great attempt to conceal their cooperation, and openly extended hands to others as well. In a letter to Atticus (Att. 2.3) Cicero mentions that towards the end of December 60, between Caesar's election to the consulship of 59 and his assumption of the office, Caesar sent Balbus to him to offer him a partnership among the dynasts, specifically saying that he would value Cicero's advice as equal to Pompey's, and that he would reconcile Pompey and Crassus. Cicero has some difficulty turning down the offer, since he was following 63 very closely tied to Pompey and, as he says, hoped to resolve the quarrels with his senatorial enemies that had been hovering over him since his consulship, but ultimately he tells Atticus that he can't do it. In April of 59, early into Caesar's consulship and before Cicero started speaking out against him towards the end of the year, Cicero says to Atticus that he doesn't envy Crassus at all for his alignment with Caesar (things were not going well for the dynasts in mid-spring), and apparently Cicero was the original choice for the third dynast. \n\nThe dynasts also appeared publicly. If there were any who still weren't aware of their alignment to each other, when the agrarian bill to settle Capua was promulgated relatively early in 59 there could be no doubt. Not only was it strongly in all three men's interest, but in a contio prior to the bill's promulgation Caesar invited Pompey and Crassus to the rostra in order to say whether they supported the measure or not. They did, and apparently made some sort of threatening overture: App. B.C. 2.10 seems to suggest that they encouraged the people to show up to the vote carrying daggers, and Plut. Caes. 14.3-4 says that Pompey threatened to use military force to get the bill, which would settle his soldiers, passed. Bibulus was also invited to a contio, and foolishly accepted--Morstein-Marx has shown that though invitations to contiones were frequently extended to rivals, they were almost never accepted, because as is the case with Bibulus a rival speaking at a contio typically was a target for the crowd's ire, not a legitimate speaker. Yet another indication would have been Pompey's marriage of Caesar's daughter. In May 59, only one month after poking fun at Crassus for siding with the dynasts Cicero has this to say (Att. 2.9):\n\n > etenim si fuit invidiosa senatus potentia, cum ea non ad populum sed ad tris homines immoderatos redacta sit, quid iam censes fore? proinde isti licet faciant quos volent consules, tribunos pl., denique etiam Vatini strumam sacerdoti dibaphoi vestiant...\n\n > > Now indeed, if the power of the senate was so hateful, what then do you think ought to be when it has passed over not to the people but to three unrestrained men? So let them make whomever they wish consuls and tribunes, and let them even dress up Vatinius' tumor with a priest's twice-dyed purple\n\nThis is the first surviving written reference to a \"rule of three,\" though App. B.C. 2.9 tells us that Varro published a book or pamphlet called the Tricaranus, or \"three-headed monster.\"\n\nBy 56, however, the dynasts' relationship was weakening, since they had gotten what they had wanted and no longer had much need for each other (therefore Suetonius refers to the triumvirate as a \"societas,\" which is not quite a coitio, though Caesar was accused of forming one with L. Lucceius, which was staved off according to Suetonius by Cato's rampant bribery). However, with Cicero returned from exile and Pompey's power over the senate in Caesar's absence significantly weakened, the dynasts reopened their relations at the so-called Conference at Luca in 56. The \"renewal\" of the triumvirate, if an unofficial agreement can really have official renewal, was a public event. The dynasts got together at Luca in Cisalpine Gaul, and agreed that Caesar should continue prosecuting the war in Gaul and that Crassus and Pompey should share the consulship of 55. With the dynasts at Luca were so many magistrates, promagistrates, and senators that according to Plut. Caes. 21.5 there were 120 lictors at the conference and over 200 senators. App. B.C. 2.17 repeats these figures. An earlier meeting between Crassus and Caesar had already taken place at Ravenna, says Cic. Fam. 1.9. In the same letter Cicero tells us that he himself was in negotiation with the dynasts through Pompey and his brother. Cicero had attempted to drive a wedge between Caesar and Pompey while ostensibly trying to restore the regular function of the state (or more concretely, as Tatum very persuasively argues, trying to get the dynasts to agree formally that Clodius' tribunate was invalid) by reopening the question, settled two years earlier, of what to do about the commission to settle the ager Campanus. When Pompey visited Caesar at Luca Caesar did not like what Cicero had had to say, so Pompey spoke to Cicero's brother Quintus, one of Caesar's legates in Gaul. Cicero says that Quintus reported that Pompey told him:\n\n > nisi cum Marco fratre diligenter egeris, dependendum tibi est, quod mihi pro illo spopondisti\n\n > > Unless you urge your brother Marcus on carefully (i.e. make him shut up), what you promised me on his behalf you'll have to pay.\n\nQuintus had, while heading out to Gaul, tacitly guaranteed his brother's cooperation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
ttv9w
|
A way to test the "frame rate" aka flicker rate of the human eye
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/ttv9w/a_way_to_test_the_frame_rate_aka_flicker_rate_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4pos0v"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If you have a strobe that you can tune very finely... I have seen a few science projects that utilize that part of your brain, to make water look like stunt is going up. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
21a869
|
How close were the Allies (specifically US) to losing WWII in Europe in terms of resources?
|
American History has always seemed to give me the impression (maybe I'm alone here) that after D-day the allies were always winning in a march toward Berlin. At the macro level, were there no setbacks? How much longer could the US economy have sustained all of the New Troops, Tanks, Bombers, Food, Ammo etc etc, had the progress been slower?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/21a869/how_close_were_the_allies_specifically_us_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgb4y37"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The allies suffered major supply problems after the invasion of Normandy and after breaking through into France and the low countries. This wasn't necessarily a problem with production so much as getting it to the necessary places. The rapid breakout that was operation Cobra stretched allied supply lines to the breaking point and motivated them to capture an intact port from which they could more easily resupply. They finally succeeded in capturing Antwerp (one of Europe's best ports) in late 1944 and after a campaign by the Canadians in the winter of 1944 which cleared out the last resistance in the area around the Antwerp, the port could begin taking in large amounts of supply. To give an idea of the supply needs of the allied armies in 1944. Take into account the allies need 700 tons of supplies a day for all their forces, the Germans needed only 200 tons a day. \n\nThe major setback would probably be the battle of the bulge, due to the allies being overstretched and Omar Bradley not appreciating the seriousness of the attack, the attack made significant progress, It ultimately failed but that's the closest the allies really came to a large sclae setback. \n\nThere was also Market Graden, which was a mass airborne assault intended to secure access into Germany over the Lower Rhine. This assault was also a massive failure. \n\n\nSources you may want to read.\n\nJohn Keegan's the Second World War \n\nThird Reich Series Richard Evans\n\nA World At Arms Gerhard Weinberg\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1vrbv1
|
if windows xp is still so popular, why is microsoft abandoning it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vrbv1/eli5_if_windows_xp_is_still_so_popular_why_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cev0w4r",
"cev39c7"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they don't make money supporting outdated software. They want people to buy the new versions. ",
"If by \"popular\", you mean that lots of people have it, then yes, it is popular. At schools and businesses where its not necessary to have the most updated form of windows, its much more cost efficient to buy many outdated PCs than to buy brand new ones running windows 8. Or, they bought a load of computers when windows XP was new and never replaced them since they never needed to."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3sqy4e
|
If i was in a boat and dropped a one pound stone over the deepest part of the ocean (Mariana Trench?) What would happen to the stone as it decends?
|
[deleted]
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/3sqy4e/if_i_was_in_a_boat_and_dropped_a_one_pound_stone/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwzvhik"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Whether or not it would be crushed depends on the chemical makeup of the stone. The Mariana Trench is nearly 11 kilometers deep at its deepest point. That's a lot of pressure. The weight of all of the water above it would be pushing down on the stone.\n\nIf it survived, it almost certainly wouldn't travel to the bottom in a straight line. Ocean waters aren't still; currents due to pressure differences, due to hydrothermal vents or other phenomena, mean that ocean water is always moving around.\n\nHow long it would take would depend on the buoyancy of the rock. An iron ball sinks, but a cruise ship floats. There's no universal answer.\n\nWould it look the same? Maybe. The rock could be pulverized from the pressure. It could be compacted into a smaller, more dense rock from the massive pressure. There wouldn't be much to see, though, because no sunlight would reach that far."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2rq65b
|
why is it ok to draw muhammad because of a few radicals. but, it's not ok to put a cross upside down, burn the us flag, and so on?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rq65b/eli5why_is_it_ok_to_draw_muhammad_because_of_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cni7y0f",
"cni7zjj",
"cni86qx",
"cni86uv",
"cni8c9l",
"cni8j60",
"cni8jrs"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"It isn't illegal to burn a US flag. Not aware of any laws against drawing crosses upside down.",
"We like to work on the idea that people can take a joke against religion. As for flag burning, my guess would be that it's seen as treason, less so but you get the idea. I'll happily burn the American flag, being from the UK. TL;DR people are hypocritical to the max, however extremism doesn't do any favours. People will just hate on the group. The few that ruin it for the rest. ",
"I don't think people mean to lash out against Muslims, I think they are lashing out against murderous extremists and showing that their actions won't take away freedom of speech. At least, that seems to be the motives of people *after* an attack. Why the first person drew a cartoon. . . probably to be 'edgy' and 'cool' or whatever. ",
"The majority of folks realize it's radicals, not the regular Muslims who are doing these things As for upside down crosses, I see them on this site all the time and elsewhere. No explosives have been set off, no bullets, no jihad.",
"I'm always curious why when someone is offended by a hijab they are called bigots and prejudice. And how small group of terrorists associated with this clothing item shouldn't make us hostile towards others who dress the same way.\n\nHowever, the swastika that has been used for basically thousands of years is now totally unacceptable. Seems kinda like a double standard? Like the Zara case.",
"I do not think it is good to paint Mohammed or to put a cross upside down or burn a flag when you know you are emotionally hurting somebody.\n\nTo attack somebody because he does that though is a crime and must be punished.\n\nIf you had a neighbour who loves his wife more than anything and somebody would tell him \"Your wife is a whore\" and he killed that somebody, he must be prosecuted and put in jail or executed or whatever the law says. \n\nBut it wouldn't be a good idea that everybody should start telling their neighbours that their wives are whores.\n",
"The problem is that when you have a billion people in your religion there's a significant number of them which take things too far.\n\nPeople shouldn't disrespect Muslims by drawing Muhammad, but at the same time Muslims shouldn't kill people just because they drew Muhammad.\n\nIn the same vein, disrespectfully burning a US flag will probably offend Americans, and if you do it in the wrong company you are likely to get shot at.\n\nThe difference in the eyes of many people is that to really show disrespect by burning the flag, especially if performed to Americans, it has to be an intentional act of disrespect with that intent. In contrast people would argue that an artist who draws Muhammad, for illustrative purposes or for an otherwise non-Muslim audience, don't have the intent to cause disrespect.\n\nAs a consequence, because society perceives drawings to less offensive than flag burning it makes responding with gunfire appear to be that much more radical.\n\nOf course it's up to you to decide where the line between doing offensive things and actually being offensive is; it's very unlikely that anyone will agree with you in all cases.\n\nSimilarly, I'm sure most people agree that shooting people that offend you is wrong. However there will always be cases where the gunman will attract sympathy, especially when you share their beliefs."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ysggb
|
why when someone gets the all clear that they are cancer free they still have a high chance to get it back?
|
Why when someone gets rid of cancer their body doesn’t just to completely back to normal? Instead they have higher chances to get cancer back.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ysggb/eli5_why_when_someone_gets_the_all_clear_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"duityl0",
"duiu5km",
"duiyz2h"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because we're never totally sure that every cancerous cell is out of your body and that another tumor won't form.",
"It's almost never 100% cancer free.\n\nDoctors generally call it \"in remission\" when you complete cancer treatments, and there is still a high chance of cancer cells being missed.\n\nEven with cancers that can be removed by removing the body part (breast and ovarian cancer) there is the chance that cancer could spread into other organs or into the bloodstream before the surgery.",
"Cancer is simply the abnormal division/growth of cells. If you manage to stop this growth in one section of the body, it can still happen elsewhere.\n\nEstimates show that tour immune system can actually defeat 60% of these growths, but the other 40% is what you should be worried about"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
86ft18
|
Is it possible Elizabeth Bathory was innocent?
|
Elizabeth Bathory was accused of murdering up to 600 girls. However, there is suspicion that the evidence against her was exaggerated or outright faked. Does anyone know anything about that theory?
It would be really great if you wouldn't mind me quoting you in a paper I'm writing. I need to conduct an interview with a credible source, but there aren't exactly many people out there knowledgeable about a serial killer from 500 years ago.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/86ft18/is_it_possible_elizabeth_bathory_was_innocent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dw58zk5"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Hopefully someone will see and be able to respond to your question shortly, but in the meantime, you may find this earlier discussion helpful:\n\n[Was Elizabeth Báthory framed?](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/54qebz/was_elizabeth_b%C3%A1thory_framed/"
]
] |
|
51j5ea
|
Have all the Earth's crusts recycled to the mantle at some point?
|
*Has all the Earth's crust [8]
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/51j5ea/have_all_the_earths_crusts_recycled_to_the_mantle/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7cj4al"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It all started as molten because of the massive amount of energy released by coalescing from a gas cloud, but after that no. That's why we can find rocks as old as from when the earth first solidified in places like Australia. [Jack Hills](_URL_0_). Continental plates are less dense than oceanic plates - that's why they're continental - so generally they float about oceanic plates."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hills"
]
] |
|
5wbhyw
|
Can a black hole exert an electrical force?
|
If you say bombarded a black hole with an electron gun, and gave it a large negative charge, would the black hole then exert an electrical field on the surroundings, or would the electrical field somehow be negated by the immense gravity?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5wbhyw/can_a_black_hole_exert_an_electrical_force/
|
{
"a_id": [
"de8y6xp"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Yes you can have [charged black holes](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reissner%E2%80%93Nordstr%C3%B6m_metric"
]
] |
|
365w3p
|
How many planets have we surveyed for signs of a Technological civilization?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/365w3p/how_many_planets_have_we_surveyed_for_signs_of_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crb25gz",
"crb28b3",
"crb9ge2",
"crbaego"
],
"score": [
12,
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"We dont really have the ability to do that to any great degree at this point. The only thing i can think that we can actively do is do a spectral analysis of a planets atmosphere for artificial or life-produced chemicals. This can be done, but it is not easy. You have to be able to detect the stars light as it passes through the planets atmosphere.",
"Our surveys of exoplanets basically involve looking at stars to see if they are wobbling or dimming periodically. We don't have the technology to image the planets themselves (although sometimes we can see them as dots), although with clever spectroscopy and lucky geometry it's possible to make [surface maps](_URL_0_) of a planet's temperature. A sign of a technological civilization might, for example, be a quickly growing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, but we don't really have the technology to see that yet.\n\nHowever, 100 years ago it was thought by some that Mars had a technological civilization, based on what were thought to be large networks of canals.",
"/u/KaseyB and /u/iorgfeflkd have answered this question a bit. I'd like to address a few other related aspects. First, one thing to note is that although looking for technology on planets is really difficult, there's also been work looking for civilizations that are much more advanced than we are, which might if they were using a large fraction of their galaxy's available energy be easier to spot. There was a very recent large-scale attempt which looked at 100,000 galaxies and found no clear signs of such civilizations. See [lay article here](_URL_2_) and [actual paper here](_URL_1_).\n\nOne of the other things to note is that the [James Webb Telescope](_URL_0_) when launched will increase drastically are abilities in this regard (both for finding galaxies with technology and for possibly spotting technological civilizations on individual planets). ",
"The only planets for which we have that kind of information are the planets in our own solar system."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://arxiv.org/pdf/0705.0993.pdf"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope",
"http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.03418",
"http://phys.org/news/2015-04-advanced-civilizations-earth-obvious-galaxies.html"
],
[]
] |
||
2868y1
|
Can we harvest energy from black holes?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2868y1/can_we_harvest_energy_from_black_holes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ci7u031",
"ci7u183",
"ci7v1eg"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"There's the [Penrose process.](_URL_0_)",
"Somebody recently wrote a paper on this very topic: _URL_0_",
"Well you can't directly extract energy from a black hole, as nothing comes out of one (except for maybe Hawking radiation). However, you can use its large gravity well to your advantage. If you could obtain a large quantity of material, say for example a star, and position it near a black hole, the gravity would start drawing off gas from the star, forming an accretion disk around the black hole. As the gas circles the black hole, it heats up through interaction with other gas particles. As the gas falls down into the gravity well, it heats up to millions of Kelvins, releasing lots of energy in the form of energetic photons. If you built a Dyson sphere around the black hole and accretion disk, you could extract this energy.\n\nOf course if the question is can *we* do this, then the answer is no. That is some borderline Type III [Kardashev](_URL_0_) Civilization stuff right there!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process"
],
[
"http://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.3342.pdf"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale"
]
] |
||
nh5ym
|
Why do I see a staticy grid when I close my eyes?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/nh5ym/why_do_i_see_a_staticy_grid_when_i_close_my_eyes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c393xjk",
"c393xjk"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I have some moderate expertise about the visual system, but I'm not an authority, so this is just my best guess based on what I know.\n\nThe short answer is that, to my knowledge, we don't know *precisely* why this happens, though it's probably a combination of things:\n\nThe first and more obvious contributor is the [visual afterimage effect](_URL_0_). That is, recent intense visual stimulation can cause a \"negative\" image to persist if one's eyes are thereafter deprived of light. This is likely the reason that many \"floaties\" people see when they close their eyes are more purple/blue in color: much indoor lighting and sunlight is more toward the opposing yellow/green end of the spectrum.\n\nAnother contributor is one we often don't consider: it only takes a single photon to depolarize a photoreceptor, and it only takes a small handful of simultaneous depolarizations to lead to the perception of light. This means that even in extremely low lighting conditions, perception can occur. Light can be easily perceived through closed eyelids in moderately lit situations, which may contribute to the sustenance of visual patterns when your eyes are closed.\n\nAnother, more cool and interesting contributor is a set of organizational factors. Specifically, the brain, including the visual system, is wired to detect and perceive patterns, and may [create patterns even when one isn't really there](_URL_1_). That is, you may be perceiving a staticy grid because your visual pathway is organized to detect organized patterns.\n\nFinally, you've got top-down, cognitive factors. This is basically to say that you may be able to influence what you're perceiving based on your experiences and your preferences, similar to interpreting Rorschach blots.",
"I have some moderate expertise about the visual system, but I'm not an authority, so this is just my best guess based on what I know.\n\nThe short answer is that, to my knowledge, we don't know *precisely* why this happens, though it's probably a combination of things:\n\nThe first and more obvious contributor is the [visual afterimage effect](_URL_0_). That is, recent intense visual stimulation can cause a \"negative\" image to persist if one's eyes are thereafter deprived of light. This is likely the reason that many \"floaties\" people see when they close their eyes are more purple/blue in color: much indoor lighting and sunlight is more toward the opposing yellow/green end of the spectrum.\n\nAnother contributor is one we often don't consider: it only takes a single photon to depolarize a photoreceptor, and it only takes a small handful of simultaneous depolarizations to lead to the perception of light. This means that even in extremely low lighting conditions, perception can occur. Light can be easily perceived through closed eyelids in moderately lit situations, which may contribute to the sustenance of visual patterns when your eyes are closed.\n\nAnother, more cool and interesting contributor is a set of organizational factors. Specifically, the brain, including the visual system, is wired to detect and perceive patterns, and may [create patterns even when one isn't really there](_URL_1_). That is, you may be perceiving a staticy grid because your visual pathway is organized to detect organized patterns.\n\nFinally, you've got top-down, cognitive factors. This is basically to say that you may be able to influence what you're perceiving based on your experiences and your preferences, similar to interpreting Rorschach blots."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.artellmedia.com/afterimage.html",
"http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/089976602317250861"
],
[
"http://www.artellmedia.com/afterimage.html",
"http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/089976602317250861"
]
] |
||
31z6n2
|
Why does samurai armour seem so badly designed compared to medieval european armour?
|
Every depiction of historical Japanese armour I've seen looks terribly impractical; it usually has huge gaps under the arms and lots of awkward looking panels sticking out all over the place. By comparison, European armour from around the same time fits snugly over the wearer's body and leaves very few gaps. The Japanese armour also seems to lack features such as ribs and fluting to increase strength, rounded surfaces to deflect blows, etc.
Did samurai armour actually suffer from the flaws which it seems to and if so, why? Or did it actually have some kind of equivalent to arming garments with voiders which simply aren't visible?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/31z6n2/why_does_samurai_armour_seem_so_badly_designed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq6ddja",
"cq7kodg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a question of resource availability. Japan had less natural sources of iron and other suitable metals, meaning that what they had was used to make weapons. It's a contributing reason that swords were so tied to nobility in Japan: they were incredibly expensive and precious.\n\nBecause of this Japanese armour was made from other materials like wood, leather, cloth and lacquer. These materials are not as malleable as metals, but beyond that there wouldn't have been as much need for tight, gapless armour. Europe warfare developed successively to make use if more and more armour penetration. Longbow volleys, pikes and the like. Knights meeting each other in a melee would grab their stilettos or morningstars rather than their swords. In Japan there wasn't such an arms race to penetrate or bash armour, so in a melee situation something to stop a sword slash was sufficient. If your opponent had a spear they'd be able to get through your armour regardless since metal armour was simply out of the question.\n\nThis is of course a wide generalization of an entire culture and their long history, and things varied in different eras, but this is the overall general difference.",
"They were lightly armoured underneath, such as shin guards, greaves, and sleeves. These adapted as time progressed and fighting style changed, but the actual type of component remained in use throughout. These pieces would generally fall under lamellar armour, a [large number of small metal plates/scales laced together](_URL_0_), or scale armour, many small metal plates sewn onto a backing of cloth. \n\nThere are also theories surrounding the need for an all-weather type armour, where it could stay comfortable in both the hot summers and cold winters while also maintaining minimal rust during humid periods. Materials and general construction techniques could also come into play, where the ability to craft armours from the poorer quality iron sand of Japan coupled with the need to mass produce armours as more recruits were needed in the Sengoku period could also cause the samurai to favour lighter armour. Another idea is that they had more gaps to provide easier movement and better flexibility when riding and managing a bow.\n\nIt's also interesting to note the exact idea these armours were made in respect to. European armour was developed with the increasing need to provide full body protection, which lead to the need to create heavier, full-coverage plate. Weapons then changed as well, with heavy weapons such as maces, war hammers, halberds, morning stars, and the like - these were used due to the fact that the force of the blow from any one of those weapons would be more than sufficient to cause damage and crush the armour, rather than pierce it. In contrast, Japan has little to no evidence of mass use of those weapons, as the armour was lighter.\n\nSources:\n\n* *Arms and Armor of the Samurai - The History of Weaponry in Ancient Japan* - Bottomley, I.\n\n* *The Samurai - A Military History* - Turnbull, S."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Lamellar_lacing.gif"
]
] |
|
1onmpv
|
What happened to the idea of invading another country to expand a current one? Details inside.
|
I mean we saw countries try to expand through invasion, WW1 WW2 then it took a break and then Korea and another break to Iraq 92'. It just seems like the idea to invade other countries to expand your borders either went out of style or into hiding.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1onmpv/what_happened_to_the_idea_of_invading_another/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cctw59p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Wars of aggressions are internationally outlawed. From the charter of the United Nations, Article 2, §4:\n\n > All Members shall refrain (…) from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (…)\n\nThis is the original purpose of the United Nations, described in Article 1 as \n\n > To maintain international peace and security\n\nand\n\n > To develop friendly relations among nations \n\nThis, of course, is motivated by the gruesome lessons of the two world wars.\n\nThere have been many wars in the sixty years, and some wars of Aggression, but none have been labelled by the aggressor as such. The United Nations Security council can and does authorize war against aggressors, such as in the Gulf War. Iraq invaded Kuwait, thus breaking international law, and the UN authorized an invasion of Iraq consequently.\n\nWord of warning: Don't discuss wars after the First Gulf war, this subreddit has a policy against discussing events of the last twenty years.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
zzvqg
|
I need help with the relationship between feudal lords and their warriors in medieval times.
|
I need to create a comic book page displaying this relationship. The project is for English so we really didn't cover the life of a feudal lord and his warriors and I am having issues finding some sources. The warrior's dialogue should reflect his feelings about his life and about his lord. Then the lord should respond. Any sources and help would be appreciated! Also the time period is Anglo-Saxon/Medieval times.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/zzvqg/i_need_help_with_the_relationship_between_feudal/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c696yub"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Ok first things first we need to define our field a bit. The Anglo-Saxons were not by any strict definition 'feudal'. \"Feudalism' as an economic/political system only properly appears in England under the Normans after the conquest in 1066. So I'm going to give you sources that point towards that.\n\n* Joseph Strayer's [Feudalism](_URL_2_) is a nifty little (47 pages of analysis) book with a great selection of primary documents at the end. The caveat, it is nearly 60 years old and so it is rather simplistic and out of date. That being said the documents are still very much primary and may be of help.\n\n* Robert Bartlett's [England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings](_URL_1_) is a very *not* small book. It is, however, exaustive and up-to-date and so might prove helpful. It has chapters on everything from the actual political landscape to Lordship and Government, Warfare and even Faeiries.\n\n* *English Historical Documents* is a series of works which combine numerous primary sources. Volume 2 is probably the best place to look.\n\n* The [Internet Medieval Sourcebook](_URL_0_) also has a wide variety of primary documents worth looking at which don't even require a trip to the library!\n\nI hope that is helpful. One last thing to remember about 'feudalism'. It is not a clean system and it is not a neat pyramid. It is a constant struggle for privilege and power. Kings want to get as much as they can from their vassals (service, payments, etc.) while giving up as few privileges/rights (land, support, protection) as they can. The same is true for the Vassals.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/sbook1n.asp",
"http://www.amazon.com/England-Norman-Angevin-1075-1225-History/dp/0199251010/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1347846138&sr=1-1&keywords=england+under+the+norman+and+angevin+kings",
"http://www.amazon.com/Feudalism-Anvil-Series-The/dp/0882758101/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1347846016&sr=8-1&keywords=feudalism+strayer"
]
] |
|
11h6n8
|
Is there a reason why Evangelical Christians sometimes have seizures during "prayer"?
|
I'm an atheist and just finished watching Jesus Camp and it's safe to say I'm shocked at what's going on. I saw kids having "seizures" during high intensity prayer and I was just wondering if it was something physiological or just psychological. What causes them to act that way?
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/11h6n8/is_there_a_reason_why_evangelical_christians/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6mgj1g"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Dr. Walter Cannon ([Study here](_URL_0_)) in 1942 studied cases of \"black magic deaths\". Cannon noticed that in cases of victims being \"cursed\" they had an exceptionally strong belief that they were doomed to die. He speculated that the victims released hormones that caused a rapid and potentially fatal drop in blood pressure thus causing them to come down with a serious case of the deads. It's quite likely that these people having seizures have such a firm belief of being able to have this seizure and expecting it is causing them to in fact have one. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://sinapsis.usach.cl/moodle/file.php/1/Papers/Original_Voodoo_Death.pdf"
]
] |
|
2hrf2e
|
Ohio Native Americans. Looking for resources.
|
Best mound builders/Shawnee/Miami resources.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2hrf2e/ohio_native_americans_looking_for_resources/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckvegqu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"**Moundbuilders**\n\n* [The Moundbuilders: Ancient Peoples of Eastern North America](_URL_12_)\n* [Gathering Hopewell: Society, Ritual, and Ritual Interaction](_URL_7_)\n* [The Scioto Hopewell and Their Neighbors: Bioarchaeological Documentation and Cultural Understanding](_URL_1_)\n* [Ohio Hopewell Community Organization](_URL_14_)\n* [Hopewell Settlement Patterns, Subsistence, and Symbolic Landscapes](_URL_4_)\n* [Recreating Hopewell](_URL_10_)\n\n**Shawnee**\n\n* [Shawnee: The ceremonialism of a native Indian tribe and its cultural background](_URL_2_)\n* [The Shawnees and the War for America](_URL_5_)\n* [The Shawnees and Their Neighbors, 1795-1870](_URL_11_)\n* [A Spirited Resistance: The North American Indian Struggle for Unity, 1745-1815](_URL_13_;)\n* [The Worlds the Shawnees Made: Migration and Violence in Early America](_URL_8_)\n\n**Miami**\n\n* [The Miami Indians](_URL_0_)\n* [The Miami Indians of Indiana: A Persistent People, 1654-1994](_URL_6_)\n* [The Indians of the Western Great Lakes, 1615-1760](_URL_9_)\n\n**All Three**\n\n* [Handbook of North American Indians, vol 15](_URL_3_)\n\n**C.C. Trowbridge**\n\nIf you check the sources for the Shawnee and Miami books, you'll see the name C.C. Trowbridge come up. His *Shawnese Traditions* and *Meeār̄meear Traditions* are frequently cited, but hard to come by these days. They're worth checking out if you can managed to track them down; if not, you'll get most of main details for the works that cite them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://books.google.com/books?id=zOKgGQeETn4C",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=7DNLDlbQXaYC",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=qJY0AAAAMAAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=PHXIeG6JyKEC",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=OrLuQQAACAAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=dvOTo_bwmEUC",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=z7wEAAAACAAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=1erz0jDvE6oC",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=qIsqAgAAQBAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=GCuuMkbLgs4C",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=mBiFQgAACAAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=mSDE_qnN2BEC",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=-5VZHAAACAAJ",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=eGFrAAAAMAAJ&",
"http://books.google.com/books?id=CqyKPJAk7YIC"
]
] |
|
9eitx6
|
how can straight talk use the same towers as verizon and other top tier providers?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9eitx6/eli5_how_can_straight_talk_use_the_same_towers_as/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e5pab3z",
"e5paep0",
"e5pavfb",
"e5pcldb",
"e5pdp1z",
"e5pdt7k"
],
"score": [
223,
10,
2,
24,
29,
8
],
"text": [
"Mobile phone companies own a lot of spectrum and towers, generally more than they can use (for now, things are growing). They sell their excess capacity to other providers, such as Straight Talk to use unused portions of their mobile phone networks. It's making $0 while not in use, so they'd rather sell it then have it generate no cash for them.\n\nJust about all large mobile phone companies do this to a fairly significant degree, and as such, its not uncommon for a company (such as a Straight Talk) to have deals with multiple providers in order to make sure their network is good enough, as often one single provider can't give them everything they need.",
"Towers are expensive to build, own, and maintain. So straight talk just leases space from other carriers that have already built.a tower. They dont have to worry about building them and the other carrier gets to recoup some funds",
"Thanks for the easy to understand reply. ",
"I work for a cell phone tower company. We own the towers and rent space on each one to several different carriers. Here’s a random tower from a google search. Generally each level of antennae you see belongs to a different carrier. \n\n_URL_0_",
"In addition to the fact that the big companies (Verizon, Att, etc) lease their towers they do so cheaper than it costs for their own customers, how could they get away with that you might ask? Often times it's because the leased carriers are given lower priority than the primary owner, so Straight talk might not get a fast internet download speed while at the same time a Verizon customer would. \n\nThe second tier carriers can be a great deal but understand you may not get quite the same quality of service.",
"I think there are some anti-competition laws which force large telecoms into sharing their towers with smaller companies. Of course they have to pay to use them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://imgur.com/a/XE2blAn"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ri9j9
|
why would the israelis and saudis lobby *against* an interim nuclear deal between the us and iran?
|
It seems to me Israel and Saudi Arabia would benefit from such a deal, especially if it's seen through to a long term deal. No?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ri9j9/eli5_why_would_the_israelis_and_saudis_lobby/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdnijdv"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"A similar deal was given to North Korea in the 1990s with regard to their nuclear program. Now they have multiple nuclear weapons and have spread the technology to other countries like Pakistan, which have since built some nuclear weapons of their own."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
yi0hl
|
How close can stars get?
|
I was wondering if there is a theoretical limit on how close two star systems can be and still host planets. For example, could two star systems be close enough that one could travel between them in a "reasonable" amount of time, say 5 years, at a "reasonably attainable" speed, say 0.25C.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/yi0hl/how_close_can_stars_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5vqva3",
"c5vr2ur",
"c5vub6k"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You have binary star systems in which each member can retain its own planets in their respective ecospheres.\n",
"Nasa found the first planet ever discovered in a binary star system about a year ago if 'I remember correctly. Found an article:[Nasa news link](_URL_0_). In it, it also mentions that binary star systems are actually the majority in our galaxy. I know this doesn't directly answer your question about how close exactly, but found it interesting and pertinent to the discussion.",
"There are two types of planets in binary systems- one is \"circumbinary\" meaning the two stars orbit each other, and the planet orbits the pair. The other, I forget the name of at the moment, but it's more like what you're thinking of- the planet orbits one star in a binary system. There are many of these systems- although RV studies are biased against them, so we don't have a good idea on their exact number, but Kepler is finding some of these so we should have a good handle on their statistics soon.\n\nMost binary pairs are separated by ~500 AU, and there's no reason planets couldn't form there. You'd have to worry about dynamical effects (Kozai, etc), especially as you moved the stars closer together, but there's no reason to suggest you couldn't have planetary systems with another star just tens to 100 AU away. Then if you could travel 0.25c, it would only take you a few days to travel from one to the other.\n\nAt the most conservative, to avoid dynamical effects let's say you have to be at 1000 AU to avoid massive scattering incidents that are not conducive for life, and let's say you can only travel at 0.01 AU- you're still only a year and a half away from the other stellar system then. Not too shabby!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/news/kepler-16b.html"
],
[]
] |
|
2edsah
|
Was it always a rude thing to ask about salaries? For example, would somebody in 19th century London be offended if I asked how much they made?
|
I've heard that this social taboo on disclosing salaries is merely successful brain washing by the anti union movements of the early 20th century.
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2edsah/was_it_always_a_rude_thing_to_ask_about_salaries/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjypma7"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"A lot of 18th century literature talks about money and how much a person had \"settled\" on them per year. Jane Austen and similar writers focused on this a lot. Jane's characters always knew how much every person made and how much they could expect to have if they married that person. \n\n\nI am not sure how accurately that translated into real life though. Or how much it happened in the middle and lower classes, since most literature focused on the richer classes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2g0mw1
|
Which events led to enforcing speed limits on vehicles?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2g0mw1/which_events_led_to_enforcing_speed_limits_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckf3yuq"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Speed limits are older than the \"horseless carriage\" itself; the Locomotive Act of 1861 in the UK limited steam-powered \"road locomotives\" (train engines designed to travel on roads instead of tracks) to a maximum speed of 10 mph. In 1865 the speed limit was lowered to 4 mph and a requirement was added for a man carrying a red flag to walk at least 60 yards in front of the vehicle to warn others of its passage. In 1896, following the development of the modern automobile concept, the red flag requirement was dropped and the speed limit was amended to 8 to 16 mph at the local authority's discretion.\n\nTwo examples of roads I'm aware of which previously did not have speed limits, but on which they were introduced:\n\nSpeed limits were introduced on the UK's M1 motorway after racing driver Jack Sears tested an AC Cobra coupe at 185 mph on it in 1964, instigating a moral panic that led to the implementation of a \"temporary\" 70 mph speed limit in 1965, made permanent in 1970.\n\nNumerical speed limits in Montana were implemented [in 1998](_URL_0_) after a man charged with speeding successfully argued before the state supreme court that the state's restriction to \"reasonable and proper\" speeds was unconstitutionally vague."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/25/us/montana-s-speed-limit-of-mph-is-overturned-as-too-vague.html"
]
] |
||
ly4kr
|
django and other web frameworks
|
What is a Web Framework. I've just started learnpythonthehardway, and i've encountered a few references to Django.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ly4kr/eli5_django_and_other_web_frameworks/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2wncrz",
"c2wncrz"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"An ELI5 would require an entire chapter to cover the basics. I'm going to assume you understand certain concepts. If the explanation is still confusing, ask, and I'll post a more detailed response.\n\n**ELI20:** A framework is like an operating system. It provides libraries, as well as resource management and code architecture.\n\n\n[Django](_URL_1_) is a Python framework for creating web applications. [wxPython](_URL_3_) is a Python framework for creating desktop GUI applications. Let's look at both of them.\n\n\n## Libraries\nA library is like a small mini program that does something specific. Just like a Firefox add-on, except in source code form. You use this functionality to do stuff within your own application. So having access to a library allows you to implement features without having to code that functionality yourself.\n\n\nFor example Django provides [sitemaps](_URL_2_) and [geolocation](_URL_5_). So if you used Django, you don't need to write your own sitemap module. You simply use the one provided by Django.\n\n\nwxPython provides [wxODBC](_URL_0_) and [wxSound](_URL_4_). Both of these are tremendously useful when writing database frontends. \n\n\n## Resource Management\n\nThe most basic webapp needs a database to store data and session management to keep track of all the people connected to your webapp. \n\n\nDjango provides a means to link your Python classes to your database, so the data from the database is automatically read/written to the class variables. This is called an an ORM (Object Relational Mapper). Without it you would need to write CRUD code to read/write/delete information in the database. \n\n\nSo in effect it makes your app a lot simpler. The downside is that you have to do things the Django way. Create classes, variables, and structures that Django needs to provide all these features. this brings me to the final point which is Architecture\n\n\n## Architecture\n\nWeb frameworks, including Django, structure code using the Model-View-Controller design pattern. Django implements a hybrid version of MVC with templates. So if you used Django, your program would also have to be organized along MVC lines.",
"An ELI5 would require an entire chapter to cover the basics. I'm going to assume you understand certain concepts. If the explanation is still confusing, ask, and I'll post a more detailed response.\n\n**ELI20:** A framework is like an operating system. It provides libraries, as well as resource management and code architecture.\n\n\n[Django](_URL_1_) is a Python framework for creating web applications. [wxPython](_URL_3_) is a Python framework for creating desktop GUI applications. Let's look at both of them.\n\n\n## Libraries\nA library is like a small mini program that does something specific. Just like a Firefox add-on, except in source code form. You use this functionality to do stuff within your own application. So having access to a library allows you to implement features without having to code that functionality yourself.\n\n\nFor example Django provides [sitemaps](_URL_2_) and [geolocation](_URL_5_). So if you used Django, you don't need to write your own sitemap module. You simply use the one provided by Django.\n\n\nwxPython provides [wxODBC](_URL_0_) and [wxSound](_URL_4_). Both of these are tremendously useful when writing database frontends. \n\n\n## Resource Management\n\nThe most basic webapp needs a database to store data and session management to keep track of all the people connected to your webapp. \n\n\nDjango provides a means to link your Python classes to your database, so the data from the database is automatically read/written to the class variables. This is called an an ORM (Object Relational Mapper). Without it you would need to write CRUD code to read/write/delete information in the database. \n\n\nSo in effect it makes your app a lot simpler. The downside is that you have to do things the Django way. Create classes, variables, and structures that Django needs to provide all these features. this brings me to the final point which is Architecture\n\n\n## Architecture\n\nWeb frameworks, including Django, structure code using the Model-View-Controller design pattern. Django implements a hybrid version of MVC with templates. So if you used Django, your program would also have to be organized along MVC lines."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://docs.wxwidgets.org/stable/wx_odbcoverview.html#odbcoverview",
"https://www.djangoproject.com/",
"https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.3/ref/contrib/sitemaps/",
"http://www.wxpython.org/",
"http://docs.wxwidgets.org/stable/wx_wxsound.html#wxsound",
"https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.3/ref/contrib/gis/"
],
[
"http://docs.wxwidgets.org/stable/wx_odbcoverview.html#odbcoverview",
"https://www.djangoproject.com/",
"https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.3/ref/contrib/sitemaps/",
"http://www.wxpython.org/",
"http://docs.wxwidgets.org/stable/wx_wxsound.html#wxsound",
"https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.3/ref/contrib/gis/"
]
] |
|
3f9sz8
|
the chinese market crashes
|
What are the factors to the declining Chinese economy. How will this affect things in U.S. Europe etc.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3f9sz8/eli5_the_chinese_market_crashes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctmry9l"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This crisis comes along with the GDP growth of China slowing down. Chinese people started to invest in the stocks because of China's central bank decision to lower rate (the idea was to keep the growth going).\n\nThis created a bubble as many businesses were overvalued. Fearing huge speculation, the Chinese authorities decided to correct it (some people were taking bankc loans only to invest) the bubble popped here. \n\nHowever the Chinese government panicked and invested back in the stock market and encourage shareholders to invest in the stocks, keeping the bubble growing back. \n\nThis crisis didn't have huge effects on the rest of world as some people feared, but this kind of crisis is going to happen. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
17q60u
|
Prior to the Industrial Revolution, was England (or the United Kingdom) ever a similarly significant internationally?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/17q60u/prior_to_the_industrial_revolution_was_england_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c87uzt9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Just drawing off the top of my own head here before a proper answer comes in, England always had a strong navy after the middle ages, henry viii leaving the catholic church made England pretty significant and then holding off the Spanish armada was no mean feat. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2kvl9x
|
Relation b/w speed of light and gravity?
|
My friend started debating (and arguing) with me recently, stating gravity has an influence on the speed of light and how speed of light depends on gravity.
His idea gave me a hint that he somehow maybe thinks gravity across all planetary bodies are same regardless their mass differences, but that's me guessing what's going on his mind to conclude such relation between speed of light and gravity.
Can anyone help me with explaining him why speed of light is independent of gravity of the planet that it's reaching to? If you can include some references and/or calculations that will be great.
|
askscience
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2kvl9x/relation_bw_speed_of_light_and_gravity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clpfksh"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"This is actually a pretty complicated question. In special relativity, for inertial frames, the speed of light is a pure global constant. In general relativity, the issue becomes more muddled, here's what Einstein said about it: \n\n > \"... according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity [...] cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position.\"\n\nIn essence, the speed of light constancy rule requires that you remain in an inertial frame, which involves two situations: Free falling into a gravitational source (ignorant non uniform, tidal effects) and being sufficiently far from any source of gravity thus replicating special relativity. The basic reason for this is in special relativity, Lorentz transformations take on a global usage, but on general relativity, you can only do these *locally* and as a result your speed of light measurement is only necessarily *c* when the light is near you.\n\nEdit: Here's some resource on the topic: \n_URL_1_ \n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html",
"http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/133482/speed-of-light-in-general-relativity"
]
] |
|
ay0a5e
|
When and why did militaries stop updating 'ceremonial' uniforms?
|
I'm speaking specifically about things such as the Guards at Buckingham Palace, and the uniforms used specifically on Parades, such as [this example of a French Republican Guard Cavalryman in 2007.](_URL_0_)
It's my understanding that these were, previously, merely just... The uniforms, and at some point the 'field' and 'ceremonial' uniforms began to diverge.
Assuming I'm actually correct and this happens, when and why?
(Obviously this will likely vary case-to-case, but examples from any country are fine by me!)
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ay0a5e/when_and_why_did_militaries_stop_updating/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ehxuz0n",
"ehyormw",
"ehyuyrp",
"ehz6igs"
],
"score": [
287,
7,
31,
142
],
"text": [
"as a side question, are they pieces of dress uniforms that actually do tend to be updated from this diversion point or are they pretty much unchanged?",
"Many countries began fighting World War 1 with colorful uniforms typical of the one's you described. [Here] (_URL_0_) is an example of the change in French military uniforms from the beginning to the end of the war. \n\nIn a large formation with elaborate plans that required different units to move around in the Napoleonic and prior eras, observers and general officers needed the different pieces of their tactical puzzle to be easily discernable from afar. This necessity also built up the unit cultures over time, an important part of military esprit de corps which you see celebrated in the photo you linked.\n\nIn his history work, The First World War, John Keegan describes this process of change. According to him, uniforms started much like they had been at the time of the Franco-Prussian war with soft caps and often elaborate regalia (by modern standards). I imagine you don't need to have read his book to imagine what heavy shelling and trench warfare did to men in soft-caps and old bright uniforms--they were clearly not suitable for conditions in hindsight. \n\n[Here] (_URL_1_) is a large NSFW gallery of primary source documents, i.e. photos taken of some archealogical digs in Europe and some old phtos from multiple points throughout the war. Notice the uniform when the year is available. By the end, you might start to be able to make an educated guess on the year just by the uniforms and head coverings in the photo. \n\nTactically, while the fighting through no-mans land did involve some old time Battle Drill 1-A (everyone charge at the enemy, screaming with your bayonette out), for the most part, company and batallion sized maneuvers were replaced by squad sized maneuvers. This meant you had small groups of 4-10 maneuvering carefully through terrain to lay barbed wire, harrass a certain part of the enemy position and conduct small raids. For this type of activity, uniforms that blended in, were tidy (no giant coattails and feathers sticking up) and allowed you to move through difficult terrain were needed. \n\nBut that French image is merely a useful tool to show that if a single point in time must be chosen for your question, World War One is that time. The British, for example, had uniforms from the time of the Boer War that very much resembled their World War 1 uniforms, at least compared to the colorful French ones. That's because the Brits in South Africa were some of the first Europeans to see what facing modern weaponry and guerilla tactics required from uniforms. (Tactically, maybe they could, should have learned a bit more.) \n\nIf I'm not mistaken (searching for the section from Keegan, will update if I can find citation) even the English started the war with soft caps. The Boar War pith helmet was not steel and either way, was part of the hot-weather uniform, not their temperate weather uniform. \n\n*John Keegan's work (ISBN 13: 978-0375700453) is excellent and the best I have read on the early part of the war. \n\n[This] (_URL_2_) documentary series is also fantastic if you're not a bookish type. ",
"/u/bacarruda has [a very interesting comment on dress uniforms](_URL_0_). It doesn't fully answer your question, but does add some background to it. ",
"Good question! \n\n > It's my understanding that these were, previously, merely just... The uniforms, and at some point the 'field' and 'ceremonial' uniforms began to diverge. \n\nBroadly-speaking, in modern militaries, there are a few types of uniforms that soldiers wear during the time in service. \n\n* Utility uniform or fatigues: Usually camouflaged, this is what soldiers wear in combat or when on deployment. It's also what most soldiers wear day-to-day basis while on post. \n* PT uniform: Since dedicated physical training for soldiers became a more common practice in the early 20th century, armies began to issue a workout uniform. \n* Service uniform: Basically military versions of the business suit and business casual wear. Worn in similar circumstances. Soldier who work in places like the Pentagon often wear service uniforms on a daily basis. \n* Dress uniform: There are varying forms of this, including mess dress, which is a sort of military tuxedo and worn in similar circumstances. Some armies also have a dressier version of the service uniform.\n* Ceremonial uniform: These are usually only worn by full-time ceremonial units (e.g. the Fife and -Drum Corps of the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Regiment, which wears Revolutionary War-style uniforms) or by units with a ceremonial function (ex. the Guards regiments of the Household Division in the United Kingdom). These uniforms are often styled after 19th-century uniforms and they aren't worn by non-ceremonial units. \n\nToday, the distinctions between these uniforms is very clear. In the past, the lines were a bit blurrier. Dressier uniforms and everyday uniforms looked much more similar than they do now. \n\nStill, even during the 18th century and the first part of the 19th century, there was still some distinction between parade dress and what soldiers would actually wear on campaign or in camp. In other words, \"field\" and \"ceremonial\" uniforms have always been different, its just that the differences were once a bit smaller. \n\nSoldiers often had multiple uniforms for multiple different occasions. Consider [these Silesian soldiers](_URL_1_) from the Prussian army during the Napoleonic Wars, taken from Peter Hofschröer's *Prussian Line Infantry 1792–1815.* \n\nI'll use them to illustrate my points, but I'll try to speak as broadly as I can about uniform practices in this period. \n\n* The man on the left is wearing the simple **camp dress** soldiers generally wore while doing chores in the barracks or in camp. In this case, he's wearing a forage cap and jacket, both common items of camp dress worn by ordinary soldiers from most European nations in this period. \n* The soldier in the center is wearing the **campaign dress** soldiers would actually wear in combat and on the march. In cold weather, he'd wear a greatcoat, as shown. Underneath that would be his regular uniform, usually a wool coat, shirt, and trousers. Also note the oilskin shako cover he's wearing. Wearing a protective cover over your headgear was common practice on campaign in the early 1800s -- see this [French shako cover](_URL_0_) from the Napoleonic Wars. The yellow coat facings indicate he is from a Silesian regiment. \n* The soldier on the right is wearing **parade dress** \\-- generally speaking, parade dress could use elements of the campaign dress (for example, he's wearing the same shako he'd wear on campaign, just without the cover). Of course, the parade uniform also added different elements like boots, a different coat, etc. In some cases, elite units like grenadiers might also wear a bearskin or a miter cap on parade, etc. Plumes, feathers, and other ornamentation are also worn -- they'd be packed away or left behind while soldiers were on campaign. \n\nYou can see a more direct comparison between [these Prussian grenadiers from 1806](_URL_5_). The man on the left is wearing parade dress, while the man in the center has on his campaign dress. Note that the headgear and the coat are the same, but the footwear and trousers are quite different. \n\nThere's a similar trend in officers' uniforms. [These officers of the Foot Guards](_URL_2_) show off some of the differences. \n\n* The officer on the left is wearing the **undress** uniform. This is what officers would wear day-to-day around the barracks or in garrison. \n* The officer in the center is wearing the **service uniform**. In the Napoleonic period, it's what officers (and men, for that matter) would actually wear while serving on campaign. As a note: nowadays, \"service dress\" uniforms are essentially the military equivalent of a business suit, so they aren't worn in combat.\n\n**So how did we get to where we are today?** \n\nWe have soldiers fighting in Afghanistan wearing camouflaged fatigues, officer in the Pentagon wearing the military version of the suit and tie, and Grenadier Guards outside Buckingham Palace wearing bearskins and red coats. \n\nWell, there are a few things to look at.\n\n1. What soldiers wear in combat or while working. \n2. What soldiers wear on parade and for other more formal occasions.\n3. What soldiers wear while \"walking out\" from their posts or working at headquarters. \n4. What ceremonial units wear. \n\nIn the early 1800s, the uniforms for all these situations were often very similar. As we've seen from the Prussian examples, soldiers often on parade and on campaign wore uniforms of a very similar style. In some cases, they wore the same thing on parade and on campaign, just with minor variations, like the addition of plumes or new trousers.\n\nNow, here's the major change: from the late 1800s and to the mid 1900s, soldiers start wearing increasingly-different uniforms for these different occasions. WWI and WWII really accelerate this process. There isn't really one instant of change, but rather its a period of transition that takes place over several decades. **This gets to the WHEN of your question.** \n\nThe uniforms that soldiers wear in combat and while in garrison get a lot simpler for a variety of reasons. **This gets to the WHY of your question.** \n\n* Industrial warfare and mass-mobilization meant uniforms got simpler and simpler. Armies had to cloth millions and million of men, so issuing everyone with elaborate uniforms wasn't feasible, even with more industrialized clothing production. During WWI, for example, soldiers tended to get one style of uniform. On parade, you wore your service dress uniform. In battle, you wore your service dress uniform. Even in WWII, when soldiers might get a dress uniform for parades and fatigues for combat, the uniforms were pretty simple. \n* The Open Order Revolution of the mid- to late-1800s meant soldiers fought less and less in packed lines and more and more in loose formations. Individual mobility and camouflage became increasingly important, so campaigning uniforms became plainer, simpler, and less-restrictive. The bright blues, reds, and other colors disappear (except for the French, who keep their red trousers until 1915!) and they are replaced with more muted colors like khaki and *feldgrau.* \n* Civilian fashions became simpler and less-elaborate. The business suit and the lounge suit become popular for men around the turn of the century. Military service uniforms adopted similar cuts, especially for officer's uniforms. \n\nYou can see the resulting evolution of battlefield uniforms for the [U.S. Marine Corps](_URL_4_) and the [U.S. Army](_URL_3_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://i.redd.it/h3wf19k5rfk21.jpg"
] |
[
[],
[
"https://imgur.com/a/GckprdA",
"https://imgur.com/gallery/b0Go8",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzf9aHZmCAM&list=PL9-2UnSOnlzX6oQ7IK9e9s1N-zZ_V-Ole"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/axks54/why_do_the_uniforms_worn_by_the_army_and_navy/ehvt7m2/"
],
[
"https://i.imgur.com/zR2Dny9.jpg",
"https://i.imgur.com/ToKHYvG.jpg",
"https://i.imgur.com/pcwsn1f.jpg",
"http://i.imgur.com/Nldz4oD.jpg",
"https://i.imgur.com/rDmY2dq.jpg?1",
"https://i.imgur.com/xnndHug.jpg"
]
] |
|
3wig0u
|
How romanticised is the 50s USA in comparison to how it actually was?
|
Except from the obvious downfalls- lack of women's rights, racist issues and all of that- was it actually a good time to live overall as a white straight man? Or was it a lot worse than we think?
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3wig0u/how_romanticised_is_the_50s_usa_in_comparison_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxwkdbq",
"cxwmkg4",
"cxxi3et"
],
"score": [
46,
795,
14
],
"text": [
"Could you be a little more specific with your question? Its not clear to me where, how, and why the 50's are being romanticized. There's a lot of dystopian views of the 50's in media - for example, lots of eerie post apocalyptic games and TV shows frequently have a 50's backdrop. Some famous examples include the Fallout series of video games. The concept of Mad Men, another dystopian TV show, also has its roots in the 50's advertising culture on Madison Avenue. So I would be interested in hearing where the 50's are being romanticized, because that may inform the answer.",
"I'm not an expert on the 1950s, however, I'll take a stab at your question. To start, I think your question is framed in a dangerous way that could lead to a rather skewed representation of American history, and history in general. Describing a time period as a \"good time to live\", *except* (and this is a big modifier) for all the racial and gender based oppression is a scary way to look at America. The largely white communities ([\"little boxes on the hillside\"](_URL_4_)) which began to proliferate in the 1950s did not exist in isolation, they were dependent on a wide variety of factors in nearby cities and towns, and, in communities all across the nation, that were not so racially homogeneous. Looking at the life of the \"American white male\" in a vacuum is akin to celebrating the golden age of the Portuguese or achievements of the American south, while ignoring the significant role slavery had in the success of both. It skews the reality of the situation and, perhaps, also creates some of the romanticism (conservatives or similar types yearning for a \"whiter\", greater America) you mentioned. With this in mind, I'll still do my best to answer the question as asked. \n\nAlthough there were significant opportunities in the 1950s for white males, and other groups, these opportunities often required significant sacrifices or adjustments of one kind or another. The most obvious is the readjustment of returning veterans to civilian society, although the myriad benefits of the GI bill (largely restricted to whites) softened the blow to an extent. This bill allowed veterans to gain a academic or technical education and find a foothold a foothold in a changed society. The government also insured a certain number of mortgages for veterans, making home ownership far more accessible. As such, an overarching theme of the period was an emphasis on settling down, buying a nice, little home and raising a family in a safe (middle-class white), suburban environment. Removed from the terrors of the battlefield, this was an attractive prospect to many. However, societal critics like Sloan Wilson ([*The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit*](_URL_5_) )or William H. Whyte ([*The Organization Man*](_URL_1_)) decried the exchange of individual creativity for conformity, an empty suburban life and the all-powerful dollar. Other contemporary writers, such as the \"Beat generation\" and particularly Jack Kerouac, described the existence of \" a hidden America\", far removed from the technicolor glare of newly resurgent television- and ad-men. While shows like Mad Men have done a passable replication of the corporate culture in the 1950s, few have captured the spirit of the Beat generation and the grimy but vibrant spaces where they made their existences, for better or worse. \n\n In the higher reaches of Washington, [McCarthyism](_URL_2_) reached a fever pitch, eventually spilling out into American communities and encouraging suspicion of \"the communist other\", whoever that may be (ethnic characters, professors, artists, etc. [some examples](_URL_0_)). Lives, careers were ruined, all in the name of some sort of perverted form of statism. That communists had played a significant role in [defending the rights of African-Americans](_URL_3_) for the past half-century did them no favors. So, while there was great advancement and achievements in business, science, and technology for America and Americans, problems were still endemic in society, not least of all with the aforementioned racial-, poverty, and gender-related problems not discussed here. I'll leave it up to you as to whether the 1950s were necessarily a good time to live (my opinion: probably as good as any other) but, at the very least, I hope this acts as a intro of sorts to the time period and, perhaps, to a slightly fuller version of history. ",
"I've been mulling on whether or not to attempt to answer this question and I think I'll take a stab at it.\n\nUltimately this very question highlights several core problems in the study of history. One is the sources problem, or the streetlamp problem. Being that it's always tempting to be drawn into studying what is available, and not being as conscious of the limitations of those sources as one should. This is a problem in all of science but history has it worse than most because often it's inordinately difficult to acquire other sources. And this isn't just a problem of \"the victors write the history\", it's much worse than that, it's a matter of only literate people writing history about the things that matter to them. There are great swaths of time where the only records we have from a few sources are a few myths, names of kings, and accounting documents, because that's what people felt important enough to write down. Much of more recent history tends to focus on the lives of the elite, since they led the most notable lives (at least by the standards of the time), were the most literate, the most able to dedicate time to writing, and so forth.\n\nBeyond that there's the preservation problem. History is a bit like a relay race, and if anyone along the way drops the baton for any reason, perhaps even intentionally, then those sources can become lost to future generations (namely, us). Worse yet, there is the potential for distortion and bias along the way either through selective filtering of which sources are carried forward or through editing or retelling. Looking at the past is thus a matter of looking through a long series of lenses, each applying its own distortions, some of which may be difficult to perceive. And then there's the matter of viewpoint, which colors not only the preservation and promulgation of sources and narratives but also how we in the present approach history. Often times people approach history with a preconceived notion of what they expect or want to find, sometimes people look at the history of a particular period with a desire to prove some aspect of it was a certain way, for example.\n\nSo all of that is the burden here *in addition to* the difficult problem of defining what a \"good time to live overall\" even means, per se. Of necessity any answer would have to be more or less subjective. That said, let me put forward some bits and pieces to \"paint a picture\", though it's not going to be any less influenced by all of the issues outlined above.\n\nFirstly, what was it like growing up? The school system had a disciplinarian bent, corporal punishment was common, both at home and in the class room. Bullying was common, as were regular fist fights in school. It was an environment that punished non-conformity. It was an environment that didn't appreciate diversity of any sort, not just of gender, race, or sexual orientation, but also of interests, passions, belief systems, intellectual pursuits, ideologies, etc. You could easily be ostracized for having musical interests outside of the mainstream, or for liking books outside the mainstream. And god help you if you decided you no longer believed in the religion your parents held or your family held a religion that was extremely uncommon in the area where you lived.\n\nIt was also an era where there was no appreciation for issues of learning disabilities, different ways of learning, the existence of ADHD, depression, bipolar, etc. If you needed to learn in a different way than the rest of the class you were out of luck. You would either be left behind or left to fend for yourself, resulting perhaps in becoming disaffected with the educational establishment (perhaps dropping out of school before finishing, which was extremely common) or being stuck on a remedial track. Also, other \"disorders\" such as autism were not well understood and were horribly stigmatized by society at large. Being significantly different from the norm was practically a death sentence. Consider, for example, the story of the sister of president John F. Kennedy, Rosemary. Due to poor care during the birth process she was born with an intellectual disability, in her early 20s she was given a lobotomy to make her more placid. There are numerous similar stories of tragedy for folks with autism, schizophrenia, bipolar, or other \"difficult\" mental disorders from that era. Many of them were treated poorly in mental institutions that were no better than prisons, most treatment concentrated on making them easier to control with little concern for their well-being, they had very little ability to re-enter society and they were typically ostracized by their communities and even their own families.\n\nThere were also very intense expectations on young boys to live up to the masculine ideal. Boys who loved books more than sports, boys who were awkward, shy, anxious, etc. were frequently (though not universally) mentally, emotionally, and physically abused by their parents. Meanwhile, it was not the innocent, crime-free era that many romanticized portrayals make it out to be. Sexual abuse, incest, and rape (by adults or by peers) was common though generally unreported because children and teens were often treated as second class citizens.\n\nSecondly, what was it like for adults? Like any era there was the good and the bad, I'm tending to focus on the bad here to highlight the issue of romanticization. One issue not to be missed is the draft. In the 1950s specifically around 1.5 million men were drafted in the US, many of them would serve in the Korean war. Tens of thousands of American men were killed, even more were wounded, and vastly more were forced to experience the horrors of war and had to live with those memories for the rest of their lives. In an era where war was glorified, \"weakness\" or sensitiveness in men was vilified, and PTSD was not widely appreciated or well-treated this left a lot of war-ravaged lives.\n\nA lot of smaller towns in that era were very insular and protective of their communities, to an almost paranoid degree. As a traveler making their way around the country if you were a stranger in a town and you were \"different\" in some way (say, with long hair) then there was a good chance the local police would hassle you and make it clear you weren't welcome. And again, it was not a crime free utopia, as homicide and violent crime rates were actually fairly similar to today.\n\nAnyway, I could go on, but this is probably enough. In short, no, it was not a period that was universally excellent even for straight white men.\n\n(I'll try to add some references tomorrow when I get a chance.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/the-red-menace-a-striking-gallery-of-anti-communist-propaganda.html",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Organization_Man",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Party_USA_and_African_Americans",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlSpc87Jfr0",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_Gray_Flannel_Suit"
],
[]
] |
|
1onfp1
|
can somebody explain ram for me?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1onfp1/eli5_can_somebody_explain_ram_for_me/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cctmuur",
"cctmuzm",
"cctn34m",
"cctnybi",
"cctof7h",
"cctorxc",
"cctp6ew",
"cctqg5l",
"cctqjr3",
"cctr9zp",
"ccts8y1",
"ccttbvg",
"cctvy9p",
"ccxdc5c"
],
"score": [
68,
10,
14,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Computer processors are really, really fast. Hard drives are really, really slow in comparison. If computers handled and processed data by writing and reading directly from the hard drive, computers would be extremely slow too, because the hard drive couldn't keep up with the processor's speed.\n\nRAM is there to address this problem. It's a place where data is temporarly stored that is really really fast to read and write from.",
"it's temporary memory in your computer, which it uses to remember what it's doing right at this moment. having more of it makes your computer more efficient, because if it runs out of RAM, it needs to use the harddisk for the same tasks, which is a Lot slower. if you want more technical details, just ask.",
"Imagine you are sitting at your desk doing a project. You grab a few books or tools off the shelf that you need right now and start working. Eventually, you need more supplies or a different book and so you walk to the bookcase and grab what you need but to make room you have to put the original books back. After a while you have made several trips back and forth. If only you had a bigger desk you could put everything you need out at once which is much faster than going back and forth each time. RAM is the desk and the book case is the hard drive(ROM). The more RAM you have the less you have to go search for more materials which makes your work faster. ",
"I'm going to take a different approach than the people who already posted.\n\nComputers have a CPU. CPU's follow instructions. Computer programmers write these instructions in a text editor in a human readable form. They then use a program called a \"compiler\" which changes human readable computer instructions into something the computer can under stand (which is numbers). The compiler also saves those numbers (list of instructions) to a hard disk as an executable file (a program).\n\nWhen a program is opened to be executed, the instructions in the executable file are copied from the hard disk into memory. So basically there is a list of instructions in memory now; each instruction is stored one after the other. The CPU then just goes down the list and performs each instruction.\n\nAt this point you're probably asking, \"why can't that be accomplished without RAM and just read the instructions from the hard drive?\". Well, that's theoretically possible, but it would be ridiculously slow (hard drives are mechanical; RAM is electrical). Also, I lied. The CPU doesn't \"simply\" go down a list of instructions. It does do that, until it's instructed to jump somewhere else in the instruction list. And this jumping around is the need for RAM...\n\nThere is a mechanical arm on hard disks that has to move back and forth to read data. This is a very slow process compared to RAM which has no moving parts. And it's even slower when the arm has to \"jump\" around (as opposed to reading files sequentially). So instead of having the CPU jump around reading stuff from the hard drive, the instructions are copied into memory, because RAM is much faster at Randomly Accessing data.\n\n\nedit: I know what your next question will be. \"well, don't you have to wait for the hard drive anyway when it loads into memory\". Yes you do... but consider that large amounts of the instructions will be repeated over and over again (but it only need to be read from the disk once)",
"Your processor is a desk and RAM is the amount of space on the desk you have to do work. More RAM = More space to do work without having to take each project off the desk to start a new one",
"You might find this useful too. _URL_0_\n\n\n^(Yeah, I know... I'm going to hell)",
"I've just started my road to the IT crew but ill try and explain it with my own words! :-) \n\nWhen the CPU is processing data is distributes this data down a front bus between the Northbridge and Southbridge chip set. We will only focus on the Northbridge chipset, as it deals with memory and storage. When the CPU processes data it needs quick storage, so it distributes the data to RAM through the Northbridge. This can be accomplished because the Northbridge runs at the same clock speed as the CPU in turn distributing data as fast as it receives it. The data from the Northbridge is then sent to RAM and stored while the data is relevant. The reason RAM is not a permanent source of storage is because it is DRAM which is dynamic RAM (I may have to edit for the correct name, the information on it is still the same however.) With DRAM the memory is only stored while they are supplied with power, once the computer is turned off it can no longer keep the data relevant and active inside the chips that are placed on the sticks of RAM. \n\nI hope I was able to help! I saw that you wanted a more technical explanation so I tryed to provide one! \n:-)",
"Rom is like a library. Theres tons of information if you know where to look. You are the processor, too fast to work at the slow speed of checking every book for the information you want. \n\nRam is the desk in the library where you put the books you want / need to read. The more ram you have, the bigger the table space.",
"Here's the most thorough explanation I can offer, with some other stuff thrown in. If I make a mistake feel free to comment and I'll edit I'm not an expert by any means, but I've take a few classes on computer architecture\n\n**What is RAM (conceptually):**\n\nRam is a form of memory. In a computer you typically have a hierarchy of memory depending on how physically close to the CPU you are. For illustration let's take a new processor, a Core i7 running at 3.5 GHz. One clock cycle happens in 277 pico seconds (1/3.5 GHz) . Speed of light being 3x10^8 m/s that means an electrical signal can travel .085m in once clock cycle (for anything on your computer to work, this can't be exceeded)\n\nThat gives you (very, very roughly) about this much space to travel in one clock cycle:\n\n < -------------------------------------------- > \n\nA memory heirarchy typically looks like this (I added a fairy typical cycle time comparison on a read to highlight the magnitudes of difference):\n\n* CPU -- > Registers (1-2 cycles) \n* Registers -- > L1 (level 1) cache (2-5 cycles) \n* L1 cache -- > L2 (level 2) cache (3 - 7 cycles) \n* L2 Cache -- > (so on pending how many caches you have) \n* Cache -- > RAM (~20 cycles) \n* Ram -- > Hard Drive (~ > 100 000 cycles, lower with an SSD)\n\nObviously, there is a massive gap in access times between the CPU and Hard Drive, which ram aims to reduce. Here's how it typically works:\n\nWhen your CPU needs a certain part of memory to do work on, it issues a read to a certain **address** of memory. The memory management unit then figures out whether or not that address line is in the cache. It propagates through the memory hierarchy, and if it is not in the RAM then it searches the Hard Drive.\n\nMost programs feature *spatial* and *temporal* locality. Spatial locality refers to the fact that instructions and data are usually near one another in an address space. This means when a block of (for example) instructions are in the cache, the next sequential instruction is usually close by. For example, the instruction at address 1000 is usually followed by the instruction at address 1001.\n\n*Temporal* locality refers to the fact that a program tends to spend most of its time in a small portion of code doing the same thing over and over again. This means that if we put most of the data that a program needs in the RAM our program will run a lot faster, as it needs to make less and less reads from the hard drive. If your RAM is used up by many processes it noticeably slows down your computer as more hard drive accesses must be made (this is usually referred to as *thrashing* which sounds cooler than it really is).\n\n**How does RAM *actually* work?**\n\nBasically think of a giant excel spreadsheet - each cell has some data in it as a series of ones and zeroes (represented by a voltage level). When you ask the ram for a certain cell (column 1, row 1 for example) the RAM controller connects the contents of that cell to the output pins of the RAM. This explains why you see CAS (Column Address Strobe) specs on RAM: this is the time it takes for the RAM controller to put the contents of a cell onto the output pins from the moment you ask for it (a strobe is essentially an 'enable' signal).\n\nTake a look at this :\n\n\n 2.5V\n |\n |--- Control Signal\n 0V\n\nThat is one bit of data in a ram cell. When the control signal is sent, the 2.5 volt point becomes 0V.\n\nThis is 1 bit of data. Now copy this picture over and over again into a giant array and you essentially have RAM. The control signal *writes* the data to the cell. It's also worth noting that the 2.5 volts is constantly leaking current to ground, so it slowly (with respect to the clock cycles) is tending towards 0. RAM needs to be *refreshed* to keep the voltage levels consistent. If a cell is at 0V, the refresh does nothing to it.\n\nIf you want any more info feel free to ask, I might add to this as time goes on. (As it stands it may not be at an ELI5 level...)\n\nEdit: Added to spatial/temporal locality Thanks andybmcc, also formatting\nEdit 2: expanded on some things",
"Think of it like this:\n\nYour a chef at a restaurant and to keep track of your orders, you have a whiteboard. You write down the order and the table it goes to on the whiteboard and you erase it when your done.",
"Simile: \nThe hard drive is like the filing cabinet. Its slow to locate what you need but stores a lot of stuff . The RAM is like the top of your desk not much space but everything is quick and easy to access. But everything needs to go back in the cabinet when you are done so you can use your desk for other files.",
"I heard it explained like a library once. Imagine your hard drive as the entire library of books. If you needed 1,000 of those books, you'd need a cart to carry them all out the door. \n\nThe size of your RAM is like the size of that cart. \n\n528mb of RAM will get you 100 books at a time. So it would take 10 trips to get the books you need. \n1GB of RAM would get 200 hundred books and only take 5 trips.\n4GB would handle 600 and only take 1.5 trips etc. etc. \n\nRAM = throughput to the CPU. It takes data from the hard drive and makes it readily available to the CPU. The more it can hold, the CPU can access quickly. If we're talking about a gaming, the more RAM you have, the more data can be processed quickly, so more characters, more enemies, more textures, etc.\n\nThis example would make a lot more sense if people knew what libraries were :(",
"The way I like to think about it is suppose you have a giant box of parts and are trying to make something. The box of parts in the HD, the CPU is you. You take parts out of the box (HD) and place them on the table (RAM). You pick up parts from the table(RAM) with your hands (internal cache) and assemble.",
"The way it was explained to me is that your hard drive is like your refrigerator, and your RAM is your counter. You don't have enough room on your counter for everything in your refrigerator, but when you need to use stuff from your refrigerator it's much faster to do so from your counter. So you computer will take the bits of information that it is likely to need in the next few minutes and store them on your RAM to be used more quickly. It is essentially like others have said. It's a way to use information more quickly. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://downloadmoreram.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4zwnbo
|
At what point in history did the average person have access to clocks?
|
I know that ends up being more vague than it seems, but like, a fairly "modern" clock with two 'hands' and all (or similar, if there are other historically used methods of telling time I'm not aware of).
And by "Have access to" I mean that the average person could reach a clock within 5 minutes or so of where they were or lived. But I'd take really any info on the subject I'm curious. They seem like such a basic thing but it seems like even 150 or so so years ago they would be the most intricate thing in most homes.
|
AskHistorians
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4zwnbo/at_what_point_in_history_did_the_average_person/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d700ie3"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"There are a couple ways to talk about this topic. One is a straightforward survey, such that is is possible, of what I guess I'd call clock density. I'm not sure such a precise study exists, but we do know that in the 14th and 15th centuries mechanical clocks started to be more present in Europe. Certainly by the 18th century they were becoming far more common, but I really don't have any idea how I'd measure how many people could find a clock within 5 minutes of their home.\n\nThe other way to approach this question is at what point in history did *measuring time precisely* start to be something the average person either did or had to care about. This is an interesting question and is largely tied to economic life. There is some good work on this topic. It's a topic that has interested historians since at least the 1960s, which has a lot to do with the rise of interest in social history.\n\nE.P Thompson's work is probably the standard on this topic and is definitely a classic. His article \"Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism\" published in *Past & Present* No. 38 (Dec. 1967) 56-97. Thompson contrasts a notion of time that revolves around time-of-day dependent work with the more rigidly scheduled work of industrial capitalism as it arose in the 19th century. Thompson calls this \"task-orientation\" and he says it has 3 key features:\n\n > \"First, there is a sense that it is more humanely comprehensible than timed labor. The peasant or laborer appears to attend upon what is observed necessity. Second, a community in which task-orientation is common appears to show least demarcation between \"work\" and \"life.\" Social intercourse and labor are intermingled - the working-day lengthens and contracts according to the task - and there is no great tension between work and 'passing the time of day.' Third, to men accustomed to labor timed by the clock, this attitude appears wasteful and lacking in urgency.\" (60)\n\nOf course, there is a relationship between \"labor timed by the clock\" and the actually presence of clocks in peoples' lives is relevant here, but the relevant location there is not the clock at home, but rather the clock at work. This is due to another observation that Thompson makes: \"Those who are employed experience a distinction between their employer's time and and their 'own' time. And the employer must use the time of his labour, and see it is not wasted: not that task but the value of time when reduced to money is dominant.\" (61). With that relationship in mind, clocks dominated and structured time in the context of early industrial capitalism precisely because of the needs of employers hiring laborers in a capitalist system. Insofar as time spent at home was less \"valuable\" when reduced to money, clocks were less relevant even when present. Thompson admits the difficulty in tracking the spread and prevalence of clocks, but notes that their spread did increase not just incidentally alongside labor under industrial capitalism. Clocks were needed to enforce labor-discipline and Thompson argues that this was not merely an artifact of a particular historical moment but actually changed peoples' relationship to time. \"In all these ways\" he argues \"by the division of labor; the supervision of labor; fines; bells and clocks; money incentives; preachings and schoolings; the suppression of fairs and sports - new labor habits were formed and a new time-discipline was imposed.\" (90).\n\nNotice here that Thompson argues that new *habits* were formed. This transcended the imposition of employers and bosses and actually changed the way people habitually related to time. Consider how you yourself consider time - it is not merely the presence of clocks that makes pay attention to it. Indeed, you might even feel apprehensive when you're not near a clock, watch, cellphone or the like because you don't know what time it is. You might feel this even when you have no particular reason to need to know the time right at that moment. \n\nOf course, this is all very classic Marxian analysis for which Thompson is known and is a great example of why historical theory helps shape analysis for people who are interested in that kind of thing. According to Thompson have the material, economic conditions of life influence society, culture and habits in the population. This kind of historical materialism is central to Marxian analysis and this is a case where that theory really shows its worth. Perhaps in what appears a bit too on-the-nose, in light of my comments, Thompson ends the article thus:\n\n > For there is no such thing as economic growth which is not, at the same time, growth or change of a culture; and the growth of social consciousness, like the growth of a poet's mind, can never, in the last analysis, be planned.\" (97)\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
f5iclc
|
why does bacteria in our mouth become harmful to our teeth, while bacteria inside our body is usually kept in check and co-exists within us?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f5iclc/eli5_why_does_bacteria_in_our_mouth_become/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhz02nj",
"fhz0bv6",
"fhz8b6q",
"fhzgxd7",
"fi1wnt1"
],
"score": [
71,
12,
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"When bacteria in the mouth eat food they poop acid. That acid mixes with food and saliva to make 'plaque'. The plaque sticks to your teeth. The acid in the plaque dissolves the surface of your tooth (enamel), creating holes (cavities).",
"It's the foods we eat. All the sugar. Our ancestors ate the diet we evolved to eat and it was much nicer on the teeth.",
"Strep Mutans is a specific bacteria that has evolved the ability to infect tooth structure. It converts carbs into acid that dissolve tooth structure.... as they destroy the tooth they create their own microenvironment to thrive in. There are hundreds of other bacteria in your mouth that are harmless. Kind of like most of the bacteria in your gut is helpful but Salmonella will make you sick.",
"Because our modern diets are particularly bacteria friendly. Refined sugars stick to the teeth and are easy for bacteria to consume.\n\nIt's only in the last couple of centuries that sugar's become so available, so we're not evolved to deal with it at all.",
"Dentist here so you’re in my wheelhouse. The top commenter did a solid job of an ELI5 but I’m going to make a couple of additions. The acids produced by the bacteria in our mouths are indeed what dissolve our teeth and create “cavities”. The bacteria eat and break down carbohydrates - chips, crackers, candy, soda, Gatorade, energy drinks, fruit juice, etc. Everytime the bacteria are given food, they eat and produce their acidic byproducts, usually lasting 20-60min after the last bite/drink. This drops the pH balance of our mouths, which usually hovers around neutral (neither acidic nor basic). Upon constant replenishing of bacterial food products with each bite or sip, the acid eventually builds up enough that our saliva (which protects our teeth) gets overpowered and the pH drops past 5.5, THIS is when demineralization (decay) begins, and will continue UNTIL the pH is brought back above 5.5. \n\nThis is why constant snacking/sipping sugary foods and beverages is so bad for our teeth - the bacteria are in a constant state of nutrient intake and acid production which then leads to extended periods of low pH and subsequent tooth decay."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2mubez
|
why are juggalos so hated on reddit (and in general), when female prostitution is viewed as for the most part completely acceptable?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mubez/eli5_why_are_juggalos_so_hated_on_reddit_and_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm7nn95",
"cm7ns1r",
"cm7o4v5",
"cm7oiov",
"cm7oxv2",
"cm7p3sr",
"cm7p7fk",
"cm7pb5t",
"cm7pe11",
"cm7ph1h",
"cm7ppt1",
"cm7ps3h",
"cm7pzm3",
"cm7pzu7",
"cm7q01v",
"cm7q5j9",
"cm7q6ei",
"cm7q6ss",
"cm7q7cz",
"cm7q7s5",
"cm7q8i3",
"cm7qayv",
"cm7qbf9",
"cm7qbn0",
"cm7qca9",
"cm7qco1",
"cm7qd2a",
"cm7qd77",
"cm7qdbj",
"cm7qdpn",
"cm7qdqm",
"cm7qevw",
"cm7qfb0",
"cm7qggf",
"cm7qggm",
"cm7qikv",
"cm7qitr",
"cm7qk94",
"cm7qljo",
"cm7qs09",
"cm7qt5j",
"cm7qt60",
"cm7qtk7",
"cm7qud8",
"cm7qut5",
"cm7qv8f",
"cm7qvlu",
"cm7qw8q",
"cm7qx3s",
"cm7qyqq",
"cm7r0bb",
"cm7r3lj",
"cm7r4nc",
"cm7r4qa",
"cm7r5pz",
"cm7r5r9",
"cm7r63y",
"cm7r70w",
"cm7r8xv",
"cm7r92d",
"cm7rdt5",
"cm7rf9s",
"cm7rfgd",
"cm7rg3y",
"cm7rgr8",
"cm7rh2b",
"cm7rioy",
"cm7rj9n",
"cm7rjb5",
"cm7rl2m",
"cm7rm5n",
"cm7rn86",
"cm7rneo",
"cm7rnip",
"cm7rol0",
"cm7ropk",
"cm7rpgj",
"cm7rq2w",
"cm7rrf3",
"cm7rrg4",
"cm7rrpu",
"cm7ry8m",
"cm7s5jv",
"cm7sr98",
"cm7tx6n",
"cm7xmqv",
"cm7y26t"
],
"score": [
3634,
566,
67,
1109,
482,
19,
119,
160,
47,
52,
3,
7,
3,
5,
143,
3,
126,
4,
49,
3,
113,
4,
3,
33,
13,
2,
3,
2,
7,
2,
3,
2,
6,
4,
8,
2,
46,
2,
2,
9,
3,
2,
5,
7,
5,
3,
2,
6,
6,
2,
2,
4,
8,
2,
2,
2,
52,
7,
2,
2,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
13,
4,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Juggalo != gigolo.\n\nHeck, I really have no idea whether male prostitutes even *like* Insane Clown Posse as a group. Anything's possible, I suppose.",
"I'd much rather hang out with a prostitute rather than a juggalo.",
"I'm going with \"Deuce Buggalo\" as my juggalo pseudonym from now on. ",
"A Juggalo is a member of the fan group for the \"band\" the Insane Clown Posse. They are typically hated due to their general habits of being annoying and \"whooping\". Additionally they can be violent with a subculture which encourages aggression. A gigolo on the other hand, is a male prostitute or escort and as far as I know, they garner no hate from Reddit. ",
"So if a prostitute is also a Juggalette, does that make her snatch insane clown pussy?",
"My reaction to this question was something like, but...how is that...those two things aren't....ohhahahahaha.",
"Rob Schneider was an animal. Then he was a woman. And now, Rob Schneider is -- a Juggalo! And he's about to find out -- that being a Juggalo -- is harder than it looks! Rob Schneider is -- Deuce Bigalow - Male Juggalo! Rated PG-13.\" ",
"Oy, I think you might have some terminology confused. Gigolos are the dudes who put their dicks in people for money. Juggalos, the ones that most of Reddit hates, are weirdos who like a group called the Insane Clown Posse and wear makeup and stuff to look like the ICP. They are an interesting mix of trashy and scary. They look like [this](_URL_1_) [this](_URL_2_) and my personal favorite, [this](_URL_0_)",
"Water, Fire, Air and Dirt...\n\nFUCKING MAGNETS. HOW DO THEY WORK?!",
"A wild JUGGALOS appeared!\n\nWhat will BRAIN ANUS RHYTHM do?",
"Prostitution is viewed as acceptable??? News to me!",
"You are not being serious? Belongs is /r/shittyexplainlikeim5 ",
"these are juggalo's: _URL_0_\n\n^ interesting documentary if you've never seen it, only 22 minutes long.",
"\"I totally did not spell Gigolo wrong to jump on the recent 'funny misspells' karma train.\"",
"Upvoted just to make sure you never live this down",
"And while you're at it…who the hell is Billy?",
"I don't think anybody would pay to sleep with a Juggalo. In fact, I'm pretty sure Juggalos get an increased rate when paying for prostitutes.\n\nPS. This post was the highlight of my day",
"I was trying to figure out the connection, then wondered if it was some /r/metacanada or /r/badphilosophy in joke I'd missed, then the page of comments finally loaded and /u/APRSNerd cleared up my confusion. ",
"Prostitites have higher morals. And probably have a higher level of education... And more teeth. And better hygiene. ",
"It was like...\"did they mean?...\" ",
"I thought this was /r/circlejerk for a second. ",
"Prostitutes are just women trying to make money. Juggalos are the trash of the trash and offer little to nothing to society.",
"Because Juggalos are fucking assholes and prostitutes get their assholes fucked.",
"This is the best thing I have ever read on reddit.\n\n",
"Juggalos as male prostitutes... damn, there's a mental image I do not want.",
"I would think the common prostitute wouldn't just call magnets magic if they didn't know how magnets worked.",
"While we're on the subject: Magnets man, how do they work?",
"My life goal has changed to get paid for sex in clown makeup. ",
"Oh my thank you for this. Seriously don't feel stupid!!! [You're one of the lucky 10,000!]( _URL_0_) I wish I was you. ",
"holy shit, this is probably the greatest moment i've had on reddit.",
"It took me a bit to figure out how you connected those two, but then I laughed.",
"A juggalo is the equivalent of a gigolo. Think of emu kids wearing clown paint. It's very dramatic. ",
"Attempts to spark gender equality debate, ends up being the guy that doesn't know what jiggly ball is. ",
"Cuz most women wouldn't have sex with the average redditor let alone pay for it and that piss them off. Now most women wouldn't have sex with anyone into ICP cuz do you know how hard it is to get out the Faygo stains? ",
"Ladies and gentlemen, we may have this sub's top post of all time on our hands.",
"I like Juggalos.\n\nI love that I live in a world where somewhere out there are cops who have to deal with unruly criminal clowns. They're basically living lives produced by Tim Burton, and I think that's awesome. ",
"This is too good to be true. If I had ever once seen a post about a gigolo on reddit, then mayyyyybe I'd believe it was an honest mistake.",
"I\"m having trouble figuring out any line that would connect those two things....It's like....I dunno, what's the difference between a duck? ",
"Fuckin magnets, how do they work?",
"Reddit, where a simple typo is the difference between a deep, meaningful conversation and a hilarious shitstorm. ",
"Because juggalos are filthy annoying retards, whereas a prostitute is a woman that loves you no matter who you are or what you look like?",
"I think this was meant to be posted in r/shittyadvice",
"I was so confused. Initially coming here to say \"what the fuck do juggalo's and female prostitution have to do with each other?\" And then I laughed. ",
"Juggalos represent everything Idiocracy warned us about. \n\nHookers pretty much just want to do business behind closed doors. ",
"I only came here to bash on juggalos. \nIm very disappointed now",
"I'm just going to assume this title was mistaken on purpose to garner karma.",
"We're intimidated by their mystery and magnetism.",
"I was under the impression that female prostitution is hardly viewed as acceptable by most.",
"Holy fucking shit I'm dying. If this doesn't become the top post of all time on this sub I'll pissed.",
"Whelp. this is unintentionally the best ELI5 question i can ever remember.",
"I know 5 girls into ICP. 3 of them have uncurable STDS. ",
"Oh man, I was really confused until I started reading the comments. Yeah, definitely two very different things... bless your heart.",
"I'm going to go with most of the commenters in saying that juggalos are not gigolos. You were probably thinking of gigolos. I don't know about everyone thinking prostitution of either gender is completely acceptable- that's a pretty sticky subject.\n\nHowever, if I am to go by your original question, the short answer is, no one wants to be fucked by a clown let alone someone who are fans of clowns.",
"Best ELI5 question I've ever read, especially picturing it asked by a 5-year-old.",
"wow. just wow. I can't believe this thread exists",
"“Yeah, good one Jerry, 2003 called, it wants its easy target back”\n-Rick",
"A prostitute *might* give you syphilis, a juggalo **will** give you syphilis.",
"Prostitution is simply a transaction between consenting adults. Juggalos are ass-clowns who can't figure out magnets. ",
"Hey, I'm down with the clown and I'm down for life",
"Is this a serious question?",
"not as top tier as anal rhythm, but up there. ",
"this is the greatest reddit post of all time. OP is either a genius, or the complete opposite of a genius but this is the greatest thing i've ever seen on reddit.\n",
"OP has been thinking we were talking about male prostitutes all these years. Too funny.",
"This man needs as much gold as he can get. GET ON IT, REDDIT!",
"the fuck does ICP have to do with hookers? *opens comments* ohhhhh, nvm...",
"I need you to watch this, you will understand.\n_URL_0_",
"The correct answer is male prostitutes are hated for not understand how a magnet works.",
"This is my favourite question because it's legitimately the kind of thing a five year old might ask.",
"Why are KKK members so hated in the world, when potatoes lack so much flavour? ",
"There's logic in being a prostitute. Not so much in being a Juggalo...",
"Someone else mooching on the successful of \"ignorance\" on reddit.\n\nfake zzzzzzzzzzzzz",
"Lol, that is a question a 5 year old would ask",
"Thank you OP for this, even if it's a troll. I needed a laugh and I had many from this thread.",
"OP's username doesnt match, not so wise now are you?",
"Posts like this are why I check Reddit before bed.",
"Also, why can't they give birth to puppies?",
"Apparently, there is an /r/juggalo. Prepare for cringe.",
"\"I'm just a juggalo and everywhere I go, people know the part I'm playin'\nPaid for every dance, selling each romance, every night some heart betrayin'...\"",
"Since your question is based on, [by your own admission](_URL_0_), a misunderstanding of what the term \"juggalo\" refers to, there's nothing here to actually be explained in simplified terms, and thus your post has been removed.",
"Yes, and why do rainbows appear in the sky when we all know Ebola is generally accepted as being really really bad?",
"New spin on an old film: Deuce Biggalow Male Juggalo. Seems legit.",
"*And when the end comes I know \nThey'll say 'just a juggalo' \n[Life goes on without me](_URL_0_)* \n\n * < :o) 'cause...\n",
"oh yeea gigalo juggalo in jeggings, this is where this goes \n_URL_0_",
"The gathering of the Juggalos is just a male prostitute convention...",
"\"What's with male prostitutes and faygo?\"...",
"Apparently this is a common mistake according to [wiki](_URL_0_) \"Not to be confused with gigolo\"",
"Is female prostitution viewed for the most part as completely acceptable?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://2.images.tosh.comedycentral.com/blog/2013/11/JuggaloMom.jpg",
"http://blogs.villagevoice.com/music/image/gotj-friday-320%20copy.JPG",
"http://www.metalinjection.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/juggalos.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://vimeo.com/29589320"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://xkcd.com/1053/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulGaxBPk2jI&index=9&list=FLVxMfP1U-zJP88xu2OthMGg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mubez/eli5_why_are_juggalos_so_hated_on_reddit_and_in/cm7qlit"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDkLSjsiqlM"
],
[
"http://rigel496.deviantart.com/art/20141119-222507-1-495521912?ga_submit_new=10%253A1416465669"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juggalo"
],
[]
] |
||
2oj3nk
|
in golf/baseball/hockey, why does a follow through matter? since the ball has already made contact with the club/bat, why does it matter if the swing is continued or not?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oj3nk/eli5_in_golfbaseballhockey_why_does_a_follow/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmnm7ta",
"cmnm8p5",
"cmnmuv9"
],
"score": [
14,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"The advice is not given out as a way of influencing the ball after it's lost contact with the bat/stick/etc.\n\nThe advice is a way of mentally and physiologically improving the motion of the swing while it is still in contact.\n\nI'm not a psychologist or kinesiologist, but I would guess that mentally if you prepare and train to swing a bat, planning to simply stop the swing at the moment of contact, you probably get a very different swing than if you prepare for and train to perform a full through swing.",
"I can speak for baseball, but my guess is the same applies to the others. Basically, its not about the follow-through per-se. It is about creating a strong, fluid, constant motion to maximize the amount of force transferred from the bat to the ball. \n\nIf do not want to read, feel free to watch [this](_URL_0_)\n\nIf you try to stop the bat at the point of contact with the ball, the bat will have no velocity to transfer to the ball. In essence, that is what a bunt is: giving a (relatively) stationary target for the ball to hit. Balls do not go far on a bunt. \n\nAnd since a baseball game consisting entirely of bunts would probably be boring, we encourage hitters to swing hard and fluidly. For hitting balls hard, the speed of the bat when it makes contact with the ball is the most important thing. \n\nAlso, much of the power in a baseball hitter's swing comes from torsion in the body; from the hammys and quads through your abs and up to the pecs/shoulders. The best hitters can time the unleash of their swing to make contact with the ball when the bat is travelling fastest (and therefore hit the ball harder and farther). \n\nFor golf, the formula changes a bit, as the ball is stationary. But golf also has to include the shape of the club. I have nowhere near enough knowledge about the different clubs to explain how the different heads matter. Same for hockey--though I imagine the cylinder-shape of the puck changes the dynamic a bit too. \n\nHope this helps! \n\n",
"It is to ensure the athlete doesn't try to let up on they swing before contact is made.\n\nAn athlete worried about trying to stop their swing isn't going to hit the ball with full power."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9CEuJ5e2cM"
],
[]
] |
||
4hbm4t
|
when did female breasts become a body part of sexual nature and why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hbm4t/eli5_when_did_female_breasts_become_a_body_part/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2oujz5",
"d2ounci",
"d2oyu0l",
"d2oyvve",
"d2ozaoc",
"d2ozfh5",
"d2ozoqv",
"d2p0hjr",
"d2p10tn",
"d2p17vd",
"d2p1zxc",
"d2p2968",
"d2p29vv",
"d2p2l4x",
"d2p32hj",
"d2p38nv",
"d2p3b1c",
"d2p3j66",
"d2p3lbi",
"d2p47u8"
],
"score": [
102,
82,
57,
2436,
335,
8,
2,
14,
3,
6,
15,
94,
3,
2,
12,
2,
11,
2,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"There's a theory that suggests breasts were evolved to attract male mates since they're jiggly and eye catching. Females with breasts could have just as easily had large flat male-like nipples for milk production since the fat in the breast does nothing but add mass. Some women with small breast sizes already do, and it doesn't make a difference for breast feeding.",
"Tens of thousands of years ago, as otherwise women would not have the large breasts that they do today. It is called sexual selection, human males seemed to have preferred larger breasts over smaller ones, and over time because of this, they selected to mate with females with larger breasts over those with smaller breasts. There is really no other benefit or evolutionary explanation for such large breasts. History seems to also agree with this in that we found figurines thousands of years old with hypersexualized breasts. As for why, this isn't really known, could be a mutation in DNA as the idea of breasts being sexual has lasted for so long, meaning it could be found in DNA most likely.",
"It's pretty well observed that gender specific traits are used to signal to potential mates when we are able to breed. Same answer as to why women will find facial hair and broad shoulders attractive on men. Women develop round fatty tissue in the hips and chest. Though these traits have no bearing on an individual's ability to create healthy offspring, they do appear after puberty and as such are signs of sexual maturity.",
"One theory I've heard is that it is related to human's and human ancestors walking upright.\n\nOther male primates walk on all fours, are visually stimulated by the female's round posterior, and generally copulate in the doggystyle postion.\n\nBut, since humans walk upright and can copulate in the missionary position, the breasts evolved to be enlarged and provide visual stimulation similar to that of the posterior.\n\nAnother thing is, breasts, especially bigger ones, are an obvious sign of fertility. Prepubescent (infertile) girls don't have them, and elderly women (infertile) have saggy ones. Big full natural breasts = fertility.",
"I believe on a Joe Rogan Podcast with the great Dr. Christopher Ryan (Sex Anthropologist) he talked about it being related to the idea that visually whenever you see large breasts, you imagine they'd be a great mother to your children and could feed them adequately. \n\nThen over the years as food became less and less of an issue, this sort of stayed along.\n\nBut lets be real, straight men, gay men and women and babies all love titties. ",
"Does anyone know when the because sexualized in society though? This may apply for all \"private parts\", but when did men and women start covering up? And adding to that, when and why did female breast become sexualized when men's didnt?",
"Desmond Morris is a zoologist who has written books about the evolution of human sexuality. You should read some if his stuff, it's quite interesting. ",
"I'm going to disagree with all the evolutionary explanations others have suggested.\nI think it is just down to the simple fact that in society today, women always keep their breasts hidden unless they are naked, so we associate them with sex, and are therefore attracted to them.\nIn some tribes women have their breasts constantly exposed and are not a body part of sexual nature.",
"I've always seen it coincide with our hiding of them? We made them taboo and now we long to see them. It's just a theory but does anyone know if African tribes that walk around topless have this same sexualization of breasts?",
"I don't really buy into the theory that there was a time when they weren't. You can read the Kama Sutra if you wanna know how much ancient dead people liked titties.\n\nI'm no evo psych expert and I don't claim to know a damn thing, but it seems sensible to me that one of the defining traits of a female body would be valued by men. Sexual dimorphism has a purpose in signalling proper hormone development. Breasts are a signal that a woman is indeed a woman, not a male or a girl. Not only that, women require a higher percentage of body fat than men to be healthy and fertile. Low body fat can be a result of famine, stress, injury, eating disorders, parasites, and a host of other things. So not only is there too little fat to support a baby, there is likely a reason there is too little fat which will also injure the parents or the baby in some other way.\n\nThe argument that they are sexualized because they are taboo or hidden isn't quite accurate either. Women's backs are usually hidden. While people may recognize the shape of a woman's back or her complexion as attractive or even sexy, it's not a sexualized area like breasts or genitals. Armpits, thighs, feet are usually hidden. An attraction to any of those would be so rare that it would be considered a specific fetish.\n___________________________________________________\nThis part is more my opinion. I think it's a pointless argument feminists use to support a goal. There's nothing wrong with the goal, but appeals to nature like this are only attempts to circumvent political argument rather than actual scientific conclusions. Another example is homosexuality. Homosexuals and heterosexuals should absolutely have equal rights in society. But the argument which is often used to support that--that sexuality is defined at birth--is only half true and leads to some unfortunate side effects including identity issues and bi erasure. We can have an egalitarian society by using political arguments. We don't need to use hastily-prepared and inaccurate appeals to nature to do that.",
"I once read it as we evolved round, full breasts because of the shape of our faces. Other primates have mouths that stick out significantly farther than that of humans, especially in babies. [Here](_URL_2_) is an orangutan profile vs a [human baby](_URL_1_). \n\nNotice how close the mouth an nose are on a human. For other primates, flat-chested females aren't a problem because the nose and mouth are far apart, but for humans, a flat chest could mean suffocation for a baby. But with a round breast, a baby can feed without its nose being squashed against something. [See here--nsfw](_URL_0_). \n\nNow, if a female could possibly suffocate offspring trying to feed it, either her baby will die or be malnourished, neither of which are desirable from an evolutionary standpoint. So, a female with round breasts can feed a baby successfully and therefore appears more fertile. \n\ntl;dr round breasts keep our flat-faced babies from suffocating",
"There are a lot of unsupported claims here. OP you would be better off going to a sub like /r/AskHistorians or /r/askscience for more factually supported arguments. Also there are more stances besides evolutionary ones, mostly because throughout history many non-western societies did not see female breasts as sexually enticing.",
"I always thought it had something to do with babies- human babies mouths are in, don't stick past their nose so the breast is out far enough for them to be able to suck. Monkey mouths are farther out than their nose, and don't need that extra help. ",
"Bigger breast generally implies having more body fat which equals to a higher chance of survival in times of famine, and therefore males attracted to big breasts had a higher chance of transmitting their genes to the next generation.",
"Unlike what many are saying in this thread, the shape and size of breasts do signal reproductive health. They are deposits of gynoid fat, which is a reflection of developmental stability, lack of parasites, and abundance of nutrition. Gynoid fat is not like the fat that men get, because it tends to only be mobilized during pregnancy and nursing, relating directly to the formation and development of the infant's brain. All humans have psychological adaptations to notice and respond to (in different ways) gynoid fat, which is reflected in the waist-to-hip ratio as well as the shape of breasts. \n\n_URL_0_",
"Going by the majority of answers I would have to say that the \"When\" you are looking for pre-dates homo-sapiens, and thus is poorly documented. \n\nWe were probably motor-boating long before our shrinking jowls allowed us to kiss.",
"Don't forget, a huge part of the stigma/arousal is social. In many parts of the world and places in time, folks wouldn't bat an eye at a bare breast. I've read that in imperial China a woman would have covered her bare feet before considering covering her breasts if a stranger walked in on her. Culture counts for a lot.",
"It has to do with the social development as well as different cultures views on sexuality and woman's body parts. Some places see the naked female breast and female body parts as something that shouldn't be hidden. Covering up woman's body parts in western media only makes a stronger stigma against publically showing the female breast or body parts. ",
"I Asked my anthropology professor about this topic and she told me they're not biologically sexually arousing: if you look at other cultures around the world, female breasts are not sexually arousing to the population and breasts are viewed the same way we view elbows when talking about something sexually arousing.\n\n\nWestern culture has sexualized female breasts and it is so widespread in our culture that we view it as a biological norm; which it is not.",
"Hm, well just so you know, in a lot of parts of the world, breasts aren't sexual. It's a primarily 'westernized' thing to see them as sexual. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_nBstVBcTkU/maxresdefault.jpg",
"http://blog.kozzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/kozzi-Baby_profile-3167x2207.jpg",
"https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSr6DO6LchEOeMOBMLY-I8DrGYkDOcg-w3BQSvaR4HFMI5sDu8q3A"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynoid_fat_distribution#Reproductive_function"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ezr6a
|
Was the War of the World's broadcast the first instance of an entire nation being trolled? Have there been other similar events?
|
AskHistorians
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3ezr6a/was_the_war_of_the_worlds_broadcast_the_first/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctk3o15",
"ctk5551",
"ctk9lue",
"ctkkx69"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Here are some precedents you may find interesting:\n\nIn the 12th century, legends began to promulgate throughout Christian Europe of a figure named \"Prestor John\", rumored to be the ruler of a rich and powerful kingdom in \"the East\" (at first, legend places him somewhere in India -- specifically the Three Indies -- but over time, his location would shift to various other favored exotic places which reappear in the Medieval imagination, such as Ethiopia). \n\nAround 1165, a forged letter began to circulate Europe, purportedly from Prestor John himself. The crux of the letter centered around the fact that a remnant Nestorian Christian kingdom was holding out in the East, at the head of which was this Prestor John, and that he wished to vanquish the enemies of Christ. This was VERY popular in Europe at the time, the more recent Crusades not having gone well, and the letter with its surrounding legend \"went viral\" over the continent. Pope Alexander III attempted to make contact. Marco Polo discusses him in depth.\n\nIn 1862, Mark Twain fabricated a story wherein he claimed a petrified man had been discovered preserved in the side of a cliff. The story caused a sensation, and the small town where this petrified man was supposedly located was flooded with inquiries. Twain had reported in great detail the exact positions of limbs:\n\n > “the right thumb rested against the side of the nose; the left thumb partially supported the chin, the fore-finger pressed the inner corner of the left eye, drawing it partly open; the right eye was closed, and the fingers of the right hand spread apart.”\n\nA careful reading would have revealed that this unearthed man was literally \"thumbing his nose\" at his credulous readers.\n\nMark Twain was a bit of a \"troll\" in his day: he would also fabricate the story of the Empire City Massacre, wherein a man, losing everything in a bad investment, committed a murder/suicide on his wife and seven children. Twain wrote the piece in protest of contemporary bad business practices. \n\nIn June, 1899, newspapers across the US ran a story about American businessmen vying with one another for the right to tear down the Great Wall of China for the purpose of using its stone to build roads. However, this turned out to be a hoax, perpetrated by four Denver newspapermen who had deadlines due and no stories to fill them. The story caught on, and in days even the New York Times succumbed to the hoax, running this headline: \"WILL CHINA'S WALL COME DOWN?\" As various newspapers across the country picked up the story, the occasional embellishment would find its way in. In the end, this hoax would spawn a daughter-hoax: that of news of the Great Wall Hoax made its way to China and wound up being responsible for a popular uprising that would be known as the Boxer Rebellion. \n\n[Source](_URL_0_)",
"An early and enormous example is the bat men of the moon hoax perpetrated by the New York Sun in August 1835. In a series of six articles written by Richard Locke, the New York Sun saw a dramatic increase in its circulation. These articles decribed a large telescope, which used a new scientific principal. It also described the large cities and curious bat men that lived on the moon. The intention was not to frighten the people of New York with an imminent attack from the moon. More than half of the readers of the New York Sun did not believe the story anyway. After just six instalments of this series, the New York Sun revealed it was a hoax, yet it continued to maintain its increased circulation. \nSource: \"The Sun and the Moon: The Remarkable Account of Hoaxers, Showmen, Dueling Journalists and Lunar Man-bats in Nineteenth Century New York City.\" by Matthew Goodman (2008) ",
"Is it even true that the entire nation was hoaxed? Wasn't the panic itself exaggerated by the press?",
"Add to these the Piltdown man, the fake pre-historic man found in England (it was carved stone), the fake diaries of Adolf Hitler and the fake biography of Howard Hughes--all of which were believed by a fairly large number of people."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=I57PTFyjyqgC&pg=PA110&dq=great+wall+of+china+hoax+1899&hl=en&sa=X&ei=h639UrnhEs2TkQWKsYGgBQ#v=onepage&q=great%20wall%20of%20china%20hoax%201899&f=false"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ar3yji
|
why can't you get an electrical shock from the neutral
|
You can get a shock from the hot wire (obviously) but even if there's a load on the circuit, I was told that you won't get shocked by the neutral because it's basically the same as the ground. The purpose of the neutral is to complete the circuit, but I don't understand what happens to the electricity after it passes through the load.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ar3yji/eli5_why_cant_you_get_an_electrical_shock_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egkmlrm",
"egkmx2j",
"egksrlu",
"egl870k",
"egld4j8"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In a balanced 3 phase system, neutral should carry little to no current. Ground is actually fail safe. Ground is there in case the equipment becomes electrically charged. It will discharge to ground through the conductor, instead of you.\n\nIn an unbalanced system, neutral will carry a current, and could shock you. ",
"As someone who regularly wires things up while they are hot saying the word “can’t “ is a problem. Will you get lit up like you would with the hot, probably not. Will you get a little tickle, maybe. It happens more than you think due to leaky appliances and some fixtures. It’s this imperfect world that caused the building codes to split the neutral and ground at the disconnecting means and later to require arc fault in some instances. \n\nRemember voltage is the potential to do work and most neutral wires will have a few to up to 15 bolts on it. As long as your body completes the circuit it’s possible to get shocked. \n\nIn other words I wouldn’t use my tongue to try it out.",
"You need to think of voltage *differences*. Voltage itself doesn't move charge, voltage differences do. It's the same way air pressure moves air: you need a high pressure place next to a low pressure place in order to move air. A balloon under pressure doesn't move any air until you puncture it and let high pressure come in contact with low pressure. \n\nNeutral is 0 V relative to you. Same as touching the door of your breaker box. Then you have another wire at +110 V in the US and another at -110 V.\n\nWire a 110 to a neutral? That's a 110 V difference. There's a wall outlet for you. Wire a +110 to a -110? Congratulations you've got a 220V outlet for your clothes dryer.\n\nNeutral is just the same voltage as you and the ground and the wall and the air and the ham sandwich. Unless equipment fails. ",
"The circuit is still complete, the electricity is still moving. Neutral though is your baseline zero volts. If the voltage drop happens over the load, and you touch the neutral line then you still are putting yourself in parallel with the circuit. However, your resistance is way higher than that of the cable connecting the load to neutral so there will be no current flow through you. Google resisters in parallel for more. Electricity takes the path of least resistance, and in this case that's not you.\n\nIf someone then cuts the neutral cord at the socket, you'd now be in series with the load, and bad luck as now to complete the circuit the electricity has to flow through you, at that point you become an unhappy resister in series.",
" > what happens to the electricity after it passes through the load \n\nLook at it this way. You have a \"hot\" wire which has the voltage (ie energy) and a return wire often called the neutral. According to Kirchoff's Second Law all voltage in a circuit is \"dropped\" across all the loads. So for example you might have 110 volts going into a load but there will be zero volts coming out, ie flowing back on the neutral. The same amount of current (amps) is flowing on both wires ( Kirchoff's First Law) but there is zero voltage on the neutral. So you don't get shocked with zero volts."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cp2ry3
|
how do passwords work. specifically passwords to unlock devices such as smartphones or laptops
|
Just to make it simpler to explain how do iPhones(if this isn’t publicly known then any computing device is fine the iPhone is just an example) know which password is correct and unencrypt your data for access without having what your password is stored to be checked against. If your smart device does have a stored copy of your password for checking how does it keep it hidden from people who would try to gain access to the phone. If this is too complex to be explained easily are their any resources you can point to that do explain it. Thanks in advance!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cp2ry3/eli5_how_do_passwords_work_specifically_passwords/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ewmtiud",
"ewmtxxv",
"ewmu75j",
"ewmv1dh"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"A iphone have a [Secure\\_Enclave](_URL_0_) that is a dedicated hardware for the password/fingerprint. It is not accessible to the general CPU except for calls that send it the passcode/fingerprint to it to unlock the system or conferme that it is correct. It also manage the part that encrypt the storage and send it the key. It is all built in a way so you never can read it.\n\nSo if there is not password it the CPU can set one but to change it you first need to send the current password and then you can update it. You can never read back the password because the hardware part that handle and store it do not allow that.",
"At a high level, typically most services (including a login to a device/computer) take what you type as a password (numbers, letters etc)\nand run a mathematical transformation on it called a “hash”\n\nThe advantages of this are \n1) you get the same “hash” output value every time for the same input (password)\n2) the hash itself cannot easily be reversed, so that you can’t get the plain text password just by stealing (or looking at) it\n\nWhen you type the password, the hash is generated and then compared to the hash stored somewhere on the system.\nIf they match, you gain access. \n\nWhere this hash is stored depends on the device or operating system (iOS, Mac, Windows , Linux etc)",
" > how do iPhones ... know which password is correct and unencrypt your data for access without having what your password is stored to be checked against.\n\nThis is actually due to a very clever process called a \"hash\". This is a complicated mathematical function that is easy to do one way but extremely difficult to do in reverse. A common example is finding prime numbers; it is pretty easy to check if a specific number is prime, but finding the next prime number after a really big prime requires a bunch of calculations that take a very long time.\n\nSo the password is run through this hashing algorithm and it spits out this big number called the \"hash\" of the password. This big number is **not unique** to the password, there are other possible inputs which could produce that result called \"collisions\". However those other options are absurdly unlikely to run across by chance, like one in many trillions.\n\nThe device only stores the hash of the password, not the password itself. If you tell the device your password it runs the hash function again and checks to see if the results match. If they do it unlocks the device because evidently you know what the password is. However even if someone steals the hash they still don't know what to tell your device in order to unlock it, until they can calculate backwards from the hash to find one of the inputs that would yield that result (either your password or one of the collisions). But calculating backwards might take tens of thousands of years with current computing technology, at which point you certainly don't care.",
"Storing passwords themselves isn't particularly secure, because any good hacker will be able to find it, extract it, and take advantage of it.\n\nBut this poses a problem, if it isn't secure to store a password in plain text, what can the program use to check if the password you input is correct?\n\nThe method typically used for this is hashing.\n\nA hash is a mathematical algorithm that has two main features.\n\n1. Regardless of what value you input, it always gives an output of the same length.\n\n2. The algorithm is not reversible. You can't perform the equation backwards to turn the hash back into the original password.\n\nWhen you type in your password the algorithm turns it into a hash, and that is compared to what is stored on the device.\n\nSo what is the upside of doing this?\n\nA database of hashes are all the same length, so even if a hacker were to steal them they couldn't determine how long the original password was. Be it 1 character or 100.\n\nHashes themselves aren't useable, if you put the hash value into the application it will get hashed itself and therefore give a completely different value and not work.\n\nHashes can't be reversed, so having the hash doesn't mean you can easily determine what the original password was.\n\nHashes are complex and slow, meaning they need a lot of processing power to run. This is good from a security perspective because it slows hackers down. It's difficult to brute force hashes because you need a lot of CPU power to run hashing algorithms over and over again.\n\nBut that doesn't mean it's infallible. Hashing algorithms are public knowledge (ie the equations are standardized and easy to get) so what hackers do is create databases of hashes using pre-generated passwords. So they run a,b,c,d, etc and common passwords through the equation to make a database of known hashes... then they compare stolen hashes to the database to get people's passwords.\n\nThe catch is this requires a lot of effort, but it's becoming more and more common place as an attack as these databases are pre-generated (someone has done the hard work for you already) and are easily found on the internet."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Secure_Enclave"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1gv517
|
how sports venues paid for with tax payer money maintain a monopoly on crappy, overpriced food when there are obvious alternatives?
|
I'm not sure of the contract structure of privately funded parks, MLB rules, or all that, but it seems stupid to continue to have people pay $6 for a budweiser and $8 for a crappy hamburger! I understand they wouldn't and haven't if they don't have to, but why don't they have to? And I think they should! Local restaurants providing food at the ball park would be great!
**edit** even if they're not paid for with tax payer money...it still shouldn't be the way it it is!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gv517/eli5_how_sports_venues_paid_for_with_tax_payer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cao4e4s",
"cao89ty"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not a monopoly, it's more of a convenience issue. A restaurant can charge whatever they want, and if people don't want to pay, they can leave and find another restaurant.\n\nSports venues charge so much for food simply because they can. Yes, you can go watch a game for just the price of the ticket, and eat before/after the game somewhere cheaper. But since people like to eat/drink while they watch a game, they're willing to pay a lot more for their food.\n\nThis is basically how movie theaters make their money, in fact. They make most of their money on food/drink sales, while the movie tickets are really just their to get people in the door.",
"There are a limited number of stalls at a venue. The businesses there have to pay a premium on the real estate.\n\nA sports venue isn't open all the time. A baseball stadium or concert venue might be open for 3 games per week. A football stadium might have two games per month. You have to pay people more money to convince them to work part-time jobs with irregular schedules. The businesses also have to make a profit from a small number of days to be open.\n\nMaking 'good food' is hard when you have twenty thousand people all lining up to buy it at half time. Your standard game/fair food is stuff that can either be made very quickly or made ahead of time and held.\n\nOn top of that, there's an element of screwing people"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
61vy9e
|
Are reading and writing learned at the same time?
|
How uncommon would it be, if possible, for a person to learn to read, but not write, or to write, but not read?
That is to say, is it essentially the same set of mental skills / muscles?
|
askscience
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/61vy9e/are_reading_and_writing_learned_at_the_same_time/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfi1jdh",
"dfi64y4"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"As to whether it is possible to learn to read or write without learning the opposite, I would certainly think that both are possible. I don't have attested examples to cite, but I don't see why someone born without arms would not be able to learn to read. In general, we certainly teach children to read before they learn to write. The opposite seems also possible. I imagine there are blind individuals out there who have learned to write, but who obviously can't read their own writing. That would just take training with some type of feedback.\n\nAs to the bigger question of whether or not they rely on the same sets of skills, in psychology you might frame that in terms of what is known as \"modularity\". We sometimes think about different processes in the brain as modules, separate pieces which combine together to do a larger function. For instance, reading is not one skill, it's made up of many smaller skills. You could then ask how much overlap is there between reading/writing in terms of those modules. One way to look at this is to look for individuals who have suffered some sort of brain trauma. Oftentimes things like strokes result in the loss of various language-related skills, which we refer to generally as aphasia. There are many different types, and every individual's trauma can result in somewhat different symptoms. For this discussion, the most important are [agraphia](_URL_2_), the loss of the ability to write, and [alexia](_URL_1_), the loss of the ability to read. Oftentimes, these two disorders coincide, but they do not necessarily. For instance, in [pure alexia](_URL_3_) an individual retains the ability to write, but has lost the ability to read. You could ask them to write out a sentence and they would would be able to do so, but when shown their own writing they would be unable to read it. The opposite, pure agraphia, is also possible although it seems to be less common. [Here's one case study](_URL_0_) of a 62 year old man who lost the ability to write, but more or less retained all his other language functions, including the ability to read. It's important to note that pure agraphia is not caused by a motor disorder, the man retained the function of his arm/fingers and could use them to perform other tasks, just not writing.\n\nIt's cases like these which informed a great deal of early work in psychology/psycholinguistics. The idea of modularity is not without (deserved) criticism, but individual case studies help demonstrate what is possible when particular regions in the brain become damaged. I think many people would be somewhat shocked at the very particular types of behaviors which can be lost, as with the 62 year old man with pure agraphia, having retained the ability to do just about anything with his hand except to use it to form words and sentences.",
"Pre school children learn to write before they learn to read. For example, they learn to write their names but can't \"sound out\" the letters until later. They also learn to write letters and could be told \"write f-i-s-h\" without being able to tell what it says. I think what you're asking is can someone learn to write fluently, ie copy diction, without learning to read....to that, I don't know. But yes, you can learn to write before you read. I suspect children recognize their names in the same way they recognize a star or a circle shape...but still, they write them (draw them?)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC490731/pdf/jnnpsyc00083-0074.pdf",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agraphia",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_alexia"
],
[]
] |
|
3ch6lr
|
why is 300 parts per million for particulate matter in the atmosphere significant enough to cause health issues?
|
I live in Fairbanks and we're dealing with wild fire smoke in the city. Today the particulate count reached the 300 mark and everyone is advised to stay indoors as the smoke is so bad. With that kind of count, though, it doesn't sound like very much. Why does so little have such a huge affect?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ch6lr/eli5_why_is_300_parts_per_million_for_particulate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csvhiv9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A couple of nanograms (10^-9 grams) of botulinum (the toxin that causes botulism) can be deadly. Everything can be lethal if you have enough of it, and some things are just really, really good at disrupting your body and preventing it from doing the business of staying alive.\n\nA single molecule of carbon monoxide from fire smoke, for example, can pretty much pretty much permanently break a red blood cell. We have a ton of them, and replace them all the time, so losing a couple of red blood cells isn't the end of the world. However, it doesn't take a whole lot of carbon monoxide before that problem starts to get really big and out of hand."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2skig0
|
why does the us order the day and month of a date differently to other countries? i.e. today to me (in europe) it is the 15/01/15 not the 01/15/15. how did this slight, but significant, difference come about?
|
9/11 should be 11/9 in Europe etc.... Why the reversal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2skig0/eli5_why_does_the_us_order_the_day_and_month_of_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnqbb1c",
"cnqbm4b",
"cnqbyid",
"cnqccv0"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"IIRC in the UK we do **day - > month - > year** as its the smallest in time to largest.\n\nThe US does **month - > day - > year** as there are fewer months than there are days, and there are fewer days that there will be years.",
"dd/mm/yyyy - keeps magnitude and is more natural.\n\nmm/dd/yyyy - bit weird it is like if somebody used hh:ss:mm but you can alphabetically order it if you have dates from just one year.\n\nyyyy-mm-dd - can be alphabetically ordered and keeps magnitude and is actual international format.",
"This has come up in /r/askhistorians a few times, but no conclusive answer has ever been proposed as far as I'm aware. [Here](_URL_0_) is a good answer, though.\n\nBasic summary: Month/Day/Year became, at some point, the preferred form for all English speakers in non-formal language, including in England proper. In the 19th century England started to switch back over to Day/Month/Year, which mimicked the more formal form of writing it out (On the 15th day of January in the year 2015). The US never made that switch.\n\nAs noted in the thread there isn't a good consensus on why the switches occurred in England, but given the timing it's probably related to the printing press and how newspapers were made.",
"This doesn't answer the question *why* but it's interesting nonetheless:\n\nApparently Britain used to do it the American way, but they began gradually switching over sometime around 1920. \n\nHere are some Google Ngrams for frequently-mentioned dates:\n\n[January 1,1 January](_URL_1_)\n\n[November 5,5 November](_URL_2_)\n\n[November 11,11 November](_URL_0_)\n\n[December 25,25 December](_URL_3_)\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1t02dv/why_does_america_write_the_date_as_monthdayyear/ce35fub"
],
[
"https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=November+11%2C11+November&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CNovember%2011%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C11%20November%3B%2Cc0",
"https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=January+1%2C1+January&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CJanuary%201%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C1%20January%3B%2Cc0",
"https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=November+5%2C5+November&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CNovember%205%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C5%20November%3B%2Cc0",
"https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=December+25%2C25+December&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CDecember%2025%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C25%20December%3B%2Cc0"
]
] |
|
2dw3jc
|
when i sometimes go to sleep with my eyes closed and not moving, i know i'm not asleep. do i get any good quality rest compared if i'm sleeping?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dw3jc/eli5when_i_sometimes_go_to_sleep_with_my_eyes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjtn8k9",
"cjtp7h6",
"cjtqhj5",
"cjtwpd5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you're not asleep, then you're not getting the same quality rest as if you were sleeping. Your brain may appreciate the decrease in stimulation, and your muscles the rest, but if you're not asleep, then you're not... sleeping.",
"I agree with the other comments in saying no, but I remember reading something about when we go to bed and get random itches and such, it's our brains way of making sure we're still awake. But when we fall asleep, our brain takes this time to heal our body (hence why people tell you to rest when you're ill/injured), so technically you won't get the same amount of rest laying in bed than you would being asleep. I may be wrong but I remember reading something along those lines about sleep.",
"Research has shown that if someone does not enter R.E.M sleep (deep sleep), they will not rest fully (this is done by waking people when they enter deep sleep). Apparently we do need deep sleep to fully rest, so just resting with eyes closed is not sufficient.",
"If you're aware of not being asleep, then you didn't \"go to sleep.\" You're just lying still with your eyes closed. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5p3j4i
|
some jobs are unpleasant but fundamental to society (eg: janitor, bus driver). why aren't these the best paid jobs?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5p3j4i/eli5_some_jobs_are_unpleasant_but_fundamental_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dco38rk",
"dco3ag0",
"dco58pf",
"dco7bge",
"dcoqf6s",
"dcoqnz2",
"dcp5xhi"
],
"score": [
86,
16,
14,
44,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Because anyone can do them. They are low skill and lots of people can fill that role.\n\nSometimes they do get better pay because the job is undesirable (I think trash collectors get paid decent, at least compared to minimum wage). ",
"Jobs are categorized by amount of skills you need to have to perform the job or amount of profit that you produce per period of time. Also, supply and demand curve of labor. How many people are available on the market to do some particular job. Being a janitor doesn't require a much of skills or bachelors degree, a lot of people can do this job, and the outcome is just a clean place you work/ live.",
"Because they don't need to. Simple as that. The market doesn't require it. At the current pay, they can find qualified people to fill those positions. A brain surgeon would make $10/hr if they could hire good people at that amount. ",
"The most highly paid jobs require some combination of: a) exceptional intelligence/skill/education/training; and/or b) an unwillingness on the part of most people to perform the job.\n\nExample (A AND B): patent attorney. A patent attorney must have an outstanding technical background (undergrad degree (4 years) plus at least a master's degree (2yrs), and frequently a PhD (5-6 years)), must have a law degree (3 years), and then must want (or at least agree) to write patents consisting of scores/hundred of pages of highly detailed technical/legal jargon. It's insufferable, and most people (including me) find it incredibly boring.\n\nAt a large law firm, a patent attorney can start at $160-180K per year and in 10 years make anywhere from $500K to a few million dollars per year. \n\nOther examples (A and B) include: neurosurgeon, heart surgeon.\n\nExample (A NOT B): Movie actor. While many people may *want* the job, few have the skill to be able to perform adequately. Same for NFL player, etc. Result = high salary.\n\nExample (B NOT A): Garbageman. While few people *want* the job, it doesn't take much skill to perform. Result: higher salary than other low skilled positions, but not anywhere near as high as, say, a patent attorney.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"Jobs aren't paid by how \"tough\" or \"important\" they are. They are (imperfectly) paid by how replaceable the skill is of the person doing the job.",
"It's basically supply and demand. More people are able and willing to become janitors, bus drivers, social workers, etc (massive supply) than there are positions available (limited demand), which drives down the price of the labor.",
"Supply and demand. Most people can be janitors or, with the proper training, drive buses. This large labor pool puts downward pressure on the wages for these occupations."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6iyx3e
|
if you have good credit, and pay your bills off every month, how do credit card companies make money off you? wouldn't they prefer customers with bad credit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6iyx3e/eli5_if_you_have_good_credit_and_pay_your_bills/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dja7ega",
"dja8h3t",
"dja8rzy",
"dja8wei",
"djaitxs"
],
"score": [
2,
17,
10,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"You almost hit the nail on the head. It's not that credit card companies prefer customers with bad credit, but they do prefer customers that carry a balance on their accounts from month to month. They can't charge interest on a $0.00 balance, so in cases like that they make money from everyone else.",
"They prefer low risk, which is what a good credit score indicates, and they still make money even if you pay all your bills in full. Every time you use your card, the merchant has to pay a fee. A portion goes to the network (Visa, etc.), though the biggest share goes to the issuing bank. As long as you keep using your card, the bank keeps making money off of you. ",
"Credit card processors make processing fees for every transaction you make, which is a set fee plus a percentage of the total. So while they make more off you running up a balance and charging you exorbitant interest, they still do make money off you even if you pay your bill every month. Additionally, they have tons of consumer data on purchases/purchasing patterns, etc. they can sell.\n\nIt's sort of like the \"freemium\" model in other businesses, where access to a certain level of the product is free but for higher level access you have to pay. ",
"Credit card companies take a small percentage from the retailer on every sale. Retailers don't mind so much because people tend to spend more when they can put things on credit. When you buy a $1,000 TV at Best Buy with your MasterCard, MC gets about $25 from Best Buy right off the bat. American Express charges a higher percentage which is why it's less common to see retailers who accept their cards.\n\nLike /u/JenusPrist said, credit card companies like people who carry a bit of a balance but keep making regular payments, but someone who owes more money than they can realistically pay back becomes a high risk of defaulting. The credit card company may have to sell a $10,000 debt to a collections agency for pennies on the dollar to let them try to recover whatever they can.",
"They charge a little from the retailer, too. This is why some stores offer cheaper prices when paid in cash.\n\nIf you keep unpaid balance, it's double income for the card company.\n\nIn Thai we use a phrase like \"gain both up and down\" to describe this situation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.