q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1gvkkq | what happens to stock when a company quits being traded? | My friend works at a company that is publicly traded and has stock in her 401K from the company. The company is going to stop being traded now, and I was wondering what happens to all her stock? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gvkkq/eli5_what_happens_to_stock_when_a_company_quits/ | {
"a_id": [
"cao8q24"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"you'd have to be more specific on \"stop being traded\". That could mean a couple of things. It could be they're just not selling any more shares, in which case not much would happen, people would just buy/sell the shares that already exist. It could also mean the company is buying a majority of the shares to become private again. In this case, the company would likely buy her shares at a certain amount just over current market value."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
603d74 | how do gums stop bleeding once they start? | i.e after flossing, no exposure to air, no coagulation, constant wetness. How does it stop? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/603d74/eli5how_do_gums_stop_bleeding_once_they_start/ | {
"a_id": [
"df3ctfd",
"df3iyta"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"From _URL_0_\n\nSeems like the gums are like any other part of the body. When cut they become inflamed and clot then heal. \n\n > The healing mechanism involves the inflammatory process, which is the same in almost the entire body. In particular in both skin and mucosa (both referred to as \"epithelial\" tissues), when there is a break, platelets and clotting factors clot off any bleeding vessels, white blood cells (neutrophils and macrophages in particular) collect and destroy any bacteria, dead cells and muck, and then the process of regeneration occurs (with ongoing inflammation), where stem cells in the surrounding tissue regrow cells, new blood vessels may be formed and scar tissue is laid down to give extra strength. Eventually after these stages of healing, there is \"remodelling\" where the structure basically gets better.\n\nAs to why oral wounds heal quickly and don't get infected that much? There are a bunch of reasons. One is that the head and neck has an excellent blood supply- just think of scalp wounds where you bleed like crazy but then they heal very well. Another is that mucous membranes have immune functions that stop invading microbes. Generally speaking we divide this into \"innate\" immunity which is a general response, and \"adaptive\" immunity which is tailored towards specific bugs. The mucosa has both. There are neutrophils and macrophages (innate) which live in that area, there are lymphoid patches (like lymph nodes, and adaptive), there are immunoglobulins specific to mucosa (IgA) which is adaptive in nature, and the epithelial lining cells themselves will signal to the rest of the immune system if there is damage or an infection. Plus, saliva itself has chemicals and enzymes which break down oral bugs.\n\nOral immunity\n\nMost of the oral bacteria themselves are not particularly invasive. Just think, every time you brush your teeth, you cause multiple abrasions in your mouth. In fact, measurable amounts of bacteria from the mouth end up in your bloodstream every time you brush your teeth! And yet, we don't end up with bloodstream infections as a result. This is partially because the rest of our immune system (and the structure of our heart and vessels) is intact, and partially because oral bacteria are not very invasive or pathogenic. They kind of have a sweet deal living in your mouth minding their own business and not killing their host, and even causing infection in an oral wound would make their continued survival less likely.\n\nIn addition I should probably point out that skin has a great deal of bacteria on it as well, and yet we rarely get infections from them (unless colonised by an invasive species), for the same reasons.",
"Well, they actually don't. They continue to bleed but the Locrian Membrane kicks in and greatly reduces the amount of red blood cells in the blood near your mouth so it appears to be clear. Your gums are always bleeding but since you can't taste or see it as blood you mistake for saliva."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/2362/what-is-the-healing-process-of-mouth-wounds"
],
[]
]
|
|
c12fhn | how does the brain suppress the sound sleeping people make themselves. | For example people who snore or breathe heavy.
They can sleep through their own sounds while others need to suffer, but they will wake up to any other sound/ other snoring people | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c12fhn/eli5_how_does_the_brain_suppress_the_sound/ | {
"a_id": [
"era2lat",
"era4gg5",
"eraa9zj",
"erb8rpb"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they are used to it. If you sleep with someone else who has a snoring problem, you will eventually get used to it because you hear it every night. Talking from experience",
"It really doesn’t, I wake myself up snoring every night. But once you are deep enough in sleep, you don’t hear anything unless it’s very loud. You are awakened more easily in the lighter stages of sleep.",
"Habituation, the same reason you eventually ignore the buzz of fluorescent lights after a while.",
"The thalamus is the part of the brain that's like the gatekeeper to conscious thought. You touch something, your touch receptors signal your thalamus, and the thalamus can choose to relay that to the cortex or not. Same deal with other senses except smell, which usually bypasses the thalamus but that's a different topic. The thalamus is also in touch with other parts of the brain, such as those involved with the sleep-wake cycle. \n\n\nSo when you're asleep, the neurons in your brain behave differently than when you're awake. You may have seen a chart like [this](_URL_1_) comparing the activity of neurons at different states of wakefulness. [Here's](_URL_0_) a similar graph but for the activity of the thalamus. You see how the \"sleeping\" thalamus is hyperpolarized and the waves are more uniform? In a nutshell, other brain parts like the brain stem release neurotransmitters that make it harder for the thalamus to be excited by signals and tell the rest of the brain about what you're sensing. Essentially, this makes it so that normal things that we sense that would make it to our cortex, and thus our conscious perception, aren't actually perceived because the threshold needed by the stimulus to be consciously perceived has increased. \n\n\nSo this answers why we suppress sound, but not necessarily why we suppress our own sounds such as our own snoring. The body has mechanisms like habituation or adaptation, which both do similar things as above to increase the threshold for perception. For example, if you're in a room with a clock ticking you don't notice the ticking after a while. Our brains can also predict what we'll do to an extent, whereas external signals are less predictable. We're very used to our own bodies so our brain knows what we do."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://media.springernature.com/lw785/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs00424-011-1014-6/MediaObjects/424_2011_1014_Fig2_HTML.gif",
"https://www.mind-your-reality.com/images/brainwaves_chart.jpg"
]
]
|
|
1lu18z | why is the nsa allowed to break the law? | Doesn't that violate the constitution? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lu18z/eli5why_is_the_nsa_allowed_to_break_the_law/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc2qvj1",
"cc2rh9y",
"cc2rv9i"
],
"score": [
25,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The NSA isn't allowed to break the law. The recent scandals are lawful behaviors of the NSA which they performed under instruction by laws passed by our representatives. Some of those representatives are on councils which are regularly briefed about what is going on.\n\nThe stink is that the public at large wasn't fully aware of the laws or what was happening (because of secrecy and ignorance) which allows politicians to obtain political gain by talking out both sides of their mouths.",
"The biggest reason why the NSA is allowed to break the law is because nobody knows that they are breaking the law. Several civil liberties groups have tried to take the government to court since the 2005/2006 revelations that the NSA was slurping up a large amount of data from telecom companies.\n\nWhen these cases reached court the government claimed that the people claiming to be spied on couldn't prove they were being spied on and resisted providing any information claiming any surveillance activity they were conducting was a state secret. \n\nIn one case the government accidentally released a document that showed they had been spying on the plaintiffs but then got a court to order the return of the document and prevented them from using it in court.\n\nDue to the plaintiffs not having proof they were being spied and and unable to get proof via subpoena the cases largely died because courts would rule that the plaintiffs did not have standing. Standing is a legal concept which means that a party has to show a connection to the action's harm in order to challenge it in court. Without proof that their rights had been violated by being spied on the courts threw the cases out.\n\nRecently, two things have happened. First, Edward Snowden leaked documents to reporters which has brought the subject back into public awareness. Second, the civil liberties groups have started winning against the government, forcing the government to release some information.\n\nSince both the Snowden revelations and the forced disclosures from the government has the information needed to prove standing, the cases haven't made it far enough through the courts to effect any change to the government's actions. It may take years for the cases to come to a conclusion and even then there is no guarantee that the courts will rule against the cases.\n\nFor one thing in 2008 Congress changed the law making many of the practices that were clearly illegal at the time legal. They also gave immunity to telecommunications companies that had participated in government spying. If the current law is legal from a constitutional basis is hard to say. If the government is only spying on non-US persons as they claim them there is no constitutional issue since non-US persons are not entitled to the protections of the Bill of Rights. However, the revelations from Snowden imply that the government is also engaging in mass surveillance of even US persons. But even then some of that may not be a constitutional issue.\n\nThe one big thing we know from Snowden's information is that the government has been receiving metadata about telephone calls. This information identifies who called whom and when. Courts have treated this metadata information as not being protected by the 4th amendment. Since the information is held by 3rd parties and is not the content of the conversations courts say that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. As such this allows the government to receive the information without a warrant.\n\nLooking into someones email also may not require a warrant. Current law considers mail stored on a server over 180 days as abandoned and allows the government to receive this information without a warrant.\n\nThese links may be helpful:\n_URL_3_\n_URL_1_\n_URL_0_\n_URL_2_",
"Because of the law. It's like a cop having to speed in order to catch a speeder. Or an undercover officer buying or selling drugs."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.volokh.com/2013/07/17/metadata-the-nsa-and-the-fourth-amendment-a-constitutional-analysis-of-collecting-and-querying-call-records-databases/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978_Amendments_Act_of_2008",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stored_Communications_Act",
"https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying"
],
[]
]
|
|
2ei4c1 | the psychology behind people liking being in control of other people | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ei4c1/eli5_the_psychology_behind_people_liking_being_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjzq419",
"cjzqel0"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I personally enjoy taking on the leader role because it makes people talk to me less - or at least be more succinct. Im not a real leader, you see, Im anti-social and introverted. I just fake it and endure it as an investment into future solitude.",
"As a social species, humans constantly struggle for rank. It's a benefit to be on top -- you get more resources and your children are more likely to survive."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
k1rgt | transitive and intransitive verbs | Thanks for reading. Yes, I have looked this up on Google, but all the answers seem to reference other parts of the English language I'm not familiar with (and it is my native language).
So break it down for me, if you would be so kind. Examples would be helpful; sock puppets if necessary.
Thanks in advance.
**Edit:** Thanks for the excellent responses. I consider this matter explained. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k1rgt/eli5_transitive_and_intransitive_verbs/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2gve8f",
"c2gvgmz",
"c2gx151",
"c2gve8f",
"c2gvgmz",
"c2gx151"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The structure of a simple sentence in English consists of a subject, a verb, and (sometimes) an object. For example, in the sentence \"The girl kicked the ball,\" \"the girl\" is the subject, \"kicked\" is the verb, and \"the ball\" is the object. Verbs, generally, are an action \"kick, run, understand, hear\". Subjects, generally, are things that do an action. Objects, generally, are things that are affected by the action of the verb. It's a little more complicated than that, but this should work for now.\n\nThe sentence I just gave has a transitive verb. It has a subject, a verb, and an object. Specifically, transitive verbs must have a subject and an object. If you get rid of the object, it becomes ungrammatical or \"wrong.\" Compare \"The girl kicked,\" to \"The girl kicked the ball.\" The second one should sound good, but the first one should sound like it is missing something.\n\nAn example of a sentence with an intransitive verb is \"The boy fell.\" There is no object, and trying to add one makes it sound weird; compare \"The boy fell,\" to \"The boy fell the glass.\"",
"A transitive verb is one that you can ask this question about:\n\n* You < verb > who/what?\n\nAn intransitive verb is one that doesn't need to answer that question to make sense.\n\nSo, for example, \"sleep\" is not a transitive verb because you don't sleep something, you just sleep. But on the other hand \"throw\" is a transitive verb because it makes sense to ask \"You threw what?\" \"I threw the ball.\" You throw something (or someone, maybe?!). \n\nSome words are tricky because they have transitive and intransitive meanings. For example, \"run\" is sometimes transitive because you can run something, like a race. It makes sense to say \"I ran a race.\" But it also makes sense to just say \"I ran,\" in which case it would be intransitive. \n\nSomething similar can happen with \"speak\" because sometimes you just want to say whether or not you spoke, but other times you want to specify that you can speak a specific language.",
"A transitive verb is one you do *to something*. \n\nAn intransitive verb is one you simply *do*. \n\nYou can hiccup, but you cannot hiccup the dog. Thus hiccup is intransitive. \n\nYou can murder your neighbour, but you cannot simply murder. Thus murder is transitive. ",
"The structure of a simple sentence in English consists of a subject, a verb, and (sometimes) an object. For example, in the sentence \"The girl kicked the ball,\" \"the girl\" is the subject, \"kicked\" is the verb, and \"the ball\" is the object. Verbs, generally, are an action \"kick, run, understand, hear\". Subjects, generally, are things that do an action. Objects, generally, are things that are affected by the action of the verb. It's a little more complicated than that, but this should work for now.\n\nThe sentence I just gave has a transitive verb. It has a subject, a verb, and an object. Specifically, transitive verbs must have a subject and an object. If you get rid of the object, it becomes ungrammatical or \"wrong.\" Compare \"The girl kicked,\" to \"The girl kicked the ball.\" The second one should sound good, but the first one should sound like it is missing something.\n\nAn example of a sentence with an intransitive verb is \"The boy fell.\" There is no object, and trying to add one makes it sound weird; compare \"The boy fell,\" to \"The boy fell the glass.\"",
"A transitive verb is one that you can ask this question about:\n\n* You < verb > who/what?\n\nAn intransitive verb is one that doesn't need to answer that question to make sense.\n\nSo, for example, \"sleep\" is not a transitive verb because you don't sleep something, you just sleep. But on the other hand \"throw\" is a transitive verb because it makes sense to ask \"You threw what?\" \"I threw the ball.\" You throw something (or someone, maybe?!). \n\nSome words are tricky because they have transitive and intransitive meanings. For example, \"run\" is sometimes transitive because you can run something, like a race. It makes sense to say \"I ran a race.\" But it also makes sense to just say \"I ran,\" in which case it would be intransitive. \n\nSomething similar can happen with \"speak\" because sometimes you just want to say whether or not you spoke, but other times you want to specify that you can speak a specific language.",
"A transitive verb is one you do *to something*. \n\nAn intransitive verb is one you simply *do*. \n\nYou can hiccup, but you cannot hiccup the dog. Thus hiccup is intransitive. \n\nYou can murder your neighbour, but you cannot simply murder. Thus murder is transitive. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
40njrp | those 360° 3d videos | How do they work? It's pretty amazing | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40njrp/eli5_those_360_3d_videos/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyvl4gi"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Have you ever seen a 360° camera? Most of them have multiple lenses and then use computing to stitch the image together similar to the panorama feature on smartphones. There are even 360° cameras with a single lens but these are only truly 360° in one axis. \n\nThe 360° video is then restricted to a frame area. Using the sensors in your smartphone, vr headset, etc, you essentially move around in that \"space\". It's like looking through a paper towel tube while turning your head. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
3w2s78 | why are numbers sometimes written out as words and as numbers right next to each other? | E.g., this box of Cheez-its has a sweepstakes where ONE (1) WINNER WILL RECEIVE $10,000. Why are the word and the number both needed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w2s78/eli5_why_are_numbers_sometimes_written_out_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxst75m",
"cxstc5n"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think it's to prevent people from turning the 1 into an 11, or something like this. \nBy changing the number, there is usually not enough room left to change the 'word' aswell",
"It used to be a formal editing rule in most things legal, sweepstakes entry rules (which is basically a contract offer from the company to the consumer) included. It is no longer required by any style guide as far as I know, but for some reason, it persists."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
61czc9 | why is it that certain candy bags have a noticeably disproportionate ratio of flavours? | I love lime-flavoured Skittles, Sour Patch Kids, Maynard gummies, etc. However, I've noticed that bags are usually 80% cherry, strawberry, or what have you.
Why are some flavours so sparse? Are some flavours cheaper to produce? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61czc9/eli5_why_is_it_that_certain_candy_bags_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfdjo12"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I'd hate to break it to you, but the green skittles are supposed to be green apple flavored"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2od6c9 | why people develop lisps and why they keep them their whole life | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2od6c9/eli5_why_people_develop_lisps_and_why_they_keep/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmm0djc",
"cmm0tcn",
"cmm13fn",
"cmm1y6d",
"cmm24va",
"cmm4qvc",
"cmm548p",
"cmm55au",
"cmm596y",
"cmm5hep",
"cmm84nn",
"cmm8724",
"cmmqbjn",
"cmmvodf",
"cmmwwxg"
],
"score": [
81,
7,
14,
5,
4,
2,
3,
2,
4,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are many causes of lisps, generally having to do with problems within the mouth, most often the tongue but other physical abnormalities can cause lisping also. Oral surgery is one possibility for correcting it. Anxiety and a possible genetic link also exist. Often Speech therapy provided by school districts can correct it. It depends on financial ability of the school system. Poor districts don't often have the funds to provide therapy even though federal law mandates services. Another un-funded mandate. Early, and I mean pre-school intervention, can do a great job if given a chance.",
"My friend told me that he can't hear the sound of the letter \"s\", and he has a lisp. I've always connected the two.",
"I had a lisp for a couple of years before I finally noticed it and self-corrected my speech (took a few months of practice!). I honestly didn't hear anything wrong with the way I had been pronouncing the S sound. It sounded fine to me internally. Only when I heard myself talk on a recording did I notice it.\n\nI think it probably developed when I had braces.",
"Your brain becomes hard wired to speak a certain way when you are young. The causes are myriad.\n\nAs far as correction... imagine speaking Japanese or Arabic (or any language, really) and having perfect diction. That would be super hard.\n\nYour brain defaults to its routine for producing sounds. Changing that, especially in something that becomes SO routine as speech, is just very hard.",
"I had a tongue thrust for several years as a child. My teeth just didn't stop my tongue from leaving my mouth when I said things with an \"s\" or \"ch\" sound. \n\nI went to speech therapy for many years to resolve it - essentially, I had to train my mouth to stop my tongue from leaving.",
"I don't have the greatest hearing since I was born, I have a minor lisp because that's how I thought it sounded from everyone else. You learn to speak by listening to others. Sick and thick are almost indistinguishable.\n\nI haven't bothered to correct it, it's fairly mild and hasn't caused any problems. It helps that I take my time to speak loudly and clearly without umming and ahhing. ",
"I'm 43 and have a lisp. I went to speech therapy in kindergarten and/or first grade, I remember trying to speak the cards that they gave me and how I had to put a lot of effort in trying to curl the tongue or keep it behind my teeth or whatever, it never stuck.\nThrough my life, when I speak I don't 'hear' the lisp, but when my voice is recorded, I hear it instantly and cringe. I know most people cringe at their voice, but I hear the lisp so obviously and hate it. On the one hand it's the one part of me I hate more than anything in the world, but on the other, I've had it this long, I don't see it going away anytime soon.",
"I read that as lips and was about to pass over clicking when I thought why do humans have lips? I mean other animals have lips too, but they're more muscly skin around the mouth while human lips are these bloated, blood-engorged things. So I clicked hoping I was going to learn the answer to a question I'd never thought of before but then it wasn't the question I thought it was and now I'm a little disappointed. ",
"People develop lisps because they're relatively easy programming languages to implement. There's tons of tutorials out there, and the syntax is easy to parse. Everything is parentheses delimited, so a recursive descent parser works wonderfully. \n\nAs for why people keep them, why not? Its usually under 1000 lines of code, and its cool to say that you designed/implemented your own programming language. ",
"I have a lisp. I took speech therapy and can control it with some serious effort but without surgery it's never going to go away. It's caused by the length of my tongue, which is very long as my frenulum is pretty short.",
"Well, you develop lips to primarily be able to communicate (talk), but to also help to keep your mouth closed so to say, to be able to eat your food without it falling out. \n\nYou're welcome!",
"I had a lisp, went to a speech therapist and I don't have a lisp anymore. Not sure why, I don't think I had any physical issues. Good luck.",
"Retired school speech therapist here:\nFor starters there are two kinds of lisps, frontal, which is the one being discussed here and lateral. The frontal can be thought of as a substitution of th for s. In many young children prior to age 6 or 7 it is perfectly normal and is usually outgrown with no intervention. It can also be related to loosing the deciduous teeth which can allow the tongue to slip forward into the th position. A second cause can be a tongue thrust or reverse swallowing pattern that infants have normally but then do not outgrow. This can require specialized therapy to change the swallowing pattern.\nThere could be other physical anomolies like tongue size or other fine motor speech problems. By and large the lisp responds to speech therapy. Anyone of school age in the US has the legal right to free and appropriate special education services provided by the school district in which they reside. To receive services the child must qualify by meeting specific criteria related to the speech problem. One of the techniques I used successfully was to have the child close the jaw almost completely and repeatedly make a \"t\" sound very lightly. This approximates the correct tongue position for the \"s\". From there I would have them stretch the sound by making the t then blow a stream of air while holding the tongue position. So basically t,t,tssssss.\nThe tongue tip comes slightly forward not quite touching the upper teeth. If you live near a college or university with a speech pathology program, check with their clinic on campus. They often will provide services to the public as part of the clinical training for their grad students. If you get stonewalled by a school district that wont provide an evaluation/therapist, contact your state office of education to obtain info on advocacy. These services are paid for with your tax dollars and are your legal right.",
"My son is 7 and has had a lisp since he first began talking. The thing that surprised me is that when he was born, a nurse in NICU saw him crying and told me he was tongue tied and would probably have a lisp. I wrote it off as an old wives tale, but she was right.",
"I had what I now know is called a \"lateral lisp\" until I was around 18. Basically, instead of forming my 's' sounds by pushing air *over* the tongue like you're supposed to, I would push air *around* my tongue, through my right cheek. This made my 's's very wet and slushy sounding. But to me it sounded normal.\n\nIt wasn't just my 's's either; I did this with a lot of sounds: s, z, hard j, ch, and y's. Some sounds were more obviously wrong than others.\n\nI don't know exactly what caused it, or when I started doing it, but that's how I learned to talk and that's how it stuck. As far as I know I don't have anything physically wrong with my mouth that caused it.\n\nWhen I was 18, I started learning a foreign language, and decided I was going to learn it right. So I recorded my own voice, and kept practicing the right way to talk. It was hard at first, and required conscious effort, but within about 6 months my lisp was cured in both languages. Now if I want to lisp like I used to, I have to purposely do it."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
a570uy | what causes the switch process in bipolar disorder? | What biological process causes a person to go from severely depressed to euthymic or manic and back again?
& #x200B;
& #x200B; | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a570uy/eli5_what_causes_the_switch_process_in_bipolar/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebk9ife",
"ebkum2u"
],
"score": [
10,
5
],
"text": [
"Mainly hormones and the amount your body produces or gives you - or doesn't because something stops/slows down the production of hormones that make you happy. (Serotonine and Dopamine) If some points in your body get close to them - you get happy. This is manic BPD.\n\n\nWorks also the other way around some bodies produce more of the 'feel good/euphoric' hormones but less 'feel bad' ones with the opposite effect. This is depressive BPD.\n\n\nThis is caused by neurological problems. Your brain can't control this right and you can't control your brain when it comes to this . Imagine pulling off all cables on a machine with no Idea how to reattach them.\n\nFeels like sitting on the back of a bike with no driver and just sometimes you can take the wheel yourself.\n\n\nEdit: ELI5 : Your brain doesn't produce the needed amount of 'happy' and 'sad' hormones or can't distribute them right. So they wait until they can 'come through' which leads to fast mood swings.",
"Great question, especially the “why” part of changing from mania to depression. It is interesting that a lot of patients have had years or decades prior to diagnosis in which they probably experienced “mini” swings. These may start with mild changes that last months at a time. Often with aging the degree of mania and depression become more severe with each passing year. The mechanism is not well understood, but there seems to be something of a “path of least resistance” phenomenon...I’ll explain.\n\nImagine you’re blowing up two same sized balloons at the same time. One balloon is mania and the other is depression. You will reach a point where one balloon starts to stretch just a bit before the other and become now easier to inflate. Any further air you blow will continue to go into this balloon causing a bigger imbalance. Eventually that first balloon will break and then the other will inflate. We probably have a feedback regulation in our brains that prevents this neurotransmitter imbalance from happening, but in bipolar disorder this regulation mechanism doesn’t operate properly. Lithium and other medicines help to dampen the amount of “swing” that can happen, although the underlying process still seems to be there often over the same time periods prior to treatment.\n\nIf we could figure out the “why” we could have truly curative treatments. Until then we are left with just lessening the effects of it. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
10n1fc | are manufacturing jobs actually important, or are they just easy political points? | US politicians (on both sides) are always going off about how important manufacturing jobs are, and how we need more blue collar jobs, etc.
However, it seems somewhat counter-intuitive to stimulate growth in markets we can't compete fairly in. I mean, there's a reason why we're losing these types of jobs, right?
Is there some benefit to keeping manufacturing within the country?
Could some economics wizard enlighten me? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10n1fc/eli5_are_manufacturing_jobs_actually_important_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6ev2vd",
"c6ev46z",
"c6ev4ll",
"c6ev9kt"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Manufacturing is still a pretty significant segment of the US economy, and historically, it was what made the US big. So there's some sentimental attachment to the idea of being a manufacturing power, and some concern that loss of manufacturing jobs will hurt people.",
"They're pretty important. Manufacturing contributes significantly to a country's balance of trade, which in turn influences the value of its currency on the foreign exchange market, which in turn influences the circulation of capital within that economy.",
"One reason they're important is that they're often unskilled. Back when we had lots of Blue Collar jobs, one could graduate from High School (or not) and get straight into a manufacturing position that you could support a family on.",
"Manufacturing is a bit different than other parts of the economy, this [post by Krugman](_URL_0_), one of the most important international economists worldwide, explains it nicely.\n\nIn really simple terms, manufacturing firms tend to be near each other. If cars are assembled in Detroit it makes sense to build your tire factory nearby, then perhaps you should make a rubber factory near Detroit as well, you should then build a chemisty instutute (to research rubber manufacturing techniques) nearby, etc etc. If this is the case then it makes sense for you to protect any single factory, because by doing so you are protecting the whole industry. Meaning, if the car factory shuts down, then tire factories shut down, rubber factories shut down, etc etc. How strong/important this effect is isn't clear, but it is very well studied and documented in theory and evidence."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/chinese-manufacturing-and-the-auto-bailout/"
]
]
|
|
1tge55 | if the fast food workers staging walkouts are wanting real change, then why don't they unionize? | I've been reading in the news recently about the fast food walkouts that have been going on in an effort to get better wages. What I'm wondering is why don't they unionize instead? Wouldn't it give them a better bargaining position, especially when they could legally strike, rather than face termination for abandoning their job? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tge55/eli5_if_the_fast_food_workers_staging_walkouts/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce7nsxs",
"ce7olxk"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"There is nothing for them to bargain. They are untrained, unskilled workers. ",
"I did see news coverage of one of the walkouts in Delaware, where a union was one of their demands. I believe the impetus to unionize is on the workers, and there are certain legal protections granted (such as, I believe it's illegal to fire a person for trying to form a union.)\n\nHowever, I belong to UFCW, the union that would likely represent fast food workers (and I took an introductory macroeconomics course), and I can say that the union wouldn't be able to meet their demands. Minimum wage is $7.25/hour, our union bargained to start us at $7.35/hour. Health benefits don't kick in until you've been there 1-3 years, depending on which local you belong to. Only people in skilled positions like managers and meatcutters, which you can get into in 3 years if you're lucky and work hard, get anywhere near $15/hour. Economically, the restaurants can't support giving their workers $15. They'd have to raise their prices, which then makes them less competitive when there are alternative choices in the market. If fast food workers somehow did get that raise, what would likely happen is that half of them would get laid off and replaced by machines, like touch screen ordering kiosks and fully automated kitchen equipment."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
4us9l9 | why do the japanese call themselves nihongo while we call them the japanese? | Also
Suomi = Finnish?
Iran = Persia?
How does this happen, and why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4us9l9/eli5_why_do_the_japanese_call_themselves_nihongo/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5sfji0",
"d5sgs0v"
],
"score": [
4,
9
],
"text": [
"Persia isn't actually a thing anymore. It's the name of the political organization that controlled what is now known as Iran. Persia is the Iran what Rome is to Italy.\n\nOther terms come from translation. \n\nLook at Germany. When the Romans spread through Europe they met the Germanic peoples. \"German\" literally meaning \"of the same parents\" in Latin. \n\nThey were essentially saying \"all the people in this region are one big ethnic group\". This stuck around with the French and into the development of the English language.\n\nWhereas people in the actual Germanic regions (Germany) developed their own term for their culture and land. This word is \"deutsch\" hence why Germany is called \"Deutschland\" and the Pennsylvania Dutch are called \"Dutch\" when they are actually German.\n\nSimilarly Nihongo is what the Japanese call themselves in Japanese, but the first European explorer to have recorded a name for the area we know as Japan was Marco Polo. He heard the Chinese use the term \"Cipangu\". This over time and translation became \"Giaponne\" and finally \"Japan\".\n\nIt's like the difference between Eskimo and Inuit. Inuit means \"the people\" in the language of the Inuit, whereas Eskimo is what other groups called them.",
"The Japanese names for Japan (Nippon or Nihon) both mean \"Land of the Rising Sun\", which was first used in Imperial correspondence with China around 600 AD. It's written as 日本, which would be read as *hi no moto* in Japanese. Nippon/Nihon is an *on'yomi* reading—which means it's a Japanese approximation of how the Chinese pronounced the characters when the Japanese adopted them. \n\nBefore that, it was known as *Wa* or *Wakoku*, after the Wa ethnic group. The character in use for *Wa* at the time, 倭, could be read as three characters meaning roughly \"dwarves\" or \"submissive people\". Eventually this was found offensive, and replaced with 和 in the eighth century, meaning \"harmony\" or \"peace\".\n\nAround that time, another name for the country developed—*Yamato*—which referred to a specific place, and probably originally meant \"Mountain Gate\". After the adoption of the 和 character, Yamato got assigned the kanji 大和 (Great Wa, in roughly the same sense as Great British Empire). It's an entirely arbitrary pronunciation of those characters, which is something you can do in Japanese.\n\nThe modern English word Japan comes to us through several intermediate languages. According to Marco Polo, the Mandarin or possibly Wu Chinese word for Japan was *Cipangu*. In Malay and Indonesian, the name mutated into *Jepang*, *Jipang*, or *Jepun*, which was brought back to Europe by Portuguese traders. From there, it became Giapan in English, first recorded in 1577."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
16yh41 | - what is a histamine, and how do they cause so many different illnesses? | I take an anti-histamine for colds and such. My best friend is trying a histamine blocker to help with a digestive issue. Those seem like pretty different things. It occurs to me that it's one of those things people talk about, but perhaps rarely understand. Fill me in. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16yh41/eli5_what_is_a_histamine_and_how_do_they_cause_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"c80j9fb"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Histamine is a small molecule that acts as a signal (ie neurotransmitter) to different tissues in your body. In the case of allergies, when you are exposed to something you are allergic to, like pollen, very small pieces of the pollen interact with receptors on the surface of special immune cells that cause those immune cells to release histamine. This histamine then signals your tissues to do certain things like become irritated and increase blood flow to the area (this is how you get a stuffy nose and other classic allergy symptoms). So by taking a histamine blocker for allergies, you stop your tissues from responding to the histamine from the immune cells. In the case of you stomach, histamine comes from nerves wiring your gut and stimulate acid production. \n\nHope this helps."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
4flkje | how do tax refunds work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4flkje/eli5_how_do_tax_refunds_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d29wpjl",
"d2amp2c"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, you owe a certain exact percentage in taxes every year depending on what your full income is at the end of the year. \n\nEvery paycheck, some of your pay is withheld, with the idea that it's the monthly portion of your total yearly tax bill. It's based on an estimate of what your actual income/tax bill will wind up being. Basically, think of your taxes as being paid monthly, but you're paying an estimated amount, not necessarily the exact amount. \n\nHowever, oftentimes this withholding amount is actually more than what you actually owe for taxes, (after you account for various deductions and so on) so the government gives back some of it, because you actually paid more than you owe. \n\nGenerally, getting a big refund is actually considered bad, because it means you let the IRS hang on to extra money that you could have invested or otherwise made use of during the year. If you get a refund of $0.00 it means you paid the exact right amount of taxes, no more and no less. You can change your withholding allowances to vary the amount and get closer to $0 if you want. ",
"Thanks for the answers, guys. But why don't they just take out the correct amount at each check? For most people, it's easy to project the exact amount they'll owe (for income tax, anyway) assuming thru don't change jobs or get laid off."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
krhwm | why is hair in my food/mouth so disturbing? | In a sense, a single hair seems so insignificant... Yet when it's in food, I can't help but to cringe a bit. It even bugs me when it lands on my plate in an area where there is no longer any food. I just cant ignore it, like I could a chicken bone or some tough fat i tried to chew from a steak. (sorry if that was gross, trying to think of good examples) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/krhwm/eli5_why_is_hair_in_my_foodmouth_so_disturbing/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2mngip",
"c2mngip"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Slightly related but this is what happened to a girl who ate her own hair for years, [small write up and a picture which is somewhat gross](_URL_0_).",
"Slightly related but this is what happened to a girl who ate her own hair for years, [small write up and a picture which is somewhat gross](_URL_0_)."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246529/Giant_Hairball_Removed_From_Woman_s_Stomach"
],
[
"http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246529/Giant_Hairball_Removed_From_Woman_s_Stomach"
]
]
|
|
a2fh83 | why do people cut cocaine with lidocaine ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a2fh83/eli5_why_do_people_cut_cocaine_with_lidocaine/ | {
"a_id": [
"eaxrxjm"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Finally my drug experience comes in handy. Cocaine is a numbing agent and doesn't hurt at all when snorted. Therefore, you need to cut it with something that doesn't hurt when snorted. Also, if your coke really numbs you up, it actually makes it seem like a better product to someone that's either high or new to coke. For someone that knows the difference, they dont really care as long as there is enough coke in the mix. Getting pure shit is hard nowadays, so having it cut with lidocaine instead of meth or some other cheap substance is a God send."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
5e1g0x | can sleeping on one side or another "shape" you ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5e1g0x/eli5_can_sleeping_on_one_side_or_another_shape_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"da8znlz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Speaking purely anecdotally here: I have always slept on my side, but slightly differently on left vs. right. This has led to a muscular misalignment of sorts that I work with both a chiropractor and a physical therapist to correct or else I get debilitating headaches. \n\n\nSo can't speak to blood flowetc effects, but sleeping purely on 1 side can definitely screw with your muscles over time"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3zh4fn | how can a retailer claim something is exclusive to their brand, then you see multiple other brands boasting the same thing. | For Example Game marketing the Halo 5 Controller as "Exclusive to Game", when I was able to get it at Tesco. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zh4fn/eli5_how_can_a_retailer_claim_something_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cym500g",
"cymb2ea"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The flat out reason is that they don't care. They make the claim, sometimes knowing that it's false, just to add a sense of urgency or validation to their store. \n\nThis is only a small example of how little truth is in advertising. In this case, lying doesn't matter and doesn't hurt anyone, but in cases where it can, do your own homework.",
"There are a number of different types of exclusives that aren't *real* exclusives:\n\n1) timed exclusives - this is where a manufacturer will allow a single retailer to sell an item for a certain amount of time before it is opened up to other retailers\n\n2) segment exclusives - this is where an item is exclusive for that type of store. This way you might see the same item available exclusively at a supermarket, high street store, catalogue shop or online store.\n\n3) model number exclusive - this is where BestBuy has a TV with the model number 12345bb and Amazon has an identical TV with the model number 12345am. This is usually done so that big chains can get out of price matching."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
4tfl2p | why do some drinks like gatorade need to be refrigerated after being opened, even if it wasn't refrigerated before being opened? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4tfl2p/eli5_why_do_some_drinks_like_gatorade_need_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5gvsup"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When the drink is bottled, it is sterile inside. The liquid is free of live microbes, and has an airtight seal protecting it from the filthy outside world. \n\nOnce you open it and drink some, you've let microbes into the previously clean environment, and introduced them to a large supply of sugar and water that they can potentially use to grow and reproduce and turn rancid and gross.\n\nSo you put it in the fridge because the lower temperature slows the rate at which the microbes do all of those things. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3h0cl7 | how do they clean portable toilets? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h0cl7/eli5_how_do_they_clean_portable_toilets/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu337sw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They pump everything out then basicly pressure wash the thing ... I'm sure there's a fairly strong disinfectant in the mix ... At least I seriously hope so "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3mvvlo | what if someone got to the moon,and started committing crimes....what could the government do about that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mvvlo/eli5what_if_someone_got_to_the_moonand_started/ | {
"a_id": [
"cviko1b",
"cvikv7t",
"cvil1ho"
],
"score": [
2,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Committing a crime requires breaking a law. Please provide the legal code for the moon and describe what laws they would be breaking...",
"Not a lot as long as he stays on the moon, since there's a shortage of police and courts there. If he returns to Earth, he could potentially be prosecuted by the country that launched the spacecraft, his home country, or the the home country of any victims, depending on how those countries feel about extra-territorial jurisdiction.",
"Well, there are space treaties, which basically say that outer space is for everyone, and no one can claim it for their own country. \nIf someone were somehow to establish a moon base and use satellites to engage in illegal activities -- let's say offshore gambling -- the perp would be literally in \"no man's land,\" and any country who could afford to would go get them and prosecute them.\n\nThis is a little different from what happens now -- people engaging in these activities in countries that don't have extradition treaties. If I open up shop in the Cayman Islands, or certain African countries, and engage in cyber attacks in the U.S., the U.S. can't come to that country and get me because the country where I'm at hasn't agreed to it. For now, we don't have that problem in space."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
eb81w6 | why does black looseleaf tea foam up after adding sugar? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eb81w6/eli5_why_does_black_looseleaf_tea_foam_up_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"fb31bsc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's a normal chemical reaction when super hot water comes in contact with the leaves. The hot water makes various organic compounds, like proteins and amino acids, come out of the leaves and form a foamy layer. Some people say that the more foam you see, the more \"healthy\" the tea is, but I haven't found any science to back that up. \n\n\nAs far as adding the sugar, I've heard that sometimes dissolved gasses in the hot water can kind of be attracted to the grains of sugar, and that allows the gasses come out of the liquid and form bubbles. Kind of like when you pour a carbonated beverage, and little streams of bubbles start coming out from certain points on the inside of the glass."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
2hs0kk | whenever i hear a fork scratching the surface of a china plate, my body shudders. what causes this to happen? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hs0kk/eli5_whenever_i_hear_a_fork_scratching_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckvgt7y",
"ckvgxcb",
"ckvhg69",
"ckvhlvg",
"ckvi001",
"ckvijam",
"ckviy7p",
"ckvjge3",
"ckvjrgv",
"ckvjs76",
"ckvjsh5",
"ckvkiee",
"ckvky0b",
"ckvl4oy",
"ckvl7qm",
"ckvmofs",
"ckvnl8x",
"ckvp885",
"ckvqtgq",
"ckvqzpv",
"ckvrst3",
"ckvrv8b",
"ckvs26w",
"ckvt0iz",
"ckvt5g5",
"ckvt6j6",
"ckvt9kq",
"ckvupqp",
"ckvv6iw",
"ckvwkre",
"ckvwqfg",
"ckvwwg1",
"ckvx1b9",
"ckvxg6t",
"ckvy3sz",
"ckvz4ff",
"ckvzhef",
"ckvzrae"
],
"score": [
1664,
19,
56,
48,
37,
461,
4,
9,
37,
3,
3,
3,
31,
14,
2,
2,
5,
12,
3,
4,
2,
2,
3,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"AFAIK, there are 2 different explanations proposed:\n\n- The primate heritage hypothesis: Hypothesizes that the sound bore some resemblances to the alarm call of macaque monkeys, or it may have been similar to the call of some predator.\n\n- Physical hypothesis: Hypothesizes that the unpleasantness of the sound is caused by acoustic resonance due to the shape of the human ear canal which amplifies certain frequencies, especially those in the range of 2000 to 4000 Hz (the median pitches mentioned above), at such a level that the sound would trigger pain in our ears.\n\n",
"Is it the same feeling as dragging your finger nails on a chalkboard. Its not the noise but the act itself that gives me the shudders.",
"I wish I could find the source, but a long time ago I read a (admittedly far-fetched) hypothesis that the sound of a fork on china or nails on a chaulkboard are similar to the sound of bone-on-bone, ie, the sound of a large-toothed predator's tooth dragging across your skull, and rates as an obvious 'this is bad and to be avoided' evolutionary pressure.",
"I also wonder how this is connected to people who experience ASMR. Are there people who are more prone to experience some kind of this phenomenon in relation to auditory stimulation in general? ",
"It could also be related to misophonia, a derivative of sensory processing disorder that causes one to react badly to certain sounds, which can be very random but it's extremely unpleasant, some have been known even to commit suicide if they can't get away from it. Basically imagine Clockwork Orange but for people chewing for instance. Although this is common enough to most likely have some other explanation.",
"Does anyone know why even just *thinking* about it causes an unpleasant sensation?\n\nI think most of us are probably shuddering just from reading the comments in this thread.",
"Notice most of the pet-peeves mentioned here are high pitched sounds. Nails on a chalk board, balloons rubbing together, rocks being rubbed on a metal slide, the squeaking of cotton/wool, teeth rubbing against a fork. I think the primate warning call is the most probable theory.\n\n It would make sense and they have done studies that have shown that nails on a chalk board has the same pitch as a monkeys screams/warning. It's likely something that is instilled in us genetically, if you think about it, being a human in the caveman days, if a Dinosaur or some shit comes up and tries to eat you, you're going to want the loudest / high pitched vocal / call for help that you can come up with. ",
"It's called Misophonia, I have it as well. Silverware scratching plates also drives me insane as well as the sound of people biting their forks. \n\nMisophonia is a sound sensitivity disorder, which makes certain noises intolerable to the sufferer. Although this condition is primarily neurological, the experience of these sounds can cause psychological distress.\n\nThis condition usually develops when a child is just entering into his or her tween years, although it can develop earlier in life. ",
"I'm surprised this hasn't come up yet, but there is a really simple and intuitive explanation for this.\n\nBefore we had plates, sand and bits of rocks often gets into food, which can really mess up teeth and wear them down. \n\nSince we also didn't have dentists back then, we evolved this awkward response to the sound of teeth grinding against sand and bits of rocks which causes us to freeze up and prevent further damage. Having served in the infantry, I have a slew of anecdotal evidence I could bring up.\n\nFork scratching china, nails on blackboard and the likes can all, unfortunately, trigger this response due to the similarities in the characteristics of the sound.",
"Is this related to the sensation one gets from biting a piece of metal, like a fork? Some people can drag their teeth on a utensil while eating. If I accidentally bite a fork while having a salad, it makes my skin crawl.",
"As a misophonia sufferer, I agree with /u/yours_duly on the physical hypothesis. Haven't done any research on the primate heritage aspect personally, but anecdotally speaking at least, there are certain types of sounds that most mammals seem to respond to (crying of infants, sometimes across species, etc., would be the most easily observable one I can think of).",
"On this topic, touching wooden objects, rulers for example, cause my body to shudder, what causes that?",
"Why wouldn't it be a mechanism to protect your teeth?\n\nI find grinding china, nails on the blackboard, rolling two marbles together in your hands ...\n\nAll are very similar to when you get sand in your food, or you use your teeth on something that you shouldn't, or when your teeth grind together.\n\nIn primitive life, preserving your teeth for as long as you can would have been important.\n\nIsn't this why the teeth falling out dream exists when under stress.",
"The Fletcher-Munson Curve. Human ears are tuned to human voice, and at the peak of this curve is babies and women screaming. Anything in the same range causes an emergency response in the brain, which is jarring absent an emergency.",
"I have an alternative hypothesis on why this sound affects us so deeply. I was walking through an old forest this summer and I heard that same noise from the forest. It was coming from a dead tree limb rubbing against another. If you live in the forest, and sleep under trees, a dead tree falling is one of the most dangerous things that can happen to you. see [Jared Diamond](_URL_0_) We could have evolved to be cognizant of this sign of risk. This is a testable hypothesis. Set up microphones in a forest, and listen for that \"fingernails on the chalkboard\" noise, and see if come from trees that have a much higher chance of falling.\n",
"You're sympathetic nervous system is in distress and going haywire.",
"You're producing a square or a boxed distorted waveform. Which naturally has harmonics at a pitch that disturb the human sense of hearing",
"Okay some interesting ideas in here, and I haven't read everything, but I'm surprised no one has brought up the concept of *resonant frequencies* yet. \n\nBack in high school physics we learned about them. The idea is everything has a resonant frequency, the frequency that matches the density of some object and causes it to shake and vibrate because it is being subjected to just the right frequency. My teacher connected this to the [Tacoma Narrows Bridge](_URL_0_) \n\nBasically the high winds caused the bridge to flex and eventually achieve its frequency until it flexed and shook apart. I think there was some other concept by Tesla or something with a machine that could bring down an entire building without explosives just by placing pneumatic or electromagnetic modules (like a shake weight) calibrated to the structure's resonant frequency. \n\nAnyway, he also said this concept was why nails on a chalkboard was so painful, because we hear a particular frequency where they achieve maximum resonance, and the sound travels through our ear canal and through our bones. Such frequencies match the density of our teeth. So when you hear that sound, your teeth are literally vibrating inside your head and causing pain sensations that are picked up by tour nerves. \n\nI don't know if this is correct but that's what I learned and it seems quite plausible.",
"Pretty sure it comes under misophonia - essentially a severe dislike of sounds. I don't mean just 'ugh stop doing that' I mean like feeling seriously repulsed. For me, it's the sound of people smacking their lips. I don't know why I don't like it (it's bad fucking manners) but I can't eat if I can hear someone smacking their lips, I go into a rage, I feel sick. You can get it with a variety of sounds and the fork/plate (or nails/chalkboard) one is amongst them.",
"Best hypothesis I've heard is that the sound is similar to tooth enamel being damaged. Our ancestors were always eating foraged food full of rocks and grit. Being extra sensitive to the sound of our teeth being damaged help us to preserve them.",
"Sorry this is vague but I remember learning that the plate/fork sounds and the \"nails on a chalkboard\" sound traces back to primates as some sort of warning. Danger. Predators. Something. I cant remember....",
"It probably triggers harmonic resonance with something in the body.\n-From a mechanical engineer",
"None of these sounds bother me in the slightest. What gets me is the sound of a felt marker writing on paper. I moved last week, and writing on boxes with a Sharpie all day nearly killed me.",
"I get this reaction when styrofoam rubs against anything.",
"I have an urge to literaly piss when I hear that sound. ",
"This happens to me too, I literally threw out every plate in the house that did this and will only eat from or serve food from smooth corel dishes that won't make the noise.",
"Why does it make your teeth hurt? Or is that just me?",
"I think its the same feeling Dogs get when we use Dog Whistles",
"Whenever I hear a pork scratching it takes me back to the pub my dad drank at.",
"The sound of sweeping (bristles brushing against a rough surface) and when someone scratches their nails against certain fabrics makes me shiver. Similarly, I hate the feeling of touching certain things, like short-haired fabrics and dry materials.\n\nEdit: Pencils writing on paper get me too.",
"You and I would not get along. I tend to do that a lot.",
"Think of it like your brain is Shazam and when it senses that screechy frequency of pure shit it just turns you into the exorcist.",
"You touch yourself at night. Stop doing that.",
"Even reading about this it makes my body shudder. I can not stand that sound.",
"I get the same sensation when latex pulls across my skin. Specifically dry latex like you would have with gloves.",
"For me it's two pieces of Styrofoam rubbing up on each other. Just writing this was hard. \nEdit: Swypo",
"Dry Popsicle stick on my tongue. I shudder and get chills just thinking about it!!! Worse than nails on a chalkboard",
" > Whenever I hear a fork scratching the surface of a china plate, my body shudders. What causes this to happen?\n\nUsually it is another human being that is causing the fork to scratch against the plate. It could be deliberate for what ever reason, or it could happen as result of someone eating something from a plate using a fork, and accidentally dragging the fork over the plate. It could also happen without the aid of a human being, though this is rare. For instance the fork could be falling onto a china plate due to gravity and accidentally touch the surface of the plate during the decent, causing a similar sound to emanate.\n\n > It's a reaction I can't control! Also happens with other sounds but the fork & plate example is the ocassion it happens the most. \n\nThat's right, in fact nobody can control the propagation of sound waves once they have been initiated. As you are touching upon, it is true that other sounds can be heard when other objects interact with each other, and you cannot control those sounds either. I hope this answers your question satisfactory."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/29/science/jared-diamonds-guide-to-reducing-lifes-risks.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
5266zh | which is worse, short term or long term memory loss? what are positives and negatives about both? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5266zh/eli5_which_is_worse_short_term_or_long_term/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7ho9f9"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There is a big misnomer about what \"short term memory\" really is. Most people think it's \"goldfish memory\", lasting a day or so. In reality, it's closer to about one second. If you have short term memory loss, you can't learn anything new, pretty much ever. \nLong term memory loss is a tragic loss of all of your memories, so you forget your family and loved ones. Short term memory loss is becoming unable to function in any meaningful way, but you at least remember who you love. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
8y7mmd | internal combustion engine was invented a couple centuries ago. why haven't we come up with something better by now? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8y7mmd/eli5_internal_combustion_engine_was_invented_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e28re5n",
"e28rh14",
"e28rkwv"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Better, or commercially viable? We have. Electric cars. They’re the transport of the future. ",
"Yes. Read about the Chinese. Europe invented glass because it didn’t have China and porcelain. China capped out on ingenuity because porcelain isn’t transparent. No glass windows. No glass alembics. They did something so well it hamstrung them.\n\nAlso we have better things. But like... we spent all this time perfecting the ICE. It’s difficult to rationalize taking literally decades of R & D expenses and cultural change head-on in order to beat something that already works. Hence hydrogen cars being weird things you see on TV and battery technology still being kind of shit. ",
"It's primarily due to the fact that internal combustion engines have a relatively high power to weight ratio. You COULD use a nuclear reactor to power your car, but the weight of the required plant to get you anywhere in a timely fashion would be horribly large. \n\nAnd, when you add up all of the losses due to efficiency, internal combustion engines are actually fair to good when it comes to converting stored energy to motion when compared against other propositions. I'm specifically thinking of hydrogen cars with that last line. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
3qb0a4 | why does so many adware toolbars set yahoo as defult search engine? | Why Yahoo? Do they get paid for it? Is Yahoo ok with that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qb0a4/eli5_why_does_so_many_adware_toolbars_set_yahoo/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwdkn2w"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yahoo pays them to set the search bar to Yahoo, because when you use Yahoo search, you see Yahoo ads."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
1j5ps0 | is artificial gravity possible? | To clarify, in regards to space travel. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j5ps0/eli5_is_artificial_gravity_possible/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbbd7d9",
"cbbd7ty",
"cbbda8n",
"cbbdaza",
"cbbde2m",
"cbbdmo4",
"cbbe7mi",
"cbbefgl",
"cbbfqnh",
"cbbg3vj",
"cbbh4h3",
"cbbhc12",
"cbbjdz1",
"cbbl05e",
"cbblccv",
"cbbmzoc",
"cbbn89b",
"cbbq61s",
"cbbrema",
"cbbrjjm",
"cbbttzf"
],
"score": [
17,
878,
94,
3,
2,
7,
3,
2,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
12,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm no expert, but could centrifugal force make a \"gravity\" in a sense? ",
"As of now, the most plausible option is ~~centrifugal~~ **~~centripetal~~** centrifugal force. To accomplish that we'd have to build something resembling the inside of a washing machine. It would rotate at a high speed and stick people to the inside face of the outer ring, the same way that a spin cycle works. Even that would take billions of dollars to construct. Then we have tons of other hurdles of taking it into space without breaking it. Even testing it in a zero gravity environment would be incredibly difficult.\n\nIn regards to artificial gravity, physicists don't really know why gravitation is so weak compared to the other three natural forces (electromagnetism, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear). So since they haven't found out how exactly that works, other than \"Get a supermassive object and stand on it\", it's not yet possible to create artificial gravity like you can create magnetism with copper wire, a nail, and a battery. \n\n~~Edit: Thanks /u/blastfemur /u/iwillyel /u/Eric-F-13 /u/infiniticomplex /u/Dakrys and /u/k0r3andud3 for pointing out it's centripetal and not centrifugal force!~~\n\nEdit2: A posse has come to meet the opposition of the centrifugal vs. centripetal battle, saying centrifugal force is legit. \n\nAlso, plenty of people have seen the glaring hole in my plan of building it on the ground then launch it, and instead proposed to build it in space. Thanks everyone!\n\n\nThis comment isn't dying, and I'm getting a lot of similar responses, so I'll put in an FAQ.\n___\n\nFAQ:\n\n**Q:** Can't we use wear some sort of metal suits to stick us to the outside of the wall?\n\n**A:** That would hold us up against the wall, but it doesn't accomplish what we need since we aren't worried about keeping people attached to the spaceships. Our bodies are accustomed to gravity, so we need a force that pulls everything in our bodies down (organs, joints, muscles, etc). Early astronauts who spent a few months in space experienced deterioration muscles and bones, slowed heart functions, and a host of other issues. What was observed in the astronauts was not significant for the amount of time they were there, but enough to see that a space trip of even 5-10 years would result in some serious issues for the astronauts' bodies.\n\nThis Wikipedia page lays it out more elegantly and comprehensively than I can. _URL_0_\n\n**Q:** If there wasn't any gravity, the cylinder would just rotate around you while you remained stationary inside it, right? \n\n**A:** Yes, that seemed like a pretty good idea when I had just woken up and written my reply. /u/acastusa pointed out that there is a much better design for an artificial gravity ship in the works here: _URL_1_ \n\n**Q:** DON'T YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CENTRIFUGAL AND CENTRIPETAL FORCE?!?!\n\n**A:** I was pretty sure I did, but half of the people commenting told me I didn't. Then the other half said I did. I'll make myself sound stupid so you all know what I mean: *The spinny force.*\n\n\n\n**Q:** If launching the ship from Earth would be such a challenge, why don't we just build it in space?\n\n**A:** Excellent point, I overlooked that. Thanks for pointing it out. ",
"The only two methods I've ever heard about that are remotely realistic sounding are a big centrifuge and flooring it/slamming on the brakes.\n\nBig Centrifuge:\n Exactly what it sounds like. Unfortunately even with the best of greases and bearings friction is always at play. You could never turn a big rotating living quarters and have it maintain that rotation without friction slowing it down. Which would force you to constantly apply/reapply energy to keep the rotation speed up.\n\nGassing it:\n Basically wherever your destination is, you continue accelerating up till the halfway point, then begin braking the rest of the way there. Constant G-force is applied to all occupants this way. Although the floor and ceiling change places halfway. That's interesting.",
"Yes, in a sense. A cylindrical or ring- shaped space craft that rotates constantly would feel like it had gravity if you were to walk around he inside edge (think the inside of a soda can or the part of a ring that touches your finger.) The \"gravity\" created by the spinning is actually centrifugal force. You know how when you're riding one of many rapidly spinning rides at a carnival and you feel yourself getting forced against the wall of the cart/ seat you're riding in? It's the same concept.",
"Check out [The O'Neill Cylinder](_URL_0_) concept.",
"Currently artificial gravity, actual gravity interaction as opposed to simulated gravity through centrifugal force, doesn't seem to be possible. I'm no scientist but I do have some speculation on how it could be achieved though now that we have confirmation of the Higgs field (the Higgs field is essentially a field that is everywhere in space and you move through it like a diver through water, which is why you have mass, your resistance (pushing against) and interaction with this field gives you mass); In the future there may be a way to meddle with objects interaction with the Higgs field, if we could setup a ball of say.........osmium/iridium at the center of a ship inside a machine that makes them \"push\" against the Higgs field even more making them more massive and creating gravity that way, this may not be possible, but like I said if it is, this will probably be the way it happens until we discover the real cause of gravity.",
"This is really a topic of much interest to scientists incase long distance space travels are to be made by humanity. But currently there no efficient methods to simulate gravity, because of our lack of understanding gravity. The current technologies use Pseudo forces and Strong Magnetic fields. Which have been mentioned by many others here. However i'd like to add that there's a lot of science fiction equipment out there which does not exist in reality. \n\n\n * Gravity Generator : A gravity machine present in spacecraft that has neither rotating nor accelerating parts as a whole, so that it can even function in a stationary space craft. There have been interesting and speculated discoveries in the past of which this Russian scientist has claimed he had made that device heres that story\n\n\n \"Eugene Podkletnov, a Russian engineer, has claimed since the early 1990s to have made such a device consisting of a spinning superconductor producing a powerful gravitomagnetic field, but there has been no verification\" [paragraph from wikipedia]\n\n\n Our understanding of gravity is so limited that i'm sorry to say we don't have a perfect machine( although we have the ones which do the job with mediocrity )\n",
"So based on the comments, i won't be seeing any of those gravity machines like they built in DBZ for training.",
"A lot of people are describing ways to do this with a centrifuge-like system, without going into actually creating gravity. Here's why actually creating gravity would work.\n\nWhen objects generate a field, like an electric field or a gravitational field, it is usually proportional the distance from its center. It looks like [this](_URL_0_). Notice, on the macroscopic scale, the forces you will experience throughout the field change directions. Also, the field falls off with the square of the distance. So that's a gravitational field to us tiny humans?\n\nIf you zoom in very close to the edge of a circle around an object with a gravitational field, we can make some assumptions about its makeup. Basically, we assume that, for some very small slice, the direction and magnitude of the gravitational field does not change within that slice. In our case, this simplifies to a field that looks like a bunch of down arrows in a single direction (down). \n\nThat's the main problem with artificial gravity. We need to find a shape of something heavy that maintains 1) A constant strength from the floor to the cieling, and 2) a constant direction, always towards the floor. And this is very difficult because you would have to put this mass a significant distance away from the floor, and it would need to be significantly longer than your craft or the gravity would not point down at the ends of a corridor. \n\nNow, the centrifuge-like system solves the direction problem (it's always pointed outward, and in a circle, this is towards the floor) but in order to fix the strength changing between your feet and your head, the radius would need to be HUGE. It's also not a perfect approximation due to the Coriolis effect, which I don't know enough about to explain in a simple manner. \n\nTl;Dr - Gravitational fields change directions and magnitudes by a LOT when you are very close to the object. So, we need to put the object far away from the space ship or station, which is not feasible for a number of reasons. ",
"Here is a list of video links collected from comments that redditors have made in response to this submission:\n\n|Source Comment|Score|Video Link|\n|:-------|:-------|:-------|\n|[filenotfounderror](_URL_12_)|6|[How gravity really works](_URL_30_)|\n|[princemephtik](_URL_2_)|4|[Docking in Elite](_URL_8_)|\n|[soulstealer1984](_URL_21_)|4|[Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey widescreen](_URL_3_)|\n|[SchroedingersHat](_URL_14_)|3|[levitating frog](_URL_5_)|\n|[Tachinidae](_URL_6_)|2|[Riding the Gravitron](_URL_4_)|\n|[spikeyuk](_URL_31_)|1|[The gravity and object movement](_URL_1_)|\n|[deadverse](_URL_26_)|1|[Empty Space is NOT Empty](_URL_32_)|\n|[ImproperJon](_URL_29_)|1|[Artificial Gravity Kerbal Space Program](_URL_0_)|\n|[hop208](_URL_7_)|1|[Elysium Trailer 2013 4K HD _URL_18_](_URL_11_)|\n|[Titanomachy](_URL_13_)|1|[Yamcha Vs. 300x Gravity 1080p HD](_URL_19_)|\n|[Serenade314](_URL_17_)|1|[Bob Lazar: How To Travel Light Years With Alien Technology - Secret Information 1](_URL_20_)|\n|[gravityguy](_URL_27_)|1|[Gyro-X](_URL_15_)|\n|[gravityguy](_URL_27_)|1|[Gyro-stabilized Electric Motorcycle Hits Road](_URL_28_)|\n|[gravityguy](_URL_27_)|1|[Running Man.mov](_URL_25_)|\n|[gravityguy](_URL_27_)|1|[Maut Ka Kuan - The Well of Death.mp4](_URL_16_)|\n|[ModusNex](_URL_24_)|0|[Bueller...](_URL_23_)|\n\n* [VideoLinkBot FAQ](_URL_22_)\n* [Feedback](_URL_9_)\n* [Playlist of videos in this comment](_URL_10_)",
"Somewhat. it can be virtually accomplished by rapidly rotating a segment of a space structure around an axis so that there is a constant centripetal force that effectively pushes everything outward and into the floor that is pointed away from the spinning center. But as far as some smart gravity in stationary corridors... not yet, at least. The only way we know of to cause the spatial distortions that define noticeable gravity is by collecting a huge amount of matter, specifically the size of a planet, and putting it under you.",
"Yes! Antigravity propulsion has been proven to be possible many times - in countless UFO sightings by civilians, law enforcement officers, and military personnel. NO UFO craft have been observed to operate using chemical propulsion rockets; ALL UFOs display antigravity propulsion. For these civilizations controlling gravity is as easy as it is for us to turn on a light bulb. Humanity will never travel to the stars or other planets with our current old-school blunderbuss chemical propulsion technology. This will only happen when we develop effective, safe antigravity propulsion. Scientists are working on this in secret. The current UFO debunking by the mainstream media is part of the cover story, so that society will continue to invest billions in rocket technology corporations.",
"Absolutely. One of the central principles of General Relativity is that gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration (this is called the [Equivalence Principle](_URL_0_), or, as my professor called it, the \"Inception Principle\"). What this means, effectively, is that someone in an elevator accelerating upwards has no way of determining whether they are being pulled down by gravity, or whether the room they're standing in is accelerating upwards. Practically, this means that the way to achieve \"artificial gravity\" is to have the capsule accelerate upwards constantly. There are two simple ways to do this. One is to just have the capsule accelerate forwards constantly. The second way is to have the capsule swing about at the end of a long arm. In the latter case, the capsule is always accelerating inwards, since without acceleration, it would fly off at a tangent. This is sort of like how water stays in a bucket if you swing it around yourself sideways at a constant rate.",
"Gravity is just acceleration. Any situation where you experience an acceleration equal to that of earths gravity will feel exactly like earths gravity. Acceleration is simply a change in speed or direction of movement, so the easiest way to constantly simulate gravity is by putting them through a circular motion, like in the circus ride where you stick to the wall, where you are changing the direction of your movement, accelerating, all the time.",
"gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable\n\n_URL_0_\n\nso, undergoing constant acceleration would be indistinguishable from experiencing gravity. ",
"My own idea, though a little outrageous, would require black holes. Ive been reading that gravity related to the mass of an object, if we were to artificially create a black hole (which ive read we are working on) and maintain and hold it in the center of the ship, wouldnt that create \"artificial gravity\"? Its just an idea from someone who only took intro to physics in college :P",
"this needs to happen already so that i can train under 500 times gravity and be as strong as vegeta",
"Are you kidding me how the hell did they film all those movies in space HUH????????",
"Alrighty.\n\nNOT in the traditional Firefly/Startrek push-button-for-gravity sense.\nThere are, however, ways to SIMULATE gravity, if not MAKE it.\n1. Rotation. If you are standing on the inside edge of a rotating hoop, the outward force would feel just like gravity if the hoop was large enough and spinning at the right speed.\n2. Acceleration. When you accelerate in your car, you feel the force push your head back against the seat. Imagine if there was NO downward gravity, and you did the same thing way faster, for a really long time. That same force would be the ONLY force, and if you accelerated at 9.8 meters per second per second (the rate at which gravity accelerates things), then that force would feel just like gravity.",
"The old put water in a bucket and swing it around in a windmill action trick is creating artificial gravity. Centrifugal force. ",
"What is the speed of gravity?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_of_spaceflight_on_the_human_body",
"http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23349496#"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Neill_cylinder"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.antonine-education.co.uk/Image_library/Physics_4/Fields/G-fields/field_2.gif"
],
[
"http://youtu.be/TXKNvZoZXd4",
"http://youtu.be/MfNz7DRwtQQ",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbf2z5",
"http://youtu.be/q3oHmVhviO8",
"http://youtu.be/A0H7TYzcMaY",
"http://youtu.be/A1vyB-O5i6E",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbqhhy",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbnq0n",
"http://youtu.be/X0czVxiEqNM",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/VideoLinkBot/submit",
"http://radd.it/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbg3vj?only=videos&start=1",
"http://youtu.be/PcXOnoSN0RE",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbfew7",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbi5rn",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbkieh",
"http://youtu.be/d6NDOAlpVIA",
"http://youtu.be/J7frD9VP85k",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbg3pg",
"CinemaSauce.com",
"http://youtu.be/zesceyrNPds",
"http://youtu.be/NVCfmmkiX-Y",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbdlj1",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/VideoLinkBot/wiki/faq",
"http://youtu.be/NP0mQeLWCCo",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbblnbg",
"http://youtu.be/52cu-8FX5OQ",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbqnso",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbdkq0",
"http://youtu.be/jICGl9jmulc",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbm665",
"http://youtu.be/DbhuRcmSkMg",
"http://reddit.com/comments/1j5ps0/_/cbbu0sa",
"http://youtu.be/J3xLuZNKhlY"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_Principle"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
17xsuq | why would a company like dell go 'private'? | See article: _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17xsuq/eli5_why_would_a_company_like_dell_go_private/ | {
"a_id": [
"c89t0w6",
"c89tysf"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Control is the answer. In a public company if you want to make a big change, you have a department meeting, then you have a board meeting, and you debate what the stock price will do if you make this change, and if it's big enough, you have a shareholder meeting where people you've never met get to decide if you get to do something. \n\nIf sales are down for a quarter, your investor relations department has to scramble to put out press releases and justify every facet of your organization.\n\nIf you have a private company, you have a few internal meetings, and then you make the change. If sales go down, you figure out why, make the change and fix it. ",
"It's not that the company decides to go private, it's that Michael Dell decided to take it private. He is going to buy all the shares off the existing owners. So instead of 1000 people owning 0.001%, one person owns 100%. They sell because he gives them a better price than anyone else for their shares.\n\nHe is doing that because he thinks he can run it better than the other group. When there are lots of owners, they appoint a board, who must run the company and try to do the best for all the different shareholders. This usually means they are very conservative.\n\nHowever, Michael Dell can do whatever he wants with the company, and take massive risks that might payoff, since he doesn't answer to anyone."
]
} | []
| [
"http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Dell-Buyout-Private-Silver-Lake-Michael-Dell,news-42496.html#xtor=RSS-980"
]
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1ysbhe | how is it that banks create money? | I find this very difficult to get my head around - I read that it's the banks that create money but I can't quite work out it happens?
There has been a few awesome ELI5 topics on similar things (which funnily enough answered questions I didn't know I had) however I can't seem to find the answer to this one. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ysbhe/eli5_how_is_it_that_banks_create_money/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfnb2yi",
"cfnbbok",
"cfnbcdp",
"cfnbrlw"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"I lent you 100 dollars but tell you that in two months I want 120 dollars back. After two months I have 20 dollars more than what I started with.\n\nNow, did I create that money? No, I extracted it from you. Why would you allow that? Because you needed that money two months ago when you didn't have it, but knew that in two months time you would have it.\n\nWas that 20% increase in cost worth it for you? You have to decide yourself.\n\n(Hint: Pay-off your credit card fully every month, that debt is not worth it :-)",
"MavEtJu is correct in that that is how banks make profits. However i think what you are talking about is an actual increase in the quantity of money for everyone. \n\nWhen you deposit some money in a bank say $100, the bank splits into two amounts. Part of it they keep in reserve in case you want to withdraw some amount of it later say $10. The other $90 is then free to lend to others. If i lend $90 to some other guy who then deposits that in another bank then boom money is made. The first guy has a balance of $100 showing in his account and the second has $90 in the other bank account for a total of $190. \n\nThis process repeats again for the second bank and so on. \n\nhope that helps explain fractional reserve banking a bit.",
"Bob has 100 dollars. Bob puts it in the bank. The bank lend that 100 dollars to Tom. Bob and Tom now have 100 dollars each - 200 in total\n\nThis is possible because Bob does not actually have 100 dollars - the bank does, except they dont have it either - Tom does. But as long as we trust the banks, society acts as if Bob does have his money. Banks can achieve this by keeping a pot of money aside, so Bob can still withdraw money even if Tom has not paid the loan back yet. \n\nIf the bank fails (if enough Toms default on thier loans) then the \"lie\" is exposed and Bob's 100 dollars ceases to exist. Usually governments step in to prevent this by guaranteeing savings ang bailing out banks\n\n",
"I found that [this book](_URL_0_) explains this in layman's terms very well. It's not really what the book is about, it's about the recent financial meltdown, but as background, it explains a lot of financial instruments in non-technical terms."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.co.uk/Whoops-Why-everyone-owes-one/dp/014104571X"
]
]
|
|
49wslj | why do british people, who are supposedly speaking proper english, pronounce 'th' as 'f'? something is pronounce sumfin as an example. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49wslj/eli5why_do_british_people_who_are_supposedly/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0vjebi",
"d0vk03g",
"d0vrk51",
"d0vsug1",
"d0vudq6"
],
"score": [
23,
6,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are dozens upon dozens of accents in Britain, even if you limit it to just England. \"Proper\" English, which is sometimes referred to as \"The Queen's English\" for obvious reasons, is the \"High-Class\" English accent. ",
"It is a dialectic variation named th-fronting, which results in th being pronounced either as f or v.\n\nThere is nothing \"improper\" about dialectic variations.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Because Britain has a huge array of regional accents, and only certain areas will tend to speak in that fashion. For example those who speak the proper queens English will pronounce and enunciate correctly, while other areas speak a form of English almost unintelligible to people outside of that area.\n\nThe same reason that natives of new York will speak differently from people from Boston, San Fransisco or Texas.\n\nAlso, since the English invented English, by default they pronounce it the correct way, whether it makes sense to you or not ;)",
"That happens everywhere man.\n\nHere in Australia, aboriginals can't seem to pronounce \"Ask\". They almost always say \"Aks\"\n\n\"I want to aks you something\"",
"The obvious answer which was taken down earlier but I didn't know how else to put it is \"because they're lazy\"!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th-fronting"
],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
4alvdu | why are the sums of odd numbers equal to squares? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4alvdu/eli5why_are_the_sums_of_odd_numbers_equal_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d11jsqz",
"d11kdkd"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The easiest way is to think about square numbers as literal squares.\n\nYou can break a square down into a series of concentric L shapes, each containing the next odd number.\n\nc | c | c\n-|-|-|-\n**c** | *b* | *b*\n**c**| *b* | a\n\nIf you want an algebraic proof, consider 2 consecutive square numbers: n^2 & (n+1)^2 .\n\nExpand (n+1)^2: \n\n(n+1)^2 = \n\n(n+1)(n+1) =\n\n(n * n) + (n * 1) + (n * 1) + (1 * 1) = \n\nn^2 + n + n + 1 = \n\nn^2 + 2n + 1\n\n\nTherefore, (n+1)^2 is always 2n+1 more than n^2. 2n+1 will give you an arithmetic progression of the odd numbers.\n",
"The first 7 squares of integers are 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, and 49. Let's take the next one and subtract the previous.\n\n4-1=3\n\n9-4=5\n\n16-9=7\n\n25-16=9\n\n36-25=11\n\n49-36=13\n\nThe increment between square numbers appears to be the sequence of odd numbers. Odd numbers are always one less than even numbers, and all even numbers can be expressed as 2*N. So, all odd numbers can be expressed as 2*N-1.\n\nConjecture:\n\nN^2 - (N-1)^2 = 2*N-1\n\nThis is the mathematical way of taking a square number, subtracting the next lower square number, and seeing if the result is an odd number. You can try it with any of the examples above to see that it works, but in Math we need to prove it for ALL numbers to be satisfied. We have better things to do than try it out on all of the numbers, so let's find a more concise way of sayong it:\n\nN^2 - (N-1)(N-1) = 2*N-1\n\nN^2 - N^2 + 2*N - 1 = 2*N-1\n\n2*N-1 = 2*N-1\n\nSo the two sides are mathematically equivalent. Our equation holds true, QED. The difference between any two consecutive square numbers is an odd number, and these odd numbers are sequential with sequential pairs of squares.\n\nYour example is the reverse of this. Instead of subtracting squares to get odd numbers, you add odd numbers to get squares. This is possible because 0 is a square number. Summing the changes from 0 is the same as going up the sequence of numbers in the function, so your statement is equivalent to what I proved above."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1yvpvv | why people spend too much money on funerals? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yvpvv/eli5_why_people_spend_too_much_money_on_funerals/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfo71md"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"People may spend a lot as a tribute to the person that has died. They may feel that they are obliged to spend a considerable amount or that they will feel bad afterwards. Or they may feel guilty already that they didn't treat the person well in life, so now they are compensating. \n\nIt's also something you're only ever going to do once for a person. So say you have a troublesome brother who borrows money and you think \"ugh, I bet he's back in six months for more!\" Well, with a funeral you certainly don't have that problem. So people may be prepared to go all out in recognition that it's a total one off."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
1sni58 | how do hostage negotiations work? | When they make "deals" with the hostage taker how much do they honor those deals? When I watched Captain Phillips the negotiator made all of these false promises and I was wondering if this is common practice. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sni58/eli5_how_do_hostage_negotiations_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdzbvuc",
"cdzmdnw",
"cdzn4km"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
12
],
"text": [
"I'd guess rarely, or to the minimum amount possible. If they always give the hostage takers what they want, that just encourages others to try this same tactic in the future.",
"Ricky Gervais talked on his podcast about how he found out one of his bodyguards was also a SWAT negotiator and drilled him with questions for two hours. Some of the things that he said were typical of most situations were:\n\n-In many kidnappings, the hostages are loved ones of the perpetrator. Since they don't have any options left, they take someone close to them because they rarely actually plan to hurt them and can just use them as a bargain chip.\n\n-The negotiator needs to gain their trust by empathizing with the perp's situation and showing that he understands their perspective of the situation, often by giving them a phone line that only connects with him and no one else to build a sense of personal interaction.\n\n-When the perp makes demands, the negotiator acts like he's trying to get the things that are demanded. But even if they get a car or something else requested standing by, he always makes them wait an extra 15 minutes to break the perp's sense of control over the situation, therefore making them feel a bit more hopeless than they can achieve anything by this method.\n\n-Even if there's a vehicle outside for them to get away in, they're never getting into that vehicle.\n\n-He tries to get them to feel remorse for the situation and then empathy for their hostages, making them harder to kill.\n\n-If all else fails, and the man is determined to kill everyone and then himself, the negotiator's sole purpose is to get him to stand next to a window for a clear shot.\n\n\n\n\n",
"I have a few co-workers that have done HNT training. The way it works is like this, the HNT tells the hostage taker what she can offer and tries to work out a reasonable solution. All people have basic needs, and the HNT will try to take care of those first. The start of talking someone down may go like this: Are you hurt? Does anyone need medical attention? If you or anyone is hurt, we can get them out and get you the medical care you need. Can you bring the hurt people out?\n\nThe next order of business would be safety and security. The HNT may ask: Is every one safe? Are the hostages safe right now? \n\nBelieve it or not, most hostage takers are not about to go killing the hostages, or even beating on them badly. Most of the time, the hostage taker has a sense of empathy and won't want to hurt people. A lot of times, the hostages are secured somewhere safe. Ensuring the hostages and the hostage takers are safe builds a stronger relationship. \n\nNext, provide for basic needs. She may say: This could take awhile to resolve. Does anyone need food, water, or to use the bathroom?\n\nFinally, she will work to resolve the situation. She will not make promises. She will not overstate her abilities or the strength of the hostages. She will also not refuse anything or say \"no\" to anything. She can, however, redirect the conversation. For example, if the hostage taker asks for a fully fueled jet airplane, an acceptable response would be something along the lines of: Let's get back to seeing how many people are hurt. We were working on taking care of those with medical emergencies first. \n\nSkilled hostage negotiators don't have to make false promises because they don't have to make promises other than the ones they are prepared to honor. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
d8o6sj | - what about the 'funny bone' gives us that super weird feeling in our nerves? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d8o6sj/eli5_what_about_the_funny_bone_gives_us_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"f1bljal"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Just to clarify, the funny bone isn't a bone at all. There's a location on the inside of your elbow where the main branch of the ulnar nerve runs very close to the skin. The ulnar nerve goes all the way down your arm, into your hand, and to your fingertips. So if you hit that spot just right, you will feel a tingle throughout all those parts.\n\nThe reason they call it a funny bone, is because you get a \"funny feeling\" or \"entire arm tingle\" when the ulnar nerve is pressed against the upper arm bone, also known as the humerus."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
cgndwa | what's the difference between sorting by best and sorting by hot? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cgndwa/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_sorting_by_best/ | {
"a_id": [
"euiq53z"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Hot means they’re very active right now; best means they’re highly upvoted.\n\nControversial means they’re highly up AND downvoted.\n\nAnd New means they’ve recently arrived."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3ysx6l | you have my full name and my social security number, what can you do to me? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ysx6l/eli5_you_have_my_full_name_and_my_social_security/ | {
"a_id": [
"cygaufb",
"cygbi5n",
"cygcju0",
"cyggkrv",
"cygie82",
"cygkjwp",
"cygllui",
"cyglvxq",
"cygm87p",
"cygmmey",
"cygmqu2",
"cygmrpr",
"cygo4h7",
"cygo661",
"cygpk6q",
"cygrdgw",
"cygskoh",
"cygsnc6",
"cygzuot"
],
"score": [
2333,
739,
217,
157,
308,
46,
37,
2,
13,
25,
10,
2,
2,
5,
6,
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Google your full name. Find you on Facebook. Make a fake Facebook profile pretending to be a male in your local area with many mutual friends. Add you as a friend. Go to the \"friends\" part of your profile. Search by your last name. Locate all of your family members. By process of elimination, identify your mother.\n\nI'd then send a message to your mother asking if she can get you to call me. We'd proceed to chat for 10-minutes, while explaining that we hooked up at a gay bar, fell madly in love, slept with each other, and you left without giving me your number.\n\nGet out of that one son.",
"I would like to add a question to this question... I had security clearance with the US Gov't. My data was stolen in the OPM [data breach](_URL_0_). They got my SSN, everywhere I have ever worked, past residences, work experience, and FINGER PRINTS. No worries right? Whats the worst thing that could happen?",
"There are public records databases sold by TRW and other companies. I have access to them at work. With just your Social Security Number (I don't even need your name) I can find out just about everything about you: where you live, your criminal record, any civil lawsuits. Depending on what state you live in, I can get driver license, vehicles owned, hunting license, voter registration information. If you own a home, I can get the address, who owns the loan, and how much you owe. If you own your own business, I can get all the information on that as well. Depending on how recently you lived with your parents, I can get their names as well.\n\nOnce I have all that, I can do just about anything. I think the one I like best is sell your house and disappear with the money.",
"On top of this question, Chinese hackers have my blood type and fingerprints. Now what?\n\n*edit* on top of having my full name, dob, address, family's address, social security number, and phone number.",
"Among other things they could pretend to be you while applying for various forms of credit like credit cards or even mortgages. ",
"There are a few categories of authentication:\nWhat you have, what you know, and what you are.\n\nWhat you are is referred to a biometrics. An example of using biometrics for authentication would a fingerprint scanner. Most banks don’t have anything like this.\n\nAn example of “what you have” would be using your debit card for authentication. If you want to make a purchase and you have a debit card, you can sometimes use that with no other information in a transaction.\n\nSomeone having your name and social security is an example of “what you know.” With this information they can claim they have forgotten their PIN or online banking password, provide this information, and gain full access to your entire banking account.\n\nNo single factor authentication is fool proof, and using multi-factor authentication can make identity theft more difficult. An example of multi-factor authentication is requiring users to enter their PIN number when using their debit card. It requires something they have and something they know. A security issue arrises when retrieving lost/forgotten information only requires limited verification. If you can provide a full name and social security number, a lot of services will accept that as proof of identification, and you will then be given full access to anything belonging to that person.\n\nTL;DR: With your full name, SSN, and criminal intent, I could probably gain access to your bank account, email account, and in turn every online account linked to that email address. ",
"I am a bit low on money currently and can not get a credit card. But you have a couple of nice credit cards I can get access to. Don't worry about me maxing out your credit cards though because I can just order a couple new ones for you. If those gets maxed out too I could just file for a few loans for you and increase your mortgage so money is not an issue yet.\n\nHowever I am a good guy and don't like leaving you in debt. I could pay down your newly acquired loans with my new wealth but as I said I need that money. What I could do for you is fake a doctors signature and a funeral directors signature and apply for a death certificate for you. With the death certificate I could get the banks and credit agencies to delete your debt and release any remaining funds in your savings and retirement funds to your next of kin, who would be me since we are so good buddies.\n\nYou could try suing me if you found out who I am but last time I checked dead people can not sue living peoples or file police reports. Traveling would also be a bit of an issue since dead people don't need a car, credit card or passport. However you would need to travel since dead people don't need houses either and your landlord or new owner of your house don't have to wait for you to move out since you are already dead.",
"a lot of these responses depend on your family being stupid. so as long as they aren't you're in OK shape it seems",
"I work fir the Social Security Administration and I can tell you that if someone has that information, then they can pretty much be you.",
"We just gonna teach id theft here? ",
"I was able to open a credit card for my sister (with her permission) so she could start building credit. I knew her SSN because it is one digit off from mine. But basically I was able to set up a credit card, online login and even chatted with customer support on the credit card website. When the card came in the mail (we had the same address at the time) I opened it up and activated it for her. \n\nI imagine this type of thing would be harder if you did not have access to their mail, but that is one thing I was able to do because I knew her name and SSN. ",
"Call credit card companies until I find one you use. Change your address and have them send me a card. Rack up a nice bill. ",
"As a security expert/hacker, this is exactly what most evil \"for profit\" hackers are after. This information can be sold for quite a bit of money in the right places, and then will be used to get credit cards in your name, and rack up lots of debt, or can be used to trace every single bit of personal information about you. ",
"If you've been employed in the United states for 10 years and are over 65, sign you up for a doctor's appointment. If I get your schedule, I could even choose a date and time that would be convenient for you. Or perhaps, inconvenient! ",
"If you only need name and SSN to steal an identity or screw other things up, why do they keep that shitty system? Why does authorities and companies accept only that simple bit of information to give access to other things?\n\nIf this number is so secret and important, how do you people in the USA keep it? On some paper document in a safe or hidden somewhere? Sounds very inconvenient. I can't understand why the system is being used if it's so insecure anyway. Sounds like the worst idea ever.",
"Calling various companies to report you deceased would cause more harm than any fraudulent credit use would.",
"Nobody has mentioned yet the possibility to take the social and name with a bit of social engineering to your ISP, your bank, your e-mail provider, and get access to your e-mail, online accounts, bank accounts etc?",
"There is a fun new scam these days that apparently has been making people lots of money.\n\nThey get your name and SSN and they fill out a tax return. They claim all sorts of false withholding, essentially saying that you paid a lot more taxes than you actually needed to, and they put their own name and address and/or bank id as the recipient for the refund.\n\nThe IRS sends them a fat check that is essentially your fraudulent tax return which they cash and spend on cheesy-poofs, while you try to convince an IRS auditor that:\n\n* you didn't file that fraudulent return\n* you didn't receive that money yourself\n* you didn't actually earn the income claimed\n* they need to upgrade to a more modern tax system...come on IRS the fuck are you doing it's 2016(ish) already!",
"Using this information, someone could borrow money in your name then never repay the loans. \n\nThe lenders (or, really, other \"collection companies\" they sell the loans to) will try to track you down and demand repayment, seeing your information and thinking you're responsible. They might take you to court, they'll definitely ruin your credit.\n\nYou probably won't have to pay the loans back, but this can waste a lot of your time, and others won't be as willing to loan you money.\n\nSo when you go to buy a house, lenders could see you as a bigger risk (even if it isn't your fault, something shady is going on with your information, so that is some risk to them). They may require higher interest rates to loan you money.\n\nA 1% increase in rates on a 30 year mortgage could mean paying around an extra $100 every month, basically adding over $35,000 to the price of any home you want to buy.\n\nSo in this way, someone could rack up $1000 in credit card bills, and effectively cost you $35,000... or all the time and hassle it takes to clean your credit history and deny claims from lenders you never borrowed from.\n\nIf everyone just put a security freeze on their credit this wouldn't be as big of an issue:\n_URL_0_"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/09/opm-hack-fingerprints/406900/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/06/how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-embrace-the-security-freeze/"
]
]
|
||
75id1l | shouldn't high blood pressure be a good workout for your heart? | If you eat salt, it makes your blood thicker, which puts more pressure on the heart to pump blood. Shouldn't things like this be a good exercise for your heart, as long as they are temporary? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/75id1l/eli5_shouldnt_high_blood_pressure_be_a_good/ | {
"a_id": [
"do6dofx",
"do6dyt2",
"do6q9kx"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The warning you see about high blood pressure aren't about the danger of raising it for a few hours. They are about the danger of *chronic* or *long-term* high blood pressure.",
"Technically yes, but this can be problematic in isolation. When you're actually exercising, your body also makes substantial changes with regards to cellular contents, blood composition, and muscular strength. The heart *does* become stronger, but it's accompanied by all these other things.\n\nStrictly making the heart stronger (left ventricular hypertrophy) causes problems at high blood pressure, because the added muscle density makes the heart less elastic. It can't fill properly due to the increased muscle mass, which isn't necessarily an issue in an athlete with an equally \"strong\" heart but healthy blood pressure.",
"Imagine it like doing quite difficult maths homework.\n\nIf you were to do it for an hour a day you'd probably get really good at maths as it's good practice.\n\nIf you were to do it every day 24/7 it probably wouldn't be too long before you had enough and give up.\n\nIt's the same with your heart except when that gives up you die."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
220j1k | why do people with severe mental handicaps appear drastically different than those without mental handicaps? | I've always wondered why. I don't understand why or how you can immediately know whether or not someone is mentally handicapped just by looking at them. Why do they look the way they do? What is going on in their brain that causes them to appear very, very different?
One example is a man I know who was previously healthy. One day, after falling out of a truck, he fell down and hit his head. Ever since then, he looks a LOT different, despite not having any visible exterior trauma. This was 20 years ago, and he still looks a lot different.
I wonder what the reason behind the facial disfigurements is, and why it happens. Do they lose control of their facial muscles? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/220j1k/eli5why_do_people_with_severe_mental_handicaps/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgi5fo5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"2 reasons:\n\n1) Mentally they may not have the faculties to appear normal, i.e. conventional facial expressions and movement. This results in things like holding the head at an odd angle, hands looking all \"twisted up\" in their lap, mouths open and drooling, etc... I think this would be the case with your acquaintance.\n\n2) With certain cases like Down's, part of the symptom IS the physically abnormal feature(s). For instance, the lack of chin or a weird-looking \"derp\" face.\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
6dfyc6 | brain autopilot | Hey!
So I was wondering. I can do a ton of stuff without concentrating and/or paying attention. Here are a few things:
1. I have a nose, sometimes I notice it, but most of the time my brain just blocks it from my vision.
2. I have a tongue. Again, I only notice the feeling that I do indeed have a tongue when I think about it.
3. Breathing. Automatic, I don't even think about breathing, but when I do I have to do it manually for a while.
4. I can have a conversation while playing League of Legends, and still do decent in the game while I'm concentrating on having a conversation and after it's done I don't even remember what I did in the game
5. Highway. When people drive on the same road over and over, sometimes they don't remember how they get home.
6. Riding a bike, typing while not looking at the keyboard, writing, reading. I don't think about how to type, or write or read or ride a bike, it's just automatically happening. Walking, talking as well.
So how does our brain do all of these things on autopilot? How does the brain decides which function gets to function auto and which are actions that needs our attention. Give a science-name if you could please, so that if I'm interested in more detail I could read up on it. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6dfyc6/eli5_brain_autopilot/ | {
"a_id": [
"di2e4kf"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"basically your brain has 2 ways to deal with things conscious and sub-conscious. \n\nfor things that require you to be actively involved and ready to react to the situation changing (requiring you to think) you deal with these in your conscious thought. \n\nFor things you are very well practiced at, and has little to no chance of anything interfering, your brain is able to allocate this task to your subconscious. \nWith this your subconscious can do things more efficiently, because it's doing it from memory rather than working things out. but it also takes less notice of the information being fed in from your sense unless it spots something potentially dangerous etc. Because of this, it does not retain the information to create a solid memory. \n\nThe benefit of all this is that tasks you can do without really thinking can still be done while the majority of your brain power (conscious thought) can do something more interesting, like remember who sang that catchy song you just heard on the radio. :)"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
1cyt7f | why is it legal for special interest groups to pay politicians to vote in their interests? | I just read an article that stated that congressmen got a combined $84M from IBM and other companies to support CISPA. Also last week, all the gun bills failed, even the parts that were supported by a large majority of Americans, and from what I understand it's in large part because of groups like the NRA paying money to senators. I admittedly don't know much about politics, but this seems like blatant bribery to me. Why is it that groups are allowed to give money to politicians? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cyt7f/eli5_why_is_it_legal_for_special_interest_groups/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9l8ym0"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"That isn't legal.\n\nBut it *is* legal for special interest groups to ask politicians to vote in their interests, because it's legal for anyone to do that. And it *is* legal for special interest groups to donate to the campaigns of politicians who they like, because it's legal for anyone to do that. So unless you want to just ban anyone who does any political activism from making campaign donations, what can you do?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
1oglov | why, when i scroll back 10 seconds on netflix / youtube, does the whole freaking film have to reload? | I mean surely it's already loaded, I just watched it! Scrolling back 10s to relisten to a line or check something you missed shouldn't take 2 minutes, should it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oglov/eli5why_when_i_scroll_back_10_seconds_on_netflix/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccrrref",
"ccrwpci",
"ccrzuls",
"ccs122s"
],
"score": [
50,
10,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"It's because the video is only loaded into temporary memory. As soon as its been read, it is discarded to make way for the following segment.",
"You can disable \"Dash-Playback\" in Youtube with [Youtube Center](_URL_0_) the Opera extension works in Chrome, and there's a separate one for FF as well.",
"It's mainly because those two use adaptive playback and dash playback, meaning that \nthey can change the video quality on the fly. \n\nThe downside of this is that unlike what use to happen before where the whole video just load at like 480, now bits and pieces of the video are all loaded at different qualities and there is no complete copy. \n\nSo to maintain the current quality, it will reload. \n\nHope that explains it better than the useless ram thingo above. ",
"It is mainly because these video players were implemented by inept morons.\n\nSeriously, I am a programmer and I know that it isn't that hard to implement it right. Especially as these players are implemented by corporations with billions of dollars in revenues. They have lots of resources.\n\nDoing it right is simply not a priority for them. It usually works like this: developers are given a list of features which player should have, and they work on it.\n\nFeature like \"it shouldn't take 2 minutes to relisten something 10s back\" simply wasn't on the list.\n\nAlso it's worth noting that Adobe Flash Player is among the the crappiest pieces of software I've ever seen. This is a sign that the team working on it is incompetent."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/youtube-center/"
],
[],
[]
]
|
|
3gd7yd | why are republicans viewed so negative versus democrat in general? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gd7yd/eli5_why_are_republicans_viewed_so_negative/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctx11yo",
"ctx12ue",
"ctx1nty",
"ctx33uf"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"People generally have a 'bell curve' when it comes to political opinions. Most are near the 'center' of their nation, with fewer people holding more radical ideas.\n\nA group of radicals known as the 'Tea Party' has taken over the Republican candidate selection process, and have forced the Republican party to be more 'ideologically pure', or more extreme in their beliefs. As a result, they have moved farther from the center, and more people find their opinions closer to the Democrats than to the Republicans.",
"I'm not sure why you believe Republicans are viewed far more negatively than Democrats in general.\n\nRepublicans control the majority of Congress at the moment, so they obviously have a large amount of support.\n",
"Depends on who you ask. People of opposing political parties who do not have much exposure to beliefs that are different than theirs tend to make extreme assumptions about the other group. Someone who grew up in a Democratic family in a Democratic town would of course have reservations about a conservative philosophy. The same applies to Republicans.\n\nThat said, there has been an unprecedented amount of political polarization in recent years. I like to jump onto the bandwagon and blame the media. Political talk shows and other propaganda that sensationalize issues to a point beyond recognition have led to a bitter divide between political philosophies. Important social issues such as abortion, education policy, LGBT rights, and immigration that should be considered in a rational, communicative way are now incendiary and explosive issues. This prevents actual progress from being made, and a lack of understanding of the other side's perspective is the largest culprit.\n\nUltimately, I would advise people to avoid incendiary propaganda from both sides of the political divide. Read the news from respected news sources and form your own opinions about it before seeking out other's thoughts. It is more than likely that you will find yourself agreeing with some democratic policies, as well as some republican policies. That just means that you are capable of critical thinking.",
"Be careful of selection bias.\n\nA lot of people on reddit are \"Everyone I know likes Democrats and hates Republicans, so I can't understand why Republicans are elected.\" Well, yeah--people of the same demographic (income, race, culture, etc) tend to have the same politics. \n\nDrop yourself in a different situation, and the reverse is true.\n\nThis is particularly acute on social media (where you pick the people you see--so you're literally creating a list of \"people I already agree with\") and on reddit, where the user base is overwhelmingly of a particularly ideology. HINT: Bernie Sanders is not ever going to be President. \n\nAt any rate, the Republicans keep winning Congressional races, which means they have a fairly strong hold over the opinions of the voting population. Just as thirty years ago, the Democrats kept winning races because they had more popular stances on positions. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
1v78ea | how does snap chat work? i'm not getting the information i'm curious about in previous posts. | Why and how have I received 7+ adds in 24hrs from people I don't know? Basically, I'm confused how they find my username to add me. And mainly are my photos really not private from other users and is this why I'm receiving lots of requests all of a sudden?
EDIT: I get that people use snap chat for sexting. I know how to and actively use the app for fun. I'm asking if the app is actually private, and how people you don't know find your username and add you. I'm questioning my photo privacy. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v78ea/eli5_how_does_snap_chat_work_im_not_getting_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepfx7j"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I think you're supposed to send pictures of your knob to women or something"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5a66kn | why is it not illegal to present objectively false information as truth in the news, videos, etc? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5a66kn/eli5_why_is_it_not_illegal_to_present_objectively/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9dxznq",
"d9dy4ng",
"d9dy7zt",
"d9dyynq",
"d9dz34s",
"d9dzsgr",
"d9e2yy7",
"d9e2zqq",
"d9e362s",
"d9e4ksm",
"d9e52f2",
"d9e5am1",
"d9e5lrh",
"d9e5zag",
"d9e6njs",
"d9e6ny2",
"d9e6nyx",
"d9e6sdu",
"d9e6vsi",
"d9e73lv",
"d9e754x",
"d9e86mj",
"d9e8hg9",
"d9e8lmo",
"d9e8usx",
"d9e8ztq",
"d9e985u",
"d9e9a84",
"d9e9glc",
"d9e9igz",
"d9e9nnc",
"d9e9qi9",
"d9e9wvb",
"d9eabc4",
"d9eb0qi",
"d9ebe10",
"d9ebhs8",
"d9ebmbi",
"d9ecbqf",
"d9ecedr",
"d9eckb3",
"d9ed0ht",
"d9ed0n1",
"d9ed950",
"d9edic3",
"d9edtc5",
"d9edwnn",
"d9edz3q",
"d9ee3rp",
"d9ee9d0",
"d9eeblp",
"d9eecj2",
"d9eerch",
"d9eexz6",
"d9efjdp",
"d9efti5",
"d9eg84b",
"d9egh8s",
"d9egmkt",
"d9ehjuu",
"d9ehkb7",
"d9ehm24",
"d9ei87k"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3531,
191,
3,
460,
96,
54,
2,
7,
5,
8,
7,
726,
11,
6,
4,
16,
25,
4,
204,
2,
4,
3,
6,
6,
4,
4,
11,
13,
2,
100,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
8,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
13,
5,
2,
2,
775,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because if it were then we would not get news. Or at least would not get them in a timely manner as they would have to spend days or weeks vetting everything thoroughly to avoid arrest. At that point it is no longer news and has moved on to be recent history. \n\nNews has to be given quickly and it uses facts as they are known at the time. They will often amend things and even retract things as new information comes out. It is your job to pay attention to this, not theirs to make you pay attention. All they have to do is publically release the correction. ",
"Chances are you are referencing opinion shows and not news. \n\nIf my memory serves there was a US court case about this. The 10 o'clock news for example was news and had an obligation to not lie. \n\nShows leg the Kelly file or whatever are opinion shows and can say whatever they want because a recent news topic is only the topic for discussion. \n\n",
"Well, who gets to decide what is objectively true or false? That might be easy to do for really ridiculous concepts (the world is flat), but would be incredibly hard to do for more complex situations. And a law would have a lot of trouble drawing the line of what is easy to determine as true or false and what is not. \n\nIn a case like this, you would have to put some government entity in charge of deciding what is true and what is false, which is very sensitive to corruption / only showing information that is in line with the government's interests. Even if you put this power in the command of some non-government organisation, you are still dealing with possible government influences (what if they cut funding) and the fact that no organisation anywhere is going to be completely unbiased. \n\nWe have some protections against media printing obvious falsehoods (slander / libel laws), but it would be hard to have any others without compromising the free flow of information. ",
"At least in the USA, your right to lie is guaranteed in the US Constitution.\n\n > Amendment I\n > \n > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or *abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press*; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.\n\nIt's impossible to regulate true vs. non-true speech -- as long as the speech does no harm -- without abridging the First Amendment. As a result, an alternate mechanism ~~has evolved in the USA~~ is used to deal with lies: \"Libel\" or \"Slander\" laws. If you can prove you were harmed by a lie in print, you can sue the liar for libel. If harmed by a lie that is spoken, you can sue the liar for slander. However, if there was no harm to you -- called \"defamation\" -- you have no standing to sue as a result of the lie. Additionally, truth is an absolute defense to libel and slander claims: if you harm someone by speaking the truth and are sued for slander, it should be thrown out of court.\n\nEDIT: If your speech causes harm, it can be criminal under some circumstances. This is ELI5, not ELIaLawyer.\n\nEDIT2: Laws outside the USA vary regarding causing harm with true statements. And, according to some rulings, the truth is not always a defense if your intent is to cause harm with a true statement.\n\nEDIT3: I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and based upon the state of my inbox after posting my top-level reply, I'm certain my originalist/textualist slant on the Constitution is unpopular on Reddit. I still, however, maintain that modern abridgments of free speech are unconstitutional. But it's interesting that we tolerate them anyway.",
"it is, but it's difficult to pin on someone and easy to get around. \n\nso i can publish something like \"the sky over california is turning purple and raining caterpillars, sources report\" and i haven't lied. i've effectively published as truth that the sky is turning purple and raining caterpillars, but i put the burden of proof on \"sources\". you'll always see things like this in the news. words like \"sources suggest\" or \"allegedly\" or \"it is speculated that\"... you get the point. ",
"\"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...\" - First Amendment to the United States Constitution.",
"Depends what country you're in...Canada has a law stating that broadcasters “shall not broadcast any false or misleading news.” It actually kind of amazes (and scares) me that the US doesn't have anything similar.",
"Well i know of one loophole. \"some sources say\" anything after that can be just about anything and be true.\n\nSome sources say that yo gabba gabba is the best show ever made ^^according ^^to ^^my ^^niece.\n\nSome sources say that the world is flat ^^according ^^to ^^some ^^insane ^^people.\n\nSame this with those fake magazines that are like. Our source reported his real life interview of the still alive Elvis. Yes their source DID report it. But that was the only true thing. I can report anything. and so can you.\n\nIf anyone just declares some unknown source I just assume its false just to be sure.",
"Libel and slander laws are different for public figures. A normal person like you or me only has to prove it was false. Someone like Madonna would have to prove malicious intent.",
"Specifically regarding news/media, there's this that many people don't know about: For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, 2013, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. _URL_0_\n",
"Most things that seem objectively false aren't actually objectively false and are just seriously misleading. The remaining things that are outright false are either mistakes are things that could easily be claimed to be mistakes in court, which would make prosecution nearly impossible. Leftover there is occasionally outright abuse which are things that the journalist obviously knows are completely false, things that are harmful, and things they obviously published with the intention of harming someone or something's reputation, and that kind of thing is illegal.",
"The first amendment's protection of freedom of speech and the press make it difficult for lawsuits against news media to proceed. Of course, libel and defamation can be the basis for lawsuits, but general prohibition of false information is largely not allowed because of the first amendment.\n\n > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; **or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;** or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.",
"Beyond figuring out where the line is drawn, there's an ethical issue as well. Once you accept the idea of muzzling the media, how long will it be before true information is censored because it's politically damaging to the party that oversees the media?",
"There is a case from 2003 where the Florida Court ruled that it is not against the law to falsify or distort information. The case, Jane Akre v Fox News, started back in 1997 when Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, reported on Monsanto Corporation's bovine growth hormone health risks. Fox pushed them to use false statements, and when Jane and her husband threatened to report them to the FCC, they were fired.\n\nBoth sued Fox citing Florida's whistle-blower laws, but Wilson's case was dismissed. Ultimately, Akre won stating that their termination was retaliation for refusal to broadcast dishonest versions of the story.\n\nLater, in 2003, Fox appealed and won because news distortion is not a law, rule, or regulation but rather policy. Furthermore, Fox argued that the first amendment gave them the right to deliberately report false information. As such, Akre's whistle-blower claim was overturned. Basically leaving it up to the news station if it wants to report honestly or not. ",
"Okay, so i happen to reside in Arizona and in Arizona there is a ballot proposition 205 to make legal small amounts of marijuana legal. The way the proposition is written is that the funds derived from the taxes would be distributed mostly to education, which I contend is a good thing. As I'm certain most voters would agree as well. \n\nTo counter the claim to persuade the voters to vote no (funded primarily by big pharma, and alcohol distributors) they play a commercial showing educators from Denver, Colorado saying they didn't receive any ear marked funds or money from Colorado's taxing legalizing the sale and use recreational use of marijuana, not a penny, it's all a sham so vote no. This is the gist of the message that schools didn't get a promised or hoped for windfall so vote no.\n\nWell if one was telling the TRUTH then what the commercial also would have said was the reason those schools didn't get any money is because Colorado wrote the law so the funds went into I believe their \"general educational \"fund use to build and maintain the public schools. Colorado saw almost 70 plus million in pot tax revenue. Colorado is indeed using this money to pay for construction and maintenance for it's schools. Absolutely are. How the funds are distributed determines how the funds are spent and where and for what. Watching the commercial one is led to believe that there are no monies made available to these schools and what little there is goes to administrative costs of enforcement. So, are what they are saying on the commercial a lie, or are they telling you the truth? \n\nI believe they are lying thru omission, which many politicians, especially politicians do all the time. Just because you hear one side of the story does not make one an informed voter. The politicians and PAC's are very aware of using such tactics knowing full well very few will dig deeper than their sound bite to uncover the rest of the story or as referred to nowadays as the backstory. That's how they can lie, distort, and spin their versions, omission is but one way and there are certainly many others. Ultimately it's up to the listener to determine whether what they hear is the truth, half truth, or a distortion of the facts, or downright lie. Fact check Trump's and Clinton's speeches and statements and see for yourself? With Google it's pretty easy yet very few do but it's getting more and more common and that's a good thing for all of us if we did. I believe all of us would be floored by the amount of disinformation we believe to be true. Education and common sense is the cure, pretty much the only cure I'm aware of.",
"Because then the governmemt can create a monopoly on what is \"true\". It would be a slippery slope.",
"Because then the governmemt can create a monopoly on what is \"true\". It would be a slippery slope.",
"Because who is going to define what is objectively true and what is objectively false? It's pretty easy for some abstract ideas but anything more complicated than \"Gravity exists\" and you've got some serious issues on your hands. Additionally it'd be ridiculously easy to get around laws like that \"this source says that gravity does not exist\" voila, they're reporting the truth because that source did say that thing.\n\nAnd don't even start about politics or science. What is considered the truth changes every other week as new information is discovered. The law doesn't exist because it'd be easily exploitable for all sides, incredibly difficult to enforce and inefficient.",
"For what you suggest to become law, you would need a government agency that determines what the truth is. I can't believe that sensible people would support or trust such a thing.",
"Slander and libel - intentionally defaming someone - can create successful lawsuits. Accidental misinformation should never be regulated otherwise through the law.",
"Think about this with something like Watergate. \n\nIf it had turned out there had been no Nixon-initiated break-in, would we want a world where reporters aren't willing to stick their neck out on the line when they have good reason to believe there is wrong-doing?\n\nDo we want a world where journalists that doubted the veracity of their source would be punished? Because, when it's all said and done, anyone that doubted that Nixon could have done such a thing done would be objectively wrong.\n\nWould it be right that if Nixon could have covered up wrongdoings, he could punish journalists for publishing truths about his abuse of power?\n\nOthers address that many things we see in the news are complex issues and that our knowledge is always incomplete (what we take as true one day could be proven incorrect the next); so there's some real epistemological concerns, but when you deal with it at the ground floor there's also very real concerns about what the role of journalists would be in a society without protections.\n\nAdded: Also, when dealing with people and allegations of wrongdoing, there's also an element to which we cannot be sure something is objectively true or false. Take the Bill Cosby allegations. We cannot know with 100% certainty whether he raped or sexually abused the women that came forward. We believe it to be the most likely explanation, but there is not always evidence after the fact (especially when dealing with instances like sexual abuse where there might never be evidence or victims might come forward when there is no evidence to present).",
"Hard to prove intent. What if someone doesn't realize they are lying? They THINK they are telling the truth. E.g.--when all the obamacare crap was going on, Obama famously said...\"you can keep your doctor, you can keep your current plan, etc.\" Most people knew this to be impossible. There are something like 37 different videos of Obama saying this. Probably more have surfaced now. Was he lying? Did his staff just tell him to say this. Kind of amazing that, after all this time, no news agency has directly asked him about this.",
"As much as we dislike lying and consider it morally wrong, it's not illegal to tell a fib *except under some circumstances*, like when you are giving testimony under oath, or filling out your tax returns. Plain old lying is pretty much allowed under freedom of speech/freedom of expression, even if it advances a political agenda. \n\nThat's not to say that free speech is unlimited. Ever heard the phrase, my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins? You don't have the right to yell \"Fire!\" in a crowded theater or to libel someone (falsely call them a pedophile online). \n\nBut outside of a few limits around defamation and incitement to riot, you are free to express an opinion, even if it's objectively false. It's a balancing act. Holocaust deniers are offensive and wrong but easily debunked. As someone once said, the best remedy to hate speech is more speech. \n\nJust as a side-note: the \"spreading of false news\" actually was a crime in Canada up until about 25 years ago. \n",
"Amendment I\n\nCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.",
"Because there is no way to objectively determine what is false. For example many people say Trump obviously lied when he denied mocking a disabled reporter. It seems clear cut, there's video of him making the hand motions. \n\nBut if you watch Trumps events often, it becomes apparent that he makes this exact same hand gesture for every single person he doesn't like.\n_URL_0_\n\nSo now a clear cut fact isn't so clear cut anymore. But check all the \"fact check\" sites (all run by left wing groups). And they still say its fact that trump mocked the disabled.\n\n",
"Firstly, there is no strict legal ruling that makes it illegal to lie, nor do I think there should be.\n\nSecondly there's a difference between lying and being arrogant.\n\nAsserting something as the truth without knowledge of it being true is known as arrogance. \n\nAsserting something as the truth WITH the knowledge that it is false, is lying. \n\nWithout a tremendous amount of proof it is almost impossible to prove that the person was lying.\n\nBecause of this it is almost impossible to legally differentiate between the two. \n\nTo legally punish someone for saying something is false would, as other have said, require there to be some sort of body of 'absolute facts'. And who determines what is an 'absolute fact' would be arbitrary and likely lead to what is broadly defined as injustice. \n\nThat and that in general it would be a very bad idea to punish people for being arrogant.",
"I think the problem with most of the comments in this thread is that many comments are stating why it would be difficult. While this isn't false by any means, I think the question, at its root deserves a different answer.\n\nThe problem is that many of these comments and even the question assume that it is the governments job to regulate this. Is it? Why do you feel the government should do that? Once that question is answered, we can find an answer to if it's pragmatic or not, but first we need to get on the same page of what the governments role in this issue should be.\n\nIn America, many would be concerned that the federal government limiting speech of this sort in any way is too far reaching, hoping that entities outside of the government can do a better job of the exact same thing (i.e. Watchdog groups, fact checking sites, common sense, etc) without having to limit freedoms.\n\nThere are cases were laws in America (generally state laws, I believe) limit certain types of speech. For instance, if I tell you if you give me $100,000 and in 2 years I'll give you $200,000, but I just go buy a car and lots of expensive things, it's fraud. The problem is less about lying and more about regulating business practices. There are many other similar laws in different areas, like protected terms like chiropractor, dentist, etc.",
"It is in Canada. Or at least it was. They had one \"infotainment\" channel spring up, but we weren't stupid enough to watch it (Sun News Network, AKA Fox News North) so it folded.\n\nWe have standards.",
"International redditors: What're you talking about? Many countries have laws to prevent false information from being aired on the news.\n\nAmerican redditors: Opinions are more important than facts, it says so in our free speech rules.",
"“Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech.”",
"In the UK, TV broadcasters are required to be impartial, and this is enforced by a regulator. Not quite the same as what you're suggesting, but in some countries the media are strictly regulated.",
"We used to have a means to enforce \"truth in media,\" we called it the Fairness Doctrine: \n \n > [The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was — in the Commission's view — honest, equitable, and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine.](_URL_0_) \n \nIt was later repealed: \n \n > In 1985, under FCC Chairman Mark S. Fowler, a communications attorney who had served on Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign staff in 1976 and 1980, the FCC released a report stating that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. \n\nThe long and short of it is this: \n \nIf a reporter says \"Climate change is a hoax.\" he's lying. \nIf a *commentator* says \"Climate change is a hoax.\" it's his opinion. \n \nHannity, Maddow, O'Reilly, and Matthews aren't ***technically*** news programs, they're \"Opinion and commentary.\" (Though most of their viewers may not know that.) \n\nSo when Hannity says \"President Obama may be from Kenya, climate change is a hoax, vaccines cause autism, immigration is on the rise, and Black Lives Matters is a hate group\" we have no legal means to stop him, because he's just expressing his opinion, which is protected by the first amendment. ",
"Watch \"the newsroom\" it will clarify everything for you as far as the current state of the media. ",
"There is, it's called libel and slander. If your lie hurts or damages the reputation of someone they can sue. But if you just tell a lie that doesn't hurt anyone like \"the world is flat\" people will just laugh at you, you will lose standing among the majority of viewers, viewership will go down, ad revenues will go down, and the problem takes care of itself. ",
"The first amendment gives you the right to say mostly anything you want. However, if what you say is a 'call to action', such as yelling 'fire' in a crowded movie theater, or instructing your friends to beat someone up in a bar fight, it is no longer protected. When it comes to the news, they aren't specifically calling anyone to action. Therefore, they could tell us that Mars was invaded by aliens, and they aren't breaking any laws.",
"Do that in Canada, and you are likely to get a hefty fine and your license revoked. Only American things.",
"because a) freedom of speech and the press, b) religion would be butt blasted, c) who decides what is \"objectively\" false.",
"There are laws against libel and slander. Other than that, there is not much the government can do. While falsehood is not protected under the first amendment of the US Constitution, it is inevitable in a medium that tolerates free speech. This is in part because it is easier to say something is false than it is to actually prove it false. Having the government screen for falsehood can create obstacles for people's right to dissent that our founding father's fought for.",
"In the UK broadcast news is heavily regulated, unlike press which is - infamously in the UK - a completely free-for-all. \n\nThe regulations are there to ensure impartiality, but almost everybody in the country assumes that the BBC, Sky News (owned by Newscorp), and ITN are biased. In ITN's case, they produce news for ITV (which people complain is too biased to the right) _and_ for Channel 4 (which people complain is too biased to the left). What is actually happening is people are upset that _their_ World view is not the one being reported.\n\nAnd that's the problem with \"objective truth\". First of all, there is the question of which stories to cover. Not covering a story: is that denying a truth? Is that creating a falsehood?\n\nTake for example, the curious case of a UKIP party member in the European Parliament who was hospitalised recently, apparently after a \"fracas\" with another party member. Now, the broadcast news programmes broadcast this, but some were concerned that they were over-obsessing about it (particularly UKIP supporters), and others that they were not pushing enough for answers (particularly those who hate UKIP). What if they'd just not broadcast any mention of it, and in so doing created the illusion that UKIP had no internal factions who were prepared to cause serious head injuries to each other?\n\nWhat if one day aliens arrived at the UN headquarters. Literally, their dish is flying over it. Because they chose the UN, the right wing broadcasters are upset, so they refuse to cover their arrival until they get to Washington D.C. - by ignoring the fact humanity has been contacted by extra-terrestrials, it could be argued that they are continuing a false version of history, a version in which we have not been contacted.\n\nThis is a very, very top-level scratching-the-surface view: everyday real world practical examples abound. ",
"Because what some people in america think is objective, is actually very very very subjective",
"Freedom of speech and freedom of the press means you can't be told to not lie. If it is illegal to lie, it means that some authority not only has to decide what the truth is, but what is a lie. This authority may or may not be inclined to only call things that cast it in a good light truth. \n\nTelling people that they can't lie removes freedom of speech. Telling news companies they can't lie removes freedom of the press.",
"Freedom of speech.\n\nIf there was a body tasked with policing what was true and what was not, it would be far too easy for them to suppress inconvenient truths for political reasons by simply declaring them false, even in the face of mountains of evidence.\n\nThe greatest historical precedent for this is the Catholic Church's suppression of Galileo for saying the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around. In more modern times, I use that phrase \"inconvenient truth\" quite intentionally - Republicans have tried long and hard to suppress the idea of global warming due to their ties to the fossil fuel industry. Imagine if they could simply declare by fiat that global warming doesn't exist and anyone who opposed it would be jailed.",
"Because very little information is actually objective, and the little that is unanimously objective, by definition, isn't particularly controversial.",
"There is no central \"why\", there are several factors at play though:\n\na. **There is no objective truth.** The idea of objectivity is an illusion and the idea of truth is an illusion. We humans are by default subjective, not because we want to, but because our brains are machines that are far stronger than our personalities/egos. Our brains process information based on what idea of \"reality\" THEY have and they fit/warp/distort/present information accordingly. It's not just about what you THINK, it's about what you perceive. What you experience as \"sight\" is not the information your eyes receive, what you experience as heading is not the information your ears receive, etc. So, when you look at all the possible political, social, religious, economic, philosophical, etc. beliefs there are, with the fact in mind that they all warp our perception in different ways, you can see that it is absolutely impossible to enforce an \"objective truth\". \n\nb. **The vast majority of current media is a business, not a source of information** News companies will present whatever makes their company most successful, this results in the omission of relevant events that are not \"profitable\", and the distortion of information because it will sell better.\n\nc. **Media are a tool** Just look at the presidential campaigns in the USA. The power politicians can wield through media is too great for them to give it up easily.\n\nd. **The internet is too big a source of information to be controlled** News isn't confined to \"controllable\" media anymore like papers, TV, radio, but the main source of news for people in the Western world at least is the internet. The internet isn't the sole domain of centrally controlled media, but is subject to literally billions of users (and automated programs) that spread all kinds of information for all kinds of purposes. ",
"Let's ask some of the guys who made it that way:\n\n > “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” - Thomas Jefferson\n\n > “The liberty of the press is essential to the security of the state.” - John Adams\n\n > “Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government: When this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved.” - Benjamin Franklin\n\n > “If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed.” - Benjamin Franklin\n\n > “If men are to be precluded from offering their sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences that can invite the consideration of mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of speech may be taken away, and dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter.” - George Washington\n\n > “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” - Thomas Jefferson",
"The answer (in the USA) is the First Amendment's protection of free speech. The First Amendment has been heavily litigated to create exceptions and fundamental protections to what one can and cannot say. \n\nAs for objectively false information, the problem is that there has to be a victim to bring a suit. \"Batboy lands on Mars, begins plan to kill all humans\" doesn't harm anyone. To the contrary, me publishing an article entitled \"John Smith: total homo\" lists his address, and accuses him of a lot of crimes and scandals harms John Smith.",
"Freedom to spech include freedom to lie, and say stupid shit. That's why it should comes with the right to be educated to learn how to make the difference",
"For one, it would put a huge strain on our already strained legal system.\n\nThey probably just rely on the fact that there are a lot of news outlets out there, to kind of.. correct each other.",
"There are lots of reasons, but the main one is that belief is not objectively verifiable.\n\nLet's say we make it illegal to say anything that can't be proven. This would make it illegal to say things like \"alien life exists\" or \"God exists\" or \"you will find true love.\" People don't want it to be illegal to say these things, so that's not the law.\n\nOkay, what about \"It's illegal to say things that can be proven false.\"\n\nThat still has problems. You could get in trouble for saying something that you were mistaken about. Like, maybe you think the Earth is flat even though it's objectively provable that it's not. Or maybe you thought that the prime minister of the UK is Tony Blair (which was true, but no longer is). Or maybe you think that Austria and Australia are the same place (they aren't). People don't think it should be illegal to be wrong, so this can't be the law either.\n\nOkay, so maybe we can make it illegal to deliberately lie. But no, we can't really enforce that, because you could just claim to be misinformed and to have genuinely believed it when you said it. It's very hard to prove you didn't simply misspeak or forget or misunderstand.\n\nSo instead we've made a few very specific things illegal (depending on where you live)\n\n1. You can't say certain extremely hurtful things, because it doesn't really matter whether it's true or not. People have agreed that it's too mean (\"hate speech\").\n2. You can't tell people to do certain very hurtful things or lie about things that could cause serious harm (\"inciting violence\" and \"crying wolf\" respectively)\n3. You can't say damaging things about people or companies if you can't prove it (\"libel\"/\"slander\")\n4. You can't lie under oath, because you have specifically agreed to tell the truth to the best of your ability, including questioning your source of knowledge and such (\"perjury\")\n\nThat's basically it. Most countries with free speech work this way, although the exact laws may differ. And the reason is the same. Because democracies tend to agree that it's not okay to punish people unless you're very certain they're doing something wrong.\n\n**Edit**: Since some people are missing two things:\n\n1. This is an *explanation* as to why the laws are the way they are, not advocacy for said laws. I am not expressing any opinion here. I am explaining to the best of my understanding.\n2. This sentence is the only one in the entire comment which mentions the United States of America. I am speaking broadly about the many democracies of the world. Yes, each country is a special snowflake with unique variations on the above and/or more or fewer restrictions. OP did not specify a country, so I did not assume one.",
"In Canada, that would be considered libel/slander. The news has to be reported accurately (eg omitting irrelevant information that could change the news story). \n\nSource- [Canada Association of Journalism](_URL_0_) and Media Ethics class. ",
"The Supreme Court decided that Television news programs are \"entertainment\" and are not obligated to tell the truth or provide factual information. The context for the particular decision I'm thinking of stems from an old whistle blower case where a network refused to run a story due to advertising pressure and then fired the reporters who made the story. The reporters tried to claim they were whistle blowers and should not have been fired, but the courts said \"Naw, it's entertainment. Networks are under no obligation to run a story just because it's true.\"\n\nThat doesn't really address your question directly, but it does show how murky the waters are when it comes to \"entertainment\" news programs.",
"Reframed another way:\n\nIs there any proven method to curb the spread of misinformation we're currently seeing in our politicians and media outlets?\n\nEven better, is there a method that relies less on people's willingness to question what they're told or education, and more on systematic changes (i.e. creating economic incentives, legal incentives, etc)?\n\nThe answers to this question in the comments are interesting, but I think there's a lot more to gain by learning of any solutions rather than focusing on the problem.",
"News agencies used to have a provision that forced them to present news in a fair and impartial way. Lying directly or by omission in these broadcasts or pushing propaganda used to be illegal, but lawmakers reversed that.\n\nThe [Fairness Doctrine](_URL_1_) was repealed in 1987 and the [2013 NDAA](_URL_0_) legalized government-sponsored domestic propaganda.",
"If presenting false information were to become a crime it would totally destroy America's political system.",
"Why would it be ? it is not the news job to report the truth. ",
"In the United States, there is nothing close to a truth-in-reporting law. And, in fact, lying is considered a right of free speech. The US Supreme Court has codified even a police officer's right to lie to a suspect.\n\nSome countries do have truth-in-reporting laws, more commonly defined as requiring impartial, unbiased news coverage. The United Kingdom has such a law. It's a reason the Murdoch-owned Sky News (UK) and Fox News (US) are totally different animals. Fox News is known for its severe right wing bent. Sky News is actually fairly respectable, a little right-leaning, but bound by law to try being impartial.\n\nThe situation with US media worsened in the 1980s when the Reagan administration did away with an equal-time rule that required US media outlets* to provide equal time to both points of view (yes, supposing that on every issue there are only two primary points of view). It is what led to the rise of right wing media outlets, which previously probably would have been illegal, if not much tamer, because they'd be required to try providing equal time for liberal perspectives.\n\nEdit: * media outlets using public airwaves, such as radio stations and over-the-air TV stations.",
"Because that would require governmental regulation of published information, and that is a violation of th U.S. constitution.",
"Because the only thing the first amendment is good for today is protecting the media's right to lie to us.\n\nIndividual's freedom of speech is quickly going the way of the dinosaur, as evidenced in social media, and many college campuses nationwide.",
"The better question to ask is why are people allowed to show one, ridiculously flawed, viewpoint and that only? Why can Fox bring on \"Experts\" to deny climate change? Up until recent history, this was illegal. Fox would have to have opposing viewpoints on to explain, not just force feed BS with no one to express another viewpoint. ",
"Because you cannot make it illegal to be ignorant. You just can't. The whole basis for society would fall apart when we would have to put everyone in prison because everyone is ignorant to something.\n\nPresenting objectively false information as truth in the news, videos, etc, KNOWING it's false information though. Now we're into an area that indeed IS illegal. It's also however an area that is almost impossible to prove, but if you can prove that a news org knowingly published false information, do submit that evidence to the closest prosecutor and they will act on it. But it's something that is just EXTREMELY rare because of the difficulties in proving something like that.",
"Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. I can say whatever I want (but you decide when to listen). Plus, if enforced what I said who enforces and how do I know they're right?\n\nWikipedia:\n\n > Today, freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized in international and regional human rights law. The right is enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.[14] Based on John Milton's arguments, freedom of speech is understood as a multi-faceted right that includes not only the right to express, or disseminate, information and ideas, but three further distinct aspects:\n\n > 1. the right to seek information and ideas;\n > 2. the right to receive information and ideas;\n > 3. the right to impart information and ideas\n\n_URL_1_\n\nFreedom of speech is in Amendment 1 of the US Constitution:\n\n_URL_1__in_the_United_States\n\nNazi Germany heavily censored and decided what they wanted it's citizens to hear:\n\n > The government attempted to tightly control information available to their citizens.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Because propaganda is now legal in the US. The bill was passed early this year/ late last year iirc",
"It is in Canada. Which is why we need to import certain stations like Fox News. Fox tried to open a Canadian channel a number of years ago, but then realized that the fines would make them vastly unprofitable within the first few weeks.\n\nAll Canadian news organizations cannot knowingly disseminate falsehoods as news. They can do so as parody or entertainment, but any show which bills itself as a news venue, and is *meant* for the Canadian market, must adhere to this rule or it risks being fined massive amounts for every infraction.\n\nWhich I think is really, really great. As a news organization, people turn to it for the unvarnished truth. When it isn’t, it’s outright deception - and a great tool for massively disrupting an entire population for the gains of a few at the top. It’s an awesome tool for fascism, which is why the Religio-wingnut Republicans have always loved it and why LibTards (Neo-Liberals) have come to rely on it as well (just look at the state of the current US election, and the Crooked $hillary promotion, as a prime example). Objective, honest, facts-based reporting is always centrist, which is why national news organizations like the BBC and CBC (Canada) are so darn important -- politicians always have a much harder time getting away with crap when there is at least *someone* big who isn’t going to cover for their shit."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsaB3ynIZH4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.caj.ca/ethics-guidelines/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2013#Smith-Mundt_Modernization_Act_of_2012",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Nazi_Germany",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States"
],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2qcf6t | what happens to water once it reaches your stomach? what processes expend it first and where does it go? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qcf6t/eli5_what_happens_to_water_once_it_reaches_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn4ucvt"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Once water hits your stomach it either mixes with acidic stomach juice and partially digested food (chyme) or continue on into the intestines. Little to no digestion takes place for water in the small intestine, where it enters next, but then it moves into the large intestine, where most of it is absorbed into the blood stream and some water helps to form feces (poop). \n\nThis gives the body more blood volume (it helps add to plasma concentration) and if the person is hydrated enough after the water contributes to the blood, it's filtered through the kidneys and then you have urine. This is why when you drink a lot of water, you have to pee a lot."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
a1fu5o | how do anti-wind lighters work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a1fu5o/eli5_how_do_antiwind_lighters_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"eapgd87"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"The wick ones(like zippo) have a little casing around the base of the wick to cut down on wind that actually hits the burning wick. The flame itself flutters in the wind, but the source of the flame is protected. \n\nThe butane or jet/cigar lighters spray the fuel out of a tiny nozzle, kinda like putting your finger over the end of a garden hose. This makes it come out much stronger, so it’s harder to blow out. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
10e6mf | how do cosmologist/astrophysicists know how big our galaxy is since we are not even in the center of it and how do they know that too? | I always see space shows on TV that talk about how large our galaxy is of 100,000 light years across, but how do we know this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10e6mf/eli5_how_do_cosmologistastrophysicists_know_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6cpra6",
"c6crmm5"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I highly recommend you read [this page about the cosmic distance scale](_URL_1_). \n\nHere is an ELY5 summary:\n\n* You can measure distances to nearby stars using a parallax method, where you look at the star twice, six months apart, and use the diameter of Earth's orbit to calculate how far away the star is. Using our best telescopes, we can tell that some stars are more than 3,000 light years away.\n* There are certain types of stars that we can predict how bright they *should* be. These are called \"standard candles\". By measuring how bright they *actually* are, we can tell roughly how far away they are because we know exactly how much light gets dimmer by distance. Using this technique we can measure huge distances, but it is not very accurate.\n* We know enough about stars to be able to make a [fancy diagram](_URL_0_) that classifies all stars into certain groups. When we observe certain groups of stars, we can figure out how they were formed and thus can figure out where they fit into the diagram. This is called \"main sequence fitting\". After we figure out where a star belongs in that diagram, we can figure out how bright it *should* be, and using math similar to the \"standard candles\" above, we can figure out how far away these groups of stars are.\n\nNow, using these techniques, all we have to do is look around and measure distances to stars and we soon find that our galaxy (all the stars we can see) is about 100 thousand light years across.\n\nWe know that we are not at the center of the galaxy because when we look around we see that there are a lot of stars in one direction and not very many in the other direction. From looking at other galaxies we can see that galaxies are usually bright in the center and fade off towards the edges, so from this we can determine that we are not in the center, or on an edge... we are sort of halfway to the edge.\n\nBy looking at enough stars we can actually determine where the spiral arms of our galaxy are and where we are in relation to them.",
"[This comment](_URL_0_) is the one with the right answer in it. But I'm going to chime in with a fun bit of trivia that highlights that what we *don't* know about seemingly basic things — like where we are in space and what's going on around us — is just as important as what we *do* know.\n\nIt's been known for 2,500 years that there's a broad streak of light in the sky. What that streak was exactly was a topic of debate for a long time, but even in the 5th century BC *at least some* people had the idea that the light was coming from distant stars.\n\nIt took nearly two thousand years for anyone to come up with compelling evidence that the \"Milky Way\" — *via lactea,* Latin for \"milky road\" — was in fact made of very tiny, very densely packed stars. From this came the observation that our sun is embedded about halfway to the edge of a roughly-disc-shaped collection of stars, and that the Milky Way is our edge-on view of the part of that disc we can see.\n\nSo our picture of the universe changed from one uniformly scattered with stars to one in which all the stars are clumped together into this single unimaginably huge structure.\n\nOver the following decades, people looked more and more closely at the stars in the sky and discovered, to their surprise, that some of those stars didn't actually look like stars at all. Instead they were kind of … blobby. They were called *nebulae,* from the Latin word for cloud.\n\nLooking more closely at these nebulae, with ever-more-powerful telescopes, we discovered that they are in fact *whole galaxies,* at least superficially similar to ours. So our picture of the universe changed *again* from one in which all the stars are part of a single structure to one in which the universe consists of more or less evenly, but *incredibly* distantly, distributed galaxies, and ours was just one of them.\n\nNot long after, we identified one galaxy in particular — a former nebula called M31 — that's closer to us than any other. Because that galaxy is in the constellation Andromeda, that became its nickname — despite the fact that there are *countless thousands* of other galaxies also in Andromeda. M31 is special only because it's fairly close to us on the cosmic scale, a few thousand times farther from us than the estimated diameter of our galaxy, and consequently it appears bigger and brighter in the sky than any other galaxy. So for a while there, we thought we had a neighbor in the cosmos.\n\nBut *then* we learned that M31 — \"Andromeda\" — is so conspicuous in our sky, as galaxies go, not just because it's particularly close, but because it's *unbelievably enormous.* If you go by the number of stars we can see, Andromeda is three to five times bigger than our own galaxy. It's simply enormous.\n\nOnce we stopped paying attention to the big guy over there and looked more closely at our own neighborhood, we discovered that our galaxy is actually surrounded by *at least* dozens of smaller galaxies that we didn't even know were there. They're much smaller than our galaxy, and much less densely packed with stars, so until we went looking very close indeed, we were completely unaware that they even existed. We'd been spending all our time looking at the giant trees in the distance and had completely overlooked the perfectly respectable ashes and birches surrounding us.\n\nThen in 2005, we made what, to me, is the most stunning discovery of all: *There's a whole other galaxy sticking right through ours.*\n\nGalaxies are, of course, not solid objects. They're more like clouds than anything else, in that they're collections of suspended \"droplets\" — stars — held loosely together. Most of a galaxy's volume consists of relatively empty space. Meaning galaxies are pretty intangible things, all things considered. It's possible for one to pass right through another with relatively little drama.\n\nAnd it turns out that's exactly what's happening to our galaxy right now. A whole separate galaxy, smaller than ours but still respectable enough to bear the name, has intersected ours sometime in the distant past, and is now *wedged* there, sticking out the side and ever-so-slowly melting away as the gravitational influence of our (bigger) galaxy destroys the structure of that other (smaller) one.\n\nThis other galaxy — nicknamed Virgo for the constellation in which it appears in the sky — is *by far* the largest structure visible with the naked eye. It's *five thousand times* larger than the full moon. But because it's so close to us, it's virtually invisible unless you know exactly what to look for. It just looks, to the naked eye, like part of our own galaxy, just more stars in the sky.\n\nStudying the sky is hard, is the point here. After 2,500 years of observations, more or less, we thought we knew a lot about where we are in the universe and what our immediate surroundings look like. But it turns out there was this *entire other galaxy* looming enormous in our sky that we'd completely failed to notice.\n\nIt's like living in the same house for thirty years and one morning waking up to discover a shed in the back yard that you'd never known was there.\n\nWhat we *don't* yet know about our galaxy and its surroundings is just as important as what we do know. Because we know a lot, but the more we look, the more we keep discovering, and it's really hard to shake the feeling that we're just now starting to get a glimpse of just how much more there is to learn."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertzsprung-Russell_diagram",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_candle"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10e6mf/eli5_how_do_cosmologistastrophysicists_know_how/c6cpra6"
]
]
|
|
4mtt6d | how were colors standardized before we started thinking of them as rgb values? like how did they keep the red on the american flag consistent? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mtt6d/eli5_how_were_colors_standardized_before_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3y83mr",
"d3y86qo",
"d3y8942",
"d3y8etl",
"d3ye97q",
"d3yibys",
"d3yln0r",
"d3ym5p0",
"d3yrqw7"
],
"score": [
324,
52,
4,
29,
30,
17,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The Pantone color matching system was the most common method. It was created originally for cosmetic colors (vanity wins again!). The matching system was just a bunch of well controlled cards. I'd have the cards, and you'd have the cards and then I'd describe my color/print/shirt/dye/whatever in terms of its relationship to these cards.\n\nEdit: Clarifying a few things:\n\n1. RGB is used for on-screen colors, not for dyes and inks (printing, etc.). It is sometimes converted, but don't expect good results ;) \n\n2. I'm not interpreting this as \"how were colors standardized in the 1700s when we started making the american flag\", but interpreting it as \"how did we do it prior to RGB\" (which became popularized with computer screens).\n\n3. If you want to go back further, you'll run into a variety of color systems. In the 1800s you'll see the munsel color system, and other \"color wheel\" approaches that achieve the fundamental goal of \"color matching\". Whether this was used in flag making or not is unknown to me, but I suspect that flag makers just bought \"red fabric\" from their fabric supplier ;)",
"Recipes and the \"mark one eyeball\".\n\nWhen you bought dyes from a dyemaker they would use certain ingredients or mixes of ingredients to make specific colour. Some of the pigments were created from certain plants, like \"indigo\" from the indigo plant or stain from walnut trees or cedar roots, that were biologically similar, so you had a base starting point. \n\nThen you either followed a recipe to get the right ingredients, or just blended them until they looked right when applied to a piece of white cloth or paper. \n\nFor reference hold your \"swatch\" up to the real flag and adjust it as needed until the colours match precisely, then make a huge batch for all your July 4th needs.",
"They generally had no real reason to keep colors consistent as long as they were reasonably close to the desired color. Any consistency more likely developed from using the same ingredients to make dyes.",
"They weren't. The precise colors of the American flag are not well-defined legally, but certain hues are traditional and dyes are chosen to match that. The same for other colors--you've got an idea of the color you like and then you find the right dye composition to match it (or a sample). Once you've found the right color, others can use the same composition--and if the dye is consistent, so will the colors produced be. This can be pretty effective, but some variation is to be expected.\n\nThis is actually not that different from current production, where it's normal for some colors to be off a little, and these products will be rejected or sold at a lower price. Have you ever heard of the Pantone color matching system, used in many sectors today? Pantone colors are defined by the mix of pigments used to create them, not CMYK or RGB values. This is a formalized system of the traditional method.\n\nNote that European flags are closely related to heraldry, where color variation is explicitly acceptable. E.g. the colors of [England](_URL_0_) are *or* and *gules*. For heraldic purposes it does not matter whether *or* is gold or yellow, or whether *gules* is blood-red or pink, it is up to the artist. Indeed, *argent* is sometimes a true silver color and sometimes plain white. Hence why many traditional flags are defined in apparently unspecific terms.",
"Consistent dying with organic dyes is really, really hard. Prior to the 1850s (when the first aniline dye was distilled out of coal tar), the best source of red was from the female cochineal, a New World insect that is a parasite on a type of cactus. Keeping dye lots consistent was very difficult because the bugs themselves had varying amounts of carminic acid, the mordant was not always chemically pure, and the fact that dye takes differently at different PHs.",
"We don't specify physical colors in RGB even today; RGB is strictly for electronic displays. Furthermore, RGB isn't even one standard - it's several (sRGB, Adobe RGB, etc), each of which results in a different color for the same RGB values - and each one only covers a fraction of the colors we can see. We specify standardized colors in Lab, XYZ, xyY, NCS, Pantone... as the old saying goes: the nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.\n\nAs for old standards: the oldest standards are simply physical examples of pigments, e.g. [vermilion](_URL_0_) is the color of cinnabar.\n\nIn terms of proper scientific standards, that would probably be [CIE 1931](_URL_1_).",
"The short answer is that they weren't.\n\nAt best you would have artists/alchemists who would use the same physical materials in the same densities to achieve the same value, as dyes and paints are just suspended particulates.\n\nThere were always inconsistencies.\n\nNowadays you have color matching systems that literally give % of each of the pigments to mix together to create a color. Those systems lack a lot of color choices that are impossible to make via pigments alone, such as CMYK. \n\nto get CMYK you're basically standardizing what cyan, magenta, yellow and black are. Not all inks are the same, which makes any printer output differently from any other.\n\nThere are plenty of RGB colors that are not possible in CMYK, flipping between the two shows it.\n\n\nThe ancient version of this was by weight / volume of pigments combined together and suspended in whatever substance... oil, resin, etc",
"RGB is not a standardization for color itself, it's merely a color model that describes levels of color to be mixed ... but it doesn't define anything about the base colors in the model (what is \"red\" \"green\" or \"blue\"), and it doesn't define anything about the different shades–a level of 0 does not necessarily mean \"no light\" for that component. A \n\"black\" screen will show the black point of a device, which is not the same as a complete lack of light (which is obvious if you've ever had a \"black\" screen on a CRT monitor and then you turn it off, and it suddenly goes several shades darker).\n\nThere's a lot of discussion in this thread about Pantone and how that's some kind of standard...but that's not really a *full* standardization of color either. For one thing, it provides no way to match a color that isn't directly represented in the Pantone system...it's easy to find shades in between existing Pantone colors. And, it's restricted to the CMYK space of printable colors and the gamut of printed materials, which makes up only a small part of what the human eye can see.\n\nThe way we standardize color is using the [CIE 1931 color space](_URL_2_) (or, more rigorously, the 1976 [CIELUV standard](_URL_0_)). Even this doesn't claim to standardize colors for all humans, only the \"standard observer\". For example, it would be a pretty poor system for a [tetrachromat](_URL_1_). ",
"When will an old timey answer just be \"they didn't\" or \"they couldn't\" that's the answer I'm hoping for and someone always has some other response"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Royal_Arms_of_England_%281198-1340%29.svg"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermilion",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIELUV",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Human_tetrachromats",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space"
],
[]
]
|
||
6zq7ls | why almost all boats (watercraft in general) have names but airplanes don't? | Even small boats have distinct (and very creative) names! But airplanes only are known by the flight numbers. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zq7ls/eli5_why_almost_all_boats_watercraft_in_general/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmx7cg6",
"dmx7hti",
"dmx8sji",
"dmx964u"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"JetBlue had names for all their planes last time I was working on them. CP Air also named their planes. Many militaries also allow their planes to be named. Thing is, aviation is heavily regulated and even a named plane's **official** identity is the fin number allocated by the regulating authority. Many jurisdictions also allocate official numbers to even small craft, but it is seldom used because their travels are not as rigidly controlled",
"I can think of one plane, named for the pilot's mother:\n\nThe Enola Gay.\n\nReasonably famous.\n\nMore generally, plenty of personal aircraft have names, as well as many commercial craft. FedEx names their planes if I'm not mistaken.\n\nAmerican Airlines does not.\n\nSo, more planes have names than you think. ",
"Airlines often have names for their planes... here's an [article that explains](_URL_0_) many of the airlines' naming conventions.",
"I worked at sea for the last 10 years and as far as I can tell the reason is mainly tradition. \n\nAlso take into account the crew on a ship live there for 4+ months at a time and a name is more personal than a designation. One of the first container ship companies (I can't remember the name) tried to put numbers on ships rather than names and were threatened with strike action by the fleet captains. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.travelandleisure.com/travel-tips/airlines-airports/how-airplanes-get-names"
],
[]
]
|
|
1x0hog | double irish and dutch sandwhich tax loopholes | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x0hog/eli5_double_irish_and_dutch_sandwhich_tax/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf715f2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Some companies offer tax breaks or tax relief for certain kinds of businesses and business transactions. They believe that this tax relief is good for their overall economies by giving companies a reason to locate some business assets and staff in those countries.\n\nIreland and the Netherlands (and the Netherlands' territories in the Caribbean) offer some of these tax advantages to foreign companies doing business under their jurisdiction.\n\nOver time these various \"deals\" have become complicated by special exemptions and rules of various levels of opacity. Eventually financial engineers figured out ways to route a business transaction through shell companies (a company that doesn't really do any business itself but acts as a legal entity through which other transactions be routed to gain favorable tax treatment) that exploit these loopholes. There are a couple of ways that such transactions can be structured to reduce the tax liabilities close to, or to, zero.\n\nThe financial engineers talk about these strategies in shorthand. A \"sandwich\" implies that the transaction goes through at least 3 intermediaries, with the advantage coming in the middle step. A \"double\" implies that the transaction has to be routed out of a country, then back into the same country to maximize the advantage.\n\nThis stuff is mostly harmless for the countries involved. They get some benefits, even if it is just a small fee charged annually to keep the shell corporations on the books as legal entities. The companies also probably pay some number of local lawyers and accountants to keep all the paperwork and filing requirements handled. Virtually all the revenue involved is generated elsewhere. So the countries offering these deals aren't really \"losing\" anything - the companies using these strategies wouldn't book the transactions within their jurisdictions were it not for these tax strategies. If the countries closed the \"loopholes\", they wouldn't get any taxes, the companies would just change strategies to the next best option.\n\nThe downside is to **other countries** where the transactions are real, and income is being earned, and where they would like to actually tax those real transactions and get revenue from things happening in their real economies. \n\nThe key to a lot of these strategies is that the countries involved are in one of several European treaty regimes, including the European Union, which limit the individual country's abilities to retaliate for the lax tax laws of other member states. Instead the countries that think they're being harmed have to work through the treaty mechanism to resolve their disputes, which takes such a long time, and is not guaranteed to result in a favorable outcome that most don't bother."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
j3pee | li5 historically which form of government has citizens with the highest quality of life and general happiness? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j3pee/li5_historically_which_form_of_government_has/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28vjkv",
"c28vkgj"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"using HDI as a base to my answer (_URL_0_), it's evident that a balance of capitalism and socialism will produce the happiest people.",
"\"Quality of life\" and \"happiness\" are notoriously difficult things to rank, because to rank them means you have to make a judgment, rather than simply looking at some numbers. It's easy to look at a chart of GDPs or something and tell who has the most, because that's just money. But \"happiness\" or something similar--who decides what \"happiness\" entails? Is it having the most money? Is it having the longest lifespan? Is it having the highest average IQ? Is it a mixture of all these and more? Who decides what we factor in, and how much each factor is worth? The potential for bias in ranking nations like this is nearly unavoidable.\n\nSo I think your question might not be answerable, because you're assuming that there is a universally-accepted standard for evaluating happiness and quality of life, when there isn't.\n\nAs an example, consider that Bhutan, a tiny nation in Asia, routinely appears at the top of \"Global Happiness Index\" reports. Why? They came up with the criteria! Bhutan has a major refugee problem and is led by a king. Certainly other nations might not consider the total citizenry of Bhutan to be the happiest in the world. It's all a matter of perspective."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index"
],
[]
]
|
||
2wdcrw | libertarians | so a volunteer at an anarchist bookstore told me that libertarianism is "socialism for rich people" and I have my doubts. What is libertarianism? What kind of person would be into it? How would a libertarian society function? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wdcrw/eli5libertarians/ | {
"a_id": [
"cops2jr",
"cops9xr",
"copspzi",
"copst13"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The basis of libertarianism is establishment of rights without encroaching on someone else's rights. Basically I have the power to swing my arms as much as I want, but my rights to do that stop at the edge of your nose. At that point it would be encroaching upon your rights.",
"The volunteer at the bookstore either doesn't really understand libertarianism or they are intentionally mischaracterizing it (most likely the second because anarchists tend to dislike anything governmental).\n\nNow, first off, let me say that the idea of libertarianism has been co-opted by groups such as The Tea Party who aren't really interested in the ideals of libertarianism so much as they're interested in how they can use some less-diligent followers of libertarianism for their own gain. For instance, The Tea Party tends to be accurately libertarian when it comes to fiscal-in-the-government issues, but absolutely not very libertarian at all when it comes to social-in-the-government issues. So they want to use the libertarian platform to push their own social agenda (which tends toward conservatism).\n\nActual libertarianism, as anon33249038 stated, is about recognizing people's rights and the freedom for individuals to choose their actions as long as they're not encroaching on anyone else's rights. A good example of this might be drug use...as long as the individual's drug use doesn't impact someone else's rights, it is considered a \"victimless crime\" and should not be illegal. Once that drug use begins to encroach on someone else's rights, there is now a victim, and that victim's rights should be upheld.\n\n",
"At its core, Libertarianism espouses that humans have natural rights to their lives, their liberty and their property. The function of government should be only that which maintains those natural rights. A government that attempts to do anything more will invariable start chipping away at one or all of those rights.",
"You might want to read through the answers that have been given the last dozen times someone asked this question.\n\nEssentially, libertarians take the position that the less government there is, and the less it does, the better. How much government that is, and how much it runs, varies from one school of thought to another. Anarcho-capitalism is sort of the far end of the spectrum, whose proponents believe the state can be done away with altogether and replaced by private businesses.\n\nThere's a lot of debate about how exactly a libertarian society would work. Non-libertarians would likely think it wouldn't work at all.\n\nFrequently, people who are into libertarianism *are* relatively well off and politically conservative. If you're relying on welfare to make ends meet, or you're a low-wage employee being screwed over by some big company, chances are that the idea of abolishing government and leaving everything to the market isn't going to appeal to you, whereas for people who are well off, the idea of getting rid of almost all taxes is pretty appealing and you get the vague notion that everything will run better without government as a bonus.\n\nWith regards to 'socialism for rich people', there are a lot of different ways that could be interpreted - \"pie-in-the-sky idea that sounds great on paper but ultimately wouldn't work\" seems at least possible."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1z8u5q | why is it when you hit a gnat mid air (or other small flying insect) with your hand, does it not die? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z8u5q/why_is_it_when_you_hit_a_gnat_mid_air_or_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfrmlzc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because you create a huge gust of air when you are trying to swat it. That is why fly swatters have little holes in them so air can pass through. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
7a6lar | how are the structures of pathogens adapted to infect the body? | I understand the some bacteria, some fungi and all viruses are pathogenic micro-organisms.
How does their structures adapt to infect our body? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7a6lar/eli5_how_are_the_structures_of_pathogens_adapted/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp7jpwz",
"dp806eu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm going to speak to viruses, since their structure tied directly to their function.\n\nSome viruses like [HIV](_URL_0_) are enveloped while others like [adenoviruses](_URL_1_) are non-enveloped. Both have different shaped proteins that bind to the cell types needed for infection and allow the virus to enter the cell. \n\nHIV inserts a copy of it's DNA into the host cell DNA, and turns that cell into a stable virus generator. The HIV components are packaged together and form a bubble at the cell membrane before pinching off and leaving as a small virus particle, leaving the enveloped structure you see [here](_URL_0_). This envelope can dry out, effectively \"killing\" the virus. This is why HIV is spread by direct blood to blood or other fluid contact.\n\nThe adenovirus structure is thought to be involved with helping the virus escape from the cells digestion system (where they enter the cell in a bubble-like compartment that fills up with acid). It then moves to the region where DNA is made and uses the cell's machinery to make viral copies. Adenoviruses quietly exit the cells like the HIV virus. Instead, their production goes from 0-100 quickly as they build up so quickly and in such high number that the cell explodes like a piñata. \n\nWhile the immune system is playing catch-up trying to destroy cells infected with the adenovirus and prevent them from harming uninfected cells, large numbers of them are spread by the infected individual through coughing, sneezing, or other transmission methods depending on the location of the infection. Non-enveloped viruses are more stable as they don't dry out like their counterparts. These are the viruses that are stable on surfaces for long periods of times and can infect people directly in the air or through indirect contact with things such as a door knob.",
"\n\nHello your friendly neighborhood pathologist enthusiast here let me break it down real nice for you.\n\n\nBacteria have a variety of toxins. Cholera toxin causes diarrhea. Endotoxin causes septic shock. Botulism Toxin (also known as botox) causes paralysis. Bacteria are encoded in cell membranes these cell membranes have a variety of structures that prevent antibiotics from killing them. Bacteria eject balls of DNA into the environment called plasmids. One bacteria can give antibiotic resistance to an entirely different species through plasmids. Bacteria also have pili, these are small hairs that allow them to attach on surfaces. Like the bacteria that infect your throat. thats how they stay on. They also can form endospores these are hard seed like casings that allow the bacteria to survive without water, nutrients and in high temperature environments.\n\n\nViruses have spikes on them that help them stick on cells. A variety of these spikes determines what it infects HSV1(cold sores) have spikes for the lips while HSV2(Genital herpes) Has spikes for the genitals. This is important for chicken pox which has spikes for neurons. Chicken pox remains in your body because it hides in your nerves cells(you body can't attack these cells because they have limited repair function) and return decades later as shingles.\nVirus are also purposely error prone in their division. This leads to mutations that confer antiviral resistance. Virus like chicken pox\n\n\n\nPlease Ask me more questions! I have a lot more info, but I wanted to keep it general."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"https://www.lukejerram.com/glass/gallery/hiv",
"https://www.lukejerram.com/glass/gallery/adenovirus"
],
[]
]
|
|
2ruwwg | how can companys require mandatory overtime. it's not in my scope of availability. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ruwwg/eli5_how_can_companys_require_mandatory_overtime/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnjgvhf",
"cnjgxmr",
"cnjh50s",
"cnjlai4",
"cnjm0vn",
"cnjmcvv",
"cnjofmq"
],
"score": [
33,
37,
39,
5,
3,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Just googled it. They are required to pay you time-and-a-half for overtime, but yes apparently there is no legal upper limit to the number of hours per week (United States).\n\nThat said, if you absolutely can't do it, talk to your manager. Explain the situation. No one wants to lose a good employee. Maybe they can work something out.",
"If you can't perform the essential functions of the job, they don't need to continue employing you. It sounds like they are now including 10 hours of OT as an essential function of the job. \n\nObviously, some jurisdictions have labor laws that would make it harder to let you go, so it depends on where you live. In most places (US), you would likely have zero legal recourse. \n\nEdit: if its just a temporary thing, they likely would want to work with you. Depending on the skill level of your position and your ability, it can be very expensive to replace an employee. \n\n",
"If it's legal or not depends entirely on your contract and where you are in the world.\n\nApparently, in some industries, this is pretty standard.. things like software development will routinely have an expectation to do overtime. ",
"How is it overtime if it is mandatory? !",
"in most places it's simple...\n\nhere is a job, these are the requirements of your job, take it or leave it.\n\nthis is especially true in jobs that involve \"violent peaks\" in business such as a walmart during the holidays...\n\nwhen you take the job, you do so with the understanding that one of the reasons they are hiring you is because they need people during the holiday rush. if you take the job, be prepared to do what they require of you to stay employed or quit and find a job somewhere else.\n\nif you ran a fireworks store, you would obviously hire people who are available to work long days/nights before and on the actual holiday of july 4th.\n\nif you can't work on july 4th, you can't work at the fireworks store.\n\nbottom line is nobody holds a gun to your head and forces you to work somewhere. if you don't like the job, or the hours, or the people you work for... quit.\n\nfind a job that works better for you.",
"be glad you aren't salary. no extra pay for overtime and they can still require you to work a bunch of hours over 40 in a week.",
"You in the US? Then yes, it's very legal as long as they pay you Overtime in accordance with your state laws, which will vary depending on whether you are Exempt or not.\n\nIf you can't work the hours or don't want to, that's fine, but it would also be perfectly legal for them to decide they'd prefer to employ another person. Ultimately, you will have to decide if this is a deal breaker for you.\n\nFWIW, in every position I've ever held has required this at one point or another, based on business needs, regardless of whether I was hourly or salaried."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
o2mcf | is it legal for churches to take tithing out of your paycheck? | Sorry I'm not sure if this belongs in r/politics. I work at a church and I'm an atheist, I've worked there about five years and started working there when I was a Christian haven't gotten another job because I just can't find one. A co-worker told me that she asked about tithing, and said that tithing is taken out of everyone's paycheck (which is 10%) and written off as taxes or something. ~~My paycheck has no evidence of this,~~ so I'm thinking they might be taking it out of my Gross Pay. For me to give money to an organization against my will seems like it would be illegal, but I'm not sure who to confront about this.
*Edit: 10%
*Edit: [Here's](_URL_0_) a picture of the earning statement. I've found that my weekend hourly rate is being taken out of. Also I just realized I'm only getting 8 an hour on the weekends when last I heard weekend pay was 12 an hour. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/o2mcf/eli5is_it_legal_for_churches_to_take_tithing_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3dus3p",
"c3dut99",
"c3dva4c",
"c3dvmy1"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Check your contract? If your paycheck has a smaller number on it than what your contract says you should be getting, alarm bells should go off.\n\nSounds to me like your coworker is a bit of a conspiracy theorist. Do you have any evidence of this other than what she told you? Ask your boss about it, perhaps.",
"No evidence on the pay stub? Your friend has no clue what she's saying.",
"I mean, they're perfectly free to pay you 8% less than they otherwise would, even if it's implied that you don't have to give the voluntary donation you would otherwise want to.",
"Your advice sheet (pay stub) should list out very specifically your gross pay (even if you're salaried, it's usually listed at an hourly rate), and any deductions from your gross pay. If there's a deduction on there you don't understand, list it on here, and other Redditors can figure out if its a legitimate tax or insurance deduction or some kind of mandatory tithe. I know lots of people that work for a large church. They can often deduct the tithe, but you have to have agreed to that in writing when you were hired."
]
} | []
| [
"http://i.imgur.com/miYAS.jpg"
]
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
91pi2z | why is steam created when water is poured over ice? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/91pi2z/eli5_why_is_steam_created_when_water_is_poured/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2zslbp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"it's called sublimation. Basically, the surface of the material is able to gain enough energy to evaporate, even though the rest of the material is still below the boiling point."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
3c54x7 | seriously, what legit reason do the billionaires of america have to horde so much wealth instead of using it to help delegate people? it couldn't possibly be as simple as greed outweighing the notion of doing something good could it? | I just don't see how an intelligent person who has any compassion justifies sitting on so much potential help for people who are suffering. Money only goes so far for one person, so what do they gain from it?
Edit: I have no fucking clue how the word "delegate" got in there. I don't even have word correction on. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c54x7/eli5_seriously_what_legit_reason_do_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cssba9j",
"cssbe9c",
"cssbl9e",
"csscb3o",
"csscg5l",
"cssdgz0"
],
"score": [
3,
18,
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"\"It's my money, I worked for it, I earned it, why should I spend it on someone else?\" ",
"Only the dumbest of individuals sit on their wealth by keeping it in cash or in a bank account. It simply make no financial sense.\n\nMost wealthy individuals actually keep relatively little of their wealth in liquid assets like cash or bank accounts.\n\nMany invest it in real estate, the stock market, privately owned companies, etc... where it ultimately ends up in the hands of companies or other individuals. \n\nOthers spend it directly on Charities, like Bill Gates and his foundation.\n\nIf you'd like, I can break down any of these concepts further.",
"They do not have large amounts of cash. Consider the Walton Family. One has built an art museum. But most of her wealth is in ownership of stock in a company employing a huge number of people selling goods to even more people.\n\nThe wealth is not hoarded. It is measured as ownership of a portion of companies producing or distribution goods and services.",
"There are speculations in this answer. Question is set up in this way so I can not do much about it.\n\nTheir net worth is mostly their properties, stocks and alike.\n\nShould they give a bunch things of value to the poor? What would that get you to?\n\nWhat would happen to people and economy if successful gave most of their wealth to the unsuccessful? What would some average unemployed bartender do with 35 K USD in stocks of Argentinian internet provider? Would he be a good stockholder (whatever that would be), would he sell it right away and plummet stock value potentially destroying company (and jobs, and local economies that depended on this company), or sit on it to the end of their lives?\n\nStocks are important for motivation too (employees with stock options \"care\" more about company performance). Stocks are usually form of control too - this control would be diluted if 124 K poor people got these stocks one morning and this would potentially influence future performance of the company (less risk taking for example).\n\nDo you mean selling their properties/companies, and then giving money (currency) to the poor? What would that do to the world economy? Who would buy these stocks or properties? How many more poor people would be there then? \n\nDid you consider they are doing something good with it already - providing services, goods, jobs?\n\nTaxes exist for this very reason, furthermore - progressive taxes are exactly made for this reason. Wealthier are forced to give more.\n\nSocialist countries something vaguely similar - taking properties from wealthier peasants \"Kulak\" (in CCCP) and forming farming collectives. My grandfather was actually in one of these collectives (but not in CCCP). It ended badly (much less efficient) because they were badly run - poor farmers were poor for a reason - their lack of talent for managing agricultural property.\n\nI am poor because my parents chose wrong professions, and my dad had addiction issues. He squandered many opportunities, he had chances and blew them. He would blew 35K USD in stocks too. I am continuing this being poor tradition because I live in crap country with terrible economy (~~immigration~~ emigration is often on my mind) and there are no opportunities in sight. One off check would help me only to emigrate to the West, it would not stop me from being poor.\n\nedit: immigration to emigration",
"it's not that simple I guess, \nI understand if someone who has worked hard, went to college , learned focus, discipline and acquired a skill to earn a good living would feel like its unfair that he should have to shell out some of his hard earned money to provide resources to help people who did not have the work ethic, the talent, the drive or ambition to achieve what this hypothetical rich person did to become a wealthy. The rich persons family and decendants now have that springboard to succeed...no money worries, good education good social contacts, they are set for life.\n\nBut you have the other side where some one is born into poverty, despite his best efforts and intentions, or natural born talents or skills..he cannot afford to attend college, goes to school hungry, is surrounded by bad role models, becomes a product of his environment, and I'm not talking about some extreme dirt poor countrys, lets keep this in America..Those resources ,(not just cash handouts, although this can help in the short term obviously)could help give those people a fighting chance. So I believe there is an obligation for the super wealthy to contribute to a system that helps people into situations beyond their control. A system that shows a man how to fish and gives him a rod Ideally, rather than giving him a fish every day. We are all human..\n\nThen there is the uber rich sociopaths who want to own government, start wars to enrich themselves as they have stocks in weapons companies, and the construction companies they also own that rebuild the countries that get blown to shit..those guys are in it for the power and the kick of meddling in world affairs and social engineering , they don't want to help the poor cause they want to cull them. They see it as some survival of the fittest kind thing.",
"Starting an enterprise takes a lot of effort and comes with a great deal of risk (a lot of risk).\n\nI'm not a billionaire entrepreneur but I can imagine that once you aquired this you want to stay there and not gamble by giving away excess cash and letting one bad deal bankrupt you. Sure they could give away money but the only way to make money is with money.\n\n\"Captialism, god's way of determining who is smart and who is poor\" - Ron Swanson\n\nThis quote is from a sitcom and is supposed to be funny but it's kind of true "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
1ubsn7 | why is it bad if i quit without cause, but employers have the right to fire me without cause? | should be without notice not without cause | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ubsn7/eli5_why_is_it_bad_if_i_quit_without_cause_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceggegi",
"ceggish",
"ceggwfq"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Who says it's bad to quit 'without cause'? Thought that doesn't make much sense, why would you leave a job for absolutely no reason?\n\nIt's bad to quit without *notice*, but that's different. That tells future employers you don't care much about the vacuum you leave when you quit.",
"Quit without cause: questionable decision. Not necessarily \"bad\" but employers will want to know why you would quit a job for no reason. This makes it seem as if you can never be a happy employee because you don't know what you want.\n\nQuit without notice: You are providing a service. If you are unable to do so it is proper to let your customer (the employer) know so they can prepare to offset the workload. When an employer fires you, they are deciding they no longer want your service and so no notice is required. It also may be considered \"bad\" if they offer no severance and no reason, they will have a bad reputation amongst former employees.",
"It looks bad to future employers. From their view, why would they want to hire someone who has a history of simply walking out without giving them time to find a replacement. Also, if you ever decide to go back to the job you quit without notice, they are going to think the same thing and probably won't rehire you. Keep in mind that when a new employer is checking your references and they call your previous employer, the one question they are almost guaranteed to ask them is if they would hire you again. If the answer is no then it is a big red flag and they probably wont hire you either. Always a good idea to avoid burning bridges if you can."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
141j23 | why reddit hates fox news | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/141j23/eli5_why_reddit_hates_fox_news/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7910sl",
"c791kem",
"c7925rc",
"c792lhs",
"c792o0h",
"c792wjr",
"c794899",
"c799ua7"
],
"score": [
6,
73,
8,
5,
5,
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they are the propaganda arm of the GOP.",
"Redditors hate Fox News for a variety of reasons:\n\nSome redditors are idealists about a lot of things. They believe that a news organization should be impartial. Fox News is highly targeted towards a specific viewpoint, and they greatly magnify their crime in idealists' eyes by doing so while loudly insisting that they are fair and balanced.\n\nSome redditors are quite liberal, and they hate Fox News because its politics are counter to its own.\n\nSome redditors are conservatives who love rational arguments, and they hate Fox News because instead of being a mouthpiece for intelligent conservatism, they focus more on rabble-rousing, accusing their enemies of being socialists who hate Christmas.\n\nSo...lots of reasons, really.",
"It's the News bit that I take umbrage to. ",
"[stuff like this](_URL_0_)",
"I don't speak for everyone, but besides the lying, right-leaning, bias whatever you want to call it (because ALL tv-stations have bias and lying to some extent) my biggest problem is that they aren't producing news. While there are many stations that have filler I can't think of a station that pushes SO MANY segments like The O'Reilly Factor, or Glenn Beck's various rants and claim that they are part of the \"news.\"\n\nWhile opinions are fine, FOX has been reduced almost entirely to these extraordinarily narrow opinion-shows. And I think this speaks to a lot of the problems in general, there is nothing in moderation for FOX. Yes the side that they are on matters, but the extent is more significant I think.",
"A couple of months ago I heared that Fox News were not allowed to air in Canada because \"they lie to much\". Anyone get a source on this?",
"I'm just reading these comments and everyone is pointing out Fox News is conservative and not impartial and that's one of the reasons reddit hates them. Do people realize that most tv news programs are very liberal? MSNBC has been caught multiple times doctoring footage to push a liberal agenda. NBC, ABC, and CBS have all been caught doing the same thing. It's a two way street. Yes Fox News is strongly conservative, but theyre the only ones out there against at least 4 other strongly liberal news stations. I don't think we can call any of it \"news\", to be honest. ",
"Stephen Colbert once famously said that \"facts have a notoriously liberal bias.\" This is really just a funny way of saying that Fox News (and other news organizations) routinely ignores pertinent facts when reporting on a story - especially if those fact conflict with or outright contradict a narrative or point of view they're espousing about that topic. A prime example of this would be for climate change. The facts for the overwhelming, real and dangerous existence of climate change (scientific research, studies, peer reviewed papers, statistics, etc.) are routinely ignored and even denied by Fox News, especially in a \"people disagree on the shape of the world\" fashion because it conflicts with the point of view and larger agenda fostered by Fox and its advertisers, sponsors and supporters."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies#Photo_manipulation"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
54nm47 | why do sugary drinks give people worse hangovers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54nm47/eli5_why_do_sugary_drinks_give_people_worse/ | {
"a_id": [
"d83dtfi",
"d83eawo",
"d845o7y"
],
"score": [
8,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"One of the main causes of a hangover is dehydration.\nIt's the main culprit for the pounding headache.\n\n\nAlcohol causes dehydration in a few ways - for example, making you pee a lot to filter it out which causes a net loss of body water.\n\n\nSugar also causes dehydration in the body. Also by urination to filter it out.\nAnother way sugar dehydrates you is that your body dilutes it.\n\n\nSugar is often seen as a harmless substance in today's society but in large enough quantities it's absolute poison. Not to sound preachy or anything.\n\n\n\nAnyway tl;dr - hangovers are caused by dehydration. Alcohol causes dehydration, sugar causes dehydration. Drinking sweet alcoholic drinks gives you the dehydration from both.\n\n\n\nAs a side note: If you want to get drunk while avoiding a hangover, or at least minimising it's effects, ensure that you're drinking either a low alcohol percentage, or drinking a lot of water along with your drink. You'll feel a lot better in the morning than someone who gets drunk as quickly as possible by downing shots of vodka or whiskey with no hydration to dilute the effect.\n",
"I don't know about hydration issues, but the biggest factor in a hangover is the length of time you're exposed to acetaldehyde (a metabolic byproduct of ethanol in the liver) and to a lesser extent, methanol. It's hard work for the liver to manage, but it does it like a champ, however sugar competes with alcohol for metabolic resources. \n\nThe more sugar you take in along with your alcohol, the longer it's going to take to break down the most noxious byproducts of ethanol metabolism, and the worse your hangover is.",
"Several factors. One is as /u/ChasePanic says - sugar helps contribute to dehydration. There are however more layers than that. \n\nSugar and alcohol are both processed by the liver, in very similar pathways. A rough rule of thumb is that 1 UK unit (~10ml of aclohol) takes about an hour to break down. However, if you add in a teaspoon of sugar that doubles. \n\nSo, what that means is that the alcohol stays in your body longer. This then increases the dehydration through the diuretic effect on your kidneys (makes you pee) and the increased sweating from alcohol. Worse, this means the toxic byproducts from alcohol breakdown are in your system longer and those are also a key contributor to the hangover. Add in some sugar crash and the fact that sugary alcoholic drinks such as Smirnoff ice are usually full of other crap too and it does lead to one hell of a hangover. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
53cp18 | steam files being downloaded are the full size of the game before finishing | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53cp18/eli5_steam_files_being_downloaded_are_the_full/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7rv2f8",
"d7rxb9o",
"d7rxhai"
],
"score": [
22,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"It's reserving the amount of space it will need. It's done so that you don't accidentally fill up the drive before it's finished, preventing it from finishing.",
"I have no experience with Apple, but I've only seen this in Microsoft. Windows reserves the space in advance. \n\nI use Fedora at home and the file grows and at the last bit can run out of space or be too large for the file system. The problem is that what downloaded is not deleted.",
"It's a bit like of you were painting a picture and you quickly rough out the outline with a pencil first. You mark out the size, shape and position so you know that it fits on the canvas properly, then once you know it does, you can paint over these spaces with all the fine detail."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
2xndf8 | object-oriented programming and general purpose programming | I heard that Java is an Object-Oriented language and C is more like a General Purpose language. What does this mean? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xndf8/eli5_objectoriented_programming_and_general/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp1nal3",
"cp1nml4"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It may be easier to just [read this](_URL_0_).\n\nLong story short, instead of just having a program that starts at the top and flows down, you can create things called objects, that have state (memory) and behavior (methods) that allow it to do things.\n\nLike lets say you had a game with a Cat in it. You could create a class of Cat, and give it state such as fed, angry, sleeping, fur color, things like that (adjectives) and behaviors such as eating, meowing, moving, purring (verbs).\n\nSo instead of me using all sorts of weird variables to track whatever a cat is, I can create an instance of a cat and do things with it, by interacting with its internal state (properties) and its behaviors (methods).\n\nSo if I need a cat, I would *instantiate* a cat (allocate memory for a cat) and set it's color, fur length, whatever, and tell it to do things, like go somewhere, meow, eat something, whatever.\n\nIt allows you to treat chunks of code as a \"thing\" and interact with it as if it was a real thing.",
"Others have also explained what Object-Oriented Programming is, so I'll answer about general purpose programming:\n\nJava is also a general purpose language. General purpose means that you can write pretty much any kind of application you want with this language. This is in contract with a *domain specific* language, which is a language (not necessarily a programming language) used in a specific type of applications. For example, HTML is a language for describing web pages, SQL is a language for database queries, VHDL is a language for designing electronic hardware, Maple is a programming language for math, etc."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming"
],
[]
]
|
|
2cj33f | why is that when i call someone and they call me at the exact same time, we both get voicemail, instead of the call connecting? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cj33f/eli5_why_is_that_when_i_call_someone_and_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjfyybn",
"cjg1yac"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the central server only check if the number to be called is ready to receive an incoming call , but it doesn't looks up to which number the phone is calling. As dialing eachother simoutaneously will lock both phones as unavailable it is impossible to call eachother. To add this functionality to the system would be to expensive as the chances of happing are very slim",
"Not just if you call each other, but if the receiving phone is in the process of dialing. \n\nHere's what happens: \n\nGSM and CDMA (most phones in the world use one of this systems), but also TDMA and most other obsolete phone systems, use a control channel for signalling. This control channel are packets going in either direction scheduled at a certain clock rate (that is, N packages per second, every x milliseconds). The control channel is how the tower stays in constant contact with the tty, essentially the tty (phone) says 'I'm here, nothing new to report\", tower replies \"I'm here, everything's cool\". When you get an SMS, on the next scheduled communication in the control channel the tower says \"Hey, I got this for you\", etc. When you call out, the call doesn't go out immediately, it's sent in the next scheduled packet in the control channel. Then that's it, your phone line is busy. The control channel is dedicated to handling this call (Hey, you are losing signal, and this other tower is closer to you, switch over there, etc. ). Now, after the call is established, the tower uses either in-band (mostly on old analogue systems), or out of band (through the control channel) communications to tell the tty \"Hey, you've got another call, want to pause this one and answer?\", but this protocol is a hack on top of the original system, and not operational until the call is established, so there are two brief moments (when establishing a call, and when hanging up) where your phone is essentially unable to receive calls. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
3bx0l5 | why are there so many kinds of bicycles? | There are a lot of cars because some people want a 2 seater, some want to haul a lot, some want a big engine, some want high MPG...
But for bicycles that transport one person under their own power, how many niches can there be? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bx0l5/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_kinds_of_bicycles/ | {
"a_id": [
"csqb451",
"csqbb4z",
"csqc524"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Speed, terrain, level of comfort all causes different niches.\n\nExample: Single Speed and Fixie\nDo you like driving automatic cars?\n\nExample: Multi-gear and mountain bikes\nDo you like driving on mountains and shifting gears?\n\nDo you like a high-end expensive, but extremely comfortable car?\nCruiser it is\n\nDo not give a shit?\nTarget/Walmart brand\n\nDo you want the fastest car, with barely any comfort?\nThere's a bike for that",
"Like gas powered vehicles, bicycles can serve man different functions, and even within the functions, there are a lot of options within them. Here are some examples:\n\nCommuter bike: do you want to haul cargo? How many gears do you want? What type of components do you want? Do you want it made out of aluminum, titanium, carbon, steel, bamboo? (Each material provides a different ride quality.)\n\nDo you want to ride very long distances? i.e. a touring bike. Do you want fenders? What component group would you like? What kind of material? etc.\n\nDo you want to ride off road? Do you want a full suspension bike? Hard tail? What size wheel do you want? Each wheel size provides a differnet ride type and handling. What material do you want? Do you want to be able to ride in the snow? What tire width is right for your style of riding?\n\nDo you want to road race like the guys in the Tour de France? Do you want a lightweight bike, an aero dynamic bike, or an all rounder? What component set do you want? Do you plan on doing Time Trials or Triathlons? You'll need a TT bike for that with a different geometry.\n\nAnd on and on.\n\nSource: Long time endurance athelete and cycling enthusiast. ",
"Well, let's see. \n\nI have a few trails near me, so I want to go offroad. Mountain Bike it is then! Just a general hardtail, bit built and knobbie tires. \n\nYou know what? I've gotten a bit better, and there are some gnarly jumps! I'll grab a dirt jumper! \n\nOh hey, there is an actual mountain not to far away, I'll grab a downhill. It's built like a tank, but it's weight is great for going downhill fast!\n\nMy kid is getting into the BMX scene. I'll grab one for myself, try to not kill myself in a half pipe.\n\nWell, now my biking buddies want to take on the road. Good for endurance, and I won't break my collar bone. Again. \n\nNow I want a bike for getting to work and back. I need a bike that will work no matter what. A fixie it is then!\n\nI need a bike for just cruising the beach. I know, I'll get a beach cruiser!"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
bb6r5b | how lobotomies affect your brain and behavior. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bb6r5b/eli5_how_lobotomies_affect_your_brain_and_behavior/ | {
"a_id": [
"ekgs29n",
"ekhcfhz"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"We don't really know yet. The brain is an incredibly complicated thing. However, we do know that different regions of the brain trigger when different things are being thought/happening. For example, we have a region of the brain responsible for transmitting images from the eyes. We have another region responsible for recognising shapes and objects. We have yet another region responsible for coordinating our own actions in response to those objects. When such a region is damaged, such as when it's cut out completely, one of two things can happen. Sometimes the brain can compensate and process the information elsewhere. Sometimes, there's nothing it can do, and it just loses that functionality all together. \n\nThere are a lot of really interesting conditions resulting from damage to visual areas of the brain. A condition called visual agnosia for example, which occurs in two forms. People can explain to you what an apple is, then when you show them an apple, they won't be able to tell you what they're look at. They know what an apple is, they know what shape an apple is, but when they look at the apple, they don't see an apple. Their eyes are describing the shape of the apple, but the bit of their brain that converts the signals into an imagined image doesn't build an apple in their mind. The second form they can look at an apple and describe the exact shape of it, but not tell you \"this is an apple\". \n\nThere can also be damage to the part of the brain that links the shape of objects to the type of movements needed to pick it up. Someone could for example know precisely what a mug is, see a mug, and then go to pick it up using the same hand shape they'd use for a pencil. \n\nThere's also a condition where you can have perfect, unhindered vision, but your brain just forgets the entire right half of your visual field. You can show someone with such a condition a picture and ask them to replicate the picture on a new sheet of paper. When they're looking at it, they can describe the entire picture, but the exact moment they stop looking at it, they forget that half the image existed, so when they try to replicate a drawing of a cat, they only draw half a cat and say \"this is complete\". Until you point it out to them that half the cat is missing, they just don't notice.",
"We compartmentalize our brains so they can specialize in doing specific stuff better. There's a part of your brain that's good at music and rhythm, part that does colors really well, lots of different parts. We usually find out what these parts do when they're damaged in people, someone gets injured and that part does, we can see what changes in the person.\n\nIn as best as we can decipher, the front of the brain is where you are, or at least the stream of consciousness that is you thinking, a higher reasoning being. A lobotomy seeks to severe that part of the brain, killing it. The results may be that, yes you now no longer show symptoms of schizophrenia, but you no longer show symptoms of being a higher functioning being either, some people have to relearn to use the restroom or walk."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
tb6b0 | how a bagpipe produces music | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tb6b0/eli5_how_a_bagpipe_produces_music/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4l3jjk",
"c4l3ock",
"c4lc33y"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"A bagpipe is literally a \"bag\" of air, with a bunch of pipes sticking out of it. A person blows air into the bag, and squeezes it (usually under their arm), which produces sound. Some of the pipes only make one or two notes (known as a \"drone\"). Other pipes can be played by covering air holes with your fingers, similar to how a recorder or other wood-wind instrument is played.",
"The bag is made of a tough airtight material (not sure what exactly) and is covered by a decorative bag which is the bit you see, usually tartan.\n\nBasically, you have 5 pipes coming out of the bagpipes, I'll go through them in turn.\n\nThe first pipe is the blowpipe. Fairly obviously you blow air in here and it inflates the bag. It also has a one-way valve on the end to stop air being forced back into your mouth.\n\nSo now that you have your input into the bag you're ready to start making some noise.\n\nThe most important piece is the chanter. This is the piece that the piper holds in both hands and plays to make music. It has a small wooden reid in the top of it where it joins onto the bag. As kcell said, you move your fingers over different holes to make a different sound, like on a recorder but louder and different sounding.\n\nNow you have three drones: a bass and two higher pitched ones (I forgot the name of them). These drones contain a reid each, two high pitched and one lower. The drones are supposed to be tuned to have the bass drone an octave lower than the two other ones.\n\nSo now you know what all the pipes do - a simple explanation on how it works. You blow into the bag which inflates and stays so, only losing air slowly. You then apply pressure with your left arm usually (most people play bagpipes under their left arm) and this forces air out of the bag more quickly which in turn causes all the reids to sound. \n\nBasically, the whole purpose of the bag is to allow you to produce very loud music without ever having to take a break to inhale as the bag stays full of air so you can pause for a second to take a breath easily. You can actually play for about 10 seconds off one full bag of air before you run out of pressure and can't cause the reids to sound.\n\nSource: Have played bagpipes for over 10 years with two different scottish pipe bands",
"The bagpipe is a bag filled with 2 to 3 kittens, with a bunch of pipes sticking out of it. A person blows air into the bag while simultaneously squeezing. This causes the kittens to scream in distress. The pipes are used to change the pitch of the screaming kittens. Usually the kittens are not harmed in any way and [some even grow to enjoy it](_URL_0_)."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ8Aw-Iow3c&feature=related"
]
]
|
||
1rbpun | how could the united states afford to go to ww2? | After the Great Depression and Roosevelt's policies to put people back to work, I'm sure the country's treasury was very low, and a third of the peoplew were and therefore unable to pay taxes. How could we afford to switch our capitalist economy to a wartime one with the federal government paying the industries for manufacturing weapons of war? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rbpun/eli5_how_could_the_united_states_afford_to_go_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdlkffx",
"cdlkkhw"
],
"score": [
13,
5
],
"text": [
"Debt. We issued huge numbers of government bonds, set to be paid back after the war.",
"The US debt during WW2 made the current US debt look like pocket change. It skyrocketed. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
5vmj8i | why a person can be at risk of dehydration in extremely cold temperatures? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vmj8i/eli5_why_a_person_can_be_at_risk_of_dehydration/ | {
"a_id": [
"de38fn2",
"de3c0i2"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Relative humidity doubles with each 20 degree (Fahrenheit) decrease, or halves with each 20 degree increase in temperature. _URL_0_.\n\nBasically, the colder the air, the less water vapor it can hold. This means that the air in a place like Prudhoe Bay, AK, is very, very dry, and as you breathe it in, it dries you out. As you breathe out, water vapor from your lungs exits your body as a visible cloud.",
"You know all that \"fog\" that you see in your breath when you breathe out in the cold? That is real water fog. All of that water used to be in your body before you breathed in that air. And when you breathe that air out, you lose all of the water that it soaked up from your sinuses, throat, and lungs while it was inside of you.\n\nCold air can't absorb much water, so it is very dry. But when you breathe in cold air, it is warmed up by your body heat and is now able to absorb much more water, so it does. From you.\n\nEvery breath you take off cold, cold air dries you out one foggy cloud at a time."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[
"http://ocw.usu.edu/Forest__Range__and_Wildlife_Sciences/Wildland_Fire_Management_and_Planning/Unit_4__Temperature-Moisture_Relationship_4.html"
],
[]
]
|
||
8q2ku9 | if plane flights are planned and scheduled months in advance, how do delays just a few hours before not mess everything up? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8q2ku9/eli5_if_plane_flights_are_planned_and_scheduled/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0fzuqa",
"e0g9yv1"
],
"score": [
11,
3
],
"text": [
"The prospect of delays is planned into the schedule, a single plane delay can result in the pane just getting shunted down the list of take-off slots with very little impact. However if a number of flights are delayed the pilots, planes and refuelling all being in the wrong place and wrong time seriously mess up the services for days. ",
"In Europe, there is something called the CFMU (Central Flow Management Unit) which is a super computer located in Brussels and operated by Eurocontrol that basically controls and calculates all air traffic in Europe.\nFor example, if you want to take off with a scheduled flight, you get a time window of about 15 minutes. If you do not use that time window, a new one will be calculated by the CFMU and you might have to wait for a bit, but it will not affect other aircraft. The same exists for different airways, etc. \nThe CFMU takes into account every possible factor that could result in a delay, even at your destination airport. This works very well in Europe and is one of the reasons why there are relatively few delays and one individual fault does not set off a chain of bad events for other flights.\nAs far as I know, the US has not implemented any system alike yet, which is why you find yourself in a holding above your destination airport much more often than in Europe. \nHope this helps! "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
64ojjn | why is it when we push our hands into our eyes (hypnagogia), some people see different colours? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64ojjn/eli5_why_is_it_when_we_push_our_hands_into_our/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg3uy35",
"dg3xx2n",
"dg43frz",
"dg44rh6",
"dg44tm7",
"dg499k3",
"dg4am6h"
],
"score": [
42,
122,
4,
14,
28,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Some? Doesn't everybody? I'm honestly curious about this now! ",
"I believe the colors you're talking about are known as \"phosphenes.\" Pressure on your eye causes your retinal ganglion cells to activate in a very similar way to how they activate as a response to light, so when you tightly shut, rub, or press on your eye, it stimulates your retina and causes the illusion that you are seeing little particles of light or different colors.\n\n\n\nSource: _URL_0_",
"There are things called receptors that help with sensing different forms of sensory. That specific receptor responds to only one sensory, which activates a specific nerve(s), which goes to the brain relaying only that specific signal. This is called label line coding.\n\nPushing on your closed eyes causes activation of these receptors in your eyes that are associated with sensing light. This activates the specific nerves associated with these receptors which travels to the brain where it's interpreted that you \"saw\" light.\n\nThis mechanism partly plays a role in why \"phantom limb\" occurs. If a nerve fiber in your shoulder that used to run all the way down your missing arm is stimulated (by touch or however else), it will send a signal to the brain that the receptor in that arm was activated and your brain will sense feeling coming from the missing arm even though that receptor is now missing. This is because the nerve fibers only transmit one type of sensation as well.",
"Was there a separate question relating to hypnagogia?\n\nThat usually refers to the period right before you go to sleep.",
"Hypnagogia doesn't refer to eyes or vision, it refers to a state kinda between sleeping and awake. \nBut yeah, I see swarming colors when I press my eyes, too.",
"I always see a sort of desert with Black spots when i do this and those spots get bigger and bigger",
"Look up visual snow / static vision. Some can see what you are describing all the time. No matter if they rub their eyes or not. Also, the individual realizes they are same visuals when your eyes are open or closed. The deeper you look into it from many different aspects / point of views you may come to realize it is vibrational energy. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphene"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
8zmjq0 | british banks clearing. | Can anyone explain why British banks take 5 days to clear a cheque in this day and age, where as I'm some countries, from what I understand, treat a cheque as cash? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zmjq0/eli5_british_banks_clearing/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2kfrs8"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Finally a question I can answer well. Source: I work in payments for a major UK bank.\n\nSo firstly, the cheque clearing system is changing *right now.* But let's talk traditionally. A cheque is not guaranteed, and every cheque you pay in physically travels to the issuing bank where they have to decide if the cheque is valid (not fraudulent or altered), and if the funds are available.\n\nI am not kidding about physically either. Pay a Barclays cheque into a HSBC branch on the Shetland Islands? Yeah, that cheque is catching a ferry and needs to end up in Northampton, where the banks all exchange the paper cheques.\n\nIn the current system, if the issuing bank has not contacted the payee bank to advise non-payment in 4 days, the money is available for you to spend. On day 6, the funds are yours forever and cannot be recalled. (This is called certainty of fate)\n\nThe good news is, this is changing right now and within the next few weeks, digital cheque imaging will finally be fully live across the country. This means the banks will exchange digital images, not paper, and your cheque will be available to spend at the end of Day 2. For this to happen, banks needed a change in the law to make that digital image a legal payment instrument, so everyone in the comments saying it's just lazy banks and / or bank policies is incorrect. \n\n(This change will also allow you to pay in a cheque just by taking a picture with your phone - not implemented yet but expect this very soon)\n\nIn the UK Cheque use is higher than you think. Dropping, but still astonishingly high. Yes it's dwarfed by Faster Payments and BACS, but it is still hundreds of thousands a week.\n\nAnother fact, The Labour government announced the abolition of cheques by 2018. Then the Tories got back into power and reversed the decision. (sigh)\n\nIt is however correct that in the USA, they have had digital cheques for some time. I am not an expert but I understand this happened after 9/11 - their paper cheques used to travel across the county too, but by plane, and when flights were grounded after the WTC attacks, people realised how vulnerable (and expensive and inconvenient) this system was. This remains the only way in which the pretty archaic American personal banking payment system is ahead of those in Europe."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
2ic7jm | how are high precision measuring devices, like vernier callipers and micrometers, made without pre-existing higher precision instruments? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ic7jm/eli5_how_are_high_precision_measuring_devices/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl0theu"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"You can make precision instruments fairly easily. I'm sure the exact chain of events is much more complex, but here's just a small example of how this can work:\n\nLet's say that you can measure an inch very precicely, but you want to be able to measure smaller distances with the same precision. You make an 11-inch long rod, with a hole through it one inch from one of the ends. If you put a pin through the hole to act as a fulcrum, you now have a lever with one end that is ten times longer than the other. So when you raise the long end one inch, the small end lowers by a tenth of an inch. So now you can measure tenths of an inch to the same level of accuracy that was previously reserved for whole inches.\n\nRepeat with smaller levers as necessary."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
6wdr0o | what is the iphone 7 home-button and how does it work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wdr0o/eli5what_is_the_iphone_7_homebutton_and_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm79anh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The \"home button\" is actually just a patch of glass which has sensors to detect the slight flexing caused by a finger pressing it. When that happens a vibration is generated by quickly shifting a weight in the phone to simulate an actual buttons movement and click of activation.\n\nThe static from the amplifier might be interference generated by the electromagnets used to shift the weight and create the vibrations."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
kezvn | elii5: why does "dropping the anchor" (aka. putting a foot on the floor while drunk) helps me to stop the spinning room | An old trick my cousin passed onto me when drunk:
Drop the anchor to stop the room from spinning
wassup? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kezvn/elii5_why_does_dropping_the_anchor_aka_putting_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2jqgk4",
"c2jrgmq",
"c2jrif8",
"c2jsc27",
"c2jqgk4",
"c2jrgmq",
"c2jrif8",
"c2jsc27"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
4,
3,
7,
2,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"This, this works? ",
"it works well especially when used with the one eye closed trick ",
"5 is not legal drinking age anywhere...",
"I'm curious where you normally keep your feet? Is this a yogic-flying drinking game you have?",
"This, this works? ",
"it works well especially when used with the one eye closed trick ",
"5 is not legal drinking age anywhere...",
"I'm curious where you normally keep your feet? Is this a yogic-flying drinking game you have?"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
26hnzu | "capturing momentum" in sports | If someone gets a touchdown in football, the announcers say they have "the momentum". If the other team gets an interception, it's a "momentum swing", same idea for basketball as well.
But what actually is a "momentum swing" or "capturing momentum"? As a lifelong fan of football specifically, it seems like some intangible thing that was invented by the media/announcers/fans. If one team gets a touchdown, the other team might be more fired up to answer with a touchdown- neither has "momentum" on the next possession.
Even more confusing is when people say "this team has momentum going into this game". What?
Just not sure what exactly is momentum in the contexts of sports, if it exists at all. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26hnzu/eli5_capturing_momentum_in_sports/ | {
"a_id": [
"chr5mku",
"chr7sua"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Yeah, it's really just a way of describing the perception of who has the upper hand at any particular moment. You're correct that's it's intangible.\n\nWhen they say a team has momentum going into a game, what they mean is that the team recently played well.",
"Momentum is just the announcers way of trying to inform the viewers who they think has an advantage at a particular point in the game. It is also assumed that a team doing well will continue to do well. Doing well will increase the players confidence in their abilities, which could make them keep playing well. I think the term \"momentum\" itself is used because it is borrowed from physics, more specifically Newton's Laws of Motion. An object in motion tends to stay in motion, much like a winning team tends to stay on top of the other team in a game (not always, but you understand)."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
1ll7zs | why is there no machine to go in a room (and entirely in the room) that can cool it down? | I understand there are machines that can go in rooms to heat them up (even if you have to pull in power). Why are there no machines that can go in rooms to cool them down? Fpr example, I understand that if you put a refrigerator and open the door there will be a net warming effect.
Is this result derivable from one of the laws of thermodynamics or is it simply a "no one has figured it out yet" thing? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ll7zs/eli5_why_is_there_no_machine_to_go_in_a_room_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc0bxsn",
"cc0c4gp",
"cc0c5pp"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Thermodynamics. Everything you do makes more heat, the only way to cool a space is to do something that takes heat from it, vents it elsewhere and also vents its net warming effect elsewhere also.",
"Have you heard of the statement that you can neither create nor destroy energy?\n\nOK so imagine your room. a perfect box. Within that room there is a certain net energy, it's pretty empty room so that energy is mostly thermal energy.\n\nNow you put a device in that room. If that device were electric from the outside (or even a battery) it begins consuming energy and adding more and more energy into your box. However you want to use this device to lower the temperature of the room (which would be a reduction in energy) \n\ncan you not see how putting more energy into a system cannot in any way reduce the amount of energy in that system? \n\nNow from a purely theoretical point of view you could move that energy around inside your box. which is exactly how a fridge works, you make the inside of the fridge cold but the outside becomes warmer. I guess theoretically you could raise the temperature inside the fridge to be higher thus cooling the outside (the room). your net energy of the system is till higher (room+ fridge = more heat) but you moved that around so there's a differential.\n\nthe biggest problem from a practical point is that these devices generate heat of their own and once it got too hot inside the fridge you would get less and less cooling outside the fridge until there was no cooling effect anymore (remember your net energy is always increasing) so while for a short time you could cool the outside room by heating the inside fridge eventually the heat inside would be too much and just operating the device would eventually warm the room. \n\n\n",
"So there is no such thing as cold, cold is only the absence of heat. \n\nIts the same reason you cant make a lightbulb that generates darkness. \n\nWhat you can do is make a machine that takes heat and removes it, thus cooling the room. This is what airconditioners do. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
eqtphu | us taxes: what's the difference between filing taxes and tax returns? | So five years ago I graduated uni and got my first job, for which I got a paycheck with the usual deductions, which I assume is the taxation. Standard employee (not freelance) I do remember I needed to do something with filing taxes on tax day, and asked my mom about it, but she answered "oh don't worry about it, I'll take care of that for you."
However I'm feeling that I should've been filing something, and that the IRS is going to bust my door down. So, could someone explain to me what my personal contribution towards this taxation is supposed to be? Is the thing I'm filing on tax day me actually paying taxes, or getting money back...? Is it possible to do this years after the fact? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqtphu/eli5_us_taxes_whats_the_difference_between_filing/ | {
"a_id": [
"fewzm10"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In general, if you are a US citizen, you should file a tax return with the federal government every year.\n\nIf you had taxes withheld from your paychecks, you want to reconcile what the government took versus what you actually owed.\n\nYou might get money back.\n\nYou might owe money.\n\nYou might have no action.\n\nIt all depends on where you live, how much you made, your tax category and what you’ve already paid.\n\nYou can settle up with the IRS years later. It can be challenging to navigate, so you may want to hire an expert to help you.\n\nIt is unlikely that the IRS is going to come after you randomly, years later. However, this could come up later in other transactions and bite you.\n\nFiling your tax return is the action you take. Either on paper, on the IRS website or through a vendor like Turbotax or H & R Block."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
5l9qa3 | why does your heart sometimes race when you wake up after a night of drinking? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5l9qa3/eli5_why_does_your_heart_sometimes_race_when_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbu0faj"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Your body is essentially breaking down two poisons. The first one makes you feel drunk. The second one we usually break down when we sleep. It takes a lot of your body's water, electrolytses, enzymes,and energy to break the harder poison. Your body is like shoot shoot shoot. OK let's do this first. Your other systems essentially pause depending on how much of its resources it needs. So your hormones and everything else gets out of wack. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
bin7lo | why do animals with claws grow them in a curved triangle? wouldn't they thicken out, through growing equally across the nail, and become a squarish oval like our nails, but thicker? or do they have to manually sharpen them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bin7lo/eli5_why_do_animals_with_claws_grow_them_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"em1npn9",
"em1pj1b",
"em2kzo6"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because our nails are designed for very different things. Claws are designed for ripping and tearing flesh, hence the curved shape. I pretty sure animals like lions and tigers will occasionally manually sharpen then on like logs and stuff but they are used regularly so that \"keeps them in shape\" so to speak.",
"A cat's claw - for example - does not grow like our fingernails. \n\nOur fingernails grow in layers horizontally, so to say. \n\nA cat's claw grows from 'inside out', basically. The sharp tip thus is always really sharp, as it's part of the 'youngest' structure of the nail. The outer sheaths of the claw grows duller over time so the cat scratches things to get rid of these sheaths. I have 2 cats and sometimes i find these near the scratching pole. They look a bit like fully grown cat claws but at a closer look they are thin and hollow.",
"Our dogs nails are carefully smoothed with little dremel-like nail files when they get their hair cut. Within a week the soft inner core of the nails has worn back, leaving the very hard top/outer shell protruding a bit. That, plus a bit of wear on the outer shell, leaves them quite sharp."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
6y7mwh | what part of an explosion causes an emp? - does it have to be nuclear or would a large enough explosion do it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6y7mwh/eli5_what_part_of_an_explosion_causes_an_emp_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"dml7sdq"
],
"score": [
27
],
"text": [
"A nuclear detonation produces a large amout of extremely high energy photons (light) called gamma radiation.\n\nThose gamma photons are powerful enough to rip electrons from a large number of surrounding air molecules in a very small space.\n\nThat sudden massive electrical charge imbalance in the upper atmosphere generates a very brief but extremely powerful EMP.\n\nChemical explosives (i.e. Regular bombs) don't have a gamma component and do not generate any meaningful magnetic interference.\n"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
dhbvxf | why is there a difference between painting primary colours (r y b), primary colours of light (r g b), printing primary colours (magenta cyan yellow) etc? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dhbvxf/eli5_why_is_there_a_difference_between_painting/ | {
"a_id": [
"f3m18ca",
"f3m1br4"
],
"score": [
2,
12
],
"text": [
"Paint absorb light. So if you shine a white light from a lamp or the sun on a Yellow surface it will ideally absorb all light that is not yellow and reflect the yellow back to your eyes. Cyan so the same with cyan light and magenta with magenta light. So i you mix all three the ideal result is a black surface, in practice it is dark brown, no pain on a white surface will be white. So it is called subtractive color.\n\nLight sources is additive with prismas or sub pixels of different colors close to each other. so if you shine red light to your eye and then att blue light. The blue light will not block any red light from hitting you eyes. No light is black and max of all is white. It is called a additive color",
"There are two types of color mixing. Subtractive and additive. White light is when all visible wavelengths of light reach your eye. \n\nSubtractive: you have a white paper. You draw on it with a red marker. The ink blocks all wavelengths from reaching your eye except the ones responsible for red light . the more ink you add the less light reaches your eye and the darker the color. Hense subtractive. Mixing 2 colors always results in a darker color. \n\nAdditive : this is when you have a source of colored light( wavelengths). If you add several different colors you are adding to the variety of wavelengths that reach your eye.\n\n2 ways of making color so 2 sets of primary colors"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
3biuue | just seen jurassic world. how are scientists able to estimate the speed of how fast dinosaurs were able to run, like the velociraptors being able to reach speeds of 50mph? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3biuue/eli5_just_seen_jurassic_world_how_are_scientists/ | {
"a_id": [
"csmhzvs",
"csmi2sp"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They can make estimates based upon their skeletal structure, which can give clues as to how the animal would stride, what sort of muscles were attached, and so on. If they can find fossilized footprints, they can even get direct evidence of the sort of strides they would take. \n\nThat being said, I haven't seen Jurassic World, but it's worth noting a lot of Jurassic Park is 'artistic license.' Velociraptors, for instance, were closer in size to a turkey than the large human-sized dinosaurs of the earlier movies.",
"out in the field using a speed detector that police use or in baseball for pitches?\n\nbut in the case of raptors not sure how they would figure that out since they were locked up in a compound probably not able to reach maximum speed."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
55m78a | why do some forms of alcohol test better or have higher quality as they age, and why do others go bad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55m78a/eli5_why_do_some_forms_of_alcohol_test_better_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8bttsm"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"The answer requires understanding of how alcohol is made. Alcohol is produced when bacteria try to break down sugar but there's no oxygen available. Oxygen is needed to completely break down sugar into carbon dioxide and water, but when it's not present, the \"anaerobic\" (without oxygen) bacteria stop at alcohol. So wine, for example, is kind of like grape juice that's partially gone bad. Because it's in a bottle, there's no oxygen, so it can't break down all the way. Often, once the alcohol levels get high enough, it kills off the bacteria that made it. From that point on, it's pretty much unchanging. When the bottle of wine is opened, new bacteria can get in, alongside oxygen, and certain types of bacteria can continue breaking down that alcohol, turning the wine into vinegar.\n\nContrast that with whiskey. Whiskey is a distilled spirit, which means the alcohol is much more concentrated. When whiskey is finished with fermentation and distillation, it's typically stored in wooden barrels. Alcohol is a powerful solvent, which means it's good at dissolving stuff. The aging of whiskey is actually the alcohol dissolving some of the complex chemicals in the wood of the barrels. After it's aged, whiskey is then removed from the barrel and put in glass or plastic bottles for selling. It's important to understand that the \"aging\" Only takes place when it's in the barrel. You can't buy a 10 year whiskey in a bottle, keep it for 20 years, and then call it 30 year whiskey.\n\nBecause whiskey and other distilled spirits (vodka, gin, etc.) have a much higher concentration of alcohol, they have a much more difficult time going bad because there's not much in the way of bacteria that can survive in that much alcohol."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
51ysdc | how is the 3.5mm jack "outdated" | With all the android vs. apple debates aside, I've been trying to understand how Bluetooth formatting is superior to auxiliary inputs.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/51ysdc/eli5how_is_the_35mm_jack_outdated/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7fxwoe",
"d7fz7o5",
"d7fzci2",
"d7fzirg",
"d7gfe6k"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
32,
13,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not. But Apple did the same thing with Flash, and like magic Flash died across most devices shortly after. The difference was that Flash WAS outdated, AND they had a superior replacement in the works. ",
"It's kind of like asking, 'is the internal combustion engine outdated\".\n\nSort of, depends who you ask. It may be old and clunky, but it works, and it's something everyone is familiar with.",
"It isn't. Anyone who says otherwise is lying. Bluetooth is wireless, so you won't have a wire to get tangled or anything, but that's the only advantage. Bluetooth speakers won't have better sound quality than wired speakers of the same quality. But don't take my word for it. Here's some quotes from a few articles that were out before it was announced that apple was doing away with the 3.5mm jack.\n\n > the sound quality is better in wired versions, as there is no need for file compression for transmission to the earbuds. The technology used for wired earbuds has advanced so much that they offer high-fidelity sound at a relatively affordable price. \n\n[Source](_URL_2_)\n\n > Between wired and wireless, whether headphones or speakers, assuming similar price between models: wired will usually have better quality. Also, audio quality gets compromised over Bluetooth.\n\n[Source](_URL_4_)\n\n > There's not necessarily a limit on the actual quality of the wireless headphones themselves (they could be identical to a wired version, but I haven't seen that in the marketplace yet), **but there IS a limitation on the signal quality available on current wireless connection methods compared to a nice copper wire.** There are infrared and 2.4GHz and Bluetooth headphones, which are all data-limited compared to a direct connection. \n\n[Source](_URL_1_)\n\n > Something worth mentioning, however, is that no matter how good Bluetooth headphones sound compared to one another, you’ll still get more for your money sound-wise by buying corded headphones.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)\n\n > The problem with Bluetooth audio has always been digital compression: in order to send your audio to your headphones, you were forced to sacrifice quality.\n\n > In addition to compression just ruining the audio quality, there are other factors at play. For one, Bluetooth rides the same 2.4Ghz wireless frequency that so many other things in your home, like wireless mice or keyboards, Wi-Fi signals, or even microwaves. Those things won't have a huge impact on sound quality, but they can—and often do—cause audio drops and other quirks. Of course, all of those are reasons why Bluetooth audio was never—and still isn't—a match for traditional wired audio. \n\n > That said, it's still not as good as wired audio\n\n[Source](_URL_3_)",
"It is not outdated.\n\nYes, it's an analogue connector. That doesn't make it outdated, because the audio signal HAS TO exist as an analogue signal in order to drive speakers/headphones.\n\nSo in a device, sound exists for part of the journey to the speakers as a digital signal, and part of the journey as an analogue signal.\n\nThe question is at what point do you tap off that signal to a connection port to transfer it to external devices. Do you do it when it is digital, or when it is analogue?\n\nThe answer is of course both. \n\nOffering just one option is unacceptable, and here is why.\n\n# Why is digital audio needed?\n\nDigital is great because you can't mess it up very easily. It is easy to clean up the signal and get the same bits and bytes at the end no matter what wires it has to pass through.\nAnalogue is not like that. Any alteration of the signal is indistinguishable from an intended part of the original signal, so it accumulates signal degradation.\n\nMaybe your music file generates a great quality digital sound signal, but the phone's Digital Analogue converter or amplifier ruins it because it is cheap and generates a really poor analogue signal. \nIf that is the case, you could use the digital signal and put that into your own external high-end DAC and amp combo and then plug your headphones into that, and get a much cleaner sound. \n\n# But why is Analogue still needed?\n\nBecause digital MUST be converted to analogue before playing.\n\nThat means if all your phone outputs is a digital signal ONLY, then you MUST buy an external DAC to decode it, and an amplifier to amplify the DAC's weak output to headphone driving levels.\n\nEither that DAC is built into your headphones (like in USB headsets) or the DAC is part of an external DAC or DAC-amp combo device that you then plug the headphones into... via 3.5mm\n\nSo now everyone either has to buy an extra external DAC device, or they have to buy a new DAC every time they buy new headphones, because it's part of their headphones.\nThat either means more expensive headphones, or lower quality headphones. The extra components will cost, so either prices go up, or less is spent on the actual headphone speakers.\n\nOverall, the consumer ends up spending more or getting less, and maybe they end up carrying more.\n\nAnd the thing is, the phone STILL HAS A DAC INSIDE. If it has a speaker, it MUST have a DAC to create the analogue signal to drive it.\n\nSince it has a DAC in there, there might as well be a port to access that analogue signal to send it to headphones, and the standard port to do that is 3.5mm jack.\n\nDigital audio should always be an option for those who want to use it, but for the vast majority of consumers, Apple's built in DAC is good enough and making users spend extra just to duplicate unneeded additional DACs is silly.",
"It isnt \"outdated\". The only way something becomes outdated is if a new standard is created or needed, the former of which apple is trying to do. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[
"http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-bluetooth-on-or-over-ear-headphones/",
"https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-difference-in-quality-between-wired-and-wireless-headphones-If-so-why",
"http://pulseaudio.com/wired-earphones-vs-wireless-bluetooth-earphones/",
"http://lifehacker.com/does-bluetooth-audio-still-suck-1505063323",
"http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/wired-vs-wireless-peripherals-really-need-know/"
],
[],
[]
]
|
|
f2h8g8 | how does content get leaked? do people get in trouble and/or exposed? | Like songs, albums, photos, shows, scripts, etc. Is there like a website or something?
And do those people who leak get known? Do they face repercussions or is it never known who did it? How often is it anonymous?
I know how whistleblowers work and the government side of this question, but I don't get how art stuff gets out. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f2h8g8/eli5_how_does_content_get_leaked_do_people_get_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhd04h7",
"fhd2qbr",
"fhfpif6"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Is there like a website or something? \n\nYes, for music there is \"Has it leaked\" and for movies is \"Where you watch\".\n\n > **how does content get leaked?** \n\nFor example, music album can get leaked from different sources, from stealing in the studio where they were recording/mixing, getting it from store employee (stores have new records/cd's a few days before sales), to some kind of glitch in music service(wrong release date on Spotify, iTunes, etc.)\n\n > And do those people who leak get known? \n\nIn the community? Yes, but you will know their nick, maybe first name but no more.\n\n > Do they face repercussions or is it never known who did it? \n\nTbh I don't know, the only article I read about that was about India leaker that leaked GoT :D\n\n > How often is it anonymous? \n\nYou want to be anonymous because it's still stealing and you are \"making\" a huge music company to lose some revenue from the first sales.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI hope I answered some of your questions, I'm not a leaker but I knew some people from that community, so I'm sorry if there is some misinformation. :)",
" > Is there like a website or something?\n\nIt depends on the medium, but I've seen leaked movies and such on various torrent and other piracy sites. I remember years ago watching one of the Wolverine movies, a rough cut with not final CGI got leaked.\n\n > And do those people who leak get known? Do they face repercussions or is it never known who did it? How often is it anonymous?\n\nThere is a serious risk of the leaker losing a job or getting sued over it. First, there often only is so many people that have access to it, so your pool of suspects is small to start with. Often there is a non-disclosure agreement involved, and leaking would be a breach of that.\n\nI've seen it done where the content had hidden watermarks or other unique signatures, so if something is leaked it can be easily traced.",
" > Do they face repercussions or is it never known who did it?\n\nIf they get found out, they will probably lose their job, if the reason they could access it was part of their job. They might have trouble getting a job in the same industry, because companies talk to each other. No company wants to hire someone who does stuff like that.\n\nThey might have to pay money, or even go to jail. Depends on exactly what they did, and how aggressive the company's legal team decides to be about it.\n\n > How often is it anonymous?\n\nPeople who do it generally know it's wrong, and bad things will happen to them if they get caught. So probably close to 100% try to stay anonymous or only use online nicknames.\n\nCompanies put in place tons of security measures in place to detect theft, some of which a thief might not know about. For example:\n\n- Security cameras (maybe hidden, maybe visible)\n- Screen recording or other monitoring of employee PC's / devices\n- Logging and scanning of network / Internet activity\n- Watermark: A unique code embedded in each copy of content that identifies which customer the company gave it to."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
5o1v1z | why is there often a 'humor gap' between younger and older generations? | Like people in their 20's tend to think that photos of animals with captions on the internet are funny, but when shown to older folks, say, parents or grandparents, the response is usually not a laugh. They don't understand the humor.
What causes a gap in what people think is funny? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o1v1z/eli5_why_is_there_often_a_humor_gap_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcg37bv",
"dcg3e16",
"dcg4l0c",
"dcg7mym",
"dcgdd12",
"dcgy3li"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
6,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Been there done that type of thing i guess, do u find the same shit funny at 25 that u did at 10? ",
"Because people laugh at what they're \"told\" to laugh at. People in their 20's laugh at pictures of animals with captions under them because it's what they are more likely to be exposed to. If a 23 year old spent enough time with a group of 60 year olds and wasn't exposed to the humor of their peers their own age; they wouldn't be laughing at photos of animals with captions on the internet.",
"Generational and cultural relevance and involvement - they just aren't involved in the culture that makes these memes so they don't get it. In this case its most probably because they don't spend as much time on social media or the internet broadly. \n\nIt's happened through history though culture is always evolving.",
"It's sometimes because the younger generation wants to split off from their parents and make something unique of themselves. And one of the ways to do this is to actively reject your parents sense of humor and define your own.",
"Context being everything here: For example, making Hitler jokes is dark humour today, but its certainly more common than it was immediately post-holocaust- the horror was fresh in the minds of the world, and was considered inappropriate. ",
"By the time you are old you have seen a lot of funny stuff. What seems like a fresh joke or idea to somebody who has never seen it before isn't as funny when you are older."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
|
ctz029 | how does a rain forest burn for 3 weeks? isn't everything super wet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ctz029/eli5_how_does_a_rain_forest_burn_for_3_weeks_isnt/ | {
"a_id": [
"expa5ei",
"expg3q7",
"exq47bh"
],
"score": [
32,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not the true rain forest that is burning. There are several different types of forest cover in the Amazon region. It's a more diverse biome than you might think. Some of the areas are quite seasonal and it's the middle of dry season.",
"While the other commenter is right, in that it's not truly the rain forest that's burning, it is definitely possible to set the rain forest on fire, albeit it would be hard. \n\nImagine you have readily burnable material, wood, available, but it is simply too wet to ignite. How would you ignite it? You dry it out, and heat helps a lot. Let's say you can start a fire with other available material and then slowly feed it wet material to dry out and catch fire. If you can feed it wet material at a rate where the fire is sustainable and gets enough new burnable material from what you can dry out even very wet forests can catch on fire. Also, as a fire grows in size the heat increases, speeding up the rate of drying.",
"There are different parts of the forests that are wet and some are dry. Either one can burn, it's just that a wet forest would burn more more slowly. The heat from the fires cooks off the water, turning it into steam. Once the wood/plants are dry enough, then they can be ignited by the fire."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
32v4ga | why does eating spicy food specifically make your body release endorphins? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32v4ga/eli5why_does_eating_spicy_food_specifically_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqewnhq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Capsaicin, the chemical that gives peppers their heat, tricks your body into thinking you're being burned.\n\nEndorphins are your body's reaction to pain. When it thinks it's being burned, they're released."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
2ohxwl | what happens to the economy when you throw away money? | For instance, if I throw away a $20 bill. It's no longer in circulation but it also wasn't spent. However small, what is the effect on the rest of the economy?
That's on a small scale, what if the amount is bigger? Say a billion dollars just sitting in a vault somewhere that has been forgotten. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ohxwl/eli5_what_happens_to_the_economy_when_you_throw/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmn9moe",
"cmn9y58"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Nothing particular. They assume a certain amount of money is lost/destroyed/whatever per year already.",
"It's deflationary. Burning twenty dollars creates a deflationary effect, and it adds a bit of value to everyone else's dollars. "
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
|
5titir | how could society re-industrialize after an apocalypse without fossil fuels? what other energy sources are available? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5titir/eli5_how_could_society_reindustrialize_after_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddmt6pw",
"ddmtkm2",
"ddmuus5"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Wind and water are easily accessible. The sun can also be used though admittedly only in limited ways. you can use mirrors to focus sunlight and heat up water creating steam which then powers turbines or similar engines....for example.\n\nbiofuels (wood, plants, etc) could also help.\n\njust from the top of my head. there probably are more ways.",
"Presumably even after such an event there would be sufficient technology left over to help re-industrialise without needing to rely on fossil fuels and start essentially from scratch.\n\nIt would be a lot harder without fossil fuels but steam based technology is still effective with using wood based fuels which is technically renewable. Then you have solar panels which are increasingly popular in rural destinations so the likelihood of masses of panels remaining in a useful condition is fairly high. You could also count hydro electric generators but generally these are big and would likely be targets for military strikes as would most other major power installations like wind farms, solar farms and nuclear power stations.\n\nEthanol from sugar or corn would be a very potent fuel. It could fuel a small industrial country providing enough land for agriculture is available to also sustain the food supply. There are plenty of other options for growing bio fuels too, the only major drawback is the sacrifice of farms for food which in a post apocalypse situation would be fairly vital.\n",
"Any answer to this will be speculative.\n\nWith that in mind, contingency plans are already in place with these situations in mind. Most focus on preserving knowledge, technology, seeds, etc.\n\nThere is a well-equipped seed bank pretty close to the north pole (Svalbard? Idk). Russian scientists during WWII famously starved to death protecting a different seed bank including onions and potatos during the battle or siege of some -grad or other.\n\n\n\nPractically speaking, the more automation we have, the easier a post-apocalypse will be. Things that don't need people to make them work are pretty awesome when you don't have many people.\n\nAdditionally, existing solar and hydroelectric sources would be capable of meeting the power needs of a greatly reduced or more survival-oriented population for a fairly long time. Nuclear power would be a possibility.\n\nAs it stands, we aren't far away from the ability to maintain an industrialized civilization that runs itself. If knowledge, technology, and ability to survive remains intact post-apocalypse, this trend will likely continue."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
3rs72j | bad vision and the numbers associated with prescriptions. | My eyes are 4.75 L and 4.0 R. I'm looking to learn what happens to the eyes to make poor vision.
Edit: Solved by u/WRSaunders | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rs72j/eli5_bad_vision_and_the_numbers_associated_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwqteqk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Those numbers are the diopter measurements of the lenses needed to correct your vision. Poor vision occurs when the shape of the lenses in the eye doesn't match the shape of the retina (the back surface of the eye where the sensor cells are). When you grow, the bones in your skull can grow unevenly, stretching the eye and putting it out of focus. Lenses can be stretched or damaged, but that's much less frequent."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
59qc6j | why can we (usa) claim a no flight zone in a foreign country? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59qc6j/eli5_why_can_we_usa_claim_a_no_flight_zone_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9ahly9"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"Because we have big guns and fighter jets. All we need is a UN Security Council resolution to be able to do whatever we want where ever we want.\n\nIn this case, Russia will veto any resolution like that."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
||
avwuvf | how do money launderers buy the first property/business to act as a front, without raising suspicion? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/avwuvf/eli5_how_do_money_launderers_buy_the_first/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehilt8h"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"To wash a few thousand (of marked bills) a criminal can buy goods, such as electronics. If he then makes use of his right of return, the refunded money is clean. Often an exchange is not even necessary, as long as there is no shortage of money. Art / luxury items and collectibles can often be bought in cash and quickly resold if needed.\n\nTo wash more money, you need a business front: for example, craft and catering businesses, cleaning services and much more. The legal business does not have to do well, the illegal revenues carry the bogus business. The obvious disadvantage of the method is that these revenues have to be taxed.\n\nNow, as you see, these business require low initial investments. A hair saloon can be started with a few thousand. All equipment / furniture / renovating services can be paid in cash. This does not raise any suspicion. You can wash a lot of money.\n\nWhat is good about small businesses? You can explain why you have small bills (which are usually used to buy narcotics) in cash all the time.\n\nOnce you have one profitable business, you can get loans from the bank. Today the banks only care if your cashflow is enough to pay the interest. With that money you start other businesses, buy property etc.\n\nNext, you get a nice property or an old, ugly house and pay cash to have it renovated. Suddenly you can sell it fox 3x the initial price, as now the property is in mint condition.\n\nNow, often you can also get a loan if you offer your art / luxury items and collectibles you already have purchased for cash, as collateral.\n\nBottom line is: you just need one \"clean\" and profitable business - everything else you can get via using the business as collateral, if you don´t offer other collaterals. This is why banks are notorious for money laundering."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
jilyo | everything buddhism | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jilyo/eli5_everything_buddhism/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2cfm4f",
"c2cfm4f"
],
"score": [
17,
17
],
"text": [
"I don't think that's really possible. But I'll try and fill in some basics.\n\n\"Buddha\" means something like \"Great Teacher.\" It's a name that was given to Siddhartha Guatama, an Indian fellow who came up with some ideas about how to stop suffering in the world.\n\nSee, Siddhartha was born rich, sheltered, and naive. It wasn't until he got older and got out into the world that he realized people around him were suffering. This upset him, and he decided to do something about it. So he spent a long time thinking, and came up with some ideas about why suffering exists, and how to stop it.\n\nBuddha believed that suffering comes from the fact that we think the world revolves around us. We think that we are somehow entitled to have whatever we want, and that we can somehow have it forever. \n\nBuddha thought that the best way to do away with suffering was to realize that nothing lasts forever, everything changes, and that all we can do is go along with the change and make the best of it. \n\nHe also thought that it was our duty to try and make sure that we didn't add any more suffering to the world than what was already in it.\n\nAnd that's basically it, as far as I understand it. Everything else is older Indian and Chinese beliefs getting mixed in there as Buddhism spread around.",
"I don't think that's really possible. But I'll try and fill in some basics.\n\n\"Buddha\" means something like \"Great Teacher.\" It's a name that was given to Siddhartha Guatama, an Indian fellow who came up with some ideas about how to stop suffering in the world.\n\nSee, Siddhartha was born rich, sheltered, and naive. It wasn't until he got older and got out into the world that he realized people around him were suffering. This upset him, and he decided to do something about it. So he spent a long time thinking, and came up with some ideas about why suffering exists, and how to stop it.\n\nBuddha believed that suffering comes from the fact that we think the world revolves around us. We think that we are somehow entitled to have whatever we want, and that we can somehow have it forever. \n\nBuddha thought that the best way to do away with suffering was to realize that nothing lasts forever, everything changes, and that all we can do is go along with the change and make the best of it. \n\nHe also thought that it was our duty to try and make sure that we didn't add any more suffering to the world than what was already in it.\n\nAnd that's basically it, as far as I understand it. Everything else is older Indian and Chinese beliefs getting mixed in there as Buddhism spread around."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
||
1upqk2 | when i plug my headphones into the microphone port, why does it work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1upqk2/eli5_when_i_plug_my_headphones_into_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cekgiuq",
"cekh8vd",
"cekhdr9",
"cekjqfa"
],
"score": [
16,
9,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Headphones and microphones are remarkably similar in design. The headphone's speaker diaphragm moves in response to sound and this drives a current which moves through the cable. This is also how basic microphones are designed. ",
"Speakers and Microphones are essentially the same device working in opposite directions. Speakers use a current to drive a diaphragm to make sound waves. Microphones use sound waves to drive a diaphragm to generate a current. Proper microphones and headphones are optimized to do one task or the other, but they still work for the reverse process.",
"The main difference between headphones and microphones is the size and elasticity of the diaphragms, but everything else is essentially the same. Headphone jacks send out electric impulses to the diaphragm of the headphones. Microphone jacks receive impulses from microphone diaphragms and amplify them. If you substitute headphones for a microphone the jack will still receive the signals from the diaphragm of the headphones, because the rest of the system is the same the only difference is the direction of the flow and strength of the impulses. \n\nTechnically the reverse is same for microphones. Plugging a microphone into a headphone jack makes the microphone work in reverse, but because the diaphragms of microphones are significantly more tense than the diaphragms of speakers, and because the amplification levels of headphone jacks are significantly less than microphone jacks, they don't really put out any sound from a headphone jack. ",
"Headphones are literally the exact opposite of a dynamic microphone. They contain a magnet, and a diaphragm connected to a coil. When signal is going the right way, it forces the diaphragm to move air and make noise. When you have it running backwards, you move the air with your voice, which moves the diaphragm and creates a signal."
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[],
[],
[]
]
|
||
36pd2b | is prostitution illegal due to tax purposes only? | I have read quite a few articles in the searching of this sub... protection etc... but, this literally boggles my mind. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36pd2b/eli5_is_prostitution_illegal_due_to_tax_purposes/ | {
"a_id": [
"crfwvpf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It has mostly been made illegal in countries due to cultural abhorrence of sex and anything related to it.\n\nNowadays there are influences to stop slave trade and other working conditions related issues.\n\nNever heard of it having anything to do with taxes before"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[]
]
|
|
f7b4b3 | why is it that in western movies and documentaries the pianos are sometimes playing by themselves? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f7b4b3/eli5_why_is_it_that_in_western_movies_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"fia41gl",
"fia47ql"
],
"score": [
6,
12
],
"text": [
"Self-playing pianos that used pressurized air or electric actuators to operate the machine like a big music box were a popular novelty until the market crash in 1929.\n\nThe song would be \"programmed\" onto a roller or perforated sheet and the piano would play it by itself, provided you connected power or pressurized air.",
"There are special pianos which play themselves. The old style player pianos use long rolls of paper that have holes punched in them, and each hole is a note. The paper is fed over a metal cylinder with holes in it - one hole for each key on the piano. \n\nA mechanical pump (or, sometimes, footpedals) blows air through the cylinder as the paper is continuously passed over it and every time a hole in the paper lines up with a hole in the metal cylinder, the air pushes a level for a piano key*. Player pianos were used when a human player was not available (or affordable). \n\n & nbsp;\n\n*It's actually a fairly complex system of vacuum, diaphragms, and pneumatic actuators"
]
} | []
| []
| [
[],
[]
]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.