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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6pcxop | why aren't people attracted to family members? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pcxop/eli5_why_arent_people_attracted_to_family_members/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkodb4j",
"dkodiqp",
"dkogmxi",
"dkor5fz",
"dkp13hu"
],
"score": [
18,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I mean they can be, incest is a thing. But if you want an evolutionary explanation, incest can often lead to severe birth defects in children and as a result, it is evolutionarily beneficial to have a hardwired response to avoid that. And that is likely what happened (I say likely because all current evidence seems to be anecdotal).",
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n\n\n1. [ELI5: How come siblings are not attracted to each other? ](_URL_0_)\n1. [Why are people not attracted to their siblings? ](_URL_1_)\n",
"One theory is the love map. Humans aren't sexually attracted to people whom they knew before adolescence. This is to prevent inbreeding.\n\nBiologically cousins could have healthy kids. But now it's gross.",
"Survival of the fittest / natural selection. If a population of brother and sister fuckers came into being, say through cultural means, then the resultant population would be less immune to disease and a whole host of other issues as recessive genes would be _more likely_ to be expressed in the populace. So comparatively they'd be at a disadvantage to non brother and sister fuckers, and would become increasingly so. \n\nIt's also highly likely that a central element of human attraction is pheremonal indication of genetic divergence - think of it as playing top trumps - you tend to like people who are strong where you are weak, and vice versa. \n",
"While there are plenty of scientific/genetic/moral reasons why you shouldnt, I think the answer is more simple. Brothers and Sisters were raised together...by the time they hit puberty, its like they have been married for like 10 years living in the same house without any physical attachment, so while you are attached to the person, you also know all about the faults and annoyances without havent much of a benefit or reason to continue the relationship beyond that point. This is the reverse of what most people consider a typical relationship progression. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5mjr7u/eli5_how_come_siblings_are_not_attracted_to_each/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/52arkg/why_are_people_not_attracted_to_their_siblings/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3qqmjy | why are they called "gold-bears" (haribo) instead of gummy bears when clearly there are more than just gold colored ones in there? | Does this have anything to do with their german origin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qqmjy/eli5_why_are_they_called_goldbears_haribo_instead/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwhhcla"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Gummy bear is what it is. Golden bear is Haribo's trademarked name for them. \n\nI don't think they have a trademark on \"gummy bear\" \n\nMy Google's broke so this is from memory. Sorry if I'm wrong."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2709id | if flouride is classified as a neurotoxin, why is it used in my toothpaste and in the water i drink? | Flouride is classified as a neurotoxin in many parts in the world, yet it is used in water and toothpaste in the US. It was also used in Nazi experiments. What health benefits does it have, otherwise just preventing tooth decay. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2709id/eli5_if_flouride_is_classified_as_a_neurotoxin/ | {
"a_id": [
"chw5q4v",
"chw5v5b",
"chw63nb",
"chw6p0h",
"chw72h7"
],
"score": [
2,
16,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well its pretty good at preventing tooth decay.\n\nLook, do you think that the US government would just pointlessly kill most of its population by poisoning them with fluoride?\n\nFluorine and Fluoride are dangerous, but only in certain concentrations. The amounts in dental work are no where near the level required to cause harm, though they do ask that you don't swallow or eat the stuff.",
"Everything is a toxin. It matters only the dose.\n\nThe perfect, and oft repeated example of this is botox. It is *the* most deadly compound known to man (about 10,000 times more deadly than \"very fast death factor,\" aka anatoxin-a). Yet it is also a very effective muscle relaxant at low doses.\n\nThe levels of flouride in drinking water are very, very low. We get the tooth hardening effects without any other dangerous effects. Similarly, the levels in toothpaste are low enough that there isn't much effect outside of gobbling down tubes at a go. In fact, bears love the stuff, so if you are hiking in bear country, it is much safer to swallow toothpaste after using it rather than spit it out, where the smell lingers around.",
"The dose makes the poison. The amount you consume in drinking water is far too low to cause any adverse effects, and I don't suppose you actually eat the tooth paste. Looking at a toothpaste tube I have on hand, sodium fluoride makes up 0.24% of the weight of the contents--so about 0.1% fluoride by weight. One part in one thousand of the mass of toothpaste you use for brushing is fluoride. Suppose you use a gram of toothpaste--that's one milligram of fluoride, a lot of which you end up spitting out anyway. \n\nConsuming 10 milligrams of fluoride per day is perfectly safe--the equivalent of 10 liters of fluoridated water. It's just not enough to do much damage. \n\nThe lethal dose for sodium fluoride (the salt of fluoride most common) is between 5 and 10 grams for an adult--that is, you'd need to consume, in one sitting, between 2.5 and 5 kilograms of toothpaste, or between 2.5 and 5 thousand liters of water. \n\nAnd just because it's used in Nazi experiments doesn't mean it's bad for you. You know what the Nazis used for rocket experiments? Alcohol.\n\nAnd preventing tooth decay is a pretty nice thing to have--or would you rather suffer from infections of the gums, or cavities that require a root canal?",
"Basically what /u/mjcapples said. Don't let those labels trip you up because they can be extremely misleading.\n\nFor example, oxygen is a well-known carcinogen and water has its own [risk factors](_URL_0_), but it's not as if we're going to stop drinking water and breathing. ",
"It takes about 5-10 grams of fluoride taken within a relatively short period of time to kill the average adult. That's actually quite a lot. Natural ground water in many parts of the world have in excess of 1.5 grams of fluoride in the water for every liter (half of a 2 liter for visualization). By comparison the EPA shows an average of 0.0005 - 0.004 grams (0.5 - 4.0 milligrams) of fluoride per liter added to municipal water supplies. You would die of water intoxication long long before you could possibly even get close to a toxic level of fluoride.\n\nThe reason that fluoride is in toothpaste is because it is very effective at remineralizing your tooth enamel. This effectively helps to slow down and prevent tooth decay. Most over the counter toothpastes have fluoride ions in the range of 1000-1100 parts per million.\n\nFluoridated drinking water works much the same way. It is only effective when it is in contact with your teeth and at the miniscule levels or 1-4 parts per million it has basically no effect on your body when swallowed despite all of the claims to the contrary. Water fluoridation does still have a profound effect at reducing the amount of tooth decay, especially in those with poor dental hygiene such as children. There are several studies that show that 1-4ppm fluoride added to tap water reduces childhood cavity rates by about 50%. Despite statements that fluoride is toxic (it is at high doses), your bones also need it in small amounts and many foods naturally contain fluoride. The recommended daily amounts of fluoride for adults is about 4mg and for children ranges from 0.5-3mg. Seafood, tea, and natural ground water are common sources of dietary fluoride, as well as municipal water supplies that add it. The average adult drinks about 1 liter of water per day with some people drinking as little as a half a liter and up to 2 liters. If all this water were sourced from fluoridated municipal water supplies that would add between 0.25mg up to 8mg of fluoride per day.\n\nIt seems to me that people are getting excited about nothing. Here's some more reading on the subject of the fluoridated drinking water controversy: _URL_0_ be sure to follow the citations for the original sources."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html"
],
[
"http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation"
]
] |
|
fxpofg | how does "getting used to it" actually work? | (Didn't know what to flair this, I assumed it was more psychology)
So I live next to a trainline, and as such trains pass by every single day, multiple times a day. I've lived here my whole life, never moved house, I grew up here and am 16 now.
I don't notice the trains anymore, they're super loud and whenever someone is over they ask if it's annoying, which it isn't because I don't notice them.
My parents tell me, and I assumed that it was because, I have just "gotten used to it". But how does "getting used to" something actually work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fxpofg/eli5_how_does_getting_used_to_it_actually_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmvqvfp",
"fmvxucg"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"You’re developing a neurological immunity to it. Experiencing anything in an extreme amount can develop resistance to its effects. This can occur with [super simplified here] happiness (dopamine), pain (endorphins), calmness (oxytocin), and an infinite number of combinations of those and many more chemicals that are released in response to a situation. Whatever chemical combination is released when you hear a train horn will continue to be released in the same dosage as the first exposure, but your body naturally demands a higher dosage each time in order to feel a response due to the way our brains interpret these chemical outputs. After repeated exposure, your brain has approximated the expected chemical release dosage and adjusted to it. This is why drug addicts have a tendency to use more/stronger drugs for example. When the brains approximation is so infinitely close to the actual chemical release, the response in your system gets infinitesimally smaller. \n\nTldr- “getting used to it” is your body adjusting to prolonged exposure to external stimuli",
"Not hearing the trains anymore is because your brain is used to them, like it's very possible to get nose-blind to a bad but constant smell."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
20n2oq | why do theatres and retailers in the us dislike the nc-17 rating? | Sure it's better than an R, which is 18+? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20n2oq/eli5_why_do_theatres_and_retailers_in_the_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg4ubha",
"cg4uc43",
"cg4uk9f"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
6
],
"text": [
"Why do you think it's better?\n\nThe reason that they don't like it is because they won't make as much money on them. Theater owners want to make a good profit, and an NC-17 movie won't bring in the crowds that an R movie will, and a PG-13 movie brings in the biggest crowds of all.",
"NC-17 means absolutely no one in the theater under the age of 17.\n\nR means no one in the theater under the age of 17 *without their parent or guardian present*. You can have a 3 year old in an R rated movie, as long as their parent/guardian is there.\n\nThe former clearly and absolutely limits the audience who can spend money on a seat -- the latter doesn't. Since an empty seat in a theater is lost revenue, it doesn't make sense to spend money on movies that people can't go see.\n\nAs far as retailers go, same thing. You can only sell to a certain market. There are plenty of driving 15 and 16 year olds with money to spend, who won't be able to spend it on a certain product.",
"No teenager money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2xjwqx | why does nobody pee themselves when they're under general anesthesia during long surgeries? | Edit: If they do, how do they keep the operating table sterile? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xjwqx/eli5_why_does_nobody_pee_themselves_when_theyre/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp0qv31",
"cp0sbmx",
"cp0snkb"
],
"score": [
39,
3,
13
],
"text": [
"After the patient goes under, they have catether inserted and it's removed (if it's no longer needed) at the end of the surgery. ",
"I woke up after surgery with a catheter in and, based on the sounds the guy sharing the room with me was making while they were putting his back in after his surgery, I was super glad they waited till I was out before putting mine in and didn't rush into rush into taking mine out while I still needed it. \n\nOuch. ",
"Patients are generally catheterized in these situations and they are instructed to fast and take a laxative before the surgery to clear their bowels. Not sure if this is for all procedures, but my dad went through the process before each of his four major cancer surgeries. General anesthesia also interrupts peristalsis - the muscular process that pushes food through your GI tract.\n\nA side note : urine is generally sterile until it leaves the body unless the individual has a UTI. I'm sure it isn't desirable to have urine spraying around the OR but infection wouldnt be a concern from it in most cases.\n\nEdit : punctuation, spelling, spelling again "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2zxgsu | if my body produces mucous to combat infection, does taking something like mucinex increase the length of time that i'm sick? | ...do they? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zxgsu/eli5_if_my_body_produces_mucous_to_combat/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpncb64"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"So first up, Mucinex is guaifenesin, which has been pretty well shown to have no effect at all on acute coughs. The American College of Chest Physicians does not recommend it for acute cough. It a pretty worthless drug if you have a cold.\n\nIn general, things that decrease the symptoms of a cold might prolong the cold. There's some data suggesting that using a fever reducer may prolong the cold, for example. However, the magnitude of this difference is usually very small. Would you rather be sick and miserable for 5 days or sick and much less miserable for 5 days and 3 hours?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5t0hk2 | why is slicing an object with a sharp utensil more effective than simple downward pressure? | So for some context: why does it seem easier, when using a sharp knife, to pull the blade across a tomato, versus simply applying downward pressure onto the item?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5t0hk2/eli5_why_is_slicing_an_object_with_a_sharp/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddj7ejt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Materials can resist different types of forces in different ways. Your skin, and the tomato's, is good at resisting stabbing forces but bad at resisting slicing forces, because microscopically it's made of intertwined strands.\n\nWhen you slice, you apply shearing forces on the molecules, and it's easier to break those bonds, because those strands need to be stretched to ripped apart. \n\nCompare this with a solid metal. Those bonds are good at resisting slicing, because the atoms can move around and bond however they want due to metallic bonds, but bad at resisting stabbing, because the atoms can easily get out of the way and make a hole. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ceb3ha | why does our skin prickle when we start to sweat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ceb3ha/eli5_why_does_our_skin_prickle_when_we_start_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"eu1b1iv",
"eu1emd1",
"eu1fh5w",
"eu1g57w",
"eu1g5p1",
"eu1g6vs",
"eu1h2zp",
"eu1h466",
"eu1i1s2",
"eu1i7ll",
"eu1iadm",
"eu1jf42",
"eu1k2iw",
"eu1kdai",
"eu1kily"
],
"score": [
63,
4,
262,
6,
3,
63,
11,
21,
2,
3,
3,
4,
2,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"I've never noticed that before, but I'm sweating right now and my guess is you're feeling the individual beads of sweat initially come out of the pore, and then when you're soaked you don't feel that sensation anymore.",
"Uhh, I'm just some guy here to say I have no idea what sensation you are feeling. Unless it is the beads of sweat dripping down your back or neck.",
"Judging from the other comments, this must be far from a universal thing, but I know what you're talking about, OP. I have psoriasis, and I frequently get a terrible feeling of itchiness when I am in humid conditions and sweaty. I also get it after taking a shower. Why? No idea. My cause may be different from your cause, as I noted, I think mine is related to psoriasis somehow.",
"Go get an allergy test. I had the same feeling and turns out that I’m allergic to somethings that trigger when I sweat maybe a few hours after a meal or the next day at the gym in the morning",
"Never happened to me. Maybe you need to exfoliate, the wet sensation on dead skin?",
"I notice half of the people know this sensation and half doesn't. \n\nI cannot explain for sure, but it has to do something with dry/clogged skin pores. I had an awful itching/prickling sensation on my face whenever I went outside, exercised or it was generally a hot day (or when I was really anxious, because it made me sweat). I went to the dermatologist and she recommended me some face cleaning products for sensitive skin as well as moisturizing cream. I also changed my shampoo because dandruff can be the source of clogging material. Now I get that feeling once or twice per week, but it is substantially less uncomfortable and cleaning my skin improved things!\n\nOne of the tips she gave, was to avoid hot shower if you can, or at least moisturize afterwards.",
"Not an answer, but a lot of people seem to not have this, so I thought I'd add to the question: I get very intense, spiky itches when it's both humid and I do anything vaguely active. They seriously impact my mood, making me very short tempered.",
"DISCLAIMER: I’m not a doctor but did my own (light) research on this a while back.\n\nWhat you’re most likely feeling is a heat rash, otherwise called ‘prickly heat’ or milaria, which is more or less sweat getting trapped and clogged beneath your skin. For me personally, there is no visible rash, but more often than not small red bumps appear where the prickling sensation occurs.\n\n Not everybody is affected by this, hence the users’ confusion in the comments.",
"No one has mentioned it, but I would get this when I was younger when I was particularly anxious. I haven't had it in a while, so I can't really recall the exact triggers.",
"It sounds like you have a medical condition and if you are lucky then a doctor will pick up the clue and tell you what it is. \nI myself have an itchy sensation when I start to sweat. It's due to the fact that my skin is allergic to all sorts of things and if I eat food with the 'wrong' preservative and sweat it out later then it triggers am allergic reaction of itching/rashes on my skin.\nMy solution is daily cardio training (voluntary release of allergens in frequent but small doses) and going to sauna.\n\nI would do an allergy check if I were you. It can be something else though, I'm not a doctor myself.",
"I know what you're talking about - I feel it too sometimes! \n\nI think it's just your pores opening. It always happens to me when I'm really gearing up to sweat hard and it's HOT. Usually right when I get into the sauna",
"I don’t have an explanation, but I’ve experienced this exactly like OP describes (you’re not alone OP!). It’s like the prickle you get from the pins and needles when blood rushes back after your arm goes to sleep, but without the numbness, and a bit less intense.\n\nIt happens when I’m “overheated”, just like OP.. either too hot in the sun, getting into a slightly-too-hot shower, wearing too many clothes while walking from the cold into a warm environment - all these can trigger it. I might not even be sweating.. I’d put it down to a rapid increase in temperature overstimulating the nerves, but now I’m curious about it.\n\nI mostly get it across my upper back (kind of between my shoulder blades?), but sometimes it’s whole-body.",
"Does skin prickle when we start to sweat? I’ve never noticed.",
"I’m in the “uh..what?!” Camp. The only thing close to this was my Army days when we would be in the field for like a month or more at a time in somewhere very hot and not able to shower. The sweat would dry in your pores, sort of crystallize, and it felt super, super prickly and itchy...but i highly doubt you’re not showering for a month, so I’m at a loss",
"The itching sensation when you sweat is caused by [nerve fibres in your sweat glands](_URL_0_), which react to heat and sweat. It can be aggravated by conditions such as [cholinergic urticaria](_URL_0_), [classic heat rash, aka *miliaria rubra*](_URL_2_), [other forms of rashes, dry skin, or eczema](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.webmd.com/allergies/cholinergic-urticaria-facts",
"https://www.zocdoc.com/answers/6097/why-does-my-skin-burn-and-itch-when-i-sweat",
"https://www.medicinenet.com/heat_rash/article.htm"
]
] |
||
n1nqi | how missiles "work" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/n1nqi/eli5_how_missiles_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c35lkwt",
"c35lkwt"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"a rocket has a couple of parts, the first thing is proulsion - usually a solid fuel that burns up, pushing it out the back, and forcing the rocket to go forward. The next bit is the payload, which is high explosive, designed to detonate when it hits its target. finally, the computer, and sensors. So the computer decides where the rocket is to go. as the guy said below \"(infared, radar, heat seeking, gps) \" which helps decide where the rocket is going. Also there are fins on the back of the rocket, these create drag (keep the back of the rocket behind itself) and allow for steering",
"a rocket has a couple of parts, the first thing is proulsion - usually a solid fuel that burns up, pushing it out the back, and forcing the rocket to go forward. The next bit is the payload, which is high explosive, designed to detonate when it hits its target. finally, the computer, and sensors. So the computer decides where the rocket is to go. as the guy said below \"(infared, radar, heat seeking, gps) \" which helps decide where the rocket is going. Also there are fins on the back of the rocket, these create drag (keep the back of the rocket behind itself) and allow for steering"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1zqzp6 | how do software activation codes work? | I'm trying to figure out how these game activation codes work - do they connect to a server or is there some sort of encryption/decryption going on? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zqzp6/eli5_how_do_software_activation_codes_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfw4ijo"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is both, depending on the software you are activating. Bigger titles like Windows, Photoshop, and Autocad connect to a server to authenticate, while other programs will use a special algorithm to generate the code so the program itself can verify it offline."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
43b9t8 | why d so many subreddits ban shortened urls? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43b9t8/eli5_why_d_so_many_subreddits_ban_shortened_urls/ | {
"a_id": [
"czgya2m",
"czgydqu"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because A. people can't see where the link is going to take them until after they've clicked on it; and B. It's sometimes possible to change where shortened URLs link to, so I could get a video of a cat beating up a chicken to the front page, then switch the link to an advert, or something NSFL",
"Click this link with a URL that does not provide any information about where it goes to! I swear it won't link to any sites that may automatically install malware or phish passwords with a authentic looking website! You can trust me, I'm an anonymous person on the internet!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1wieeg | why do people in the military get married at such a young age? | I have a few friends that have joined the Military straight out of high school and get married under 20, and in general I feel like getting married at a young age ( > 21), is more accepted if they are in the service. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wieeg/eli5_why_do_people_in_the_military_get_married_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf28xfz",
"cf2acuq",
"cf2c3g4"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It has very little to do with being accepted.\n\nMarried members get slightly higher cost of living allowances. Combine that with living expenses not scaling directly by person (a household with two members is cheaper, per member, than two households with one member) and you have your answer.",
"Quite a few factors:\n\n- The government's accounting does not recognize significant others as a single item. You're still legally single even if you've been living with your girlfriend/boyfriend for many years and have kids. \n\n- Military pay is basically broken up into three main parts: base pay, Basic Allowance for Housing, and special bonuses for dangerous or needed jobs. BAH is supposed to cover the cost of living where you live and varies by location (it's more expensive to live in DC or Japan than, say Kentucky). Married people (\"with dependents\") get more BAH money because they presumably need a larger place for more people. If you live on base you don't get BAH because you're not paying rent.\n\n- In most places unmarried junior enlisted (which includes nearly everyone under 21) are required to live on base in the barracks (sometimes on a ship). These days most barrackses are of quality similar to college dorms instead of the rows of racks you see at boot camp, but they still don't offer the privacy/freedom of living in your own off-base place. \n\n- Like college freshmen, a lot of new junior enlisted are trying to keep their relationship with their high-school sweetheart. \n\n- As you can see, young military kids have financial and quality of life incentives to get married young. \n\n**I should emphasize that this isn't a healthy/encouraged part of military culture.** The divorce rate is much higher in the Military than the general population because you have young kids not ready to settle down rushing to get married, then realizing once they're on deployment that they're not ready for a long-term marriage. Every leader in the military is going to warn their young soldiers/sailors/airmen/Marines to not get married, yet plenty of boots (military slang for people straight out of boot camp; the military version of the college freshman) still do it and end up getting divorced when they realized they married the wrong person too soon. Military wives are also often stereotyped as unfaithful too (which of course hurts the divorce rate). ",
"There's a strong correlation between education, social class/family wealth & age of marriage.\n\nIf you come from a family with money, you're more likely to go to college & start a professional career & wait longer to get married and have children. If you don't come from money, you're more likely to enter the military/trades/labor, get married early & have children.\n\nGoing into the military also offers a sense of security - as long as you don't fuck up (or get shot) you know your job will be there next year. This attracts women that are interested in having kids & settling down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
409ufz | how do your odds change when the lotto gets to 1 billion dollars? isn't it the always same regardless as you have the same amount of numbers to choose from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/409ufz/eli5_how_do_your_odds_change_when_the_lotto_gets/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyskdce",
"cysll9d",
"cysn346",
"cysslb4",
"cysvibl",
"cyswtn4"
],
"score": [
29,
7,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The odds of winning any jackpot doesn't change based on the value of the jackpot.\nWhat does change (by a minuscule amount) is your risk:reward. This is what gets people to play more often. ",
"There is also increased likelihood of more than one person winning and splitting the jackpot because so many more are playing.",
"[Expected Value](_URL_0_). Suppose a lottery (that only has one prize) has a 1 in million chance of winning the prize. When the jackpot is $1M, your expected value of return is $1. If it costs $1 to buy a ticket, then this is just a breakeven proposition. As the jackpot grows your expected value goes up so your return on investment is greater. It doesn't change your chance of winning it just gives you a better return.",
"On a similar note, why does my Powerball ticket say I have approximately 1 in 25% chance of winning?",
"The odds don't change of you having the winning ticket, but the odd of sharing the jackpot with someone (or many someones) increases when more people play. ",
"_URL_0_\n\nThis a few days old but relevant. Also there's a post on /r/dataisbeautiful that's really good."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/powerball-jackpot-800-million-odds/?ex_cid=538fb"
]
] |
||
3e3wip | the function of the battery in a car | First the basic question: I get that if I leave lights on overnight it kills the battery. What function does the battery provide that starts the car?
Second, since a battery is required to both start the car and run the lights and other electronics, why don't we have 2 batteries? One dedicated to running the car, the other to non-critical functions like the headlights...seems like that would solve the very common issue of leaving lights on overnight stopping you from using your car. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e3wip/eli5the_function_of_the_battery_in_a_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctb8jys",
"ctb8o0z",
"ctbbhur"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The battery powers the starter motor - an electric motor that turns your engine over to get it started. Back before this was introduced, you had to use a hand crank to get your engine started, which sucks for obvious reasons.\n\nEDIT: regarding \"secondly\": because it would mean having two batteries and two separated electric systems which makes design more complex and drives costs up.",
"the primary need for the battery is to turn the starter motor, a small electric motor that engages the flywheel to start the engine turning. It also powers the fuel pump and the spark plugs, as well as the ECU and other control systems that manage the modern fuel injection motor.\n\nAs for a 2nd battery, cost, weight, space. A simpler option is a low voltage shutoff that cuts power to auxiliary functions when the charge approaches a level that would compromise the ability to start. This is becoming standard on most new model vehicles now. Before that, the lesser alternative was automatic lights, but there were other ways to kill the battery that it did not address so they took it a step farther.",
"As others stated, the battery's main job is to power the electric starter motor, which cranks the engine until ignition.\n\nMore info: the engine then turns an alternator, which generates more than enough power to run your car's electrical system, plus charge the battery back up.\n\nThe battery's secondary job is to power your car's electrical system when the engine is not currently running. Stereo, interior lights, clock, alarm, etc."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
56uafl | why do energy drinks make us have to go take a piss quicker than other drinks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56uafl/eli5_why_do_energy_drinks_make_us_have_to_go_take/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8mebsf"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Have you noticed, same happens with coffee.\n\nLike alcohol, caffeine (most widely consumed psychoactive drug, btw) is the one that \"binds water\" in your organism - removes it from you body - makes you take a piss. \n\nThis is usually not good for you so you need to rehydrate yourself by drinking **water** (not just random sugary liquids but WATER!... OK, if you add little bit of apple juice to a glass of water + few grains of salt, it will rehydrate you even faster. Mildly cool, not ice cold!) \n\nLoss of water aka dehydration also gives you a hangover and makes you tired and weak/sleepy. \n\nIf you feel worn out by afternoon, have a large (pint) glass of water, not coffee, and you will feel super!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
18nfx5 | why do stars glow? (why are they white?) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18nfx5/why_do_stars_glow_why_are_they_white/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8gbtt4",
"c8gcahs"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they're on fire.",
"Stars are super-heated giant balls of gas that emit heat and energy. We perceive the energy as light which is why they appear to glow. The hotter a star and the different materials in the star changes a stars color ranging from red at the coolest to blue at the hottest. The reason that stars in the night sky appear to be white when we look at them is simply because they are too far away for our eyes to see and distinguish the color of them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
aibd3p | why should i let my car run in cold weather? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aibd3p/eli5_why_should_i_let_my_car_run_in_cold_weather/ | {
"a_id": [
"eemfph5",
"eemfpi2",
"eemfs2n",
"eemg7ui"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"There are little rods in your engine that slide back in forth lubricated by oil. If the oil is cold, the rods will touch bare metal and can get damaged. If the oil is warm/hot, the rods are properly lubricated and there won't be grinding/scraping in your engine.",
"Because the engine oil and other lubricating oils become like syrup so driving a vehicle cold causes premature wear on engine components which could cost a ton in repairs that's also why most cars up north have block heaters so you can plug your car in at night to keep the oil warm.",
"If you turn on the engine, and immediately begin to do something that requires significant energy, the engine will begin working faster. This in turn, as we use combustion engines, generates heat, assuming your car has been out in the cold, your rather massive engine block stores said cold very well. So, by rapidly pushing out extreme heat into metal that is already very cold, the outermost parts of the metal expand while the inner parts stay cool. This causes strain that will overall shorten the life of the engine, but not cause significant harm on its own. The effect can be seen on a more visible scale when you pour hot water onto cold glass",
"If you were being chased by a chainsaw wielding maniac, hopped in your car and gunned the engine cold, you'd get away just fine. Nothing will explode. By and large modern engines with modern fluids can handle it. \n\nDoing it everyday however will significantly shorten the life of your engine. Your car has all sorts of fluids and lubricants in that help parts move smoothly together. When they are cold they are very thick though. They'd like some time to warm up and become really effective. \n\nSo best advice is to either let your car idle for 5-10 minutes in sub freezing temperatures, or at the very least go easy on it for about as long before you hit the highway. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2kvldb | why is the term "air conditioner" only applied to cold when they can also heat things? | Can't warm air also be the product of conditioning its temperature? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kvldb/eli5_why_is_the_term_air_conditioner_only_applied/ | {
"a_id": [
"clp3h12",
"clp3hnd"
],
"score": [
2,
10
],
"text": [
"In Australia, we call them \"Reverse Cycle Air Conditioners\"",
"Because the birth of \"air conditioning\" was primarily to cool hot environments. Making air hotter is simply a matter of building a fire. Making it cooler has been a real challenge."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5zx3jr | each car has its own key. why can't that same car key unlock other cars of the same brand and model? | Inserting the key into the lock is one point, but unlocking in terms of clicking the button on the key from a distance to unlock the car. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zx3jr/eli5_each_car_has_its_own_key_why_cant_that_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"df1pua9",
"df1q9hl",
"df1rgqm",
"df21kdc",
"df27512",
"df2lav1"
],
"score": [
18,
2,
12,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the keyless entry device sends a code that the car is configured to accept. Typically a second code (double click) is also configured to unlock every door, and not just the driver's. Obviously, designing them so that they all sent the same code and could unlock any car would generally be unpopular. ",
"Before I had to replace (remove) that shit from the ignitions they put in now a days so you need to pay hundreds of dollars a key, you could start another car with your key. Growing up we had an s10 and a some gmc trucks. One of they keys worked in the s10 and one of the gmcs. The lebaron key would occasionally work on the caravan too.",
"For physical keys, there are a finite number of combinations and there are more cars on the road than combinations. My family had two Ford cars with compatible keys. The key from either vehicle would open the doors. Interestingly, one car could be started with the key from either car. The other car the key from the second car would turn but not start the ignition.\nSimilarly, at my church, there were a number of occasions where someone left their lights on in the parking lot. An individual would try his key in the car and and find that it would unlock it so they could turn the lights off. It probably helped that I grew up in Dearborn, Michigan, hometown of Henry Ford and Ford Motor Company's world headquarters so a majority of the cars on the road were Fords.",
"yes it can, once after dark we went with my friend for something in his trunk, he could not find it there, but then the real owner of the car came and he was not very happy we went through his trunk, because friend confused his car with another, they were same model, parked nearby, though different color which we didn't noticed in darkness\n\nluckily this was public parking in Europe so we were not shot",
"I actually had an issue with this once long ago. Had a 1978 Pontiac Catalina. Ugly green car. I went to the grocery. Went in, came out. Got in car and drove away. Then realized I wasn't driving my car. Same year, same color, and equally ugly Pontiac Catalina. Went and reparked it and found my car a row over. Sigh. \n\nI waited around to explain to the driver what happened. But gave up after a half hour and just left. \n\nStill can't believe my key opened and started another car. Not high odds. ",
"For mechanical keys, there is a type of key called \"stripped\" that is cut down in a certain fashion that can be manipulated, \"jiggled\" mainly, with which car thieves, with just a few 'stripped' keys can open and start an amazing number of cars. They are illegal in many areas, and cause for arrest."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
28rx9c | what happens if a us state were to claim to own part of another state? | What would happen if, for example, Wisconsin claimed to own Michigan's Upper Peninsula? What if Wisconsin sent state troopers, enforced Wisconsin law and started making maps that included the UP as part of Wisconsin? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28rx9c/eli5_what_happens_if_a_us_state_were_to_claim_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cidulsr",
"cidv59c",
"cidvk2q"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This actually happens with surprising frequency, although it's a bit more than would fit into an ELI5:\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's happened before... funnily enough, I think it happened between Michigan and Wisconsin. They both wanted the territory because of its access to the great lakes, and it eventually escalated into a full blown fire fight. But the government stepped in and gave the Upper Peninsula to Michigan, but gave the disputed territory to Wisconsin, ending the fight. They still hate each other though... It also happens with islands all the time, Ellis Island for example.",
"There would be no rational basis for Wisconsin claiming to own the UP. Michigan became a state 11 years before Wisconsin. Before statehood, the Michigan territory at one time included all of what is now Wisconsin, so Wisconsin never had any individual claim to the UP.\n\nBefore statehood the Michigan territory had been involved in a dispute (known as the Toledo War, though it was fairly mild as wars go) with the state of Ohio over the Toledo Strip. A compromise was reached (which Michigan largely hated) to include the UP as part of Michigan in return for giving up any claim to the Toledo Strip.\n\nAlthough they initially felt that they got the shaft, Michigan later discovered that the UP was a treasure chest of copper and iron ore."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Internal_territorial_disputes_of_the_United_States"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
8s41bi | how to people in 'to catch a predator' get charged with soliciting a minor, if there was no actual minor involved? | I get how they thought they were planning to have sex with a minor, but there never was a minor to begin with, how can you be charged with a crime if there is no victim? Especially if the charges include "soliciting a minor for sex"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8s41bi/eli5_how_to_people_in_to_catch_a_predator_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0wdkk9",
"e0wdo67",
"e0y942c"
],
"score": [
19,
10,
3
],
"text": [
" > they thought they were planning to have sex with a minor, but there never was a minor to begin with, how can you be charged with a crime if there is no victim?\n\nIt is the same sort of idea behind if they were caught trying to buy drugs from an undercover officer who doesn't actually have drugs to sell. They were caught while attempting a crime; they don't need to complete the crime or even be able to complete the crime in order to be charged.",
"If you buy a bag of oregano from a cop, thinking it's marijuana, as far as the law is concerned, you're guilty of buying drugs. The intent was clearly there\n\nIf you have a bunch of sex talk with a \"minor\" and then go over to that \"minor\"s house with the intent of having sex with a child, you're in the same boat.",
"you are right to question this and in fact, many of the charges from those scenarios were eventually dropped/overturned in court because of the sketchy/illegal way they lured the guys to the houses. I think mainly because they used an organization to play the chat decoys that had no affiliation with law enforcement whatsoever."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2jvvx7 | how does the "hover engines" in the hendo hoverboards work? | So a [kickstarter](_URL_0_) launched today which features a hovering skateboard concept, the "Hendo". They only say that the technology has to do with magnetic fields (and Lenz-law) but doesn't really explain why or how it actually makes the board (or white-box) hover. Why dons't is fall slowly like the classic magnet in a copper pipe experiment?
The Verge made a [youtube clip](_URL_1_) about the board and they talked about one-sided magnets (?), what is that?
I get the feeling that this never would work without the metal surface on the floor, because that's where you induce the magnetic field, so it could never work outdoors like in BTTF right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jvvx7/eli5_how_does_the_hover_engines_in_the_hendo/ | {
"a_id": [
"clg2v80"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They stuck a bunch of magnets, in [a special pattern](_URL_1_), on the spokes of a wheel. When you hold this wheel parallel to a copper sheet and spin the wheel, magnetic forces push the wheel away from the copper sheet.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > I get the feeling that this never would work without the metal surface on the floor\n\nCorrect. They mention this on the kickstarter page:\n\n > this surface needs to be a non-ferromagnetic conductor\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard?ref=category_recommended",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs_QOx_X5TE"
] | [
[
"https://www.google.com/patents/US20140265690",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array"
]
] |
|
2jyze4 | how do politicians make an income? | Title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jyze4/eli5_how_do_politicians_make_an_income/ | {
"a_id": [
"clgd5q8"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Well, they are paid by the State. Obama makes $400,000 a year. Lower level politicians can easily make 6 figures based off their position. The Governor of California makes $180,000.\n\nThey are also probably independently wealthy prior to office. Many own their own business or have investments. Many write and publish books that they make money off of."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2aest8 | gaming headsets vs non gaming | As an FPS player have i always thought that i needed the best headsets to be a better player, so of cause would i go for the one made for gaming.
But now i'm being told to just buy a pair of quality non gaming headset, and buy a microphone on the side.
So whats the deal with Gaming headsets, are they worth the price?
And now that i have your a attention - 5.1/7.1 vs normal 2 speaker headphones, is surround sound in headphones just a gimic?
_URL_0_ < - any truth to this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aest8/eli5_gaming_headsets_vs_non_gaming/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciucrck"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of peripherals are marked up in price just because they are labeled gamer gear and what not. It is possible to find good \"gaming headsets\" but you have to do your research before you buy because otherwise theres a lot of low quality or over priced stuff out there branded as gaming gear from one of the many gaming companies.\n\nYou'd be surprised how well it works too dudes will snatch stuff up in a heart beat if they think for even a sec it will somehow make them a better gamer."
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/doLScHh.png"
] | [
[]
] |
|
3nspad | how do people have "blind spots" on their cars? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nspad/eli5_how_do_people_have_blind_spots_on_their_cars/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvqx9zf",
"cvqxdsz",
"cvqxe06"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of it comes from improper side-view mirror positioning. Ideally, you shouldn't be able to see the side of your car through your side-view mirrors unless you lean a little bit. Remember, a side-view mirror should show you what's to the side of your vehicle, not what's behind it.",
"(You are five? Who gave you keys?)\n\nYour difficulty with \"backup visibility\" is in fact a blind spot. This either happens because you have that blind spot all the time and only notice it when backing or because while backing you're not comfortable using your side mirrors (which is generally a good thing).\n\nThe best way to become aware of blind spots is to have a *person* (much smaller than a car) walk around and look for places they can't see your eyes, either directly or in a mirror.",
"Blind spots are places that you can't see when you look in your mirrors. Usually they are close to the back corners of the car. This is why it is necessary to always look over your shoulder when changing lanes to make sure there isn't someone that you can't see with your mirrors.\n\n\nHeres a graphic that depicts the phenomenon:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://teendriving.statefarm.com/system/article_images/TDS_Image_17.JPG"
]
] |
||
1tirek | what is property tax and why is it ok? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tirek/eli5what_is_property_tax_and_why_is_it_ok/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce8dy2y"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is a tax on the value of property. \n\nwhy wouldn't it be ok?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9633cq | why do sports photographers use still cameras instead of video and screenshot? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9633cq/eli5_why_do_sports_photographers_use_still/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3xezcd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Usually for sporting events, the frame rate of video cameras won't be too high because there's just so much recording time, and the more frames means the more memory that recording takes. Meanwhile, a camera can have an extremely fast shutter speed letting it take crisper pictures than one frame of a video camera can produce."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
89irlv | if palms of our hands don’t have pores and oil glands, how can they get sweaty? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/89irlv/eli5_if_palms_of_our_hands_dont_have_pores_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwr7yg0",
"dwrmefy"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"While our palms don't have sebaceous glands, that doesn't mean they don't have other sorts of pores and glands.\n\nIn fact, when it comes to sweat glands (specifically, eccrine glands), our palms are among the most densely covered areas of our body.",
"Although the palms of our hands do not have hair follicles, they do have sudoriferous glands. These are also knows as sweat glands, which are a type of exocrine gland. In fact, these sudoriferous glands are most prominent on the palms and soles. They’re responsible for regulating body temperature"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
pkax7 | why should contraception be free? | In light of the recent "compromise" by Obama on coverage for contraception, I'm wondering why contraception should be free in the first place? I get that it should be available, and everyone should have access to it if they want it, and I get that insurance companies should have to cover it just like any other drug, but with a copay, like everything else. Why should it be free? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pkax7/eli5_why_should_contraception_be_free/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3q1bk6",
"c3q1dce",
"c3q1hth"
],
"score": [
7,
11,
4
],
"text": [
"If you can't afford even a cheap co-pay, you really can't afford to raise a kid.",
"In the article (I think) you're referring to, it points out that abortions and childbirth actually cost more than providing free contraception.\n\nIn any case if contraception isn't free, people aren't going to get it. Some people couldn't afford it. So they end up getting pregnant. So now they either have to get an abortion, which costs the insurance company, and causes a lot of trouble for the person getting an abortion and causes arguments to break out anew.\n\nSay they have a child. Well, someone has to pay welfare and/or child support. More money has to be raised for planned parenthood and other services.\n\nIn the end, it saves money. It keeps the arguments to a minimum (pro-choice vs. pro-life is avoided if people don't get pregnant).",
"One of the provisions of the Adfordable Care Act was to have preventative care be free without copay. The thinking being that anything that encourages preventative care decreases long term health care costs. Contraceptives have been classified as preventative care since the 2011 guidelines (which added other expanded coverage as well for things like HIV screening)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3hue4o | why can most mammals safely lick their own fecal matter when grooming, but humans have to avoid any contamination or get horribly sick? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hue4o/eli5_why_can_most_mammals_safely_lick_their_own/ | {
"a_id": [
"cualvld",
"cuamfjp"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You're already exposed to your own strains of intestinal bacteria all the time; your body knows more or less how to deal with them. It's *other peoples'* intestinal bacteria that are usually the concern.",
"You won't get horribly sick from touching your own fecal matter. That's just one of those things people take as fact that actually isn't true!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2n9xcs | how is it that sometimes torrent can have 10k+ seeds, but i can only connect to 20-30 of them and get poorer speeds than a torrent with a smaller number of seeds? | Like for example, right now I'm legally downloading a non-pirated program with 10000 seeds, but am barely getting 500kbps and only connected to say 20 seeds. Why wouldn't I connect to say 1000 seeds? Yesterday, I legally downloaded another non-pirated program with only about 40 seeds but got 1mbps+ speeds. What gives? Shouldn't more seeds = more connections to seeds = more speed? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2n9xcs/eli5_how_is_it_that_sometimes_torrent_can_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmbop8x",
"cmbqqiv"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It probably depends on a lot of factors. It could be settings in the program you are using to download the torrents that are putting a limit on the number of seeders you can connect to. Also the upload speed of the individual seeders will affect your download speed if you are connected to a limited amount of seeders. Most of the seeders may have there upload speeds limited in the program they are using, then every once in awhile you connect to a seeder who has a good internet connection speed and doesn't have a limit on the upload speed in there torrent program.",
"It depends on how many leechers there are as well as how fast of a connection the seeders have. Almost everyone has an asymmetrical connection, meaning their upload speed is much slower than their download speed. For example, if you are on a torrent that has 1000 seeders and 1000 leechers, your download will be slow because there are 999 other people trying to download data from those 1000 seeders, but the total download rate possible is much higher than they can upload (seed). If you have a torrent with 10 seeders and 2 leechers, there are 5 people uploading for ever person downloading and the downloads will go much faster, although this can vary depending on the upload speed of the people seeding."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1r6o08 | why is there such a significant split in population between the eastern and western united states? | Whenever I look at a population map, there is a huge difference in overall population in a perfect half split right in the middle of North Dakota all the way down to Texas. The East overall has a way denser population density compared to the West(not counting the coasts). Why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r6o08/eli5_why_is_there_such_a_significant_split_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdk4h4h",
"cdk532m",
"cdk7ccs"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"1. The East was settled first, most people chose to \"stay\" there.\n\n2. West of that \"split\" is much less hospitable (geographically speaking). Lots of high plains, deserts, mountains, canyons, etc. The weather here can be very extreme. Compare this to the flatter, greener, less tornado-prone eastern half of the continent. ",
"[Check out the rainfall](_URL_0_). There was a post yesterday about [why the Western US is so dry](_URL_1_).\n\nIf it's too dry and mountainous to farm, you're not going to find many people living there. It's only recently that we could cheaply, quickly & easily move food anywhere - the current interstate freeway system was started in 1956 and it wasn't until 1992 that they finished building all the roads in the original plan.",
"It's hard to live in mountains and deserts. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap17/us_precip.gif",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r4syu/why_is_the_us_west_coast_a_desert/"
],
[]
] |
|
2sd5zn | how are anti-handling landmines disarmed? | Watching a video on (Aki Ra)[_URL_0_] disabling land mines has brought up some questions regarding his safety. A lot of the mines you see being disarmed are your run-of-the-mill landmines that can be picked up and taken apart safely if done right. But unfortunately not all land-mines can be even picked up due to a mechanism inside that is triggered at the slightest movement (depending on the mechanism and mine). How is this dealt with? How are these mines identified?
Edit: Thanks for telling me how they are dealt with (without disarming). But I'm really curious as to how they are *disarmed* or if not, *identified*! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sd5zn/eli5_how_are_antihandling_landmines_disarmed/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnodfx0",
"cnodj33",
"cnodtyh",
"cnof41c",
"cnofixr",
"cnojneh"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > But unfortunately not all land-mines can be even picked up due to a mechanism inside that is triggered at the slightest movement (depending on the mechanism and mine). How is this dealt with?\n\nThese mines are sometimes just detonated.... after clearing out the areas that would be in the range of the explosion.",
"I don't think they are disarmed. I suspect the most efficient way to disarm them would be with a mine clearing vehicle similar to [this](_URL_0_). The machines have heavy flails on the end, typically, and they drive over the mines beating the ground to set the mines off. \n\nheavier mines such as anti-tank mines also are cleared this way, but the machines that do that work are larger in scale and more robust for clearing the more powerful mines. ",
"Want to hear how bomb experts disarm most bombs? They [shoot it](_URL_0_). Now I only said \"most\" for dramatic effect. It is more accurate to say that is the first resort. The idea is to either make the bomb explode on your terms, or to shoot it until it won't work anymore. ",
"The best way to prevent unintentional detonation of landmines is to intentionally detonate them.\n\nNo seriously, the easiest way to clear a minefield is if you run a remote controlled, landmine proof vehicle over it and trigger all the mines. Or bomb the hell out of it, turn no-man's land back to earth.",
"Just a comment. I worked in Bosnia doing humanitarian demineing and we had to do an extraction of a farmer. The farmer had run a few over with his tractor. So we show up and the CT from North Dakota sees the farmer waving at her. They clear a path to the farmer and he reaches down and picks up a live mine. We get the interpretor to tell him to please put the mine down. To which the farmer replies that you just don't touch the detonator on this mine. Just thought of that moment. Mine Flail or controlled detonation is your answer or a miclick if you have one. Remote vehicle is not a bad way. In Bosnia and Afghanistan they have many mines not made from metal so they are a pain to find. You look for different things like temperature differences. There are some mines that cannot be disarmed which is against UN rules. A mine flail is nothing but spinning chains that spin like a street sweeper or combine like mechanism. The hardest way is by hand with a mine prope. If you ever see any old munitions, spent rounds, bombs, blasting caps, grenades, call your local law enforcement and Do not attempt to handle or touch. Get back at least 300 meters. ",
"Clearly no one has answered your question, including the individual who claims to have Demining experience...\n\nWith any ERW (explosive remnants of war) clearance operation everything is highly dependent upon the situation and there are removal and/or render safe procedures for all situations - rain, cold, boggy ground, hard ground....whatever.\n\nIn answer to your question, devices are typically not disarmed, or rendered safe and intact components recovered. Yes, some are, but mostly for training purposes. The vast majority of clearance operations employ in-situ demolitions whereby the device is exploded where it is found. This is simply done by placing another amount of explosive on, or against the device and it is destroyed through what is called sympathetic detonation. In any event, handling or moving devices is specifically avoided.\n\nHow devices are identified is straightforward. In a clearance situation, if a mine detector locates a buried object there are a specific number of things that happen in a set order, one of those being an excavation procedure. The clearance tech will start about 6\" in front of the signal and slowly remove the soil towards the object, exposing the front edge. The Team Leader would then be called to visually identify the device and then the device destroyed in-situ.\n\nHope that explains it.\n\nEdit: you can reference the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) from _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBXpTbDmbHc"
] | [
[],
[
"http://www.armedforces-int.com/upload/image_files/suppliers/images/companies/711/mv-4-l.jpg"
],
[
"http://i.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/7/9/1/283791.jpg?v=1"
],
[],
[],
[
"mineactionstandards.org"
]
] |
|
cjdhb8 | intel optane memory | If a computer spec sheet says it has 16GB of Intel Optane memory and 4GB of SDRAM, is it like 20GB of total SD RAM? What are the real world results of comparing say this type of spec to a computer with 8gb or 12gb of SDRAM. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cjdhb8/eli5_intel_optane_memory/ | {
"a_id": [
"evcl6ww",
"evcllxj",
"evclve0"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Optane Memory is not RAM. Think of it as sorta booster for your Hard drive and ram interaction. But absolutely not RAM and you don't add them together. Optane memory is sorta more like a really fast SSD that works with your HDD to increase speed.\n\nThese lots of misleading ads on this claiming more memory and counting it as RAM (marketing!), but its all just nonsense. It is not a substitute for ram, its more of an addon to it.\n\n4GB of RAM is actually pretty budget build for a pc right now, thats an odd spec to have 4GB Ram and an optane memory. I'm guessing this has a traditional HDD, so in that case, the optane memory is really meant to speed up the HDD turning it into a hybrid SSD/HDD drive and give sexy specs, but be on a budget price, as SSDs and more RAM are going to be significantly more expensive than the HDD/Optane combo.\n\nIn the past, budget builds, since SSDs were really expensive, often contained Hybrid HDDs (a HDD which contains a small SSD as well) or you would get a seperate small SSD for the OS, and a HDD for data. As SSDs have decreased in price immensely though, this is falling out of favor except in more budget builds. However even in good builds there is room for an optane memory, but thats not what its use is here in your build",
"No, it's not the same.\n\nSDRAM holds working data that the processor is actively using for calculations. The more it has, the more stuff you can have open and working at once; this gets assisted by the hard drive in most computers as most users are *really* only focusing on using 1 or 2 applications at a time in most cases, but your RAM is the practical limit on how much you can be doing at a time before you get slowdown.\n\nOptane memory is, from what I've read, a way to make your most critical files and applications available to read faster when you're using a lower-speed HDD to store data; it's essentially like having a 16gb SSD in the computer to load some stuff super fast, but it's not accessible to you really, the computer decides what goes there so it can load fast.\n\nBut at the end of the day, Optane memory isn't memory in the same sense that your RAM is.\n\nAdvertisers don't seem to care, and add the optane memory to the \"memory\" specs when advertising a computer, though. so pay attention to that.\n\n > What are the real world results of comparing say this type of spec to a computer with 8gb or 12gb of SDRAM.\n\nIt depends on a few other factors and usage, but by and large, the biggest thing that would stand out to me is that if I had a game that needed 8gb of RAM, something with 4gb of SDRAM and 16gb of Optane memory would not meet the bill, while something with 16gb of SDRAM would.\n\nIf you're just a regular user though, you will probably get better performance out of a computer with 8gb RAM and 16gb Optane than you would a computer with 16gb RAM, just due to quicker load times for applications.",
"My understanding of Optane memory is it's not much different than a typical SSD. It's a bit faster due to newer technology but also in smaller amounts which makes it much cheaper. \n\nIt is NOT a replacement or supplement for RAM, it does not get added to your RAM amounts. 16GB of Optane and 4GB of SDRAM means you have 4 GB of SDRAM and 16GB of SSD-like storage space. \n\nOptane is designed for users who want SSD-like performance for their primary system, but don't want the high cost of replacing their HDD with a SSD. Instead, they use Optane + HDD, Optane stores the OS and maybe primary software they use to speed up those applications, but leaves all the big storage (videos, pictures, etc) on the slower, much larger, HDD which doesn't need fast access. \n\ntl;dr - For a normal business/home user, Optane is a cheaper alternative to SSDs, allowing them to keep the large storage of a HDD but speed up the OS and applications. For a power user who's buying a SSD anyway, Optane offers little to no benefit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
xmdxf | the difference between cable and dsl internet | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xmdxf/eli5_the_difference_between_cable_and_dsl_internet/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5nm6xn",
"c5nmck6"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"DSL sends information through the phone line network (usually old copper wire, so more interference and slower), cable sends it through the cable television network, which is most likely faster and has less interference.",
"One important difference is that cable is shared, DSL is not.\n\nThe cable plant in your town was originally designed to send the same TV signal to everyone. It's sort of like water pipes. All the pipes from everyone's house trace back to bigger pipes, which trace back to even bigger pipes,which all trace back the same water plant. Water comes from that plant through the pipes and any water you take out through your tap is water that someone else can't use. All the houses share the water.\n\nCable broadband is sort of like that. The data that's getting sent to you is just for you - it's not like everyone is surfing Reddit right now - but the bandwidth you use is bandwidth that isn't there for someone else to use. Usually this isn't a huge problem because, just like there's a lot of water in the water pipes, there's a lot of bandwidth in the cable system. But when *everyone* is trying to download high-bandwidth content at the same time, the system can clog up and slow down.\n\nDSL isn't like that. It's like if everyone had their own separate pipe straight to the water plant. The pipes aren't as big (DSL is generally not as fast in theory as cable) but you don't have to worry about someone else using the pipe while you're trying to use it. That connection is all yours.\n\nAnother odd difference has to do with the way DSL transmits over old copper phone lines. The farther you are away from the phone company's switch (the water plant in our analogy) the slower it gets. Far enough, and it doesn't really work at all anymore. This is part of the reason why some places can get DSL and some places can't, while anybody with cable ought to be able to get cable broadband."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8uyxiu | who "should" be drinking gatorade? | There are many posts about Gatorade which basically say "most of you don't need it, only high-endurance athletes would benefit from a sports drink instead of water." My question is, how would one know whether they are in that category? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8uyxiu/eli5_who_should_be_drinking_gatorade/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1j9wx5",
"e1j9wyc",
"e1jbdqg",
"e1jip4o"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If they are exercising and they need the electrolytes they they can drink gatorade, but if they aren't exercising then it's not much different to just drinking soda",
"There are two kinds of Gatorade. There's the sugary stuff you can buy at Walmart and there's the sugarless stuff they give to athletes on the field.\n\nAnyone who works out could stand to benefit from the sugarless kind. It's like having a tall glass of water and a banana, but it's a liquid and doesn't taste like banana.\n\nThe sugary version is like having a glass of water, a banana, and a spoonful of sugar. It's tasty, but the sugar content can be worrying.",
"If I remember right from \"The Lore of Running\" by Dr. Noakes, a benefit toward running time from the calories in sports drinks starts to show up after about a half hour of running.\n\nSo that's really two answers: a half-hour or more of sustained intense activity is where it starts to be worthwhile, and also if you're approaching the activity in a way that doing whatever you can to shave a few seconds off your finish time is worth it.\n\nFor my own personal experience with non-race athletic activity, it's somewhere between the first and second hours that I start to really notice my butt is dragging if I forgot to bring nutrition and just have plain water to drink.",
"If they are in need of replacing electrolytes. \n\nSo those who are doing a lot of sweating, such as people doing long workouts, playing intensive sports, working outdoors in hot weather, etc should drink some gatorade. Now they should also drink water during this period as well, but replacing the electrolytes is important and the energy boosts from the sugars is also useful in sports where energy reserves can become depleted. \n\nIt is also people who have been severely ill with dehydrating symptoms such as diarrhea or vomiting. Now these should drink less of it, and if they can find low sugar varieties that is better but some sugar tends to help as well if it has been a while since they were able to keep food down as it will give them some energy to fight the illness with. \n\nBut drinking it otherwise is not really any different than drinking a soda. It is fine in moderation but too much can cause problems. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ntvn2 | how are laptop screens so much thinner than computer monitors? | I mean I look at my MBPr screen and it might even be better than the clunky monitors I use for a second display. Surely manufacturers could make monitors like laptop screens and add something to the bottom to support it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ntvn2/eli5_how_are_laptop_screens_so_much_thinner_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmgudel"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"You can remove the external interface circuitry and move the driver components into the main body. There's also an incentive to use smaller, more expensive components. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2tqajp | what happened on wwe and why is /r/squaredcircle so mad about it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tqajp/eli5_what_happened_on_wwe_and_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"co1em24",
"co1opca"
],
"score": [
16,
2
],
"text": [
"(Copy-pasted from another thread here that asked this question.)\n\nOkay, I'm going to try to summarize this as best as possible assuming that you know almost nothing about the WWE.\n\nLast night, there was a pay per view show called Royal Rumble. In the Royal Rumble match that the show is named for, 30 entrants come out in a staggered time frame. To eliminate a man from the competition, you have to toss his over the top rope and his feet have to touch the floor on the way down. The last man standing is guaranteed a spot at the main event at Westlemania, the biggest pay per view of the year, and this spot is typically for the Heavyweight Championship belt, the most coveted belt in the franchise. Obviously, this is a huge deal.\n\nThe show also took place in Philadelphia, which has a very strong wrestling history and a robust indie showing. That crowd is very informed on what makes good wrestling, and they are not afraid to show it. They had their favorites including some Superstars such as Daniel Bryan, Dean Ambrose, and Bray Wyatt.\n\n**[SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT FORWARD]**\n\nThey did not win. Daniel Bryan, a fan favorite, was eliminated very quickly towards the beginning of the match, and it went downhill from there in terms of fan reaction. In the end, it was Kane and Big Show (two \"heels\" or villians in their 40s and no where near the top of their game anymore) against two \"faces\" or heroes, Dean Ambrose (fan favorite) and Roman Reigns.\n\nRoman Reigns is being pushed by WWE at the moment, meaning that they are trying to prep him to be the next big thing of the company. Most people agree he is not ready in any way. When reciting his lines, they often feel awkward and he has a tendency of stammering or forgetting his lines. When wrestling, he is only good offensively, and even thing, he is not as good as some other wrestlers currently working for the WWE. While he is improving, he is no where near ready to be the top dog of the WWE. Of course, I am being far nicer to him than many other adult/internet fans of WWE. He is widely despised by the community.\n\nHe ended up winning the Rumble in a ridiculous way. Dean Ambrose was unceremoniously thrown out of the ring by Kane and Big Show, and then Reigns somehow managed to get both of these men out. To help you understand how ridiculous this is, Big Show is 7' tall, Kane is 6'7\" tall, and Roman Reigns is only 6'3\" tall.\n\nThe crowd, that had already turned on the match, went nuts, booing him incessantly, chanting for other wrestlers who are also despised by the community (namely Rusev, an anti-American Russia-loving Bulgarian currently on an undefeated streak that is just as ridiculous as it sounds.) They even brought out The Rock, one of the most beloved wrestlers of all time, but the crowd booed him for supporting Reigns. (They are cousins, by the way.)\n\nAfter the show was over, fans were pissed and many went to cancel their subscriptions to the Network. So many people did this, the site crashed. The hashtag shortly followed the end of the match on Twitter. Basically, the fandom is pissed. Big time.",
"Last night, the WWE held The Royal Rumble. It's their second biggest show of the year. The Royal Rumble is a match that has 30 wrestlers with each coming in every 2 minutes until all 30 enter. The winner is the last person in the ring without going out.\n\nThe show was held in Philadelphia, which is a hotspot for independent wrestling and is know for having fans who don't mind expressing their opinion.\n\nGoing into this, Roman Reigns was the favorite to win. The WWE sees him as the future of the company while the fans currently prefer other wrestlers.\n\nRoman Reigns won the Royal Rumble last night, but the fans wanted Daniel Bryan to win. Daniel Bryan has arguably been the best American wrestler for the last 10 years or more and frequently competed in Philadelphia. He worked long and hard for little money or fame and finally made it. He's very popular, he's skilled and he has everything one would want in a wrestler, except two things - he's 5'9 and he's not a model by any means. Due to his height and look, he is frequently passed over and treated badly. He's usually embarrassed, made to look weak and is treated as a second class citizen due to his look. WWE has also done everything they can to make sure he doesn't gain popularity, but the more they try to hurt him, the more the fans like him. The WWE does not see him as a top star and unless he can grow taller, they never will. Meanwhile, the fans love him more than any other wrestler. \n\nRoman Reigns, the Royal Rumble winner last night, is the exact opposite. He's big, considered good looking by some, but has yet to really prove himself as a top star skill wise. He's not a great wrestler, he has a lot to learn and he is not a good talker. Despite this, he is given better storylines, is treated as a top star and has every advantage one could want without really having earned it. No matter what he does, he's going to be positioned as a top star for a long time to come, which really upsets people.\n\nThe fans did not want Roman to win last night and instead wanted Daniel Bryan to win. WWE knew this and didn't care, and continued the story of Roman Reigns rising to the top. The fans got really mad about it, booing Reigns when he won and complaining about it. The WWE knew this was going to happen and brought back, \"The Rock\" Dwayne Johnson, to try and stop the boo's, but it wasn't enough.\n\nIt's a big problem. Imagine if a TV character you hated was constantly on TV and promoted as something great when they clearly aren't. Eventually, you'd either turn the show off or you'd be forced to deal with it. Since there isn't much wrestling on TV, fans are forced to deal with it or else watch less popular wrestling companies. Since it was shown last night that the WWE doesn't really care what the fans want, fans are retaliating by threatening to not spend their money on WWE and complaining about it online.\n\nExtra notes:\n\n\n- Last years Royal Rumble ended similarly. The fans wanted Daniel Bryan to win, but someone else got the win instead. The fans booed the winner and ruined most of the show by chanting for Daniel Bryan and booing everyone not named Daniel Bryan. It was really frustrating for the WWE at last years Rumble and at this years Rumble when they are trying to present certain wrestlers as being great while the fans are basically saying that they suck. You would think that WWE would have learned from what happened last year, but they learned nothing and instead of preventing it from happening again, basically tried to put a band-aid on it after it happened for the 2nd time.\n\n- WWE has a long history of doing what they want, regardless of what fans thinks. WWE really only sees top stars as people who are 6 foot taller or more, very muscular and good looking, while caring little about how skilled the wrestler is. Fans tend to not care about the looks so much and instead focus more on the talent of the wrestler. Obviously, the solution would be to give the fans what they want so that the fans would spend more money on the company, but WWE is very stubborn and doesn't really care.\n\n- WWE is a huge company that has many big television contracts all over the world. They will continue to make money for years to come, regardless of what fans think of certain wrestlers. They can basically afford to piss fans off, because they have many fans all over the world and for most people, are the only company they can watch wrestling with.\n\n- WWE's current top star, John Cena, has had similar predicaments to Roman Reigns. There's a large portion of fans that despise him and some that have even stopped watching due to being tired of him. However, he has the look WWE wants and no matter what the fans have tried to do, WWE has refused to change the way they present John Cena. The choice is either deal with it or stop watching."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
bgrnlv | how do some supermarkets end up with millions in profit? | I work with children and a they asked me how supermarkets make money. I explained they buy things and sell it for more. Then they started asking more question about what about the food that goes bad that they can't sell and what about things that just don't sell that go past the expiration date. It got to the point I started questioning myself that I don't know how some supermarkets end up making millions. What am I missing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bgrnlv/eli5_how_do_some_supermarkets_end_up_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"eln1kw9",
"eln1lm8",
"eln7vnu",
"elna0hm",
"elnmety"
],
"score": [
12,
6,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"High mark up low risk items. Yes you lose money on dairy and meat but the margins on things like cereal soda chips and especially household cleaning supplies and paper goods more than make up for these pretty loses. People come in for the loss items but almost always also buy the higher margin stuff too",
"Because they are Low Margin - High Volume business. Sure there are losses, but it's covered by the 4% to 10% margins on every item, time 100,000 items a day.\n\nThis is the straight explaination. Not sure it would be understandable by children tho.",
"I am surprised that nobody mentioned here the most common misconception about how supermarkets work. (At least here in Europe.) They do not buy and then sell the goods, they RENT OUT the space for their suppliers to sell at. More noticeable shelf, higher the price. (Eye-line shelves are for example significantly more expensive to rent than place at your feet.) So how do they make money? Same way any rental business would (like huge companies who buy houses and then rent them out for cutthroat prices.). An the suppliers? They usually HAVE TO sell in supermarkets, because where else people would buy them? If the goods expire or are not sold within certain period? Suppliers has to take it back and take care of it, not the supermarket. But do not worry about suppliers too much - companies like Nestlé are legendary for their shady behavior. Does this system favor huge companies with big capital? Does it fuel merger craze and oligopolies? You bet! A way to fight it as a customer? Very few - outside of your standard \"support small suppliers\" there is very little you can do. I, for example, like to carefully compare goods in eye-level shelves and bottom (or very high) shelves. Not just blindly go for the biggest brand.\n\nOh and btw. - One of the reasons the \"supermarket brands\" (Tesco Value, for example) are usually the cheapest ones is not only about their quality, but also about the fact that the supermarket doesn't have to \"pay the rent to themselves\".",
" Tesco admitting in 2014 that it had overstated profits by £326m. This overstatement was linked to how it booked payments from suppliers.\n\nGuess thats one way.",
"They buy things and sell it for more. They sell it for *enough* more that it makes up for things which expire or go bad. Of course they work hard to minimize the amount of food that expires, by not buying so much that it expires before it sells, and by grooming the shelves so that the soonest-to-expire items will be at the front where they are more likely to be grabbed.\n\nThey also charge major brands to shelve their products in the prime location (like at eye-level, or on end displays). Sometimes they don't even own the products, they are basically selling on consignment. But these are rather minor things in the big picture. The fundamental is that they buy and sell for quite a bit more.\n\nPeople often talk about the profit margin being in the 1% to 3% range, but that is net profit margin, after all expenses and taxes. The gross margin, which is what they sold it for versus what they bought it for, is more like 20%. And that 20% already includes spoilage in it, as the cost of buying stuff that ends up going bad is still part of the cost of sales for the things that do sell. (Apparently, it also includes advertising, at least in the case of Kroger--not very intuitive, you would think advertising belongs in general/sales/administration).\n\n > I don't know how some supermarkets end up making millions\n\nArithmetic. If you make thousands, and do a thousand times, you have made millions. If you make dollars and do it a million times, you've made millions. If you make pennies and do it a hundred millions times, you have made millions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
23u6cb | why whenever a pair of quarks is pulled apart, is an additional quark generated at each element to produce two pairs | Whenever you have a pair of quarks and you begin pulling them apart, their attraction grows. Whenever their bond is broken, an additional quarks is generated at each of the separated quarks to balance them. Where does the generated quarks come from?
Conservation of Energy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23u6cb/eli5_why_whenever_a_pair_of_quarks_is_pulled/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch0qmyi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Physics student here.\n\nShort answer: Pretty much yes.\n\nLong answer: Strong interactions are very peculiar, but more or less you can describe it by saying, that quarks exchange gluons between themselves and with them some energy and momenta. Graphically you can show it by drawing so-called Feynman diagrams and \"summing\" them (or more precisely, the mathematical expressions that they represent). [Here](_URL_1_) and [here](_URL_0_) are some examples of interacting quarks (the first one is the simplest possible diagram (with the exception of no interaction at all), the seconds adds so-called loop corrections, giving the creation and annihilation of quark-antiquark pair and gluon pair). I say we sum them, because for every interaction between particles we can't tell, what happened, we can only observed what are the incoming and outgoing particles. What we can do is calculate those diagrams, each one less probable that others (usually the more vertices you have on those diagrams, the less particular process is probable). Ideally we should sum infinite numbers of them to get true results, but usually most of them gives us somthing within acceptable margin of error.\n\nFor low energies, the more probable are diagrams like the first one. But when you get higher energies of the whole system, every particle (including gluons) appearing in the process also can bear higher energies and momenta and some processes for them becomes possible, like creating a real quark-antiquark pair. Why am I saying real? In the second diagram you have an example of a pair of virtual particles, that is particles we can't observe (for us observable particles are only the incoming and outgoing). Such particles don't follow the conservation of energy and momentum law so strictly. But the real one have to, therefore gluons with higher energies can create a quark-antiquark pair.\n\nIn a very violent system, like in high energy proton-proton collisions, interactions can become very complex and gives creation of multiple quark-antiquark pairs, which can assemble a large set of other hadrons (particles composed of quarks, like protons and neutrons). The higher energies you have, the less predictable it becomes to say, what particles will pop out, but you can say for sure, that the total energy (in relativistic sense, that is including the masses of those particles) and their momenta sums to energies and momenta of particles we started with, the same thing with their total electric charge (since every quark-antiquark pair has total charge 0).\n\nI may oversimplified what is actually going on, but more or less thats how you can think about it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://cronodon.com/sitebuilder/images/QCD_2-666x415.jpg",
"http://inspirehep.net/record/780840/files/qq-qq-scattering.png"
]
] |
|
2l5q0n | how can animals tell the difference between play and attacking? | I was just watching a video of a dog and a magpie playing and I had to ask myself how the dog and the magpie know each other was playing and not attacking them. If one accidentally gets too rough with the other, how does it know that the action was meant as play vs attack? I understand that same species can tell from body language and the like, but is it true for cross-species playing as well? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2l5q0n/eli5_how_can_animals_tell_the_difference_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"clrt8pl",
"clrugkz",
"clruyyk",
"clrzrlx",
"cls5s3q"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
8,
19,
2
],
"text": [
"I think they learn each other's body language, like we did with dogs and like dogs did with us.",
"I took a Communications class at a university a couple years ago and we read a chapter called \"A Theory of Play and Fantasy\" by Gregory Bateson. It was a very interesting chapter exploring the concepts of how a \"nip\" denotes a \"bite\" but does not denote what a \"bite\" denotes. Here is a [link](_URL_0_) to the chapter!",
"Well, in any species, there are generally tells that are instinctual: for dogs we know that a wagging tail means the animal is happy for instance, or sneezing denotes that the animal is only roughhousing and not actually hostile.\n\nInterspecies requires a bit of trust and learning. Likely, both animals in that video have learned to trust humans and took a naive (or possibly educated) leap of faith that other animals were just as friendly. ",
"I work at a dog daycare facility and a huge part of my job is breaking up play when it starts to border on fighting. Essentially it comes down to the energy or intensity level. Each animal has a level of intensity or roughhousing that they are comfortable with/ naturally bring to the table when they start to play. A lot of times you will have one (usually younger) more energetic dog and a less energetic dog. They start off playing and everything goes well but then the puppy (having boundless energy and no sense of when \"enough is enough\") gets more and more aggressive until the other dog becomes overwhelmed, or is in pain. Then the body language and energy changes instantly and either the overzealous offender backs off or teeth and claws come into play. \n\nBasically that threshold is different for every animal and every animal will get along with some playmates and not with others. This seems to be true cross-species as well. One of my horses loves to hang around the dogs around while my more shy horse is bloody terrified of them and will kick at them if they approach her. \n\nThe way that this difference between \"we're playing\" and \"shit's about to go down\" is typically decided is via the body language, vocalizations and energy (i.e. emotional intensity and focus) of the animals. Now before you call me out for saying that animals respond to \"energy\", bear in mind that body language is the primary means of communication for most non-verbal creatures, and so it stands to reason that they are VERY keenly tuned into it. This means that while a human may only be able to see obvious signs like bared teeth, animals are used to paying attention to much subtler changes like where the eyes of the other animal are, how their breathing changes, which muscles they're tensing, what they are focusing on, etc. People can learn to tune into this too and in fact that's how most \"horse whisperers\" or \"dog whisperers\" get their edge. ",
"Haven't you ever seen brothers wrestling on the floor? Or someone sarcastically say, \"I hate you.\" Same deal. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://sashabarab.com/syllabi/games_learning/bateson.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fjjgeo | what is the difference between index funds and equity funds? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fjjgeo/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_index_funds/ | {
"a_id": [
"fknee0v",
"fkneh0e",
"fknkq28"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"An equity fund is one that invests in stocks, also called equity securities. The people managing the fund decide which stocks to invest in. \n\nAn index fund is one that invests in every stock in an entire index, like the Dow Jones or the S & P 500. If you invest in that fund, it’s like owning a piece of every stock on that index. \n\nSo an index fund may also be an equity fund if it invests in stocks, but not every equity fund is an index fund.",
"Index funds are a form of equity fund.\n\nAn equity fund invests your money. It can do this actively, by trading your money according to the markets movements. It can also do this passively, using index funds (such as ETFs).\n\nThat’s about as simple as it gets, but I can get much more complicated if they start using different financial instruments, unfortunately.",
"Equity funds tend to buy ownership in something, usually stock or real estate. This is in contrasts to bond funds that tend to buy debt, such as government bonds or mortgages.\n\nAn index fund is a passive fund where it attempts to match an index. For example, the S & P 500 is an index that does a weighted average of the stock price of the top 500 companies by market cap on the New York Stock Exchange. An index fund will try to buy stock so that its holdens match that of the S & P 500. With an index fund, human decision making is minimal as any trades the fund makes are mainly to continue matching the index. This is in contrast to an active fund, a more traditional fund where humans actively make decisions about what to buy and sale.\n\nAn index fund may be an equity fund, like many S & P funds are, but it can also track bonds or a mixture."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1od722 | in order to get white on an led billboard, red,yellow, and blue must be activated at the same time. how come when i mix r.y.b. paint, i don't get white? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1od722/in_order_to_get_white_on_an_led_billboard/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccqwht2",
"ccqwr6k"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"there are two ways of creating colors — the additive method and the subtractive method. Additive primaries involve adding more LIGHT (as in a TV), while subtractive primaries involve mixing more PIGMENT (as in paints).\n\nWhen using the additive method, the primary colors are red, blue, and green. The more additive primaries you add, the lighter the resultant color. Mix all three and you get white. The subtractive primaries are red, blue, and yellow — to be exact, magenta, cyan (light blue), and yellow. These are the colors that, together with black, are used in color printing. The more subtractive primaries you mix, the darker the color. Mix all three and you get black. ",
"The billboard most likely uses red, green, and blue, by the way.\n\nThe difference is in whether it's \"additive\" color mixing or \"subtractive\" color mixing. A dye works by absorbing (subtracting) light that hits the surface, so if you have a yellow dye/paint, it's absorbing everything *except* yellow, which gets reflected.\n\nIf you then mix some blue paint in, it'll also absorb a lot of the yellow light. The yellow paint, however, is absorbing most of the blue, too. What you're left with is the stuff that's sort of \"in between\" the two colors, and green is right between yellow and blue, so you get green. Essentially, both the yellow and blue paints reflect some green since neither is perfect, and what you see when you mix them is the green part in both that overlaps.\n\nThe point, though, is that we *removed* colors by mixing in the blue paint. The green was already there in the yellow paint, we just couldn't see it as well because the yellow dominates. We brought out the green by covering up the yellow, essentially.\n\nSo, if we mix in red paint, we're just blocking out even more, and we end up with brown or something. You certainly won't get white, though, you'll get even farther from it.\n\nA monitor, though, is adding light. Adding another color doesn't dampen the other one, they just get stacked on top of each other. That's why we can get to white, because we can keep adding colors until we have all of them, which is what white light is.\n\nTechnically, what we see as \"white\" wouldn't look the same to an animal with better eyesight than ours. Our eyes respond best to red, green, and blue, so you can \"fake\" white with just those three. Some birds, on the other hand, have eyes that respond to red, green, blue, and yellow, so if they looked at an LCD monitor's \"white,\" they'd think it was a little off."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2e7swj | why do most cars have the "hump" in the middle of the back seat? | Seriously, is it there to torment the youngest of unluckiest child? Because that's what it did to me...
EDIT: I was talking about the middle of the back seat, but that floor one seemed useless aswell.
EDIT2: First front page post, cuul | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e7swj/eli5_why_do_most_cars_have_the_hump_in_the_middle/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjwv702",
"cjwv8k5",
"cjwweq7",
"cjx1blo",
"cjx7678",
"cjx7r37",
"cjx87eg",
"cjxbksx",
"cjxdoud",
"cjxeb9d",
"cjxfjdk",
"cjxh47l",
"cjxhx1w"
],
"score": [
4,
1003,
2,
1848,
9,
2,
4,
7,
16,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In the rear wheel drive days, it was to make room for the axle and drive shaft. As more cars switched to front wheel drive and typically smaller cars, they often run the exhaust down the middle, where the relief in the floor of the car would most minimally affect the interior space. ",
"Because of things under the floor of the car. \n\nRear wheel drive cars have a drive shaft that runs from the transmission to the rear differential. It needs to be high enough off the road so that it doesn't bash into things, so they have to make a hump in the floor of the car. (or they could make the floor higher, but that makes it hard for adults to sit there). \n\nOn front wheel drive vehicles, if there is a hump, it's likely where the exhaust pipe runs under the floor, from the engine to the muffler. ",
"Are you talking about on the floor in the rear seats? That would be the drive shaft tunnel for AWD and RWD cars. Also present in many FWD cars because manufacturers want to build one body to fit all drivetrains.\n\nSometimes there is a hump on the seats themselves this could be a couple things. Room for the rear differential, possibly some electronics, or perhaps there simply isn't enough width in the rear seats to make 3 comfortable \"seats\" where your butt goes so they make 2 plus the hump. ",
"Unlike everyone else in this thread I believe you are talking about why the middle seat in the rear seems to have extra cushioning. I sold cars for some time and the reason for that is this: By moving the center person forward, it creates more room for shoulders in the rear. people are wider in the shoulders than they are in the hips, so this makes it easier and more comfortable to seat three people side by side than if they were all shoulder to shoulder.\n\nObligatory thanks for the gold edit! Apparently I was the first person who understood what the OP was asking.\n\nEdit for clarification because this seems so controversial. What OP is talking about is the additional cushioning in the middle seat like found [here](_URL_1_) which he confirms in the reply to this post. At no point in the post does the OP mention anything about the floor. yes there is a bump there but that's there for obvious reasons of clearance for undercarriage materials such as strengthening members, exhaust, and driveshaft/transmission. I worked for Mazda for almost 4 years and met with Jim Sullivan who is the head of Mazda North America and this is his explanation of the seat's shape.\n\nHope this clears things up!\n\nFURTHER EDIT:\n\nHere's an illustration of the rear seat from above. Ovals are humans\n\n_URL_0_",
"Front wheel drive 1960s [Citroen DS](_URL_4_):\n\n[The rear seat](_URL_5_), no hump.\n\nAs kids, there were no fights over who got to sit in the middle. Sitting on black leather seats on a hot summers day when you are wearing shorts...not so good.\n\nHere's a rear-wheel drive car from the same period:\n1960s [Pontiac Tempest](_URL_2_), [pic of rear seat](_URL_0_) no hump either. (I think it's the original rear seat)\n\nAnd a quote from the page I found this on:\n > It didn't just have an engine, it had one bank of a _URL_1_. Pontiac V-8--easy to build, but notorious for rough running. It didn't just have a transmission, it had a complicated transaxle, with everything stuffed under the back seat.\"\n[link](_URL_3_)\n\nShort version: \n\nProbably just design aesthetics. No mechanical reason for it. Older cars just had 'flat benches' in the back. Two dipped seats in the back looks more comfortable/selling point.\n\nDoes that answer the question?\n",
"The middle seat is sometimes elevated so the person's shoulders that is sitting in the middle is not inline with the people sitting on either side. This allows 3 people to sit more comfortably in a cramped place.\n\nAs it turns out, certain helicopters are designed this way for the same reason.",
"The simple answer is they can't actually fit 5 adults comfortably in a sedan and are basically making a shitty seat of leftover space so they can advertise and sell it as a 5 seater. The cars are designed as 4 seaters and they make 4 really comfortable and more importantly, safe (bucket) seats and are forced to use the elevated space as a seat. The elevated space allow the for the other two seats. Back in the day there would be a big ass sofa style seat in the back but that was really uncomfortable and super dangerous during accidents. And anyway the floor is elevated for exhaust and/or drive shafts and so a lower seat in the middle would mean an adult sitting with their knees to their chins. ",
"The hump in the middle of the back seat was to raise the child sat in the middle, forward a little so s/he could have a better and more commanding view of the road ahead like the little prince/ss they were. It's a pity that whole prestige thing passed you by.\n\nIt was also better to be in the middle seat because during any side impact your brothers and sisters would be either side to cushion you.",
"It serves multiple purposes. \n\nIt creates a slightly different height for hips and shoulders in the hopes of fitting people together like a zipper. Being higher also improves the middle passengers chance of getting a view through the windows which is important in order to not get carsick and to not feel claustrophobic in the cramped space. \n\nIt also gives room for a driveshaft which is needed in order to provide a vehicle with RWD or 4WD. A lot of cars that are mainly sold as facepullers can be delivered with 4WD/AWD as an optional extra. Some were planned to have during the design process and then dropped, and sometimes the manufacturers just wants to keep that door open even if only FWD was the plan all along. \n\nIf the \"space\" ends up not being needed for a driveshaft it always provides room to put other things later in the design process such as exhaust mountings or brake lines for which gets them out of the way of other things and makes them less exposed too.\n\nNow it's more or less a market standard as there is little to no reason for it not to be elevated. ",
"Tesla model S doesn't have that issue. No exhaust. Motor in the back near the rear wheels (rear wheel drive) _URL_0_",
"It's to prevent homeless people from sleeping there overnight.",
"Ah yes, the enemy of teenagers parking at vistas everywhere.",
"The floor hump accommodates the drive train. The transmission is connected to a long bar with gears at each end, called a drive shaft. The rear connection is to the rear axle. This is what drives the wheel forward and reverse. \n\nOn 2 separate occasions, I have dropped the drive shaft on the highway. Both times my dad made me rebuild the whole thing. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/53ap715",
"http://imgur.com/7ULq3n6"
],
[
"http://imgur.com/D93mt3D",
"389-cu.in",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_Tempest",
"http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2012/03/01/hmn_drivable_dreams1.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_DS",
"http://i.imgur.com/lZTiSNY.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://image.motortrend.com/f/roadtests/oneyear/alternative/1310_2013_tesla_model_s_p85_arrival/57734856/2013-tesla-model-s-rear-interior-seats.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
c6q38u | why is it that when you've got a bad cough you're forced to cough almost every minute, but when you fall asleep you don't have the urge to do so? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c6q38u/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_youve_got_a_bad_cough/ | {
"a_id": [
"esals33",
"esaozz0",
"esb0ic3",
"esb9apm",
"esbltwr",
"esbmtf4",
"esbmy2h",
"esbp4b5",
"esbrss1",
"esbwevx",
"escml8a"
],
"score": [
1122,
100,
8,
40,
739,
14,
4,
2,
3,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The body actually paralyzes you so when youre running or doing something in your dream you dont actually do it in real life and hurt yourself. Same thing is applied to when you cough. The body suppresses the physical aspect of it but reminds you of the mental aspect of it if that makes sense.",
"Some cough syrups include codeine because opiates depress certain functions of your central nervous system. (Which in some ways mimics sleep states) One of the original commercial uses for heroin was as a cough suppressant.",
"you do. your brain doesnt let you. when u sleep, autonomic functions are ok, like breathing and eye movement. all other functions cease.",
"I think what the OP might have been wondering (or at least what I am) was more along the lines of: if we can safely not cough in our sleep, why do we need to cough at all?\n\nPersonally I always thought we coughed to dislodge phlegm, but then do we not generate phlegm when we sleep? If so does it not require dislodging?",
"3rd year md here - cough is a reflex, i.e. it doesnt need cognitive control for the cough to occur, i.e. any particular irritant along your airway will trigger a cough. Some people can have a more sensitive airway and thus this reflex is triggered mote often.\n\nWhilst it does not need a cognitive input - the reflex itself passes through the brain - and it can be very nuch possible that cognition may influence a cough - whilst I can have a tickly throat i still can control whether to cough or not esp if your in a quiet room. There is an area in the brain called the cough center (we divide the brain in small modules responsible for specific functions called nuclei or centers).\n\n Certain medications - opiates and opiate derivatives example codeine and morphine, inhibit this cough center, hence why they stop coughs and hence why codeine linctus is a cough suppressant.\n\nSleep may have a play with the cough center as well, and the degree of irritation of the irritant also has to be considered, example if its a lifethreatining situation (i.e. no oxygen is making its way to the lungs hence to the brain - a cough is exteemely likely to occur)",
"Coughing is a deep airway clearing mechanism or reflex, meaning it is used by the body to clear out something in the tiny airways inside your lungs. \n\nWith that being said, 2 more things should come to mind: being asleep does not eliminate a reflex, therefore it wouldn't be supressed entirely by sleeping (hence why so many people have commented that when they have a really bad flu or disease they still wake up coughing), but it does get toned down a lot because sleeping muddles up the brain (so to speak).\n\nMoving on to the second thing is gravity, when you are standing up the tiny cells in the lung have to work against gravity to move out and clear whatever it is that you have in them, when you lie down they can work more effectively, and if there is less stuff bothering your lungs then there is less cough.\n\nFinally, as a side note, you should take into account that coughing, as most other reflexes in your body, can be triggered by stuff that isn't what the reflex is meant for i.e: when we use a reflex hammer to the tendon in your knee for checking muscular reflexes. Same thing happens here, some medicines like hypertension drugs, allergens, diseases of the heart, nervous system or lymph nodes can also trigger a cough that might be position/time dependant.\n\nHope this helps clear out your question!",
"For the same reason you don't have to pee while you're asleep unless it is a serious emergency (gotta go NOW!)\n\nWithout getting into the specifics of which hormones do what, your brain suppresses those urges. Which is why when you wake up you really gotta pee.",
"When you are awake, your brain (that's you) is in awake mode and gets to drive your body (a flesh car that your brain (you) can drive) on manual. When you are asleep, your brain hands over to a kind of smaller, older brain, and they keep you alive while you (your brain) sleep.\n\nCoughing is like scratching an itch, or brushing hair out of your eyes. If you're asleep, you won't notice it. Unless it's essential for breathing, a little cough won't be important enough for your minion brain to wake up his boss, i.e. you.\n\nIf you're awake, that tickle from some phlegm in your lungs will be as noticeable as an itchy foot, so you'll do something about it.",
"If yiu throat is sore, but just the throat, you will cough only while awake. If the infection spreads to your lungs, you will wake up coughing. Basically, if coughing is needed to keep your airways free, you will cough even when asleep.",
"But I do? Without codein cough syrup I wake myself up coughing, if I have a bad cough.",
"The cough during the pneumonia I once had couldn't even be supressed by codeine at night..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7vfk5c | how do investors/traders profit from short selling? ie. profit from the drop of value in public companies' share price. | Capitec Bank, arguably the world's best bank for the past two years, was recently embroiled in controversy by a [report by Viceroy](_URL_0_) that resulted in the bank's share price initially plummeting by 25%.
Viceroy members are known for short selling - profiting off of drops in share price. How is this possible?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vfk5c/eli5_how_do_investorstraders_profit_from_short/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtruhgu",
"dtrv4zt",
"dtrxn45",
"dts9945",
"dtsdn1y"
],
"score": [
29,
12,
4,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Someone short-selling with a brokerage usually shortcuts the process, but the basic transaction is this:\n\nThe short seller borrows a share of stock, promising to return a share of stock at a later date. They then sell it. Eventually, they will have to re-acquire a share of the same stock and return it to the original owner, but if the price drops in the interim, they make money on the difference between the price they sold it for and the price they have to buy it back for.",
"Here's the ELI5 how shorting works:\n\n1. I borrow your 100 shares of XYZ Co. that is currently trading at $100/sh. and sell them, pocketing $10,000.\n\n2. 3 months later, XYZ Co. stock is trading at $85/sh. so I buy 100 shares for $8,500 and return them to you.\n\n3. I pocket the $1,500 difference between the proceeds when I sold your shares and the cost to me when I replaced your shares.",
"Short selling is betting the stock will go down. Here's how it works.\n\nI have a feeling that Acme Biomedical will drop in value soon. So, I call up a friend that I know invests in the company, Wile E. Coyote.\n\nI call up Mr. Coyote and arrange to borrow 1000 shares of stock for 30 days. The agreement is that in 30 days, he will have his stock back.\n\nRight now, Acme is selling for $10 a share. That makes this stock worth $10,000. I sell it. All of it. I now have $10,000 in cash.\n\nOver the course of the next few weeks, Acme stock is falling, like I knew it would. On day 29, Acme stock is selling for $5 a share. So, I purchase 1000 shares. This costs me $5,000.\n\nI return the 1000 shares of Acme stock to Mr. Coyote. He has his shares back, and I have $5,000 in my pocket.",
"Let's say the latest Xbox is selling on eBay for $100 and you think the prices will go way down in the near future. You don't have an Xbox, so you borrow it from a friend and sell it for $100. A week later, Microsoft announces the next generation box's games will not be backward compatible, and prices plummet. You buy one on eBay for $70, return it to your friend, and you are up $30 free and clear. However, if you guessed wrong and prices went up to $150, you'd have to pay that much to replace your friend's and lose $50.\n\nThat is pretty much what you do when you short a stock. You borrow the stock from your broker and sell it, wait for the price to go down, then buy it back and return it. It is essentially buying a negative share of stock.",
"One caveat to keep in mind with short selling. When you buy long (buy a stock and try to sell it when the value is higher) your potential losses are limited by the amount you invested. If you short it though, the potential liability is unlimited. If you were dead wrong and instead of going down in price, it jumps 10x then you have to make good on the higher price. \n\nAlso unlike long positions, short ones typically have maturity dates so you can't just hold on to it and hope things eventually turn your way."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.biznews.com/global-investing/2018/01/30/viceroy-targets-capitec/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
10fiau | why are hard drives so difficult to destroy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10fiau/eli5_why_are_hard_drives_so_difficult_to_destroy/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6d22fs",
"c6d280j"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"It's like a lot of things -- it's very easy to do properly, but also very easy to do improperly. Removing the platters and then taking a belt sander to each side of each platter will render it unreadable pretty quickly. Overwriting it completely with zeroes, and maybe an extra time with random data will render its contents unreadable. \n\nBurning it may or may not destroy the data, though. Throwing it in a river probably won't either.",
"The data lives on metal disks inside the hard drive case. To access the data, the disks have to be able to spin so a head can read them, kinda like a record player.\n\nNow, if you drop the hard drive and the motor breaks, for you or me it's useless. Replacing that motor would be WAY more than a new hard drive. But, what happened if you had critical data on the drive. If you take it to an expert, and they remove the disks, they can put it on a new spindle / motor, and read it for you. This might cost $1000, but if the data is worth it to you (or the cops), it can be done.\n\nSo, while the outside of the hard disk may get damaged, the plates inside are pretty well protected. Also, the data is really tiny. Just like a record can still have music on it if scratched, disks don't lose all their data just because of a little scratch. You might lose some, but not all. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2g91w1 | if the republican party pass their petition to abolish the irs, what would then happen? who would manage taxes? | I know it won't happen, but what would happen if it did?
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g91w1/eli5_if_the_republican_party_pass_their_petition/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckgsowv",
"ckgsp9y"
],
"score": [
5,
6
],
"text": [
"Hypothetically if a flat tax was implemented, tax collection would be a lot simpler and most-all of the IRS would be unnecessary. However, a flat tax is a whole other can of worms.",
"It's nothing they actually think will go through. It's a symbolic action & political grandstanding."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.gop.com/act/abolish-the-irs/"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3idokj | why was the housing bubble so bad for regular us citizens? | I was reading an article on gentrification. I vaguely understand how that could be difficult for regular people (property value goes up, property taxes go up, person can no longer afford house).
But why was the housing bubble so bad? I understand that the mortgage is not affected, but it seems like the house would be cheaper overall (property values go down, property taxes go down). | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3idokj/eli5_why_was_the_housing_bubble_so_bad_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cufhtc6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Many many americans don't have much wealth apart from their home. So people's total wealth fell dramatically because of the housing bust. This was especially true for Black and Latino Americans of any level of wealth.\n\nSo on top of that, there's really not much point in keeping up on an underwater mortgage. Would you pay 500,000 for a 150,000 home? And then factor in the economy: lots of people lost jobs. Even less reason to keep paying 500,000 for a 150,000 home. And finally, because they were so underwater, there was no way to refinance it for the lower rates that come out. \n\nAfter losing a bunch of homes, Americans have no rushed back in, really. So home owner rates are down. Average people haven't recovered as quickly as the wealthy and investors, too. Wages stagnant, hiring was painfully slow for a long time. So a lot of Americans just had their wealth annihilated, now their credit score is horrible because they abandoned an underwater mortgage, etc. It's hard to capitalize on the low prices of homes when you've been through that. \n\n*edit*\nI guess I should add that wealth from the home is often a strategic thing Americans use to buy other things. You can take out a second mortgage or line of credit against your home to invest in projects, send your children to school, pay for something important. So losing that wealth wasn't good."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
383hsg | why can we always trick ourselves into thinking staying up all night is good idea even if it never is? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/383hsg/eli5_why_can_we_always_trick_ourselves_into/ | {
"a_id": [
"crs1d4k",
"crs2zqg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"As you get more tired, you get dumber, and it doesn't occur to you how bad an idea it will be. You also get more easily distracted by things, so you don't think about \"is this a good idea\" long enough to decide to go to bed.",
"That sounds like a problem for Future Me to deal with. He's a big guy, he can tough it out.\n\nAlternately, Past Me is a dick who likes to set me up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5iwq92 | why do we humans have a 'cooldown' after swallowing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5iwq92/eli5_why_do_we_humans_have_a_cooldown_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbbiiro"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because you active a lot of muscles in a specific sequence to swallow. Before you can swallow again all these muscles need to be propely relaxed after the previous swallow. This takes some time. In other words: you can't start on your next swallow before the one you're doing is completely done + a tiny time for rest. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1of1ya | when did society decide that certain articles of clothing are only meant to be worn by a certain gender? | Such as women with dresses/skirts/etc,
Or men such as only getting jeans, shorts, etc | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1of1ya/when_did_society_decide_that_certain_articles_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccre96l",
"ccrekgq",
"ccreoij",
"ccreowd",
"ccrfi6n",
"ccrhu7a",
"ccrjn72",
"ccrksnw"
],
"score": [
74,
11,
7,
65,
16,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A quick google search suggests that gender specific clothes for children (pink vs. light blue) emerged sometime in the 1940's. I don't know about dresses, skirts and shorts etc. but [Here](_URL_0_) is a photo of Franklin D. Roosevelt taken in 1884, when he was 2. This was not uncommon at that time.\n\nedit: [here](_URL_1_) is a pretty in-dept answer to a very similar question. ",
"Biblical times or earlier. \"A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.\" -Deuteronomy 22:5. \n\nFor non-Christians/Jews, Deueteronomy is one of the first books in the Bible, meaning that chronologically this statement is placed very near to the beginning of humanity in the eyes of Christians and Jews.",
"Lots of different societies out there.\n\nIn Europe , boys wore dresses until they were breeched at roughly age 8.\nHere is the Wikipedia article which says this goes back to the 1500's. My guess is that it was even earlier but Renaissance paintings start giving us a record around then.\n\nThr rules for Muslim women seen to have come about at or shortly after teh Qu'ran was written, so that takes it back to the mid 600's\n_URL_0_\n\nHere is a bit on women wearing trousers from Wikipedia on Trousers\n\nAlthough women had been wearing trousers for outdoor work thousands of years earlier in the Western world, by the time of Christianization it had become taboo for women to wear trousers. It was Eastern culture that inspired French designer Paul Poiret (1879–1944) to become one of the first to design pants for women. In 1913 Poiret created loose-fitting, wide-leg trousers for women called harem pants, which were based on the costumes of the popular opera Sheherazade. (Written by Nikola Rimsky-Korsakov [1844–1908] in 1888, Sheherazade was based on a famous collection of legends from the Middle East called 1001 Arabian Nights.)It was only in the 1960s that trousers became acceptable wear for Western women.\n\nThere are references in Deuteronomy Chap 22 that women shoould not wear men's clothing.\n\n\nIt is the converse of your question, but I have personal recollection of when it became acceptable for women to wear pants/jeans etc in the early to mid 1960's",
"I wonder if you train monkeys to cover up for a long period of time, so that they never see other monkeys naked, will they feel shy/embarrassed/(or whatever the relevant term is) if they are put out naked. In other words, will they react or will be completely nonchalant about it. ",
"Did you know high heels were for men? High heels were used in the military for Calvary to easily use a bow and arrow while mounted on a horse. Plus it gives that height boost over the regular folks: status. Not sure how it became a woman thing.",
" /r/sociology should help us out a little..",
"Loads of times, and then continued to change their minds about it. See: tunics, high heels, leggings, v-necks, overalls, wigs....",
"It probably started from the fact that men and women have different body shapes.\n\nMix in weird preferences called 'fashion' and gender inequality then bake at 352.222°C for a few thousand years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://media.smithsonianmag.com/images/212*271/pink-and-blue-Franklin-Roosevelt-2.jpg",
"http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080114195558AAlOQRS"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6cfith | how can many gun brands copy classics like ak-47, ar15, etc? do they have to acquire copyright first before manufacturing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cfith/eli5_how_can_many_gun_brands_copy_classics_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhu9yko",
"di369t8"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Copyright only covers *creative works* - books, movies, music, photographs, etc.\n\nInventions & mechanical devices are covered under *patents*. Patents expire after only 20 years and, in order to get a patent, you have to give the public a detailed description of how your invention works.\n\nThe AR-15 was invented in 1956. The AK-47, surprisingly, went into production in 1947. Any patents on these designs have *long* since expired and they are now in the public domain.",
"Actual like-5 answer: yes if it's a new design, but not for older designs for which patents expired. \n\n\nThe AR-15 design is out of patent; it's a 1950s/1960s design that's been marginally improved over the years, but the designs are so widely available you can google them and machine one yourself with the right know-how. \n\n\n\nAK-47s were never under patent, and the designs were shared with damn near every 2nd-world nation during the Cold War. You can find those designs online, but that's a tad harder to do in a home machine shop because it's not milling a block but bending steel. Good for high volume but not home machining in the US. \n\n\n\nOther designs are also out of patent and have since been copied. I've seen homemade Glocks, 10/22s, and other modern firearms as well as older designs. You'd have to acquire a license to copy certain modern firearms still within patent (about 21 years I believe) from the manufacturer, and this is sometimes done by other manufacturers. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
32azs7 | when i was in my teens, i would always have these weird head pains that made me felt like i was about to black out when i got up from sitting for an extended period of time. does anybody know what that is or have experienced it before? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32azs7/eli5_when_i_was_in_my_teens_i_would_always_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq9j19r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Hey yeah. I experienced the same thing before. Turn out I didn't actuallt eat enough protein. Do you exercise? Do you have small bony frame body?\n\nTry eating 1-g protein for every lb-bodyweight you have. Next morning you would feel marvelous!!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1z5kjh | scientology. their beliefs, origins, etc. | I don't want to be ignorant anymore about Scientology and I'm just looking to be more informed about it. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z5kjh/eli5_scientology_their_beliefs_origins_etc/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfqqfa6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"L. Ron Hubbard wrote a semi-autobiography which he intertwined with a shit ton of make believe stuff about his time in the war. (To his credit, he legitimately was something of a war hero.) He published it as \"Auto-biographical.\" As opposed to fantasy inspired by his life. People read it, liked it, and thought because it was labeled as non-fiction it must be true. \n\nHe got a cult following. And he thought it might be fun to be the head of a religion. Boom. Scientology. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1jvu95 | . why is the term "tumblr feminist" being thrown around and what does it mean? | As someone who loves both reddit and tumblr and also supports feminism and gender equality, it's a little insulting to me that people seem to be associating what seems to be a very negative term with the entirety of tumblr. Why is a common term now?
Edit: Thanks to everyone for replying and explaining. I know this is getting to be really controversial, but I appreciate the objectivity.
That being said, I know there are extreme feminists on tumblr, but as a feminist on tumblr, it's still insulting to see the term. (From what I've seen, other feminists of tumblr feel the same.) I know it's probably too late because the name has stuck, but isn't there another term that could be used? Watching redditors diss tumblrites as a group is complete stereotyping and generalizing. I hate to see all of tumblr get a bad rep because there was someone just as misinformed on a different website that associated tumblr and extreme feminism together.
Also: watching redditors and tumblrites fight is like watching my babies rip each other apart. :/ I just want everyone to be happy! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jvu95/eli5_why_is_the_term_tumblr_feminist_being_thrown/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbis1mn",
"cbis2j0",
"cbis2o7",
"cbis363",
"cbitmk8",
"cbitset",
"cbiuazq",
"cbiuc9w",
"cbiuivm",
"cbiuqic",
"cbiviyw",
"cbivoeq",
"cbivv4m",
"cbiw1q3",
"cbiwlkn",
"cbiwote",
"cbiwp9c",
"cbixb7y",
"cbiy2e3",
"cbiyqws",
"cbiys3p",
"cbiyvza",
"cbizoog",
"cbizu4s",
"cbizvi4",
"cbj0bq6",
"cbj0e4j",
"cbj13bn",
"cbj14bk",
"cbj1hlf",
"cbj1m7t",
"cbj1sxl",
"cbj1wo7",
"cbj1zyn",
"cbj2a65",
"cbj2cht",
"cbj2tx0",
"cbj3p1m",
"cbj4xzc",
"cbj5bjq",
"cbj5frj",
"cbj7rbl",
"cbj7yuc",
"cbj92jh",
"cbja6hb",
"cbjaocz",
"cbjapjo",
"cbjb1x7",
"cbjbm80",
"cbjc6tu",
"cbjcub6",
"cbjcuzf",
"cbjd1k5",
"cbjdbhq",
"cbjegcg",
"cbjewd5",
"cbjgov2",
"cbjkvbb"
],
"score": [
11,
1709,
61,
1011,
188,
25,
157,
2,
3,
28,
19,
7,
5,
46,
137,
48,
3,
39,
8,
8,
7,
18,
2,
5,
4,
3,
4,
5,
3,
2,
2,
11,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
6,
6,
23,
3,
5,
3,
3,
2,
4,
5,
7,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not a full explanation, but I believe it mostly relates to 'internet activism' in the sense that a 'tumblr feminist' is simply posting things on the internet rather than actually getting out there and doing something. ",
"True, academic feminism approaches issues like gender equality in a concise, analytical manner. While it does involve the idea of a 'patriarchy' (that is, a set of gender roles that affect *both men and women* by forcing men into a 'superior' role and women into an 'inferior role'), it generally approaches all issues (i.e the stigmas against female sexuality and male mental illness) and works to resolve them. Knee-jerk reactionism is generally frowned upon, as for the ideology to be taken seriously, rational debate is imperative.\n\n'tumblr feminism' is usually more unprofessional and emotional. It takes a lot from a 'radical feminist' ideology - ~~the idea that race and class are irrelevant to the subjugation of women by society. That is, it is entirely the fault of men that women are prejudiced against.~~ that is, a 'gender abolitionist' approach, and that society must be dismantled because patriarchy is the oldest form of oppression and is too ingrained in our society to ever shake it off (the prevalence of #smashthepatriarchy on tumblr, etc.). Writers like Dworkin are popular, and their satirical work is hailed as truth. Tumblr feminists are known for completely disregarding logic, history, and reputable studies (I saw a post claiming straight people arose as a result of patriarchy) which is where we get the infamous \"facts don't real, only feels\" mantra from. They hate white people, men, heterosexuals, anyone who they view as 'more privileged'.They tend to shy away from information that would refute their views, or claim it is invalid because it comes 'from a place of privilege'.\n\nAs an example, while an academic feminist would be actively trying to reduce incidents of domestic violence, a tumblr feminist will claim all men need to be castrated. An academic feminist believes in *equality* for all people, regardless of religion, race, sexual orientation, etc., while a tumblr feminist generally wants *superiority* of the oppressed over the majority (women having power over men, non-whites having power over whites, etc.), which is ridiculous in that it's simply reversing the current trend.\n\n**EDIT: Of course, not all feminists on tumblr are misinformed and emotional. Same goes for radical feminists. Generalizations are always wrong and this post is merely trying to report a trend, not put all activists on tumblr under one umbrella.**\n\n**EDIT 2: Radical feminism as an ideology is (in my opinion, at least) not problematic - there is nothing wrong with wanting to remove gender roles. However, the *mechanism* by which that agenda is furthered can be problematic.**\n\n**EDIT3: To quote the sidebar:**\n\n > ELI5 is not for literal five year olds. It is for average redditors. Preschooler-friendly stories tend to be more confusing and patronizing.\n\n**If you have an issue with the ease of reading this, well, I don't know what to tell you.**\n\n**EDIT 4: Not to be cliche, but thanks for the gold!**\n",
"It usually refers to band wagon jumpers who parrot and don't research.\n\nThey talk about patriarchy at length but if you ask them what the fuck they're talking about they resort to circular reasoning and explanations.\n\nIn short: Idiots who happen to be where feminists congregate e.g. tumblr - reddit users feeling superior decide to make fun of them because *they're* better than them.\n\nSource: Talking to feminists who aren't idiots.",
"The perception is that tumblr users are passionate but not very informed on gender issues, so the term is used derogatively.",
"A lot of radical feminists are actually misandrists with a twisted view of gender issues that, essentially, make them hate men, or anything male-centric. These people often feel like they are constantly victims of male oppression, and due to their inability to function as sane people in an insane world, blame every problem on their perceived enemy: patriarchy.\n\nFeminism addresses issues of gender inequality that have impact on men and women. Tumblr Feminism™ is essentially radical feminism that's typically propagated by [keyboard commandos](_URL_1_). They do far more harm and cause more division between both sides of this issue than real, rational feminists (who are fighting for a just cause).\n\nBasically, this term is reserved for people with identity issues who hate men. This shouldn't be used to describe feminists, but rather this specific breed of feminism that is highly reactionary, irrational, and misandrist.\n\nThis is feminism:\n\n_URL_2_\n\nThis is a Tumblr Feminism™:\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's a group of young radical leftist people of average intelligence who think they are highly intelligent, and try to sound like intellectuals and activists by using buzz words such as \"privilege\" and \"normative\" and to automatically discount the arguments and opinions of everyone who doesn't agree completely with them. They often have very bigoted and illogical opinions, which they are unable to see because they believe so strongly that they are right, and that everyone who disagrees or debates them is inherently wrong. This phenomenon is not limited to feminism, it extends to LGBT, enviromentalists, overweight people, etc. as well. \nThey use Tumblr as a way to project their opinions and bolster their ego. They typically surround themselves with other pseudo-intellectuals on Tumblr to create an echo chamber of their flawed, self-serving opinions. ",
"Well, the usual term is social justice warrior (SJW), where \"warrior\" is the key word. The implication is that they don't care about equality like a normal feminist so much as they just like being really angry and fighting about stuff, leading them to defend some pretty questionable stuff. Such as, say, doctors assigning babies gender at birth being LITERAL OPPRESSION.\n\nIt's associated with tumblr because it really is primarily a tumblr thing, and it is pretty huge there. Just be glad it's not the biggest thing you're known for, a la reddit/creepshots.",
"As the person who (I believe) posted the comment that spurred all the \"tumblr feminist\" talking (first reply to the MRA bestof link), I can tell you that I got the term from /r/tumblrinaction, which I had been browsing before going to the thread in question. \n\nI apologize if/that I offended you, and in retrospect, should probably have used a term closer to \"militant feminist\" that didn't generalize or target a large and diverse group of people.\n\nIf I'm totally off target in this assumption, feel free to let me know.",
"The only time I've heard that phrase has been in relation to an argument over skin color of characters on a tv show [here](_URL_0_). My understanding is that it's a similar insult to calling someone an \"armchair specialist\".\n\nEDIT: for those of you with RES there is a lot more at that link than just the photos. There's a detailed response from someone who works on the show talking about how colors work if you want an interesting read for a few minutes.",
"\"Tumblr feminists\" seem to be a particularly odd kind of armchair activists. \nWhile they could try to go out and do something about the things they're complaining about, they seem to prefer posting to tumblr all day and attribute everything that went wrong in their life to patriarchy/privilege/ \"add other buzzwords\".\n\n\nNow, my comment may seem overly critical, but seriously, check out /r/Tumblrinaction. \n\nThere's stuff that got the support of thousands of people on tumblr and is probably the most ridiculously dumb stuff to happen on the internet....yet. \n\nIf I'd had to come up with a word for that kind of activists, it'd be \"Femi-Taliban\".",
"It's because tumblr bears the unfortunate stigma of being populated by a lot of very loud, very obnoxious, very ignorant people whose passionate yet insipid obsessions trivialize everything they touch. \n\nOf course the majority of tumblr doesn't match that description, but the *loudest* part of tumblr does. \n\nJust like how the popular opinion of what a \"brony\" is usually includes a neckbeard, permanently Cheetos-stained fingers, crippling obesity, total lack of hygiene, pedophilia, extremely inappropriate revealing attire, and the social skills of a hyena suffering from heroin withdrawal... and yet, I was **at** bronycon this past weekend, and *nobody* matched any more than two of those qualities at once (and some of those qualities, **mercifully**, never showed up *at all*.) \n\n*edit: clarification:* \nThe crowd looked pretty much like... every other convention I've ever seen a picture of. All in all, at the very most, the frequency of individuals possessing any of the above descriptors was never any higher than about 1 in 20. \n\nWe have, as a species, a tendency to lump together all the worst traits of any community we see and assume every member of that group is exactly the same. Honestly, it really is *safer* that way... even though there are diminishing returns to paranoia. A little prudence can save your life, but assuming the worst of *everyone around you* will ruin it just as completely. ",
"Men are wrong because they are men. That's what they mean.\n",
"My view would be mostly that tumblr feminist might be less academically inclined, less well read, and less focused on real, achievable equality, instead reposting a lot of sensationalism about the struggles of women, and then making sweeping statements about men as a whole, and generalizing men as a gender.\nSearching feminism on tumblr Ill find images like [this](_URL_3_), [this](_URL_2_), [this](_URL_1_), or [this](_URL_0_)\n\nI do have a problem with MRs too, I totally support the idea, its more the subreddit I have trouble talking on. Im constantly told how feminism is the route of all problems, and is full of manipulative women with a superiority complex. an then i'm often told all these awful things feminists are said to believe, even though Ive never heard claim those facts were true. (e.g, that men can't be raped, all feminists are anti-porn, all feminists don't care about the sexism that works in their favor like men paying for dates).\nSome people are really just mad at feminism for only being about women, and ranting about things like womens centers, womens cancer screenings, domestic abuse prevention laws.\n",
"For me, the cornerstone of \"Tumblr Feminism\" is the idea that attacking people instead of their ideas is okay. Even further, there seems to be this perception that silencing people when you're unable or unwilling to conduct a civil conversation is acceptable.\n\nBasically, \"real\" feminism confronts and challenges opposing viewpoints. \"Tumblr\" feminism says that you're a manslaining rape apologist pedophile and calls it a day.",
"Oh man. I am a feminist (a graduate Anthropology major with a specialization on Women's Studies...) but these women are freaking CRAZY. I read one yesterday that quoted a young women stating that she would not go to school because the term \"Bachelor's Degree\" was too patriarchal and anyone who unapologetically held one should be \"put down.\" \n \n \n \nI do not think she understands that it is a slang term for Baccalaureat...but whatever. \nFor more info? /r/tumblrinaction",
"[This flowchart] (_URL_0_) will explain everything you need to know",
"Feminism != gender equality",
"The term \"tumblr feminist\" is a stereotype which does highlight the bad parts of the tumblr feminist community however the usage is being pushed by reactionary elements.\n\n---------------------\nAttributes of a tumblr feminist stereotype\n---------------------\n\n1. Repost everything that confirms their view. The medium of tumblr makes it easy to get stuck in an echo chamber where fake infographics, propaganda, fake stories, are all reposted time and time again. The tumblr feminist just reposts them without researching it.\n\n2. Teenagers trying to find an identity. The view is that a lot of tumblr feminists are 14/15/16 trying to carve out their own identity so they give themselves all kinds of labels on mental health, sex, gender, sexual orientation, and others as an attempt to be \"unique\" and not actually caring about the theory/politics of it. The young audience finding their political way is also a source for a lot of \"cringe\" posts like in any political movement i.e 14 year old youtube \"austrian economists\"\n\n3. Exaggerate everything with extreme language. All men are rapists, everything is rape. Everything is oppression. Someone asking you on a date is rape, someone oogling you is as bad as rape, someone touching your arm without consent is exactly the same as rape. While these are true consent issues - the tumblr feminist considers them all exactly as bad as rape.\n\n4. Using privilege to shut down debate. The view is that tumblr feminists start trying to find a way to negate other people's opinions on any subject because they are less oppressed than them - \"I don't need to listen to a white cis males opinion on X\"\n\n5. Constant childish infighting. Because of the \"privilege\" the tumblr feminist is constantly finding enemies. \"cis homosexuals aren't really oppressed\".\n\n7. Focus on middle class American problems. Tumblr feminists are pre-occupied with the perceived slights in their middle class life they ignore the wider issues of equality and the plight of women around the globe.\n\n8. Hatred of men. White cis males are the enemy. They are the cause of everything. It doesn't matter if you are a homeless, poor, uneducated, white cis male you have it better than everyone full stop. \n\n9. More generally it's the idea that they're so wound up in their own petty world of trying to paint themselves as the ultimate victim that they sit on tumblr all day posting and reposting instead of doing something.\n\n---------------------\nReactionary Attacks\n---------------------\n\n1. Tumblr feminism is the return of popular Feminist views that actually rock the boat and threaten the current situation. They are questioning gender, sex, sexual orientation, and pushing for changes in society in a big way and unashamedly so. Most of the people using \"tumblr feminist\" comment on \"they are extreme feminists\" because they're feminist views that they don't agree with.\n\n2. It's a trans friendly movement and the launchpad for a lot of trans and queer theory that is developing at the moment. There is still a lot of transphobia in people who attack \"tumblr feminists\"\n\n3. The tumblr feminist movement directly attacks popular cultures opinion on things such as fat shaming which makes them enemies.\n\n\n--------------------\n\nSo while there is a element of truth in the stereotype of some tumblr feminists the reason it's got so popular is because of a reactionary element who don't like the related theory and seek to minimise the community with the stereotype.\n",
"The harm of a dismissive term like this is forgetting the fact that a majority of \"tumblr feminists\" are women in their teens and early twenties, sometimes coming into the concept of feminism for literally the first time in their lives, because it's not a topic that is covered much in school beyond the basics. They're exploring it, and they're looking for feminism in media, identifying problematic things and taking notice. While it might not be super effective in change, it is definitely an important outlet for many who literally have never had the chance to learn about concepts in their own circles. For example, how many grew up knowing mothers or older women who would start sentences like \"I'm not a feminist but...\" Hearing phrases like that, young women might get the idea that there is something wrong with their own equality, and if Tumblr Feminists do one thing, very loudly, it's affirming the harms of a culture where these things simply aren't talked about, or are ignored altogether. Try not to mock tumblr feminists, because they're *seeking and shouting* for the first time. It takes a while for everyone to come into their own sense of politics, and it's always messy, and sometimes annoying, but it's usually beneficial in the long run. The alternative is never asking questions, never taking second glances, and passing on more ignorance to the next generation. ",
"For those debating the suggestion that the language (descriptive terms used like 'patriarch' etc) itself contributes to the issues surrounding the feminist debate and should be altered to boost credibility.....\n\nI'm just going to leave this here because George Carlin puts it much better than I ever could.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n\nNSFW. Let's not kid ourselves, George Carlin loves to swear. ",
"\"Im a demisexual apathetic half horse trans-racial agnostic satanist and I want to be referred to as 'splur' or 'splurself', also I hate white straight men for bringing the womyn down, I saw a dog die once, I bet the patriarchy was behind it\"",
"Reading the explanations here makes me think that you could replace \"tumblr\" with \"reddit\" and it would apply exactly as well/much.",
"There's plenty of responses here, so I wont give my opinion, but I will give you [This Link.](_URL_0_)\n\nThis is the tumblr of a queer woman of color that brings to light just how crazy some of the \"tumblr feminists\" can be. Some of the posts she finds just make me go \"wat\" ",
"[Here is an example of one](_URL_0_) (if I understand the term correctly).\n\nShe argues a gigantic double standard: it's OK for women to treat all unknown men as potential **rapists**, but it is NOT OK for men to treat all unknown women as potential **consensual sex partners**. Nor is it even OK for the man to treat one unknown woman as a potential conversation partner.\n\nI've tried joining in discussions on posts like this, but I just get shouted down and negatively abused. So I have learned just to treat these people as a sort of lunatic fringe and ignore them.\n",
"It's like calling someone an arm chair psychologist, they can talk out the ass, but they sure as hell don't practice in real life. ",
"Can you support feminism and gender equality together? Isn't feminism kind of like affirmative action in that it gives women an advantage over males instead of equality? It seems to me you can only be for one or the other. Not being a dick, serious questions.\n\nEdit: Removed a single word.",
"NOT TRYING TO BE SEXIST OR RAPE DENYIG OR DIS FEMINISM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT: however, I feel a decent amount (again, not all)of gender bashing (on either end) come from people who have been rejected outright, used by, or just suck at dealing with the opposite sex. So they naturally develop an us versus them mentality. I will also add this applies more to men than women , however I'm sure it goes both ways",
"Try /r/outoftheloop for other questions about reddit/internet stuff that goes over your head.",
"I summon thee, anti-sexism-raptor!",
"Many on tumblr don't actually understand gender issues and they just jump on the bandwagon. Unfortunately their behavior and attitude is often detrimental to the actual social issue they are trying to advance. Due to simple ignorance. There is as well often tumblr feminist i found tend to be RadFems(Radical Feminists) Who have a habit of making up statistics and \"problems\" and more or less their attitude revolves around wanting to purge men from the planet. They seek and perpetuate gender superiority over equality.\n\nIt might be a bit derogatory but to equate most of them to actual feminists would be insulting to the feminist movement.",
"I support the elimination of gender. \n\nSo there. ",
"**tumblr feminism:** girl who doesn't get what she wants. Get's rejected/hurt by man/men so she generalizes all men and feels disenfranchised. Can't have a discussion on the subject with a man. Basically a misandrist. \n\n(Note: this is simply a definition of the implied meaning of the phrase and not a generalization.) \n\n\n\n\n**Feminist:** Well-informed activist that fights for equality, primarily women's rights. Understand that males can also be a 'feminist' a.k.a want equality between the sexes.\n\n\nby the way,\nfeminism != Egalitarianism ",
" > what seems to be a very negative term\n\nOh.",
"I've come to make this personal conclusion:\n\nHow to know when a certain branch of \"feminism\" being presented is *wrong*? (based on fallacies and not logical)\n\nIt starts with \"the patriarchy suppresses women\" and ends just about there, basing all of the opposition on men.\n\nI respect almost any kind of feminism that continues its argument along the lines of \"men and women repress women as well as men\", therefore showing true equality and more sensibility that the aforementioned one.\n\nSo yeah, the term \"tumblr feminism\" refers to philosophies that end their arguments with \"you're a man, therefore you're wrong\", that is, pure sexism. (A tumblr feminist's favorite sentence? \"Men can't be raped\")\n\nSorry if I didn't explain in a way a 5-year old would understand, but given the subject I guess it's more understandable...",
"There's a lot of unintelligent douchebags on Tumblr who think they know everything when they're just 15 years old",
"Tumblr is a medium often used by a specific brand of feminists that look for signs of the patriarchy when they are really not there or unintentional. A Tumblr feminist is someone who deliberately looks for anything that could potentially be seen as sexist towards women and then blogs about it, even if these sexist stereotypes are not really there. The Tumblr feminist views everything through such a mindset. If you try dare to disagree with the typical Tumblr feminist you are either considered a 'male chauvinist pig' if you are a man or an enabler if you are a woman. The Tumblr feminist typically has a very narrow world vision that is nothing more than raging against anything that could potentially be sexist from any random perspective. The actual fight for equality between genders and elimination of sexism, which is what the feminist movement was originally about, is completely overshadowed. In fact, the Tumblr feminist stereotype is that of someone who denounces men very quickly as 'sexist supporters of the patriarchy', which is in itself sexist and certainly has nothing to do with gender equality.",
"Dumb people love pretending to be smart, this applies to males and females of all races, tumbler feminists are just a bunch dumb girls pretending to be political feminists for women's rights. Sexual harassment and lesser pay in the workplace are legitimate women's rights issues, but tumblr feminists prefer to focus on things like labeling any man that tells a women to smile as a degrading, superficial, and controlling misogynists. ",
"Think armchair activist. GAY MARRIAGE NOT BEING LEGAL IS FUCKING OPPRESSION! !!1!!! SO DISAPPONTED IN THIS COUNTRY type of Facebook stuff. Now apply it to (what they believe to be) feminism. ",
"\"tumblr feminist\" is to feminists as \"fedora\" is to hat enthusiasts",
"I saw a post on Tumblr a while ago that summed this up perfectly, it went something like this.\n\n____________________________________________\nOP: \"Male privilege is when a woman does a magic trick she gets burned at the stake, but when Jesus did it he became worshipped.\"\n\nPerson's Reply: \"Um, you know they killed Jesus, right? Like I get what you're saying, but they did kill Jesus, that's a thing that very much did happen...\"\n____________________________________________\n\nThat's seriously my favorite Tumblr post. It just sums the site up so well. ",
"It's what feminists call misandrists who believe in gender superiority and repayment. \n\nIt comes because on tumblr, the radical blogs are the ones that get the most notice. TITP, the more extreme feminism blogs, etc. That's how it get's associated with tumblr in general. It's unfair and stuff, but I honestly can't think of a better word to use other than \"misandrist\". ",
"I definitely feel like a lot of the stigma against tumblr comes from some of the crazier members of the website. Like reddit, tumblr is what you make of it. If you choose to follow crazy people, you'll get crazy stuff on your dash. But if you follow some good art blogs and stuff, the content's pretty good.\n\nA lot of original content from reddit ends up on tumblr. A lot of original content from tumblr ends up on reddit. They're very similar, in my opinion. And while reddit seems to have this view that tumblr is comprised of young teen girls with a poor grasp on social issues/crazy shipping fanfiction, users would probably get defensive when faced with tumblr's view of reddit: A dangerous place filled with perverse misogynists who will hunt down and ruin anyone they don't like. In general, it's all rather silly. I agree with OP, fighting is dumb and a waste of brain power for all parties.",
"Tumblr is really good for finding high-quality porn.",
"Yo OP, all you need to know, the mentality of a certain kind of girl from a certain background at private colleges 10 years leaking into dumb teens around the world. and they repeat the shit without knowing a damn thing. ",
"Is \"tumblrites\" a thing? Cause I hate that.",
"/r/tumblrinaction may have already been posted, but I believe this is what most of reddit is referring to. Extreme feminist male haters who equate anything a male does to literal rape. There's a big difference between a normal tumblrite or a normal feminist and what we see here. They're also usually very misinformed. ",
"I'm responding to your edit.\n\nIt's very common for people to utilize terms like these to dismiss an entire ideology, or type, or whatever. The first U.S. President Bush popularized the term 'bleeding heart liberals' as a propagandistic derision for people who were compassionate. Now the word 'entitled' is used for anybody who wants the government to help anyone except the upper class.\n\nTerms like this catch on because people want an easy way to classify things. And it's in our nature to join a team and fit in. It's a peculiarity of human nature that, if you can make fun of something, especially with a catch-phrase, people will buy into it without critically or intellectually questioning it. It's what makes people so easily led. ",
" > Watching redditors diss tumblrites as a group is complete stereotyping and generalizing. \n\nI'm fascinated by how meta this conversation turned. \n\n",
"Shit like this _URL_0_",
"Combine first world problems and feminism and you get tumblr feminism. Instead of going to countries like Saudi Arabia and fighting for rights there, they like to sit back in their comfortable homes and complain on the internet about non-issues. In order for their inconsequential opinions on the most menial things to be heard, they need to be as obnoxious as possible so this is where the stereotype comes from.",
"there's Feminism and then there's interpereted Neo-Feminism\n\nFeminism is great, but the other one is fucked up.\n\nI'd give it a 50-50 split for each demographic, (still a small percentage of society), then you have nonplus, non-literate supporters, and non-literate non-supporters, and then there's (a very small number) anti Feminists",
"Alright, as a feminist on tumblr, who is basically on tumblr almost everyday and follows a lot of other feminist blogs, a lot of what is being said in this thread is not accurate.\n\nThe term \"tumblr feminist\" doesn't really have to do with \"extreme\" feminism (radfems), or even being uneducated, it's a negative term that is usually used to discredit a feminist for being online, like you're not a *real* feminist, you just sit there on the computer all day. It's almost exactly like \"arm chair activist\" (it's also used as an insult by people who don't actually understand what feminism is)\n\nIt has nothing to do with being angry or \"too passionate\" and nothing to do with talking about privilege in society. It's just a term used to dismiss someone you don't like, for saying things you don't like or for not talking about a social issue the way you'd like them to. (i.e. don't just bitch about it! *do* something about it! You won't get anywhere with that tone of voice! address this issue how *I* think you should!) as if telling your story to other people and venting in a safe space doesn't help anyone.",
"I've seen \"Tumblr [thing]\" for a lot of things. It usually means \"idiotic [thing]\".\n\nAs an asexual, please don't pay any attention to the Tumblr asexuals.",
"I can't stand majority of tumblr feminists.They are immature and bigoted. Half of them don't even follow or fully understand all aspects of feminism.",
"Tumblr feminists: People on the internet that are supposed to support social action, but are usually not informed or too reactionary and hateful to actually make a good change.\n\nIt's unfortunate because there actually are a lot of level-headed, talented and smart people I've seen on tumblr, but the amount of crap you have to wade through to see them is excessive to enjoy the site.",
"I always thought Feminism was the seeking of equal rights for women however on the contrary it is a form to show woman as more dominant and superior. Gives me angst every time I see that word and equal in a sentence now..",
"Crazy people on tumblr tag their shit as feminist when they are actually militant misandrist and posting things like \"all men should be murdered\" and equating literally *everything* to being raped. \n\nSome of it is so outrageous that it gets passed around the Internet simply because its crazy, so people like me who don't use tumblr have really only been exposed to that side of it. Of course I understand that there are legitimate and educated feminists on tumblr, but \"tumblr feminist\" is just a meme that people use to reference crazy, misinformed, extreme misandrists. ",
"It's a similar term to say. . . \"armchair economist\" or \"social media liberal\". It's a catchall phrase that refers to uninformed activists who do very little for their cause outside of arguing against strawmen, often on websites such as Tumblr. That's not to say that all (or even most) feminists on Tumblr fit this description, rather just a few vocal ones who stand out from the rest due to their unconstructive fallacious arguments."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80",
"http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Keyboard%20Commando",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbMbRVy41Y0"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://bryankonietzko.tumblr.com/post/54495619739/this-past-friday-i-published-this-post-which"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://24.media.tumblr.com/48770dc021c06fb7932b85d948f2646c/tumblr_mr60folViP1sevlnvo1_500.jpg",
"http://24.media.tumblr.com/cc4c66be54a16889e7417680787fc493/tumblr_mr60t4w65R1sevlnvo1_400.jpg",
"http://31.media.tumblr.com/0a331fdfaaa24ac7890f7dfb33cdb638/tumblr_mr63j0TnrS1qi1d97o1_400.jpg",
"http://31.media.tumblr.com/c9c1a45819ee0019ae5ecf5ec9146762/tumblr_mr668gdC8Q1rurahdo1_500.png"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://img.archive.is/VnFDE/f9e43f001d4941cccb42c4253a520090e7937a4a.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o25I2fzFGoY&feature=youtube_gdata_player"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://wtfsocialjustice.tumblr.com/"
],
[
"http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/Dl3dZqN.png"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3omi2n | how are we sure that our time is accurate? is there any proof? does it involve an expiriment to find out? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3omi2n/eli5_how_are_we_sure_that_our_time_is_accurate_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvyhxhs",
"cvyhyx8"
],
"score": [
13,
2
],
"text": [
"How do you mean 'our time' ? Like, we know acceleration towards the earth occurs at 9.8 m/s. You can drop something in a vacuum tube and measure this. If the acceleration is something else, it may be that your timing device is incorrect.\n\n Or do you mean, how do we know a second is actually a second? Because we created the second. There isn't a natural 'second' we're trying to measure. \n\nNowadays it is given as:\n > One second is the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 10 9 ) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom.\n\nBecause we define it that way. ",
"You're going to have to clarify here. What do you mean \"our time is accurate\"? If you mean whether a second is accurate, then kind of - seconds is a human-derived unit of measurement, so it can be any length we like. If you mean whether our methods of measuring time is accurate, yes and no. We can measure a second very accurate using quartz. Quartz vibrates at a known number of times every second, and by counting the number of vibrations we can find out how long a second is. However, a day is not 24 hours and thus not 86400 seconds exactly, because of slight wobbles of the Earth."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
99x74q | would it be possible for a computer screen to flaah the same code as a remote control and change the channel? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/99x74q/eli5_would_it_be_possible_for_a_computer_screen/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4r12c9",
"e4r3eh9"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"Infra Red waves are not in the visible light spectrum, your monitor probably can not emit radiation in the same frequency as Infra Red \"light so No.",
"Consumer tv remotes use infrared at 940nm wavelength. The signal is like a Morse code that's pulsed at 30-60khz range.\n\nDisplay monitors pixels have a color gamut range typically up to low 600nm range. There's no intentional emissions from the lcd panel upwards of 700nm.\n\nHeat is produced by the panel though and emitted by IR radiation. A tinnnnnnnny little bit comes out the front. \n\nBut monitors pulse their refreshes at 60-120hz. So you're short a few thousand times a second."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2zhpnq | what are the "test" and "reset" buttons on bathroom outlets for? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zhpnq/eli5_what_are_the_test_and_reset_buttons_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpj138i"
],
"score": [
17
],
"text": [
"Bathroom outlets are what are called GFCI breakers. These aren't just simple circuit breakers like in your electrical panel that protect you from too much current. GFCI protect you from being electrocuted. How?\n\nWell, in the US most plugs have 3 prongs - hot, neutral, and ground. Ignore the ground for now. Any electrical component works* by sending electricity (called current) down the hot wire, through the thing you're using, and it returns back through the neutral wire, creating a *circuit*. If everything works correctly, the amount of current going *into* the device on the hot wire is the same as the amount going *out* of the device and back through the neutral. \n\nIn a situation where you drop a hair dryer into a tub or something like that, the current tries to follow a new path - usually from the hot wire, through the dryer, through the water, through *you*, and then to ground through your plumbing. Now, there is an imbalance - the amount of current coming out of the hot wire is now much larger than the current going back in through the neutral. A GFCI breaker detects this imbalance and turns the circuit off (it \"trips\"). \n\nAll GFCI breakers have a test feature that you're supposed to use (but no one does) where it tests to see that the breaker trips if there is a current imbalance. That's the \"test\" button. The \"reset\" resets the break to work again. \n\n^* *Yes, I know it's AC and current doesn't actually flow like down one wire and back another like in a DC circuit. For the sake of ELI5 let's pretend it does.* "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3lj1d0 | how are some things considered natural and others artificial or synthetic. isn't everything made from materials that are natural. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lj1d0/eli5_how_are_some_things_considered_natural_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv6px8p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The difference is between whether something is man-made, or made from nature. The actual fibers of cotton are natural materials. Polyester, or teflon, for example, are man made. Leather is a natural material. Plastic or spandex is man made. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3lpr07 | whatever happened to "cellphones cause cancer?" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lpr07/eli5_whatever_happened_to_cellphones_cause_cancer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv88su3",
"cv8ei3s"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"There are still people out there that believe the human body is affected by radio waves somehow. But the issue has died down, largely due to the complete lack of evidence. It seems that there are always some people that are scared of new technology, and it takes a little while for it to become accepted.",
"Cell phones went from a extravagant optional accessory to a necessary part of life. So people stopped caring if they caused cancer because they sure as hell weren't going to stop using them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3tbsld | why are bills proposed to congress so complex? why can't they stick to passing laws on one thing at a time? | Wouldn't that stop parties throwing a deal-breaker in on purpose to a bill that might pass otherwise? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tbsld/eli5_why_are_bills_proposed_to_congress_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx4sy8d",
"cx4t44l",
"cx4tw5c",
"cx4u9ox"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"For many members of Congress, many \"one thing at a time\" bills wouldn't be important to their constituents. If it's a bill that spends money (as most do), they would vote \"No\" so the money would still be around for government to spend on a different \"one thing at a time\" bill that helps their constituents. Alas, in this system, \"one thing at a time\" bills never have enough support to get passed. Even if Congress could agree, the President could veto a \"one thing at a time\" bill they didn't like.\n\nThe \"solution\", and I use that word in the most general sense, is to lump together many \"one thing at a time\" bills into one big super-bill. Each member of Congress can say \"I voted for the super-bill to get you the {one thing at a time bill his people want}.\" The President can't veto it because some piece of legislation needed to keep the government running was tossed into the super-bill.",
"All of this depends on the bill in question. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nI suspect you mean appropriations bills. These bills fund the federal government discretionary operations and are often used as leverage to advance a political agenda (like ending funding to planned parenthood, ending funding to obamacare, and currently threatening to end funding to refugee relocation because of security concerns surrounding Syrian refugees). Ideally, the Congress passes 12 individual appropriations bills before the start of the next fiscal year (October 1). By going one at a time, Congress has the ability to amend federal government discretionary programs line-by-line. While the House has been pretty good at passing some, if not most, of these bills, these appropriations bills have failed in the Senate. The Majority in the Senate either refuses to put these bills to a vote or the Minority party threatens a filibuster. And since you need 60 senators to agree to end debate, and neither party has 60 senators currently in the Senate, it's extremely difficult to get to a vote in the Senate.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nSo what happens when we don't pass these bills? We have a situation like we have right now. Currently, the federal government is running under a continuing resolution (CR). This is an appropriations bill passed by Congress, signed into law by the president, that says we will spend exactly what we did last fiscal year through a specific date in this fiscal year (this can be decreased slightly based on spending caps from the Budget Control Act. I'd be happy to elaborate in a separate reply). Our current CR runs through December 11, 2015. At that point, Congress will most likely vote on an Omnibus appropriations/spending bill. Basically, its a combination of all appropriations bills. If Congress does not, we go into a government shut down. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nEssentially, timing is providing leverage to advance a policy point of view to add a measure to this \"must pass\" bill.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nThat all being said, adding measures to a large bill can HELP pass a piece of legislation. In order to make a bill more palatable to members of the opposing party, the majority may add small reforms that the minority likes. These are sometimes called \"sweeteners\" to try and get people on board with a larger bill. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nOther larger bills will often get riders this way. For example, look at the [\"Cornhusker Kickback\"](_URL_0_) during the passage of Obamacare. Here we have a case of major policy goal from a new president with a super majority in the Senate and still needing a sweetener to win votes. \n\n & nbsp;\n\nSometimes policy riders are small and non-controversial. For example a large veteran reform bill may include language that names a post office after a soldier who fell in the line of duty. ",
"This is a super awesome question, and hopefully I can help clarify some stuff aside from what has already talked about in this thread: \n\nLet's break down your question: \n\n > Why are bills proposed to Congress so complex? \n\nIt's mostly because bills HAVE to be complex. Legislative language is complicated legal language for a good reason -- bills, if passed, turn into the law of the land. That's a whole lot of power. \n\nSo they need to be thorough and clarify absolutely as much as they possibly can clarify in order to avoid confusion later on. \n\nLet's use an example I am going to blatantly steal from a plot of The West Wing. You propose a bill that would allocate money for researching pediatric diseases. That's a good cause, yeah? Nobody wants to see sick kids, we should help out the people trying to help sick kids. \n\nSome points that need clarifying in the legal language of the bill: \nWhat counts as a pediatric disease? There's a whole lot of them, so what does it take to qualify? \nAre some diseases given more money than others. \nWho actually receives the money? Universities? Specific labs? What kind of research qualifies? We don't want money going to people who believe in the healing power of crystals. \n\nAll of that stuff has to be detailed as much as possible. \n\n > Why can't they stick to passing laws on one thing at a time? \n\nBecause the process of getting something passed through Congress takes a long time. It has to be introduced, sent to committee, voted on by the committee, scheduled for a vote, then amended on the floor, then voted on. And it has to do it all over again on the other side of Congress. \n\nYes, there are issues with pork and poison pills and all of that, but the reason why we have to allow bills to get amended so heavily is because it takes forever to pass something. \n",
"Two things:\n\nFirst, laws are written to affect behavior in the real world, but they're applied in court. Part of living in a free society is that we are very exacting about when and why you can convict someone of a crime. As a result, the law needs to be very, very exact about what they want people to do and what they aren't allowed to do. \n\nIt's like how a computer program that you want to do something very simple, like \"Make a little bird fly around the screen\", has to be *vastly* longer than the description of what it does, because the computer will only to *exactly* what you tell it to do, and nothing else. Well, judges are like computers; they try to figure out the intention behind the law and they try to be reasonable, but most of the time if there is an ambiguity or a loophole, the law is gutted.\n\nSecond, politics is the art of compromise. Bills pass when you can get a majority of people to do X instead of not-X. But some people have different opinions about X when it is combined with other things. For example, one person might think it's good to go to war with Syria, but *only* if we simultaneously raise taxes to pay for it without increasing the deficit. Another person might think it is only good if we *don't* have to raise taxes to pay for it. So those people are both willing to go to war with Syria, but any intervention in Syria the one supports, the other opposes; they're actually opponents, but you need to look at *both* issues together to see that. There might be other people who have still other views linked to Syria. Some people might only want to go to war in Syria as a second priority if we spend more on international aid first (because Syria is less important), other people might only want to go to war in Syria if we cap our international aid (to limit total spending on international affairs). Some people might support it if the war will increase the importance of the Air Force in the military, but oppose it if it increases the importance of the Army, or vice-versa. \n\nSo in many different ways, issues that seem separate actually can't be treated separately. Many political factions have many different issues that they see as linked to the core issue. Other factions may have second-degree issues that are linked to the first circle of sub-issues. (For example, say war in Syria increases taxes; but some people will want to increases taxes on the middle class, some on the rich...) Sometimes people resolve these issues just by trusting their own predictions about how the linked issues will be resolved, and vote according to their prediction; sometimes politicians negotiate and make promises to one another, and they trust the promises and vote according to the agreement they've made; but in other cases they don't trust the promises and want to have all the different parts of the agreement in a single bill."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/82621-obama-healthcare-plan-nixes-ben-nelsons-cornhusker-kickback-deal"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1ouw0d | why is it that we can tell so easily that someone hates you, but it's just impossible to tell if someone likes you? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ouw0d/eli5_why_is_it_that_we_can_tell_so_easily_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccvv5t0",
"ccvvurx",
"ccvxos5",
"ccvyc74",
"ccwd6lg",
"ccwg0as"
],
"score": [
73,
3,
19,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the default attitude of people is to be decently polite, which is close to friendly. It's a little harder to distinguish to such a degree that you are sure that they are treating you as a bonafide friend and not just adhering to normal rules of behavior.\n\nMeanwhile, being a dick is abnormal, so it's immediately obvious that they have an issue with you.",
"They can both be easy to distinguish, or hard to distinguish depending you and the other person.\n\nSome people can read body language better than others and some people can hide body language better than others.\n\nBut I am going to guess the real answer to your question is low self esteem or social akwardness, i.e. it is easy to assume people hate you and hard to accept that someone likes you.",
"There are two effects at work here: (1) the *sender* of the signal has reasons to send messages of hate more clearly than messages of love, and (2) the *receiver* of the signal has more of a reason to immediately recognize and act upon signals of hate than signals of love.\n\nFirst, as to the sender: Signaling that you hate someone is a good way, in the wild, to get them out of your social group. You are signaling to your peers that you don't want that individual around. If the individual is a relative newcomer or outsider, they will be quickly castigated from the social group. Hate is thus a good way to get rid of potential rivals, by cutting them off from potential mates within your social group and by decreasing their survival chances by making them strike out (or remain) on their own. Love, in contrast, is a risky signal to convey in an obvious manner. If a male attempts to court a female, in a highly social society, and gets rejected, the other females take note. While being *accepted* by one female will make other females think that the male is a desirable mate (a concept known as \"social proof\"), rejection has the opposite effect, making females think (\"what is wrong with this guy that that female rejected him\"). So conveying love is a risky game of cat and mouse, with subtle signals, to avoid an outright rejection that is socially costly.\n\n(2) The receiver of the signal needs to pick up on hate quickly, but not necessarily love. Hate is often a quick, one-off, social encounter. In the wild, an animal that hates another may quickly show a flash of \"I'm going to kill you\" before striking. Picking up on a hate signal too slowly may mean death (picture a pit bull that is seething hatred towards you). In contrast, love - as already mentioned - is often elicited from a long social relationship. You don't have to pick up on it as quickly in order to survive. Your genes are much happier if you pick up on love *eventually* - as opposed to missing all the signals forever - but in smaller societies, missing a signal once usually didn't end a person's chances at mating with that individual. It wasn't like some random girl at a party who says, \"I'm tired, walk me home?\" and you say, \"no, I wanna stay here and play flip cup,\" and the girl leaves and you never see here again. There were repeated interactions in smaller villages. So missing one or two \"love\" signals was not the end of the world. And with a smaller number of potential mates, it was not as easy for a frustrated female whose potential mate was *not picking up her signals* to simply move on to someone else and write him off.",
"What's more beneficial to human's ancestors. Assuming hostility until you know otherwise, or assuming the best intentions until you know otherwise.\n\nAn unfriendly tribe sets up camp close to you. Is it more beneficial determine any possible hostility as quickly as possible, before they potentially get the jump on you? Absolutely.\n\nYou can easily tell when someone hates you because if you act accordingly and you're right, you get to live another day where you otherwise may not have.\n\nIt's also why it's so hard to convey emotion or positivity in text/email, etc. People assume hostility too often when there isn't any.",
"at the same time, there are instances where you think someone hates you for sure, but they secretly respect, love, or envy you (depending on gender/circumstance). \n\nThis is not as common as when they like you and dont show it though. ",
"I personally would explain this from an evolutionary view. You have nothing to gain from knowing the other 'monkey's' like you but you have something to gain from knowing that a monkey does not. Let me put it another way.\n\nThe news focuses on negative news because the human brain is programed to react to things which threaten us. This is why negative news is more prevalent. I believe the same logic applies but I'm certainly no expert."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2s0xz4 | how do sports commentators avoid speaking at the same time? | I convince myself that they poke each other to signal "It's your turn." | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s0xz4/eli5_how_do_sports_commentators_avoid_speaking_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnl4fek"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Two commentators do different jobs one is a play caller its his job to tell the audience what is happening the other will talk when nothing happens basically telling stats and things they need to do to win/gain advantage "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1vk2yt | how can beads of water on a table evaporate when the water isn't being heated to boiling point? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vk2yt/eli5_how_can_beads_of_water_on_a_table_evaporate/ | {
"a_id": [
"cet0hk4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"At any one time, individual water molecules are bouncing off each other like crazy. Some of them will get hit the right way to pick up enough speed to escape the droplet and they become free floating water molecules in the air, aka water vapor. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
arprxh | how does nasa figure out where to send rovers when sending them to outer space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/arprxh/eli5_how_does_nasa_figure_out_where_to_send/ | {
"a_id": [
"egoxh1i",
"egp0ebw"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The rovers that landed on Mars were launched after nearly 50 years of study from orbit and other probes. Plus centuries of observation from Earth.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nFind an area on the planet that has stuff you want research using the sensors on the probe, has the terrain the rover can navigate. There are studies with the scientists, rover designers operators and management that will find a suitable site for exploration\n",
"Do you mean:\n\n- which planet?\n- how to get there?\n- where on the planet? or\n- whether to send a rover at all?\n\nRovers are almost a mission of last resort. They are fantastically expensive, very risky and can only explore a very tiny section of the planet compared to an orbiter."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars"
],
[]
] |
||
67o7v7 | redshift: how do we know the original emited wavelenght? | I've read some previous posts about this topic but I wasn't able to find an answer to this particual question.
In order to calculate the magnitude of the shift you need the emited wavelenght of your object of interest. How can we be sure about that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67o7v7/eli5redshift_how_do_we_know_the_original_emited/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgrw3ly",
"dgrwd9c",
"dgrwhy5",
"dgrx126",
"dgrxh53"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Redshifted objects in space are usually stars, and we have a pretty good understanding of what stars are made of and how they function.\n\nSpecifically, the hydrogen atmosphere around stars absorbs light at very specific wavelengths. A star's spectrum will be mostly complete except for those hydrogen absorption bands that have been deleted.\n\nIf that same absorption pattern is present but redshifted way down to longger wavelengths, you know exactly how much redshift has occurred because we know where that band *should* be.",
"Redshift isn't calculated from a single photon. Usually astronomers look at a spectrum of light, say from a star. That spectrum isn't uniform, as certain atoms radiate light at specific wavelengths. For example, Sodium radiates a pair of wavelengths, 588.9950 and 589.5924 nanometers. These are part of how the sodium atom is made, and all sodium atoms work the same way. This doublet should have the same magnitude at each frequency, because of some more complicated physics concerning how sodium radiates. \n\nWhen an observation shows a doublet at 598.9950 and 599.5924 nanometers, that's considered pretty good evidence for a 10 nanometer red shift. If you see the characteristic structures of several atoms, all with the same redshift, that's evidence of how fast the star is moving.",
"Each element has its own light signature. When hydrogen is burning, for example the light it emits [peaks at very specific wavelengths. ](_URL_0_) So if you are looking at a star that is burning hydrogen, these peaks will be visible. If you are looking at something that doesn't emit light, such as a big dust cloud, then the light reflected back at you from the could will have gaps at the same wavelengths. (absorption spectrum) \n \nSo if a galaxy is moving away from you very quickly, it will have the same peaks/gaps, but they will be shifted to the red side of the spectrum. ",
"When light pass through a material it will absorb specific wavelength of light. Each element have a specific pattern, a bit like a fingerprint if you want.\n\nIf you look at the light from a star you can see those pattern. We know at which specific wavelength those pattern should be for different elements. So if all the pattern are shifted, you can calculate the red shift.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nYou can see it there. All of the pattern at the same, but all shifted. Obviously, we don't know what is the original pattern, but we know what pattern each element can create so we can guess what was the original pattern and verify if everything shifted the same way.",
"That is an excellent question. A few things.\n\nWe know what things are made of, and we know what wavelengths those elements give off. When you burn hydrogen it goves off certain colors. When you burn helium it gives off certain colors. This is one way that scientists tell what things are made of.\n\nWe know what stars are made of, so we know what they should look like.\n\nFurthermore, the wavelengths arent a single spike. They are a distinctive series of wavelength spikes. This means you can still recognize hydrogen's preaks and valleys even if it is down in the wavelengtgs where you wouldn't expect it. Especially if you have examples of slightly closer stars giving you a trend you can compare.\n\nYou can kind of think if it like this. You have a record of ella fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong. You put it on a record player and hear a very slow low version. It is possible that two new singers you never heard of that happen ti sound kike deeper ellas and louis (if that is even possible) released a song using a language just like English but with all the sounds drawn out. \n\nBut it is far more likely you have the right record playing the song printed on it but that something is gunking the turntable and making it turn slowly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://jahschem.wikispaces.com/file/view/hydrogen-spectra.jpg/185968109/hydrogen-spectra.jpg"
],
[
"https://i.stack.imgur.com/Q4ylT.png"
],
[]
] |
|
93brg1 | what made crt tv so durable than lcd tv and how did rf adapter send the signal to the tv themselves? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93brg1/eli5_what_made_crt_tv_so_durable_than_lcd_tv_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3c4gm1",
"e3c58od"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"CRT stands for **C**athode **R**ay **T**ube.\n\nThe *Tube* part was made out of glass including the screen area. In this regard one could say it's more durable than an LCD which is usually made with a soft material as the screen area.\n\nAs for the RF adapter, it takes a composite video signal and converts it to a radio frequency based signal that is centered on the frequency for TV analog Channel 3. It's basically like a little tiny TV broadcast tower except it broadcasts directly into some coaxial cable instead of out into the airwaves. ",
"CRTs are basically big glass tubes with an “electron gun”, which you can think of as kind of a laser that lights up a spot on the display.\nThere we no moving parts, no computer driven logic (at least to draw the screen), everything is controlled by analog logic, certain voltages that activate various components based on frequency and other values that steer the electron gun to draw the picture.\nRemember, no digital, just voltages, they don’t care what gets fed into them, they just interpret it as signal, that’s why they show that “CRT snow” when there is no signal, it’s picking up random noise.\n\nAn RF adapter simply feeds the TV signal that it interprets as a picture.\n\nThe reason why they last much more is because they have a huge glass tube, practically indestructible, they are very heavy so they don’t get moved around, they had no mechanical moving parts. Also they used bigger components that are soldered to the board better, larger and easier to replace than today’s SMD and BGA pretty much un replaceable components.\n\nThe most fragile part is the quite heavy fly back transformer that runs the electron gun and steers the beam around, sometimes it gets moved around and can break the circuit board, that’s why if you bang them on the side they usually come back to life, you are moving around the transformer and that contacts the tacks again \n\nAlso most modern TVs that fail either have a broken panel (that pretty much is impossible on CRTs) or have a broken backlight inverter on CFL (the old thicker LCDs) or on plasma TVs the high voltage driver board can die because of capacitors \nOr they are simply thrown out because they are too old, which is somewhat sad..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
34zjms | how does the international space station maintain it's altitude? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34zjms/eli5_how_does_the_international_space_station/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqzj6e7",
"cqzj9co",
"cqzlpxd"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"The ISS moves at about 4.75 miles per second. The earth is round. This means that the ISS is moving sideways fast enough that the earth drops out from under it at the same rate it falls.\n\nImagine you are standing on top of a pointed roof, and you are standing right at the point. If you jump in front of you just a little bit, you'll land on the roof. If you jump harder, you'll land closer to the edge of the roof. If you jump hard enough, you won't touch the roof at all and you'll fall to the ground. This is like what the ISS does, except the earth is a sphere so it works in all directions. By the way, this is how ALL things that orbit maintain their altitude, including satellites, the moon, and the earth itself around the sun.",
"Imagine you fire a bullet, it will slowly approach the earth until it hits the ground in a inverted U trajectory, the faster the bullet the further it goes. In the case of satellites after lifting them up to a certain height you give them enough speed so that its trajectory doesn't hit the ground, thus becoming a circle.",
"The ISS isn't maintaining altitude. Its constantly dropping altitude. Every couple of years, they fire rocket to push it back up higher."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9az133 | stock trading | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9az133/eli5_stock_trading/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4z37zv",
"e4z3xom",
"e4z4rwe",
"e4z57c1",
"e4z6oc4",
"e4z6oir",
"e4z75gm",
"e4z78js",
"e4z7j1h",
"e4z7p0j"
],
"score": [
7,
237,
11,
15,
5,
2,
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It’s simple :\n- you buy a part of a company.\n- you hope someone is going to buy it to you at a higher price\n- you sell at that moment\n\nYou make profit \n\nTo buy or sell a stock, you place an order into a broker : I want to buy 3 ACME stocks for 3$\n\nIf someone places the order: I want to sell 3 ACME stocks for 3$, then, you get it. \n\nThe broker tries to match sell orders with buy orders.\n\nThe price has no real meaning : it's what shareholders are willing to pay to get the stock. And this changes every second. \n\nIf ACME is making a negative announcement, every shareholder will want to sell the stock at a lower price hoping to find a buyer accepting this price. \n\nIf ACME makes a wonderful announcement, everyone will want to buy stocks to existing holders (who probably wants to keep theirs) so you will need to pay a higher price to be able to buy it.\n\n",
"Let's say you start a company. You own 100% of that company.\n\nBut you want to grow it, so you need money to do it. You need to sell part of your company to investors. You get money and they get a percentage of the company. After raising money from investors directly (typically called private equity or venture capital) let's say you now own 40% of a much larger company.\n\nBut owning 40% of a company doesn't mean you actually have money in your hands. Your money is tied up in the business. So owners and other large investors will often like to \"go public\" in am effort to both a) diversify their risk and take some cash for some of their share of the company or b) raise more money to put into the business so it can grow. \"Going public\" means making the stock publicly traded in the stock market so anyone can buy shares.\n\nSo the company sells shares to the public. Let's say they sell 10% of the company to the public. They do this by selling 10 million shares at $10 a share. The company and existing shareholders bring in $100 million dollars in cash and now the company is worth $1 billion ($100 million is 10%)\n\nNow the person that bought it at $10 owns the stock. They are hoping that 1) the price of the stock goes up and 2) eventually the company will issue a dividend to share holders. Let's say after 10 years of growth the company is more mature and is generating more cash than they can reasonably put back into the business. The CEO doesn't just pocket the money. The company can decide to issue a dividend to shareholders. If the company is a $1 dividend and you have 1,000 shares, you get $1000. \n\nIt's public so you can buy and sell as you want. ",
"When companies need to raise money for whatever reason, they can sell stock. When you buy stock, you are actually buying partial ownership in the company. Your hope is that the value of the stock will increase and you can sell it for a profit at some point in the future. For example, you buy 1 share of Apple for $10. A year later, the stock is now worth $20 because the company is highly profitable and many people want to buy Apple stock (supply and demand). You can sell your one share and make a $10 profit. This is very basic, but hopefully helps you understand the general concept.",
"I can't get a link, but watch Explained on netflix. There is an episode thats only like 20 minutes on the Stock Market and its super informative. ",
"You need money to run a lemonade stand. You can borrow money from someone, or you can say: \"Give me money now and I'll give partial ownership of my lemonade stand. You can vote on what the company does and you'll get some of the money I make selling lemonade\".\n\nStock are written legal agreements (contracts) for the later situation, you can think of each share is a partial ownership of a company. When stock is traded the buyer is getting the right to vote and receive profits from the company and the seller is getting paid for giving those rights up. It's a transference of this ownership, just like buying or selling anything.\n\nMore formally: Conceptually there are two ways to raise capital: debt and equity. Debt is borrowing money and paying interest, equity is ownership (partial or otherwise) of something. Stock is equity. When stock is issued ownership of the company is divided in to \"shares\" which represent a partial ownership of the company. The total value of a company can then be calculated as sum( < outstanding shares > \\* < share price > ). By owning a share you're essentially owning a legal contract that gives you rights to a certain amount of control (in proportion to your shares) of a company, as well as an entitlement to a certain amount of dividends (profits) if the company chooses to pay them out (again in proportion to your shares). If you buy or sell stock you're simply transferring the ownership of this contract.\n\nLet me know if you want to know how exchanges, which facilitate these transactions, work.",
"You are investing by buying tiny pieces of companies, hoping that the shares go up in value and/or the company pays out dividends from profits.\n\nSo you buy 10 shares of Apple stock for $215/share, you now own 10 out of 4 billion shares in Apple. Each quarter, they will pay you a small amount from their profits, and you can also make money by selling the shares for more than you paid down the road. Of course, if the company doesn't do as well, the shares can lose value, too.\n\nTypically, the value of the shares is based on a combination of the company's profits (or expected future profits) per share and expected growth. The stat looked at is price/earnings ratio and it'll be higher for higher growing companies and lower for stable or declining companies. So a slowing coal mining company might have a P/E ratio of 4 while a high growth tech company it might be 50. Average for all public companies is about 18, meaning the share price is about 18x the company's profits per share.",
"To add to the already great basic explanations; some interesting things. Computers regularly scan the market trends (I.e. Stocks that go up over time) and buy millions of small, low risk transactions (I.e. Steadily increasing shares) and then sell them as soon as they increase. The faster they can do this the more money they make. The big money comes from the people who sell the stocks for companies. They sell you stock and take a commission on what you pay. If they're good at guessing trends and make you money you're more likely to do it again and give them even more commission. ",
"You find $40 in the couch and decide to start a lemonade stand. You go out and buy a folding table, pitcher, lemonade, etc.. \n\nBefore you even sell your first cup, that company is worth $30. Theoretically, you could cash out right now by returning the pitcher & table, and dumping the lemonade. \n\nBut it's a good location, so you open up. The first day you sell 10 cups at $2 apiece. You company is now worth $30+20 = $50! \n\nThe next day you spend $5 to reload the lemonade ($45 valuation), and sell another 10 cups! Value is now $45+20=$65! \n\nNow, someone's offering to buy you out. They take everything about your business for a lump sum, and you walk away. You know the business is worth more than $65, because if you keep going you're probably good for another $15/day before you even open the second location and add on the brownie & strawberry expansion. But those are only theoretical profits. \n\nExactly what that dollar value is today is highly debatable. A car could smash through your stand. A competitor could open up across the street selling $1 cups of lemonade. The City may come enforce a new Lemonade Tax, and demand $0.30/cup. \n\nBesides, this was all just to get a Nintendo Switch, and it's hot outside. So you put the value of the company at $300. \n\nNow, a private buyer can come in and offer you $300. Or you can just sell them 10% of your company for $30 to cover startup costs for a new brownie line alongside your lemonade. In exchange you will give them $0.10 of every dollar you make. \n\nBut it's tough lining up a private buyer. $300 is like, alot of money to come up with. So instead you can \"go public\". Your initial offering is $1/share for 300 shares. You go through a process to list your stock on the NASDAQ, and the free market will decide what your stock is worth. The day you go public, you keep 150 shares and sell the rest for $150. \n\nYou're still in charge, and can open three new stands with that $150. The public sees this and a month later your company is worth $5/share, or $1500. School is starting, and you can't run the business anymore. So you opt to sell your remaining 150 shares at $5 for a cool $750 on top of the $150 you already made. $900 total from the $40 you found. Not a bad return for a summer. \n\nYour shareholders appoint a new CEO and the lemonade empire moves on without you. Or your share holders liquidate ASAP, the stock price plummets to 0, business goes under and everyone that owned shares in your company loses their investment. ",
"Stocks are referred to as \"equities\" because ownership of the stock grants you a share of the company's assets. In addition some stocks will periodically pay a dividend which is a payment to the share holder. If you own stock in a company that liquidates you are entitled to a share of the remaining assets following claims made by direct creditors and then bond holders.\n\nStocks are bought and sold for a number of reasons. In the \"primary\" market a company sells its own stock in order to raise capital. A private company will go public and issue stock in order to compensate the private owners for the risk of their investment in the company with cash. A public company will issue more stock in order to raise capital in order to improve its operations.\n\nIn the \"seconday\" market stockholders sell to each other. They do this for a multitude of reasons. Keep in mind that the value of a stock has to be judged against the time value of money. If interest rates are high then the same amount of money invested in bonds at lower risk makes stocks less attractive and vice versa.\n\nA value investor will buy a stock because they are bullish on it -- they think that the company will invest its profits in assets to which ownership applies. They will sell a stock either to \"realize gains\" meaning that they bought it for a lower value or they are bearish on it -- they think that the company's assets are not as valuable as the stock price. Speculative investors will buy or sell a stock because of anticipated supply and demand changes for short-term changes in price. (i.e. volatility) Quantitative investors will buy or sell a stock because they have certain targets of concentration in different aspects of the stock. For example, they may want to own an even balance between transportation stocks and energy company stocks because increased oil prices will reduce the profits of the transportation stocks but the energy stocks will make up for it and vice versa. There are a huge number of complex ways for quants to balance portfolios. I may have left out some types of investors but I think that this characterizes the largest groups.\n\nMarket structures are very complex. They can be fragmented meaning that there are lots of different places -- \"venues\" -- to trade the same stock. The process of finding out what your a stock is actually worth is called \"price discovery.\"",
"Same as trading baseball cards\n\nI bought some baseball cards when I was young. Some were good players, some average. Then, some average players stated playing great! So people wanted those cards! They were willing to pay me double what I paid! I sold some for that price and made a profit.\n\nI held on to some also. But then the ones I held on to, the players started playing poorly again. No one wanted to buy the cards. But I still held on to them. \n\nI'm now 40 and have baseball cards and live in my parents basement.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6ys1wf | why did the us red states blue states flip in the 60's? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ys1wf/eli5_why_did_the_us_red_states_blue_states_flip/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmpriy4"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"It's complicated. There are many factors and this would be a better question for r/askhistorians but I'll try to summarize it here.\n\nFrom the time of the civil war, Republicans dominated the northern states and anti-war democrats dominated the southern states. This came to be known as the \"solid south\"; a reliable voting bloc for democrats for decades.\n\nAs civil rights become a prominent issue in the 50's and 60's, the southern Democrats started to split with their northern counterparts. There were essential 2 factions of Democrats. The northern liberal Democrats (Think Kennedy) and the southern \"Dixie-crats\" who were conservative and pro-segregation (Think Strom Thurmond). In the early 60's, Republicans developed the so called \"southern strategy\" to court white southern voters who were conservative and against racial integration. This led to a large realignment of white voters in the south who switched from Democrats to Republicans. Likewise, northern moderate republicans gradually began to shift to the Democratic party."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5tjczy | how are large projects, like the development of an aircraft carrier, a car or a smartphone approached? | I've always wondered how large projects go from idea to reality. Mainly interested in very complex systems like satellites or planes. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tjczy/eli5how_are_large_projects_like_the_development/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddmxql1",
"ddmyj7d"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a good question. \n\nBasically they are broken down into smaller, interconnected projects that have critical paths that cross. There are project managers for the smaller projects and overall project managers that make sure they are coordinated. \n\nIt takes a lot of alignment and communication. ",
"Lots and lots of analysis and optimization. The first step is identifying a need and setting a goal. Corporations and other for-profit entities need money and the goal is usually to acquire as much as possible while investing as little as possible. Defense and other public projects typically have different goals, such as \"win this war\" or \"eradicate this disease,\" or \"put a flag on that rock.\"\n\nFirst, is it possible to achieve this goal, given the available resources? How critical is this need? Is there a better way to utilize these resources?\n\nIf it seems feasible and worth doing, then it's time to propose and analyze specific solutions. Every situation is different and a certain amount of trial and error is to be expected, and must be taken into account. What level of risk is acceptable? \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6nomov | what are the benefits of an american city being it's own county? i.e. san francisco | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nomov/eli5_what_are_the_benefits_of_an_american_city/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkb1cst"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When this occurs it has happened for two possible reasons. \n\n1) It physically grew to take all or most of the space of the county that it is in. There is no specific benefit or detriment to this, it is just a function of physical space. \n\n2) It is a city that is on a county border and either one of the counties took control over it, or it was awarded its own county status to keep there from being conflicts with county governments over what they require of the city. \n\nYou also commonly have the county sharing a name with the city that was the largest when the county got its name. This city also commonly happens to be the county seat (place of governance). But this is not the same thing as a city being its own county, they just share names. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8ovwil | why are all of the rappers, professional athletes, etc. talking about fortnite? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ovwil/eli5_why_are_all_of_the_rappers_professional/ | {
"a_id": [
"e06i8y5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You answered your own question.\n\n > It’s popular/heavily advertised\n\nBattle Royal games are the genre that’s on top, and Fortnite happens to be the one that came out on top, most likely influenced by the fact that it is free. It’s pretty similar to the old Dota vs. LoL split, to be honest, where Dita created the genre and made it popular but the LoL ended up with a much bigger fanbase due to a handful of facts such as being free to play."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
33hews | please explain how volts, amps, watts, etc.. translate into every day appliance use. | I am becoming increasingly interested in building my own Solar Panel system for basic things in my home but I am coming to a quick understanding that I have no concept of what volts, amps or watts are in relation to what I want powered.
For example, what do I need to output to run a light bulb? I know lights are typically 40-60w but does that mean if my solar panel produces 100w that it's going to blow my light bulb?
Finally I think I need to understand the basic components more in depth such as do x amount of Amps = x amount of Volts and so on?
Thanks!
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33hews/eli5_please_explain_how_volts_amps_watts_etc/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqkw5ep",
"cqkwcxc"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The volt is a measure of electric potential. Electrical potential is a typThe three most basic units in electricity are voltage (V), current (I, uppercase \"i\") and resistance (r). Voltage is measured in volts, current is measured in amps and resistance is measured in ohms.\n\n\nA neat analogy to help understand these terms is a system of plumbing pipes. The voltage is equivalent to the water pressure, the current is equivalent to the flow rate, and the resistance is like the pipe size.e of potential energy, and refers to the energy that could be released if electric current is allowed to flow. An analogy is that a suspended object is said to have gravitational potential energy, which is the amount of energy released if the object is allowed to fall.\n\nElectrical power is measured in watts. In an electrical system power (P) is equal to the voltage multiplied by the current.\n\nVolt is the size of the current potential, amps are the strength of the flow.\n\nHope this helps. ",
"Watts are a measure of power, amps are current, voltage is energy\n\nwatts=volts*amps\n\nHouses are all 110v AC (at least here in the US). Argument's sake, a 55w lightbulb at 110v is drawing .5 amps (55w=110v*.5a).\n\n**Power is drawn, not pushed.** Having a device capable of generating more power than needed (a 100w panel and 50w bulb) just means that the panel is only going to give the 50w being drawn by the bulb. If you had two bulbs, it would give the whole 100w. If you had three bulbs, it would not be able to supply the current they are demanding and they'd be stuck partially lit with 33w each. It can't push 100w to a 50w bulb and blow it, like I said, power is *drawn*.\n\nWhen installing solar panels, meet with an expert who can assess your current needs, budget, and space to design a system that will work for you. Usage, storage, space, exposure to sun, and objective all need to be considered.\n\nTo do it yourself, find all the products you want to supply (essentials-lights, fridge, AC, TV/internet). Find their wattage, multiply by average hours of use per day, and add together for a \"daily watt-hour\" figure. Lets say, you need 11,000watt-hours per day (about 458watts per hour, the low side of a home).\n\nTake this, divide by 110V, and you get an \"amp-hour\" figure-this is how much battery storage you'd want, approximately (many people do 50-75% of this as its only supposed to last through a night or storm, not 24 hours). In this case, 100amp-hours, or about 2 group 31 AGM batteries.\n\nTake your daily watt-hour figure from before, divide by how many hours per day you get sunlight exposure on the panels, and you have a figure of how many watts you need in panels. 11,000watt-hours, 10 hours of exposure per day, you'd want 1,100 watts of solar panels in order to produce enough current to supply your devices and store enough charge to last through the night.\n\nSorry it got so long, this is one heck of a complex subject."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
20xoge | what this new discovery is that helps prove the big bang theory. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20xoge/eli5_what_this_new_discovery_is_that_helps_prove/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg7rims"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Big Bang Theory states that the universe was once in an incredibly dense and energetic state. This early universe then expanded into the the universe of today. However, certain phenomena in the universe, like the fact that it appears fairly homogenous in energy density over large scales could only be explicable if the initial expansion was incredibly fast, but then slowed down. We call this \"inflation theory\", the idea that the dense universe experienced an incredibly rapid period of expansion, slowed down, and eventually developed into today's universe.\n\nThere had been no real direct evidence for this rapid period of expansion, but it was the only theory that seemed to fit the observations and most physicists just assumed it to be true. However, we now have direct evidence of this inflation, confirming what most physicists had thought all along.\n\nThe evidence is found in the CMB, or the cosmic microwave background, which is leftover thermal radiation from the big bang. What we notice in the CMB is that some of the light is polarized in certain patterns. And these patterns are uniquely produced by light which has gone through gravitational waves. However, the only way to create waves of such size that would polarize this light is if small gravitional waves existed during the dense universe before inflation, but were expanded along with the universe during inflation.\n\nThis is evidence of not only gravitational waves, but of the fact that the universe very quickly expanded from a smaller state."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3ewm3b | vulture funds | Dear Reddit,
I do not really understand how vulture funds work.
After reading some articles in the news and wikipedia (for example the famous Elliott Management Corp. and its [Congo Deal](_URL_0_), I still don't really understand what the step by step procedure is of Vulture Funds.
More specifically, if at the end the fund accuses the debted country - who's paying then? And why do the money lenders not accuse the debted country themselves?
Thanks a lot!
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ewm3b/eli5_vulture_funds/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctj1xrf"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"So banks generally don't like to hold bad debt on their books (it tends to bother their regulators and their investors). As a result, when all the banks have a lot of bad debt it gets very inexpensive (as in a $100 million loan might sell for $5 million to $20 million depending on the credit of the borrower). Vulture funds usually have lots of researchers, lawyers, and experienced negotiators and some very good ideas of assets they can extract from the failing or failed firm which will ensure they get something from their purchase. \n\nGenerally the steps are:\n\n1. Bank with too much bad debt contacts vulture funds to make an offer on a pool of bad debt (if it's in really bad shape it may allow them to purchase individual notes). \n2. Vulture fund reviews debt, looks through public records for assets, has attorneys review bankruptcy law in the relevant jurisdiction, and makes an offer. \n3. If their offer accepted becomes the owner of the debt. \n4. Vulture fund then either negotiates with he equity holders of the company, starts proceedings to seize assets (usually resulting in a bankruptcy filing) or takes other actions to get value for their debt or collect payments. \n5. Once they've come to an agreement, seized assets with commensurate value to the debt, or the courts have awarded them ownership of the firm or various assets (in a liquidation) they sell that stuff and pay out the profits to their investors and management. \n\nIn the case of Congo, they set their researchers up to find assets stolen by various governmental leaders, and most likely planned to sue those leaders to seize money or assets purchased with money stolen from the country (the Wiki entry isn't very clear but it appears Congo's leaders were selling oil to foreign companies and keeping the proceeds so they successfully attempted to claim ownership of those sales to satisfy the debt they owned). Banks don't usually prefer to carry bad debts (that have no value or produce a return) and don't always have the in house expertise to collect a bad debt. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliott_Management_Corporation"
] | [
[]
] |
|
31bajj | why does my mouth get watery after i accidentally bite my tongue? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31bajj/eli5_why_does_my_mouth_get_watery_after_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq02wy4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Saliva can stop blood flow and also helps get rid of bacteria. Too an extent you mouth generates saliva to both stop bleeding and prevent infection."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4olfno | why there's separate measurement in pools for alkalinity and ph | Isn't PH just a scale of how alkaline or acidic the water is? How come my pool test strip is saying ph is perfect now but alkalinity is way too low? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4olfno/eli5_why_theres_separate_measurement_in_pools_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4dklgq",
"d4dodey"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"There are minerals in the water that act as buffering agents to resist changes in pH levels. The measure of these minerals is the Total Alkalinity.",
"Acidity (pH) and alkalinity (pOH) are opposites, what I believe pool people are referring to when mentioning alkalinity is buffering capacity. A buffer controls for fluctuations in pH."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
q66ab | why is it bad to drink alcohol with a straw? | My father used to tell me that, so I was wondering... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q66ab/eli5_why_is_it_bad_to_drink_alcohol_with_a_straw/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3v19q7",
"c3v1i03",
"c3v2v3q",
"c3v33z1",
"c3v3oai",
"c3v3whn"
],
"score": [
119,
9,
9,
15,
2,
12
],
"text": [
"Because you look stupid.",
"Straws are for girl drinks, you don't want to become a [Girl Drink Drunk](_URL_0_), now do you?",
"That's just some macho bullshit regurgitated by people who take Mad Men way too seriously. In the immortal words of Humpty Hump: \"Doowutchyalike!\"",
"Social stigma. Other than that, no reason.",
"The British show Brainiac (kinda like Mythbusters, but funnier, and starring [this lovable rascal](_URL_0_)) tested this. Not sure which episode, so far I think it's either:\n\nS2E9, S2E13, or S3E3.",
"**protip**: I always teach new bartenders to put 2 bar straws in each drink because it encourages faster consumption. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_H_sVNgvf4"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://richardhammond.bravehost.com/myPictures/in%20car%20ova%20sholder.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
3dpium | what do economically strong nations gain from staying within the eu? | Wouldn't being tied to a bunch of crappy economies just bring them down? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dpium/eli5_what_do_economically_strong_nations_gain/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct7gckl"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Think of it this way: If the U.S. economy is strong, and U.S. goods and services are in high demand, then the value of the dollar will rise because of the demand. When the dollar rises, U.S. goods get more expensive for other countries, and so other counties' goods become more of a bargain. This continues until an equilibrium is reached, but a floating currency allows for this effect to occur. \n\nNow contrast this with Germany. The German economy is solid, and German goods and services are in high demand. But because the deutschmark no longer exists, there is no German currency that will get more expensive. Instead, because it shares a currency with countries with lousy economies like Greece and Spain, who have goods and services that are *not* in demand, the currency does not increase in value, and as such German goods and services *do not* get more expensive for the rest of the world (which would have happened if they had retained the deutschmark). \n \nThe weak economies in the Eurozone are actually keeping the price of the Euro low, and artificially depressing the cost of German goods and services, thus making them more desirable for the rest of the world. If Germany had its own currency, BMWs would be more expensive. But because it shares the Euro, they are cheaper than they would otherwise be, thus ensuring a steadt stream of international buyers to keep the German factories running.\n \ntl/dr: Bad economies in other parts of Europe keep the value of the Euro down, which makes German goods more attractive to the rest of the world, which means more jobs in Germany. \n \nEdit: Sorry, thought you were asking about Euro. But the common currency is by far the largest effect of being in the EU (save for those counties that retain their own currency, and which are much less committed to the European idea). But as for the other real effects of leaving: In truth, not much. Sure, Germany would piss a bunch of other countries off, but nothing else would really change in any way remotely close to the effects of leaving he Euro."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
aaar6l | how is google photos able to give you unlimited storage completely free? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aaar6l/eli5_how_is_google_photos_able_to_give_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecqbi03",
"ecqc72d",
"ecqckx1",
"ecqcspz",
"ecqfabi",
"ecqfkqa",
"ecqip22",
"ecqkx2d",
"ecql02y",
"ecql1vr",
"ecqlbgk",
"ecqlff5",
"ecqlkx4",
"ecqlpsc",
"ecqluvp"
],
"score": [
456,
210,
78,
27,
1658,
3,
53,
3,
2,
4,
14,
3,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you give them your usage metrics and email address completely free. Big data is worth far more to a company like Google than 5 bucks a month is.",
"It's because your data and you yourself are the product.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nGoogle uses your photos to train their KI and what not of other products are in their X-Labs.\n\nThey are building the largest photo database ever and can use it for whatever they like.",
"Because they can combine the images with data taken at time of capture to build up their visual recognition machine learning capabilities, which will be the future of advertising (think of the power of providing contextual ads based on what you see). It also draws your deeper into their ecosystem.\n\nThe thing about Google is...\n\nEverything Google does is to empower its primary business, which is advertising. Android, the Pixelbook line, the photo apps are all cost-centers (meaning they are business units not concerned with turning profit) and their main focus is just creating a more robust ecosystem to draw people to gather their data (to 1) further empower ad display algorithms and 2) to ensure better targeted ads) and show them ads that they will click on. ",
"Google uses a lot a powerful technique called Machine Learning. It usually improves with more data. So, Google can use all uploaded photos in Machine Learning algorithms to solve problems like object recognition in images, face identification, autonomous cars, etc. \n\nSome people say that data is the new oil, and it is specially true in a Machine Learning world. So, Google costs to store photos is actually a huge investment. ",
"Many reasons :\n\n1. You're not actually going to use that much space. Google can advertise \"Unlimited space\", most people will only use a fraction of it.\n2. If your read carefully the Terms of Service, it's not really \"Unlimited\". There are conditions. But it will *feel* unlimited, cause the limit is way beyond what the average user does need.\n3. You're the product. You get free storage, they get free data about you, that they'll turn into personalized advertising.\n\nIt wouldn't be free and unlimited if Google had no way to make big bucks out of it.",
"As an incentive to sign up for a paid package for Google Drive. giving you free storage for pictures allows you to see the convenience of using Google to back up all your stuff. Most people won't even use that much space, so although it's unlimited, most people won't use that much.",
"The other answers are true, but there's more to it. Unless you select a paid plan, they compress your photos by deleting a whole bunch of detail in your photos that most people wouldn't notice. This means that each photo doesn't take up as much space as it usually does.\n\nAs far as I'm aware, if you but the phone that Google makes (Pixel), you'll also get free unlimited uncompressed storage.",
"If Google gains so much value out of our data, why can't we monetize our data and sell it to them?\n\nEspecially since jobs are hard to come by these days, you would think someone would come up with a solution so the average user could get an income stream instead of a giant corporation. This could be a good way to monetize UBI",
"Regards our photos, i figure its free because its a great way for google's AI to learn about identifying things.",
"As others have said;\n\n1. It's not unlimited, most people use relatively little so they can take the hit on the few big users\n2. It's cheap for Google as they already have vast amounts of computing power & storage sitting around, photo hosting may well be happening on equipment which would otherwise be end-of-life and is therefore \"free\"\n3. Because YOU are the product, they are going to utterly fucking rape all your data for every last detail to sell to advertisers; where you've been, who you know, other people who were there, what phone(s) / camera(s) you used, when you changed them, GPS coordinates, comments and tags to feed their machine learning stuff (ML needs a LOT of \"good\" random data to train on), who you share the photos with, who actually bothers to look at them...\n\nThe stuff they can mine out of your photos etc. is beyond creepy these days.",
"They will use your photos to create a perfect clone of you through memories and will then sell the organs back to you when you experience liver failure in the year 2067. Its right there in the TOS. ",
"Ever wonder how Google's AI has become so good at recognizing objects, scenes, products and the like from photographs? If so, you may have found the answer to your question.",
"Google has enormous data centers. Remember, when it comes to Google, anything you get for free and you’re the product.\n\nFrom Google’s point of view, they’re not giving away storage capacity on their servers, they are effectively getting data sets for their image recognition AI. \n\nFrom the users point of view, they get unlimited storage of their photos (data sets). ",
"Because the marginal cost of storage is pretty low. Marginal cost is the cost to produce more of something you are already producing. \n\nLet's say you want to start selling storage. Even if you just wanted to sell one terabyte you would need to rent a building, set up the webservice, build a server, employ support staff, etc. That would cost a ton of money. But if you already have all that built, adding one more hard drive or server is pretty cheap. \n\nAs you get bigger and bigger that cost gets lower and lower. Both relative to the money you are making, but also because it is cheaper to buy lots of things than just one or two things. Companies that sell things give discounts when you do that. \n\nIf you are Google you already have an incredible amount of storage. Adding a little more to host some photos is not going to cost you all the much. In exchange they get more users of their services and tie more people into their ecosystem. ",
"Since nobody else mentioned it ...\n\nThey also can easily push their photo printing services. Since your pictures are already on their servers, it's so much easier as a consumer to get prints/photobooks etc.\n\nThis is also made easier when they use AI to generate \"albums\" for you - the other day they sent me a notification for a \"puppy album\" or something, and sure enough, they had grouped up a ton of pictures I've taken of my dog from puppy to today. I could have ordered a nice little photo album with just a couple clicks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ud7zf | why is deflategate so controversial? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ud7zf/eli5_why_is_deflategate_so_controversial/ | {
"a_id": [
"co7bptq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is not controversial. I have been watching ESPN for a while and came to one conclusion: ESPN regurgitates the fuck out of worthless news. Sports journalism is becoming a joke and just like regular (news) journalism. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2hw8b3 | why can't my car key open other cars of the same make/model? what's different about my key. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hw8b3/eli5_why_cant_my_car_key_open_other_cars_of_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckwjyb7",
"ckwjyvt",
"ckwlmoq"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the cuts of every key/lock combination are different. For instance, compare the way your key looks to another of the same car. They will be different. Also, in the case that another key is made, newer cars have a microchip in the base of each key with a \"code\". If you try to start a car without a key with the same code, it will not start. ",
"The blade of your key, the part with the notches in it, is shaped differently from others. It does not match the tumblers in other vehicles which must be engaged to open the lock.",
"My uncles both have 3/4 ton Chevy trucks and they can use each others keys to unlock the doors but it doesn't start the truck"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
fsxipd | how do leds that are individually controllable on a strip know which number they are? | Some of you may know these led strips where each led is individually controllable. I'm using these right now for my work and I think they are really interesting. I can cut the strip after every led, so how do the led controller chips know at which position they are? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fsxipd/eli5_how_do_leds_that_are_individually/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm3v9ms"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"the leds are 'daisychained' which means they take data in and pass it on to the next in the line. You can string, say, 10 of them together. The burden of 'knowing' how many LEDs there are is fulfilled by the microcontroller, it knows it needs to put out 10 LEDs worth of data. if there's any more or less, you get weird effects. It also means that say if you have 100 LEDs, and you only need to change 1, you need to send all 100 LEDs worth of data again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
q6ucf | why does scotland want independence? what effect would independence have on the rest of great britain and the world? | I'm an American and I have no idea. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q6ucf/eli5_why_does_scotland_want_independence_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3v8ecz",
"c3v8fd2",
"c3v9jv6",
"c3v9jzk",
"c3v9ndo",
"c3v9zcv",
"c3va3mn",
"c3vafj9",
"c3vaqk3",
"c3vb1c6",
"c3vd73e",
"c3vhiqc"
],
"score": [
182,
12,
8,
6,
3,
6,
7,
2,
3,
32,
28,
2
],
"text": [
"First of all, it is not \"Scotland\" that wants independence. It is a part of their government, dominated by the Scottish Nationalist Party that wants it.\n\nAs for the reason why, it is a mix of sentiment and economy. At present, the land of Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom (made up of Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England). For this reason, many of Scotland's policies are not decided by a Scottish parliament, but rather by the superseding combined government, which resides in London.\n\nSo for instance, when the United Kingdom decided to go to war against Iraq in 2003, the Scottish people were obliged to go along. And when the United Kingdom enters an agreement within the Nato, the Scottish people have no say in it.\n\nSome Scottish people (united in the Scottish Nationalist Party) are not happy with this state of affairs.\n\nFurthermore, it turns out that Scotland is rather rich in natural resources, such as oil from the North Sea and single malt whisky. As matters stand, the proceedings of exploiting this richness are going for a very large part to persons of not Scottish origin. Again, this is reason for the Scottish National Party to cry foul.\n\nAs for the effects of an independent Scotland:I personally think it would become more or less like the Republic of Ireland, minus the Euro. Which would not be bad. The Scottish would take control of their natural resources, leaving England with a lot less money to spend. This in turn would have its negative effect on the role that England (through it's United Kingdom) is able to play in todays world.",
"For a start it would mean that the government of Scotland would be the one which was voted for by the Scottish people. The Conservatives won 1 seat out of the 59 Scottish seats in the last election and the Lib Dems 11 seats, so the Scottish people are having policies thrust upon them from Westminster by a coalition which even combined won less than 37% of Scots votes. The Labour party alone won more votes than both coalition parties combined.\n\nThose in favour of independence want a government which truly represents the wishes of the people of Scotland.\n\nIt won't really have much of an effect on the rest of the world, but could lead to renewed talk of independence for Northern Ireland.",
"If it does happen, I think Scotland will become close with the Nordic countries, which would be really good for us.",
"[Look at this chart of the last UK general election](_URL_0_). If you don't know where Scotland stops and England starts, you can pretty much tell by the colours. We have one MP from the conservative party, and yet the conservatives are in power. That is a serious democratic deficit.\n",
"Well, why did America want independence?",
"300 years ago Scotland used to be an independent country, than it joined with another country to form the United Kingdom. Despite this union, Scotland still has it's own laws and in some ways still quite a distinct culture. Some people now think that Scotland would be economically better off if it became independent again and could make it's own economic decisions. Decisions based solely on the needs of Scotland and not the needs of the rest of the UK, in particular the capital - London. Other people have a thing called 'national pride' and would like Scotland to be independent even if it wouldn't make the country richer (or even if it made it poorer). Yet more people, in Scotland and the rest of the UK, think that the people who want independence are silly and that Scotland should remain part of the UK.",
"More importantly, what would happen to the Union Jack?!",
"While vaguely on this topic, why don't Scottish people have to pay University fees, while english people do? Don't we have the same government?",
"One interesting aspect of this is that many from the unionist tradition in Northern Ireland for the most part associate themselves strongly with Scottish Presbyterians. If Scotland declared independence it would be something of a cultural shock for them and could lead to them questioning their place in the United Kingdom too.",
"I'm Scottish and I don't trust the stupid fucks that 'run' the country not to ruin it any more than the stupid fucks that 'run' the UK as a whole. Unless they can prove, using real, empirical data, that independence is without a doubt *a good move* (tm) then I will vote against it because of the real and nagging suspicion that the SNP have absolutely no clue as to what they are doing.",
"Alright lets say your school system has a vote to either extend recess time or lunch time. The vote is made by the all the grades 1-12 and each grade has an equal number of students. 1st through 8th all vote for recess time and 9th through 12th all vote for lunch. Recess is extended and lunch is not. \n\nThe 9-12 grades will never win any vote unless it is what 1-8 wants and each group generally votes together. So they want to split off from the school and have separate votes for their grades so decisions more closely represent their differing views 1-8 will have recess and 9-12 will have lunch. \n\nThe downside is that the 1-8 and 9-12 grades share resources like buses and if they split up this can no longer be done. No one is sure how badly this split will effect either group. ",
"diMario said, \"Furthermore, it turns out that Scotland is rather rich in natural resources, such as oil from the North Sea and single malt whisky\"\n\nI love the thought of single malt being a natural resource!!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010UKElectionMap.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4op722 | if old nintendo cartridges had virtually no load times, why do games on pc hard drive do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4op722/eli5if_old_nintendo_cartridges_had_virtually_no/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4eey9y",
"d4ef7gv",
"d4efidr"
],
"score": [
53,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Catridges were closer to RAM than they are to hard drives. \n\nHard drives spend time loading games into RAM to be quickly accessible by the CPU. \n\nCartridges were like sticking a RAM stick in that already had all the data loaded on it ready to go. ",
"The cartridges were indeed just a plastic shell around a ROM chip (plus some battery-powered RAM or flash for saved games if it didn't use a separate memory card), so there was nothing you needed to spin around to find the right place to load things. The downside being that they're way more expensive than a CD and the N64 cartridges maxed out at 1/10th the space of a CD. Games on a solid state drive should have much closer speed to the cartridge loading, but new AAA games are also close to 1000x the size of those cartridge games and we haven't sped up read times that much. ",
"Cartridges were much faster than your typical hard-drive, AND games were much smaller in size, making loading times mostly instant, or even no loading at all (loading is the time needed to copy information to the RAM, but cartridges were so fast you could stream data to the RAM in real-time or nearly so)..\n\nKeep in mind the largest games ever released for the N64 were 64MB, and even with the expansion pak you had a maximum of 8MB of RDRAM (a very fast type of RAM). So each time you wanted to \"load\" something from the cartridge, it would never be more than 8MB. Copying 8MB of data at most, from cartridge (super-fast medium) to RAM, would be nigh-instant.\n\nIn comparison, when playing the latest AAA game on your PC, you're loading hundreds of megabytes, if not gigabytes, of data, from a relatively slow hard-drive to your RAM. Will definitely take longer. You can lower load times by switching to an SSD, but you'll still have hundreds or thousands of megabytes to load at a time, instead of 8 of them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
j9nu2 | narcissism | And the characteristics and how they apply. I've tried looking it up but am having a hard time looking at it subjectively. Can someone give me a good 5-year-old example? Please and thank you. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j9nu2/eli5_narcissism/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2aar63",
"c2acoah",
"c2aar63",
"c2acoah"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Narcissism is that one friend that can't stop directing attention to themselves.\n\n* Like when you one friend talk about hamburgers, he'll jump in and talk about how his hot dogs are the best.\n* When there is a silence, he will fill it talking about himself.\n* Most proper pro nouns used are \"I\" \"me\" and \"my\" etc.\n\nThat's the self absorbed part of it. Now it gets nastier.\n\n* He's the friend that knows you'll do anything for anyone so he'll call you at 3am for something he needs. If you ever tried to do the same, the call is not answered.\n* He can toy with the idea of stealing your girlfriend/wife and not feel guilty about it if he goes through with it.\n* Self-exceptionalism = normal rules do not apply, they are better than \"common\" people.\n* Doing things for no perceived gain(money/social status/material) is worthless. Charitable acts are done loudly to let everyone know.\n* Greedy. One example, my friend had to have dinner with his parents but opened up his place for us to hang out. I did not eat yet and brought some Del Taco nachos. He gets home (straight from dinner) and starts eye-fucking my nachos. Once my back is turned, he is on it. Not going to say anything because we're at his house and he'll play the \"I thought we were friends\" card.\n* Same friend sent me a link to his website and asked him to look at his \"About Me\" section and see what else needed to be on there about him.\n\nThat's just some, check out the wikipedia on it for more info.",
"As the son of a (undiagnosed) Narcissistic mother who has spent years studying this disorder and being on the receiving end of it, I may be able to help. For years and years, I tried to understand why she is the way she is, and when I stumbled upon Narcissism during my search, suddenly it all made sense and the pieces fell into place.\n\nNarcissism is very complicated and multidimensional, and it exists along a spectrum. Most everyone is Narcissistic to some degree, and a bit of it can be healthy, but the Narcissists that I think we're all talking about exist on the far end of the spectrum. There are volumes of \"textbook\" information online detailing characteristics and diagnostic criteria and such, so I'll just write what I know based on my experience.\n\nMany people think of Narcissists as people who act like they're better than everyone else - prettier, smarter, more popular, richer. And this is true, but it masks an ugly reality. *Narcissists don't think of themselves this way.* Despite how they look to the world, **the Narcissist secretly thinks of him/herself as worthless, inferior, unlovable and contemptible.** This is their \"reality\".\n\nThis \"truth\" permeates every aspect of their existence and influences everything they say and do. It's a filter for their thoughts, and a prism that warps their perceptions of themselves and everyone and everything around them. They think that the only thing that keeps their head above water is the image they present to others - one of success, power, confidence, beauty, whatever. They believe that no one could possibly accept them for the genuine, unique person they are if the illusion fell away. \n\nHow did they get this way? Not to sound like an armchair psychologist, but a lot of it stems from not having their own needs met as a child during crucial developmental years and never feeling validated for having their own individual identity. This is especially true in broken homes and where drug use/alcoholism/divorce/abuse/abandonment was commonplace.\n\nEven if the Narc is genuinely beautiful, intelligent, well-loved by everyone and/or financially well-off, it will never be enough to convince them that they're respectable in that regard. They deflect compliments and diminish their own accomplishments by \"rationalizing\" that they were lucky or that they \"fooled\" everyone. They're forever striving towards some imagined goal that will validate them and make them feel at ease with themselves - a Master's candidate who will finally feel smart when they get their Ph.D, a rich and successful businessman who will finally feel competent when his company makes the Fortune 500, etc. They're forever chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, never realizing that the rainbow is an optical illusion that will moves farther away every time they take a step towards it. They're completely oblivious to all the gold coins they already have because they can only focus on that distant pot.\n\nNarcissists are incapable of genuinely loving other people because they don't love themselves. They can't empathize effectively with other people because they're not fully in touch with their own emotions.\n\nNarcs don't register that other people are separate, autonomous individuals with their own lives - they're all background characters in the Narc's own Truman-Show style reality show. Narcs bloom with public attention and wilt when it is nonexistent or withheld. Narcs frequently divide people into \"good\" or \"bad\" categories - \"good\" people are people that make them feel good and give them things they want - attention, money, sex, approval - thereby providing what is called *narcissistic supply*. \"Bad\" people are people who don't make them feel the way they want to feel - everyone from the person ahead of them in line at the ATM to the co-worker who takes attention away from them. If you're a \"good\" person who can give the Narc something they want, they'll be charming, seductive, friendly - whatever it takes. If you're a \"bad\" person, you'll be ignored at best or undermined, back-talked and possibly trampled or sabotaged at worst.\n\nBecause Narcs feel that they're worthless and that nobody will ever fulfill their needs if they ask or help them out because they're worthless and undeserving of help, they use covert, underhanded, manipulative or downright cruel ways to get what they want. They flatter and suck up to curry favor, they play mindgames and use emotional blackmail, or they use outright intimidation and force. \n\nNarcs are a terrific example of a \"fairweather friend.\" As long as you're fitting into their life in a way that serves them and leaves them better off, they'll love keeping you around, but the instant that you ask something of them (especially intimacy, love and commitment), they'll view you as a liability that's trying to punch holes in the bottom of their boat and deal with you accordingly.\n\nI could go on and on, but I hope this helps.",
"Narcissism is that one friend that can't stop directing attention to themselves.\n\n* Like when you one friend talk about hamburgers, he'll jump in and talk about how his hot dogs are the best.\n* When there is a silence, he will fill it talking about himself.\n* Most proper pro nouns used are \"I\" \"me\" and \"my\" etc.\n\nThat's the self absorbed part of it. Now it gets nastier.\n\n* He's the friend that knows you'll do anything for anyone so he'll call you at 3am for something he needs. If you ever tried to do the same, the call is not answered.\n* He can toy with the idea of stealing your girlfriend/wife and not feel guilty about it if he goes through with it.\n* Self-exceptionalism = normal rules do not apply, they are better than \"common\" people.\n* Doing things for no perceived gain(money/social status/material) is worthless. Charitable acts are done loudly to let everyone know.\n* Greedy. One example, my friend had to have dinner with his parents but opened up his place for us to hang out. I did not eat yet and brought some Del Taco nachos. He gets home (straight from dinner) and starts eye-fucking my nachos. Once my back is turned, he is on it. Not going to say anything because we're at his house and he'll play the \"I thought we were friends\" card.\n* Same friend sent me a link to his website and asked him to look at his \"About Me\" section and see what else needed to be on there about him.\n\nThat's just some, check out the wikipedia on it for more info.",
"As the son of a (undiagnosed) Narcissistic mother who has spent years studying this disorder and being on the receiving end of it, I may be able to help. For years and years, I tried to understand why she is the way she is, and when I stumbled upon Narcissism during my search, suddenly it all made sense and the pieces fell into place.\n\nNarcissism is very complicated and multidimensional, and it exists along a spectrum. Most everyone is Narcissistic to some degree, and a bit of it can be healthy, but the Narcissists that I think we're all talking about exist on the far end of the spectrum. There are volumes of \"textbook\" information online detailing characteristics and diagnostic criteria and such, so I'll just write what I know based on my experience.\n\nMany people think of Narcissists as people who act like they're better than everyone else - prettier, smarter, more popular, richer. And this is true, but it masks an ugly reality. *Narcissists don't think of themselves this way.* Despite how they look to the world, **the Narcissist secretly thinks of him/herself as worthless, inferior, unlovable and contemptible.** This is their \"reality\".\n\nThis \"truth\" permeates every aspect of their existence and influences everything they say and do. It's a filter for their thoughts, and a prism that warps their perceptions of themselves and everyone and everything around them. They think that the only thing that keeps their head above water is the image they present to others - one of success, power, confidence, beauty, whatever. They believe that no one could possibly accept them for the genuine, unique person they are if the illusion fell away. \n\nHow did they get this way? Not to sound like an armchair psychologist, but a lot of it stems from not having their own needs met as a child during crucial developmental years and never feeling validated for having their own individual identity. This is especially true in broken homes and where drug use/alcoholism/divorce/abuse/abandonment was commonplace.\n\nEven if the Narc is genuinely beautiful, intelligent, well-loved by everyone and/or financially well-off, it will never be enough to convince them that they're respectable in that regard. They deflect compliments and diminish their own accomplishments by \"rationalizing\" that they were lucky or that they \"fooled\" everyone. They're forever striving towards some imagined goal that will validate them and make them feel at ease with themselves - a Master's candidate who will finally feel smart when they get their Ph.D, a rich and successful businessman who will finally feel competent when his company makes the Fortune 500, etc. They're forever chasing the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, never realizing that the rainbow is an optical illusion that will moves farther away every time they take a step towards it. They're completely oblivious to all the gold coins they already have because they can only focus on that distant pot.\n\nNarcissists are incapable of genuinely loving other people because they don't love themselves. They can't empathize effectively with other people because they're not fully in touch with their own emotions.\n\nNarcs don't register that other people are separate, autonomous individuals with their own lives - they're all background characters in the Narc's own Truman-Show style reality show. Narcs bloom with public attention and wilt when it is nonexistent or withheld. Narcs frequently divide people into \"good\" or \"bad\" categories - \"good\" people are people that make them feel good and give them things they want - attention, money, sex, approval - thereby providing what is called *narcissistic supply*. \"Bad\" people are people who don't make them feel the way they want to feel - everyone from the person ahead of them in line at the ATM to the co-worker who takes attention away from them. If you're a \"good\" person who can give the Narc something they want, they'll be charming, seductive, friendly - whatever it takes. If you're a \"bad\" person, you'll be ignored at best or undermined, back-talked and possibly trampled or sabotaged at worst.\n\nBecause Narcs feel that they're worthless and that nobody will ever fulfill their needs if they ask or help them out because they're worthless and undeserving of help, they use covert, underhanded, manipulative or downright cruel ways to get what they want. They flatter and suck up to curry favor, they play mindgames and use emotional blackmail, or they use outright intimidation and force. \n\nNarcs are a terrific example of a \"fairweather friend.\" As long as you're fitting into their life in a way that serves them and leaves them better off, they'll love keeping you around, but the instant that you ask something of them (especially intimacy, love and commitment), they'll view you as a liability that's trying to punch holes in the bottom of their boat and deal with you accordingly.\n\nI could go on and on, but I hope this helps."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5s84qy | what happens when someone rich dies with nobody to pass it on to? where does the money go? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5s84qy/eli5_what_happens_when_someone_rich_dies_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddd3ztz"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"A person who dies intestate, or without a will or beneficiary, will have their assets distributed \"by law\". There are laws everywhere to govern this sort of thing and vary by location. For example, the laws in England are different than those in the United States. In fact, in the US, the laws are by state. For the most part, the assets are placed into an account, an administrator is hired and assigned to locate the nearest living relative/s. Failing that, the assets will eventually go to the State Treasury. Generally speaking."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dlbxbj | how does the earth's atmosphere break things up? | Meteor (flying rock) gets broken apart by air? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dlbxbj/eli5_how_does_the_earths_atmosphere_break_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"f4p36sf",
"f4p3cni",
"f4p6opg",
"f4p6yns",
"f4p71ol",
"f4p7ijt",
"f4pbn2w"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"When you hit air really really hard, the air hits you really really hard back. Not only this, but the air generates a lot of heat as it is compressed by you hitting it really really hard. This heat will likely transfer to you, cooking you in no time flat. It is worth remembering that meteors are not solid bricks of granite most of the time - they're loosely packed lumps of dust and small rocks.",
"Unlike space, where there is no air. Earth’s atmosphere has air. This air enables the creation of friction between the object and the air itself. This friction generates enough heat to destroy the object.",
"Imagine you are jumping in the pool, it doesnt hurt you, right?\n\nNow imagine you are jumping in a pool from a 5meter/15feet tall spring/diving board and land on your belly.\n\nThats gotta hurt a lot.\n\nDue to your higher speed the impact on the water is much more critical. What you feel is the density difference between gaseous air and liquid water.\n\nFor meteors its the same with earth.\n\nThey are flying extremly fast through the emptiness of space. There is nothing that could slow them down.\n\nAnd then they hit the gaseous atmostphere of earth, which has a much higher density that space. You suddenly hit molekuls and material. And you do that at such a high speed that the atmosphere creates very high friction on the meteors and it will burn.\n\nYou would also burn if you would run with 15-20,000 km/h through the atmosphere.\n\nSo dont do that",
"Because a meteor is traveling at astonishing speed, around 100,000 miles per hour. Hitting even air at that speed will smash anything.",
"These rocks can by travelling at kilometers PER second. Hitting our atmosphere at those speeds causes friction and heat to build up very rapidly causing them to explode. It's like when the shuttle used to reenter earth's atmosphere and the flames would engulf it and it was travelling at a much slower speed.",
"So when a meteor comes into Earth's atmosphere it is broken up by the air. Specifically it's the DENSITY of the air. With the speed of the rock and this density of the air, these combined creates a resistance causing it to break apart. Essentially, air becomes denser the closer you reach sea level. Air is considered a fluid in a bunch of disciplines. In comparison, the atmosphere is like the ocean. The closer you travel to the center of the Earth the density will increase for air and any body of water.\n\nEdit: more explanation.",
"Have you ever stuck you hand outside the window of a car driving down the highway?\n\nYou will have felt that the air going past was pushing at your hand and that the faster you move the harder the air pushes at your hand.\n\nSticking something light and fragile like a cheap paper flag outside the window of a fast moving car, will result in the object being ripped apart by the forces of the air rushing past.\n\nNow imagine sticking something out of your car window when your car moves really really fast. That fast moving air will carry quite some force.\n\nObjects coming down from orbital speeds move extremely fast. The International space station for example moves at speeds that would be something like 22 times the speed of sound if it were moving that fast near the ground.\n\nAt that speed the air will not really be able to move out of the way much at all. It will drag and tear at any tiny imperfections of the objects surface with enormous force. It will also heat things up with friction a lot. This sort of thing can for example rip apart a space shuttle coming down from orbit and turn it into a fireball.\n\nSo running into our planets atmosphere at high speeds can be a very destructive experience even for solid objects that were designed to withstand this kind of thing.\n\nThis brings us to the second part.\n\nMany of the things out there are not very solid. There are snowballs and heaps of loosely stuck together gravel and things that even if you gently teleported them down to the surface and set them down without disturbing them would collapse under their own weight into a heap of material rather than remain stuck together as solid rock.\n\nOf course there are also more solid obejects, but tumbling through the air at high speeds while being heated up red hot is not going to be doing them any favours either."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6ngyhn | why do flags wobble in the wind even when the wind is steady? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ngyhn/eli5_why_do_flags_wobble_in_the_wind_even_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dk9ddh8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Not 100% sure but i think its because even though the wind looks like its traveling in a single direction, the air molecules are still moving in different directions and with different velocities. Therefore when the wind is traveling around the flag, there are areas of different pressure that push and pull the fabric of the flag around. You might be able to get the flag to not wobble in a wind tunnel where all the air molecules are traveling with the same velocity. There is also a fight between gravity pulling the flag down, and the wind trying to straighten it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1s0ncd | how do pro-hormones differ from "illegal" steroids and why do many bodybuilders claim that pro-hormones are more dangerous to the body (especially liver)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s0ncd/eli5_how_do_prohormones_differ_from_illegal/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdsravz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Pro-hormones are basically anabolic steroids that are slightly different on a molecular level from illegal steroids. The slight difference in structure allows them to be sold until they get evaluated by the FDA, at which point they are classified as illegal anabolic steroids and can no longer be sold. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4e7f8d | how did hiv/aids transfer from primates to humans? from what i have heard it is more complex than "guy ate a monkey." | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4e7f8d/eli5_how_did_hivaids_transfer_from_primates_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1xn32v",
"d1xrh9w",
"d1xt6zs",
"d1xwm3b",
"d1y2tkp",
"d1y4tpa",
"d1y8dq5"
],
"score": [
81,
17,
71,
7,
2,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It is probably closer to \"guy ate a monkey which had a strain of Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV) which just happened to be able to infect humans efficiently.\" Otherwise, that's probably about right.",
"The theory I've heard is a hunter was infected while butchering a primate. When a person is butchering an animal they're going to have the animal's blood and bodily fluids all over them. If they have an open wound they could easily catch infections from the animal.\n\nI think a person would be less likely to catch HIV/AIDS or other infections from eating cooked meat, since cooking would kill most infectious microbes or viruses.",
"Excellent Radiolab podcast called Patient Zero that covers the current theory. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nThey say they can trace the original human virus back to a specific area in Africa. Patient Zero was probably a hunter, infected while cleaning a freshly killed chimpanzee.",
"If you're interested, The Chimp and the River: How AIDS Emerged from an African Forest (D. Quamm) does a pretty decent job of explaining the origins of the virus and how it turned into a worldwide epidemic. I found it pretty fascinating and its not a difficult read. ",
"It may have entered the human population in various routes. It may have crossed over to highly isolated tribal people then fizzled out many times over the decades and perhaps centuries.\n\nThere were mass immunization efforts in African mining camps. Everyone would get in line and the same needle would be used from person to person. Some of the bushmen in the line could have had the virus. Add to the mining camps the common use of prostitutes and you end up with a heck of a situation to cultivate and spread a virus. This might be how AIDS got out of the isolated tribal populations and into metropolitan areas in mass. \n\nThere are things that are not talked about today because it is considered anti-homosexual. But these not so pleasant things were discussed in my pathophysiology class in the late 80s. There were/are the sex cultures/cities in the third world. Jet set westerners would frequent sex cities. In these places it was possible to have sex with monkeys that were strapped to boards. There were also a lot of sex in bath houses where there were a great many partners. Add in to this situation needle injected drug use and international travel and you have an excellent situation for the spread of disease. \n\nI recall reading about a strain in the US being tracked down to an airline steward who would frequent bath houses in every city he would fly to. ",
"The RadioLab podcast is wonderful, though allow me to expand upon it a bit. Instead of the SIV miraculously being able to infect humans, a more developed explanation would say that the SIV managed to replicate efficiently enough in the human, and then through subsequent replication and transfers (read about the founder effect), the strain became more fit in humans, to the point of being capable of causing an epidemic. One hypothesized factor in why HIV emerged when it did was that the growth of African cities prevented the disease from dying out by exhausting its host population, as it would have in tribal communities, and allowed the chain of transmission to persist for long enough for it to adapt to a new host. Another possible factor was the high prevalence of other sexually transmitted infections in African cities (genital warts, etc.) which substantially increase the transmission rate of the virus, allowing the chain to continue on.\n",
"I actually took a class on HIV in college. Long story short, \"bushmeat\". Basically, hunters would hunt primates for food and during that, would be exposed to the blood of the primates that they hunted through open wounds. Unlucky situation later, cross species transferring occurs. The process is a bit complicated than that but that's the absolute basis without going into the science behind it. The HIV spreads down the trade route (it's actually well documented), where there is prostitution. Since HIV gives no symptoms until it progresses (which can take 11 years), it continues to spread quickly. Along the way, the virus mutates and an entire new strain emerges. There's different sources of HIV (chimp and monkey) but the origin is all pretty similar. The HIV virus is actually very viable and doesn't survive very well in the outside environment. It's only transferable through sex and blood. And no, there is no documented case where HIV was spread through sex with a monkey. They epidemic in Russia and former Soviet countries can be attributed to needles and IV drug usage but that's not the main explanation for the epidemic in the African continent. The main contribution for that is through sex, lack of education, and lack of access to health care. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.radiolab.org/story/169879-patient-zero/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6kbkit | what modulo is in computing, and how it works. | i am taking a SoloLearn course on python, and I am having trouble understanding modulo's. I am sure I can just keep on in the course and figure it out, but I want to really understand it. Any help helps. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kbkit/eli5_what_modulo_is_in_computing_and_how_it_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"djks0it"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Modulo is an operation that gives you the remainder after division. It is often represented by the % sign.\n\nSo, for example, \n\n10%6=4. If you divide 10 by 6, you get 1 remainder 4. \n\nIt's often used to check for multiples of something. For example\n\nif( x % 10 == 0 ) { do something }\n\nWill happen every time x is a multiple of 10. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8ea5ae | if all the wealth in the world were divided equal between all people which country would best represent the standard of living we would have? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ea5ae/eli5_if_all_the_wealth_in_the_world_were_divided/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxtkhn9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"GWP according to the 2014 CIA Facebook is US$16,100. \n\nIn 2017, Brazil had a GDP of $15,500 per capita. China was $16,600\n\nSorry about the mismatch years... \n\nEdit: Found the 2017 GWP figure which has GDP per capita at $17,300 (estimated). \nCosta Rica has a GDP of $17,200 per capita. \nAzerbaijan @ $17,400\nMontenegro @ $17,400. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ppktj | why are there different political parties in the united states? like why does every candidate have to be either democrat or republican to have a chance at winning? | For example:
John Smith, Republican, Nebraska
Sally Swordfish, Democrat, Rhode Island
Whats wrong with:
John Smith, Nebraska.
Sally Swordfish, Rhode Island.
This way people could actually vote for someone because of the policies and issues they support rather than which gang (party) they are associated with. Please someone explain like I'm five what good these gangs do to improve our candidate choices or our elections. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ppktj/eli5_why_are_there_different_political_parties_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3r7y0v",
"c3r860x",
"c3ra2ba"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not really like people *want* there to be only 2 political parties, that just gives them the best chance of winning. When a third party is introduced they take away votes from either the democrats or the republicans (whichever they have more in common with), making the other one win. This undermines what they're trying to achieve. The logical thing to do is to belong to one of the 2 major parties.",
"[Because the political system makes more than two parties unsustainable](_URL_0_)",
"It has a lot to do with our voting system. (See: [Duverger's Law](_URL_1_), [Spoiler Effect](_URL_0_)).\n\nThe way we choose winners means that whoever gets the most votes wins, even if everybody else hates them. Imagine the following election results.\n\n|Candidate|Vote%|\n|--|--:|\n|Bob|40|\n|Alice|38|\n|Carol|22|\n\nBob will win, even if the Alice/Carol voters hate him so much that they would switch their votes. In this case, Carol and Alice have \"hurt each other\", and if either of them had not been a candidate, Bob would have lost 40 vs. 60.\n\nBecause of this, having more a third, fourth, fifth, etc. party will **backfire**. Similar parties are destroyed or forced to merge, until you get just two that struggle to each get 50.0000001% of the vote."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_effect",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duvergers_law"
]
] |
|
2e40jq | why do babies in prenatal stage suck their thumb in the womb? | heard about this in my child dev. class today and asked the teacher why, but she couldnt explain. googled and not much came up. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e40jq/eli5_why_do_babies_in_prenatal_stage_suck_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjvvhx4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's a matter of reflexes. Babies are born with an array of interesting reflexes that include (but aren't limited to): a startle reflex, step reflex and a sucking reflex. That last one is the one you're thinking of. Babies will show these reflexes in the womb already, since it will trigger subconsciously. The thumb, when you look at the position of a foetus in the womb, is the closest and easiest to suck (but that doesn't mean they will only suck their thumbs!). This reflex is quite obviously used for feeding once the baby is born."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8alsbi | why does hearing your own voice through a recording sound so much different than how you hear/perceive your voice when speaking in general? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8alsbi/eli5_why_does_hearing_your_own_voice_through_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwzm0o5",
"dwzm2xt",
"dwzpkf0",
"dwzposj",
"dwztjza",
"dwzy1fg",
"dwzzy3l",
"dx006t9",
"dx00ayt",
"dx00qtz",
"dx014my",
"dx01c45",
"dx01j3j",
"dx01m9h",
"dx01pkv",
"dx020is",
"dx020s5",
"dx035b0",
"dx038mw",
"dx03b7a",
"dx0491c",
"dx04oac",
"dx06jtd",
"dx07bou",
"dx07kgm",
"dx084ct",
"dx08dix",
"dx08s92",
"dx098r9",
"dx0a6o3",
"dx0e9b9",
"dx0elgt",
"dx0hqgo",
"dx0jd2j",
"dx0n5j0",
"dx0pejt"
],
"score": [
6501,
343,
63,
843,
2395,
672,
3,
11,
82,
7,
23,
51,
77,
5,
22,
7,
4,
87,
11,
3,
13,
2,
2,
2,
31,
2,
2,
2,
2,
13,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When you speak, you hear your own voice as it sounds vibrating through your head (for lack of a better way to say that). \n\nWhen you hear your voice through a recorder, you're hearing your voice without that vibration. \n\nEdit: Had I know so many people would see this, I would have tried explaining a lot better than I did here but thanks either way!",
"When you speak, you are hearing your voice from multiple pathways. One is out your mouth, outside your body, and into your ear, and this is how others will hear you. But competing with that is the path from inside your head, from vocal cords to cochlea. The structure of your head enhances the lower-frequency vibrations, and so what you hear is a mix of the the two sounds (internal and external). On a recording, you only hear the external.\n\nSource: _URL_0_",
"It's been posted many times before, but we all have three voices:\n1) the one we hear in our head\n2) the one we hear when we talk aloud\n3) the one everyone else hears\n\n",
"Related question: Can you hear someone else’s voice the way *they* hear it? If so, how?",
"I've always wondered how great impressionists do it. If you can't hear yourself correctly how can you impersonate someone else correctly? I know my Michael Cane impression sounds perfect in my head, but when I hear it recorded it sounds way more nasally.",
"Slightly different question, why does hearing your own voice through a recording always sound bad? Why isn’t anyone ever pleasantly surprised at how their recorded voice sounds instead of disgusted and horrified???\n\nEdit: it appears some people do in fact like the way their recorded voice sounds! TIL!",
"Your voice is speaking inside your body (like talking in a room by yourself) and as it goes out the open doorway of the room, it is no longer amplified by the walls of the room. That's why your voice sounds different.",
"When speaking in general, there are two ways by which sound reaches your ears.\n\nFirstly, the air in your larynx (voice box) vibrates, reaches out and hits your tympanic membrane(ear drum) and from there converted to electrical signals and perceived as sound. This is Air conduction \n\nSecondly, sound from the voice box travels through the bones in your body (your skull bones, facial bones) and directly reaches an organ in your inner ear called the cochlea. Cochlea is the organ that is responsible for converting sound(or any vibrations) to electricity.\n\nWhen you listen to yourself speak, both these ways are there.\n\nWhen you hear it through the recorder, you only hear the first pathway i.e air conduction only. And it sounds different because the other pathway is 'missing' from the recorder. \n\nWith some people their voices may sound so different from a recorded sample that they may not recognise it as their voice. ",
"Is there a way to simulate how your friends voices sound through them?",
"Semi related question. When you plug your ears Your singing sounds worse. Are you actually worse, or are you just hearing how you actually sound? ",
"Lots of good answers but they don’t explain why when I hear someone else’s recorded voice, it sounds different than how I hear it IRL. ",
"One more thing I want to add from what everyone else is saying. The microphone also affects how different your voice sounds. You voice sounds a lot worse wen recorded through an iPhone, as opposed to a high quality microphone. ",
"That’s gotta be weird for people that sing for a living. You hear yourself on the radio and may HATE your voice. ",
"Related question: Podcaster I listen to says he gets expensive microphone equipment so that he sounds the same way on recordings as he does in his head. Doesn’t this mean the whole skull vibrations thing is more complicated than that?",
"I’m on the radio weekly. It used to freak me out but now that I know how I sound I play the role of the person I hear. It’s like I know it’s me, but I’m playing “me” as others hear me.\n\nTruth be told it’s pretty liberating.",
"What's crazy to imagine is only in the last 150 years or so did humans even realize they sound different than what they hear. I can't imagine we would have known before sound recording was invented by Edison.",
"As others pointed out, what you know as \"your voice\" is how your brain percieves your talking, not how it actually hears it.\n\nIn a sense, you get kind of a *preview* of your speech because the sound echoes directly into your own ears as your brain predicted.\n\nIf you want to actually hear yourself, take two folding papers or magazines, just about any hard flat surface larger than your head will do. Place a pair, one for each ear, against your face covering your ears at a 45° angle.\n\nSpeak casually as you would, that's how we hear ya.",
"One of my favorite parts of speech training!\n\nA long time ago, when your grandpa was a little boy and dinosaurs still roamed the earth there was a toy that children made out of two tin cans and a length of string--you've probably seen this in a cartoon.\n\nThe way this works is that your voice makes the first can vibrate, the vibration is carried along the string which makes the second can vibrate, THAT can makes the air vibrate and you hear the speaker coming out of the can...\n\nThat's basically what's happening when you listen to a recording of anyone, including yourself.\n\nBut \"what if\" instead of two tin cans you used 1 tin can and a pie tin. A pie tin isn't very good at vibrating the air like the tin can was so I'm not sure if you'd be able to hear it very well... UNLESS you held the pie pan tightly against your ear... then you'd hear it really well! Even better than you did with the tin can.\n\nThat's basically what's happening when you listen to yourself speak without a recording.\n\nIn the first example you heard the voice as it vibrates through air, in the second example you heard the voice as it vibrates \"through pie pan\". In the real world that \"pie pan\" is your skull.",
"Am I weird for liking my recorded voice? ",
"In a nutshell, bone conduction. Sympathetic vibrations in your skull cause you to hear your voice differently in your head. ",
"So do the majority of people who hate listening to themselves when they hear a recording of their voice, hate it because they are so used to how they would naturally be hearing themselves speak?\n\nI mean if I’m so used to hearing myself speak on a daily basis, then I am confronted with a recording of myself where my voice is completely different to my perceived norm, I wouldn’t like it either haha",
"When something vibrates, that vibration goes into your ears, and that’s how you hear things. All sound is actually just vibration.\n\nWhen you speak, most of what you hear is your own voice inside your skull. You can only hear a little bit of the sound that escapes your mouth. Other people—and sound recorders—only hear what is coming *out of* your mouth and into their ears.",
"FUN EXPERIMENT:\n\nPut both your hands up in front of your ears against your cheeks to block your voice from traveling directly to your ears. Speak. Sounds different. You’re hearing more of your voice reverberating off the surroundings.",
"When you hear your own voice, as mentioned earlier, the frequencies are often perceived to be notably lower/deeper because you are effectively hearing the vibrations in your head. To see how much of a difference these vibrations can make, try holding a steady note then pressing your ears shut. You will likely hear a drastic change in the sound other than simply the volume. \n\nA microphone doesn’t register these vibrations in most setups, but you’ll find that if you press the microphone to your mouth when recording, the sound of your voice will become more “familiar.” Although this technique harms the quality of the sound in terms of the mic’s performance, many performers will do this because it seems more comfortable to them almost inexplicable.\n\nI’ve been making different sorts of videos for about 10 years now and I can tell you both from experience and advice from others that you get used to your recorded self quite quickly. You can also edit your audio in post production to be more pleasing by altering the bass levels, even though most files don’t hold up well with too much editing. ",
"So I am a Voice and Speech teacher ( from a theatrical background rather than a medical one - think Geoffrey Rush's character in The King's Speech). \n\nThis is what I tell students - imagine you were confronted with your own image (a photo or a mirror) when you are either a teen or an adult for the very first time. At first you would probably reject the reflection - you have no relationship to it, how can it be your own face... the very concept of having a relationship to this reflected thing is foreign. It's only with continued exposure to that image or recording that we can begin to have a relationship with it. \n\nSecondly the mechanics of hearing - when you speak normally you are listening to your own voice from two sources at once - through your ears (your brain automatically adjusts your perception of your voice to be lower in volume than it is so you don't overwhelm your hearing - which is why we can scream and not hurt our ears much) AND through the internal vibrations of the larynx and resonates through the bones of the skull.\nThat is when you take much notice of your voice at all.\n\n\nThirdly! A recording cannot pick up the warmth of the human voice - with all the strides in digital recording it is no substitute for a live human voice that is not amplified or distorted through a Mic or recording device (a recording or amplified voice will always sounds slightly \"tinny\") \n\nAll 3 reasons are why we reject our recorded voices so violently when hearing them the first time. But anyone who is in the entertainment industry will tell you - that goes away and you can start listening to your performances and start to know how to adjust them so they sound better outside your head once you have a working relationship to your voice. (That sounds like an Ad! Heh heh)",
"Audio engineer here. I get this a lot when recording those that are new to the studio. So, here is how I explain it.\n\nWhen others hear you speak or when you sing into a microphone, what is heard is the sound projecting from your mouth (and nose). However, when you hear yourself, you are hearing both what is being projected mixed with the vibrations of your throat and vocal chords affecting your inner ear.\n\nThis affects the percieved sound in a number of ways. Namably, your own pitch is percieved to be lower and fuller because of the throat and mouth's proximity to the inner ear. And secondly your recorded voice will typically sound more \"nasally\" because while resonances from your nasal cavity project clearly into a microphone, they are difficult to hear using your own ears. \n\nA combination of these two differences often dumbfounds new singers and those new to the recording arts.\n\nI hope that answers this age old question...",
"When you hear your own voice it's comprised of two components. The sound vibrations carried in the air which sounds higher. This is also what you sound like to other people. On top of that you hear the lower frequency vibrations carried through your skull. If you block your ears and speak you can hear this component. \n\nThis personal lower voice also sounds more soothing and warm which is why when you hear your own voice recorded you don't like it. ",
"Simple. When you hear your own voice you are hearing the sound transmitted from inside your head as well as outside so the two sounds combine to make the sound you hear when you speak. When you listen to a recording you only hear it as an outside sound.",
"I think alot of people arent accounting for a shitty microphone picking up their voice on top of it coming back out of a shitty speaker from a compressed file.\n\nIts not as bad as you think, but its still different.",
"The important thing to remember is that despite our disgust at hearing our voices, whenever anyone new hears us talk they're not vomiting at the sound of it.",
"When you speak your voice travels along the sides of your face to your ears, this is called a preview.\n\nThe preview is your voice before it is unaffected by the environment you're in, such as the acoustics of the room or area.\n\nIf you stick both your hands on the side of your head like elephant ears (in front of your ears) you can block the preview, and you will be able to hear your voice as others hear you in a given environment.",
"1) You hear your voice mainly by your throat vibrating your skull which in turn vibrates your ear drum directly - this is called bone conduction.\n\n2) There is a small muscle in your middle ear that contracts every time you speak. Your voice inside your head is an extremely loud sound for your ears to handle by themselves and tensing this muscle helps ensure the vibrations get muffled a bit (and so the volume gets lowered) to ensure your ears don't get damaged.",
"Sound frequencies get all warped in the recording phase and you end up sounding more like a ‘duller’ version of yourself. ",
"When we talk we hear the air that comes out along with the vibration of our bones. It’s called Bone Conduction, other people or devices don’t pick this up so we always sound different to how others hear us, typically we sound deeper or lower pitch to ourselves because of the bass-y effect of our bones vibrating.\n\nI think if you use a really good microphone, it can pick this stuff up but your typical one on a mobile or headset won’t. ",
"Because of inner vibrations and the sound travels from your mouth directly to your ear without bouncing elsewhere. \n\nIf you put two notebooks in front of your ears the sound wont travel directly anymore and you'll get a somewhat correct felling of how you sound to others.",
"Your voice is in one hole on your face and your ears holes are close to that hole and those hole run pretty close together in your face/head"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-does-my-voice-sound-different/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
f92xvz | why couldn't you live forever on an artificial heart? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f92xvz/eli5_why_couldnt_you_live_forever_on_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"fip4b77",
"fip4ptf"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Your heart stopping beating isn't the only reason you die. Your body is a complex system of organs that are all dependent upon each other. Your liver and kidney's filter out naturally occurring wastes that would poison you. Lose either of them, and you've got a problem. Likewise any of your organs can fail, and take you down. \n\nRealistically though, the only surefire \"death\" is when your brain quits working. Even if you could replace ALL of the other organs, eventually the brain is going to break down as well.",
"We die due to organ failure. The hearts just one. If you could build a mechanical version of every organ and keep your body from rejecting all of them and killing itself you still have the problem of the brain.\n\nAs it ages we can’t reverse the damage to it significantly. Not to mention our body can only replenish cells so much before they break down, look at old people and their skin, it ends up like tissue paper. This happens to everything, including blood vessels in the brain. Eventually one bursts, and you suffer a lethal stroke."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.