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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5yeoln | why is it that with how advanced we've become technologically, we still cannot have peoples medical records be able to be transferred between all the doctors? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yeoln/eli5_why_is_it_that_with_how_advanced_weve_become/ | {
"a_id": [
"depdf55",
"depdfny"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"- Who would be responsible?\n\n- How do you secure it?\n\n- How do you prevent misuse?\n\nThese are just some of the questions that are hard to answer before you can have an electronic patient file ",
"It's entirely possible, depends on your country's healthcare system. Where I live (Israel) we have exactly that. But in some countries there isn't such a system in place or healthcare companies don't share data to stop people moving to another company. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
27iwgk | why do websites need "mobile versions" of websites? dont they work the same way? | What makes surfing the web on a cell phone or tablet different from a computer? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27iwgk/eli5_why_do_websites_need_mobile_versions_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci18y2q",
"ci197xi",
"ci19cnh"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Some elements of the site will not work for mobile browsers. The screen will also be smaller which makes browsing experience friendlier to the users.",
"There are three types of mobile versions of websites, mobile apps, media queries, and mobile websites. Mobile apps would be ones that you download from Google Play or the App Store. Media queries are the same website but the server sends files that tell the browser how to render the page at specific window sizes. Mobile websites are different websites that use a subdomain, _URL_0_, these are completely different websites that can do anything.\n\nI think there is a lot of movement toward the media queries as it is by far the easiest to set up, but the mobile app is probably the one that gets the most return visitors although that is by far the most difficult as it uses a completely different computer language.",
"The layouts would look horrid on a mobile device without alteration (columns of text wider than your screen making you swipe side to side every line, etc), and certain features would not work (how are you supposed to hover on a menu without a mouse?)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"m.example.com"
],
[]
] |
|
5xmfsh | why is politics not a compulsory course from high school through college? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xmfsh/eli5_why_is_politics_not_a_compulsory_course_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"dej9a5m",
"dej9d9m",
"dejc2lv",
"dejg2pu",
"dejibrw",
"dejn7sf",
"dejqki3"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
59,
7,
10,
6,
5
],
"text": [
"We have civic education in high school in my country. They teach you how the political system works, the separation of affairs between the different powers of State, what elections are for, etc. Let me tell you, it doesn't seem to make much of difference if you look at what people end up voting for...",
"Because telling people \"this is how to rule a country\" makes no sense. No one *knows* what the best way is, so it can't be taught. If you mean a general education on the respective country's political figures, then it's because that's not very long term. An overview of the system itself is already being taught, at least here in the Netherlands.",
"A \"politics\" course sounds a lot like government indoctrination.\n\nIn high school (Colorado, USA) we already have courses that cover the branches of government, how elections work, etc. How much further do you think it should go?",
"In New York State, high schoolers are required to take half a year of U.S. Government and half a year of economics (including a financial literacy component).\n\nIn my class, we were required to write brief weekly reports on government-related news, which was generally political. I believe that one of the teachers required students specifically to read the WSJ in some capacity, but I don't remember the details (though I know that the library stocked it).\n\nOne obstacle to a more explicit politics course in high school is trying to define a neutral, objective stance. There are still a few schoolboards in the U.S. who don't like the idea of evolution being taught as fact and who deliberately rewrite sections of the history curriculum to suit their politics. A government-defined “neutral” stance on modern politics seems to be asking for trouble.",
"The better question is why aren't financial classes mandatory. Too many financial illiterate adults in society. ",
"In a way, we do. We discuss how the three branches work, basic election procedure, how a bill becomes a law, etc. Beyond that, there is nothing more to say unless you want to start teaching one political agenda over another. Ideally, children would develope the critical faculties needed to reason the \"right way\" to run the the government a side benefit of a quality education. Side note: a lot of people forget the most basic parts of government operations anyway...",
"There used to be a class called \"civics\". They don't teach it any more. Maybe because the schools have a mandate to not spend any money on things that aren't absolutely essential (home economics, and shop classes are also being cut), or maybe because a lot of politicians would prefer that the American populace not actually have a good understanding of how government works. If people don't really get why gerrymandering or voter suppression are bad things, then politicians can get away with doing it. If people don't actually know what the constitution says, politicians are more likely to get away with violating it, or with falsely accusing their rivals with violating it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ya995 | why do clouds rotate with the earth? | It seems like the rotation of the Earth shouldn't affect clouds or the atmosphere since they are made up of gases. Why doesn't the earth just slide beneath clouds without dragging them with it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ya995/eli5_why_do_clouds_rotate_with_the_earth/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfip7z5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Gases are affected by gravity too. The rotation of the Earth creates the jet streams, and that's the predominant influence on the travel of the clouds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9th19t | the libertarian party | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9th19t/eli5_the_libertarian_party/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8w9l0h",
"e8w9tok",
"e8wstuv"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Basically a focus on as least amount of government intervention in peoples lives as possible. High amounts of both Social and Economic freedom. I would encourage you to visit /r/Libertarian, the FAQ is great and the Libertarian Parties website also breaks their beliefs down well.",
"\"Fiscally conservative and socially liberal\" \n\nBasically they want lower taxes, smaller government, like republicans but don't think government should get involved in social issues like trying to regulate marriage, weed, abortion rights, etc, like democrats.\n\nSounds alright in theory, until you actually scratch the surface and realise most of them are just fucking nuts, and even the \"smart and reasonable\" ones like Gary Johnson really don't know what the hell they're doing in any level of detail.",
"Rather than the part, let's go over the philosophy and how it differs from the other two. \n\n\nConservatism and Liberalism are RELATIVE positions. Conservatives seek to keep to the norm and Liberals seek to change it. What specifically that means can vary wildly, according to time and place. A Chinese Conservative, for example would be nearly the opposite in many ways form both an American Conservative and form a Chinese Conservative 1000 years ago. \n\n\nLibertarians, on the other hand, is an ABSOLUTE position. It always means what it means. Libertarians believe that that Government should not interefere with the choices of the individual. That will always be the case, no matter what the current norm is. \n\n\nInsert caveat that people are individuals and never totally agree with any given idea or philosophy and go for it to varying degrees and with varying exceptions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
12htv3 | the invisible hand | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12htv3/eli5_the_invisible_hand/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6v59nu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Of the market?\n\nThe idea is that firms will profit maximize and consumers will utility maximize until they reach an equilibrium. This equilibrium is socially optimal in some economic models.\n\nOr more generally...\n\nEveryone tries to make themselves as best off as possible! When everyone tries to do this everyone should find a natural compromise where things can't get any better. Because this is supposed to happen without guidance there is an 'invisible hand' that guides the economy. (the name is a 'joke' reference to the notion of a managed economy)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
krkfr | that rumbling sound you hear when you clench your rear upper neck muscles. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/krkfr/eli5_that_rumbling_sound_you_hear_when_you_clench/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2mmx6w",
"c2mn89j",
"c2mnaxg",
"c2mnh97",
"c2mnxvl",
"c2motzv",
"c2mpes6",
"c2mr46b",
"c2mxe8q",
"c2mmx6w",
"c2mn89j",
"c2mnaxg",
"c2mnh97",
"c2mnxvl",
"c2motzv",
"c2mpes6",
"c2mr46b",
"c2mxe8q"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
4,
33,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
4,
33,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I have wondered this for years. *saved for future reference*\n\nHopefully there will be an answer.",
"Like when you smile really hard? I always thought it was blood being squeezed.",
"Layman here, but it seems to me that those muscles extend up into the back of your head near your ears and what you're hearing is the muscles quivering close to your ear canals.",
"Like you're 5:Not everyone in the world can make this sound. It's when a muscle in your ear is able to be squeezed together making what sounds like rumbling. Like when you flex your arm, look at the muscle and your fist--see it moving, or vibrating? That's whats happening in your ear, but you are able to hear it.\n\nNot like you're 5: You're contracting your Tensor Tympani muscle. Not everyone can do that, so congratulations!\n_URL_0_",
"I can't hear anything, and now I'm sad.",
"Is this what you hear when you yawn (with vigour)?",
"I've noticed this sound is much louder while under the influence of opiates. Can somebody explain that? \n",
"also, the sound you hear when you shut your eyes really hard",
"Thanks. Now I can't stop doing it. At least I know why, but it's really bloody annoying. \n\nIn repayment for that: Can anyone else hear the hum of the room they're in? Not your computer hum, the hum of the room. \n\nAhhhh, there you go.... muahahahahaha.",
"I have wondered this for years. *saved for future reference*\n\nHopefully there will be an answer.",
"Like when you smile really hard? I always thought it was blood being squeezed.",
"Layman here, but it seems to me that those muscles extend up into the back of your head near your ears and what you're hearing is the muscles quivering close to your ear canals.",
"Like you're 5:Not everyone in the world can make this sound. It's when a muscle in your ear is able to be squeezed together making what sounds like rumbling. Like when you flex your arm, look at the muscle and your fist--see it moving, or vibrating? That's whats happening in your ear, but you are able to hear it.\n\nNot like you're 5: You're contracting your Tensor Tympani muscle. Not everyone can do that, so congratulations!\n_URL_0_",
"I can't hear anything, and now I'm sad.",
"Is this what you hear when you yawn (with vigour)?",
"I've noticed this sound is much louder while under the influence of opiates. Can somebody explain that? \n",
"also, the sound you hear when you shut your eyes really hard",
"Thanks. Now I can't stop doing it. At least I know why, but it's really bloody annoying. \n\nIn repayment for that: Can anyone else hear the hum of the room they're in? Not your computer hum, the hum of the room. \n\nAhhhh, there you go.... muahahahahaha."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_tympani_muscle"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_tympani_muscle"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
er7nhx | how to learn to use a wing suit | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/er7nhx/eli5_how_to_learn_to_use_a_wing_suit/ | {
"a_id": [
"ff24gjg",
"ff258zg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Maybe go skydiving in a wing suit with a parachute on, and practice most of the way down?",
"Step 1: Learn to use a parachute *very* well. Like, well over 200 jumps. \nStep 2: Study how to use a wingsuit. \nStep 3: Always wear your parachutes (normal and reserve) when you use a wingsuit. \nStep 4: Jump out of a plane. Don't panic too much. Don't forget your wingsuit. \nStep 5: Land with a parachute. \n\nThere's also a special sloped wind tunnel in Stockholm that you can use if you want to learn to use a wingsuit without all the practice and falling."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
246yco | why are famous people called stars? | How is the word 'star' associated with them? For example, movie stars or sports stars when they can be called movie person,etc.
What about superstars? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/246yco/eli5_why_are_famous_people_called_stars/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch473tq",
"ch47dn3"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's hard to say, but there is a reference to a famous English actor called David Garrick, and it was written in 1779. The writer is talking about less well-known actors -- \"little stars, who hid their diminished rays in his presence\". The writer seems to be saying that Garrick's talent shone out like the sun, making the lesser stars' talent appear invisible, just like stars are outshone by the sun during the daytime.\n\nSo a star is somebody whose talent shines out. Bigger stars are brighter (have more talent).\n\nThe first person to be called a \"superstar\" was Frederick Wellington \"Cyclone\" Taylor, a hockey player for the Vancouver Millionaires from 1912 to 1922. But the word didn't become popular until the hit 1970s musical *Jesus Christ Superstar*.",
"Is it associated with the word \"Starring\" ??"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
19y45h | what is the difference between advil, tylenol, and ibuprofen and how exactly do they alleviate pain in the body? | For example, do these pain killers have a way of targeting pain in the body, or do they affect the body uniformly? Why can't you mix certain pain killers with alcohol while others will not hurt you when mixed with alcohol?
*EDIT* Thank you ToubaboKoomi for sharing this video: _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19y45h/what_is_the_difference_between_advil_tylenol_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8sd6di",
"c8sdha0",
"c8sdr5y",
"c8sezav",
"c8sf3jf",
"c8sfbkw",
"c8sfmq1",
"c8sh8jg",
"c8si2dv",
"c8sk24x"
],
"score": [
466,
29,
7,
21,
6,
53,
11,
3,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Advil *is* ibuprofen. So is Motrin. Tylenol is a little different, it's acetaminophen. Most over the counter painkillers are either acetaminophen or ibuprofen. They work by inhibiting an enzyme called cyclooxygenase and then inhibits the production of prostagladins. \n\nLY5: When you get hurt, this little protein (cyclooxegenase) creates a kind of chemical (prostaglandins) that make that spot swell up (inflammation) and then when that swells up, you feel pain. When you take ibuprofen or acetaminophen, they spread everywhere in your body and make the protein stop producing the hurtful chemical. Then the pain and swelling go away!",
"I know you're supposed to take Tylenol instead of Motrin/ibuprofen when you have a concussion, but I forget why.\n\nSource: I've had about 5 concussions...I think...",
"Related Question: Why do I not seem to feel any great effect from it? Is it more effective to some people then others? Or am I just trying so hard to think it doesn't work?",
"How about explaining the differences between ibuprofen, acetaminophen, aspirin, and naproxen sodium, which are the four most common OTC pain relievers?\n\nFor people who only recognize brand names:\n\n* [Ibuprofen](_URL_3_): Advil, Motrin\n* [Acetaminophen](_URL_1_): Tylenol\n* [Aspirin](_URL_0_): Bayer\n* [Naproxen Sodium](_URL_2_): Aleve",
"A lot of these answers are helpful, but I'm still curious as to HOW drugs like these work; as in, how do they know where you are in pain, and if they don't, why aren't there more side effects on the rest of the body? For instance, I can take an advil for a headache, or I could take it for a sprained muscle. It doesn't make a difference, the pain still goes away. In that sense, is the medicine being distributed throughout my whole body? Does it have to travel through the bloodstream? etc.",
"This [video](_URL_0_) explains it fairly well.",
"This whole thing is pretty confusing if you live in Australia, where Acetaminophen is called something completely different: paracetamol. \n\nAlso, I'd like to point out that with Ibuprofen, many Doctors are seriously concerned with the potential dangers to your stomach, even within recommended dosage.\n\nBy comparison, the danger to your liver presented by Acetaminophen/Paracetamol is only present if you exceed recommended dosage.",
"My question is, what are these drugs made of? How did scientists discover them?",
"There is a difference if you are one of the millions of people who take the anticoagulant ('blood thinner') Coumadin (aka Warfarin). \n\nWarfarin users should avoid aspirin or ibuprofen unless directed by a doctor, as either can affect your INR substantially. In general, they can take reasonable amounts of acetaminophen without affecting INR.\n\nIANAD, but I do take Warfarin (I have two replacement mechanical heart valves).",
"Sounds like a case of \"he-said, nsaid.\"\n\nI'll show myself out. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mcuIc5O-DE"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspirin",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paracetamol_brand_names",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naproxen",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ibuprofen_brand_names"
],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mcuIc5O-DE"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7fyd77 | how come if we travel to space at the speed of light and then come back, then time on earth is drastically different? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fyd77/eli5_how_come_if_we_travel_to_space_at_the_speed/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqffevr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Think of it this way:\n\nIf you throw a ball out of the window of a car, for at least a little while, it will travel the speed of the car + the speed you threw the ball.\n\nNow, we have one rule: light always travels the speed of light (in a given *time* it covers the same distance).\n\nSo, you're in a car going half the speed of light, and you shine a light out the front. How fast does it move away from you? The speed of light. I'm standing still as you do this: how fast do _I_ see the light move? The speed of light.\n\nHow is this possible? Speed is distance divided by time. _Time_ is what changes. You are going half the speed of the light, so the light should be moving away from you at only half the speed. The light moves away from your 1/2 light speed car more slowly, but time is being counted 1/2 as fast (a second is twice as long as it is to you in the car than to me standing still), so the speed of light works out to the same amount for both of us.\n\nThis is how every thing works everywhere, so the result is that as you travel faster, time slows down so that our one rule stays satisfied."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
cyjg8o | why does the japanese language have four alphabets? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cyjg8o/eli5_why_does_the_japanese_language_have_four/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyscwe5",
"eysl24p"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"There is hirigana which is the phonetic alphabet similar to the English alphabet. Then there's kanji which isn't really an alphabet it's just a bunch of symbols for words, things, or ideas. Then there's katakana which is for spelling English words, but it's the same as hirigana just different symbols so it's kind of redundant. Then there's romanji which is pretty much just the japanese spelled out with English letters so it's not really its own alphabet.\n\nIn summary hirigana and kanji are for native Japanese speaking. Katakana is for English words in Japanese. Romanji is Japanese spelled in English letters. Why do they need all of these? I don't really know, it's my understanding that they could just as easily use only hirigana and a lot of the time kanji is skipped and just spelled with it's hirigana pronunciation.",
"Technically, they are not alphabets, they are kana or writing style / character set\n\nThere are 3 main kana's\n\nHiragana - main writing style\n\nKatakana - mostly used for borrowed words like computer or radio\n\nKanji - old school writing style, not every Japanese know all the characters\n\nThe fourth you mention\n\nRomaji - English transliteration of the kana"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
jdolr | audio compression | Note: I am talking about dynamic range compression, not audio data compression (e.g. mp3 encoding).
I'm a casual musician who records songs in my spare time. I've heard a lot about how audio compression can be applied to make your songs sound "better", but I don't quite get what it is and what it does. There are a number of good articles on the net, but I'd like a simplified explanation.
As a side note, I notice my own recorded songs are somewhat quieter than commercially-produced music, even when I try and get all the levels as close to 0 db that I can without crackling. Obviously, sound engineers use a number of things to get audio as loud as possible, but is the main element I am missing compression? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jdolr/eli5_audio_compression/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2b8uxc",
"c2b97vy",
"c2b8uxc",
"c2b97vy"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Compression is a tool (sometimes a physical piece of hardware, sometimes a software) which is based on volume reduction. You set a [threshold and ratio](_URL_0_) in reference to your signal. \n\nWhat happens is at your set threshold, you will get a volume reduction based on ratio. For example: If you set 4:1 compression ratio, for any 4 dB you put into the compressor over the threshold, you will get 1 dB out. \n\nThe effect of this is it makes the loud things quieter, and due to that, the quieter things louder. If you use light compression on something like a vocal or guitar, you can get some very nice tones out of it. If you compress a whole song, then you are able to have less dynamic range, and hence keep the overall level closer to zero. \n\n\nBut be careful! Compression is both a beautiful and dangerous tool. It is easier to get yourself lost in overusing it, which will make EVERYTHING sound like crap. \n\nWith great equipment comes great responsibility. ",
"Audio compression is a technique that sound engineers use. It changes a sound recording to make the quiet parts louder (and also makes the loud parts quieter, sort of). Music producers like to do this so their song sounds loud the whole way through. One good reason to use audio compression is so people can hear your song better if they're listening to it in the car. When someone is driving really fast, the car gets a lot louder which can sometimes make it hard to hear the music, especially if it has both a lot of quiet parts and a lot of loud parts. Using audio compression on the song will make it easier to hear all the different parts of the song more easily by making them the same loudness.\n\nAnd now, deviating from LI5speak, yes, audio compression is the main element in getting your recorded song to sound as loud / as close to 0dB as possible, but you may also need to do some equalization with the compression. This should be obvious, but if you are trying to get a loud kick drum sound and the crash cymbal is too loud, the crash cymbal is what will determine the peak amplitude when compressing. You'll need to bring the high frequencies from the crash cymbal down and bring the low frequencies from the kick drum up and then run your compression.",
"Compression is a tool (sometimes a physical piece of hardware, sometimes a software) which is based on volume reduction. You set a [threshold and ratio](_URL_0_) in reference to your signal. \n\nWhat happens is at your set threshold, you will get a volume reduction based on ratio. For example: If you set 4:1 compression ratio, for any 4 dB you put into the compressor over the threshold, you will get 1 dB out. \n\nThe effect of this is it makes the loud things quieter, and due to that, the quieter things louder. If you use light compression on something like a vocal or guitar, you can get some very nice tones out of it. If you compress a whole song, then you are able to have less dynamic range, and hence keep the overall level closer to zero. \n\n\nBut be careful! Compression is both a beautiful and dangerous tool. It is easier to get yourself lost in overusing it, which will make EVERYTHING sound like crap. \n\nWith great equipment comes great responsibility. ",
"Audio compression is a technique that sound engineers use. It changes a sound recording to make the quiet parts louder (and also makes the loud parts quieter, sort of). Music producers like to do this so their song sounds loud the whole way through. One good reason to use audio compression is so people can hear your song better if they're listening to it in the car. When someone is driving really fast, the car gets a lot louder which can sometimes make it hard to hear the music, especially if it has both a lot of quiet parts and a lot of loud parts. Using audio compression on the song will make it easier to hear all the different parts of the song more easily by making them the same loudness.\n\nAnd now, deviating from LI5speak, yes, audio compression is the main element in getting your recorded song to sound as loud / as close to 0dB as possible, but you may also need to do some equalization with the compression. This should be obvious, but if you are trying to get a loud kick drum sound and the crash cymbal is too loud, the crash cymbal is what will determine the peak amplitude when compressing. You'll need to bring the high frequencies from the crash cymbal down and bring the low frequencies from the kick drum up and then run your compression."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/processing/images/compressor-graph-01.gif"
],
[],
[
"http://www.mediacollege.com/audio/processing/images/compressor-graph-01.gif"
],
[]
] |
|
1zrxeh | does windex "melt" flat screens? | If you have not been living under a rock, you're probably aware that the age of CRT's has come and gone. Chances are also very high that you own at least one flat screen device. You've also likely been told at some point: ** "Do not use Windex to clean your < insert screen type > ." **
I'm hoping that somebody out there can provide a legitimate, simple, (hopefully citable) explanation as to what Windex can do, or where this myth came from.
Please do not bother responding if you're going to tell me, "don't do it!". You have better things to do with your life- please go do those things instead. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zrxeh/eli5does_windex_melt_flat_screens/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfweukc",
"cfwghaj"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"CRT's had *glass* screens. Many modern flat panels (LCD/LED-LCD) are *plastic*. Cleaners formulated for glass, like Windex, may react with some plastics. This can lead to etching, fogging, and/or reduced strength.\n\nIn addition, some flat panels are made with an outer layer of harder plastic or glass but not all are. The displays made without this protective layer can be scratched fairly easily, so cleaning with paper towels or tissue paper can be an issue as well.\n\nCleaning with a clean, dry, lint-free cloth is usually the recommended method because it should be safe on just about any screen. If you need a solvent and don't want to buy a dedicated cleaner, use a small amount of water (on the cloth).",
"Screens like LCD / CRT have extremely thin non reflective coatings, usually quartz , The ammonia in windex and other glass-cleaners is a solvent to it and turn it milky. Even though the amount of ammonia in windex is very weak it can affect it over time. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2fdueu | internally, why is putin allowed to continue to take such drastic steps without any checks on his power? when is the next opportunity for russia to have another leader? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fdueu/eli5internally_why_is_putin_allowed_to_continue/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck89yr1",
"ck8a0zf"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Putin is one of the old guard, a hardcore former KGB guy, so he's a symbol of all that old \"Great Russian Bear\" mentality, which I think a lot of Russians respect. \n\nFor the older people who support him, they're remembering what it meant to have Russia be a world power, strong and mighty, and conveniently forgetting how bad it was under communism. For the young, they have no idea what life was really like under communism, and see him as a great and powerful leader who can make their country significant again. \n\nPutin was elected in 2012. He has a six-year term, and can conceivably be elected for another six-year term in 2018. ",
"In 1993, Russia's parliament tried to do exactly what you suggested, stripping power from a president that was overstepping the bounds of constitutional power. In response, the Russian president shelled its Parliament and stormed it, killing 187 civilian MPs in the process. \n\nThe referendum made in the aftermath has the following clauses, which remain in effect now: \n\nThe president could choose the prime minister even if the parliament objected and could appoint the military leadership without parliamentary approval. \n\nHe would head and appoint the members of a new, more powerful security council. \n\nIf a vote of no confidence in the government was passed, the president would be enabled to keep it in office for three months and could dissolve the parliament if it repeated the vote. \n\nThe president could veto any bill passed by a simple majority in the lower house, after which a two-thirds majority would be required for the legislation to be passed. The president could not be impeached for contravening the constitution. \n\nWhich basically amounts to, 'Putin doesn't give a shit'. It's pointless to even bother protesting the Russian government because constitutionally, the President has literally all of the power in the government and can't be contravened by anyone. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4wt4fu | how does the ocean maintain a perfect salinity level? my aquarium requires a refractometer and work without relying on changing weather patterns. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wt4fu/eli5_how_does_the_ocean_maintain_a_perfect/ | {
"a_id": [
"d69oya2",
"d69q9x7"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesn't.\n\nThe ocean is not uniformly saline. Some parts are more or less salty than others.",
"It's basically because the ocean is so much bigger than your aquarium.\n\nThe ocean's salinity varies by about [20%](_URL_2_) from place to place, with the lowest salinity being near big rivermouths and the highest in desert seas like the Mediterranean and Red Seas. It doesn't change nearly so much from time to time -- see below for an explanation. Since your average fish isn't likely to swim from the Congo to Greece, each fish is adapted to the consistent salinity they see over the course of its life.\n\nLet's compare your aquarium to the Mediterranean Sea. Your aquarium gets no rainfall, but it does evaporate, and heating and air conditioning makes the air inside our houses very dry. A typical aquarium will lose several mm of water depth per day to evaporation. For a small tank, that's [2%](_URL_0_) of its water per day. On the other hand, the Mediterranean Sea also has a net water loss (evaporation minus rainfall) of [a few mm per day](_URL_1_), but since it's about 3000 times deeper than your fishtank, its salinity will change by 3000 times less. It compensates for this slight water loss by exchanging a little bit of water with the Atlantic through the Strait of Gibraltar."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums/f14/normal-evaporation-rate-162656.html",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Latitude_Longitude_Evaporation_minus_precipitation.jpg",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/WOA09_sea-surf_SAL_AYool.png"
]
] |
||
4pnjy0 | why do we feel blood rushing to our head but don't get that feeling in our feet when we are walking around? | Is it because our bodies are built to have blood flow top down or have our bodies just gotten used to it similar to how we don't feel the Earth spinning. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4pnjy0/eli5_why_do_we_feel_blood_rushing_to_our_head_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4md9z4"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
" > Is it because our bodies are built to have blood flow top down\n\nBingo.\n\nYour body is built to force blood uphill to your brain, and to prevent blood from pooling downhill in your hands/feet. When you reverse your orientation you feel that rush of blood to your head because the vessels above your heart don't have the same capability to control blood flow and prevent pooling that the ones below the heart do."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3gegqu | why is adolf hitler talked more about for his responsibility for the deaths of about 17 million instead of mao zedong, who is responsible for about 3 times as many deaths? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gegqu/eli5_why_is_adolf_hitler_talked_more_about_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctxe13f",
"ctxe46g",
"ctxecdr",
"ctxez4d",
"ctxgqsx",
"ctxpz19",
"ctxrs4g",
"ctxsl76",
"ctxsu4v",
"ctxsxqm",
"ctxtfdk",
"ctxtfdr",
"ctxu3sb",
"ctxu72g",
"ctxun6k",
"ctxwvc7",
"cty2yt6",
"cty37tk",
"cty5llh",
"cty7hq5",
"cty8zpw",
"ctyjesf",
"ctyl4rt"
],
"score": [
123,
32,
20,
12,
962,
9,
2,
15,
2,
2,
2,
10,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you live in the West. Hitler's atrocities are more personal to you and your countrymen. If you lived in Asia you would hear a lot more about Mao and 1930's/1940's Japan.",
"Don't forget Stalin on your list, whose death toll is around 30,000,000 if I remember correctly.\n\nHitler gets the attention because his actions affected a significant part of the world. He was also different in the fact that his actions directly started a genocide. Hitler's war drew in pretty much 5 of the 6 populated continents (South America remaining mostly out of it) and drastically shifted the political scene of the world.\n\nStalin and Mao, on the other hand, were mostly responsible for the death of their own citizenry. Because the politics that lead to those huge number of deaths were primarily internal, the results were swept under the rug until the events were part of history. People typically don't care as much about events that don't directly affect them.",
"The nazis literally made death factories to eliminate entire groups of people from the earth.\n\nThe others just had no problem killing people they didn't like/care about.",
"Pretty sure that this comes down to their motives; Hitler tried to exterminate an entire race, Mao started the Steal Revolution in which millions starved to death. Hitler tried to kill people and succeeded, Mao tried to improve his country [and kind of succeeded; infrastructure and income] while also killing millions. Yes there there were 100s of thousands of people Mao killed for no reason other than he didn't like them but he also didn't TRY to exterminate a whole group of people. ",
"Two things: specificity and deliberateness. When the Final Solution was put into action at the height of WWII, it was with a view to wiping out entire classes of people - Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and the disabled, to name a few. The Nazis undertook this work with a level of planning that was unprecedented in human history and has never been matched since. They made an earnest attempt to kill every single Jew in occupied Europe using all the techniques and technologies of the industrial age. This is why the Holocaust was such an appalling event: firstly because we attach a special significance to genocide compared to other forms of mass murder, and secondly because of what an indictment of the industrial age it was. To expand on this second point a bit, the Holocaust gave us - probably for the first time in history - an act of genocide in which the virtues of a supposedly civilised society were put to a perverted use, as tools of extermination. The Nazi regime coordinated countless soldiers, bureaucrats, engineers, scientists, doctors, politicians, and industrialists, and deliberately concentrated all of their talent and learning to destroy European Jewry.\n\n\nFor sheer numbers, Mao (and Stalin) put Hitler in the shade, but theirs were passive acts of mass murder, and they probably weren't genocides. Mao starved millions in the 1960s, but the starvation wasn't the goal - it was a simple by-product of CCP policies. Likewise, Stalin would probably be guilty of ethnic cleansing in his treatment of numerous ethnicities in the USSR, but these acts were always in service of his paranoia, and never because he made a concerted attempt to bring the state's full industrial might to bear on a particular ethnicity. \n\nWhether or not a certain dictator might have intended to kill so many people seems like a semantic difference, and to the victims it wouldn't really matter. But, we differentiate between murder and manslaughter for a reason, and for the same reason we also put Adolf Hitler in a category of his own. Sheer numbers are not at issue here: what really matters to us when we compare these things is mankind's capacity for evil, and the Nazis' methodical genocide is a far darker reflection on our species than Mao's criminal neglect.\n\nObviously, this is just a perspective, and I'm happy to take criticism from anyone who disagrees.\n\n**Edit:** A lot of people are pointing out that it's a result of cultural bias in the West and/or that Stalin and Mao gget off lightly because their crimes were confined to one country. I'd definitely agree with that, but I'd still maintain that if you were somehow able to revive all three and take them to the Hague for trial, Hitler would still get the most severe sentence. I guess I came at this from a quasi-legal perspective, and I'm grateful to everyone who offered cultural explanations, most of which I hadn't previously considered.",
"We share a lot of cultural roots with the Germans. More than we are comfortable admitting, since the wars. Their actions appalled us a lot for this reason.\n\nIn raw numbers, some of the other actors were worse. In terms of shocking our own conscience, the Germans hit a bit too close to home. Our own anti-semitism, as a majority Protestant nation, was a factor in this. \n\nThe industrial nature by which they did it was pretty shocking, as well. Ike rightly predicted that people would not believe it without proof. Some seem not to believe it *with* proof.\n\nAnother factor was that they did not count on losing. They kept records. Most of the littany of genocidal actions that have plagued our Earth since then have been(are) conducted with a view to secrecy.",
"Post World War ll, movies about the Holocaust/ Nazis exploded in popularity, mainly due to the fact that all famous directors at the time lived in Europe and had close ties with the event. This lead to mainstream knowledge of Hitler and the Nazis' atrocities that soon found its way into every classroom in the western world.\n\nMao's legacy exists in China and it's sphere of influence in the East, but most of these countries praise him as a leader who modernized China and gloss over all the famine he caused. I doubt most adults 40 and over know much if anything about Mao, as he's literally non existent within Western culture.",
"Economy price winner Amartya Sen wrote a book called \"Hunger and public action\" where he campared China after the revolution (-49) with India after the independence (-47), two countries on quite equal terms.\n\nHe talks about the 16-30 million people that died in Chinas great famine and that it could grow so severe because the lack of freedom of press and regional party officials not wanting to lose face saying that everything was under control. Thus central government was unable to contain the crisis. \n\nBut when it comes to India, the same number of people that starved to death in the great famine starves to death in silence every seven years. Amartya Sen states that the chinese model, despite all the faults of dictatorship was superior to the indian when it comes to providing for the fundamental needs of the people. Indian market economy is indifferent to suffering, only cares for profit. So countless millions starve while food is exported. But this is not seen as politics and no one is held responsible. It would sound absurd to say that ghandi killed 50 million people. \n\n\nBut in a planned economy people can be held responsible. So Mao being the chairman of the CCP is held responsible for the great famine. And it is reasonable to say that he has a certain responsibility for it. But it is also reasonable to believe that without the chinese revolution many more people would have died. \n \n",
"If Adolf was successfully assassinated would the Nazi party have just gotten another \"guy\"? Was Hitler really the driving force of the final solution or was he just the front man?",
"Here in New Zealand, we hardly learn about the Pacific \"theatre\" of the war... Wouldn't know what Pearl Harbour was until that movie came out. We also don't learn about the Japanese Empire nor its atrocities, even though our troups went to SE Asia to fight them Japanese... (We learn more about Gallipoli - where most of our troups fought - and died - for honestly a failed cause; Gallipoli was a disaster)\n\nWe only learn about the British side of the war, as well as bits of the German side. Basically how the war affected Britain, and Europe in general, nothing else unfortunately. ",
"All these answers trying to go deep. The truth of the matter is, where u live (US, Canada, UK) hitler was enemy number one, and these countries are very supportive of the jews. Hitler isnt talked about much in the other 90-95% of the countries. ",
"The reason is that Mao Zedong was indirectly responsible for those deaths. A lot went into the great leap forward and it was the goal of the party to propel them into a 'First World Nation' in a very short time. His policies just simply didn't work and there were a mass amount of starvation in the country side due to this. It wasn't just Mao's fault though, but the pressure to 'produce'. A lot of farmers at the time would falsify reports showing that they met the quota, when in fact they didn't. This deception led to the quota being raised and the falsified reports to continue. The peasants in the country-side didn't have enough food to eat and to meet quota so as a result villages ended up starving to death. China is a massive nation with secular villages full of millions of people. There just simply wasn't enough food for everyone. ",
"Here's a very ELI5 answer. \n\nHitler and the Nazi regime desired and planned the deaths of the people they killed. \n\nMao desired power and his plans killed people and he did not care. \n\nFor Hitler death was the PURPOSE, For Mao death was a BYPRODUCT. ",
"1- His evil went along with an international war effort. So he was more of a direct villain to a lot of the world rather than a cruel man ruining some other part of the world. Hitler, along with his genocide, was going for world domination.\n\n2- We beat him, and we would all like to think that we already beat the worst evil the world can produce.\n\n3- Targeting and popular propoganda that made it clear his intent against a group Americans are familiar.",
"The reason is that Hitler lost the war, and the regime that he established was effectively terminated and put to trial. \n\nMao and Stalin, on the other hand, were the founders of modern states that are still in existence. Mao founded the current China, Stalin created the modern Russia (most of the institutions of modern Russia were created under Stalin, and modern Russia considers itself heir to Stalin's state). Both these states have important resources to defend their founders, and find apologies for them (including, saying, as most commentators here, that they \"lacked the intention of murder\", which is untrue). Moreover, other states that want to cooperate with Russia and China, refrain from being overly critical of these figures, at least officially. ",
"Part of it was Hitler was our enemy during WWII and the truth about concentration camps came out during the later part of the war, so the shock and horror of the holocaust was more direct to Americans and Europeans than what happened under Mao. And, that shock has never completely gone away.\n\nOn the other hand, much of the intellectual elite was sympathetic to communism in the 1930s and 40s, and the reports of how badly people were being treated in Soviet Russia and later China were not really taken seriously. I don't think most Americans were aware of how many people were starving to death in China until well after the fact. We were never shocked by it while it was happening; it's not the same thing if you just read about it in a book later.\n\nAlso, there's the fact that Hitler deliberately engineered the death of all these people, while you could argue that Mao didn't really want millions of people to starve (even though he didn't care when his ass-backwards policies clearly weren't working and literally talked about the virtues of doing things ass-backwards).",
"Partly because Mao's legacy is still debated by many academics. The legacy being what he is or what he is not responsible for. \n\nMost of the deaths attributed to his regime were not necessarily state-sanctioned and driven. For example, the campaign for land reform was said to have resulted in the death of one million people. To a Western audience, we imagine brutal secret police rounding up people and hoarding them into pits to be executed, much like the *einsatzgruppen* did throughout occupied USSR territories during the Second World War. In reality, the sweeping and chaotic rural transformation that occurred was more protracted in nature, and far more dependent on grassroots violence over that initiated by state agents. Chinese landlords fought tooth-and-nail to avoid land redistribution. They at first tried less violent methods, of bribing or blackmailing Communist cadre, of commanding wives, daughters or prostitutes to seduce Communists to undermine their credibility, of enforcing tenancy relations by coopting peasant resistance by promising favorable treatment if they choose to resist land reform, and by concealing their holdings by transferring land titles to ignorant poorer relatives or to what would be considered today as 'non-profit' institutions. Likewise, they also became extremely violent, hiring thugs (there was a large stratum of rural bandits and petty criminals that were easily recruited) to physically intimidate and murder land reform cadres and their peasant supporters. The most charismatic and harboring of anti-landlord feelings convened mass meetings with party cadre where they called out landlords directly and publicly on such crimes. Sometimes Party cadre had to even restrain peasant violence, and attempt to discern whether poor peasants were just attacking richer or even middle peasants in an attempt to enlarge their own stock of property. Plus, they had to restrain the peasants by creating a metric by which such extra-judicial proceedings could even be carried out - many Communists feared that land reform could be exploited over petty disputes, or be used against poor widows who had no other choice but to rent out their land because they didn't have time to work on it, and so on. \n\nAnother is the role of the famines under Mao. Many Westerners conflate collectivization under Stalin to that under Mao, in which the former was undoubtedly based on a generous application of mass violence. I think there is a long list of differences, both in the regimes and how they enacted their policies and how their economies varied from one another, that need to be considered. While there are many documented cases of coercion being used by regional and local party cadre, particularly in the south, it was by and large a voluntarist movement that was patriotic in nature. Many Chinese named their children (and I can't find that Chinese pronunciation of it now) \"Overtake Britain\" and \"Overtake America\" in coal and petroleum production, which were at the time unknown resources in China. Many also genuinely believed in the Maoist dream of ending the division of city and town, of decentralizing production and proletarianizing the peasantry. This all did not happen without consequence, as the famine proved and Mao's embarrassment at the Lushan Conference confirmed. The PRC attempted to import one million tonnes of grain from Canada during this time to make up for the obvious bottleneck in food distribution, but a blockade prevented it. Politically and economically isolated by both the Soviet \"revisionists\" and also by Western \"imperialists,\" their style of radical development disrupted food production and distribution that was not at all created by one man alone (as anti-communist historians like Conquest and Pipes try to play it up as) but by a movement altogether. \n",
"Chuck Klosterman wrote a book on villainy. He addresses this question, \"why does Hitler stand out amongst Stalin and Mao?\"\n\nHis answer is basically:\n\nWe Americans know more about Hitler's personal life than about Stalin or Mao. The mustache, the rumors of his testicle, his vegetarianism, Eva Braun, proximity of German culture to our own, etc. Even though a lot of it is rumor, misinformation or propaganda, Hitler is a bigger villain because he is more memorable than the others.\n\nJewish immigration would be a thought I would add. Jewish Americans were aware of his atrocities, helped build The Bomb, lobbied our government leading up to the war.\n\nOthers mention the \"intention\" of the mass murders, the facets of genocide, etc. these are also highly relevant answers.",
"Because Hitler killed other people's people. Can't remember the comic who said it but, if you kill millions of your own people, that's an accomplishment! But, once you start moving into other countries and killing their people, that's when it becomes a problem.\n\nKilling your own people is entertainment, killing another country's people is a travesty.",
"Because those that lived to tell became rich and influential and made it their life's mission to spread the news and remind the world. Many of Mao Zedong's victims were minorities in China that still lack a voice and equal rights today. ",
"This is just a question of general public discourse. For example, in the US, it has been estimated that between 20 and 100 million native Americans were exterminated just for Europeans to settle here. People generally don't talk about this, though, because Native Americans don't have very much control over the media.\n\nSimilar atrocities, like the Armenian genocide (although much smaller, was still around 1 million people and should be noted) and the Holodomor (almost 2 million people) are basically unknown. Not that there is any reason for this -- it is just that there is insufficient impulse for people to talk about these things in comparison to the tight media control that tries to quell such discussion.\n\nHitler lost, and the outrage about the number of deaths he caused has a tremendous voice in the people who control media. Hitler's media apparatus went down with him, so that's the end of it. For example, everyone knows that Hitler killed about 6 million Jews, but the total casualty figures, which is a much larger number (17 million according to you (I have not even checked this figure, as it is unknown to me)), including soldiers is less well known. Why is the knowledge about these atrocities so disproportionate relative to its impact?\n\nIn China they actually do play up the atrocities that the Japanese did to them in the so called Nanking massacre (which was a comparatively small number of people). This seems absurdly disproportionate, but since it fits a particular narrative that the media there wants to portray, this gets some play there.",
"Its because of how it was done.\n\nNo One else built factories for the explicit purpose of killing people.\n\nThey werent an old volkswagen factories modified to kill people.\n\nThey were specifically built from the ground up for the only purpose of killing people. think about it.",
"The Chinese empire (unified by Mao) still exists and many times bigger than Nazi-unified Europe could ever become. That's why you don't criticize Mao, he succeeded where Hitler couldn't. \n\nIf Hitler won WW2 and unified Europe, there wouldn't be dissent about his policies.\n\nIf China was fragmented into a thousand tiny states like Europe, you bet Mao would be bearing a lot more bad press. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2fs8bw | how do business/company owners get paid if they are at the highest level in the business? | If they own the business, do they get a normal paycheck like everyone else? Can they just take money from the company and pay themselves? How does this all work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fs8bw/eli5how_do_businesscompany_owners_get_paid_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckc96hl",
"ckc9dr6"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on how the company is setup. The owner may simply take the entirety of the net earnings as income. Or the owner might have established the business as a separate entity, and granted himself a regular summary. Or, in the case of corporations, the Board (which is generally elected by the stockholders) determines the CEO's compensation.\n\nSo it all depends. But ultimately, they're getting paid, yes.",
"I own a corporation, but also am an employee. I get a pay check just like my employees. Sometimes I act as a share holder and sometimes like an employee. The government requires me to pay myself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7jt6ds | how is disney not a monopoly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7jt6ds/eli5_how_is_disney_not_a_monopoly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr8ycx1",
"dr8yjju"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"To be a monopoly, you have to control all (or nearly all) of the commerce in your given market. Microsoft was thought to be a monopoly in the past because they controlled ~95% of the PC OS market.\n\nDisney is in the entertainment market. Even after the merger, they won't even control 50% of that market, much less the > 75% you really need to have a serious discussion about a company being a monopoly.",
"mo·nop·o·ly\n\nməˈnäpəlē/\n\nnoun\n\n1. the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.\n\n\n\nDisney does not have exclusive control of media or entertainment"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1ueidp | why does pbs get the rights to bbc content where other networks do not? | I've noticed that PBS seems to get amazing series from the BBC (Downton Abbey, Sherlock) where other competing networks do not.
Normally, networks will sell the rights to other countries to the highest bidder, but if that's true why hasn't FOX/NBC/CBS/TNT/AMC/ABC tried to gain the rights to wildly popular shows like Downton Abbey or Sherlock? They certainly have more money for great shows than privately-funded PBS does. Does the BBC and PBS have a contract that makes them the exclusive rights holder for the US Market? Or now that shows like Downton Abbey and Sherlock have become so popular, PBS now has serious competition for BBC shows in the future? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ueidp/why_does_pbs_get_the_rights_to_bbc_content_where/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceh8nny",
"ceh9332"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"British entertainment, while popular, is still considered a niche interest amongst the larger population. Larger networks like FOX/TBS/NBC would prefer to make American adaptions (The Office, Skins, Top Gear) of British shows in order to more appeal to an American audience. \n\nThis has left networks like PBS with a nice little niche to get involved in. They can get newly popular British programming and get the ratings from it while American networks focus on their own adaptations. \n\n",
"Downton Abbey is not a BBC production; it is created by ITV, a commercial television company. So whatever is the reason that PBS gets British shows, it's unlikely to be a specific agreement between them and the BBC."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3ns31i | i'm fat and don't understand carbs | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ns31i/eli5_im_fat_and_dont_understand_carbs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvqrgd2",
"cvqrm7b",
"cvqrn27",
"cvqsmuo",
"cvqudlg",
"cvqzin4",
"cvr0kyp",
"cvr2aqy",
"cvr2ifu",
"cvr3p5d"
],
"score": [
2,
30,
23,
3,
9,
2,
3,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I think you'll get better and more help and support in places like /r/loseit :)\n\nGood luck!",
"You don't really need to worry about carbs at your point. I'm 6'0\" and was 280 at one point. Just watch your calories, and I mean really watch them because bullshitting yourself does nothing but hurt you. Eat 1500-1800 calories a day for a month and you'll lose weight guaranteed.",
"In order to lose weight, you need to eat fewer calories then you burn. Someone of your weight and height probably burns close to 3,000 calories a day, so you have a lot to work with (at least for now).\n\nNote, that **this does not require exercise**. That 3k calories is just keeping your blood flowing and your lungs breathing and your cells otherwise supplied. Cut down to 2000 calories a day, and you'll end up losing about a pound every few days (at least for a little while). \n\nAnd what about carbs? carbs don't matter. I say this as someone who lost close to 80 pounds on a low carb diet. And I'll say it again **Carbs don't matter**. What matters is calories. \n\nThe reason that carb diets \"work\" isn't because some carbs are good and others are bad, it's because high calorie foods that don't really fill you up (like french fries, or breaded anything) tend to be very, very, very carb heavy. A slice of bacon is 70 calories. that means you could have 5 slices of bacon instead of a large French McD's French Fries and still have 200 calories left over. \n\nNow, there's a bit of a caveat in that high carb diets are associated with things like diabetes, and some people argue that cutting carbs makes it less likely that you will end up diabetic or pre-diabetic, both things that will leave you hungrier, less efficient at processing food, and less healthy in ways that are likely to keep a person heavy. And, maybe for some people carbs really are magic, because biology is messy. \n\nBut ultimately it's not about carbs. It's about calories. \n\nWell, calories and mindset. but mostly calories.",
"Don't get mixed up between \"carbs\" and \"calories\".\n\nCalories is food energy, present in fat, sugar, starch, protein, alcohol. \n\nCarb is *carbohydrates* and that means sugar and starch (food like bread, bagels, grains, pasta, etc contains lots of starchy carbohydrate). Some carbohydrates are better for you than others, brown bread with all of the bran and germ and other parts of the wheat is better for you than bleached white bread, and of course a gallon of sugary drink is even worse. Eating the right amount and kinds of carbs is very important for people with diabetes.\n\nYou need calories to live, and you certainly use more calories when you exercise. All weight loss is about using more calories than you are taking in, and whether those calories come from carbs (sugar, bread, etc) or other sources (fat, protein) *doesn't matter*. Weight loss is about the math, not the source. \n\nYou are having trouble burning calories if you can't exercise, so you need to work on the other side of the equation by *eating fewer calories*. For example, a baked potato has fewer calories than french fries, and a bunch of carrots has even fewer calories than a baked potato.\n\nTLDR; eat less calories, hope it works out for you.",
"In my life I've seen weights between 185-295. Few pro tips:\n\n-Every change should be a life change. If you can't see yourself doing it forever, it's probably not a good idea. \n\n-Giving up caffeine was the single greatest change for me. This isn't the same for everybody but when I gave this up my cravings went away. It's worth do some research on. \n\n-Exercise like any other thing you do daily (shower, brush your teeth, sleep, etc.) I do ~40 minutes a day now after breakfast. The only exception is if I'm going hiking, snowboarding etc. \n\n-I should note even when I was at my largest I still was an athlete. I've always love a number of sports. I acknowledge this helped a good bit in my progress and maybe is a bit lucky. However it comes with a great point. Find exercise you enjoy. If it isn't fun, you won't do it for very long. Remember, life changes. \n\n-There will always be another meal. Always. So you can eat what ever you are craving later. I used very hard limits. 4x 500 calorie meals w/ 1 cheat meal a week. Cheat meal was whatever I could eat in a single sitting. (though for some people they may stretch that out to far.\n\n-Don't give up.\n\n-Most important, for anything, have a why. This is really an end all be all life lesson. If you can't find a why, you fail, at anything. Fuck anybody I'm about to offend. Maybe it's about dating a really hot person. Maybe it's about health. Maybe it's about just feeling good in the mirror. You need that why though and it MUST be stronger than the temptation to eat. I can't stress this enough. No \"Why,\" no results. How far does this concept go?\n\nAsk anybody you work with why they do what they do. You'll notice the people with the best answers, are the ones that do 80% of the work. \n\n ",
"The best summary I have every heard was:\n\n\"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.\"\n\nInstead of carbs, let's talk calories. Your body burns about 2200 calories a day. Perhaps a bit more because you have a lot of body to haul around but a bit less because it is tiring and painful to move, so you don't. \n\nIf you consume more than you burn, you will gain weight. If you consume less, you will lose weight. Obviously the answer to losing weight (unfortunately) is eat less and move more. \n\nMost of the posts in this thread will talk about good carbs and bad carbs but really for you, those things don't matter yet. See a doctor, get on a diet, eat less and exercise more.\n\n",
"Hey, I'm 5'10\" and tipped the scales at over 370 a few years back. Today, I'm around 190. As others have said, carbs don't matter. What matters is calories. If you eat 5000 calories a day, you're going to gain weight. It doesn't matter if those carbs are protein, fat or carbs. Where low carb helped me was it made me feel fuller faster. Carbs just caused me to crave more carbs. Eating one slice of pizza is so difficult. I want six slices. Forget about sweets. I've eaten an entire box of cookies before. \n\n\nWhat I've found throughout my weight loss journey is this: everything that involves eating less and exercising more works! As mentioned low carb/keto worked for me, but I've also done something called a Protein Sparing Modified Fast, which worked very well. Then again, I've done the diet/workout protocol called LeanGains and really liked it. I've also followed bodybuilding programs, which included carbs, and had success. The diets that accompany P90X and Insanity also include carbs.\n\n\nIf I could be so bold as to suggest a strategy for you, I'd suggest the following:\n- Weigh yourself\n- Download MyFitnessPal App\n- Buy a kitchen scale and get used to weighing and measuring your food.\n- Visit /r/keto and learn more about the ketogenic/lowcarb diet and why it's actually a high fat, moderate protein, low carb diet. Learn a little about why fat doesn't make you fat.\n- Day 1: weigh yourself. Naked, first thing in the morning. Make a note of your weight.\n- Start a ketogenic/low carb diet, with your only goal being to not exceed 25g of carbs per day. Eat whatever you want and as much as you want for 2-3 weeks, but DO NOT go over 25g of carbs per day. Meticulously track everything you eat with MyFitness Pal. Make sure you read the FAQ at /r/keto and learn how to prevent electrolyte depletion. It's not Gatorade. These 2-3 weeks of no calorie limits will make the transition to keto much easier, imho.\n- At the beginning of week 3 or 4, weigh yourself again. You should have lost a significant amount of weight. Yes, a lot of it was water weight, but you will have lost some actual fat. \n- Go back to /r/keto, use their calorie calculator to figure out how many calories to eat per day and how many of those calories need to come from fat, protein and carbs. With this information and MyFitness pal, you'll be set. This is it - your road to success. Of course, as you continue to lose weight, you'll need to adjust, as your body won't require as many calories.\n- Start lifting weights. Don't go to the gym without a plan. Find a good beginner lifting program and stick to it. It'll probably be three days a week. A search at /r/fitness will help you find a program. Sprinkle in some moderately challenging cardio (nothing crazy) a few times a week and you'll see changes pretty quickly.\n\n\nGood luck!",
"Forget the ELIF thing man, get your sciatica tended to. Sure there are carbs and calories and other things that you should get wise about. Forget them for now. Go to the doctor and repair yourself. \n\nSciatica is a compression of a spinal nerve root in the lower back. The more that gets inflamed, the less you can move your leg. This has nothing to do with carbs and has only tangential connection to your weight. But it's the first thing in the list of fixes. \n\nAs someone who's been in your spot, this is not something you can man-up through. Telling yourself that if you lose 20 pounds will fix it is wrong. It'll cut the pain by a small amount, but the underlying condition will remain, and depending on how you move, that pain savings will evaporate real quick. \n\nOne way this can go is with proper care, medication, and PT. It's recoverable - your spine can restore itself to normal distance between your vertebrae and then you can listen to talk about carbs and weight loss. \n\nAnother way this can go is with spinal damage spiraling into disk rupture, leading to spine surgery.\n\nAt 27 I had the first, five or so years later I had the second. I've got 2 inches on your height, but the weight is pretty much identical. Get to a doctor, asap. ",
"Check out r/keto, it really is a life changer that helps you manage carbs and your blood sugar to lose fat and be healthier overall. O have lost over 80 lbs eating a ketogenic diet.",
"I will agree with most people that you shouldn't worry a lot about carbs more than calories, though I will say even with what you've said I'd recommend a certain level of activity. Try lifting heavy things - if you have leg/back troubles, you can lift heavy things while sitting or lying down. You have a couple options for heavy things lifting:\n1) lift something very heavy a few times\n2) lift something not very heavy a lot of times\n\nYou should do 1 if you can as this will give you more appreciable results for less work, and honestly 2 is not as effective for weight loss for whatever reason, ending up being a bit more like cardio. Just be careful with 1 as you do not want to further damage yourself.\n\nI'm a girl, and when trying to get my weight under control (full disclosure: I have never exceeded 190lbs), I joined something awful's You Look Like Shit forum and found a community of women who got into weight lifting because they wanted to lose weight and stuck around because they wanted to be stronger and tighter. While I may not have been humongous, there were a few amazing girls in that group had started at 300lbs+. You have to take it slow and give your body time to adjust, but you will be doing your body the greatest service in this way. While dead lifts were most popular when I was big on the forum, you can also just do bench presses or lat pulldowns if you are concerned about your back or your legs. Doing exercises that strengthen your core may help with your lower back pain and allow you to take on more work.\n\nDead lifts are probably one of the best ideas for your situation though, as they are essentially picking something off of the ground and then dropping it or setting it back on the ground - no lifting above your waist unless you want to take it there, and no constant reps - you release the weight after every lift. I started out doing about 5 of these 2-3 times a week along with a couple of other lifts to strengthen my upper body, trying to increase my lift weight by 3-5kg every week or two, as a modest start. I saw a good degree of toning and decent weight loss even chugging down peanut butter nutrition shakes, and the benefits to one's bones is apparently quite good as heavy strain seems to encourage greater bone density, which combined with muscles will make it easier to take on more intense activities. YMMV, personally my weight loss and gain tend to be about normal - I lose weight if I try, I gain weight if I don't try, it's not always so easy or so hard for others so it really will depend.\n\nBut you should certainly consider some form of calorie restriction even if lifting heavy things feels beyond your body's current abilities - part of it is eating less than you burn, but you should also make sure what you eat is satisfying, which may be where you're thinking of good carbs vs bad carbs. I've found beans, poultry and fish to be very satisfying for low calorie values, and I did switch to whole grains for a while. I can confirm that avocados, while one of the most calorie dense plant-based foods you can eat, do tend to stave off the feelings of needing to snack for me. At my healthy peak I would have one for breakfast normally with a whole grain or a salad, or split it in half and wouldn't be hungry until lunchtime, eat the other half at lunch with yoghurt or a sandwich and hold fast through till dinner. Intermittent fasting (5:2 mainly, though 16:8 is an option if it fits with your lifestyle) is an excellent way to maintain calorie restriction without having to dig too much into your normal life - its malleability and the freedom it allows in your diet otherwise makes it easier for many to stick with than other methods.\n\nI mentioned making peanut butter nutrition shakes, I had two variants of shake I would make. To have a healthy day while eating little, I'd make the following:\n1 avocado\n1 mango\nlike 30g of baby spinach leaves\nsome honey\nA bit of greek yoghurt for additional protein and calcium\n\nThis would normally make two shakes - I'd sometimes add a teaspoon of milled flaxseed or nuts in because it seemed good at the time but I don't know if it did anything, but that was a tasty, healthy shake for not many calories. The other shake was the weightlifting shake (keeping in mind that I am 5'5\" and was also trying to lose weight more than build muscle so skimped a bit on some things):\n\n-About half a serving size of protein powder indicated on the product\n-One to two tablespoons of peanut butter or almond butter\n-Enough Almond milk to get desired consistency, normally 200-300ml in my experience (you can use regular semi-skimmed milk, I just like the taste of almond milk more, and it had fewer calories per 100ml)\n-1/2-1 full serving of BCAA powder as it was recommended on the forum, but the stuff tastes like royal ass so it did not always make it in\n\nWith the option for a bit of honey and/or yoghurt if necessary, I think I'd still add a teaspoon. I used honey rather than other forms of sugar as I'd seen some success in warding off throat troubles when consuming honey, but can't testify whether it made a huge difference - I did tend to recover faster from colds when eating the stuff straight off a spoon but in shakes, who can say...\n\nStill, this shake would serve as breakfast a bit just before and the rest after a morning lifting session, and would leave me feeling good and taste-fulfilled until lunch. The avocado shake would normally be breakfast on non-lifting days and get me through to lunch as well (since I wake up at 6 for work, mornings tended to be the hardest time to not snack...)\n\nAnyway, whatever you choose to do, good luck! The key is, as others have said, considering things you can maintain consistently without the concept of being a temporary fix. People who do 5:2 intermittent fasting will usually do it the rest of their lives, adjusting as they go along, people who lift weights also will continue to lift weights, people who eat avocados will at least have avocado days."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3v6v7c | why do i sometimes get zapped when touching metals? how can i prevent this from happening? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v6v7c/eli5_why_do_i_sometimes_get_zapped_when_touching/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxkta65"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You are most likely building up a static charge by rubbing dry materials together. \n\nTurn on a humidifier and moisturize your skin.\n\n Pick up your feet when you walk, stop scuffing them, and stop wearing socks on carpet.\n\nPut anti static sheets in your dryer and and stop doing crazy dance moves in wool sweaters and nylon pants.\n\nWear leather soles shoes instead of rubber.\n\nThey also sell anti static spray you can put on carpets and chairs and whatnot too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
k9dhp | how a sonogram works and how they do a 3d image. | Soon to be dad and was wondering how all this stuff works.
Thanks in advance. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k9dhp/eli5_how_a_sonogram_works_and_how_they_do_a_3d/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2ihgym",
"c2ihgym"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"A sonogram is basically a sonar (sound navigation).\n\nWhen you look at a person, you are observing light which has reflected from the them to your eye. A sonogram uses the same principle, it's just that we use sound waves which can travel past our skin and reflect off of our internal organs, or in this case, your child. Don't worry the waves are low energy and are not harmful. \n\nCongratulations on your child, I hope they are healthy and well. :) \n\nEDIT: I should clarify that there is a certain amount of risk taking a sonogram (ultrasound). The potential knowledge gained by the procedure however, far outweighs the risk.",
"A sonogram is basically a sonar (sound navigation).\n\nWhen you look at a person, you are observing light which has reflected from the them to your eye. A sonogram uses the same principle, it's just that we use sound waves which can travel past our skin and reflect off of our internal organs, or in this case, your child. Don't worry the waves are low energy and are not harmful. \n\nCongratulations on your child, I hope they are healthy and well. :) \n\nEDIT: I should clarify that there is a certain amount of risk taking a sonogram (ultrasound). The potential knowledge gained by the procedure however, far outweighs the risk."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
bh8b3f | why do currency exchange rates exist? why is it not just 1:1? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bh8b3f/eli5_why_do_currency_exchange_rates_exist_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"elqq3dm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because the value of things is different depending on the country you’re in. The GDP determines the value of money in a country. GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product, that is the total value of goods produced and services provided in a country during one year. \n\nSo lets assume England has a higher GDP than Iceland. Their dollar has a higher value than Iceland, because Iceland is not producing as much in terms of goods and services within their own boarders. So money needs to fluctuate to adjust for that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3igke8 | what is actually happening at evangelical church things when people speak in "tounges" and have fits and stuff? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3igke8/eli5_what_is_actually_happening_at_evangelical/ | {
"a_id": [
"cug6rj2",
"cug7mfe",
"cugf6xp"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"nothing... its all a act, all these people that \"speak in tongues\" are just mouthing gibberish. they are actually getting themselves worked up emotionally but that is more a bi product of the crowd and the scenario. its the equivalent to a laugh track on a tv show. more people laugh if other people laughing. mix that in with religious guilt and bang, you have some poor bastard waiving his arms making goofy noises.",
"Hysteria would cover it. You see the same kind of thing in certain primitive tribes during their religious happening. \n\nOfc, you'll get the \"well they're wrong, but Jesus fills us\". Still, externally it's the same thing.",
"Depends on who you ask. If you ask them, [Glossolalia](_URL_0_) is channeling the God/Holy Spirit/ghosts and speaking an angelic language.\n\nTo anyone else, it's [self-hypnosis](_URL_2_), religious mania, and/or group therapy [psychodrama](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossolalia",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychodrama",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-hypnosis"
]
] |
||
4j80h8 | why are some youtube videos flagged for removal for minor use of music clips, but many other youtube videos of entire songs are left to be viewed millions of times no problem (and presumably monetized by someone without the rights)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4j80h8/eli5_why_are_some_youtube_videos_flagged_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"d34hyo2",
"d34jp19"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"YouTube doesn't flag them. It's the task of the copyright holder to find and flag any videos that may infringe.",
"YouTube has deals with some song rights owners, allowing videos to have the entire songs in, and any YouTube ad revenue from the video goes to the *song royalties*, and not to the video creator. I have a video on YouTube of my dog and cat playing like this: you can barely hear the song playing in a commercial on the TV in the background, but YouTube detected it and identified the rights owner, and all the ad money goes to some company in Germany. Otherwise YouTube would have not allowed the video on their site."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2g16rz | why are ebooks generally just as expensive as their print counterparts when publishers don't have to account for ink, paper, and binding costs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g16rz/eli5_why_are_ebooks_generally_just_as_expensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckene2e",
"ckenghe",
"ckeoaeg",
"ckeocpy",
"ckeoh5o",
"ckepmcy",
"ckeuo0j",
"ckexn5d",
"ckf7v47"
],
"score": [
7,
47,
7,
6,
7,
10,
10,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Price fixing\n\nSource: WSJ\n_URL_0_",
"The price of products is only indirectly based on how expensive they are to produce. The primary factor is how much can be charged for them.",
"You're paying for the intellectual property, not the physical artifact. Think of it this way, if the book was empty, just blank pages, it would cost a fraction of what the book with printed words actually costs. That difference is the value of the intellectual property. Take away the printing, and you can just make a lot more money. \n",
"You just described the question Amazon has been asking publishers, authors, and the general public. There is currently a war going on between ebook publishers and Amazon. Everybody knows that these books could easily be cheaper but publishers clearly do not want this.",
"Another post alluded to it, but a large part of it is that most of the cost to make a book is not in the per-unit costs; its in the writing, editing, and marketing of the book. Publishers need to pay writers (even writers who write books that don't sell!), they need to pay editors, they need to pay marketers, etc. And its not like distribution *goes away* magically when things are digital; stores like Amazon or Kobo still take a (substantial) cut, and people need to specifically format the e-book version to make sure it works on your Kobo, Nook, or what have you.\n\nOn top of this, there's very little reason for the publishers to undercut their own product by making the digital version of a release significantly cheaper; the publishers would largely be cannibalizing their own sales.",
"Everyone is offering different comments, but I question how many of you actually read ebooks?\n\nMy answer to OP is, ebooks are cheaper. I don't know where you are shopping, but ebooks are almost all cheaper, and discounted earlier in ebook form.\n\nI was going to provide links, but just go to _URL_0_ and look at books. Kindle versions are almost always the cheapest versions.",
"I'm an author for a major publisher. People have already said that the price is the same because it's simply how much they can charge. This is true, but I'd like to point out that they pass this on to the authors. They're not just greedy bastards! Typically an author's contract gives a much greater percentage of royalties for ebook sales than print sales. When you buy an ebook and feel like you're overpaying, please know that the artists that originally wrote those books and their families thank you. ",
"I might be able to shed some light. I actually run a small publishing business. It grew out of a hobby that I've had since I was young. I've been up and running for a few months as of right now. It isn't making me rich, but I am making beer money off of it right now. People have also already mentioned some of the reasons in this thread as well.\n\nOne reason for the cost of ebooks is that you have to pay programmers to actually make the ebooks. This is one extra cost that you have with ebooks that you don't have with paperbacks. Distribution platforms also take a substantial cut of sales as well. Technically I could lower prices for ebooks, but then it would take forever to make any money.\n\nAlso, things like printing/paper/binding/etc really aren't that expensive when you compare it to everything else that goes into making a book. When I sell a $16 book about $3 goes to printing and binding costs.\n\nWhat really costs money is things like getting the layouts done so that I can get it printed, artwork, and in my specific case translations. You're also going to have to pay editors, royaltees and then still make a profit. In my case, the actual printing costs are almost an afterthought.\n\nedit: I forgot to add that I make my ebooks cheaper than my paperbacks. Also from what I've seen, ebooks generally are less expensive that most physical copies.",
"I'm late to this party, but I'm going to say this anyway because there's a lot of nonsense here.\n\nEbooks from the big publishers are priced around $12-14 or more. Amazon are fighting all of them to get the price down to $9.99 at most. Self published authors have already figured out that the optimal price point is somewhere around $2.99-5.99.\n\nAmazon has the sales data to show that there's more profit to be made by dropping the price to increase the volume sold, and the big publishers are just not listening. They're pricing high because they want to stop ebooks from cannibalizing hardcover sales, even though the print market is dropping and has been doing so for a few years. They also hate Amazon and fear their market dominance, and they tend to overvalue their product.\n\nSo, fact is, ebooks are expensive because the big New York publishers make bad business decisions. They were convicted of collusion to keep the price of ebooks high by the DOJ, remember. They didn't do that because the market could bear a higher price; Amazon had it figured out that the higher price was suboptimal, hence the frequent discounts to $9.99.\n\nSo a lot of the reasons in this thread are missing the point. It's mainly about protectionism and flat out stupidity on the part of the big publishers. Self-published authors have almost all the same up-front costs (which are far less than you'd think, even with professional editing and design), and they price their books far more reasonably and make more money from them.\n\nThe whole industry has been getting a big shakeup in recent years, so don't be surprised if the price does come down significantly. Amazon are in a battle with Hachette right now over ebook pricing, and personally I think Hachette has zero chance of winning."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304444604577337573054615152"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"Amazon.com"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3v2ebe | why do we prefer wider-screened tv's over just larger tv's? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v2ebe/eli5_why_do_we_prefer_widerscreened_tvs_over_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxjq3jc",
"cxjvfgw"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they better match our field of view. A wider screen means that more of our view is of the film/show. This makes it more \"immersive\", to employ some marketing-speak.\n\nAdditionally, for we old folks, the wide format was that of the movie experience and the narrow format was that of our lowly TVs. When we first got the wide-screen we couldn't help but feel we'd brought the theater home. ",
"Look in the mirror. You have two eyes, right? And those eyes are arranged one on the left and one on the right?\n\nTherefore, your total field of vision and more important your field of foveal vision, which you see things _well_ are wider than they are high.\n\nIf you had an Academy ratio (4:3) TV, a more substantial portion of where you see well would be \"wasted\" (on the real world)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6bvjua | why do so many acne medications require you to not be exposed to the sun? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6bvjua/eli5_why_do_so_many_acne_medications_require_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhptqyo",
"dhpuyv2",
"dhq0v2t"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of acne medicines are tetracycline based antibiotics. These can sensitise your skin to sun light making it more susceptible to getting sun burnt. ",
"Acne mediation affect how the skin cell divided and proliferate. And consequently affect your skin barrier. Which make your skin more sensitive icity to the sun",
"Pharmacy student checking in here. Multiple acne medications can increase your sensitivity to sunlight. Isotretinoin and other retinoids, as well as the tetracycline antibiotics (and possibly others). One mechanism of action for certain kinds of photosensitivity is through the activation of the drug by sunlight, leading to a compound which produces some kind of irritation or prompts an immune response. These activated compounds may have reactive groups which damage DNA, or they may cause damage and inflammation through another mechanism. Lastly, as some of the other commenters have said, they may not have experienced a severe reaction to sunlight while on these medications. It is important to remember that not everyone will have these side effects. They may naturally have an excess of certain metabolic enzymes, more melanin production, an underactive immune system, or a whole host of other things which lessen or prevent this reaction. However, this can occur in most patients, and you should wear sunscreen when you plan on being outside for any length of time (skin cancer is bad!!)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
35wbbj | why does obama and the republicans like the trans-pacific partnership and many democrats dislike it? are trade pacts good for american jobs? | What's the theories and how have they worked in the past? It seems to be a very complex subject. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35wbbj/eli5_why_does_obama_and_the_republicans_like_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr8h7kw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's incredibly complex, yes. The answer to your american jobs question is that it both helps AND harms the economy, it just depends what sector.\n\nIt would likely improve the job situation in any of the poorer countries, it would be very good for finance and financial services (LOTS of american jobs there), it would be good for retail, as goods can be imported cheaper.\n\nIt would likely be a bad thing for American Manufacturing in general. It would be a bad thing for anything that can be outsourced or offshored. \n\nThe main area of concern with most people is that we just don't know. Trade deals often deal with specific sectors in different ways, so we have no idea what effects it will have if we can't read it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
jh0a3 | warhammer 40k lore | I'm really digging the whole brutal empire of man, but I want to learn more. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jh0a3/eli5_warhammer_40k_lore/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2c0qmi",
"c2c0vcm",
"c2c27uk",
"c2c0qmi",
"c2c0vcm",
"c2c27uk"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2,
7,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The universe was broken by the eldar, they accidentally unleashed chaos into the universe, this chaos seeks to corrupt everything, the only thing standing in its way is the empire of man, lead by the god emperor in his golden throne, the eldar try to help but mankind wont have any of it and pretty much kill anyone who isn't human. Theres various alien species that exist in the universe, and mankind will kill any of them on sight. Also nuns with flamethrowers. ",
"There is an ungodly amount of information out there, so much that it is nigh impossible to give a brief synopsis. But:\n\n**15th millennium**: Dark Age of Technology - Actually a Golden Age that saw humanity hit its zenith in technology. The creation of the Iron Men (think Terminator-like robots) that worked and fought for humans was, at first, a great and wonderful thing. But...\n\n**25th millennium**: Age of Strife - The Iron Men revolt, technology breaks down and the vast empires of Man are sundered when the Warp becomes much more prevelant. The rise of Chaos and uncontrolled psykers caused much trouble for man, lasting centuries.\n\n**30th millennium**: First Founding - The Space Marines are created.\n\n**31st millennium**: Horus Heresy - The God Emperor is almost killed by his most trusted friend. Chaos marines are born. Fifteen novels are written detailing this time frame. Black Library rejoices.\n\n**31st millennium**: The Age of Man (Age of Imperium) begins\n\nLots of other stuff.\n\n",
"[The TVTropes page for it](_URL_0_) is surprisingly informative.\n\nAnyway, since you seem to understand the Imperium, I'll explain some of the other factions:\n\nThe Tau Empire is the closest thing you get to \"good guys\" in Warhammer. The main reason they're nicer than other factions is they'll at least offer you a chance to join before they start blasting you to pieces. Their society is broken into 5 castes: Fire (warriors), Air (pilots), Earth (builders), Water (uh, I forget) and Ethereal (leaders). Ethereals are very rare, but very powerful. They also exude some sort of pheromone that makes it impossible for other Tau to disobey their orders. \n\nUnlike the Imperium, the Tau embrace progress and have advanced technologically at an impressive rate, going from cave dwellers when they were discovered 6000 years ago to flying around in hover tanks with plasma guns by \"current\" times. Their empire also includes various other races like the Kroot, a savage race that gains strength by eating the bodies of foes (which tends to be a problem when the Tau fight Chaos), the insectlike Vespids and even some humans.\n\nThe Eldar are space elves. Very old, very technologically advanced, but on the verge of extinction. They come in three flavors: Dark Eldar are exactly what they sound like. They thrive on torture and feed on the souls of their enemies. Craftworld Eldar are probably what most people mean when they talk about Eldar. Each Craftworld generally focuses on one specific thing. For example Biel-Tan is a warrior Craftworld, Ulthwe is the Craftworld of seers, or something. Exodite Eldar are pretty rare and not a playable race in the game. They're like space wood elves, sort of. They eschew technology and just sort of live all primitive like on \"Maiden Worlds.\"\n\nAll Eldar used to be a bit like the Dark Eldar, actually. Not as much with the torture and murder, but they embraced debauchery and generally having a good time. However their society got so wild and debased that they actually spawned a Chaos god (Slaanesh) who is now out to consume the souls of all the Eldar. The Dark Eldar keep their own souls safe by feeding on the souls of others, while Craftworld Eldar protect themselves by storing the souls of their dead in soulstones.\n\nThe Necrons were once the Necrontyr, a very short lived race that I guess were jealous of races that lived longer, and eventually came to hate everyone else. The C'Tan Star Gods (that's not just a cool name, their gods are actually stars sort of) replaced their bodies with a living metal, making them immortal and essentially unkillable. (They can be defeated in combat, but can always be repaired.) Most of them lie dormant in underground tombs with pseudo-Egyptian themes, but once they're awakened they do not rest until they've exterminated all life on a planet.\n\nThe Tyranids are ravenous aliens from outside the galaxy. You are no doubt familiar with Starcraft's Zerg, yes? Well they're based on the Tyranids. Tyranids have a massive hive mind and just go around devouring everything on a planet to add to their stores of biomass. \n\nOrks are the comic relief. Seriously. Their actual history is that they were genetically engineered by some ancient race as warriors/guardians/whatever. A plague destroyed their creators and the Orks were left to roam the galaxy, looking for fights because that's what they do for fun. Ork infestations are almost impossible to get rid of as they release spores when excited (and considering how much they like fighting, they're excited pretty much any time they're awake) which can grow into a new Ork in something like 6 months I think. Orks are also strangely psychic, and most of their technology works because they believe it does. \n\nChaos: Demons and traitors and all that lot. The Imperium but with more spikes and carnage and giant medieval demons with horns.",
"The universe was broken by the eldar, they accidentally unleashed chaos into the universe, this chaos seeks to corrupt everything, the only thing standing in its way is the empire of man, lead by the god emperor in his golden throne, the eldar try to help but mankind wont have any of it and pretty much kill anyone who isn't human. Theres various alien species that exist in the universe, and mankind will kill any of them on sight. Also nuns with flamethrowers. ",
"There is an ungodly amount of information out there, so much that it is nigh impossible to give a brief synopsis. But:\n\n**15th millennium**: Dark Age of Technology - Actually a Golden Age that saw humanity hit its zenith in technology. The creation of the Iron Men (think Terminator-like robots) that worked and fought for humans was, at first, a great and wonderful thing. But...\n\n**25th millennium**: Age of Strife - The Iron Men revolt, technology breaks down and the vast empires of Man are sundered when the Warp becomes much more prevelant. The rise of Chaos and uncontrolled psykers caused much trouble for man, lasting centuries.\n\n**30th millennium**: First Founding - The Space Marines are created.\n\n**31st millennium**: Horus Heresy - The God Emperor is almost killed by his most trusted friend. Chaos marines are born. Fifteen novels are written detailing this time frame. Black Library rejoices.\n\n**31st millennium**: The Age of Man (Age of Imperium) begins\n\nLots of other stuff.\n\n",
"[The TVTropes page for it](_URL_0_) is surprisingly informative.\n\nAnyway, since you seem to understand the Imperium, I'll explain some of the other factions:\n\nThe Tau Empire is the closest thing you get to \"good guys\" in Warhammer. The main reason they're nicer than other factions is they'll at least offer you a chance to join before they start blasting you to pieces. Their society is broken into 5 castes: Fire (warriors), Air (pilots), Earth (builders), Water (uh, I forget) and Ethereal (leaders). Ethereals are very rare, but very powerful. They also exude some sort of pheromone that makes it impossible for other Tau to disobey their orders. \n\nUnlike the Imperium, the Tau embrace progress and have advanced technologically at an impressive rate, going from cave dwellers when they were discovered 6000 years ago to flying around in hover tanks with plasma guns by \"current\" times. Their empire also includes various other races like the Kroot, a savage race that gains strength by eating the bodies of foes (which tends to be a problem when the Tau fight Chaos), the insectlike Vespids and even some humans.\n\nThe Eldar are space elves. Very old, very technologically advanced, but on the verge of extinction. They come in three flavors: Dark Eldar are exactly what they sound like. They thrive on torture and feed on the souls of their enemies. Craftworld Eldar are probably what most people mean when they talk about Eldar. Each Craftworld generally focuses on one specific thing. For example Biel-Tan is a warrior Craftworld, Ulthwe is the Craftworld of seers, or something. Exodite Eldar are pretty rare and not a playable race in the game. They're like space wood elves, sort of. They eschew technology and just sort of live all primitive like on \"Maiden Worlds.\"\n\nAll Eldar used to be a bit like the Dark Eldar, actually. Not as much with the torture and murder, but they embraced debauchery and generally having a good time. However their society got so wild and debased that they actually spawned a Chaos god (Slaanesh) who is now out to consume the souls of all the Eldar. The Dark Eldar keep their own souls safe by feeding on the souls of others, while Craftworld Eldar protect themselves by storing the souls of their dead in soulstones.\n\nThe Necrons were once the Necrontyr, a very short lived race that I guess were jealous of races that lived longer, and eventually came to hate everyone else. The C'Tan Star Gods (that's not just a cool name, their gods are actually stars sort of) replaced their bodies with a living metal, making them immortal and essentially unkillable. (They can be defeated in combat, but can always be repaired.) Most of them lie dormant in underground tombs with pseudo-Egyptian themes, but once they're awakened they do not rest until they've exterminated all life on a planet.\n\nThe Tyranids are ravenous aliens from outside the galaxy. You are no doubt familiar with Starcraft's Zerg, yes? Well they're based on the Tyranids. Tyranids have a massive hive mind and just go around devouring everything on a planet to add to their stores of biomass. \n\nOrks are the comic relief. Seriously. Their actual history is that they were genetically engineered by some ancient race as warriors/guardians/whatever. A plague destroyed their creators and the Orks were left to roam the galaxy, looking for fights because that's what they do for fun. Ork infestations are almost impossible to get rid of as they release spores when excited (and considering how much they like fighting, they're excited pretty much any time they're awake) which can grow into a new Ork in something like 6 months I think. Orks are also strangely psychic, and most of their technology works because they believe it does. \n\nChaos: Demons and traitors and all that lot. The Imperium but with more spikes and carnage and giant medieval demons with horns."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Warhammer40000"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Warhammer40000"
]
] |
|
ezdppw | what is the best thing the average person in a more-developed country can do to improve the life of the average person in a less-developed country? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ezdppw/eli5_what_is_the_best_thing_the_average_person_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgmlizj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"One average 3^rd world person = marry them.\n\nAll average 3^rd world people = raise your children to study engineering and appreciate the necessity of contributing to those less fortunate than themselves."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9ivgnc | if we have the ability to create tall skyscrapers, why don’t cities have a bunch of skyscrapers of the same height? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ivgnc/eli5_if_we_have_the_ability_to_create_tall/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6moig6",
"e6momjj",
"e6monp1",
"e6mqqr1",
"e6mv863"
],
"score": [
13,
5,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Each builder is going to do what they want.\n\nGoogle pictures of Beijing some time, they have entire large blocks of buildings the same style and height. They also are far more regulated about how they build.\n\nI imagine in a more free market economy, each builder wants their building to be \"their building\" and not like another one. Plus each builder has a plan, purpose and marketing approach to create a profitable building, and that's going to differ from developer/investor to developer/investor.\n\nYou'd have to ask an engineer, but another short answer is the materials and design of the building will also dictate what is optimal. So again, with each design being different, making the building as tall as another building is just not going to even make the bottom of the priorities list for the engineer/builder/investor/developer teams.",
"It has less to do with engineering and more to do with politics.\n\nIf someone proposes building a high-rise, there's liable to be all kinds of complaints from people who live nearby. High rises block peoples' views, they put pressure on infrastructure, they bring lots of people into the neighbourhood, etc. \n\nSo city planners have to balance the willingness to densify their city with concerns that the residents might have. ",
"Well.... because, each company wants their own building. think of it like buildings owned by different people, all who want their own looks, heights, needs. ",
"It is much cheaper to build out than up. Two 50 story buildings are much cheaper than one 100 story building, and ten 10 story buildings are cheaper still.\n\nThe height of a building is going to be a function of the prevailing economic conditions. Is the extra cost of having one building in Manhattan justified over having two in Queens or ten in New Jersey?\n\nIn addition, building that 100 story building will put a glut of real estate on the market, making the next 100 story building less valuable.",
"And, in addition to the other posters, building height of a skyscraper is a safety question. Basically, the more relaxed your safety standards are, the higher you can build. Different cities over the world have different safety standards, and therefor different maximum heights.\n\nThis is not to imply that higher buildings are unsafe, but it gets more expensive to make them safe, adding the the great number of economic limiting factors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6jwnoc | stupidly, i replied to a text near a petrol bowser & was embarrassingly told off over the pa system to "get off your phone", in front of everybody. what're the actual concerns for using phones at service stations? (and how stupid was i?) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6jwnoc/eli5_stupidly_i_replied_to_a_text_near_a_petrol/ | {
"a_id": [
"djhjr8o",
"djhk60b",
"djhmdv3",
"dji05mr"
],
"score": [
14,
12,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It's an urban myth that mobile phones can ignite gasoline vapor (it's actually static electricity, which doesn't come from a phone).\n\nIt's complete bunk, and they're parroting misinformation. Just keep a good ole \"fuck you\" chambered when they say nonsense like that.",
"As far as using a cell phone at a gas station and having it start a fire, that's been well proven as a myth. \n\nThe biggest problem with someone using a cell phone at a gas station is operator inattention. Walking into traffic, forgetting to remove the gas nozzle from the car before driving off, not paying attention to any possible equipment malfunction such as the gas nozzle auto-shutoff not working.",
"Don't feel too stupid. As a former gas jockey I can tell you that there are still people who have to be reminded not to smoke while filling up. ",
"Trivia but a little on topic - real risk is using a purse. Women much more likely to have fires at the gas station as they get in and out of their car to fiddle with their purse and static electricity builds up to cause a spark. Happened several times.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
edylie | why does alcohol have the wavy/ distorted looking lines when mixed with other drinks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/edylie/eli5_why_does_alcohol_have_the_wavy_distorted/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbm6xt6"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Alcohol has a slightly different index of refraction to water (1.36 vs 1.3333 for water). As the fluids mix the light will take slightly different paths through the fluid which results in the wavy/distorted lines you see."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
302zxc | how are rock songs constructed? | How exactly does the guitar interact with the bass, rhythm and vocals.
I know nothing about music theory or rhythm, and I don't even know where to begin looking for a deeper understanding about how a rock song is put together. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/302zxc/eli5_how_are_rock_songs_constructed/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpon7ak",
"cpon8hs",
"cponapa"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Rock grew out of American folk music and jazz. Rock music covers a very wide range of sounds and styles, however. There's no good description of a genre that includes Good Charlotte, Megadeth and AC/DC.\n\nEvery band handles writing their music differently. Some start with lyrics and then work music around it, others start with a bit of music and then work out lyrics later. Some build on a guitar riff, some on a chord progression, some on a baseline, some a drum beat. \n\nSome like simple guitar parts, some do more complex ones, some like to weave many parts together, some keep it all really simple.\n\nMost of them use a mix of these approaches. \n\nThere's really no substitute for learning to play the kind of music you want to write, and working out first hand what makes it work. And there's nothing better than just writing pages and pages rubbish music to find out what works for you. \n\nNow, if you want to ask about a specific band or song I can talk about what I think makes it work.",
" > How exactly does the guitar interact with the bass, rhythm and vocals.\n\nGenerally speaking, one instrument (most often the guitar) plays a lead melody, while all other instrumentation and vocals play harmonically-compatible parts which *support* that melody. On their own these supportive instruments do not play parts that could be considered distinct melodies, as they're designed to accent the lead melody. More complex rock music, and a great deal of music from other genres (such as classical or technical death metal), will feature instruments playing completely *separate* but harmonically-compatible melodies, each of which could stand on its own as a distinct melody.\n\nIf you require more information than that, I don't think your question is really ELI5 appropriate. You'll need to start learning music theory thoroughly, and from the ground-up. And [this](_URL_0_) is as good as any place to start.",
"Most band composed rock songs start with a riff, guitar/bass/vocals. Everyone else starts writing to it, staying in the same key usually. Some can be quite complex, some simple. If the guitar riff is written first, the bass player will often start with the root notes and work from there. Some groups are into collaboration, some have writers who control the process, short of flourishes. It really depends on the band. As the song gets put together, often pieces are changed to fit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.teoria.com/"
],
[]
] |
|
63cjok | why do many college students want safe spaces on their campuses? why is it such a big deal to them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/63cjok/eli5_why_do_many_college_students_want_safe/ | {
"a_id": [
"dft2kl6",
"dft46q5",
"dfuc8tv"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The problem with 'safe spaces' is the context it is used in - in different context, it could range from referring to a safe space as a space where certain groups of people/ideas are not discriminated against (tolerated) and allowed to be themselves (love whoever, demonstrate faith however, express whatever), it's a place where tolerance and inclusion is almost celebrated - to basically a space where ideas/opinions are censored, etc. \n\nWhat many people fails to realize is that the desire for safe spaces on campuses (as a sign of inclusion and acceptance) implies that it is not safe for certain demographics to function within certain public spaces - a lot of subtle discrimination reflected in nuances in behavior is easily overlooked by people not experiencing certain cultural biases working against them and thus conclude that there is no on-going problems with discrimination. It isn't meant to be a tool to silence ideas you disagree with (as many people perceive it to be) but it's supposed to be a public space without (unfair) hateful ideas (from cultural biases) - ideally it would be a space where people don't insult each other right away if they slightly disagree with one another but are encouraged to learn about each other's differences through discussions and eventually awareness to acceptance. ",
"Wouldn't it be a big deal to you if you felt unsafe on campus?\n\nThat is what it is about: safety. Certain people (4channers, gamergaters, MRA's and the like) want to pretend that it is about protecting people's feelings, but the clue is in the name. It is about making people feel safe.\n\nIf you're black, and the school invites a KKK leader out to talk about their beliefs, you are going to feel unsafe. Because that person wishes to harm you, and the simple fact that so many on the school wanted to hear this person means that some of your fellow students harbor similar ideas. If you're a rape victim, and students are encouraged to discuss subjects such as \"there's no such thing as rape\", you are going to feel really, really unsafe. Because you know people are literally discussing whether or not they can get away with harming people like you, and they are doing so with the school's blessing.\n\nA lot of people want to harm many different minorities in many different ways. Sometimes with physical violence, sometimes with verbal abuse, sometimes by taking away their rights. If you have to fear these things happening to you at campus, you're not going to learn much, you're not going to contribute much, and you're putting yourself at danger. That is why knowing that you're not in danger when you go to college is a big deal.",
"It's so they won't have to be exposed to uncomfortable thoughts and ideas. This is both a good and bad thing.\n\nIt's a good thing when \"safe space\" means \"I don't have to worry about feeling threatened or endangered here.\" It's a bad thing when \"safe space\" means \"I don't have to deal with thoughts, ideas, or people that make me uncomfortable.\" The former says \"We can discuss tough topics openly because we're all adults here.\" the latter says \"We can't discuss tough topics because we're still children here.\"\n\nSexual assault is bad, there's no ^[citation ^needed] about it. A college campus isn't \"safe\" from it if the entire male student body is corralled and labelled \"potential rapists\" over one incident. In fact, that makes it even less safe; the faculty's sending a message to female students that \"Men are predators and you should be afraid and suspicious of them.\"\n\nBuilding on from this, there's a difference between hosting a presentation on racism and hosting a Klan rally. Painting both with the same \"safe space\" brush delegitimizes an open and honest discussion on a sensitive topic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
46z0jw | how does running/walking for a cause work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46z0jw/eli5_how_does_runningwalking_for_a_cause_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d08wf5n",
"d08wf66",
"d08wjq1"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"one method. you as the runner/walker go and beg people to donate money for each mile that you run or walk. \n\nanother method. you pay to run or walk for the cause. ",
"Basically to participate in those thing you have to raise some money. Either from other people or pay it out of your own pocket.Some of those money goes towards charity that even it held for. Then you run/walk to show that you participated, and contributed. Not sure if there prizes for the people who comes first. ",
"It is a fund raiser, runners/walkers pay in registration fees that help go toward the race and also some of that money goes toward the cause. Sponsors agree to pay in so much to the cause in return for the advertisement of sponsoring the race. The event raises awareness and there are places to donate when people come to watch the race. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1myd8v | electronic device battery charge indicators? | What process tells the software what level of charge a battery is at? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1myd8v/eli5_electronic_device_battery_charge_indicators/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccdqsmo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Batteries provide a constant output of power. Though the amount they put out drops slightly as it's charge decreases. The software monitors this drop in output and uses it to extrapolate the remaining charge level."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1v3788 | having a family member who is once or twice removed? | Can someone please explain what this means... and what they did to get themselves removed at one point in time..? My dad tried explaining how some of my cousins were "once removed" but I still don't understand what it has to do with removal. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v3788/eli5_having_a_family_member_who_is_once_or_twice/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceo9olf",
"ceoah9w"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Removal doesnt mean \"taken away\" it mean \"distanced from generationally\".\n\nFor instance, if your first cousin (your parent's sibling's child) had a child, that person would be your first cousin once removed. If that person had a child, they would be your first cousin twice removed.\n\nWikipedia has some pretty charts that will help, I think: _URL_0_",
"I'll state this in a few different ways:\n\n* My sibling is my sibling.\n* Our respective children are first cousins.\n* Our respective grandchildren are second cousins.\n* Our respective great-grandchildren are third cousins.\n* Our respective great-great-grandchildren are fourth cousins.\n\nWho is the common ancestor:\n\n* Siblings have the same parents as you.\n* First cousins have one pair of the same grandparents as you.\n* Second cousins have one pair of the same great-grandparents as you.\n* Third cousins have one pair of the same great-great-grandparents as you.\n* Fourth cousins have one pair of the same great-great-great grandparents as you.\n\nThe number of \"greats\" in the grandparents who are the same:\n\n* First cousin = 0 greats\n* Second cousin = 1 great\n* Third cousin = 2 greats\n* Fourth cousin = 3 greats\n\nCommon ancestor distance:\n\n* Sibling: 1 generation back\n* First cousin: 2 generations back\n* Second cousin: 3 generations back\n* Third cousin: 4 generations back\n\net cetera...\n\n\"Removed\" means that the two of you have a different number of generations back to your common ancestor. If our common ancestor is three generations back for me and five generations back for you, our relationship as cousins would be twice removed. My first cousin's child would be my first cousin once removed. I would be their second cousin once removed.\n\nSomeone can also be a \"double-cousin\" if one of your parents is one of their parent's siblings and if your other parent is also their other parent's sibling."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin"
],
[]
] |
|
86rmll | why do electric cars have a lower range when it's cold? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86rmll/eli5_why_do_electric_cars_have_a_lower_range_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw7bzyg",
"dw7c2vp"
],
"score": [
4,
9
],
"text": [
"Batteries rely on chemical reactions to provide power. Cold temperature slows down those reactions, giving you less power",
"That's for two reasons:\n\nFirstly, in colder weather, it is more difficult for electrons to move through the battery, so many electric cars will have a climate control system exclusively for the battery for optimal battery performance at the cost of range.\n\nSecondly, unlike gas engines, electrical engines produce much less heat energy (thus why they are more efficient), which would normally be used to keep the inside of the car warm. In electric cars, because the engine doesn't make a lot of heat, the climate control will be used a lot, and that power comes from the same better that drives the car, thus reducing the range. If the climate control isn't used, then there's hardly a difference."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
ltc1i | how goldman sachs is ruining the world. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ltc1i/eli5_how_goldman_sachs_is_ruining_the_world/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2vfqqg",
"c2vgjk7",
"c2vgvg6",
"c2vhn9x",
"c2vfqqg",
"c2vgjk7",
"c2vgvg6",
"c2vhn9x"
],
"score": [
11,
6,
3,
14,
11,
6,
3,
14
],
"text": [
"It's not explaining LY5, but [this Rolling Stone article](_URL_0_) is pretty thorough. One of those rare many-paged articles that's actually worth reading all the way through.",
"It's not so much that they alone are ruining it. It's more that they're a very useful accomplice to those that are, and that they happen to be making a lot of money while accomplicing...[sic]",
"It's a variation of \"Money = Power\". Goldman is good at a) making money; b) raising money. People are willing to stretch their morals and ethics for money and power.\n",
"I don't know if Goldman Sachs necessarily is ruining the world, but they seem all too happy to help people who are interested in such, and don't mind bending the law in order to do it.\n\nCase in point - in 2007 a hedge fund named Paulson & Co. Inc. put together a CDO with toxic mortgages and asked Goldman Sachs to sell it for them. Paulson & Co. Inc. was a company known to short the mortgage market, which means they were expecting it to lose money. So you aren't going to run off and pay top dollar for mortgages hand picked by these guys.\n\nBut here's the deal - Goldman Sachs didn't tell the people they were selling the CDO to that it was put together by Paulson & Co. Inc., something which they are required to do by law.\n\nThe SEC filed a criminal complaint, Goldman Sachs said the lack of information was a mistake, and paid a half billion dollar fine to have the case dropped.\n\nThat may not seem like an example of ruining the world, but to the people who invested in the CDO and saw their entire investment virtually disappear because of Goldman Sachs withholding information they were legally obligated to share, they might find it more grievous.",
"It's not explaining LY5, but [this Rolling Stone article](_URL_0_) is pretty thorough. One of those rare many-paged articles that's actually worth reading all the way through.",
"It's not so much that they alone are ruining it. It's more that they're a very useful accomplice to those that are, and that they happen to be making a lot of money while accomplicing...[sic]",
"It's a variation of \"Money = Power\". Goldman is good at a) making money; b) raising money. People are willing to stretch their morals and ethics for money and power.\n",
"I don't know if Goldman Sachs necessarily is ruining the world, but they seem all too happy to help people who are interested in such, and don't mind bending the law in order to do it.\n\nCase in point - in 2007 a hedge fund named Paulson & Co. Inc. put together a CDO with toxic mortgages and asked Goldman Sachs to sell it for them. Paulson & Co. Inc. was a company known to short the mortgage market, which means they were expecting it to lose money. So you aren't going to run off and pay top dollar for mortgages hand picked by these guys.\n\nBut here's the deal - Goldman Sachs didn't tell the people they were selling the CDO to that it was put together by Paulson & Co. Inc., something which they are required to do by law.\n\nThe SEC filed a criminal complaint, Goldman Sachs said the lack of information was a mistake, and paid a half billion dollar fine to have the case dropped.\n\nThat may not seem like an example of ruining the world, but to the people who invested in the CDO and saw their entire investment virtually disappear because of Goldman Sachs withholding information they were legally obligated to share, they might find it more grievous."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6f9qds | why do chip card transactions take so much longer to process than magnetic strip transactions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f9qds/eli5_why_do_chip_card_transactions_take_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"digjajl",
"digm0di",
"digogn2",
"digpn0c",
"digpupl",
"diguei0",
"digxko4",
"dih7bb8",
"dih7beu",
"dih7fw0",
"dih89ec",
"dih89l3",
"dihdipj"
],
"score": [
16,
253,
2,
6,
52,
4,
2,
6,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You're right, chip cards do take longer. According to the [Chicago Tribune](_URL_0_) here's why:\n\n > The delay is due to the added security features, the primary reason for using the technology. Specifically, the chip in the card is generating a unique encrypted message between the store and the bank's network.... All of this is more secure than the old slide-card technology ",
"It's an Infrastructure Issue.\n\nChip Cards have added Security Features. These features are meant to make forging a Chip Card *incredibly* difficult, even if you manage to get a Skimmer working for them. However, more complex security features require more Computer Processing to verify and authorize.\n\nThe Chip Cards are new, and they're running on the older hardware made for Swipe Cards. This hardware isn't fast enough to do Chip Cards as quickly. You've basically traded some Time for Security.\n\nChip Card Transactions *will* become faster as the Infrastructure is improved. It's just a matter of waiting for companies to get that Infrastructure set up.",
"Chips take longer because the security is in incredible amounts, and therefore, because every machine that reads them insnt a high-grade supercomputer, it takes longer for a weaker machine to process as much information as it is providing for you to use your card.",
"Two reasons: 1.) Chip cards encrypt the information. Think of it as a code, it takes a while to take a normal message and turn it into a coded message. It also takes a while for someone else to decode the message. It would be a lot faster just to write the message out in plain text and then give it the other person, but if anyone grabbed it, they would be able to read that message.\n\n2.) Chip cards have a secret handshake. Now that the message has been encrypted, before handing it to the other person, they first must verify that the person they are handing it to actually is the person they say they are. This is done by a secret handshake between the chip card and the person. This secret handshake takes time to do.",
"Do you have contactless payment with debit cards in the USA yet? Just touch the machine with the card and beep, 3 seconds on wifi it's approved? Anything up to £29.99 is pin free. Guaranteed by the banks. Works a treat in U.K. ",
"Mag stripe is an info dump. Machine reads the stripe, grabs what it needs, then throws that up to the processor who gives the thumbs up or thumbs down.\n\nChip and Pin is more complex. Behind the chip there is a computer, and the computer needs to encrypt the message. Due to this there are two trips that need to be done to the processor.\n\nSo in short, there's more going on when you use EMV (Chip and Pin) than with a mag stripe. This more stuff takes more time.",
"At my store the chip reader takes about 5 seconds. I think it depends on the terminal setup. We have a stand alone terminal hooked straight to the internet. We hand input the amount into it. Maybe the slow ones go through the business' infrastructure, slowing it down.",
"As a cashier operations supervisor, I get this complaint a lot. I had a feeling it was a myth. So I actually timed about 50 transactions from the moment the card was swiped or inserted, depending on type.\nAssuming their is no \"user error,\" they take about the same amount of time. Thing is, the consumer actually pays attention to the card reader while the card is in a chip reader so they don't forget their card. With a swipe, the consumer can swipe and forget. The \"extra time\" is an illusion.",
"In the U.K. Under a set amount all you need to do is tap your card on the terminal and it's done about 3 second.",
"As someone who worked in retail, they don't take longer.... anymore. They took way longer at first because of the transition, but now they are actually faster or just as fast. People just have a hard time letting go of the stigma of it being slow. Maybe they are still figuring it out where you shop, but that shouldn't last.",
"tripped me the fuck out the other day i had a customer from the US and he had to swipe and and the sign the receipt. first time i ever saw that with a customer. Everyone here either has contactless or swipe with pin. (New zealand)",
"My store has tap and pay, chip readers, and brand new pin pads, all running on Internet that has the equivalence to LESS than that of dialup.\nSo generally they bought rims for the car, but didn't wanna put gas in it.",
"Credit card applications solution architect here.\n\nFirst of all, think a chip card as a small memory device which stores its own software code in the chip and decides what to do. Several security steps like encryption, decryption, generating security data etc needed to be completed using that code to ensure completely secure financial transmissions. Furthermore the terminal communicates with your card, verifies it, and executes the code stored in it which your bank stores in your chip while issuing your card. Even your bank authorizes your purchase, your card can deny it thanks to the software code stored on it. This all takes some time. Even in some cases your bank sends some new code (called scripts) for your card to execute and along with execution, writing the output to your card takes some time too.\n\nMagnetic stripe transactions do not honor many security rules and only work with your card number, transaction amount and terminal information. That's why when your card number, and expire date are stolen, it's very easy for a third party to use your card and purchase online."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-how-chip-cards-work-htmlstory.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4gl0tc | how do video game sales work? | I assume that Steam can't just cut half the price off of a game whenever they feel like it, but do they really have to get every single game creator's permission to put their game on sale? (I can imagine this'd be a nightmare during the summer sale) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gl0tc/eli5_how_do_video_game_sales_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2ihdqk",
"d2ihn67"
],
"score": [
9,
6
],
"text": [
"Steam and the publishers work together on those sales. Steam does not have pricing power over the games it sells. On the other hand, if you sell things on Steam, you actually have to go through Valve to do your own sale - you can't just change the pricing yourself.",
"It's not really as much of a nightmare as you'd assume. Game publishers know that sales are coming up, and can give Valve permission months in advance if necessary. It wouldn't surprise me if Valve just has a standing email list of all the publisher's marketing departments that they can use to send out what essentially amounts to a legal permission slip before each sale."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4u5vl7 | how is it possible that data doesn't weigh anything? | Think of all the data in the world. How come if it's on a (admittedly massive) hard drive, the hard drive will weigh the same even if the data is deleted off it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u5vl7/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_data_doesnt_weigh/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5n3g81",
"d5n3g9a",
"d5n3hi3",
"d5n5scl",
"d5n65mh"
],
"score": [
3,
31,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You aren't adding anything or taking anything away when you delete things. All a computer does is change the current state of something, almost like millions of little switches that are either on or off. if it is flipped off, it doesn't magically start weighing less.",
"Let's say that we have a bunch of bottle caps laying on a table in a big grid, just bottlecap after bottlecap, red on top, silver on the bottom. \n\nIf we turn some of the bottlecaps over, we can draw a triangle. Now the bottlecaps are storing data (a picture of a triangle). But they're still the exact same bottlecaps, and weigh the same as they did 'blank'.\n\nComputers store 'data' as a pattern of switches. The switches weigh the same whether they're switched on or off. But once all of the switches are being used to store something, if you want more data you need another hard drive, and that will have weight.",
"does a light switch weigh more when it's on? does a bead weigh more on one side of the abacus than the other? nope, and that's why data doesn't necessarily weigh more. just a bunch of 1s and 0s, and 1s don't weigh more than 0s.",
"Sometimes \"data\" does weigh something! [A charged capacitor weighs more than a discharged one](_URL_0_). So if data is stored in volatile memory, it does have a little bit of weigh, although not very much.\n\nIn the case of a hard drive, or a solid state drive the data is not stored as a charge. Imagine the drive has being billions of very small switches. The data is stored by flipping the switch. No matter how you flip the switch, it weighs the same!",
"I stole this: \"higher information content correlates with a more energetic configuration and this is true regardless of the particular type of storage... Now, as per Einstein's most famous formula, energy is equivalent to mass.\"\n \n \nIt's a miniscule difference, you would need a very high precision scale to accurately tell the difference. An electric charge (even magnetic) carries with it mass. Those electric charges are recorded for long term on magnetic cylinders. \n \n \nRam (not your harddrive) is volatile memory, which means it loses its charge and whatever values in memory when it loses power. That type of memory will always be the same mass or weight when power is not running through it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/eory2/does_a_charged_capacitor_weigh_more_than_a/"
],
[]
] |
|
5ai1l8 | why are there so many conflicting scientific research, especially in fitness/nutrition? how do we know which one is true? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ai1l8/eli5why_are_there_so_many_conflicting_scientific/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9gmsil",
"d9gmx35",
"d9gnxfj",
"d9gptk4",
"d9gq4qp",
"d9gq7yr",
"d9gqxjr",
"d9gta60",
"d9gx8dj",
"d9h5hbj",
"d9h8a3p",
"d9hbvo8",
"d9heasi",
"d9hqv7x"
],
"score": [
4,
121,
4,
38,
9,
4,
3,
2,
4,
5,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"These days researchers get paid, and get recognition for having researched published, they can also get paid to do research. Companies can also be selective of what results they publish, and when it is bublished, media companies or marketers can take that info and spin it in a way to make it click baity, or make their product look better. So it is really difficult to figure out what is true, what is false, and what has been omitted from research. I even find ot hard to beleive some goverment research. \n\nA good way to know how factual research is, is to find out who paid for the research, and to find stuff that has been reviewed, or has reseach from other organizations that came up with similar results. Also, don't beleive some hot blond women who tells you they found a root in the amazon rain forrest that cures hemorrhoids, common sense helps. ",
"There is conflict in studies about nutrition because a) the body is a very complex biochemical factory and b) there are vested interests who want to muddy the waters and c) we simply don't know everything d) people apply their existing knowledge to a subject more complex.\n\nFor example /u/sexuallemon below has applied a (valid in that discipline) scientific principle from another discipline and extrapolated it on the assumption that \"energy is energy\" (and no offence to sexuallemon it's a common error). This error is based on the original definition of \"calorie\" which was based on how much it heated water when burned.\n\nUnfortunately your body doesn't work that way, it doesn't neccessarily extract all of the *potentially available* calories, if they're wrapped in an indigestible way or your body is missing key vitamins to metabolise it, it will go straight through.\n\nSugars and high GI carbohydrates are very easy to metabolise, low GI (Glycaemic Index) foods are metabolised more slowly and often less completely. Fibre is mostly not metabolised particularly well at all but as we know - wood (cellulose fibre) burns and hence has \"calories\".\n\nThen there is the complex biochem thing, for example you have a trigger in your gastrointestinal tract that signals saiety based in part on how much fat you have eaten. If you've only been eating carbs you won't get that hormone trigger making you more likely to over eat. Then there is a bunch of complexity around hunger and insulin levels that new science is coming out about regularly now.\n\nJust to make it more complex, you're a symbiote - you carry millions of bacteria in your gut that help you digest your food (your mum was right, eat your yoghurt and eat your greens, they need it). The *particular* combination of bacteria will determine how well you can metabolise certain foods. Evidence now even shows that the wrong combo of bacteria will cause you to get fatter without changing your diet (faecal transplants are now being doing to stave off serious C. Diff infections, and studies on rats plus the actual results on humans show a skinny person will get fat if transplanted with the biota of someone obese - but hey it beats being dead).\n\nThen lastly, people make shedloads of money off making people confused so you buy THEIR book\n\nSo as a rule of thumb. Eat a balanced diet - which is NOT the food pyramid common in the 70s- 90s (it comes from a bunch of bad research that has been now rejected but it's hard to get the message out). \n\nA balanced diet means a substantial amount of your intake is raw or lightly cooked vegetables NOT including potatoes (high GI nearly pure carbs) and a balance of protein (preferencing whitemeat and oily fish if you're a meat eater) dairy, carbs and fruits.\n\nThings not to do, don't drink fruit juice, you might as well drink coke (chock full of sugar), avoid processed meats (yes that includes bacon :-( avoid sugar\n\nThere is solid peer reviewed evidence for everything above. More than that and we start getting into the conjecture part because we don't know or the obfuscation part because I want to make money off you\n\nEdit: corrected resistant bacteria from MSRA to C. Diff (Clostridium difficile) brain fade error thanks to /u/gatz for spotting\n\n\n",
"They're all *true* -- in that they all report results that were found. However most scientific research isn't easily generalizable all by itself, particularly when it comes to applying that research to individual humans and getting particular results. ",
"What other answers are missing is that reports written by newspapers, magazines, and websites telling you about a new study and what it found, are often fundamentally wrong in their summary of the study and its conclusion.\n\nIt's worth just once going to the trouble to find and read the whole scientific study relating to a web story you find interesting. You're likely to find the stunning conclusion reported in the mass media is actually very conditional (eg the effect only occurred in male mice that already had cancer, and didn't affect the female mice) or maybe doesn't even exist in the study at all and was just a random idea the scientist mentioned in one sentence.",
"In my opinion, marketing plays a large part of it. \n\nHave you ever noticed, almost like a TV show... there is always a \"bad guy\" in the food world?\n\nEveryone screams about the \"bad guy\", and new foods (that happen to be more expensive and higher margin) are sold without the \"bad guy\". \n\nOnce the buzz dies down, a new \"bad guy\" is introduced and the old one slowly fades away. \n\nFat (this one was brilliant and seems to have pretty much started the trend)\nSalt\nSodium (When \"salt\" died down they just changed the name. \"Sodium\" sounds more threatening anyway)\nMSG\nTrans Fat\nCorn syrup vs. sugar\nGluten\n\nNow we seem to be shifting into the production of foods as the bad guy. \"Cage free\", \"free range\", \"organic\", \"grass fed\", \"farm raised\", etc. \n\nOr perhaps that's just a sub plot, and the next bad guy is just a paid study or two away. Stay tuned. ",
"This is how science works. Unless you want to volunteer to be locked in a room and [fed only yogurt for 6 months](_URL_0_), researchers can't control all the factors involved in human health studies. The truth gradually emerges over the course of time, when many different studies are combined. This isn't a problem for scientists, because the preliminary studies almost always say something like this at the end: \"our findings require further confirmation and clarification by other studies\", like the one I linked. The media, however, normally does not include that qualification.\n",
"Humans are not all alike. You've probably noticed that we all look unique and have learnt that no two humans share the same dna. There is more far more variety in humans than 2 sexes and 4 blood types. We use our bodies differently, we live in ecosystems, etc. even though we are the same species nothing holds true for every person... except may be that we all have opinions. \n\n\nI do not believe there is one diet that works for everyone. There are certain aspects that many diets outline such as: exercise regularly, be hydrated, eat yer veg, cut back on soda and processed foods, eat in moderation, etc. These repeated things are more likely to be universally helpful but not always (fat is not evil). You have to be mindful of your body and find a diet and fitness regime that suits it. If you have allergies, are pregnant, sit at a desk all day, are old, whoever! your diet and fitness needs are going to be different. ",
"First why are there conflicting studies. To do a study you need money which you either have or have influence over people with the money (governments). And you need a reason for doing it. Most of the people with the money and reason are not looking for the way to stay healthy but instead that their food or product is not harmful. So first there are a lot of studies with the goal of proving something just isn't bad, so sugar doesn't kill you and you can eat sugar and not get fat gets found. Still doesn't mean it's healthy or has the possibility of getting you fat. See the issue there, that is just 1 of many problems. \n \nSecond Many studies are very broad due to I want to say limited ability to do invasive testing. People are people, you can't put them in a lab with probes attached for a year and monitor the complete response of every system with everything they eat. So we have studies that monitor people over the years and we get correlations between things instead of causal relationships. \n \nSo like some others have already said it's hard, the body is very complex and there are many factors that inhibit in one way or another effective study of it. \n \nNow with all that, we are still making progress although a bit slow. There was a pretty bad mix up in the 50s and 60s that we are still feeling the hurt from but I will ignore that. Also as far as healthy eating I don't know too much but what makes us fat is something I have looked into for a long time now. \n \nWhat we do know is that insulin is the hormone that makes us fat, it tells our cells to start to take up blood sugar and other things for energy and regulates our bodies energy. You might think that's fantastic so how do I control my insulin? Well we don't really know, as far as I know there has not been any major study that has measure insulin responses in people based on different foods and genetics. There are some people out there, usually body building people that have done some more personal tests, but it's not wide scale enough to say anything general. \n \nAs related to studies most insulin stuff is related to diabetes and not healthy eating/weight loss. Because of this there really hasn't been any studies centered around controlling insulin response in the body because doctors use insulin to regulate the patient. So if there is not enough insulin they don't care about making the body make more (which is Diabeties type 1, can't make it) they just give you a shot of insulin. It's treated as a medicine. \n \nThis is where I am at after looking into this stuff for about 5 years on and off. I am not a doctor it was just for personal understanding of the situation. ",
"The key is understanding the subtle difference between these statements:\n\nA: \"This result only has a 5% chance of happening by coincidence\"\n\nB: \"This result only has a 5% chance of being a coincidence\"\n\nStatement A doesn't say anything about how likely it is there's a real effect. Maybe the odds are only 0.01%. In that case, even though both explanations are unlikely, a coincidence is still much more likely.\n\nOn the other hand, statement B implies there's a 95% chance the effect is real.\n\nThe problem is that scientific studies almost always mean statement A, but people often confuse it with statement B, which is a much stronger statement.\n\nIt's actually very easy to generate results that only have a 5% chance of happening by coincidence. If you measure 100 things, then each one will, on average, be correlated with 5 of the others by pure coincidence. That's 5 *each*, so 500 possible headlines can come from one small study. It's so easy to do that [someone made a website that does it automatically](_URL_0_). My favorite: Per capita consumption of mozzarella cheese correlates with civil engineering doctorates awarded.",
"I'm a science grad student, not studying nutrition but I know enough that I can tell when people are reaching with science for a reason to eat or not eat something. I have been curious about food for the last 5 years or so; where it comes from, what makes it bad or good for you, how to cook it, etc. I've found that Michael Pollan is a great author to read to learn about food, and he had a nice rule that he wrote: \"Eat food. Mostly plants. Not too much.\" He wrote a quick little 60 page book called food rules where he defines the terms in this sentence pretty specifically, but I think it makes sense to me.\n\nIn terms of common nutrients like salt, sugar, fat, carbs I think everyone has heard that they're both good and bad in a dozen different ways. It can be frustrating not knowing what's healthy! Trends or lifestyles like vegetarianism, veganism, paleo, raw foodies, even a fad like juicing (god forbid) may point you in the right direction but ultimately there will still be a number of exceptions.\nA lot of people volley for raw food only (or mostly) but from the way I understand evolution part of the reason humanity developed superior usage of brainpower was the discovery of cooking, allowing your body to consume more calories at once from the food you eat so you don't spend half you day finding your food and chewing it. Cooking and processing can unlock nutrients that wouldn't be accessible to our bodies if we just ate them raw. While a lot of food is great to eat raw, like salads and fruits, I'm not going to eat a raw sweet potato, I won't get anything out of that. Even raw kale is so fibrous you chew each leaf forever before you can swallow it, but if you massage it with some acidic dressing, it softens and becomes significantly more edible.\n\nSo let's say that's our philosophy now, let's find every nutrient in every food and figure out what needs to be cooked and what can be eaten raw, and we'll build a diet out of that, right? Wrong. There's no database for that... except history. This is another thing I think Pollan conveys very well in his book (and Netflix series) cooked. People have thrived for thousands of years without obesity, but also without juicing, or vitamin supplements, or dieting smoothies. Learning from cultural traditions of eating is the best way I've been able to understand what is healthy. There are just too many variables! Even if we know the exact contents of everything we put in our bodies, we won't know how much of it we actually digest and benefit from unless we can describe every enzyme and interactive nutritional agent in our body, which won't happen for a while. My favorite example is corn, or maize more specifically. Early civilizations of North and Central America lived off of corn, it made up a huge percentage of their diet. When corn was taken back to Europe, everyone ate a bunch of it and got sick with pallegra due to a vitamin deficiency or something (one of the big diseases contributing to the spread of vampire lore, but that's for another time), which was not fun. Turns out, maize had some pretty specific processing protocol (the Good Eats episode on tortillas explains this very well) to extract nutrients from it, along with how it interacted with the food in the rest of their diet.\n\nNext there's fermentation. This is food processing, where bacteria basically digests part of your food for you, adding some tasty and sometimes nutritious treats of their own. Chocolate, bread (made properly), beer, wine, yogurt, and sometimes pickling are all forms of fermentation. I don't know a lot about why fermentation is good for you, but there's a reason it's been around about as long as we have. It's a good place to start for healthy food preparation ideas.\n\nTLDR: Learn about food culture and traditions. Cooking methods, ingredient combinations, and even fermentation techniques developed over generations of thriving and healthy lifestyles. Use them. Also nutrients on a label can only tell you so much, assuming we know everything about how the human body processes food is ignorant. Michael Pollan, Good Eats. Great references for me.",
"Part of the problem is that science journalism has conflated \"a single study came out that says X\" with \"all scientists now believe X\" and created that impression in the public. So with that in mind, it's easy to see how it could appear as if \"scientists\" are constantly changing their minds if you consider \"scientists\" as a monolithic unit. \n\nIn my opinion, this has also eroded the boundary between fact and opinion in the public imagination. These articles try to tell us \"all scientists now believe X\", implying that \"all scientists say X is fact\". Really the takeaway should be \"there is some evidence for X, but it could also be Y, **we don't know yet**\". But uncertainty isn't flashy.",
"The main reason is the rather obvious one that properly conducted studies take a lot of time, planning and money. To get funding it is desirable to explain why you are not simply replicating previous studies that have been done in an area. Therefore it is very unusual to be comparing identical studies.\nAnother reason is that some areas such as diet and nutrition have a lot of preconceived notions that suit certain ideas such as weight loss is not about energy intake versus expenditure. So studies that support the basic physics are not news whereas poorly designed and controlled studies with a headline of \"Scientists say calories don't matter, eat what you like\" is going to attract a lot of attention as it suits what many people want to hear.",
"In my experience talking with scientists (emphasis on endurance sport performance) they don't see a lot of conflict or contradiction, but rather a gradual increase understanding the whole picture. They have the experience to know that the results of a study are necessarily limited in application and focus.\n\nThe popular press on the other hand is another matter. While a scientists will be the first to say that Study X reveals something they will qualify this noting that the results are constrained to certain duration of exercise, experience and fitness of subjects and a variety of factors. The popular press is frequently guilty of extrapolating a positive sign from research into a much larger population case than the research supports. There are some genuine areas where new research contradicts and corrects old assumptions but most research simply widens the arc of understanding. The results seem in conflict when they are poorly reported in the media.",
"Actually we do know the basic stuff about fitness nutrition. For example we definitely know that to lose weight you need to eat less calories than what you maintain and to minimize muscle loss and maximize health along the way you just need to consume enough protein and the essential micronutrients/fats needed for life.\n\nThere isn't a secret diet or food that will make you lose fat and there isn't a single food item/family that will 100% make you fat (carbs for example as many people think). It's all about the total calories.\n\nHaving said that, fitness is a big industry that thrives on the ignorance of the general public to sell them fad diets and supplements to lose fat and gain muscle. If the general public knew how simple it is to build muscle and lose fat then they wouldn't buy said fitness industry products."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27314414"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3skqed | why were/are cars designed to slowly roll forward when no pedals are pressed? | I read about *why* this used to happen with older cars, but surely they or newer ones could be designed to not do so.
Is there a reason it's better for the car to move forward slowly with no pedals being pressed? It just seems like a silly precedent. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3skqed/eli5_why_wereare_cars_designed_to_slowly_roll/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwy2zg5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's not. The engine is running, and it outputs power. Leave it in neutral (disengage the drive shaft) if you do not want to propel the car forward/backwards. If drive shaft is engaged, the very act of having the engine on will produce a minimum amount of power in whatever gear you have it in. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
c9uwc5 | why can firms like ally & goldman sachs offer much higher interest rates for savings then my own bank? | They have rates of \~2.15% while my own bank only has 0.01% interest on savings. Why is this?
Edit - follow up question, besides more inperson support and physical branches, why would anyone want to keep savings invested in the banks with such lower rates, especially now in the digital age where transfer ease/time is neglible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9uwc5/eli5_why_can_firms_like_ally_goldman_sachs_offer/ | {
"a_id": [
"et3571q",
"et35l5d",
"et3685m"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
4
],
"text": [
" Instead of higher interest rates, it offers services like in person tellers, physical branches, linked checking accounts, notary services, certified checking and networks of no-fee atms. Enough people value those extra benefits that those banks don't feel the need to offer higher interest rates to compete with online no frills banks.",
"Limited (in GS case) or no (ally) local branches allows them to reduce their overhead of paying for locations, utilities, cleaning, staff, etc. So they offer more competitive rates to attract customers because they have fewer expenditures so they can funnel some of that extra money into returns.",
"Banks make most of their money from issuing loans. \n\nThey're allowed to lend more than they have in cash, but they need to have at least some money to start with, so they offer savings accounts to get people to give them money to lend out. \n\nThen the Federal Reserve sets a requirement for the percentage of deposits that they have to hold in cash or at the Federal Reserve. \n\nThe idea is that they incentivize you to give them your money to hold by giving you some of the interest they earn by lending your money out. But a lot of the largest banks have way more deposits than they need to meet the Federal Reserve requirements. So they don't have to pay any interest because they don't need your money anymore."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8y1gw9 | if clouds are masses of condensed water, then how come if a plane flies through it, the plane does not get wet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8y1gw9/eli5_if_clouds_are_masses_of_condensed_water_then/ | {
"a_id": [
"e27ayqw",
"e27b1y8",
"e27b60z",
"e27b9en"
],
"score": [
15,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Why do you assume they don't get wet?\n\nThere will be some water on the plane but not a large amount. Compare to what happen if you drive a car trough mist/fog that is like a cloud at ground level. It is not a huge amount of water that stick on the car. A plane is faster so it passes trough more clouds/mist per unit of time but the force of the wind is also higher so it will blow away the water.",
"It does get a bit wet, just as your car gets wet when you drive fast through a lot of thick fog. Sometimes you can even see the moisture streaming along the plane's windows.",
"Planes do get wet when they fly through clouds. How wet depends on the type and density of the cloud. ",
"If the plane is warmer than the surrounding air, it would resist (or counteract) the tendency of water to condense on it. Just like a cold drink can collect condensation in a room where there isn't (normally) any water condensing, the conditions of the *surface* impact this as much as the conditions of the air do.\n\nAlso, planes fly very fast. If water did start forming drops on it, it would likely get blown off. So water may come in contact with the plane, but never stay still for long enough or form big enough drops for it to be visible. \n\nLastly, planes can get wet and this is an especially big issue when the water *freezes* and ice starts to build up. They have heaters on the outside to deal with this, and procedures/backup devices to handle a situation where stuff stops working as a result of ice. But occasionally when the situation isn't handled right, ice can cause plane crashes. There was a big crash a few years ago (an Air France plane IIRC) which happened because a speed sensor was blocked by ice. The pilots did not correctly realize that its reading was wrong, or switch to other methods to read or guess their speed. It *may have been* a preventable crash if they pilots had been more aware or trained better in that case, but in those circumstances the result was deadly. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3i1n64 | why is it racist/closed-minded to find people of a race unattractive? | I got called out today because a couple of Black women overheard a conversation I was having with my White mom; I'm Mixed. I had said that I don't really find myself attracted to Black women, but White and Asian women, and one of the two had called me out quite loudly, shouting about how I was this horrible, racist, blah blah blah.
I don't get how I'm racist if I don't find myself attracted to Black women.
EDIT: posted this further down but here:
Context: We were at a informal pizza parlor kind of restaurant and we were not speaking that loudly, but one of them kept looking over at us. Eventually my mom asked me if I was looking to see anyone and the conversation went like:
"meh I dunno. I'm going abroad in a year for a year and I'm looking for something long term and someone with whom I could go abroad. [insert somewhat closed-minded country of interest of study here] is a nice place, but if I were to see someone, I'd enjoy it so much more if we could go together."
"What about [Black girl I dated on and off]? You two still a thing?"
"Nah, and I think it's good because I don't know how she'd react to [country of interest] culture. I mean id be hard-pressed to find a Black woman who'd be
"That's true, well do you have your sights set on anyone?"
"this one girl from [country] and I have actually been talking this summer and we're getting coffee once we're back on campus. She might be going abroad."
Eventually it circles around to me saying "Well maybe it's a good thing I don't find myself attracted to Black women—otherwise I might be going all alone."
They were eavesdropping on the entire fucking conversation, it's not like I was like "lol Black wimmenz are 2ugly6me."
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i1n64/eli5_why_is_it_racistclosedminded_to_find_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"cucib9q",
"cucie95",
"cucirbs",
"cuciw4j",
"cucix8z",
"cucj1wp",
"cucm2nb",
"cucmesh",
"cucymfv",
"cudb0se"
],
"score": [
30,
20,
7,
4,
10,
7,
4,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not. Some people are overly sensitive and think too highly of their own opinion. If you're not attracted to black women, that's completely fine as long as it doesn't lead you to treat black women poorly.",
"You aren't racist. You were expressing an opinion of what you prefer.\n\nIf I were to say I prefer shorter women, \ndoes that automatically imply\ntall women are not attractive?\n\nYou weren't being racist, they were being hyper sensitive.\n \n ",
"They weren't mad about your preferences, they were mad that you were talking about them in public. How would you feel if you were sitting in a restaurant, and someone at the next table over was talking about how ugly mixed-race people are?",
"There are people who like feet over boobies, it's fair to say that some people like Hispanics over blacks or whatever example you wanna use. You can't really change who you wanna get dicked by or dick down. ",
"If you happen to not be attracted to certain features, and those features tend to be present in black women, then you're not racist.\n\nIf you're not attracted to certain features *because* they tend to be present in black women, that's racist. Problem is, it's not always clear to a third party like the two black women who overheard you which of the two it is.",
"Among the black community there is and has been a huge lack of support for black women particularly from black men. While having preference isn't a bad thing and very normal you might have struck a nerve. It's quite possible these women have gone through harsher treatment from other men of color and were lashing out because of it. \n",
"Aesthetic preference isn't completely 100% unambiguously something that you're born with. Stupid people extrapolate this to mean that if they aren't in your aesthetic preference, it's because you're racist. Racism is the only reason you couldn't possible find them attractive in their deluded mind.\n\nSo no, it's not racist. You just met a complete idiot.",
"Short answer: Societal rules(constructs) and human psychology don't mesh well.\n\nDisclaimer: I am on painkillers from surgery two days ago. This may be a bit disjointed, but once you look at the larger concepts, it is all relative. Here in I shall talk about not just \"racism\" but all sorts of preferences and such in general, because it is all manifestations of the same simple(when you get down to it) evolutionary mechanisms.\n\nWe say racism is bad, but we have an instinctual urge to be more trusting and attracted to that which is similar to us. We tend to distrust that which is dissimilar or unfamiliar. We often bond in the face of adversity, and when there is no obvious adversity to be had, we can sort of force something into that wedge. We don't do this on purpose, we do this for the same reason dogs piss on car tires.\n\nBut we create a social construct about how that is unfair, and how we're above nature, almost like religious worship. We have fabricated an impossible golden standard based on wishful thinking and pixie farts.\n\nOne of the best ways to get over \"racism\" is to be conditioned to being around a wide variety of other races as we are growing up. We can't simply *will* our instincts to react a certain way.\n\nI put \"racism\" in quotes because that is only one manifestation of what I talked about, distrust of that which is different. We tend to be distrustful and not attracted to people who look \"gross\", retarded, ill, dangerous, creepy. We don't want them around us and we don't want to breed with them. We often actually treat people who would want to breed with a mentally challenged person, or the very young or very old, or the non-human... as if they are criminal should they try such a thing.....\n\nIt is all about how we've evolved to bond. Over time, those shortcuts became prevalent features in our subconscious because they were useful. We don't find circus freaks and mentally retarded people attractive(mostly), because that would, in general, lead to a weakening of the gene pool....our best chances of reproduction producing viable offspring is someone who is obviously healthy and likely to get along with us. \n\nJudging by a surface trait like skin color isn't really an active choice at all, it is a remnant of evolution that society declairs is \"unfair\". Science is hardly ever fair when it comes to societal standards.\n\nYeah, I went there. There is biological reason to be \"racist\", and in fact, that is the natural state if society doesn't domesticate us. Human's **are** just animals after all, so saying \"domesticate\" is quite apt.\n\nThat we're on the top of the psychological chain and can think about things on a higher order does not eradicate those natural tendencies. We're all judgemental beings, we take cursory looks at X and decide whether we like it or not before we ever try it. People, food, what movies to watch, everything. \n\nIt is *all* a manifestation of the same mechanics within our psyche/brains. Racism is but one sequelae of the illness that is being human.\n\nAnd that is the problem with social constructs. They are fabricated things that are established based on one of our more flawed and subjective measures, emotion. It is no better than dining etiquette or thinking that \"cursing\" is \"bad\". Which are just more tools we use to judge or feel superior to others.\n\nIn fact, that in and of itself, is what I find a bit Ironic or Meta. You get an ignorant racist, who, because of the way evolution has panned out and his separation from society, has a thing against Purple people.....and we see just that....and judge him as a bad person off the get go. We don't take time to study why he feels that way, we just assume that he is a lesser being.\n\nYou see that in a lot of activist types, a kind of hypocrisy and/or projection(seeing the flaw in yourself and subconsciously projecting it on others). There are even people in this thread who are doing such a thing, taking a very tiny and meaningless bit of information and forming opinions about you, some of them severe.\n\nWe like what we like. We can't really control it. I like pizza, but not with anchovies. I like icecream but not yogurt.\n\nIs that fair to yogurt or anchovies? No.\n\nCan wishful thinking, or an arbitrary decree from others, change my tastes/preferences? No.\n\nCan a bit of conditioning be employed to over-ride that natural state of aversion? Sometimes.\n\nAnd that is the best we can do. People can't just up and decide to be straight or gay. Surely society influences us in that area, as well as our instincts and subjective tastes so we're not entirely \"born that way\". Saying \"born that way\" is an intellectually lazy version of saying \"we really can't control our own preferences\" While can choose to try to *do* anything, we cannot simply choose to *be* something else.\n\nGetting along in society is a two way street, IF that is what we want. We have to admit that none of us are perfect. We have to admit that human's are not biblical creatures designed to be X, Y, or Z. We evolved here like everything else. Evolution is not perfect. We all have many flaws. If we want to be forgiven for our flaws, we have to be willing to overlook flaws in others.\n\nMe, some skin color doesn't strike my fancy. I am not a fan of extremely dark skin, aesthetically speaking. I really like pale skin, and I can get into bronze skin or even very dark skin if the features are otherwise attractive to other tastes that I have. The eyes just so, a nose that isn't too gnarly, long legs, etc...whatever your anatomical kinks are. (Whether you like pepperoni or not, maybe You do like anchovies, but not green olives....)\n\nMost people are the same as that. Many people, though, will avoid making a long rambling post like like I am doing here and just say something with a few words. \"I am not a big fan of black chicks.\" That is not an inherently evil statement. It is an offhanded and shallow statement, yeah.\n\nBut why should people have to curb their wording....It's going to be tough to coddle the rest of the entire planet. If we all refrained from being offensive to anyone, our vocabulary would be quite limited. Even monosyllabic grunts some people **take** offense at.\n\nThe ultimate end to being that kind of authoritarian social structure, is to put everyone in place of total solitude so they cannot interact with people at all, because someone *will* get pissed with enough time and exposure.\n\nAs I was saying earlier, the best we can do is try to overlook faults in others. Authoritarianism isn't the way to go, because everyone's criteria for \"authority\" is pretty much themselves and those they agree with, fuck everyone else, because, reasons. We have evolved to be tribalistic. This is why we riot over sports games, this is why we argue on the internet, this is why people who like Coke think they're better than people who like Pepsi...etc\n\nAs much as I talked about evolution it's pretty clear I'm not religious at all, even been the outspoken atheist a time or three, but that doesn't mean that some of them didn't have some good mottos to live by. Turn the other cheek....do unto others. If society could not throw out the baby with the bathwater, we might be able to survive long enough to get off this planet.\n\nWith all that, I'll step down off my soap-box and try to remember to thank my Dr. for prescribing Vicodin after my nose job(functional, not aesthetic, it is going to be as ugly as it always was)\n",
"It isn't racist *to do that*. But, finding an otherwise attractive person ugly due to her ethnic makeup probably comes from living in a society that conditions you not to like her ethnicity, if you follow. You are not *being a racist*, but you, like all of us, are conditioned by a racist society.\n\n .\n .\n .\nI mean, think about it: you are (as an example) a heterosexual male. You see a beautiful, stacked, nude woman. Iman, say, or Beyonce, or Gabrielle Union, whoever. How could it be normal or natural for you to not think she was attractive? Is skin tone *really* stronger than, you know, your natural heterosexual drive? I don't think so.\n\n .\n .\n .",
"This is a loaded (it's not obviously true you are racist if you feel that way) and subjective question so this has been removed.\n\nIt also appears like you posted this in order to argue a point of view, please see the sidebar:\n\n > Don't post just to express an opinion or argue a point of view.\n\nIf you want opinions from redditors try /r/askreddit. If you want to be convinced otherwise try /r/changemyview (but read their rules)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cbwx0a | why are there different types of zits? i.e. blackheads, different types of puss, seed-esque, etc. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cbwx0a/eli5_why_are_there_different_types_of_zits_ie/ | {
"a_id": [
"etju4h4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Blackheads is just pores thst fill with dead skin, dust etc and culminates into a black thing.\nZits are basically where the skin has been ruptured, andd bacteria have been allowed to enter pass most of the dermal layers. Blood clots over hole, skins heals over yadda yadda, but bacteris is still inside, so white blood cells are deployed in a video game like scenerio to kill bacteria, begin long ass war. The white residue left under skin, is primarily dead white blood cells, bacteria etc. The reason why some zits grow so latge, is because some invasive bacteria have extremely high mitotic indices, basically replicate very quickly, and it takes the body a while to either develop or find an antimicrobial cell that can deal with the bacteria. Same with a cold or flu really. \n\nIf pus is different colours, it probs to do with the chemical structures of the bacteria, more rhan anything else. Or more simply, the skin might thinner or thicker causing cllour distortion. Think of the ocean, deeper you go the more the colour arounf you will change.\n\nIdhac wtf seed-esque is so ill leave someone else to answer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7mzgui | how do high blood pressure medicines help reduce blood pressure? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7mzgui/eli5_how_do_high_blood_pressure_medicines_help/ | {
"a_id": [
"drxxq58",
"drxytp8"
],
"score": [
2,
27
],
"text": [
"There are a few different methods to lower hypertension depending on what is causing it. For what is known as \"essential hypertension\" (in where there is no known cause to the high BP), a certain class of BP meds work to lower BP by decreasing the preload of the heart, which means less blood is going in so the pressure is not as high going out because the volume is lower. People with left sided cardiac failure often have problems retaining fluid, so a diuretic (or \"water pill\") can help the kidneys remove more water from the blood to reduce blood volume, which in turn reduces blood pressure. How cool :) ",
"Couple of ways. High blood pressure mostly comes down to the heart pumping harder/faster, blood vessels squeezing harder (blood vessels have a little lining of muscle), and salt/water balance. The body controls all this in a couple of complicated ways.\n\nLet's cover the most common groups:\n\n* Calcium channel blockers (like amlodipine) stop blood vessels from squeezing down as tight by working on that little lining of muscle.\n\n* ACE inhibitors (like lisinopril) stop part of a signal relay that normally tells blood vessels to squeeze down and tells the kidneys to hold on to salt and water. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs, like losartan) are really similar, but work on a different part of that relay.\n\n* Thiazide diuretics (like HCTZ) are interesting. You'll mostly read that they make you pee off salt and water, so you have less blood in your vessels, meaning lower blood pressure. There actually seems to be a lot more to it long-term, but it's not ELI5 (they don't even explain this part well in med school.)\n\n* Beta-blockers (like metoprolol) block signals that tell the heart to beat harder and faster.\n\n* Alpha-blockers (like prazosin) block signals that tell blood vessels to squeeze down. They act on a different part of the same big system as beta-blockers. \n\n* Central alpha agonists (like clonidine) act on the same system as alpha and beta-blockers, but instead of blocking the signal, they trick the brain into not putting it out to begin with.\n\nIn general, what we've realized is that blood pressure isn't always the thing to focus on. Some drugs that decrease blood pressure don't make you live any longer, or have fewer heart attacks and strokes. (Alpha and beta blockers are both great for a lot of other problems, but not great if high blood pressure is the only one. Thiazides, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors and ARBs are all cool.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3r4ls1 | why do conservatives not typical push for conservation of the environment and of natural resources? | This is not just a semantic question. Conservatives favour family, the economy, a strong country and a continuation of the status quo. It would seem that the degradation of the environment and the overuse of resources would be a being threat to these values than, say, terrorism. So why is conservation of the environment and of natural resources not generally a prominent part of the conservative platform? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r4ls1/eli5_why_do_conservatives_not_typical_push_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwktlqc",
"cwkwhgm",
"cwkzvaw",
"cwl9tg0"
],
"score": [
62,
9,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Generally conservatives are against regulation of business, and conservation of the environment requires businesses to be regulated so that they don't exploit it. This is a case where their economic stance of \"making laws that regulate businesses is bad\" outweighs any other considerations.",
"The short economic answer would be that environmental degradation can only be reflected by charging financial costs to those who are causing the degradation (ie. cap and trade). These extra costs are likely viewed as economic inefficiency which tends to be anathema to conservative ideologies ( which favour light-touch (or zero) regulation and simplifying tax, both of which are aimed at minimising inefficiency).\n\nThe truth is that policies like cap and trade actually maximise efficiency by including previously-unvalued environmental degradation in the costs of polluters but most conservatives don't view it this way (although some do).",
"There's a few things that come into conflict,but they all come from the same root belief\n\nThe main one is that if you accept that it's happening,you pretty much have to accept that the only way to fix it is government regulation. (If the market was taking care of it,it wouldn't be happening).most are ideologically very against government regulation.\n\nGenerally this leads to them trying to mesh those two beliefs. Generally this means \"It's not happening\"(or its not happening on a big enough scale to matter),\"other countries will take advantage of it anyway \",\"God will handle it\" etc.\n\nThey have a conclusion (government regulation is bad),and back rationalize to satisfy that belief",
"There's actually a group of \"green\" conservatives who are doing just that. AND!!!! Ecologists often tag-team with hunters to preserve natural spaces because hunting is important to rural conservatives :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4b1kno | is reverse-engineering easy? like if say, someone dropped an f-22/f-35 at the chinese doorstep how much could they learn from it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4b1kno/eli5is_reverseengineering_easy_like_if_say/ | {
"a_id": [
"d15cern",
"d15ci1p",
"d15dlsw",
"d15dwby"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
29
],
"text": [
"I wouldn't call it easy, but a government power like China wouldn't be hard press to find the kind of money to get a good team together to solve any problem like that.",
"Well it some areas of engineering it's quite easy. Basic measuring tools can give dimensions for the physical make up of said plane.\n\nthen there are ways of finding out which alloys and polymers are used in the making. It's a little harder than measuring but still not too terribly hard. \n\nThe electronics on the other hand would be pretty inconceivable to clone. Military programming is a big kept secret and unless created by the Chinese would be pretty hard to decipher and replicate. \n\nSo an exact clone would be terribly difficult but a working jet that looks like an f22 not so much.",
"They could learn a lot, but they couldn't make an exact duplicate. They don't have the metallurgy to build an engine that'll match the performance of the real thing's even if they were able to copy the physical design perfectly.",
"It would certainly boost their aviation programs by quite a bit, but it doesn't mean they'd be able to make a copy of those planes. At best they'd be able to glean some working principles and make a poor substitute.\n\nThe plane is just the outcome or artifact of a long and complicated design and manufacturing process. They only see the outcome of the process, not the process itself, but the process is what makes the plane. So for example, they can measure the plane's dimensions, but that doesn't mean they'll be able to replicate the production process that went into making the parts. It's like being able to measure that a sample of gold is 99.99999% pure but that doesn't mean you'll know how to make gold that pure. In this case, they'll be able to do a lot of analysis on things like the stealth coating and stuff, but they'd still need to figure out how to make them that way.\n\nYou can read about Russia [reverse engineering the B-29 bomber](_URL_0_). They had issues such as the U.S. using the imperial system, so things like sheet aluminum thicknesses were in inches, while Russia (like everyone else) had moved onto the metric system. So it was a pain to actually make a copy, even though they had the measurements, since the available materials were not calibrated to the same scales (i.e. imperial vs metric). And this was back when production processes were relatively simple, and a plane's performance was largely mechanically based (as opposed to nowadays, where there's computers for everything). Nowadays the production process for most parts of a military plane is awesomely complex, and thus both difficult to figure out by just looking at the end result (the plane), and very expensive to reproduce (custom manufacturing processes, large jigs, etc.).\n\nAs a side note, apparently one of the reasons why the F-22 is unavailable for export is because if a foreign nation got it, they could easily get its source code and be able to figure out how the U.S. operates its AESA radar, flight controls, etc. The F-35, on the other hand, was designed from the ground up for export, and so its software is heavily encrypted; other countries can use it of course, but it's supposed to be very difficult to reverse engineer (decompile, etc.). Additionally, one of the problems with restarting F-22 production is that its processors are already out of date now and no longer manufactured, although they were undoubtedly top-of-the-line when the plane was designed. So even for the U.S. to make more (and the U.S. of course already has all the blueprints etc.) would be a difficult proposition. It would be orders of magnitude harder for any other nation (who does not have the blueprints) to make a copy.\n\nBut having the plane would undoubtedly boost their aviation programs by quite a bit. Not anywhere near being able to make a copy though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-4"
]
] |
||
3wevwx | how is the deep web inaccessible via search engines? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3wevwx/eli5_how_is_the_deep_web_inaccessible_via_search/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxvn224",
"cxvnajd",
"cxw106c"
],
"score": [
11,
17,
3
],
"text": [
"Search engines aren't magic. If a site requires a login to access some content, then a search engine won't be able to access it and therefore can't index it. It's the same reason google maps doesn't have pictures of the inside of your hose - they don't have access.",
"If I create a page, but don't link anything to it, or only link to it from inaccessible locations, then it's part of what's called the deep web.\n\nEven if it's accessible you can always use [robots.txt](_URL_0_) to flag it as \"not to be indexed\".",
"Several ways:\n\n1) Content that needs to be logged into with specific info (e.g. your bank account.) Search bots cannot access this.\n\n2) You can tell bots not to index your site's page(s) by implementing the meta robots tag on your site's page(s): Specifically < META NAME=\"ROBOTS\" CONTENT=\"NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW\" > \n\n3) Likewise, you can also tell bots not to index certain pages / directories in the robots.txt file.\n\n4) As others have mentioned, content that is not linked from elsewhere will not get found by search bots and indexed...but even so, if I link to my personal bank account profile and a bot crawls that link, it will still need to log into my account to access it (#1) which it won't be able to do.\n\nEDIT: mentioned .htaccess file when I should have mentioned robots.txt file."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robots_exclusion_standard"
],
[]
] |
||
3ie2rb | why are big guys tough (or at least portrayed so in media)? | In all sorts of action and other movies the protagonist inevitably fights a 7 foot tall, often Russian beast of a man. It seems like being tall always correlates to being essentially immune to punches in movies and TV. What does being big have to do with being so tough? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ie2rb/eli5_why_are_big_guys_tough_or_at_least_portrayed/ | {
"a_id": [
"cufm3ix"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The old adage 'the bigger they are the harder they fall' is just a feel good statement. The reality is that the bigger a person is the more power it takes to hurt them and the more power that can deliver. \n\nJust think about professional fights, they all have weight classes. 160lbs people do not fight 200lbs people because they would lose. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9lsmlu | what caused the deserts across the sahara, middle east, and central asia? | What weather conditions created [this](_URL_0_)? Or did ancient civs have access to nukes? All I've heard for central asia is that the Himalayas block moisture from the Indian Ocean leading to a rainshadow effect.
Edit: I still think this is the result of the Finno-Korean Hyperwar | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9lsmlu/eli5_what_caused_the_deserts_across_the_sahara/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7991np",
"e79bk77",
"e79bsr0",
"e79c5cl",
"e79csou",
"e79cywm",
"e79d9in",
"e79dh8e",
"e79dhjs",
"e79enad",
"e79f180",
"e79go4e",
"e79gpkt",
"e79kjec",
"e79smlf",
"e79uakc",
"e7a0ikr",
"e7a34mc",
"e7a4dk6",
"e7a7yk8",
"e7ancmc"
],
"score": [
3315,
354,
83,
126,
5,
22,
14,
3,
3,
2,
107,
42,
10,
2,
2,
4,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"“Between 30 and 35 degrees both north and south where Earth's atmosphere is dominated by the subtropical high, an area of high pressure, which suppresses precipitation and cloud formation, and has variable winds mixed with calm winds”\n\nBasically there’s regions where rain is unlikely to form due to global air currents as hot air at the equator rises and then falls beyond this zone\n\n_URL_0_",
"These regions are in a band of latitudes known as the sub-tropics. There is a large circulation of air know as the Hadley cell, in which air rises near the equator and descends in the sub-tropics. When air descends in altitude, the pressure increases and the relative humidity goes down, making the air drier. This also helps explain dry regions of Mexico and Australia. Clouds and rain are very unlikely to form in these regions because of this constant supply of dry air. This also happens over the sub-tropical ocean regions, causing less rain there.\n\nA somewhat similar process happens when air goes up and over a mountain range, which results in lots of rain on the front side and a rain shadow (very little rain) on the back side. ",
"The things about weather patterns are true, but it also should be noted it wasn't always desert. The Sahara used to be jungle, which is how our ancestors were able to move through it to get to the fertile Crescent. However an ice age hit, more water was locked up in polar ice, and so areas that were vulnerable to desertification did so\n\nEdit: thanks to all of you for finding a source. I really shouldn't put something out on reddit that late at night without a source. Cheers! ",
"You're right, what is now Iraq/Iran (Mesopotamia and Babylon along the Tigris and Euphrates) and Algeria (over farmed by the Romans), used to be lush, pastoral land. So what happened? Most likely it was desertification caused by early agriculture. In short:\n\n - Over tilling the land leads to loose, bare topsoil\n - Wind/rain takes all that fertile top soil away\n - The same crop is grown year after year on the same land, depleting the soil of key nutrients needed for growing that crop \n\nWhen the land has been tilled and single cropped for centuries, the last of the topsoil erodes and the subsoil beneath is depleted of nutrients needed by native plants. Because no plants are growing, there are no roots and soil organisms like earthworms to keep the soil loose and porous for water infiltration. So the soils become \"hard-capped\" and water runs over, instead of into, the soil. The hard capping makes it even harder for plants to grow, starting a vicious cycle that leads to a desert. \n\nHow could you conclude agriculture is to blame? Scientists looked at pollen samples in lake beds and found a sudden drop in native forest and grassland pollen and a rapid rise of agricultural pollen. This corresponded with a major increase in the rate of sedimentation on the lake bed due to erosion.\n\nIf you want to learn more about it check out Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations by David Montgomery, everything I've said here is pulled from that book. ",
"Anyone know why the US Southwest gets so much rain even though it looks like it’s in that desert ring?\n\nEdit: oops meant southeast lol",
"a new theory is that the Sahara was man-made through the introduction of livestock which ate the grasses causing a dry feedback loop\n\n > Growing agricultural addiction had a severe effect on the region’s ecology. As more vegetation was removed by the introduction of livestock, it increased the albedo (the amount of sunlight that reflects off the earth’s surface) of the land, which in turn influenced atmospheric conditions sufficiently to reduce monsoon rainfall. The weakening monsoons caused further desertification and vegetation loss, promoting a feedback loop which eventually spread over the entirety of the modern Sahara. Central to this cycle was the role that fire played in creating the new ecological circumstance. Although there is evidence for the presence of fires throughout all of human history, wild animals will not go onto a newly burned landscape because they would be easy targets for predators. However, pastoralists direct and protect their animals onto the newly regenerating landscape, altering the “ecology of fear.” This encourages scrub growth at the expense of grasses.\n\n > There is much work still to do to fill in the gaps, but Wright believes that a wealth of information lies hidden beneath the surface: “There were lakes everywhere in the Sahara at this time, and they will have the records of the changing vegetation. We need to drill down into these former lake beds to get the vegetation records, look at the archaeology, and see what people were doing there”.\n\n_URL_0_",
"To add to other responses, look carefully at the map. If you draw a straight line where the equator is, you'll notice that's where all the rainforests are. If you draw a curved line above the equator (representing the earth's curve), you'll notice that's where all the deserts in the northern hemisphere are including the ones you said and in southwest U.S./Mexico. If you draw another curve to the south of the equator, you'll notice that's where the other deserts are including Australia, south Africa, and the the hottest/dryest of them all in South America.",
"The sun hits hits the earth from directly above at the equator, heating the ground and sea. This causes water to evaoprate and rise as warm humid air. As it rises the air cools and forms clouds which eventually fall as rain, forming a lush green band at the equator. The cooled air flows away from the rising air at the equator and eventually decends as it becomes cooler and heavier. This air decends at roughly the same latitude above and below the equator; creating a band that is dominated by air that has already been stripped of moisture. This makes it harder for clouds to form or get to the point where they fall as rain, creating a desert. There is a further system below this creating the temperate forests and the desert regions at the poles.",
"It’s related to air circulation patterns. At the equator, the sun heats up the air and evaporates water over the oceans and continents. As the air rises, water vapor in the air condenses into cloud droplets, which form clouds, which create precipitation. After the air loses its moisture over the equator, the air gets pushed towards the north and South Pole. As it moves away from the equator, the air becomes colder and starts to sink over the subtropics (around 30 degrees north and south of the equator). The air is already dry, and cold, which means it can’t provide rain or even clouds to the subtropics. This is where you get deserts like the Sahara and the Atacama. The air eventually gets diverted back to the equator to go through this process again. The entire loop is called a Hadley cell and is responsible for the tropical rainforests along the equator like those found in South America and Africa as well as deserts in the subtropics in North America, South America, Asia, Africa, and Australia (I’ve no idea about Europe. They’re a bit too far north to be influenced by this.) \n\nIf you want to know more about this, here’s an article on the subject: _URL_0_",
"Iran's Caspian Sea coastline region along the north is lush and green; the Alborz mountains cause a rainshadow for the rest of the country",
"Once upon a time, there was this 'event' called the [5.9 kiloyear event.] \n(_URL_0_)\n\nThe 5.9-kiloyear event was one of the most intense aridification events during the Holocene. It occurred around 3900 BC (5900 years Before Present), ending the Neolithic Subpluvial. \n\nThe Neolithic Subpluvial was the most recent of a number of periods of \"Wet Sahara\" or \"Green Sahara\".\n\nWhile you're at it, check out the [4.2 kiloyear event.](_URL_1_) \n",
"I wish we could keep this near the top because I have two follow on questions related.\n\n1. Could the amount of sands in the deserts be contributing to global warming similar to the asphalts in our streets?\n\nI mean if you go to a patch of grass on a hot summer day - the soil and grass is cool to the bottom of your feet. \n\nBut if you walk on hot cement sidewalk or asphalt driveway it literally burns your feet at high noon - that absorption of heat has got to be contributing to global warming.\n\nAnd I never thought of it until I saw this picture today _URL_0_ - I was always thinking the sands acted as a mirror similar to ice and reflected the sun's heat energy - but sand is not a reflector of heat - it's an absorber - it you walk on stagnant *dry* sand barefooted - you can burn your feet - so the sands of the sahara are not reflecting that heat energy - they are absorbing it.\n\n\n\n((Not saying human's pollution and greenhouse gases are not contributing to global warming)) - certainly they are the main factor. But I wonder if the sands (and cement roads/streets etc) that cover *(random estimate here) maybe 15% of earth's land mass might also be contributing to global warming.\n\nSomeone mentioned above that planting trees that could live in the desert would be expensive and difficult - but I am now wondering if it might have a huge impact on the environment world wide?",
"Warm air rises.\n\nWarm air can hold more water than cold air. \n\nThe wind blows over the round earth left to right. \n\nSince it’s round, the wind curves towards the poles from the equator. \n\nSo what happens is air gets hot at the equator and starts moving towards the poles. If it can it collects water until it cant hold anymore and then rains it out. When it’s rained it’s guts out, that happens to be the towards the poles range where the deserts are. \n\nThe hot desert air try’s to collect water again, which makes the deserts more desert. The air continues to move towards the poles, getting colder as it gets further over the round earth. Cold air cant hold water as good as hot air, so it rains again. This is the temperate zone. Pine forests and such.\n\nNow the air is dry and cold as it continues to the poles. It picks up water over the dry tundras of Canada and Siberia but can’t hold much. \n\nThis process is what trade winds and “Hadley cells” are. Trade winds sailors talk about. Wind blowing from the equator toward the poles. Hadley cells are the water going up and down with the wind. Jungle, desert, temperate, tundra pole. \n\nMake sense? ",
"Take a look at _URL_0_ ... it actually covers why the saharan desert is growing, how the weather causing it is in a feedback loop, and their idea to reverse it.\n\nNot saying other comments are wrong, but i think this gives a better explanation as to the conditions than just \"cuz its hot\" which doesnt address other areas of the world on the same latitudes, other desert areas of the world on other latitudes, etc.",
"Most, if not all terrains where forests at some point in time, even in Africa to this day you can see there is around 40 meters of erosion, and a few tablelands are still standing. Deforestation from civilization is a cause for most of it. Central Mexico used to be forest, now it is arid. Canada and USA are swiftly catching up because of conventional agriculture and plowing that speed up the process. Modern Alberta, Canada used to be almost all forest now it is arid, Natives in both Canada and Australia both burned swaths of forest to clear it.\n\nNow when you look at the Sahara, know that we have had 14,000 years of people there, and at least 180,000 years of people before that, with an apocalyptic event, and the younger dryas ice age inbetween. A lot of Europe was deforested not only for agriculture, but also during the mini iceage that we had in the middle ages period. \n\nWhen a forest is cleared (for agriculture) it erodes the topsoil and exposes it to sun, wind, and rain that all accelerates the desertification process even more. A healthy forest floor will absorb rain, alowing it to evapotranspirate into more rain. \n\nTl;Dr humans not implementing rainwater harvesting techniques to the land they control. [This](_URL_0_) is a paper I am working on that explains how to regenerate the land to generate forest and more productive agriculture than what we have today, not ELI5.\n\nEdit: the natural procession of land is a forest. In 99% (everything but tundra/permafrost) will become a forest if humans are not part of the equation. Humans are not inheritly negative, we can do better with nature than nature can by itself, as described in the linked paper. ",
"Ohh, something I can comment on!\n\nThe sun makes the equator really hot and this, in turn, makes a lot of hot, wet air. Now think of your kettle when it boils, where does the steam go? It rises, and it's exactly the same at the equator! The hot, wet air rises up into the atmosphere.\n\nNow think about the mirror in your bathroom when you take a shower, what happens to it as you enjoy a long soak? It gets misted up. This is because the hot, wet air in your bathroom cools down and turns back into water, which condenses on your mirror. It's exactly the same at the equator! As the hot, wet air that has been rising begins to cool, it turns back into water and falls as rain. The equator is hot and also very rainy! This is why we find rainforests, mostly, near the equator.\n\nBut what happens to that Cool, dry air after it has rained? It can't sink back down to the equator because more air is rising beneath it. Instead it gets 'pushed' North and South from the equator where it can sink back down to ground level.\n\nBecause it already lost most of it's water, this cool, dry, sinking air can't rain North and South of the equator; and so this is why we tend to find deserts in these areas!",
"Hard to say the exact cause but it may be due to continental uplift of the region draining the old mega lakes. Much of the salty areas used to be seafloor until around the period of the yonger dryas climate disaster 13000 years ago. Here's a video with a hypothesis of where Atlantis went in context to what Africa used to look like. _URL_0_",
"One very recent example of a man made desert is the Aralkum Desert in Central Asia. As late as the 1960s the Aral Sea was the fourth largest lake in the world. The Soviets diverted the Syr Darya and Amu Darya rivers for the purpose of irrigation. The Aral sea was made up of northern and southern lobes and now only the northern lobe exists. A thin strip of the southern lobe remains in varying sizes. What was left is a dry lakebed made up of salt deposits and is heavily polluted by the remnants Soviet weapons testing. It is a source of massive health problems in the region.\n\nThese irrigation projects led to water levels dropping by as much a 3 feet per year. This led to massive ecosystem collapse. The rising salinity killed much of the remaining sea and plant life. \n\nBy 1997, in less than 50 years since the diversion began, the Seas size reduced to such an extent that the once massive lake was split into two separate lakes. The North (Lesser) Aral sea, and the South (greater) Aral Sea. The southern lobe, now cut off from any inflow source was almost totally dry by 2014. Occasional snow melts and ground water replenish the far western portion, but the vast majority of the former lake remains dry. For scale, those of us in north America could imagine all but the very northern portion of lake Michigan becoming a desert. \n\nThere are attempts underway to replenish the North Aral Sea. Dam projects are having some success. Salinity has been reduced even to the point that some commercial fishing is returning. The southern lobe however may be lost forever. This is considered one the greatest man made evnironmental disasters in history. \n\n_URL_0_\n\n",
"Deforestation and overfarming.\n\nThat area used to be the bread basket of humanity.\n\nIn some cases the earth was salted to kill everything.\n\n\nThe land is reclaimable, though ",
"If I recall correctly, it's basically because at certain latitudes the pressure is higher due to convection of air and stuff,leading to less clouds being formed which = less rain= desert.",
"That desert region is due to the same event that resulted in Humans getting down out of the trees and standing upright: Panama.\n\nWhen the Americas came together some 4mil years ago the West- > East flow of the Pacific could no longer continue straight through to Africa and thus the El Nino weather pattern stopped bringing as much rain.\n\n1) creation of Panama blocks W > E humidity flow\n\n2) region dries out overall, with some falling into desertification\n\n3) Africa-wide jungle breaks up and forms intervening savannah\n\n4) Humans evolve on savannah, spread across planet and devise Internet, asks climate question that wraps around to human evolution."
]
} | [] | [
"https://imgur.com/a/GMyqHhA"
] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_latitudes"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://blog.frontiersin.org/2017/03/14/did-humans-create-the-sahara-desert/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.storagetwo.com/blog/2017/5/hadley-cells-a-crucial-cog-in-earths-climate-machine"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.9_kiloyear_event",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.2_kiloyear_event"
],
[
"https://imgur.com/a/GMyqHhA"
],
[],
[
"https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/09/09/645539064/so-maybe-stopping-the-sahara-from-expanding-isn-t-an-impossible-dream"
],
[
"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QFRCaNya-6SBTBGAMG8fAqXRGktS_E9LjsRshAC-Fos/edit?usp=drivesdk"
],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/lyV8TUlV3Ds"
],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1p1r5w | what are the differences between us civilian and military courts? | I'm pretty familiar with the US civilian judicial system (rules of evidence, witness testimony, etc.) and I would like to know how a military court is different. For instance: Does the prosecution have to disclose all the evidence to the defense? Thank you. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p1r5w/eli5_what_are_the_differences_between_us_civilian/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccxvyvt"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Courts martial (NOT court martials) aren't technically an arm of the U.S. judicial system. They're a component of military command; they exist as a resource for a commander to discipline his/her troops. They have their own rules of procedure and evidence. That said, the play-by-play of a court martial would look a lot like a regular ol' criminal proceeding.\n\nThere are, however, some big differences:\n\n* **No jury,** at least not in the traditional sense. In civilian criminal trials, the defendant has a right to a *randomly selected* jury of *peers.* In courts martial, the commander personally selects members of its panel (jury). Furthermore, these are not necessarily the *peers* of the defendant. The panels are usually composed of officers and veteran enlisted men. So if you're on trial as a private, don't expect to see any of your buddies in the jury box.\n\n* **Appeals are handled differently.** They are made to military courts of appeal, as opposed to a U.S. district or circuit court (for example). Decisions are ultimately appealable to SCOTUS only in rare cases. Instead, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) is usually the end of the line for appeals. The CAAF is as close to a civilian proceeding as most servicemen will get - it's a five-judge panel of civilian judges, and the defendant can opt for civilian counsel. Also, after a conviction at the trial level, you can \"appeal\" to the commanding officer, though this is less like a judicial appeal and more like a request for clemency.\n\n* **Venue and jurisdiction are kind of wacky.** Courts martial are held at whatever base the defendant is stationed at/reports to, which can lead to some wacky cases where you might have to fly to Japan to try a case for an assault that happened in Texas. The navy might be a little different than everyone else in this respect - I don't really know.\n\n* **Pretrial detention,** in my understanding, is a little more rigorous than it is in civilian courts. I don't think there's any sort of bail to speak of. That said, there's a general 120-day maximum for confinement prior to trial, but this may be exceeded if it's required to secure the defendant's presence at trial.\n\nThere are plenty of other differences, but I think these are the big ones. Hope this helps."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
y6p7o | military numbering, regarding squadrons/wings/battalions etc. | I feel dumb (five years old?) for asking this, but when I read reports about how the "111th air wing intercepted [whatever]", I'm always left wondering if there are/were 110 other wings standing by. Same with squads, battalions, infantry divisions, etc. How are these numbers reached/calculated/set? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/y6p7o/eli5_military_numbering_regarding/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5swytr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It varies from military to military but generally speaking if you see something like the 111th Air Wing, it doesn't necessarily mean that there are 111 Air Wings. What tends to happen is that during large expansions of a military (say during a big war), new units will be created. These get numbered in a fairly logical sort and things make sense. However, when that military decreases in size (like after a big war), they don't go about decommissioning them in chronological order. So, for example, at the end of the war Air Wings 35 through to 75 are deemed surplus to requirement and disbanded but for whatever reason the 111th is retained. Thus, the 111th doesn't mean there's 110 other units.\n\nAs for things like regiments and battalions, this tends to vary more widely. Some armies (like the British) tend to go in for named rather than numbered regiments (although during times of rapid expansion a number system has been used) and so most regiments go by names like The Green Jackets or The Black Watch, while the US Army tends to stick to numbers. In both armies, those regiments will be made of Battalions and these will be numbered according to where they sit in the regiment. So for example, in the US 3rd Infantry Regiment there are at present three Battalions, the 1st, 2nd and the 4th. This is because the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th were disbanded in 1967 as they were deemed surplus to requirement. However, they could be reactivated. The important point is that you don't see big numbers in front of Battalions because regiments rarely have over 6 or 7 Battalions and Battalions are never referred to in isolation (saying your from the 1st Battalion would be meaningless as virtually every regiment has a 1st Battalion. However, saying 1st of the 3rd would make sense and confirm that you were from the 1st battalion of the 3rd Infantry Regiment). \n\nThe same rules apply for sub units of Battalions although Companies are usually lettered rather numbered.\n\nThe levels above regiments are brigades, followed by divisions, corps, armies and army groups. These are nearly always numbered."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
kbhwk | what is an 8-bit game? | If I understand correctly, the NES was an 8-bit console, SNES was 16-bit and this number doubled with each console generation.
My question is what does this mean? How could you possibly create a Mario game with only 8 bits (1s and 0s?)
I know I am missing something, what are those bits used for and what does it all mean!? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kbhwk/eli5_what_is_an_8bit_game/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2ixx4z",
"c2iym3c",
"c2iz2ac",
"c2ixx4z",
"c2iym3c",
"c2iz2ac"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"So, a console is just a computer. A computer has many parts, one of these is the processor. The processor is what does the math needed for the video game. A processor can only work with so much data at a time, so many bits. The number of bits is not just 8. It just means the processor is only working with 8bits at a time. Modern day computers and consoles are 64bit(though some computers still only use 32bit). I hope this helps.",
"Inside a computer everything is represented by numbers. When people say that an NES was an 8 bit machine, all that means is that all the numbers inside an NES were 8 bits wide.\n\nIf you played the original Zelda, you probably remember that the most money you could have is 255 rupees. That's because your money was represented using an 8 bit number. If you have one on and off switch, it can be in two positions. If you have two switches, there are four combinations of positions. Three switches, eight combinations. Keep going with this, and when you get to eight switches there are 256 positions. For counting money, this means you could have anywhere from 0 to 255 rupees.\n\nAll this means is that if you wanted to do math with numbers bigger than 255, you had to use some tricks to get it to work. These tricks take a little more processing power. In old systems this processing power could be very precious, so game designers had to make trade offs. In Super Mario Bros. your score could climb well above 255, and the timer would count down from 300, but in Rad Racer, the top speed was 255.",
"Think of bits as \"digits\". (10 bits are about the same as 3 digits). \n\nPretend the NES is a \"three digit game system.\" This means that it's designed to work with numbers that are three digits or less. So remembering or doing math on numbers less than 999 is very easy and fast.\n\nThat means it's hard to work with numbers that have more than 3 digits, though. Let's say the game designer knows he'll need to work with the number 1000 at some point-- it won't fit in one 3-digit number, so the programmer must split it across TWO three-digit numbers. The first number can store the first three digits (the \"000\" part of the 1000), and the second number can store the second three (the \"1\" part). Then, any place the programmer wants the game system to do math to his stored \"1000\", he'll have to remember to command the system to do math on the first part, THEN on the second part. This is really inconvenient and much slower than working with smaller numbers.\n\nNumbers are very important in games, because *literally everything* in the game is stored as a number. This is because computers and game systems *only* understand numbers. Where is Mario in the level? He's at horizontal position #371, and vertical position #14. Which enemy did he just stomp on? Enemy #21. What kind of enemy is enemy #21? It's enemy kind #8 (a goomba). What does a goomba look like? It looks like picture #41. How do I draw picture #41? Put color #17 in the first pixel, color #2 in the second pixel.... etc. Everything is numbers.\n\nSo back to our digits-- this means it's really inconvenient and slow to have more than 999* of any given thing in our game. No more than 999 different colors. No levels wider than 999 tiles. No sprites with more than 999 pixels in them. No sounds with more than 999 distinct levels. Everything is \"blocky\" because you can only represent it in 1/999-size \"chunks\".\n\nIn reality, \"digits\" are bits. An 8-bit system can only store numbers smaller than 256 (2^8). A 16-bit system goes up to 65,535 (2^16). A 64-bit system goes up to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615! You may never need to store a number that large, but it means you can represent your game in very fine detail, and there are many more unique \"places\" in memory to store things like pixels, or points on your 3D character. Also, the game system can do math on many more \"digits\" in one step, making your game faster.\n\nHope that helps.\n\n *(yes, it's actually 1000 unique things, not 999, since 0 counts as a number too, but it's much easier to see the three-digit nature of \"999\").",
"So, a console is just a computer. A computer has many parts, one of these is the processor. The processor is what does the math needed for the video game. A processor can only work with so much data at a time, so many bits. The number of bits is not just 8. It just means the processor is only working with 8bits at a time. Modern day computers and consoles are 64bit(though some computers still only use 32bit). I hope this helps.",
"Inside a computer everything is represented by numbers. When people say that an NES was an 8 bit machine, all that means is that all the numbers inside an NES were 8 bits wide.\n\nIf you played the original Zelda, you probably remember that the most money you could have is 255 rupees. That's because your money was represented using an 8 bit number. If you have one on and off switch, it can be in two positions. If you have two switches, there are four combinations of positions. Three switches, eight combinations. Keep going with this, and when you get to eight switches there are 256 positions. For counting money, this means you could have anywhere from 0 to 255 rupees.\n\nAll this means is that if you wanted to do math with numbers bigger than 255, you had to use some tricks to get it to work. These tricks take a little more processing power. In old systems this processing power could be very precious, so game designers had to make trade offs. In Super Mario Bros. your score could climb well above 255, and the timer would count down from 300, but in Rad Racer, the top speed was 255.",
"Think of bits as \"digits\". (10 bits are about the same as 3 digits). \n\nPretend the NES is a \"three digit game system.\" This means that it's designed to work with numbers that are three digits or less. So remembering or doing math on numbers less than 999 is very easy and fast.\n\nThat means it's hard to work with numbers that have more than 3 digits, though. Let's say the game designer knows he'll need to work with the number 1000 at some point-- it won't fit in one 3-digit number, so the programmer must split it across TWO three-digit numbers. The first number can store the first three digits (the \"000\" part of the 1000), and the second number can store the second three (the \"1\" part). Then, any place the programmer wants the game system to do math to his stored \"1000\", he'll have to remember to command the system to do math on the first part, THEN on the second part. This is really inconvenient and much slower than working with smaller numbers.\n\nNumbers are very important in games, because *literally everything* in the game is stored as a number. This is because computers and game systems *only* understand numbers. Where is Mario in the level? He's at horizontal position #371, and vertical position #14. Which enemy did he just stomp on? Enemy #21. What kind of enemy is enemy #21? It's enemy kind #8 (a goomba). What does a goomba look like? It looks like picture #41. How do I draw picture #41? Put color #17 in the first pixel, color #2 in the second pixel.... etc. Everything is numbers.\n\nSo back to our digits-- this means it's really inconvenient and slow to have more than 999* of any given thing in our game. No more than 999 different colors. No levels wider than 999 tiles. No sprites with more than 999 pixels in them. No sounds with more than 999 distinct levels. Everything is \"blocky\" because you can only represent it in 1/999-size \"chunks\".\n\nIn reality, \"digits\" are bits. An 8-bit system can only store numbers smaller than 256 (2^8). A 16-bit system goes up to 65,535 (2^16). A 64-bit system goes up to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615! You may never need to store a number that large, but it means you can represent your game in very fine detail, and there are many more unique \"places\" in memory to store things like pixels, or points on your 3D character. Also, the game system can do math on many more \"digits\" in one step, making your game faster.\n\nHope that helps.\n\n *(yes, it's actually 1000 unique things, not 999, since 0 counts as a number too, but it's much easier to see the three-digit nature of \"999\")."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7l5lz3 | in films how do they make background noises like wind so quiet compared to the actors voices? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7l5lz3/eli5_in_films_how_do_they_make_background_noises/ | {
"a_id": [
"drjp8ef"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"This can be accomplished a couple of ways. One is by use of a shotgun mic that records sounds from a narrow direction, thus catching the dialogue clearly without too much background noise. \n\nAnother method is known as ADR, automatic dialogue replacement, where the actors will go through and record their dialogue again in a closed recording booth to be dubbed over their scene."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
30ml8j | why don't all the cars in nascar go the same speed? | The cars are regulated. They're all built the largely in the same way. I understand that minor tweaks make a big difference. I also understand the skill of competitive driving, but why don't all the cars go the same speed? Why do certain cars drive slower? Why are certain teams and cars consistantly less competitive than others? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30ml8j/eli5_why_dont_all_the_cars_in_nascar_go_the_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"cptskmh",
"cptsmno",
"cptv0ov"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"just because you have two cars built exactly the same doesn't mean the driver is capable of driving the same lap speed. \n\nthe specifications only limit engine size and car weight and aero profile and tires. there's a lot that's not the same between each team's car. a more smooth aero profile makes a faster car on the straight. but it means less traction in the turn. a suspension adjustment can mean the car is quicker to turn, but more unstable at the limit. every component can have almost infite small adjustments and the combination of adjustments for every component is vast. \n\nin addition a race track is not a static piece of pavement. the heat and rubber deposit variation from \"the line\" and \"off line\" can mean the difference between making the turn and slipping. it's a difference of a couple inches. if the driver gets on the brake 1/10th of a second too early or slow on the accelerator, that can mean being in 2nd place or 20th place. ",
"The cars are governed, not built exactly the same. You can have different gearing, different angles of spoilers/air dams, different tires, a lot of different things on the cars, just the engines are the same.",
"The margins are very small but over a 3 hour race even the slightest skill advantage is really a large time difference."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3kbk3c | do i lose my information on the cloud if the data storage center where my data is stored is destroyed | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kbk3c/eli5_do_i_lose_my_information_on_the_cloud_if_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuw7suf",
"cuw8nn2",
"cuw9km1",
"cuwepl3",
"cuwh5vw"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Typically, a good cloud storage provider will have data backed up/replicated to other data centers. Plus, multiple layers of redundancy throughout their servers, disks, network equipment, etc.\n\nI don't know the specifics of what Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc have in place. I would assume they could still withstand some data center damage/downtime. \n\nCompanies would negotiate availability into their service agreements with the cloud proved. But if you're talking about your personal data, I'd recommend always keeping a copy yourself.",
"Consumer-level cloud storage through companies like Google, Amazon and Apple is stored redundantly at multiple sites. To destroy the photos you took on vacation would require an asteroid-strikes-the-Earth level of catastrophe - or a decision by your provider to delete that information.\n\nYou can buy cloud contracts that designate a specific server located in a specific building. However, such contracts aren't normally for cloud storage but for location-specific services. If you're running an online game, you'll buy servers in a building somewhere near your player base. If those servers get destroyed, your service will be disrupted but you'll still have all your information.",
"Like mentioned, the major companies have secure backup redundancy. But if put your data on Hanks Cloud Data Service, and Hank didn't have any backups or redundancy, then once Hanks server, that he located in new orleans, gets flooded from katrina and goes down, your data is lost.",
"If you have a really, _really_ crappy 'cloud' contract which only stores your data at one data centre, with no off-site backups, then yes.\n\nIf you have a fairly crappy cloud contract which only stores your data at one data centre, but they at least have a backup routine, then no-ish. You might have to wait a week while they fish a tape out of a warehouse, and when they do retrieve that, a little bit of the data might be gone. You would lose everything from the day it was destroyed, if they only took off-site backups once a day, for example.\n\nIf you have a reasonable 'cloud' contract then you would expect data to be mirrored across multiple data centres at all times, in which case one of them can be destroyed and you lose, or even notice (perfect case) nothing.",
"Depends. If there are no backups or the backups are unusable, and there are no duplicate data centers to duplicate the data, the yes. \n\nServices like One Drive and Google backup your data across multiple data centers, then backup those data centers data locally as well. Worst case scenario, data that has only just recently been uploaded is vulnerable, because there wasn't enough time to fully duplicate the data. \n\nBut things can still go wrong. A recent heavy lighten strike at a Google data center caused them to lose a small amount of data that didn't have time to get fully backed up . "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2nwzz4 | how does radioactivity work | If radioactivity is a decaying atom. What is left behind at sites like chernobyl. What causes some atoms or isotopes of atoms to be radioactive while others are not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nwzz4/eli5_how_does_radioactivity_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmhowec",
"cmhp0ww",
"cmhp9wx",
"cmhsvtx"
],
"score": [
17,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Some atoms are just unstable and will eventually break apart. Imagine them like a bunch of legos chained together and being spun. Some configurations will allow a little piece to go flying off while others will stay together. \n\nAt Chernobyl, Uranium atoms were being split in half in the nuclear reactors. When uranium splits in half, the two smaller atoms that remain (each being about half the size of U) are typically unstable (they have too many neutrons). So they convert neutrons to protons in what we call *beta decay.* This happens slowly and releases some energy as it goes. That energy can cause biological damage and is therefore dangerous (especially if ingested). ",
"Basically, what happens is that certain elements are unstable, and to increase stability, they release particles and energy, known as radioactivity. This happens because there are too many particles in the atom for it to be stable.\n\nIt's lke a crowded elevator. Since there are so many people, everyone is uncomfortable, and some people will just leave the group instead of sticking together to go all the way to the top.\n\nEventually enough people will leave, and the elevator will be comfortable again. This is how lead is formed; it's uranium that has released enough particles to make it 'stable', or comfortable enough for the particles to stay together without losing any more. ",
"Radioactivity is usually caused by an unstable nucleus. This is caused when the nuclei are very large (ie Uranium, Plutonium, etc.) or if they are poorly assembled with an unstable construction with excessive or lacking neutrons (Potassium 40). When an atom decays it separates into two particles, a (often) hydrogen nucleus and another element slightly smaller. Chernobyl hosts a lot of strontium and cesium which are the products of a nuclear reaction. This is different from a decay scheme. Large elements like Uranium and Plutonium split into large chunks like cesium and strontium. Those are the materials that make sites like Fukushima or Chernobyl.",
"The simple explanation is that there are three forces at play: the strong force, the weak force, and electromagnetism. Now, the strong force keeps the nucleons together, so the component quarks can never be seen (confinement). A small excess force, called nuclear force, \"spills over\" from this. The electromagnetic force tends to drive apart particles with the same electric charge, like protons. But, if you had only the nuclear force and electromagnetic force, nuclei would be either perfectly stable, or perfectly unstable (they would break before or very soon after being formed). Conservation rules say neither force can change the quark count, quark flavor or particle charge. If you have two neutrons and one proton in a nucleus, the rules say that you'd always end up with a tritium nucleus that can't decay, since you can't have strong force or electromagnetic force change a neutron into a proton. So, the explanations in this thread about the nuclei being *inherently* unstable are not really correct, since that would imply only extremely fast radioactive decay.\n\nEnter the weak force. This is the only force that can break the rules for conservation of flavor. One of the down quarks can emit a weak force W- particle, and turn into a up quark, which accordingly means that a neutron turns into a proton. Now, the W- particle is relatively massive (and by E=mc2, has high energy), so it quickly sheds its energy by decaying into an electron and an antineutrino. (Notice how charge and lepton number are conserved by emission of a charged lepton + uncharge antilepton. Weak force can't break these laws)\n\nSince the weak particle W- is very massive, it takes a long time for one to appear, and that's why a tritium nucleus has a half-life of 12 years.\n\nAs for the ultimate *why*, the reason is the so-called anarchistic principle of quantum mechanics. It says that if something can happen - the event doesn't break conservation laws - it eventually will. Only the *rate* is set by the thermodynamic favorability. Kind of like that someone will eventually be hit with a meteorite, no matter how uncommon that is. (That's also a somewhat confusing example since quantum mechanics implies someone will be hit by a meteorite *from below*, to be precise; getting hit by a meteorite from the sky is always thermodynamically favorable. Quantum mechanics allows a probability also for events that aren't.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8ii3ow | why sometimes ice cubes in the freezer, freeze perfectly and come out in one easy piece, where as other times they break into dozens of pieces leaving you with ice chips and not cubes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ii3ow/eli5_why_sometimes_ice_cubes_in_the_freezer/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyrxd6b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you let the ice trays sit out and get to room temp before refilling them, the cubes tend to come out intact. If you immediately refill them while they are still cold they tend to shatter into pieces. I don't know why, but this is my experience."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
aocsvg | why does the first patch of pancakes come out spotty and the later batches come out a perfect golden brown? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aocsvg/eli5_why_does_the_first_patch_of_pancakes_come/ | {
"a_id": [
"eg06cgi"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"A combination of too much oil, an unevenly heated pan, and batter that hasn’t “rested” long enough before cooking.\n\nExcess oil in the pan causes the first pancakes to not cook nicely. More is not better. Those first pancakes absorb that excess oil while the pan heats up properly, and that leaves a perfect pan for subsequent batches.\n\nLet your batter rest for 10-15 mins, heat your oiled pan to the right temperature, and then wipe out excess oil. That should result in a nice first batch of pancakes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3032dr | why can some people eat 2 meals a day while i have to eat 5+ meals a day to not stay hungry? | Assuming every meal is about 500 calories. I'm not that big either, just 5'5 weighing at about 145 pounds and these guys are 6 foot weighing at about 180+ sometimes they don't even eat they just eat a big patty for example | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3032dr/eli5_why_can_some_people_eat_2_meals_a_day_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpondcn"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Are you 17? Because my 17-year-old eats like there's an alien in him. Not kidding. He came home yesterday and ate half a lasagna and a roast beef sandwich \"as a snack\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
bztdtb | what is it about john carmack's code that makes it so special? | Is there anything special or even transcendent about it, or did he just basically set everything out in an elegant and well-planned fashion? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bztdtb/eli5_what_is_it_about_john_carmacks_code_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqx1bdn",
"eqx2073"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"You know how we have all those nice looking 3D games today? A modern computer has a special graphics processing unit designed and built specifically for doing the calculations to draw those worlds. For example, [here are specifications](_URL_0_) for a pretty nice one (RX Vega 64).\n\n- It has 64 \"compute units\"\n- Each compute unit runs 1200 million instructions per second.\n- The compute units and memory are designed specifically to do 3D graphics calculations\n\nJohn Carmack figured how to do this on a regular computer in 1993:\n\n- You have one \"compute unit\"\n- The compute unit runs 10 million instructions per second.\n- The compute units and memory are the regular stuff of a general purpose PC.\n\nBeing able to do 3D graphics at all in that limited setting is amazing programming feat. He wasn't the only or first person working on it, but he's famous for a couple reasons:\n\n- The games his company created were a new kind of video game called \"First Person Shooter,\" no one had made this kind of game before, it's been really popular ever since, hundreds of variations on that theme have been made.\n- A big part of the reason no one did it before, was that kind of gameplay meant getting the right kind of 3D graphics to run fast enough on a regular computer. Carmack figured out how to do that using programming, a lot of early 3D FPS games either bought his code, or waited until computers / consoles were faster and started using special hardware to help with 3D graphics.\n- Carmack eventually released his games' code as open source, so people could look at it and see all the clever tricks he used.\n- His games were incredibly popular and famous, people wouldn't talk about Carmack much / at all if Wolfenstein / Doom / Quake had only sold a few thousand copies.",
"He's just very good at coming up with good tricks. DOOM for instance was a very remarkable achievement -- the hardware back then was extremely slow compared to modern one, and it took a lot of tricks to make things work decently well. Working within those constraints and producing that kind of result is remarkable on its own, which is why DOOM was a gamechanger.\n\nHere's one famous [piece of his code](_URL_0_)\n\nJust try and figure out how that works without actually reading the explanation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units#Radeon_RX_Vega_Series"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_inverse_square_root#Overview_of_the_code"
]
] |
|
fetfds | why do humans cringe? does the same response occur in other animals? | What is the reason for such a crippling reaction to uncomfortable social interactions?
EDIT: Thank for the replies so far, I am more wondering from an animal behaviour perspective. Starting to get the sense it is a form of social preservation because you can dissociate yourself from the bad thing. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fetfds/eli5_why_do_humans_cringe_does_the_same_response/ | {
"a_id": [
"fjqvf3f",
"fjr46xo",
"fjr8itb",
"fjs6ova",
"fjsieem",
"fjswxd3"
],
"score": [
24,
31,
9,
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There's a lot of things that say humans feel/think that animals can't, and they're still unsure on so much shit. We don't even understand our own brains let alone an animal's. Let alone EVERY animal, when dolphins and chimps are more intelligent than half of Reddit.",
"You react negatively to anything \"out of place\" or something that can impact your social/hierarchical standing. Such discomfort gives you a signal to not do something that can make you an outcast.",
"I’ve tried to condition my dog to not bark at strangers, but she’s a watch dog at heart. If I’m in the room and she barks at a noise outside, she’ll immediately look at me, put her ears back and flinch, then break eye contact and stop barking. A doggy cringe if ever I’ve seen one.\n\nAs for why people or animals might do it, I can only guess. Some mechanism in our brains makes us close our eyes and will this awkward situation to go away. A holdover from our childhoods to close our eyes and deny that object permanence exists so that the cause of our discomfort also no longer exists? An acceptance that we can’t avoid this situation so we close our eyes and brace for impact emotional or physical?",
"If you did something awkward or socially unacceptable, you might be an outcast or kicked out of the tribe. Kicked out of the tribe? No food, no protection, no mating. You die, and so does your bloodline. Cringing is a conditioned survival response.\n\nSame reason it’s so devastating for a child to feel like their parent doesn’t Love them. We’ve evolved to see that as a threat to survival\n\nSource: my parents don’t love me\n\nEdit: in response to your edit, I think most of the same principles apply to animals. I don’t think an animal that doesn’t rely on others of its species to survive would have as much of a cringe response",
"This definitely occurs in animals and humans. \nSee also having your feather's ruffled, birds that actually ruffle their feathers, cats who's hair stands on end. It's can be done without intention, they have the same back crawling feeling of just insecure cringe.",
"Humans are intensely social and we tend to mirror the emotions of who we’re observing. Happy people make you feel happy, angry people make you feel angry, seeing someone get hit in the balls makes everyone around wince and so on. \n\nSo seeing someone get embarrassed causes second hand embarrassment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1sp329 | if 2-d and 3-d can be drawn on paper (a "3-d" object) then what is the real world and the first dimension? | Plus, what about inside black holes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sp329/eli5if_2d_and_3d_can_be_drawn_on_paper_a_3d/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdzsfm6",
"cdzsfsz",
"cdzsg6n"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"3D isn't drawn on paper. A 2D representation is drawn on paper.\n\n",
"It might *look* 3D because of shading and perspective, but every picture drawn on paper is 2D.",
"Your question makes me really confused. Exactly what is it that you're asking about?\n\nAs for the first dimension: A square drawn on a paper has two dimensions, height and width, right? So then a line is one-dimensional, it only have length (a drawn line physically has a width, but the line represents one dimension).\n\nA 3D-object drawn on a paper is a 2D rendition of a 3D object, it's not actually 3D since you need three actual spatial dimensions (height, width, length) in order for it to be truly three-dimensional. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ct8az | why large companies like tyson are not charged with animal cruelty? | Even after multiple videos showing evidence of cruelty, why do companies that raise livestock and poultry in a very inhumane manner do not face legal repercussions? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ct8az/eli5_why_large_companies_like_tyson_are_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"csyp93n",
"csyt4tl"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Doesn't Tyson own like 40% of the food market?",
"The correct answer: Because it isn't animal cruelty.\n\n\"Animal cruelty\" is what we call **senseless** harm to animals. People who smack their dog on the nose when it pees on the carpet may not be role models for animal care -- but they won't be charged with a crime, because the reason for their action stems from something more than \"Because I want to cause pain and suffering to the animal.\"\n\nLikewise, despite some of the poor conditions that various companies keep animals in, they aren't doing it for the purpose of being cruel to the animals. Rather, the treatment of the animals is a consequence of necessity to create the yields demanded by our meat-loving citizens. Sure, they **could** make things better -- but that means extra costs... extra costs which would make them less competitive against companies who are unwilling to do the same (this is why regulation is sometimes required to force everyone to play by a standard deemed important). And, ultimately, consumers do not want to pay more for those comforts.\n\nSo the reason companies like Tyson are not charged with animal cruelty is simply because they are not committing animal cruelty. If, at some point, someone at Tyson decides to implement a method of causing pain to animals simply because it brings him joy or entertainment... then you'd have a case for animal cruelty.\n\nWeirdly enough, though, the same reason that the poor conditions exist is the reason that you'd never have such a conscious abuse of animals... because such a conscious abuse, itself, would have a cost associated with it, and the company's shareholders would bring an action to stop it just for the sake of profits."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
oxtgl | quantum particles reacting to observation | So, when you observe a particle it reacts differently as if it is aware??? what implications could this have in our own day to day lives, if any? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oxtgl/eli5_quantum_particles_reacting_to_observation/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3kwgdl",
"c3kwmzu",
"c3kx2l1",
"c3kxkm9",
"c3kxrz9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Any explanation of quantum mechanics in ELI5 will be woefully lacking in information, but I'll do my best.\n\nSome things (well, all things, on a sub-atomic level) exist in a state of superposition - that is, they are doing / in more than 1 place at once. But when we observe it, it has to pick 1 place. Shit is funky on that level.\n\nThe biggest implication of this in daily lives I can think of, its quantum computing, which takes advantage of objects that can be more than 1 thing at a time. A traditional bit has 2 states, on or off. A quantum bit can be 70% on, and 30% off, or anything in between. ",
"I always thought it was helpful to compare them to cockroaches. In the dark, when you can't see them, they're doing one thing. Flip the lights on & they do something else.",
"[A good introduction to the concept](_URL_1_).\n\nParticles are not thought to be aware.\n\nParticles can exist in a state that is \"indeterminate,\" meaning that it cannot be predicted how they will act, no matter how good your predictions are. Observation of a particle means that you must interact with it in some way (e.g. shine a light at it), and this interaction makes the particle stop being indeterminate in the way it was before. There is no way to determine beforehand what option the particle will take when you shine a light on it, making it truly random. There are different theories about how this happens, but the fact remains the same.\n\nAn implication for day-to-day living might be a [true random number generation](_URL_0_) which cannot be achieved by traditional computing technology alone.",
"[There's a decent ELI5 on this topic from just the other day.](_URL_0_)",
"Here's the ELI5 version. Quantum particles are not reacting to observation- they are reacting to the interaction with other particles. In order to observe a particle, there must be a chain of interactions between that particle to another particle and so on, eventually all the way to you. The 'spooky' results of quantum mechanics which can be quite poorly phrased as a particle 'reacting to being observed' are much better phrased as depending on the chain of possible interactions between the particle and you.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://random.irb.hr/",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oufmr/why_do_particles_change_when_observed/"
],
[]
] |
|
65rjxg | how do "hive" applications get startup users? apps like tinder, meetup, and other social apps? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/65rjxg/eli5_how_do_hive_applications_get_startup_users/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgcp3q0",
"dgcq47k",
"dgcr14s",
"dgcrud6",
"dgcs03i",
"dgcwcat",
"dgcxar5",
"dgcy7d3",
"dgcy949",
"dgcytwz",
"dgd0am4",
"dgd1eqt",
"dgd2lci",
"dgd2uq7",
"dgd31in",
"dgd3brj",
"dgd5pja",
"dgd5xds",
"dgd5ydj",
"dgd6x5h",
"dgd7lq0",
"dgd86ue",
"dgd8lku",
"dgd95v8",
"dgdd0dv",
"dgdd8g1",
"dgdg1v2",
"dgdgqvm",
"dgdhvua",
"dgdk0s2",
"dgdl80n",
"dgdnnpa",
"dgds35x",
"dgdsot8"
],
"score": [
464,
11,
25,
592,
1953,
118,
5983,
10,
31,
8,
5,
18,
32,
7,
40,
258,
2,
5,
2,
3,
5,
47,
21,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Many don't start with a user base.\n\nQuite a few buy the information they will need to start from a similar business with a different focus. Think buying traffic flow data from Google maps or how many people in what areas are looking for hot singles near them from bing.\n\nAfter that they will advertise millions and millions of dollars in advertising, hots special prizes for joining earlier, have bots, and staff do the heavy lifting till the user base picks up. Just like forums really.",
"Not a direct answer to the question, but any service that requires a group of users to work relies on \"network effect\". That is, the value of the service is very dependent on having the right number of users in its network. Having too few people on a dating site makes it useless, or in business terms, it has little value. \n\nWhen starting such a service, the cost to acquire each user is an important cost to factor into business plans. ",
"Smaller companies lean heavily on word of mouth. Tell everyone you know and beg them to tell everyone they know. It was how I found out about the Her app back when it was datch I think it was called. ",
"One of the simplest methods is simply not to launch until you have X number of users pre-signed up, i.e.:\n\nWe are launching soon enter your email to be notified when we do\n\nThe peril there is your concept and marketing has to be strong enough to bring them back when you launch. You also need to be aware 1 email != 1 user\n\nThere are bots thy just fill in forms, users that don't bother returning, bounced and changed emails and so on. Rule of thumb tends to be around 10-30% usually come back to check it out",
"\nTinder targeted a few college campuses when they first launched in the fall of 2012. These colleges included \"party\" schools such as USC. 90% of users were ages between 18-24 in 2012. \n\nI would suspect other social/dating apps would begin in colleges as you have aggregated amount of young people in one area. ",
"As others have noted, many of them start off with a small, easy to target niche. Facebook and Tinder started off with colleges because college students have a shared identity that their marketers could leverage, it's easy to test your messaging when you can actually watch people react, and young people tend to be early adopters of new technologies.\n\nSome marketplace-type apps cannibalize their competitors. For instance, AirBnB started off putting listings on CraigsList pointing to their own platform, to get people to switch. I've also heard of companies selling things on eBay and including materials promoting their own apps. That way they're getting the best possible users, the ones who are already doing what they want them to do and just need a better way to do it. That minimizes the number of users they need to get in the door to get a useful amount of activity going through the product.\n\nSome companies use a honeypot approach, where they launch a product that doesn't depend on network effects, then use that to build up their audience enough to later switch on the parts that are dependent on network effects. OkCupid started out as just a bunch of wacky, fun questions that you could share with your friends. Then once they had some number of people, they rolled out the ability to find other people based on how close their answers are to yours.\n\nSome go for broke and just try to sprint past it. They build a product dependent on network effects, raise millions of dollars, and sink most of that money into marketing to almost immediately grow the userbase large enough for the product to be useful.",
"The heart of your question is really 'How are social networks formed?\" The textbook answer is that you need a **critical mass** of users, so that when someone new signs up, there are other people to interact with. Otherwise no matter how many people download your app, the newcomers will just leave if people are just trickling in, which means the app will be perpetually unpopular. The key then is to get a large number of users *at once*, so that the network becomes sustainable.\n\nHowever, this answer only leads to more questions because it creates a paradox that many people refer to as \"the chicken and the egg problem.\" How can you convince the first users to sign up when no one else is around? Unfortunately, there's no easy answer, which is why businesses are willing to pay an incredible amount of money just to buy an existing social network. If you've ever wondered why Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter are worth so much even though they have no clear business model, this is exactly why (social networks are valuable because they are very difficult to create).\n\nNevertheless, here are a few guidelines that can help create a network. They don't always work (e.g. Google+ have tried and failed), but these are characteristics that successful social networks share:\n\n1) Start with a small but concentrated population. For example, Facebook was initially only available to Harvard students. Once it reached a critical mass of users there, it then expanded to other ivies, and then to all colleges, and finally to everyone. The same can be seen for dating apps like Coffee Meets Bagel, which first started off in NYC, and then gradually expanded to other cities before opening up to everyone. \n\nWhen you start off with a localized population, you lower your marketing costs and you get more mileage out of word of mouth. It's much easier to simultaneously sign up 1000 users in one city than it is to simultaneously sign up 1000 users in a thousand cities.\n\n\n2) Rely on users to recruit other users. Social apps become more useful when more people sign up, which means the users themselves are interested in helping advertise the app. For example, Venmo isn't very useful if your friends don't use it, so there's already an incentive for you to get your friends to install it. This growth will happen slowly over time, but because a critical mass requires a lot of simultaneous new users, you can speed up the process by rewarding existing users who help you expand your network. Venmo did this with a $20 referral bonus to both the new user and the friend who referred them. Other apps reward in-app currencies or features, such as letting you message more people on dating apps.\n\n3) Minimize sign up costs for users. If you've ever wondered why many computer games (e.g. League of Legends) and mobile games are free to play, it's because the very presence of a user is valuable. A multiplayer game would be unplayable if no one else is there. Thus, companies will literally pay new users (e.g. Venmo example above) to sign up. Of course, this is very costly, so the next best thing is to offer the app for free. ",
"At a high level, every new/innovative product (or service) introduced in a marketplace starts with the *Early Adopters*; these are people who are unhappy with the status quo, the stuff out there, and they are looking for something new that fits their needs/wants, often by *hacking* the present products.\n\nEngage then early adopter and ... that's just the beginning.\n\nFor more: _URL_0_",
"PayPal paid $10 to sign up for a while.\n\nSource: Notes on startups, or how to build the future by Peter Thiel",
"There's a locally developed app for music sharing, sharing information about shows and the scene, etc. I learned about them at a music conference, where they started to market and share the app with musicians in the area. They are currently on a tour across the country interviewing and recording musicians from all over the US. They're putting together some good video content and sharing it online.\n\nIt seems like it's a tough grind.\n\nActually, I just remembered something. They held a talk at my college and got Andrew W.K. to talk about the app before I learned about them at the music conference a couple of years later.",
"To add to the other answers here, you can also \"buy\" users, but not in the traditional sense. What I mean is you can reach out to internet celebrities that already have their own fan base, and ask them (pay them) to use your app and bring their followers with them. This may not work for dating sites, but it can work for user-generated content sites like blogs, video streaming, etc.",
"Some of these apps also started as a different platform entirely. When Instagram first started it was promoted as an image filter app but you were forced to create an account to use their filters. It happened to have a feature that would let you post on Facebook and twitter at the same time in exchange for posting on their social network. So it kind of built up that way. \n\nSnapchat was marketed as a private messaging app that happened to grow into its own social network. ",
"I was on Grindr when it first started. On the original iPhone. The nearest person was like 20-50 miles away. And littered with dick pics as profile pictures. The good old days. ",
"What a lot of people seem to neglect in their replies that critical mass isn't just down to the number of people using your service. But the number of people who use it in a particular area.\n\nThis makes universities an extremely good place to target your services. Facebook started out as a way for students to keep in touch that was better than myspace. Tinder likely the same.\n\nYou need to find a high density of the demographic you're targeting and market the fuck out of your product to them. (reddit stole fark users)",
"I work(ed) for a company that had this exactly, I can tell you the answer is money and speed.\n\nI can't give away too many details about the company without giving it away, but we were spending upwards of $25 per person to build an account. It's not that we were paying them, but we used feet on the streets, and face to face interactions with an army of hourly people to just get as many downloads as we possibly can. \n\nWe did this quickly. We just accepted that the first 100-1000 users were going to have a bad time, but once we artificially cranked the wheel enough, we could take our hands off of it and it would go on it's own, and that is exactly what happened. ",
"Social networks rely upon something called \"network effect\" to provide a benefit to the user.\n\n- You need a lot of users for the features in the application to work the way they are meant to\n\n---------\n\nExample: Using a dating app with only 10 users.\n\n- You log into the app and only see 10 people\n- You aren't likely to date any of those 10 people\n- You aren't likely to even connect with any of those 10 people because you don't match\n- None of the features like search, messaging, favoriting, etc provide any value because the isn't a network to interact with\n\nFor many applications the network needs to be in a specific vicinity for those features or the key benefit of the application to be obtained.\n\nExample: A dating app with 10,000 users but, the users are spread across the world with only 10 users in any given city.\n\nEven though you have many times more users you're still going to have the same shitty experience as if the entire application only had 10 users.\n\n------\n\nSo, what do applications that rely upon the network effect to provide a benefit and value to their user?\n\n- They can create many fake accounts to give the illusion of a big network which leads to actual users joining\n- They create alternative benefits for users that do not rely upon a network effect--like creating contests or giveaways in the application tied to using it, paying users to use the app, creating affiliate programs paying people to get their own network to join and use the app, specific features the aid in the experience (like personal matchmaking or dating consultation services), etc\n- They partner with a much larger network and offer incentives to the partner to on-board their users--like an affiliate program arrangement\n- They acquire an existing company with an establishing network\n\nIf the application's network effect does require the users of that network to be within a close proximity of one another the strategy is focused on a single specific area at a time.\n\nDating apps and ride sharing apps are great examples of this. They start in hyper local areas (college campus) and slowly extend outward. Once they capture a large % of the market in that area they roll out to a new area and build further.\n\nDefinitely read up on Tinder, Bumble, Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Facebook, Snap, etc for interesting examples of how they each did it a little differently.\n\n------\n\nEverything distills down to an experience. \n\nA user judges their experience not just upon using the application but, upon every instance of interacting with your company--directly or indirectly through word or mouth/reviews.\n\nWhatever strategy is created and implemented usually supports the overall experiential goal that the social network represents...the key benefit of being a part of that network.\n\nIf you're trying to do this yourself, always be aware of this and always do what enhances the experience by having every strategy, decision, and action in alignment with each other and the overall goal.\n\nIf what you do does not support that goal, you're only creating confusion/discomfort for the user and taking away from that experience.",
"Op read up on customer acquisition funnels and strategy. Much of it is data mining your analytics, tweak it until you figure out where acquisition is less than the value of the customer and then start throwing money into that specific strategy. Having a really good analytics team can help you bring customers into your platform for cheap.",
"random sidenote but I had an idea for an app called \"MeetUp\" where you can find people near you who share your interests\n\nand then i found out that it already existed with that exact name lmao",
"Pretty sure I heard somewhere that Tinder started with a huge party. To get in, you had to download and use the app before you came (no pun intended)\n\nMost people left that party pretty happy. ",
"I was offered a promo job for some dating app a year or so ago. We walked down the line of club liv with 'cool' light up shit that drunk tourists live for. If they downloaded our app, they got a random prize and a voucher for a free drink if one of their friends signed up before they entered the club. (Drinks at liv are like 30$ so almost everyone did it) imagine them doing this in miami, la, new york, chicago etc on the same night in multiple clubs per city? The tourists go home, the app alerts them to nearby people and they start using it... they are in those cheezy club photos you take at the entrance with the glasses, boom sticks, pins, phone cases etc with the logo on it. Of course they post that super cool time they went to liv on their social media.... advertising to more people. It was pathetic to watch people give up personal info, effectively selling themselves to advertising companies, to get a fucking light up ring. ",
"It's less important to have a *lot* of users, and more important to have a big percentage of your users be able to connect with each other.\n\nIf facebook had a user-base of 50 people, and each one was from a different city, none of the users would find it all that useful of a platform. But if those 50 people were from the same school, they might find it to be useful. And those 50 people would start telling their friends that aren't on facebook to get on facebook. And everybody that signed up would have at least a few people that they could talk to, and they'd start telling their friends to get on facebook. You can see how quickly these numbers can skyrocket.\n\nYou only need a small starting point and a well designed platform for it to blow the fuck up. \n\nWith that said, there's also the option of buying users, or recruiting them from other social media platforms. You'll see people doing this a lot on reddit, but usually only in the smaller subreddits. Fake user accounts is another option.",
"Well, there's a few ways. You could look to how Reddit did it. Looking through the comments, surprised nobody saw it. Basically, they setup the site and then created a pile of alt accounts. As people would post, they'd patiently remind them of the rules and guide them into the behavior of the kind of user they wanted to attract. They also quite literally had conversations with themselves to give the appearance of a larger (and more cohesive) userbase than actually existed. It was basically a re-enactment of the monkey story -- and eventually it reached critical mass and started growing on its own and the alt accounts went defunct. The site you see today is the result of those early efforts. \n\nWas it dishonest? Maybe. But that's how a lot of sites kick off. Slashdot did the same thing, before it rose to prominence in the IT world... and then they sold out and it all came crashing down. There's actually many, many forum-based sites where when they initially went live, it was mostly the author/owners going to other forums and canvasing to draw people to their site and giving the appearance of more activity to keep people around until that critical mass point tipped over and it became self-sustaining.\n\nThere's also examples where they didn't do this and trusted that the mere brand identity or whatever would carry the day: Google+ for example, also known as the Ghost Town of the social networking world, or Hangouts, which is yet another attempt by Google to shove something down people's throats that totally isn't working out. I'm sorry to say, but if you're the only one at a party, more people showing up isn't gonna happen. You need that core glob of people to start roping others in, and even if you have to fake it, it's better than just kicking off the site and then promoting it without that (even fake) activity to engage people. \n",
"Hey! So I was actually recruited to help spread an app like Tinder because I'm a sort of influential member of my campus and in a fraternity. The one I \"worked\" for offered commission for certain thresholds of downloads for my area, and it was monitored via how many people stated they were at my campus. The app that was described to me versus the actual app in function was very different, and honestly pretty sleazy. The developer was my point of contact and would every couple weeks check in and tell me some new even shallower feature that they added.\n\nAt the end of it all, after I had given up trying to spread this app that I ultimately decided was not something I wanted to support, he sent me a very unprofessional email basically saying, \"Hey! You know how we said we would pay you? Turns out we can't!\"\n\nSo yeah. A lot of the apps rely on getting some college kids to whore out downloads from their friends.",
"This is actually a specific occupation now a days, called growth hacker. Despite the name, _URL_0_ has a lot of interesting business cases of how different businesses did it.",
"Some apps have a 'pre-order' like sign up phase where you create your account before the app actually comes out. That way, when the app launches, it could already have thousands of users, many of which are excited for it to come out and will start eagerly using it from day 1.",
"I found Tinders story pretty cool. From what I recall they actually threw a party at USC and had everyone there download the app and it grew at least partially naturally from those people. Pretty sure it was like a couple sororities and frats. Look it up. ",
"It usually starts with local marketing. I had an idea for an app, and just by taking surveys people wanted to use our app, and kept asking us about it even thought it wasn't economically safe to start that app. Another app has had a history of bulling people out of the market by offering their larger more experienced infrastructure to users.\n\nSo, to answer the question it starts relatively small, but function, unless its comes from an existing company then its the big fish eating the little fish. ",
"Lots of people who can't, are afraid or don't have enough free time to socialize IRL. Wait the word to spread, make sure your app doesn't suck and you're good to go.",
"All you guys are tip-toeing around the reality - they use bots, buy users are do all kinds of grey area stuff to get to the critical mass. Everyone does that.",
"Tinder went to colleges and sponsored parties at the college bar. Cover charge was free if you showed your phone had the app installed. ",
"Get young women to sign up.\n\nEvery successful social network has started by focusing on teen and college age girls. Tinder actually started by bribing sororities.\n\nGoogle+ gave out early access to 30-40 year old male tech bloggers. Guess what happened to them.",
"This is a huge part of what killed Google+. Google did a slower rollout of Google+ and throttled who was allowed to join. When interest was highest for Google+ only a small group of people were allowed to join. Those folks eventually got bored of talking to each other and didn't use Google+ as much. When Google+ was finally opened up for anyone to join all the early adopters already left due to boredom.\n\nThe slow-rollout approach worked fine for Gmail, because you can still email people on other services. Gmail for a long time was invitation-only, and getting invited was a very desirable thing.\n\nGoogle effectively killed any chance of success for Google+ by not releasing it for everyone at the same time.",
"Some of them used a bunch of fake user accounts manned by an ops team. I won't name names but I worked for a company that started like this.",
"For dating apps like Tinder the answer is obvious; seed the network with fake users so the first users don't see a ghost town, drop a load of money on marketing to get massive adoption quickly, then phase out the dummy accounts as the real users come in.\n\nIt's also common to do a phased regional roll out. Target the big cities and college campuses first which tend to set the trends for everyone else. Once some buzz is going in those areas then you expand your marketing to broader markets."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Chasm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://growthhackers.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6z5zqd | why aren't tunnels under rivers straight? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6z5zqd/why_arent_tunnels_under_rivers_straight/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmsri9h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The earth is not consistently made up of the same thing.\n\nSome areas are made of soft rocks that aren't very stable\n\nOther areas are made of hard rocks that are incredibly hard to drill through.\n\nIt's cheaper, easier and safer to curve your tunnel around these obstacles than it is to just drill a straight line. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5g4zs6 | how does vinegar help hold a poaching egg together? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5g4zs6/eli5_how_does_vinegar_help_hold_a_poaching_egg/ | {
"a_id": [
"daq3vpx"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Vinegar denatures (unravels) the protein albumin that comprises much of the egg white. When albumin denatures, it unravels into a long strand of amino acids that form bonds with other strands of albumin. This phenomenon is called cross linking, and it results in the formation of a white milky skin on the other surface of the egg - which forms a sac that helps keep the rest of the egg compact instead of dissolving and spreading out in the water. The heat of the water, then cooks the sac-contained egg, resulting in a nice compact poached egg.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9fy66f | how is powdered milk created? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9fy66f/eli5_how_is_powdered_milk_created/ | {
"a_id": [
"e603mv0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The water content of milk is evaporated away until a hard substance remains that is ground into powder\n\nfrom wikipedia:\n\nIn modern times, powdered milk is usually made by spray drying[6] nonfat skimmed milk, whole milk, buttermilk or whey. Pasteurized milk is first concentrated in an evaporator to approximately 50 percent milk solids. The resulting concentrated milk is then sprayed into a heated chamber where the water almost instantly evaporates, leaving fine particles of powdered milk solids.\n\nAlternatively, the milk can be dried by drum drying. Milk is applied as a thin film to the surface of a heated drum, and the dried milk solids are then scraped off. However, powdered milk made this way tends to have a cooked flavour, due to caramelization caused by greater heat exposure.\n\nAnother process is freeze drying, which preserves many nutrients in milk, compared to drum drying.[citation needed]\n\nThe drying method and the heat treatment of the milk as it is processed alters the properties of the milk powder, such as its solubility in cold water, its flavour, and its bulk density. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5ma5kw | when a jar won't open, why does hitting it from the bottom, or tapping the lid on the edge of the counter, work to make it easier to open? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ma5kw/eli5when_a_jar_wont_open_why_does_hitting_it_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc20429",
"dc278q8",
"dc28iqr",
"dc2juhz",
"dc2k7a0"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A jar won't open is often due to pressure. Hitting a jar from the bottom rarely works for me. What I do is put it under running hot tap water for 30 s and it usually opens. When it's heated up, pressure in the jar changes. Someone please correct me if I am wrong ",
"Tapping or tampering with the lid loosens the seal, allowing the pressure to equalise slightly. This makes it easier to remove the lid.\n\nI have personally found it most effective to tap firmly with a spoon all around the top edge of the lid. This creates slight deformations in the lid, weakening the seal fairly substantially.\n\nJars are pressure sealed. This is actually usually a byproduct of the production process - the jars are filled hot and then cooled. When the contents cool, they contract (all materials, with few exceptions, shrink in volume/size as they cool). This creates a partial vacuum inside the jar, an area of much lower pressure. As a result, the higher pressure outside the jar forces the lid on tightly. You can do this yourself if you get some jars and make your own jam or other preserve. They're prepared hot, then poured into jars and left to cool.",
"The only thing I know that works is hitting the lid of the jar to deform it (with like a butter knife). The deformations make it easier to turn the lid. ",
"Most jars like you are talking about are packaged while heated. As the contents cool down a vacuum forms in the container which makes it harder to unscrew the lid. \n\nSmacking the bottom of a full jar can cause gasses trapped in the contents of the jar to be released (just like shaking a can of sofa). This increases the pressure inside the container making the lid a little easier to remove. \n\nFinally, don't underestimate the power of a good smack on a sealed container. The shock forces you generate can slightly deform the lid making it easier to open. \n\nDO NOT TRY AT HOME:\n\nFun fact. If you take a sealed, full glass bottle of Snapple and smack it firmly with your hand on the lid (the way you might smack the bottom of a pickle jar to open it) you can generate enough force to cause the bottom of the Snapple bottle to completely sheer off.\n",
"The most effective method is to use the curve of a spoon as a lever against the side of the jar to lift the bottom edge of the lid just enough to allow air in and break the vacuum that seals the jar tight. It may take experimenting with different sized spoons to get the right angle and grip on any specific jar and lid combination. Some jars need that small pointy spoon to get under the lid because the fit of the lid on the jar has so little space to access it. If too little space is available to get the spoon under the lid, try a butter knife levered over some fulcrum for the knife to rest on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1lakjm | why do we order steak on a "rare- well-done" scale and not chicken? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lakjm/eli5_why_do_we_order_steak_on_a_rare_welldone/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbxazkj",
"cbxdz8h"
],
"score": [
18,
2
],
"text": [
"Because beef is a very dense meat, poultry is not. Since beef is very dense, it's rare for bacteria or viruses to live on the inside of the meat, generally they only live on the surface. That's why you usually sear the outside of a steak to kill any bacteria that may live there. \n\nSince poultry (and pork) are less dense, it's possible for bacteria to actually live inside the meat itself, hence why it's necessary to cook poultry to a certain interior temperature before it's considered safe for consumption.\n\nThis is also why you hypothetically cook hamburgers more than you cook steak. Since the inside and outside of ground beef get all mixed up, there may now be bacteria inside of the ground beef.",
"The real reason is because of storage. I've eaten \"rare\" chicken before (Japanese cuisine) and it was actually pretty tasty. But as it turns out, these places have their chicken so fresh they are still rigid from rigor mortis. Getting chicken this fresh enough for the average individual would be insane. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe way mass produced meat is handled, the entire thing is just a big fight against time to prevent pathogens from building up on the meat. Poultry is harder to handle for mass operations so its basically just a no-go to get them fresh enough to not be eaten at anything other than well-done. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/07/17/chicken-sashimi-is-the-other-pink-meat.html"
]
] |
||
1sfakg | why are passwords with extra characters like numbers and symbols considered "stronger," as opposed to just a password that's longer. | So lots of sites now ask for passwords that have at least 1 number and/or at least one symbol. What I don't understand is how this makes the password stronger.
I mean, of course, I understand that with > 26 characters, the number of possible password combinations increases significantly, but if the "cracker" trying to decrypt a password doesn't know if you have all letters, or a mix, they have to try them all anyways, don't they?
So it would seem that the only thing that would make a password stronger would be increasing the length of the password. For instance, if my password is 40 character "a"'s in a row -- if someone was trying to crack it, they'd have to go through every permutation of letter/number/symbol combinations for 1 letter, 2 letter, 3 letter, etc... until they get to 40 characters.
Alternatively, if my password is 8 characters long, and has a distribution of all the possible letter/symbol combinations, it's still cracked by the time the hacker gets to 8 letter passwords, hence much weaker, right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sfakg/eli5_why_are_passwords_with_extra_characters_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdx1qed"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Basically passwords on a server are transformed into a \"hash\" string that cannot be reversed back to the original password. When you login to a site, you submit your password and they run the hash function on it to see if it matches the stored value - if it does, you win. Now suppose a hacker downloads the whole password database somehow. He doesn't have your password, but he does have your hash (plus salt, but let's keep it simple). He can start generating strings and checking each one to see if its hash matches yours, and if so, that is a valid password (even if it isn't the actual PW you use!)\n\nYou already understand the concept of brute-forcing, i.e. try all combinations. So it seems that of course length is all that matters. The question is, where do attackers start? Do they just start enumerating a,b,c,...aa,...ab...,aba...? This would be really, REALLY slow. Instead they generate strings based on entropy, with more-likely strings coming first and dictionary words almost surely cracked in an instant. So adding numbers and symbols puts you WAY behind all that easy stuff, and makes it take a lot longer to crack your password. Even if the attacker knows he only has to make strings matching the symbol requirements, it'd still take a lot longer than if you just used alphabet characters. For instance, checking all 8-character strings with:\n\n(approximate since stuff like \"$$$$$$$$\" is ONLY symbols and wouldn't be a valid PW)\n\nAlphabet characters: 52^8 = 5.3459729e+13\n\nAlphanumeric: 62^8 = 2.1834011e+14\n\nThat plus symbols: 94^8 = 6.0956894e+15\n\nIt's hard to know exactly how many strings a hacker can check per second though, so look at it this way: if it would take him 5 minutes to check all alphabet-only passwords, it would take 20 minutes for alphanumerics and a little under 10 hours for the third category. Instead of getting a few hundred passwords in a day, he gets 2.\n\nThat said, longer is better when it comes to entropy - however, once you get to really secure lengths you end up with users easily forgetting the password unless they used dictionary terms. Sites choose password standards that balance security with user convenience, and usually build extra security so that your accounts are secure even if the password's stolen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4hrnck | how is it possible that certain theories in math (euclid's 5th postulate, the comparability theorm) have been proven to be unprovable? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hrnck/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_certain_theories_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2rs2df",
"d2ryr3g"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The easiest way to show that something is unprovable is to show that it is false. We did this with Euclid's 5th postulate (in a manner of speaking). There exist different types of space where it doesn't hold.\n\nI haven't heard about the Comparability Theorem, so I can't comment on how they showed it's unprovable.",
"A lot of this goes to [Godel's incompleteness theorems](_URL_1_). In a nutshell, he was able to show that in any rigorous system of logic that was sufficiently developed that it contained the rules of arithmetic, there will statements that are true within that system, yet are impossible to demonstrate they are true.\n\nOne interesting place this turns up is with the [continuum hypothesis](_URL_0_). In 1940, Godel (the same dude I mentioned in the previous paragraph) showed that the continuum hypothesis couldn't be false. Great, that means it is true, right? Everyone thought so, and everyone was happy, because this had been an open question for over 50 years, and lots of mathematicians cared about it. But, about 20 years later, someone else came along and showed that the continuum hypothesis also couldn't be true. Well now. A statement that can't be false, *and* can't be true. Is this a joke? The only conclusion: it is not true, and it is not false. In other words, it is independent of the other axioms upon which ZFC (the current logical framework for mathematics) is based."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_hypothesis",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel%27s_incompleteness_theorems"
]
] |
||
6f8rp9 | if bacteria randomly mutate anyway, why does over prescribing antibiotics really matter? | I guess what I am asking is - tomorrow, a bacteria strain could randomly mutate to be resistant not only to current antibiotics but the random mutation could by chance make them resistant to what we happen to be working on next. Since mutation is just chance to a degree, shouldn't we just enjoy antibiotics all we want until the mutation occurs? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f8rp9/eli5if_bacteria_randomly_mutate_anyway_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"digabz5",
"digap36",
"digdncw"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Random mutation is just that. It's not driven by a response to some change in the environment. By abusing antibiotics, those bacteria that survive are guaranteed to have a resistance they pass on. If bacteria were to develop a resistance randomly, the chances of the the resistant strain becoming dominant is much, much less.\n\n[Here's a video of resistance development.](_URL_0_)",
"Bear in mind that most possible mutations are bad for an organism, most of the rest are neutral, and very few are actually good. \n\nFurthermore, what counts as a good mutation depends on the environment the organism finds itself in. \n\nImagine that we liberally use an antibiotic so the organism is very likely to encounter it. Now a mutation which makes the organism resistant to the antibiotic is far more likely to be a \"good\" mutation, even if it has some otherwise negative consequences, and that mutation is likely to spread throughout the population. \n\nHowever if the antibiotic is used sparingly, that mutation, if it arises, is likely to be, overall, a \"bad\" mutation, or at best neutral, so will be far, far less likely to ever spread throughout the whole population. \n\nSo although mutations are random, and a mutation to make the organism resistant is just as likely to occur if we over-use the antibiotic or not, the mutation will only take hold in the population if it actually provides a net benefit to the organism, and this is only likely to happen if we overuse the antibiotic.",
"Antibiotics aren't the main thing bacteria in the world are competing against. Mostly they are competing against other bacteria. It is very possible that a bacteria out there just evolved a mutation to be resistant. In fact it has probably happened millions of times. But then that bacteria wasn't got out competed for whatever food source it was on because that mutation wasn't that helpful, and perhaps even cost a bit of resources. So now it is dead, or at very least rare. When you encounter a bacteria in the wild, it probably isn't that one.\n\nNow, scenario 2. That bacteria makes the same random mutation, but now it is in an environment rich in antibiotics... say a river downstream from a farm that heavily uses them on beef.\n\nNow it isn't a level playing field. The other versions of that bacteria are struggling. That means open buffet for the one bacteria in a billion that is resistant. Soon that whole stream only has resistant bacteria. Billions of them. Even worse, bacteria has ways of exchanging dna with other bacteria, which they would do anyways, but now it is way more likely to be exchanging the resistant defense than some other random dna.\n\nNow when you encounter the bacteria, instead of a 1 in a billion chance that you catch the resistant strain, you are almost guarenteed to have a resistant strain. Bad for you. \n\nPlus, now that everything is a super bug, the only ones that get advantage are those that have anothrr mutation to be even tougher.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThis is the best video I've found demonstrating it. Watch a bacteria go from completely contained by antibiotics to resistant to a concentration 1000 x higher right before your eyes. If someone happens to get exposed, they better hope it is a strain on the right and not a strain in the middle that has had a chance to buff itself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plVk4NVIUh8"
],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/yybsSqcB7mE"
]
] |
|
194rwj | how does the government track people downloading illegal music? | Also, if possible, please explain how they can track who is visiting sites offering illegal downloads. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/194rwj/eli5_how_does_the_government_track_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8ks9xr",
"c8ksfru",
"c8kubhx",
"c8kudsa",
"c8kv775"
],
"score": [
11,
11,
5,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"They don't bother to track who visits sites that offer illegal downloads since it it too hard to know what they downloaded.\n\nBut bittorrent, one of the most common file sharing methods, requires the computers to connect to lots of other computers using bittorrent in order to get all the different parts of the file. It is easy to set up a computer that joins this network and look at what computers is asking it for parts of a file that is illegal to download.\n\nThen they ask their internet providers for the name of the owner.",
"I am not aware of any evidence of any western governments tracking 'illegal' downloads. Most file-sharing is not 'illegal' in the sense of committing a crime that harms society in general (such as theft or assault). But it does breach copyright laws. Breach of copyright is a *tort*, a civil crime in which an individual who is wronged can sue for damages. In order to sue for damages, evidence that meets certain standards must be acquired. \n\nLarge trade organisations, copyright enforcement groups and smaller security firms seeking to earn a quick buck monitor file-sharing downloads in order to obtain the details of participants.",
"As far as I know, they don't. It would be too much effort for something with too little of a return.",
"The government doesnt do anything, its all businesses who do the tracking and lawsuiting.",
"When you torrent something, you don't download the whole file at once (that would be to hard to move around, and really easy to track). Instead, the file is broken up into hundreds or thousands of little pieces, and for each piece you tell the network \"Hey! I'm downloading this piece of this file,\" and the torrent client of someone who's \"seeding\" sends it to you. \n\nJust watching you, this doesn't look too different from any other peer-to-peer activity, like playing online games.If someone wants to know who's pirating a file, there's something else that they do: they do the same thing as you, and tell everyone to send them pieces of this file. Then, they make a list of everyone who did so, and accuse them all of downloading illegally.\n\nIf your ISP wants to watch you for torrenting (which some in the US now do) they have a different way to check: they watch your uploads. It's pretty clear when you've torrented something, because you're now sending bits of the file to loads of people on the internet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
24xuaz | how can fruit that costs $2 in us food shops cos $100 in japan? | How is this possible, surely fruits can't me that hard to produce/import in japan?
Reference: _URL_0_
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24xuaz/eli5how_can_fruit_that_costs_2_in_us_food_shops/ | {
"a_id": [
"chbplgh",
"chbtwdf"
],
"score": [
12,
7
],
"text": [
"Those are not ordinary \"let's have a snack\" fruit but meant to be given as very exclusive gifts. Every one of those fruits are in some sense \"perfect\", just look at how identical the grapes are. That's a particular quirk of Japanese culture.\n\nRead more about it in this [BBC article](_URL_0_).",
"The $100 watermelon is exclusively given as a gift. Everyone knows it's expensive and would never buy it for oneself (you can get a $8 watermelon very easily), but when someone shows one off at a party everyone gets excited and talks about how it looks. Kind of like a Louis Vuitton bag costs $2000, but you can get a $20 generic one that will work just fine.\n\nAnother factor is promotion. The $100 watermelon gets a lot of free advertising and news promotion. The person (company) that buys and sells the first one of the year also gets a lot of free promotion. Finally, the price of fruit at the supermarket is probably higher because people might imagine the $8 one is a good value because it's not $100. \n\nFruit does cost more in Japan, but domestic production is protected by tariffs, labor is expensive, and farms are small and inefficient. Generally, a 50 cent apple in the US goes for about $1.10 in Japan."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fR6GefDZWeQ"
] | [
[
"http://www.bbc.com/news/world-radio-and-tv-17352173"
],
[]
] |
|
5bdrul | how to deal with depression as a friend/spouse/relation? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bdrul/eli5_how_to_deal_with_depression_as_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9nppjp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Depression is complicated, and to be honest, the only thing you can do is be there for them and try to help them if they get frustrated or upset. The only thing is, don't go over the top and be that guy who is always saying shit like \"You okay? Need anything? I'm here for you.\" Just be a bro (or lady bro) and be there without saying it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5x6bjx | why do they still make complicated stop-motion movies if there is more-efficient animation software available? | Why do they still make complicated stop-motion movies, like Kubo and the Two Strings, if there is more-efficient animation software available? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5x6bjx/eli5_why_do_they_still_make_complicated/ | {
"a_id": [
"defl5g2",
"defqg7m"
],
"score": [
20,
6
],
"text": [
"Because it has a very particular style. It's like why do people still paint with paint and brushes when they could do it on a computer, or why do people buy records when they can just get an mp4. New and efficient doesn't mean better in every way.",
"Why do people paint when photography exists?\n\nSometimes the medium or methods used are more important than the final product."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3jy4kl | why do so many news agencies cite reuters stories for their information? what's so special about reuters? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jy4kl/eli5_why_do_so_many_news_agencies_cite_reuters/ | {
"a_id": [
"cut9i2i",
"cut9job",
"cuta8ee",
"cutbm89",
"cutcxgk",
"cutdx6v",
"cute96o",
"cutf0zx",
"cutf49q",
"cuthiuu",
"cutinv6",
"cutlf40",
"cutm7h8",
"cutn4oj",
"cutnevk",
"cutse89",
"cutt780",
"cutved1",
"cuu4f0v"
],
"score": [
7,
2741,
60,
289,
2,
17,
171,
10,
4,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
3,
3,
25,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"because it's either reuters or the ap that are actually getting the news. the other news agencies are just repeating what reuters or ap have already said since people tend to read local news more often. ",
"Most outlets reporting news can't afford to have a presense around the world. So they have to get a lot of their coverage of global news from a few companies that have extensive global networks of reporters, such as Reuters and Associated Press.\n\nAs an example, for most of the year, your average newspaper doesn't need to have a reporter in Ethiopia or Tajikistan. But if something newsworthy happens there, they want to report it. So they'll get the story from Reuters reporter who's there and go from that.",
"So why not cut out the middleman and get your news directly from AP or Reuters?",
"Every newspaper/radio- or TV-station uses the service of press agencies like Reuters, AP and a couple of others (AFP is based in France, dpa in Germany, etc...) and you pay a certain fee to use their reports for your stories. \nThen you usually rewrite the thing/throw in a few of your own sources/ do some more research / mix the information from several press agencies.\n\nThe reason the media does that is that your local newspaper can't afford a huge network of correspondents around the world (especially in more remote places) but they still want to inform you about the stuff that happens there.\n\nAnd there's nothing super special about Reuters - there are just one of the big players in the press agency game and have a network of reporters around the whole world, so they can cover almost everything.\n\n(My workplace has decided recently to Reuters because my boss thinks they are not fast enough compared to the others...I kinda miss Reuters - especially their pictures are usually good and they really cover almost everything)",
"What makes Reuters reputable is that their reports are extremely neutral. They just write like \"So, this happen in this country, this guy said this and this guy did that\" They didn't put their own opinions in it",
"Former journalist here.\n\nReuters and Associated Press (to use two big examples) are press agencies. Many, many news outlets pay either a subscription fee or buy a story off them for a one off price. This way, they don't have the overheads of sending a reporter to X location, and they get breaking news thanks to the huge network of local reporters these agencies hold. Reuters is fairly unique in as much as it has a massive news outlet presence, as well as a 'ticker' reporting service for the financial markets. This competes with Bloomberg and Dow Jones - part of the Wall Street Journal (now separate from the Dow Jones market) and is hugely successful.",
"You've already got enough basic information from others here, so I'll add to that. This might be longer than you're after, but hopefully you'll find some of it useful.\n\nFor a more in-depth explanation, a good book to read about how news works today is [The Flat Earth News](_URL_0_). I can't recommend this highly enough. It speaks specifically of the context of journalism in the UK, but its lessons translate perfectly to what's happened in the US, and the book's aged well - it's only become more important since 2009.\n\nUltimately, many news outlets in the past relied on AP and Reuters because it was a great source of reportage for those parts of the world where it might not make sense to have your own reporters.\n\nIn the era when every almost major city had two or three major daily newspapers papers, and the US had three television networks, for these outlets (and many magazines) international news was often a \"prestige\" expense; it might not be a money maker for every newspaper, news magazine, and television network, but if you didn't have it, it would make your operation seem less serious to the public, and make your entire news operation seem less credible.\n\nToday, AP and Reuters serve a different function. Faced with competition from low-expense outlets on the web, and the diminishing power of the big three US television networks, running an international news department is just another expense in an industry which is suffering loss after loss. Many cities are down to one daily paper, and some even less, with their newspaper of record not appearing every day. Smaller towns which were served by multiple newspapers in the past are even more likely to see contraction. Many of the US's major news magazines have long since ceased publication.\n\nMany news outlets don't just source their international news from AP and Reuters, they source as much news as they can from any source they can get. CGP Grey, someone best known for funny, brief explanatory YouTube videos, noted something I found very true in my own experience: the closer you are to a particular subject of interest, the more you notice that news reportage on it is incredibly wrong. This isn't limited to areas where one has a subjective opinion, such as politics, where if one is an extreme partisan for one major US party, everything someone of the other party says is automatically \"wrong\" or at least suspect. This includes just basic day-to-day science, technology, human interest, current events, and gossip stories. The basic facts are often wrong, the conclusions are often not sufficiently supported by the evidence, and they simply don't match what an \"insider\" to a particular field would agree properly describes the truth, even about non-controversial issues.\n\nThis is because most news outlets simply don't spend as much time and money on real investigative journalism as they used to. Companies and lobby organizations are notorious for sending \"pre-written\" news stories and videos about products and issues to various outlets, who will cover them with no further investigation, and will sometimes re-write them so superficially that they'd fail a plagiarism review for a high school paper. As far as the original authors of the pieces are concerned, this is fine, because they're not interested in getting credit for the piece, they're interested in getting information - usually quite biased - out there to the public.\n\nHere's an example of someone debunking the sort of corporate press release disguised as news: [EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)](_URL_1_). Admittedly, this guy knows his electronics, and he's not afraid of technical terminology, but the basic point stands is that most of the basic claims made by the makers of this product were easily testable by anyone with a modest budget to grab two identical battery-dependent gadgets and a handful of batteries. They didn't, because outlets like PC World and others who carried this glorified advertisement need content, not a research project which requires time, editors, and a modest amount of money.\n\nSo, AP and Reuters benefit from the same sort of pressures that corporate press release distributors and lobbyist groups benefit from:\n\n* shortened news cycle\n* reduced news budget\n* significantly reduced news budget for international news\n* less \"home competition\" (newspapers in the same city, news magazines, and TV channels by people with limited options) driving prestige expenses\n* drastically more outside competition (internet, internet, internet, people with many, many more TV and VOD options than ever before)\n* more of a focus on amount of content rather than quality\n\nThis isn't to say AP and Reuters aren't good news services; they're certainly better than the barrage of advertisement-as-copy I've referenced. In a world where AP and Reuters are doing more and more of the international reportage for an increasing amount of English-speaking news outlets, however, this is problematic. It limits the amount of opinions we hear. Further, both Reuters and AP are largely defined by their desire to be as objective as possible, sticking only to facts. They're never perfect at it, being fallible organizations run by fallible humans, but you often need in-depth reporting by people with an opinion and experience, and who can contextualize a situation in another country for a domestic audience who may not fully appreciate it. AP and Reuters are also noted for their brevity, they were not traditionally intended for the job of replacing international news outlets' foreign correspondence, but rather supplementing them for more out of the way places (a polite way of saying \"less newsworthy to the US and the UK\"), or giving a gloss of international news to more local organizations which weren't equipped to provide it at all themselves.",
"As a fellow journalist who trusts Reuters and AP I think I can answer in ELI5 mode: \n \n\n\nWhen someone does something the right way for a long time you trust them. Reuters is news agency which proved itself in time for doing proper journalistic work so that's why everyone is trusting them. \n\nAnd continuing in ELI10: \nTrust is very important when you are working with information. Journalism is not some production in which you can just buy the best part for your assembly, it is very delicate field where you work with rumours, information which not always is true. And Reuters and AP have true information because they gained trustworthy relations with people who have first-hand access to very delicate information.",
"Television news kinda works the same way. Reporters across the country will make \"canned\" news stories about general interest stories then sell them to local television news to use as filler during news broadcasts. In fact, Conan O'Brien does a bit sometimes where he just compiles all the local news stations around the country using the same news story.... _URL_0_",
"Reuters is one of several \"wire services\" or news agencies. Its' specialty is to be on the ground first (or early) and send out stories other news agencies can publish. They do this via contracts and licensing agreements. The idea: We'll have reliable reporters on the ground, and you can pay us to publish our stories in your newspapers/magazines/websites/TV programs. The wire agencies are known for being neutral and accurate (but lacking in sizzle).\n\nUsually, if you read your local city newspaper (Which you should), local stories will be by local reporters, and national news will come from the wire. It's just easier that way.\n\nThere are two major wires, or three if you live in europe. The Associated Press (\"The AP\"), Reuters, and the Agence-France Presse (\"AFP\"). The AFP's seen better days, however. Reuters is owned by the massive conglomerate Thompson Reuters, which also owns West. It's in the business of information, be it legal, economic, or news.\n",
"Local television news stations also use services like these. The reports are written specifically for television and are used to fill local broadcasts when there isn't enough local news to cover. \n\nThat's why this happens: _URL_0_",
"Also begs the question: Why get your news from slanted news companies when you can just get it straight from Reuters or AP?",
"Reuters used to be an independent news agency .. Until 2008, when it was acquired by Thomson.\n\nIt is still considered by many to be the most independent and reliable.\n\nOver the years Reuter's agency has built a reputation in Europe and the rest of the world as the first to report news scoops from abroad. Reuters was the first to report Abraham Lincoln's assassination, for instance. Almost every major news outlet in the world currently subscribes to Reuters. Reuters operates in more than 200 cities in 94 countries in about 20 languages.\n\n",
"Does anyone know of any good documentaries about the media? I know of Manufactured Consent and Outfoxed. Any other good ones?",
"What u/Pontus_Pilates is true but if you're asking about Reuters specifically it could also be because Reuters' policy is to report unbiased facts and you will see something like 'said an official' or 'reports say' after almost every statement.",
"Note: I worked at AP.\n\nAs many people here posted, AP and Reuters are wire services, which distribute news stories for other people to publish (wire is the term for the distribution method). They've got a full staff of reporters in various locations around the world doing investigative journalism, but there's more to it than that.\n\nOne important thing to note is that the AP, as its name implies, is an association of press. It's not a for profit company, but actually a non profit collective owned by its member newspapers.\n\nTo be an AP member, there are different levels of involvement depending on your level of usage and the type of organization you are.\n\nBut, the most important kind of membership are with local news organizations. To be a member, you pay a significant fee (often in the millions of dollars). In exchange, you get access to all of the news reporting that the AP generates itself, but also access to the wire, or all of the local reporting provided by its member papers.\n\nYou, in turn, are expected to provide your own local coverage for distribution on the wire.\n\nFor example, if there's a bombing in Boston, a small town paper in Cleveland might not have a reporter in Boston, but they'll be able to pick up the coverage that the Boston Globe created without having to send a reporter of their own.\n\nThen if something were to happen in Cleveland, for example a high school basketball player is getting attention from the NBA and is being talked about as a first round pick, that Cleveland paper would send its coverage of that on the wire so the other papers could use it.\n\nBecause the AP is a non profit focused on journalism, they don't have to worry about being motivated by money or only covering things that are profitable.\n\nHappy to answer other questions if anyone has them.",
"Hi, journalist here!\n\nReuters is not a newspaper like CNN or the BBC. There are groups that we call various things. At my old papers we called them \"wire agencies\". \n\nReuters hires mostly photographers, business experts, journalists, ect., but the real beauty is that they, along with other wire agencies like the Canadian Press and Associated Press, have a global dedicated network of freelancers that will buy anything newsworthy, if there's a demand for it. \n\nThe way Reuters works is that they constantly have a stream of incoming material through what we call the wire, really whenever I used the Canadian Press it was just a website. You can get photos, press releases, anything you want through them. If something important is happening and there's a demand for certain information, they'll let the people in their mailing list know: \"Reuters is looking for this\". \n\nMedia outlets like CNN/BBC/CBC whatever can then access this information and \"borrow\" it (not free, of course). Reuters, in the eyes of the people who use it, sort of works like a really efficient freelancer. \n\nNow, why use them? Because of their connections, networking prowess, and speed. And because it's cheaper to pay Reuters then it is to fly one of your own guys out to the middle of nowhere. \n\nAnd the final reason is because Reuters has created a standard of quality for themselves that cannot be beaten. Reuters, especially their business and foreign politics side, are the absolute best in the business. \n\nThese Wire Agencies also don't actually cost that much to operate, since they use so many free-lancers. In fact, I can't speak for Reuters, but the Canadian Press headquarters is a 1-floor office with a staff of less than 30 people. At least, that's about how many I saw when I toured there a few years ago. \n\nEDIT: Sorry, I forgot to mention, the language barrier is one of the best reasons why Reuters, the CP and the AP are so often cited. You see, your news paper may have a staff of 100 people but if some shit happens in Taiwan and nobody speaks Taiwanese, your paper will be screwed out of that story; unless someone who works for Reuters in Taiwan writes the story and translates it to English for you. ",
"So this discussion is meaningless? _URL_0_",
"Fun potential source of embarrassment and tangent I didn't find in the comments. It's pronounced Roiters. I didn't learn this until well after I should have."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.amazon.com/Flat-Earth-News-Award-Winning-Distortion/dp/0099512688/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1441628575&sr=8-1&keywords=flat+earth+news&pebp=1441628580979&perid=1CXBV0FJN33HY54D93YC",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iEshd6izgk"
],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM8L7bdwVaA"
],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/TM8L7bdwVaA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.quora.com/Why-is-stock-market-data-delayed-by-20-minutes-NYSE-NASDAQ-to-the-general-public"
],
[]
] |
||
3mfczj | how do we map images from the non-visible color spectrum into an image we can see? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mfczj/eli5_how_do_we_map_images_from_the_nonvisible/ | {
"a_id": [
"cveji9p",
"cvejqcp"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Light exists on a spectrum, so even if we can't see it we can still tell that this part of the image has longer wavelengths and this part has shorter ones. We can shift these into a range we find useful. Just map all the short wavelength parts to blues and the longer ones to reds, or you can just sum up the intensity at each point and just make a monochrome image in some particular color.",
"Colour maps. A digital camera returns some value from it's sensor, and a computer relates that to some value it sends to a screen using a colour map, and we see a colour. There's really two ways to do this. \n\n\nOne way is to just map the intensity, how bright the light is in whatever invisible spectrum. This can be mapped to any arbitrary colour scheme you want. For example, the cliche [nigh vision goggles dark and light green vision](_URL_1_). Or the thermal camera [black=cold (less IR) white=hot (more IR).](_URL_0_) Or the also common thermal camera mapping where [more IR (hot) is red and less is blue.](_URL_2_)\n\n\nAnother way is just to map a non-visible spectrum onto the visible spectrum. Usually the lower frequency of whatever spectrum is being viewed shows red while the higher shows blue. Photos of space that look like [this](_URL_3_) are often timed colour mapped like this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.x20.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/thermal-image-man-breaking-into-warehouse-300x225.jpg",
"http://cdn.lightgalleries.net/4ebd8bde12cf2/images/Iraq_Perspective_BookEdit_0049-2.jpg",
"http://www.terrahope.com/videos/video-3.jpg",
"http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02357/eso-summary_2357457k.jpg"
]
] |
||
6qh9au | why aren't coal and oil interchangeable? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qh9au/eli5_why_arent_coal_and_oil_interchangeable/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkx8o4r"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Coal can be converted into liquid fuel through a few different processes that are broadly called \"coal liquidation\". There are some plants that exist today that convert coal into things like jet fuel and the Nazi's used similar processes during WWII when they were cut off from oil supplies in Russia and the Middle East. The problem with is that the process is expensive and dirty."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1dh9h2 | space - time crystal | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dh9h2/eli5_space_time_crystal/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9q9tqp"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I don't even..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3g79lz | why are software installers (windows) used for programs that work fine as standalone executables? | I've recently been travelling a lot, and one thing that I've noticed is how many programs I use that work fine if you just copy the folder the executable lives in to a new computer or flash drive. Most of the time these programs are not installable from scratch without Windows administrator access. What's the rationale behind adding an extra layer of complexity, changing registry keys, and doing file access in global user locations when you could just distribute a copy of a compiled executable? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g79lz/eli5_why_are_software_installers_windows_used_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctvmqkn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Often times this is done for users who want uniformity in their apps. For a portable or self-contained application, often times the installers are just wrappers that add a Start menu entry, add registry keys so Windows knows that it is 'installed' and maybe things like user prefs.\n\nOther times, the installers also contain commom redistributal utilities such as VC++ or Direct X so that it will work if those utilities aren't previously installed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3c6uhe | why do americans have to face the flag during the national anthem? | Never heard this one until a shower thought that was posted today. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c6uhe/eli5why_do_americans_have_to_face_the_flag_during/ | {
"a_id": [
"cssrh4q",
"csssm0q",
"cstifk2"
],
"score": [
10,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"The flag represents our nation.\n\nThe national anthem is our \"nation's song\".\n\nFacing the flag (quietly and while rendering proper honors) when it is played is a matter of protocol, with the mindset that in doing so, you are showing respect, through the symbol, to our nation as a whole and also to all it represents and also to all those who have given parts or all of their lives in support of the nation.",
"We don't HAVE to, as in there's no compulsion to. That being said, social pressure makes it pretty much required in certain settings such as a sporting event. As someone else said it's pretty much about respect. ",
"Americans don't have to face the flag or even partake in the anthem. Facing the flag is tradition because it symbolizes the union."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7ytwxb | why can't we increase our penis size through excercise, just like developing other parts of our body by working out? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ytwxb/eli5_why_cant_we_increase_our_penis_size_through/ | {
"a_id": [
"duj5g6j",
"duj5xn6"
],
"score": [
18,
2
],
"text": [
"Because working out increases the size of *muscles,* and this organ is not a muscle. So it's not relevant.",
"There are a couple of reasons why that doesn't work. First is that the penis isn't a muscle, rather it is full of spongy tissue which is inflated by blood to become firm. You can think of it like a water balloon with structure.\n\nWhen our bodies sense that our muscles are being worked in ways which are beyond their capabilities they are repaired in ways to make them better at the previous use. For example if you lift a large amount of weight all at once it will build one kind of muscle fiber, while if you are lifting a moderate weight many times it builds a different kind.\n\nThe key here is that it isn't just used frequently but in ways that push its capabilities. For example you can use your hands all day for normal tasks without making them stronger if you aren't doing anything they can't easily handle. For a penis it isn't clear how a signal of inadequacy would occur; how is the body supposed to know that the penis isn't doing its job just fine?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3tn4ii | all these "free! just pay shipping!" items i keep seeing on facebook | I keep seeing a lot of cool shit, but it it seems like there must be a catch somewhere. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tn4ii/eli5_all_these_free_just_pay_shipping_items_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx7kgsq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"If it is anything like I've been seeing on /r/NearlyFreebies and /r/free, most of those things most likely come from Chinese websites where they can buy in bulk for very little money (such as AliBaba/Express or Wish/Geek, where many things are $1 with free shipping) and then they charge high rates of shipping. A quick reverse image search can usually link you to the original item on the Chinese site."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
382rra | on computers running windows, how can an empty folder take up 0 bytes? surely the disk has some trace of the folder there, even if there's nothing in it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/382rra/eli5_on_computers_running_windows_how_can_an/ | {
"a_id": [
"crrshnk"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"Part of the reason you buy a 60GB hard drive and don't get the full 60GB is that some of that space is sectioned off for information that manages the file system. The space for file system information is fixed, and you can't store things in it. The folder would be an entry in the file system data, and not be present on the part of the disk where things are stored.\n\nIt's like a card catalog in a library. Adding cards to the catalog does not take up space on the shelf; only in the drawer with the cards."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2uh08l | how do you pause a video game, as in what is going on with the processor and memory once a pause is executed? | For me, pausing a single player game began as simply as pressing "start" on an NES controller. ELI5 how the system accepts the pause command, and continues exactly where I left off once the resume command is requested. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uh08l/eli5_how_do_you_pause_a_video_game_as_in_what_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"co8brg3",
"co8caoi"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"In most games, the program is performing some sort of loop: check button presses, move characters, move enemies, etc. and repeat. When you hit pause, it just skips all the other steps besides checking button presses. So when it sees that you've hit pause again, it can keep moving as it did before.",
"How would you pause something you were doing? You'd just stop doing it.\n\nComputers can idle, they don't have to be doing anything at a given time. Most CPUs even have a command that literally means 'do nothing for one clock cycle'.\n\nIf you want to pause a game just suspend any activities that affect game state. No physics, no movement, no inventory additions or subtractions, etc. Just wait for the un-pause to resume the game from the state it was pause in. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
343ain | why do guys shave when they are in the military and in space? | I don't even want to shave and I'm at home! hehehe | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/343ain/eli5why_do_guys_shave_when_they_are_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqqu4rx"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Per regulation. \nAir Force is AFI 36-2903. \nIt gives the appearance of uniformity and professionalism. \nAlso, in case of a CBRN attack, if you're shaven, when you have the gas mask on, it creates a better seal to your face. So you don't get fucked up and shit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
17azbn | how does a black hole have mass? | I was asked this last night by my stepmom. I didn't have a satisfactory answer. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17azbn/eli5_how_does_a_black_hole_have_mass/ | {
"a_id": [
"c83unpj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A black hole is often created by star collapsing much of its mass into a small space. It's literally a lot of mass in a small volume. You might as well ask how an apple has mass. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7n2kq0 | if the ice caps melted, would the oceans be colder or warmer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7n2kq0/eli5_if_the_ice_caps_melted_would_the_oceans_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"dryj1xg",
"drykbyb",
"dryklkc",
"dryli5z",
"dryll7k",
"dryne6p"
],
"score": [
17,
44,
7,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not a scientist but I read somewhere that when the ice melts the additional water creates more overall surface area of water. That additional surface area is more water the sun can heat up.",
"You can sort of think of it like a glass of ice water on a hot day. Ice water is 32°F (0°C) even when the ice is melting. However, once all of the ice melts, the heat is no longer just melting the ice it is instead heating up the water.",
"The world in general would get warmer because of the reduction in the albedo effect. \n_URL_0_ \n \nELI5 The ice caps reflect some of the light from the sun back out into space while water in the oceans absorb most of the sunlight that hits it. At a global scale reflecting sunlight means less heat, absorbing sunlight means more heat.",
"Warmer. If the ice caps melted, it would likely be caused by, or at least in tandem to, rising ocean and atmospheric temperatures, which means the ice caps are melting because the ocean is warmer, not the other way around. ",
"From looking at other responses I get the idea that people think it's a very linear question: a+b=c. \nChanges in albedo is a big concern, but the ice transferring temperature (like in a glass of ice water) is not as significant. \nThe added fresh water from melting ice creating density differences could slow currents and water circulation.\n",
"It depends where you live, the uk for example would most likely get cooler, due to the fresh water disrupting the tropical currents that make it warmer here, i think? \n\nAnyone able to expand on this or correct me if I am wrong? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
j4zqg | keynesian economics | Could someone please ELI5 what Keynesian Economics is and which political party typically supports Keynesianism and for what reasons? It seems to be a hot topic now in regards to the legislation in Congress about the Debt Ceiling, and I'd like to know more. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j4zqg/eli5_keynesian_economics/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2972gy",
"c29782t",
"c297bfq",
"c2989cn"
],
"score": [
9,
68,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Keynesians believe that recessions can be caused by nothing more than a vicious cycle:\n\n* People are getting laid off.\n* Laid off people conserve their savings very carefully.\n* Other people who are worried that they'll get laid off too conserve their money too.\n* People conserving money means that business have fewer customers.\n* Fewer customers causes more people to get laid off.\n* And so on, and so forth.\n\nUsually, something \"real\" (like a banking problem) triggers the vicious cycle, but once's it's going, it's self-perpetuating, even after the underlying problem is fixed.\n\nKeynesians believe that the solution is to interrupt the cycle. One way to do this is for government to go on a short-term buying spree. This is called \"stimulus.\" Basically, the government is just making sure that businesses have at least one customer: the government itself. This prevents further layoffs, which eventually causes people to relax and stop worrying about getting laid off, which causes them to start spending money again. Once regular people are spending money again, the government no longer needs to be the \"customer of last resort,\" so the government can then stop with the short-term buying spree. Thus, the cycle is broken.\n\nIt's important to realize, though, that people, once they become afraid of losing their jobs, they don't get over it instantly. Because of that, these short-term spending spikes need to last more than a few months. If they don't, then the effect is minimal.\n\nSome people think that tax cuts are stimulus. In fact, if people take the tax refunds and save them because they're afraid of losing their jobs, then that's not stimulus at all. It's only if they go out and spend the refund that it becomes stimulus. In general, some percentage of a tax refund will get spent, and some percent will get saved. So a tax cut should be viewed as (say) 50% stimulus, whereas government spending is 100% stimulus.\n\n",
"I've tried to make this short and sweet. Keynesian Economics, most simply could be thought of as such:\n\n* \nThere exists a cycle in the economy, in which there are years of success and growth, followed by years of depression or recession, where the economy is not doing well and people are unemployed and business is not good. This is called the *business cycle*.\n\n* The best way to combat this is by doing two things. During the good times (the *boom*) the government should have high taxes and lower spending, because everyone is doing well. During the bad times (the *bust*) the government should lower taxes and increase its spending to make up for the lack of business. This spending is called a *stimulus*, as it is intended to create activity within the economy. \n\nMost economists today are primarily Keynesian-influenced. Keynesian thought has spread so far that there are several different takes on his economic theory (such as Neo-Keynesians, New Keynesians, Post-Keynesians, etc). The Democrats are definitely the Keynesian party, though many Keynesian economists have criticized Obama for not doing enough with his stimulus and now cutting government spending. Republicans, however, have *recently* taken a decidedly anti-Keynesian approach. They now prefer a mix of Austrian, Supply-side, and Monetarist economics, which are schools favouring less government intervention in the marketplace, and lower taxes.",
"I believe all things should be handled in the form of a rap battle - and for that reason i submit to you Keynes vs Hayek in 2 parts.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n\n_URL_0_\n\nTLDW; both parties are Keynesian (with the exception of the conservative Libertarian camp) - who more or less believe that flooding the markets with lots of cash will help to stimulate positive growth when people are fearful to spend cash and take risks (especially during recessions). \n",
"\nThink of your five-year-old self as the government, and the economy as a minibike. To ride on it you have to do some stuff like keeping the throttle running and the steering steady. But you live on a street that's covered with patches of sand, and every time you hit one it slows the bike way down, veering it off course and occasionally knocking it over. You and your friends have tried ways to sweep away the sand or keep it from piling up, but mysteriously, they never seem to work. The sand keeps coming back.\n\nSo the next best thing is figuring out the best way to ride your minibike on this street, and your bike mechanic buddies disagree on that. The Keynes kid says to goose it harder when you hit a sand patch, to get through it faster and keep from falling over, and make up for it by easing off when you're back on asphalt. Some kids say you should build up lots of speed first, so hitting a sand patch doesn't slow you down as much. Others say you shouldn't do anything special, it won't help and just wastes gasoline. One says the minibike will ride better by itself if you stay home entirely, but most kids think he's been eating glue.\n\nYesterday you hit a really huge sand patch, tried Keynes' advice and goosed it really hard, and got through it - but still almost crashed, and burned through a lot of your gas tank, and came out the other side barely moving forward. Your buddies are so alarmed over this, they're arguing about their different suggestions. Keynes says you should have goosed it harder, the exchange student from Austria says you should have rode it out, the guy from the supply store says you should have worked up more speed before hitting it. An hour ago it sounded like they might agree on a solution to handling sand patches, but now it only sounds like shouting - and the argument has drifted from what to do about sand patches, to each kid telling the others they're lousy riders. You're not sure that's gonna be useful advice the next time you hit sand.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk"
],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.