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
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
b16foc | how can sunscreen keep your skin from aging while still sitting in the sun long enough to tan? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b16foc/eli5_how_can_sunscreen_keep_your_skin_from_aging/ | {
"a_id": [
"eijmvif",
"eijo159"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Not quite. Sunscreen protects against **too much** solar radiation. Depending on how easily you burn, you can decide how strong a protection you want, whilst still allowing yourself to tan.\n\nNow, **don't do this at home. Or *anywhere* come to think of it**. But imagine this. If you put your hand in boiling water it's going to hurt and cause serious damage. Blisters and boils and pain. But if you put your hand in warm water, you can keep it in for much longer.\n\n*That's what sunscreen does*. It turns the boiling sun rays into warm sun rays. ",
"To answer your title: No, it can’t. \n\nTo answer your other question: Yes it’s basically the same damage, you can’t have a sun tan without skin damage, and skin damage leads to what looks like “quicker aging”. So sunscreen cannot “keep your skin from aging” it just keeps your skin from getting sun damage. \n\nSunscreen works by reflecting the sun before it reaches your skin, the same way clothes do. It’s kind of like if you were to grind up tin foil, mix it in paste, and spread it on your body. The sun bounces off and you don’t get sun damage. Sunscreen also contains lotion which helps the skin look younger. \n\nHowever, sunscreen does not block 100% of the sun. The SPF value tells you how effective it is at blocking the sun. SPF 15 will block about 94% of harmful sun rays, while SPF 50 will block about 98%. Sunscreen will also wear off after a while, usually through sweat or swimming etc, so if you don’t re-apply after a couple of hours you’ll get sun damage that way too. \n\nIf you have sensitive skin or you care about skin damage or skin aging effects, then you shouldn’t be getting sun tans. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
92ln6t | what does the 101 in beginners courses mean ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92ln6t/eli5_what_does_the_101_in_beginners_courses_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"e36kesh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It was introduced when colleges begin to organize course work systematically. Courses starting with a 1 are intended for freshman, 2 for sophomores, et cetera.\n\nThe second digit is the content area and third digit the sequence. So the 101 is introductory course. 102, 103, etc should be take sequentially.\n\nEdit: 101 became the socially accepted indicator for introductory courses. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5tw8n4 | how x-ray machines work and what metal is typically used | Title is self explanatory. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tw8n4/eli5_how_xray_machines_work_and_what_metal_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddpmx2c"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They work similarly to CRT televisions, interestingly.\n\nThere is an 'electron emitter', which generates a cloud of electrons around a coil. Then there is an 'electron collector', that pulls the electrons to itself with great acceleration. This acceleration gives the electrons their energy, with which they crash into an angled piece of metal. When they crash into that metal piece, they 'excite' it, and cause it to emit high energy photons, which are called the x-rays.\n\nThe metal target gets *very* hot in the process. I know that, due to its ridiculous heat resistance, tungsten was a popular choice for target material, but my knowledge on x-ray tubes is very superficial. They might be using some fancy alloys."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3j56pr | why do dogs eat grass? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3j56pr/eli5_why_do_dogs_eat_grass/ | {
"a_id": [
"cumlbqb",
"cumm0kp",
"cumm0p1",
"cumm9v1",
"cumn2ku",
"cumnk5t",
"cumnngd",
"cumo1rx",
"cumoh53",
"cumpose",
"cumf20b",
"cumf2tw",
"cumf321",
"cumg1n7"
],
"score": [
14,
16,
2,
6,
3,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
16,
4,
622,
76
],
"text": [
"Both my dogs chomp grass when we go to the park. At first I thought that my dogs were getting upset tummies but nope, they just like grass. ",
"My labrador, possibly labrador/goat mix grazes grass everyday. He never throws up or shows any signs of an upset stomach and has solid poops. \n\nI just think he likes it.",
"Anecdotal, but mine only does it when it's close to mealtime and he hasn't been fed yet, or when there's (apparently) ultra delicious cool morning dew on the grass. ",
"Mine do it out of spite. I just looked into this because mine do it non stop. Basically they don't know for sure could be compulsive behaviour, could be remedy, could be spite.\n",
"Maybe boredom? Maybe its tasty? My dog eats grass a lot and he has no stomach problems. You shouldn't worry about it endagering your dog unless you treat your grass with chemicals and stuff.",
"_URL_0_\n\nA large portion of dogs eat grass, very small percentage do when they are ill, and about 22% vomit on a somewhat consistent basis. Dogs who are ill are more likely to vomit when eating grass. Dogs do it so often when they feel well, its hard to imagine that they do it to make them selves puke and feel better. If you read the link, it will explain how one theory is in the wild, the grass would provide fiber to help in the digestive track, and remove worms and other parasites. The theory is that the dogs still carry this instinct that helped their ancestors, and eat grass; even though they don't have the parasites that it would aid for.\n\nAnother theory I've read, but I don't know from where, could of just been a reddit comment; saying that it could be your dog is bored, and isn't getting enough exercise, but my friend has a couple dogs on some acreage, and they run a ton and play together; but one of them still eats grass sometimes, or will chomp on part of a plant.",
"Wait, so dogs actually *can* eat grass?",
"Sometimes when their tummy is upset they eat grass to tickle their throat and cause them to vomit up whatever is bothering them. Other times they may be eating it to get a nutrient their food isnt supplying enough of.",
"Lots of bermuda grass here in Arizona. My dog doesn't care for the closely mowed grass. She looks for places where there are taller blades with new shoots and grazes the tops off them. I think she just likes the taste. ",
"My dog eats grass every single day, he seems to like the taste of only a certain type of grass that is different than the type of grass his friend likes and my previous dog liked.\n\nIt's kind of interesting, I always hear people say that it's because they aren't feeling well or to throw up but in all honesty I haven't met a dog that didn't eat grass if given the option. They just seem to like eating grass, some more than others.",
"Multiple reasons. Most often to aid an upset stomach be it through just aiding digestion or to induce vomiting, but a handful of under-stimulated dogs will do this just out of boredom. ",
"Dogs eat grass when their stomach feels bad. Grass makes them throw up so the feeling goes away since they can't put a finger in their throat like we do",
"Your doggie sometimes eats grass to help with tummy aches or if they ate something that didn't agree with them. But dogs and cats also think it tastes yummy, so will occasionally have it as a snack. It doesn't always mean something bad! \n\nEdit: in your dog's case, he/she may have gotten into the garbage, eaten something bad outside, or may have been fed at a different time than usual. Some dogs just have sensitive stomachs. ",
"My dog is a Germans Shepard and golden retriever mix, and probably some Fucking Billy goat in there because Damn can he eat grass. Which he does to calm his stomach, and then puke on my floor. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201412/why-dogs-eat-grass-myth-debunked"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6udhsk | do steroids actually enlarge the head? | I'm thinking of the claims that Barry Bonds' ballooned in the late 90s after he started taking steroids.
Is this a real effect, and, if so, why does this happen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6udhsk/eli5_do_steroids_actually_enlarge_the_head/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlrwmtb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Moon face is the result of fat distribution to the face--the head is not actually getting bigger. It's a common side effect of Prednisone, an immunosuppressive corticosteroid, but can also result from prolonged anabolic steroid use. The specific mechanism that causes this is not known, but longer use generally corresponds with more prominent showing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3wscjd | why did a radical islamist behind a school attack shout "it is for daesh" if "daesh" is a horrible insult? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3wscjd/eli5_why_did_a_radical_islamist_behind_a_school/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxyo00o",
"cxysgvn"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
" > Daesh is an acronym for the Arabic phrase al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant)\n\nMaybe is has some other meaning but it seems its just an acronym \n\nSo, yeh, he's pretty much saying \"for ISIS\"\n\nEdit: Further searching I found this from an article\n\n > The word is an Arabic acronym of al-Dawla al-Islamiya fi Iraq wa ash-Sham – meaning the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams – but Daesh when spoken sounds similar to the Arabic words for \"the sowers of discord\" (Dahes) or \"one who crushes underfoot\" (Daes).\n\n\nThey dislike it because of the sound \n",
"I think the truth behind your question just came out, apparently the guy is being questioned by police about why he lied about the whole thing"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7qoa4m | how will humanity determine if free will is a myth? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7qoa4m/eli5_how_will_humanity_determine_if_free_will_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsqn2se"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You don't know what is real and isn't. Therefore, you don't know if you can freely interact with anything because you don't know if it exists. This means it's not possible to determine... but that's just my take. For more information, look into metaphysics (or do yourself a favor and don't)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3y4uc4 | why don't other organizations last as long as religions? | Islam is nearly 1000 years old, Christianity nearly 2000 and Judaism even older. Are there any nonreligious organizations that have lasted this long? What is special about religion that allows their organizations to last so long? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3y4uc4/eli5_why_dont_other_organizations_last_as_long_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyake1u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I don't know what you mean? Empires sometimes last just as long as, if not longer than religions. \n\nIran is about 5000 years old if you count the proto-Elamite kingdom on the Iranian Plateau as the start of Iran. Azerbaijan could also count under the same kingdom. \n\nChina's oldest dynasty is just older than christianity by about 200 years. \n\nJapan's oldest emperor dates back before christ as well. \n\nAfghanistan has had mixed tribes since about 600BC (maybe a little later) \n\n Bahrain could have been founded as early as 4,000 BCE if you count the Dilmun empire. \n\nEven somolia outdates christianity by about 200 years. \n\nAnd those are countries that are still around! Countries last just as long as religions in some cases. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6iubb2 | why do people get foam in their mouth when they have rabies or an epileptic seizure? | Title explains for itself | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6iubb2/eli5why_do_people_get_foam_in_their_mouth_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj96x6f"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I can explain the seizures (epileptic here): when you have the most severe of epileptic seizures, you lose total control over your body. Obviously the most visible symptom of this is loss of limb control, ie, seizing. But most of the the rest of the body goes too - including the ability to swallow. A basic body survival response to this is blowing spit out to prevent from drowning. The spit comes through the teeth or the sides of the mouth, is aerated (filled with air from the blowing) and thus has extra bubbles that look like foam."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
audgou | how does adding money to be circulated affect the economy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/audgou/eli5_how_does_adding_money_to_be_circulated/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh7fgb3",
"eh7rxdx"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It causes inflation.\n\nWhen the total money in an economy (the money supply) increases too rapidly, the quality of the money (the currency value) often decreases. Economists generally think that this money supply increase (monetary inflation) causes the goods/services price increase (price inflation) over a longer period.\n\n & #x200B;",
"Currency like that in the US has no inherent value. It’s just a piece of paper that we have agreed represents a certain valued amount. The dollar bill is a one dollar federal reserve note. You can’t go into a bank and exchange it for something like gold or silver or diamonds. \n\nThat’s separate from money. You can’t touch money. Money is the numbers in your bank account that tells you how much buying power you have. Currency is what you get out of an atm and trade for real world objects. \n\nAdding currency to circulation does raise inflation because the more paper dollars that are out there, the less each one is worth in terms of actually being traded for stuff of value like food or water. And if the currency is worth less then prices go up. That’s what inflation is. One of the tactics to fight inflation is to print less currency. \n\nAdding money to the economy is different. A bank loans you 10 grand worth of buying power. They don’t remove that amount from their reserves. They add it to their assets. They have created 10,000 that didn’t exist anywhere before and now they show themselves on paper as 10 grand richer and you as ten grand poorer. They in turn can make loans against the ten grand you haven’t paid them yet (that they made up in the first place) and if you stop paying, take possession of your physical assets. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
39sk84 | since black absorbs light, exactly how much warmer will you be in a black shirt, contra a white one? and also, are black people on average hotter than the rest? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39sk84/eli5_since_black_absorbs_light_exactly_how_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs62c0s",
"cs62pde",
"cs62t8h",
"cs632r5",
"cs64bvf",
"cs6559r",
"cs65jik",
"cs66bwz",
"cs6klz8"
],
"score": [
116,
51,
10,
31,
5,
2,
5,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Can I add to you question why women in Arabic countries wear black robes (burqas)? Wouldn't it make more sense to wear white ones?",
"Read \"Why do Bedouins wear black robes in hot deserts?\" a paper from Nature. \n\nTurns out that the colour makes no difference and it's how the robe is worn that makes the difference. ",
"I think questions like this are better suited for /r/askscience. Anyway, there's no *exact* answer, it depends on too many variables and a lot of the underlying processes are essentially random. \n\nI think the reason for wearing black clothes is that a good absorber of radiation (= light) is a good emitter as well. So, despite getting hot more quickly in the sun, black skin or clothes also lose the heat more quickly. ",
"Well I don't think black people are \"hotter\". White skin evolved because of a lack of sunlight the further north you go, which is why someone from Sweden is a lot paler than someone from Malta. People in Europe needed a better way to get vitamin D. Darker skin actually protects the person better from UV radiation. People who ate a lot of fish kept their darker skin, like Inuits.",
"I'm not sure, but I believe most of the heat that reaches you is in the infrared spectrum of light. So while a shirt may reflect visible colors, it may not reflect others.",
"If we assume only heat transfer due to radiation, we can use stefan boltzmann law of radiation. We can assume black has an emissivity of 1.0, white... let's go w 0.25. \n\nQ=e*sigma*(t1^4 - t2^4)\n\nWe know e and sigma. we want to solve for t1, temp of black shirt (or white shirt, solving the eq a second time). We can make an educated guess about solar Flux (q) and t2 (ambient temp)\n\nI'm taking a poop and I'm almost done so someone else can take it from here :)",
"Mechanical Engineer here\n\nRadiation is absorbed by black a lot better than white. The way it is measured is by the absorpion constant which varies from 1 being an ideal blackbody (perfect but non existent in real life) to 0 being a perfect reflector. \n\n[The Engineering Toolbox](_URL_0_) has generalized coefficients by color, suggesting a white smooth surface would be between 0.25-0.40. We can assume 0.40 because a T-shirt isn't a smooth surface.\n\nBlack is 0.9 or higher, so it would absorb twice as much radiation than a white shirt. As such, you would get hot twice as fast wearing a black shirt than if you were wearing a white shirt. This is only if you are in the sun, though, as ambient light doesn't really have much infrared heat associated with it.\n\nTheoretically, that means that a black person's skin will be twice as hot as a white person's skin if they were both perfectly black and perfectly white, respectively. That doesn't necessarily mean they will actually feel hotter though, but their skin will feel much hotter to the touch. Once again, this is in direct sunlight\n\nSomething interesting about heat transfer, though. If you wear a baggy shirt you will be hotter than if you wear a really tight shirt, regardless. A loose shirt will trap hot air under your body and serve as insulation. A tight shirt won't trap hot air, and as such the heat is transferred to your body directly through radiation, and it leaves through convection. A black shirt won't necessarily make you hotter, but the shirt will be much hotter. The bagginess and thickness of the shirt are far more useful in determining how hot you will be.\n\nTL;DR: if you werar a black shirt, it will be twice as hot as a white shirt. However, the heat has to transfer from the shirt to your body, so a baggy shirt will make you much hotter than a tight shirt, regardless of color",
"For black skin, it's been explained to me that it's like painting a greenhouse black. Sure, the outside gets hotter but it means the light doesn't penetrate and heat up the inside. Similarly, light gets through several layers of white skin and heats up the inner layers. Having black skin stops the light in the outer layers which lets you shed the heat more quickly. ",
"So, a shirt that's white on the outside and black on the inside seems to be the coolest. You guys watch me kill it on Shark Tank."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/solar-radiation-absorbed-materials-d_1568.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
7p6adc | if both lsd and psychedelic mushrooms use psilocybin then why does one give you an 'energizing' experience and the other gives a more 'relaxing' experience | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7p6adc/eli5_if_both_lsd_and_psychedelic_mushrooms_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsetr0l",
"dsetrmf",
"dsev4hb"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"LSD is definitely not a party drug. Some people may enjoy it that way, but overall that is not true. Usually you want to be by yourself or with a couple of close friends. Going to a party on it is a terrible idea.\n\nThe trip from both is extremely similar. I would say LSD feels “cleaner” and is much more enjoyable, but it’s not really possible to explain if you haven’t done both. I’ve never had an enjoyable trip on mushrooms, but have always had great ones on acid.\n\nLSD also does not have psilocibin in it, it’s a chemical compound derived from ergot, a different fungus. The effects are very similar but they are completely different drugs.\n\nLSD is not “energizing”, and shrooms are definitely not “relaxing”. It’s really not possible to explain the nuance if you haven’t tried at least one of them.",
"They aren't the same chemical. Only mushrooms are/use psilocybin. LSD is a man made chemical called Lysergic acid Diethly amide (aka \"acid\"). They're both hallucinogens, but act on the brain and body in different ways. However, both have therapeutic and recreational uses under the right conditions. ",
"They're not both psilocybin. LSD is the name of the chemical. It's short for Lysergic Acid Deythlamide, chemical formula C20H25N3O. Psylocybin and psilocin, the 2 psychoactive compounds found in hallucinogenic mushrooms are totally different chemicals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9udrhe | what are the amino acids? and what do they do to the body? (simple answers cause i’m a noob) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9udrhe/eli5_what_are_the_amino_acids_and_what_do_they_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"e93fpsb",
"e93fvlj",
"e93pjqs",
"e93w1a7",
"e93wmdh",
"e942w3l",
"e94e1x2"
],
"score": [
9,
56,
6,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Amino acids are what proteins are made out of. Your body uses proteins for basically every function it has. The amount and order of the amino acids determine what kind of protein it is and what it does. ",
"Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins. Imagine amino acids like lego blocks, you can assemble them into any shape and size.\n\nAmino acids are all identical, except for a single “side group”. This side group can be a single hydrogen, a complex carbon chain, some nitrogen groups, etc etc. These give the amino acids different properties, which gives the proteins a function.\n\nAny protein you eat will be broken down into its base amino acid components. It doesn’t matter if you eat chicken, peas, beef or mushrooms, you will still get the same amino acids, which your body can use to make any protein. The lego structure will be split into individual blocks, which your body will assemble into functional proteins.\n\nEating “collagen protein” for smooth skin doesn’t work, Nor eating “special proteins” for some magic purpose. In fact, overeating one single source of protein will harm you. Some plants like wheat don’t have the same ratio of proteins as humans, so if you only ate wheat you would be short of some amino acids. It’s like disassembling a black lego boat and expecting to build a blue sphere - impossible.",
"Think of it like building materials. You cells use the amino acids as material for building and repairing your body. If your body does not have the amino acids that it needs, it can't build and maintains anything that uses it. Just like if you were building a brick house and ran out of bricks, you'd have to stop building the house until you go more bricks. This would be everything from recovering injuries, replacing work out cells, building muscles, or just maintaining general health.",
"It's like if your muscles were made out of lego, the small pieces of lego would be amino acids. The large piece would be protein.",
"Amino acids are like a toy roller coaster set. You can link them together to make bumps and loops and contort them into all sorts of ways. Amino acids have a singular, common backbone, which are linked together through peptide bonds, and is like the track of the roller coaster. The entire roller coaster is the protein. And... that's kind of where that analogy ends. \n\nOn this backbone you will have a bunch of different R groups, which are just variable parts that jut off of the backbone. This R group determines what amino acid you have. It can be as simple as a singular hydrogen in glycine, or something like methionine has a sulfur on the end and allows that amino acid to bond covalently with other methionines to strongly joint two different parts of the track together, or the R group can be positively charged, negatively charged, uncharged, aromatic, or even bond back onto the backbone like in proline and cause the entire track to get a kink in its structure. \n\nDepending on the order these pieces of the track are bound together will change how the protein that results will function. For example, an enzyme (a type of protein that catalyzes reactions) may use it's positive amino acids to hold the negative parts of a molecule in place, the negative amino acids to hold the positive parts, and then another section that actually catalyzes the reaction. \n\nThe endoplasmic reticulum (an organelle) will fold the protein makes sure that the track is in the shape so that the critical parts of the track are in the correct place. If it's not in that shape, the protein can't function. If it gets too hot (or if it's too acidic or alkaline) the protein can unfold, and possibly be unable to get its shape back no longer function, and that's called denaturing. \n\nProteins are kind of the working unit for cells. They do an absolutely mind boggling amount of tasks, from signal transmission, to movement, to being a pathway from in and out of the cell, to metabolic functions, to providing structure, etc. If there's something that's done by the cell, it's likely a protein (made up of amino acids) carrying it out. ",
"Ok, this one is DEFINITELY someone's homework. (however if I don't answer the question they delete my post, so: they are what make up proteins)",
"Amino acids are the legos your body uses to make proteins.\n\nProteins are the legos your body uses to make little molecular machines that control your metabolism and whatnot."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3f64vx | why do people on reddit justify piracy of entertainment, just because they don't have easy access to the content? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3f64vx/eli5_why_do_people_on_reddit_justify_piracy_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctlm1ux",
"ctlmyaq"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The content creators only lose money if they lose a sale. If you download something you never would have paid for there is no loss to the legal owners of the content. ",
" > The whole \"if only I could get this in a way that is super easy for me, I wouldn't steal it,\" seems like complete bullshit.\n\nI used to pirate a lot; almost all entertainment I consumed came from torrents. Yet over the past five years or so I've been converted to Steam/Netflix/Spotify/etc. They introduced services that made things super easy and generally cheaper to get hold of.\n\nBefore I would have to go into a games shop and pay fairly significant money even for pre-owned versions of older games. Now Steam offer instant downloads with big discounts for older games. I haven't pirated a game in years.\n\nBefore Netflix, if you wanted to watch an old TV series you'd have to buy a fuck ton of DVDs which cost a lot of money. Even if the price was right, I hate cluttering up my house with things like DVDs and CDs. Torrents were so so so far ahead of the game, I wasn't even tempted to buy legit. \n\nNow, I'm not trying to convince you that my piracy should be deemed acceptable; that sort of debate is often a waste of time. Everyone has their own personal ethics on it. What I'm trying to say here is that just because you don't believe in my reasoning yourself, saying it's complete bullshit is wrong because there are people like me for whom it is absolutely the truth, whether you believe them or not. If not wanting to pay for stuff was the sole reason for piracy, I'd still be doing it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1hlmmk | why when it's 'damp' old people feel it in their bones... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hlmmk/eli5_why_when_its_damp_old_people_feel_it_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cavncvf"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"When bad weather roles in it tends to come with a lower barometric pressure (lower air pressure). \n\nThis affects how much pressure your body is being subjected to.\n\nWhen there is lower barometric pressure your tissues are allowed to expand (for instance feeling that your joints are swollen or that there is more water retention).\n\nSometimes when this expansion happens some of the liquids that are supposed to be in your body veins and lymph vessels leak out, putting the enervation of our joints under pressure, hence the dull pain that comes with it.\n\nI think it is a controversial issue. This is the best explanation I have for it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
186btj | why the celsius to fahrenheit conversion is what it is. | So, I get that to convert from C to F it's °C x 9/5 + 32 = °F. But **Why** is it that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/186btj/eli5_why_the_celsius_to_fahrenheit_conversion_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8bzus1",
"c8bzwqz",
"c8c00io"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because it's how the math works out between the two scales. Fahrenheit was originally created with the freezing point of water at 32 degrees and the boiling point at 212 -- don't ask why, they're arbitrary, except that they're 180 F degrees apart. Maybe it had something to do with how evenly divisible that number is over many integers -- 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12 being very important ones.\n\nThe Celsius scale was set with the freezing point of water at 0 and the boiling point at 100, so they're 100 degrees apart. Now, what's 180 over 100? 9/5. What's the difference between the starting point of the two scales? 32 F degrees. Voila, you get that conversion equation.",
"Celsius is set up so that water freezes at 0 degrees and water boils at 100 degrees. Fahrenheit is set with water freezing at 32 degrees and boiling at 212 degrees.\n\nTo go from Celsius to Fahrenheit, there are two things to take into account: where zero is and how big a \"degree\"is. Since 0 Celsius is 32 Fahrenheit, you add 32. Then, you multiply by 9/5 because each Celsius degree is 9/5s as big as a Fahrenheit degree. You can see this by taking the boiling to freezing temperature difference in Fahrenheit (212-32=180) and dividing it by the boiling to freezing difference for Celsius (100-0=100). The result is 180/100, which reduces to 9/5!",
"[Because Farenheit was a nutter, basically](_URL_0_). In Celsius, water freezes at zero, water boils at 100, everything else is in-between. In Farenheit, **brine** freezes at 0, water freezes at 32, and (originally) average blood temperature was 3x the freezing point of water (96). \n\nThis is just speculation, but I shouldn't wonder if Farenheit picked a 0 that was less than water-freezing temperature because that way you could fill a thermometer with specially salt water and measure how cold it was even if it was cold enough to snow. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#History"
]
] |
|
5x68r3 | what exactly did sessions do, and why is is such a huge deal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5x68r3/eli5_what_exactly_did_sessions_do_and_why_is_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"defkc60",
"defkjyf",
"deft2qv"
],
"score": [
14,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"He was in communication with Russia during a time when Russia was suspected of tampering with our election. While this is not illegal, Sessions lied about this contact while under oath which IS illegal.",
"He had two meetings with the Russian Ambassador to the United States during the Trump campaign for the Presidency. This in and of itself may not be of significance. However, he did not disclose those under sworn testimony to Senator Al Franken, instead saying, \" I didn't have — did not have communications with the Russians.\" This could potentially constitute perjury, although his defense so far appears to be that these meetings fell within his (reasonably possible) job duties as a US Senator on the Armed Services committee and so he did not mention them as they were not relevant to the Trump campaign for the Presidency.\n\nHowever, whether they are perjury or not, given the intense suspicious currently hovering over the administration regarding communications with Russia, they present yet another uncomfortable stumbling block for the administration in avoiding at least giving the appearance of being compromised with more Russian influence than many consider proper. \n\n",
"Sessions was asked \"did anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign have any contact with russia during the election?\" \n \nSessions said no, except he was affiliated with the Trump campaign and did have contact with russia during the election. \n \n*Why* he was contacting russia isn't the problem. The problem is that he lied under oath to congress."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
87gmnd | why|how do we make reddit bots that remove post automatically? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/87gmnd/eli5_whyhow_do_we_make_reddit_bots_that_remove/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwcq719"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"As to why, we make them because they are effective at combating spam and ensuring a level of quality without requiring a human to operate. A bot only requires a human to take a look at appeals and complaints, ie. to correct any false positives or negatives, instead of a human having to manually go through all posts.\n\nFor how, a bot is given certain triggers (for example, common words or features in spam messages) that it looks for. Based on these triggers, the bot decides if a post is spam or otherwise against the rules, and if it is, removes it. Of course, a bot requires a human backup, as it may have false positives and false negatives, but a bot vastly reduces the work load on admins in a subreddit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2vohx0 | if symptoms of being sick (mucous, sore throat, fatigue) are immune system responses, what does the cold virus actually do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vohx0/eli5_if_symptoms_of_being_sick_mucous_sore_throat/ | {
"a_id": [
"cojiejn",
"cojjihc",
"cojjymo",
"cojkrpc",
"cojks6k",
"cojl7sz",
"cojnh13",
"cojo1z2",
"cojoeue",
"cojopns",
"cojoyhb",
"cojp84a",
"cojpdvo",
"cojplp6",
"cojq0a9",
"cojrq9o",
"cojrvey",
"cojsof2",
"cojt66i",
"cojtdg1",
"cojucnt",
"cojupgx",
"cojvl6b",
"cojwb47",
"cojwcw2",
"cojxlu8",
"cok17g3",
"cok3guh",
"cok3vfr",
"cok79k5"
],
"score": [
71,
5,
3263,
3,
2,
48,
453,
3,
2,
4,
15,
3,
2,
23,
103,
3,
8,
2,
2,
9,
8,
8,
2,
25,
2,
3,
5,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It invades cells in your upper respiratory tract and reproduces inside of them. Viruses utilize special mechanisms to commandeer the machinery inside of your cells and turn them into little virus factories. Eventually, these cells will burst and release millions of viruses which will go and infect other cells. More serious viruses, such as Ebola, can do a lot more damage because they can evade the immune system and continue to reproduce inside your cells, which will eventually kill you if your immune system cannot stop it. ",
"I'm not well versed enough on the actual mechanics behind viral reproduction to provide a long form answer, but briefly, the virus takes over and destroys cells in the affected areas.\n\nThis prevents the affected cells from performing their normal jobs.",
"While your immune system is fighting them, pretty much nothing. However, if they were allowed to keep reproducing without a fight, then they would just keep killing off cells at faster and faster rates, eventually preventing vital functions from working and killing you.",
"just came across this link this morning...\n\n_URL_0_",
"I am not a doctor or a biologist but without the immune response I am assuming you would experience similar symptoms as someone with Necrotizing Fasciitis. \n\n _URL_0_\n\nBasically the infection would eat or kill healthy cells and spread causing bleeding, weakness, massive inflammation, pain, and eventually death. ",
"People almost never die of the common cold. Instead, they die of other opportunistic diseases that take advantage of a weakened body (from fighting the virus and rebuilding things that get destroyed in the crossfire) to set up shop. From there, the sky is the limit in terms of how many fascinating ways you can die.\n\nIf there were no other contenders and no response to the virus, you would slowly loose cell function via lack of vital proteins from overloading of protein synthesis pathways with virus RNA, your cell populations would decrease from necrosis by lysing, and you'd eventually die of systemic organ failure. As I stated before though, this never happens in reality; before the cold virus gets to that point, you'll either recover, or die of another disease.\n\nNow, what if the common cold were the only disease present, and it was winning, but your system was not completely forgetting to do the things that usually accompany a viral infection? This is ... an interesting situation. It is theoretically possible for a person to die of something like viral induced meningitis (a condition in which inflammation around the brain and spinal cord causes increased pressure in those areas). However both its onset and result in fatality are very unlikely, and neither this nor any other direct fatal result of a common cold infection has been documented in an adult human in reality as far as I know.",
"Most basic response:\n\n1. squats in your cells\n1. steals your food\n1. makes babies\n1. your cells die of starvation and the virus' fecal mater (RNA)",
"Well since we are on the topic of colds, ELI5 why I am getting a reoccurring cold every two weeks it seems? ",
"When people with AIDS get a cold, they have a higher risk of pneumonia. It stands to reason that an asymptomatic cold, that is to say a cold that does not get fought by the immune system at the spot of infection, would eventually cause pneumonia. Then you'd be in serious trouble. \n\nTLDR; Pneumonia ",
"Thanks for the answers everybody, but can can I politely ask someone to address the issue of snot? How the hell does me being a snot factory help my immune system fight off the rhinovirus? \n\nDoesn't it seem more likely that me being a snot factory is for the benefit of the virus and not me? Me gets sick, me snots all over the fucking place, snot gets on other people, other people become snot factories, and the cycle continues. Right? \n\nEdit: Also I am sick now, and every time I get sick, I want to make a shirt that just says \"Snot's Not Okay!\" ",
"Piggybacking on this, I have a cold right now. Why do I wake up with a dry nose/no symptoms but then within 30 minutes it all comes back?",
"Why don't we become immune to the common cold after having getting it? Why isn't their a vaccine against it?",
"Long answer short, the cold virus turns your cells into factories that reproduce itself. It does this because the virus has no other way to replicate other than using another living thing (in this case your cells) in order to reproduce. The immune responses that you feel (mucous, sore throat, fatigue) are all symptoms of your body ridding itself of the virus. It does this by the only way that is viable which is killing its own cells already infected by the virus. The symptoms you feel from the cold are from the cell death and the subsequent ways your body deals with the cell death associated with your body killing its own infected cells. ",
"Once introduced, the virus will enter one of your cells, usually near the point of entry (nose, mouth, throat). The virus will then commandeer your cell's functions and materials necessary to replicate itself. Your cell is essentially the virus's host. Once the baby viruses are ready to be born, your cell will lyse (=dead cell). The newborn viruses will then attack neighboring cells. This will continue and without your immune system, the virus can and will keep attacking and killing cells, until you die. \n\nWhat your immune system does to combat the attack of a virus is two-fold. One is a general search and destroy of cells that have been flagged as under siege. This causes the sore throat and the mucus is the byproduct as an attempt to flush out debris from the battle. This continues until the second and more specific line of defense is found (the body's specific antibody for the virus). The antibody is then replicated and used to fight the virus until the war is won. ",
"The human body's primary method of defeating viruses, aside from the white blood cells, are quarantine and cooking. The fatigue comes from the bones, the body diverts resources into producing white blood cells.\n\nThe sore throat is caused by the virus damaging the skin and thinning it.\n\nThe mucous is the body sending white blood cells out of the blood stream in the vector, a suicide mission.\n\nSpot creation: By sealing an area off and then raising the temperature, one encourages viral growth within a closed system, leaving the virus forced to contend with an abundance of virus particles and a lack of food sources but a key-lock mucous, which is essentially a red herring designed to trick the virus into suicide.\n\nEventually the virus is going to run out of sustenance and die within a closed, inhospitable area, or kill itself trying to inject itself into a red herring.\n\nWhilst it is doing this, the body pumps white blood cells into the area, to attack and analyse the virus, looking for weaknesses.\n\nOnce a weakness is found, the virus is then attacked to extinction in all places where it occurs and the pus filled quarantine area is then reabsorbed slowly, the antibodies are then cycled to ensure that no further outbreaks occur. The trouble is; sometimes the pressure from the quarantine can become so high that it mechanically affects other parts of the body. In some cases it is just a small painful abscess, in others, the abscess can be massive.\n\nThis is why it is really important, not to pop spots because if the body hasn't finished killing the intruder, you will spread it everywhere, or if you do have to lance it because of say, inter-cranial pressure or excessive pain. Make sure to lance it and extract the core with a syringe made of silver (as silver has anti-bacterial/viral properties) or surgical steel that is coated with a minor disinfectant. With spots on the skin, it is really bad idea to squeeze them without coating the skin with a disinfectant, because they can spread everywhere really quickly.",
"This entire thread makes me want to play plague Inc again. ",
"You have to look at viruses as the little hijackers they are. They have no method of reproduction so they hijack a cell to do it for them. Think of a virus as a terrorist, who decides to visit your a Kinkos (your cell). The virus will then hijack your printers (ribosomes) into copying the genetic sequence of the virus. Once your Kinkos is filled with the virus, they either can either bud out through the membrane (lysogenic) or blow up the Kinkos (lytic cycle) to spread the new viruses created. Many will be of those will be destroyed by the T cells and macrophages but some will escape notice or implant themselves within other cells, repeating the above cycle. This is all I remember from high school biology.",
"The virus wipes out the epithelial layer of your throat and this allows for bacteria (which are always present) to establish themselves. This is why you are most contagious before you feel anything. The virus will burn itself out and then as the bacteria come on you will feel the bad symptoms. ",
"It seems weird a virus exists only to kill the host that feeds it.",
"Running from the white blood cell cops, haven't you seen Osmosis Jones?!?!?!",
"Man, I once posted this on a reddit thread and got down voted to hell and told I was stupid. I just don't get it. It's like the first reply to a submission determines all the rest of the comments. ",
"Basically, a virus hijacks the specific cells they infect and turns them into virus factories. Im the case of a virus like the common cold, which does not have a membrane envelope, the virus eventually burst the cells releasing lits of new virus particles into the tissue.\nThe infected cells produce molecules called interferons, which try to shut down the virus and also cause neighboring cells to be more resistant to viral infection. These interferons are responsible for the general feeling of lousiness when you are sick.\nIf a virus is able to replicate unchecked, it will destroy the tissue where it is and keep spreading. The real trouble is if the virus gets into the blood and is able to spread to the rest of the body. Containing the virus is another aspect of the body's immune respone.",
"When your immune system attacks the cold virus, it kills it, but it also attacks you as collateral damage and inflammation occurs.",
"So, there's this country (you), whose economy (health) is based largely on car factories (the cells that make up your body's tissues). Selling cars (creating things like enzymes, and transporting them) brings in the resources that the country needs to prosper.\n\nA foreign crime syndicate using brand-new robot soldiers (viruses... work with me here) moves into a major industrial area (lungs) in this country, and its robot soldiers attack the car factories. If they succeed, they will use the materials that the factories have on hand to make more robot soldiers--collapsing the economy (killing you) in the process. They don't care, there are other countries (people who are not you) to attack with their now bolstered numbers.\n\nThis country is not defenseless, but war is never easy. The factories that are under attack start making guns, instead of cars, to help fight off the invading robots. They also call their friends at other factories in the area, and *those* factories start making guns, instead of cars, in preparation. The factories are still working at this point, but they're doing something other than what they usually do--at least in part--and what they usually do is vital to the economy. \n\nThere is a military. However, those people need to be paid (provided resources). Some of this is already covered in the annual budget, but there will be casualties--as well as damaged equipment needing to be replaced or repaired, and no standing military is ever enough to fight off an invasion--if they were, there'd be nothing for them to do most of the time. \n\nSo, the already wounded economy is further stretched to accommodate the recruitment of new soldiers and the manufacturing of new equipment, as well as the repair of any damage to the country's infrastructure. Lost soldiers will have to be replaced through additional births, which means that the civilian jobs once occupied by now deceased individuals (the ones who signed up to fight the robot army) go unoccupied in the meantime (thankfully, within your body, this happens pretty quickly on the small scale, but large-scale damage--like a war-torn countryside--can take a very long time to heal). Everyone needs to work overtime, people are tired and worn out. Everyday wear and tear takes a greater toll than before. Raw materials are lacking. \n\nCriminals (everyday viral exposure), as is common in war-time, take the opportunity to expand their own enterprises (Dick Cheney) at a cost to the legitimate economy--normal, everyday threats are harder to deal with while the country is recuperating.",
"Hijack over the machinery of your body for it's own reproduction, just ask anyone who doesn't have an immune system, i.e someone with AIDS. The death for immunocompromised patients is essentially caused by the pathogens that were normally kept at bay by so many layers of defenses, and now decided to use the nutrients and resources in our cells for themselves. \n\nEdit: grammar",
"There's plenty of theories abound that the virus is smarter than most people credit it for. The theory goes that the virus infects other hosts because of the immune system responses helps it to reproduce. In other words, because you're sneezing and have a runny nose, you're more likely to infect someone else. Essentially using a person's immune responses as its reproductive system to infect another host. It supposedly intentionally selects your lungs and nasal passages because that's the easiest way for you to transmit it elsewhere.\n\nSame goes with cholera. People in 3rd world countries get cholera because they drink water from natural sources where other people have cholera and had diarrhea. In turn, you now have diarrhea and handle your business at the local creek, which is also the natural water source for some community downstream.\n\nTLDR: It's intentional, you're not just collateral damage.",
"As simply as I can\n\nHijack cells and kills them. Your immune system is trying to save you because a virus doesn't care what cells they hijack. \n\nA virus needs a living cell to reproduce. ",
"The virus gets into some cells, makes copies of itself in an effort to make more virus to spread to more people. In the meantime, some immune cells get pissed off with all this silliness and they go all \"Oh no you didn't\" on the virus virus, meanwhile messing with your sinuses.",
"The virus itself will eventually turn you into a living meat patty. Trust me, I'm a student.",
"The best way to answer your question is to consider what respiratory viruses would do in the absence of an immune system. Coincidentally, there is a population that has been studied extensively that fits this criteria--the immunocompromised population. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2014/12/boost_your_immunity_cold_and_flu_treatments_suppress_innate_immune_system.html"
],
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necrotizing_fasciitis"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://jmm.sgmjournals.org/content/47/7/561.full.pdf"
]
] |
||
40i4be | when you accidentally close a book, and then try to get back on the same page, how is it that you can "randomly" open the book and be +/- a few pages of the page you were on? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40i4be/eli5_when_you_accidentally_close_a_book_and_then/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyuapmo",
"cyuapnk"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You had some idea about where you were. You tried to open it there. The book also has a memory in that it was opened to a page. The bindings and paper had shifted.",
"1. you've stretched and not re-compacted the binding in that spot. It's the last place you held open. Further, the pages just before the spot you're on have all been recently stretched and had the least amount of time to be re-compressed.\n\n2. you know pretty darn well where you are approximately. So...there is a smidge of confirmation bias here - you're not really finding the page within the entire book, you're finding it within a sub-section that you know to be pretty close. \n\nedit: pour spallinj"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6sbqab | why do beavers make dams? | Do they live in them? Are there little beaver apartments inside? Also, are beavers just fat otters? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6sbqab/eli5_why_do_beavers_make_dams/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlbjl1r",
"dlbkomo",
"dlbuhm0",
"dlbv1zt",
"dlby2af"
],
"score": [
53,
6,
5,
11,
8
],
"text": [
"Beavers build lodges next to streams to live in. \nThe living spaces are high and the entrances are low. \nThey build dams so the entrances to the lodges become underwater while the living spaces stay above water.. \nSince the entrance is underwater things that can't swim can't get in, since the living spaces are above water, things that can only swim can't get in. \n[Here's a picture of both the dam and the lodge with a dachshund for scale.](_URL_0_) \nNote how the lodge is entirely surrounded by water, if the living space was in the dam, things that can't swim could walk along the dam to the living space. \n \nSo yes and no, the little beaver apartment is upstream from the dam, but not inside the dam.\n",
"Dams raise water level which kills trees and serves two purposes. 1. Dead trees can thus be used to build beaver houses. 2. Beavers thrive In a flooded wetland and most of their food comes not from flowing rivers but dammed up wetlands. ",
" > Beavers and otters might occupy the same sorts of aquatic habitats, and their ranges often overlap, but they are completely different animals.\n\n > They have different bodies, different diets and different roles in the ecosystem.\n\n > Otters are carnivores, living on fish, amphibians, aquatic reptiles and invertebrates and often taking the role of top predator in freshwater ecosystems.\n\n > Beavers, on the other hand, are herbivores, eating mostly leaves, roots, bark and twigs.\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)",
"Beavers build dams to flood an area, which allows them to move from their lodge to their feeding areas by swimming through water instead of walking on land where they are more vulnerable to predators. Beavers predominately eat willow, cottonwood and aspen trees, specifically the tasty and nutritious cambium layer under the bark. These trees grow in the riparian zone (along rivers, lakes and streams) where beavers mostly hang out. \n\nA study was conducted that determined that the instinct to build dams is triggered by the sound of running water. Beavers were left in an empty room with a pile of sticks, and the sound of water was played from different directions, and the beavers would move the pile of sticks to where they heard the water. \n\nBeaver created ponds provide habitat for a lot of other animals, from birds to big game, and provide crucial ecosystem services that greatly benefit people too. Their ponds store water (like reservoirs) and make it available later in the year when it's needed most. They also filter the water, and some of it seeps into the ground and recharges aquifers. The ponds Eventually fill with sediment and become beautiful meadows. ",
"Canadian here. Lots of good info here, but what has been missed is a discussion about *winter*. Beavers build dams and lodges. Dams just control water level, but lodges are dams they live in. As stated, the entrance to the dam is below the waterline. The tricky thing beavers manage is the entrance must be below the level of the *ice* that forms on top of the flooded area. A deep pond is better, but harder to create. The entrance must be able to be open all winter because the beaver will store food (young trees and stuff) below the waterline. I have seen lodges with dead beavers...the water level got messed up too late in the year, and caused the ice to form too low."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://celebritydachshund.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/beaver-dam-lodge-pond.jpg"
],
[],
[
"http://animals.mom.me/difference-between-otters-beavers-3101.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
2d50le | the importance of honey bees in our (daily) life and why they are dying off so rapidly | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d50le/eli5_the_importance_of_honey_bees_in_our_daily/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjm4thj",
"cjm5eai",
"cjm7fo4",
"cjm7qpi",
"cjm88ln",
"cjm8xe2",
"cjm96ua",
"cjm9ixh",
"cjmadxx",
"cjmaq7r",
"cjmb0ix",
"cjmd5zi",
"cjmf6op",
"cjmj0sl",
"cjmj9mr",
"cjmkzyr"
],
"score": [
11,
556,
2,
130,
3,
11,
6,
3,
2,
12,
3,
5,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, it's not just honey bees, it's bees in general. Without bees, most plants would not be able to pollinate and such not able to bear fruit. They are dying of because of pollution, extermination and loss of habitat",
"You've probably seen it on the news lately because one type of pesticide, a relatively new one called neonicitinoids, has been identified as a possible cause of colony collapse disorder - the sudden mass die off of hives. There's also the increase in mites that infect bees and possibly malnutrition.\n\nBees are important because they pollinate so many crops. Hives are rented from beekeepers in the spring so flowering plants are pollinated so they'll produce fruit. But this movement of hives from site to site as they are rented by different farmers exposes bees to a variety of chemicals and bee diseases, any of which (or any combination of which) may be the reason they're dying.",
"They are dying because of a number of factors, largest ones I believe to be pesticides and the honey industry - we take their natural food and replace it with glucose, and long term this doesn't do them any good. ",
"This is a huge issue. \n\nIt starts with the relatively new use of [Neonicotinoid](_URL_1_) class of insecticides. These insecticides were supposed to get rid of wide variety of insects/pests. And in their general application most users DO stay away from Bees as bees are so, so critical in our food chain.\n\nWhat apparently is happening, scientists are still putting together the pieces here but [the story looks pretty strong at this point](_URL_0_), is that the bees are receiving a mild dose of the insecticide. That affects their ability to 1) reliably get back to the hive and 2) survive the winters successfully.\n\nLong story short, this class of insecticides is critical to get out of the ecological system. If the bees go you can say goodbye to all sorts of nuts, fruits, vegetables and for sure, honey.\n\nWe keep one hive of bees on our small farm. That hive swarmed (left) this Spring and we have no cherries this year and our apple trees are pathetic for production.\n\nI can't urge you enough to stay up to date on this issue and input your two cents where and when you can. Bees are too critical to lose.",
"[SciShow to the rescue!](_URL_0_)",
"It's actually more likely the veroa mite. Reddit loves to jump all over pesticides and while they are harmful if applied incorrectly, there is plenty of evidence that CCD is caused by these mites. For example no veroa mites heavy neonicotinoid use in Australia limited CCD.\nEdit: us department of ag's own report _URL_0_",
"The commercial method of raising food crops in a monoculture environment depends heavily on hives of European honey bees being relocated to the area just as the flowers are ready for pollination. Native bees aren't as suited to this because they don't create such large colonies. Some smaller growers take steps to attract natives pollinators by planting flowers near the crops, but commercial growers probably see this as a waste of space. \n\nDisclaimer: this is all from memory from an article I read like 2 years ago.",
"Honeybees are important because honey is delicious.\n\nThey're dying off for a variety of reasons including:\n\n* Urban beekeepers.\n** I'm seeking a wild swarm to put behind my ginormous fruiting hedge and mini-orchard, which will attract butterflies, hoverflies, bees, wasps, more bees, oh god there are six hundred varieties of bees here, yellow jackets, why are there Japanese hornets on the east coast, and hummingbirds.\n** By contrast, many hippies in San Francisco are placing bees on roofs, but no flowers: they suck down all the nectar, and then wild and domesticated colonies starve en masse. Further, many beekeepers import bees without the genetic adaptations to the local climate, parasites, and diseases; these swarm, send out drones, and otherwise spread their defective genetics, weakening local populations.\n* Pesticides, to some degree.\n* Pollination services. Bees carted from place to place pick up non-native diseases and parasites, and then move to another place to infect the local population.\n\n",
"The honey bees that have experienced colony collapse disorder have all been colonized bees that reside in moveable hives that are transported from farm to farm in order to pollinate certain crops on a massive scale. This is most commonly seen in California and the almond plants which greatly depend on bees pollination to flourish, using this technique caused crop yields to greatly improve. \nThese colonized bees are forced to live very close to each other along with the other boxes and boxes of colonized bees. These tight living quarters along with bee's poor immune system cause sickness to spread very easily. Resulting in mites and other diseases to spread and kill off the bees, which results in the colonies collapse. \n\n ",
"The honeybee is a larger part of the agricultural landscape. These bees are used to pollinate many different types of crops and this results in much larger fruit sets than if there were no bees. From almonds to peaches to berries to apples to pears and cherries and melons and squash and the list goes on and on. When you stand in the produce isle, about 30% of the fruits and veggies are a result of bee pollination. \n\nThese bees are also used in oilseed production. So your French fries and anything that is fried usually is fried up of some type of vegetable oil like canola oil. This oilseed needs large amounts of pollinators and no more bees means no more oilseed.\n\nAs for why they are dying off:\n\nIn the 1980's a parasitic mite (Verroa destructor) transfered from the Asian honey bee to the western honey bee, and has since spread around the world. This mite reproduces in the brood cell and greatly reduces the vitality of the hive, leaving it much more vulnerable to diseases and viruses. Beekeepers use insecticides to control the mite levels but throughout the last 30 years some have developed resistance to the insecticides and as such there is only one insecticide that is effective that is used. It is only a matter of time until there is full spread resistance to this miteacide as well. Organic acids are also used also to control the mite but they are more difficult, costly and time consuming and are not used in large scale operations for the most part.\n\nThere are also many chemical poisonings resulting in the application of insecticide or herbicide to crops that the bees forage on, and as the theory goes, an accumulation of sublethal doses eventually causing a failure to thrive and colony collapse. \n\nThe type of crops planted in agricultural areas have also changed in the last hundred years. Where there used to be acres of grassland with wild flowers and large hay fields of alfalfa, now it is more common for a large percent of this forage to he planted in corn which provides very little for bees.\n\nThe economics of beekeeping is also a factor. There is cheap honey produced elsewhere in the world that can make it difficult for honey producers in North America to compete economically. The cost of operating a honey producing operation, like most businesses, is going up. And many beekeepers cannot make a great return resulting in people leaving the business. We could use some more young people if you don't mind getting a sting from time to time. \n\nSource: junior beekeeper man",
"Can I buy bees and put colonies around my property to pollinate the fuck out of it?",
"As for the importance of bees independently, bees have a very close co-evolution with many plant species, typically 'modern' plants are mainly evolved to be pollinated by bees, there's also wind pollination (mainly used by grasses *poaceae*), fly, bird, butterfly, bat, beetle, moth and others. Before bees evolved, many plants were pollinated by beetles (but this is limited as most can't fly, limiting distance of pollen travel).\n\nMany flowers are specifically adapted to their chosen pollinator, and suffer reduced pollination when it's not around. Look around outside at flowers and look at their shape, a good example is foxglove, which has evolved to be pollinated by bumble bees - _URL_1_ It's flower is the right shape so the bee has to crawl inside rubbing what ever pollen it has on its body, and also being covered in more from that plant. See those little dots on the petals? They're UV guides so the bee can see and access the flower quicker. If the bee finds the reward quicker it's more likely to return to the plant.\n\nThe bee and the flower's survival strategies have co-evolved to compliment each other. The bee pollinates the flower and recieves the nectar as a reward for its service. The bee has specialised pollen 'baskets' on its back legs to carry more and a long probiscus (tongue) to access the nectar (this also limits other species from nectar robbing as they wont have the right mouth parts - e.g. flies). Bees and flowers are in an evolutionary lock, and loss of either is detrimental to the other. To see how closely some are evolved, look at buzz pollination - where the frequency of the vibrating wings of a specific bee species releases pollen of the plant.\n\nBut why is this important? Surely if the bee goes then other pollinators will take up the slack and we'll just have a few more inbred plants? Yes and no. The main issue is very few plants are generalists and able to be properly pollinated by other species. Flies are more interested in carrion, moths/butterflies have too long legs, so when feeding on plants are far above the pollen.\n\nThis photo shows a good example of the effects of fruit production by different pollination. _URL_0_ On the left, is normal bee pollination, on the other two is hand (by humans) and self pollination.\n\nWithout the bees, we will lose a lot of fruit production, plant genetic variability (making them more susceptible to invasive species and diseases) and some closely evolved species of plant entirely.\n\nAlong with the other points mentioned in this thread. The intensification of farming has affected bees, along with reducing field margins (where wild flowers grow and bees feed and pollinate). The increasing use of nitrate fertilisers increases crop homogeneity - which is great for farming, but again reduces available resources for bees. Invasive species of plant and animal on ecosystems also take their toll.\n\nSource - I'm a BSc Biology student studying this type of stuff for my dissertation.",
"A good article: [Bees and CCD: Myths and Facts](_URL_0_).",
"Biology student here - I spent this summer doing research on this exact problem. There's no one reason for this phenomenon, but there is a lot of literature on contributing and synergistic factors. \n\nTo be brief, pesticides are picked up by foragers in the field, and rub off onto the wax of the hive where it accumulates. Miticides are applied to beehives by the beekeepers, which interact to increase the negative effects of pesticides. Interestingly, *Apis Melliflera*, the commercial honeybee, has 1/3 the normal amount of genetic code that allows for detoxification. \n\nMites (In particular the Varroa mite) suck on the hemolymph (blood) of pupal bees, and an infestation can kill a healthy hive within a few years. They are incredibly hard to detect by normal hive inspection, and commercial beekeepers tend not to use PCR analysis to check their hives. \n\nMonocultured crops cause poor nutrition for the bees - bees need 10 amino acids to grow and survive, and there are very few pollen sources that are rich enough in all 10 for bees to be able to survive off that. Furthermore, feeding off monofloral pollen sources can decrease their immune resistance. \n\nI have sources for these statements but a lot of them are behind paywalls. PM me if you want a PDF of relevant literature!",
"I asked the same question to a bee keeper in NYC and he listed these 4 reasons\n\n1. Almonds. USA produces 80% of the worlds almonds. In the spring, a huge percentage (forget the exact number) of the honey bee population is shipped to Cali where they feed on just almond pollen and nectar for a few weeks, then they get shipped back to where they came from and are very sick and die quickly. He said Kale is very good for you, but if you ate just Kale for several weeks, you would be very sick. \n\n2. Pesticides being sprayed \n\n3. Plants that are genetically modified to have pesticides within the plant, so when the flowers bloom, they are toxic even though they haven't been sprayed.\n\n4. Varroa mites. A parasite that came from Asia, kind of like ticks. They carry viruses and disease and spread it to colonies when they get into a hive. They first were introduced to Ameria in 1987 and there was a huge loss in the bee populaiton that year. ",
"Followup question. Is the link between human extinction and bee extinction justified? That is, if the bees go, we go theory?\n\nThanks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://ento.psu.edu/publications/are-neonicotinoids-killing-bees",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonicotinoid"
],
[
"http://youtu.be/Zgc5w-xyQa0"
],
[
"http://www.ars.usda.gov/News/docs.htm?docid=15572"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2006/10/images/pol_strawberry.jpg",
"https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7305/9125117527_384439bc26_z.jpg"
],
[
"http://www.twipscience.org/news/2014/8/8/bees-and-ccd-myths-and-facts"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2i4jqo | how does wifi keep up with all the signals in the air? | I've got one Wifi Access Point, but I've got 10 wireless devices all connected to it. How does it not get stupidly confused with all the signals in the air at the same frequency.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i4jqo/eli5_how_does_wifi_keep_up_with_all_the_signals/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckyr80z"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"WiFi uses something called CSMA/CA, which is Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance.\n\nWhat this really means is that it's a system where, although it might seem your device is constantly sending data, it's actually not. There'll be a pause where your laptop stops sending, and then your tablet will jump in for a bit, then that'll pause, and your e-book reader will have a go.\n\nThe way they do this isn't dissimilar to the way you might try to get the attention of the bar staff in a busy pub.\n\nObviously, if they're serving someone else, they're not going to serve me, so I'll check that first. If they are serving someone else, I'll wait a bit. This is exactly what your WiFi device will do - it'll listen to see if the channel is in use, and if it is, it'll wait.\n\nSo then, back in the pub, once the barman is free, I'll try and get their attention. This isn't a classy pub, and so I'll do it by yelling, and seeing if I get a response. As it happens, I yell at the exact same time as someone else, and so the barman has no idea who's just called. Maybe the other customer gets served first, maybe neither of us do. If I don't get a response the first time, I wait for the barman to become free, and then I yell again.\n\nThis time, the barman acknowledges me, and so I can send my data (my data being \"two pints of lager and a packet of crisps, please\").\n\nYour WiFi device is doing pretty much the same thing. It's checking to see if the channel is free. If it's free, it's asking the other device (probably a router) if it can send it data. If it doesn't get a response, it assumes it hasn't been heard, and tries the whole thing again, until it gets a response saying it's OK to send the data.\n\nSo, to go back to the second paragraph, there aren't necessarily loads of signals in the air at the same time. It might seem to you, as a slow human that everything is communicating simultaneously, but in actual fact, all your devices are doing it one at a time, and swapping between each other very, very quickly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1sr6m1 | how come when i sing along with a song i sound awesome but when you take away the vocal track i sound ridiculously horrible? | dsfghjkl;' | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sr6m1/eli5_how_come_when_i_sing_along_with_a_song_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce0l3y8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I think your ears are blending the two voices. It also might be that you feel more confident in singing it with the vocals. Two things I do to tell how well I'm really doing: first, gradually decrease the volume of the song, but keep your singing voice the same. Second, take a finger and plug one ear while singing. It helps drown out the outside sound, but still hear your own vocal vibrations. \nI have the same problem too, if you can't tell. XP"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1rx4a6 | day trading on the stock exchange | This is something that has always interested me, but also something I never fully understood. I even attempted to read a book or two on stocks but none of them really touched on day trading. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rx4a6/eli5_day_trading_on_the_stock_exchange/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdrsbaj",
"cdrsdj6",
"cdruqat",
"cdrwcrh"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Hey look, finally an ELI5 that I can be helpful on.\n\nDay trading is a form of trading where you basically want to start and end the day with no open position. An open position means you either own a stock/option or haven't covered a short (I'm assuming you know what these mean if you've read up on stocks). Because of this, it is inherently risky as you are essentially trying to make money on the volatility of that particular day as opposed to large price increases over time. \n\nThe gains from day trading are seemingly small but if a trader averages say .5% gains and trades 200 days out of the year then they are still earning quite a bit of money. \n\nAs far as day trading strategies go, most of them involve a combination of purchasing common stock and buying/selling options as insurance or as a means of making more money. If you're interested to know some specifics as well as the payouts from different strategies then feel free to PM me.\n\n**TL:DR** Day Trading is where you start and end the day with no open positions, all money starts and ends in a cash account. ",
"Stocks fluctuate in price. Investors will attempt to purchase a stock in hopes of it gaining price over a period of time- thus making money.\n\nDay traders hope to do the same in much smaller time frames, usually multiple times a day, and with much smaller price movements. ",
"The math on day-trading as your means of living:\n\nLet's say you sell at a profit of $200 per day. \n\n$200 less 30% tax = $140 (30% is an average).\n\n$140 less fees of, say, $20 per day = $120 net profit per day.\n\n$120 x 5 days a week = $600 per week.\n\nPer month = Ends up being about $2,400.\n\nYou're netting about $28,800 after taxes.\n\nYour gross income would be about $50,000. \n\n($200 x 5 days/week x 50 weeks or so = $50,000.)\n\n\nIt's hard to make $200 a day on the market if you only have $5,000 or $10,000 to start. It's possible, but hard.\n\nThe worst thing about day-trading is being patient. NEVER buy first thing in the morning - stocks will dip and flinch more then. Buy around 2 hours after they open. You have to have discipline. Don't buy stocks over $10. They won't jump fast enough if you're not investing all that much. (These are my personal rules, just passing them along).\n\nI like Yahoo Finance as a nice summary of what's going on. There are articles on that particular stock, so it's easy to see if it will go up or down. Watch to see if a bunch of tech companies are about to have a Summit. Watch if a bunch of energy CEOs go on an all-CEO retreat or whatever. Watch if financial institutions are about to settle a lawsuit - people will begin reinvesting and the stock will go up.\n\nRemember that a trade fee online is usually $10 each way, so that's $20 by the time you sell it. Get out if your stock keeps going down, or commit it to long-term. Discipline. \n\nLastly - google \"stocks that fluctuate a lot\". If one just went way down, find out why, because it might not necessarily be a bad thing soon. Find out if they're going to fix the problem, then keep it in the back of your mind. Then invest when news breaks that the problem will be fixed. Then buy it. Or don't if it's too risky. \n\nLook at the 5-day, 1-month, 3-month, etc. chart, use common sense - is the stock at its peak for the first time in a year? (Do not invest.) Did it just go way down last week and is now trying to recover? (Maybe invest.) Is it flatlining or going up and down and up and down? \n\nWhat is the volume size? Is it 12,000 or 12,000,000? A volume of 12,000 is slow-moving. More volume will move faster.\n\nDefinitely watch Cramer, because if you see what he's said about stocks, you'll notice that the stock will make a jump (probably a day-trader jump), because people do whatever Cramer says to do.\n\nAlso see r/personalfinance.",
"Long term investors buy into the stock market hoping for an overall long term rise in stock price.\nDay traders, otoh, play the small variations that occur during the normal trading day. Whereas investors buy with the intent of holding stock, day traders buy with the intent on flipping that stock as soon as profitable.\nA day trader may sell after a gain of only an 1/8th of a point, or they may hold longer if the stock continues to rise, but they're most likely unloading it before the end of the day.\nFWIW, I think the mass influx of day traders in the past decade has severely increased the volatility of the market, and taken the \"what have you done for me lately\" mentality to new and dizzying heights."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9b3ac7 | why does having chalk increase your grip while on something like monkey bars? | & #x200B; | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9b3ac7/eli5_why_does_having_chalk_increase_your_grip/ | {
"a_id": [
"e502n2c",
"e50q0wj"
],
"score": [
28,
2
],
"text": [
"Chalk is typically made of magnesium carbonate which serves the purpose of keeping your hands dry. The reason it works isn't that it directly improves grip per se, it's that it prevents grip from degrading in the face of moisture. For most uses that moisture comes from your sweat, but in rock climbing you often encounter moisture from rocks as well.\n\n",
"Rock climber here. Chalk improves friction between your hand and the object you are grabbing compared to having a sweaty palm, but is actually not as grippy as a dry hand. As a climber you have to chalk up often while climbing but often try to not overchalk your hands. Absolutely caking chalk onto your hands is no good. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
e5hhyi | how does fat accumulate symmetricaly in both our legs when we become overweight. how do our legs and arms get the same amount of fat stored in them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e5hhyi/eli5_how_does_fat_accumulate_symmetricaly_in_both/ | {
"a_id": [
"f9jpvnu",
"f9jqsk0"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Fat is stored in cells called Adipocytes and generally they are evenly dispersed in our body",
"From an evolutionary viewpoint, it's beneficial to keep the body balanced. If you gain significantly more fat cells on the right side of your body than the left, your center of gravity will shift to the right. This would make even basic walking more difficult and stressful to the body, which would make surviving long-term and passing on your genes more difficult. \n\nIn essence we gain weight evenly over our center of gravity (as far as right/left) because gaining weight unevenly makes it even more difficult to survive."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8bg5fw | why is the reversible, and compact design of usb-c only made recently? why couldn't they have used this design decades ago when they were designing usb-a? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8bg5fw/eli5_why_is_the_reversible_and_compact_design_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dx6hetr",
"dx6l0qs",
"dx6m5sa",
"dx6mfiq",
"dx6mk0j",
"dx6o5l1",
"dx6oyl0",
"dx6ozua",
"dx6ppwc",
"dx6q1hd",
"dx6q2h3",
"dx6qai9",
"dx6ra26",
"dx6rlbz",
"dx6rs29",
"dx6tk06",
"dx6tmu1",
"dx6uokm",
"dx6uzgj",
"dx6v7pc",
"dx6vmq2",
"dx6wi49",
"dx6xz5i",
"dx6zwkf",
"dx70a7l",
"dx72af1",
"dx740oz",
"dx7bkkr",
"dx7cogs",
"dx7iqsm",
"dx7iupa",
"dx7lg2c"
],
"score": [
307,
4108,
6,
32,
530,
35,
21,
2,
132,
3,
8,
1864,
7,
5,
222,
2,
3,
41,
3,
3,
44,
2,
3,
2,
5,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Reversible plugs require better microcontrollers to determine powe distribution.\n\nBasically directional plugs are dumb and easy, you always know what pin is going to be where and sending what. If its directional then you need a microchip to check which pin each slot got and how to act accordingly\n\nThink like water taps that have 2 handles (one hot, one cold) or just one lever. The one lever is more complicated to design and requires more balancing and math on the engineering side, the 2 tap one is cheaper and leaves it up to the user to know what each does.",
"One of the other deals with this: USB was meant to be a replacement for SERIAL interfaces (Eg, RS232). It was a way to quickly transmit data that happened to also provide a little bit of power. Today, it's primarily used as a power source that happens to have a data exchange.\n\n\nIn terms of transmitting information like RS232, USB was meant to be a semi-permanent, hot-swappable interface for things like mice, printers, keyboards, and gamepads. No one was thinking about charging phones. The USB-A and B ports were designed to be fairly strong on their own. USB C is a significantly \"weaker\" physical connection.",
"As with most improvements things take time.\nWe learn over time what works, what doesn't - and we gain additional knowledge in the process that brings to mind new ways of doing things.\n",
"USB in and of itself is an attempt to condense parallel communications into a serial interface. When USB was designed, they condensed 8 pins to 4. I am not trying to say the original RS232 port was parallel, it was serial; but the logic to achieve the same ability with fewer pins was one of the main priorities when USB was designed.\n\nFewer pins + more data throughput = much beefier controller chip needed.\n\n\nIt should be noted that only in the last few years has technology become cheap enough to push the limits of the USB standard. Which also means that the designers for USB had already attempted to use the most powerful controllers they could.\n\nThis entire conversation is more or less a display of how technology 'know-how' doesn't always keep pace with the literal technology available. The technology exists to push the standard much farther, but the price per controller is holding it back. Remember, BILLIONS of devices use this standard.",
"What is obvious in retrospect was not necessarily obvious at the time. Engineering always involves compromises, and reversibility would have been low on the list. At the time USB was relatively compact, robust, and convenient, but was pushing the mass manufacturing of the time. Then you saw the mini USB, and later micro USB. Reversibility wasn’t seen as a necessary feature until Apple created the lightning port. It was only then that the market began demanding reversibility in the plugs.\n\nSo really it is a combination of vision based on where they were coming from, engineering compromises, manufacturing capabilities, and market forces.",
"They simply didn't think about it at the time; no technical reason why they couldn't have implemented reversible plugs decades ago.\n\n*edit* also _URL_0_",
"If you look at Apple they were always trying to get here. They were the first to release a computer with no dedicated keyboard or mouse ports, USB all the way.\n\nThey were pushing firewire which was better than USB for a decade, they used DisplayPort and miniDP before almost anyone, and released lightning in 2012, giving a small reversible connector.\n\nSince USB is a standard that has a consortium behind it, it moves at a snail's pace in regards to upgrades.",
"Why is the 4K led tv only made recently? Why couldn't they have used this design decades ago when they were designing the crt?\n\nJust kidding. The short answer is that sometimes obvious designs are only obvious once they are designed.",
"In mass electronics the answer is almost always cost. Today on Mouser a USB-C socket is over 3x more expensive than a USB-A. Multiply this out across a few million units and you are talking real money. The USB forum, which represents device manufacturers, wanted to minimise these costs.\n\nThere were also design compromises which were made which were later shown to be less important than first thought. Notably the wear and directionality of the USB cables.\n\nThe USB forum decided on a deliberate policy of wearing the plug, not the device. So a USB micro B plug has small spring elements on the bottom that lock it into the socket. Being a mechanical bendy device these wear with time, a deliberate choice was made to take this wear on the plug. Time and the lightening connector have shown that the wear is less of an issue and consumers don't care. With USB-C the bendy fatiguing spring is in the socket of the device allowing for a cleaner appearing plug.\n\nInitially USB was designed with a strong Master-Slave relationship. One issue they wanted to avoid was pairing a Master-Master or Slave-Slave, a common issue with Serial and led to atrocities like null modem adapters. Part of avoiding this was to have a distinct Master and Slave plugs so building the wrong relationship was physically impossible and obviously not going to work. Mobile phones buggered this all up with USB On-The-Go, which allows a device to be a Master one minute and a Slave the next. With this compromise made the initial rational fell through and now we have identical USB-C plugs on both ends of a cable.",
"The needs have changed as time went along.\nThey had different things which had different uses. Now USB C can transfer energy and also specific information. I have USB c for my laptop and phone. They didn't have cables for phones before, and didn't even consider charging it for a laptop. ",
"Because we humans can be slow to build the obvious. For example mankind has had the wheel for thousands of years. Mankind has had luggage of various types, also for thousands of years. Wasn't until about 1970 that someone thought to put wheels ON the luggage.",
"Some more food for thought: USB connectors were designed in the '90s. At the time, there weren't really any devices small enough to *require* super compact connectors. They did provision Mini USB at the time, and it took a while before devices got small enough to necessitate the introduction of Micro USB. Additionally, larger connectors are more physically robust, so this would have factored into the decision.\n\nRegarding reversibility: either you make the connector keyed, so it can only be inserted one way, or you make it reversible/symmetrical. If there's no perceived advantage to one solution or the other, then both seem equally viable. It's possible that a keyed design was chosen at the time to minimize the complexity of the connector in manufacturing. Also keep in mind that at the time of USB-A's design, virtually every data connector standard used a keyed design. Reversible connectors were pretty distant on the industry's radar - consider again that connectors hadn't gotten super small yet, and reversible connectors are most useful at small sizes where it becomes a pain to fit the keyed ones.\n\nSome better-informed responses already in the thread, but I wanted to add these points for consideration! The TL;DR of the whole thing would be that it wasn't a matter of technical limitations, but simply that there was no perceived need or benefit at the time to make tiny reversible connectors. Those just plain weren't necessary for the intended purpose of USB-A in the timeframe during which it was designed.",
"I think the real question is why USB mini-b and especially (!) micro-B didn't have reversability as a feature",
"There is no technical limitations. No one thought of it till Apple did the Lightning cable. Then that influenced USB C cable to be reversible.",
"USB was abismally easier to connect than previous serial or parallel interfaces, which were 4-5 times usb size, had dozens of pins and had to be actually screwed. Complaining about why wasn't it reversible from the beginning is like giving a nice car to someone traveling by mule and him refusing because seats are not leather.\n\nEdit: Yup, I'm abismally wrong and I should've used a different word. Sorry, English is not my first language. ",
"Smaller connectors require better manufactoring technologies. And reversible data connectors require additional software and/or hardware to work. And when you look at the problems with power delivery it still seems to be quite difficult to do that stuff properly in 2018. In the 90s this would have just meant huge costs for no real benefit.",
"USB-A was introduced in 1996. At that time, almost nobody had PCs, laptops rarely existed, and Windows 95 was a revolutionary operating system. Google was launched in 1997. The \"revolutionary\" Nokia 8110 featured in The Matrix had not been launched yet.\n\n_URL_0_",
"There are a lot of really good answers in here, but I think there's an angle that isn't getting much attention.\n\nThe direct answer to your question is that there was no technical barrier to engineering and mass-producing a reversible connector that would have had the same technical capabilities of a USB 1.0 connection. It would have been simple to create a connector that was mirrored on each side and thus could be inserted with either side facing up.\n\nThe problem is that engineers don't always consider the user experience. And to be fair, that's not their job. Their job is to make things work well. Sure enough, USB-A connectors work well *as long as you follow the instructions and insert them properly*. But as anyone who has used a USB-A connector knows, the experience is often mildly frustrating: you try to plug it in, but it won't fit, so you flip it over, and it still won't fit, so you flip it over again, and surprise, it fits.\n\nThe companies that got together and came up with USB -- including Microsoft, Intel, IBM, and several others -- should have done some user acceptance testing. That is, they should have asked a group of everyday, random, run-of-the-mill people to come in and try using the thing with no instruction other than \"plug this in\".\n\nThe reason they didn't do this is, ironically, a huge part of why USB was invented in the first place. When USB was being developed in the early 1990s, most people had only a basic working knowledge of how to use a computer. They could turn it on and launch WordPerfect, but couldn't hook up a new printer. USB was meant to help by greatly simplifying (and standardizing) the connector, and greatly simplifying how drivers were installed (prior to USB, installing a peripheral typically involved a nightmare of IRQ, DMA, and address settings, as well as installing software that was not at all user friendly).\n\nSince this was all beyond the grasp of the average computer user who wanted stuff to \"just work\", the coalition beyond USB didn't really consider their experience. Since USB was such a massive improvement over the current standards, it was assumed that everyone would love it. And we did, mostly.\n\nTL/DR: There were no physical, technical, or manufacturing limitations that prevented this. It was just never anticipated that it would be an issue.",
"The design is not good for immediate identification. Generally ports are made so that they are not reversible. That was one of the considerations when making them originally. A unique shape, that only fits one way.\n\nUSB c is not very unique and is not a very good design when speaking in terms of safety and longevity.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I haven't seen it mentioned here, but one of the bigger \"Electrical\" (read not electromechanical) complications of implementing USB-C is the forced inclusion of a signal mux for the data lines. This wasn't always easy (and certainly at high speeds, can be quite hard). A good bit of technology had to catch up to do this affordably.\n\nE.g. in simple terms if you happen to have wire A mated to wire A, B to B, C to C by flipping the connector you mismatch the letter pairings in the cable. \n\nFrom a hardware point of view, there's an integrated circuit that than \"fixes\" the marriages of the different lettered wires regardless of the orientation of the physical connector.\n\nThere's more to it of course, there's a good bit of science involved to negotiate the different power deliver requirements (and increase the voltage) to mitigate problems with increasingly small wire gauge. But I won't dive too deeply there. \n\nSource: have designed / laid out USB 3 connectors\n\nAnd the less ELI5 version:\n_URL_0_",
"All these answers are great but realistically what happened is this:\n\n- no one thought you could make a reversible cable\n- no one asked for a reversible cable\n- there was so much stuff to do on this project, even if someone did think of a reversible cable it was thrown down to the lowest priority\n- Apple came out with one and suddenly the masses were like “oooooh I want that”\n\nThis goes with the theme of Henry Ford’s “if you asked people what they wanted they’d say a faster horse”",
"Everyday usability just recently found its way into product design as a valuable thing to do",
"Imagine a power plug with two \"pluggy-inny\" ends.\n\n(Old USB plugs are just conductors from the pin on the computer to the pin on the device. USB-C has circuitry to figure out which end is plugged into what, and which direction the zappy stuff goes. Even the first USB-C cables were a mixed bag, and a lot of times a high-draw device would melt a low-capacity cable.)",
"Electrical engineer here, you're basically asking engineers why we don't predict the future... where our society will be and what its ready to adopt 10 years ahead of its time is hard to do. Basically we have like 10 viable paths for technology to go and no idea what will win out so all we can do is set it up to be compatible with the future as much as possible without knowing where we will be. At least USB A B and C are similar enough you dont need huge hardware and software overhauls to use or be compatible...\n\nAsk the question: why didnt we design the USB C to incorporate USB D, E, or F designs. Well because we dont have a clear idea of what technologies or standards will be incorporated.\n\nStandards are developed a few years after technology is found or become mainstream. The USB D tech is just becoming viable and understood now and im sure theyre starting to talk about and draft it, but you you need to wait until its mostly agreed upon by the industry to start to use it in your designs\n\nAlso, technically its not like we couldnt have designed it to be reversible 10 years ago, wires and PCBs have not changed much relative to a simple USB plug. its most likely just that there were bigger problems the engineers working on at the time they had to worry about rather than user friendliness. User friendliness comes last when it comes to sorting out technology breaking bug fixes and hardware issues. USB Has now gotten to the point that the engineers working on it have time to go and design it to be ergonomically friendly and reversible, its just taken time to come around to it. \n\nLastly maybe the idea just didnt exist, or if it did it wasnt mainstream enough for everyone to want to implement it. Unfortunately not every technology has a steve jobs type who completely innovates, changes it over night, and includes user friendliness. These are being designed by engineers so new technology usually takes some time before it becomes user friendly enough someone other than an engineer is willing to add design to it, or for an engineer to even just think of that new innovative design.",
"Thats like saying why didn't we have SUVs until they were invented, we already had cars and trucks. The USB drive was a breakthrough itself when first invented and it could only handle about 12Mb/sec, but as they were used the limitations and issues were discovered and addressed in future models. In fact, although it is called a USB-c, it is not the same as USB3.0, which is a standard for speed and other features, whereas USB-c is referring to the connector shape so cables from different companies can have much different speeds.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nRegarding why it didn't switch designs earlier, the usb connector was one of the smallest ports on a regular computer until recently. Even laptops would have a vga out and various other ports which kept the design of the cases deep enough to accommodate multiple usbs stacked on top of eachother. Add in the fact that a USB3.0 port is backwards compatible so a first generation USB device will work without needing any adapters. This leads to most peripheral manufactures to use the USB standard, and if most peripherals use that standard then pc manufacturers have little incentive to switch to a whole new port that few people need or want.\n\nNow, with the desire to make smaller and smaller devices, even 1 USB port can be too large to fit in the laptop case, but the real benefit for computers is the added speed. But the real driver pushing adaption of the USB-c are cell phones, where even the headphone jack is too large for some high end devices as they try to get thinner and thinner. And Apple computers, but they just really want to sell you all the adapters you need to connect to the devices they sold you with your last computer.",
"Why didnt we use new technologies before they existed??? WHY?v?",
"I'm not completely familiar with how USB-C works, but if it's anything like Lightning it works by probing the cable to figure out which way it is oriented and then choosing which pins to use, which requires extra computing power and circuitry. That's nothing today, when even an IO chip has considerable computing power and high-density circuit boards with nearly microscopic components are universal, but back in the mid-1990s it would have been seen as a pointless waste of resources. At that time I don't think there were *any* multi-pin computer interfaces that could be plugged in more than one orientation. It simply wasn't something that anyone had thought of or needed. USB *was* unique in that it was the only (non-round) computer connector whose orientation was determined only by the internal pin layout, not by the external shape of the connector, but it is still pretty easy to tell the correct orientation just by looking at the port.\n\nAlso, in the 1990s the concept of \"hot-swapping\" was still brand new and rarely implemented, for the most part plugging and unplugging devices had to happen when the computer was turned off. While a big complaint about USB today is that you can't see which way the port is oriented when you're reaching behind your monitor that simply wasn't an issue back then. Even though USB *could* be hot-swapped there were no USB data storage devices yet (apart from semi-permanent things like Zip drives and CD burners), so most things would be set up once when you could see the ports and then left plugged in forever. And for the rare times you *would* need to hot-swap a USB cable the one or two ports on the front of a computer were enough. It wasn't until years later, with the proliferation of USB storage devices, digital cameras, media devices, and especially USB 2.0 that the need to constantly access and use the USB ports became a big deal.\n\nAnd, finally, USB-C for the most part solves a problem that doesn't really exist. While it is definitely more convenient to not have to worry about orientation it's not like that is a \"must-have\" feature, and while it is definitely smaller which is a bonus for smartphones it's not any smaller than existing smartphone ports were and the need for small connectors is a very recent trend. Back in the mid-1990s when USB was being developed even a full-size USB port was far smaller than any of the legacy ports it was replacing, and even mobile devices were large enough to fit a full-size port so there was no need to make it smaller.",
"Because morons on reddit made it a meme that they are stupid and cant plug a cable it. It only goes one way in and has a mark on one side, do you need more than that to indicate if it is the right way or not?",
"The pins have to be made much more scaled down to fit them all in a compact conductor. This means higher cost. In the old days of USB 1 and 2, you only had like 6 pins. Now with USB-C you have something like 18. (You have 8 for superspeed pairs, 4 for normal high speed data, 4 vbus, 4 gnd, 2 sidebands, and 2 CC pins) Almost 1/4 of those are only used because the USB-c is flippable so it isn't the most effective use of real-estate from a connector point of view.\n\nYou also have a lot of neat features for USB-C that frankly weren't thought of way back then. Those sidebands can be used for \"alt-modes\" for displayport, for example. There's also support for Power Delivery too. These needs didn't exist until recently.\n\nTl;dr: \n\n1) Manufacturing small enough pins to fit 24 pins in such a small connector\n\n2) USB A/B type connectors were good enough for what they were needed for at the time. With more interest in alt-modes and power delivery.\n\n3) Cost",
"USB includes the idea that one device is not only in charge of the communication, but may have to supply power to the other. A reversible connection could lead to two devices plugged together that are both supplying 5volt power (which could damage one or both). The standard is now widespread so the electronics for a USB transceiver that can handle the power negotiation are cheap and easy to get. But when it first came out, it was a lot simpler to design equipment knowing that you could not plug two master devices into each other.",
"Its not so much a technical limitation....\n\nWhen you invent something, the moment it is invented is it the best version of it that it could be? Probably not.\n\nWhy do apple and microsoft keep realeasing all these terrible in-betweener operating systems when they could just release the best one!?",
"Having a symmetrical connector only makes sense if you anticipate that people will be plugging/unplugging things frequently. It also costs more to manufacture. Smaller connectors cost more to make too, because the tolerances need to be tighter.\n\nWhen USB was designed, they did anticipate \"hotplugging\" (adding and removing devices while the host computer was on), but not to the extent it actually ended up happening. So it made sense to have a cheaper, easier-to-manufacture connection that had an orientation, just like every other device.\n\nThey didn't anticipate people walking around with USB cords in their pockets, or pocket computers that were so thin, so there was no particular reason to put engineering effort into compact size (though microUSB was added in 2007 in part because people were making small enough devices that a smaller connector made sense)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41htM9RiX%2BL._SY450_.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_8110"
],
[],
[
"http://www.belkin.com/us/Resource-Center/USB-C/USB-C-counterfeits/"
],
[
"https://www.reclaimerlabs.com/blog/2017/1/12/usb-c-for-engineers-part-2"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.qacqoc.com/usb-type-c-vs-usb-3-0-whats-difference/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
f5uyyv | why can flood waters get 20-30 feet high on flat land, when water will fill it's given space, wouldn't the water "just flow away?" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f5uyyv/eli5_why_can_flood_waters_get_2030_feet_high_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"fi0vrdd",
"fi0x644",
"fi16hnu"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It is flowing away..\n\nThrough your house and your neighbours'\n\nWater takes volume, if a lot of water arrive in a riverbed, it will overflow and take another path.",
"There is no flat land, to start with.\n\nWhen rain falls, it flows from higher spots to lower spots. When there is a constraint, like a valley with a river running through it, the level of the river has to rise to accommodate the extra water. All the water is moving, but its speed is controlled by the steepness of the bottom of the river. It will \"flow away\" eventually, but for the interim period when more water is flowing in from the wide rainshed than can flow out through the narrow river, the build up is called a flood. Human efforts to keep flooded areas small leads to much higher flood waters than would occur is we let the water spread out and flood more homes.",
"Water in the ocean gets pushed around by wind and tidal forces. A lot of wind and high tide can push water from the ocean onto land.\n\nWater in a river flows down with gravity. More rain- or snowfall at the river's origins (e.g. a mountain) means more water in the river, which can cause the it to overflow beyond its normal boundaries. In that case, it's gravity that pushes water onto land. \n\nSo, forces like wind, tides and gravity can push water away from one place and towards another place. Eventually, if that second place isn't a lowly situated basin, the water may flow away again to a lower place (usually the nearby river or ocean that it came from). Or, it may evaporate. But that doesn't stop water being on (usually dry) flat land some of the time, and even reaching great heights. All you need is the right forces to push it there."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5w9tay | why are old tv screens round on the edge. | Why is the corner of my crt tv round so that it cuts off the corners of the screen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5w9tay/eli5_why_are_old_tv_screens_round_on_the_edge/ | {
"a_id": [
"de8hyee"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"In addition to problems of fabricating the glass (remember, there’s a vacuum inside, so it has to hold up against roughly seven pounds per square inch of pressure from the atmosphere), it’s harder to get the electron beam to behave in the corners. For years, color TVs, which had three beams to control, were outright round all up and down the sides.\n\nNow, of course, they could simply have put a perfect 4x3 image into the center of the screen, but test after test demonstrated that consumers would rather have a big picture with the corners cut off than a perfect picture that was smaller.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2vi5fp | pharmacies - what in the world is taking so long? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vi5fp/eli5_pharmacies_what_in_the_world_is_taking_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cohuses"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"I don't think you realize the volume of prescriptions they are dealing with. They pretty much fill them in order that they are received.\n\nWhen they then get to your prescription, they just don't fill it and hand it to you -- *or just grab it off the shelf in the case of your steroid cream* -- they review your computer file to make sure that you aren't allergic to that med, that you aren't also taking other meds that would cause an unintended reaction, they confirm that the health care provider that wrote the prescription is legally allowed to do so. Then there's the relatively routine printing of the instruction and warning labels. The pharmacy techs handle a lot of the routine steps, but these are all verified and double-checked by the registered pharmacist on duty. These steps and double-checks all take time.\n\nThen there's the explanation of the med to you... how/when to take it, any warnings, or things to look out for, or whatever. They do this for each and every medicine and each and every patient filling a 'scrip.\n\nIf you are a relatively healthy person, there might not be a lot to check for you. But imagine some of the folks with more medical issues than you that are \"ahead of you in line\". This process can take quite a while to go through especially for someone with multiple medical problems filling several scrips at once. It's really easy and common for the pharmacy to get backed up.\n\nSorry.... you just have to wait. If it's really important to get in/out quickly, treat the pharmacy like the DMV and be the first one there. Or, just drop the med off and come back several hours later or the next day... or have your doctor call in the 'scrip.\n\n**TL;DR**.... stuff takes a long time to do, yo.\n\nEDIT... I forgot about the insurance companies that they have to deal with. Private pharmacies deal with a number of insurance companies. Each insurance provider has their own protocols that have to be verified and followed as well before handing you your medicine. This also slows the system down. Even if you are straight up paying for your med, imagine all of the people in front of you who aren't. Remember, unless you are having an actual emergency -- *like an asthma attack and need an inhaler immediately* -- it is first come, first served, and you have to wait in line."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ddzqrt | how to tell the difference between polar, non polar, and covalent bonds | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ddzqrt/eli5_how_to_tell_the_difference_between_polar_non/ | {
"a_id": [
"f2pl2ss",
"f2pp2vz"
],
"score": [
11,
3
],
"text": [
"polar and non polar bonds are covalent bonds. Bonds/molecules are polar when the electrons forming the bond are unequally distributed, like water molecule has bit of a V shape, but non-polar carbon dioxide is in line, O-C-O. \nIn ionic bonds the electrons are entirely on the other atom.",
"Polar and non-polar aren't types of bonds. Instead they describe whether the electrons in a molecule are equally distributed across the entire molecule. All polar/nonpolar molecules contain atoms that are covalently bonded together, that's when atoms have to share electrons with each other so that they're stable.\n\nPolar and nonpolar arises from the fact that atoms don't share these electrons equally. Polar molecules, for example water, have unequal electron distribution, which causes one side of the molecule to be positively charged and one side to be negatively charged, thus they have poles, kinda like a magnet does. Nonpolar molecules don't have this unequal electron distribution."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5uzv07 | the reasons why the colonies sought independence from england. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uzv07/eli5_the_reasons_why_the_colonies_sought/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddy4a5t",
"ddy4g8v",
"ddy8c5k"
],
"score": [
2,
16,
3
],
"text": [
"No representation of the colonies within Parliament, particularly given that there were numerous taxes levied on the colones by that same body.",
"The American colonies fought for several reasons.\n\n1. They didn't want to pay taxes on goods such as paper and tea. Those taxes were meant to pay off the 7 years war, but the colonists figured that they didn't ask for the war.\n\n2. King George refused to listen to the colonists' problems. They tried to raise issues, but that wouldn't have been an issue if it wasn't for the main reason, number 3.\n\n3. The colonies lacked representatives in parliament. This was the main cause of the revolution. The colonies fought against England because they had no say in their government, which ties in to reason 4.\n\n4. Enlightenment ideas about government were popular in the colonies. The founding fathers fought for the principle of a government where the people held power, not a monarch.\n\nThere's a lot more to it than that, but hopefully that summed some of it up.",
"The Colonies had a really great deal from 1607 to 1763 or so. They got to behave as independent countries essentially. They got protection from the British Military, and didn't have to pay taxes to the crown. The British Government tried to establish some taxation to pay for the French and Indian War, but they had let their \"kids\" run wild for too long, and a rebellion was on their hands."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6zz7z5 | how does the milk, dye and soap experiment work? | This experiment has you put a drop of soap into a dish filled with milk and dye. When the soap is added, you can see the dye begin to move around in the milk. What exactly is the chemistry behind this phenomenon? (I know it has something to do with soap being both a polar and no polar molecule)
Here is a [video](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zz7z5/eli5_how_does_the_milk_dye_and_soap_experiment/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmzbg6y"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Milk is an emulsion of fatty globules suspended in water. We can ignore the fat for now, just note that it helps keep the dye from mixing in too fast. What we're really interested in is the water.\n\nWater is rather interesting for a molecule. It has a negatively charged end (the oxygen) and a positively charged end (the hydrogen), effectively making each water molecule act something like a bar magnet. When you put a bunch of water molecules together, they bunch up really tightly, giving water a lot of interesting characteristics.\n\nThe key characteristic is a high surface tension. The surface of the water clings to itself very tightly, forming a sticky film. We're too big to feel it ourselves, but this is why [water strider bugs](_URL_0_) don't sink into the water.\n\nSoap is also interesting. It is usually a set of molecules with a hydrophilic (water-loving) head and a hydrophobic (water-fearing) tail. That's what gives it its cleaning power (dirt sticks to one end, water to the other, and everything gets washed away). Here, however, the soap gets in the way of the self-attraction of the water.\n\nWith the surface tension broken, the rest of the water without soap contracts, bringing anything it's carrying (like dye) along with it.\n\ntl;dr: soap pops the film on the surface, the remains of which yank the dye to the side."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqQSlEViNpk&t=37s"
] | [
[
"http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-u_MNC8dcdyY/UQMolc0ZOgI/AAAAAAAADrU/_z9FE58kI1M/s1600/water-strider.jpg"
]
] |
|
1u81ah | multiverse theory: is it thought that anything you can think of has happened in these universes (infinite possibility), or just everything possible within the laws of logic? | For example, does the theory make a universe with different physical laws possible or do these universes have the same basic physical structure, making only things that are actually possible within those laws potential universes? Say that, hypothetically, something like faster than light travel is literally impossible to achieve, does this, according to the theory, still mean it has happened in another universe? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u81ah/eli5_multiverse_theory_is_it_thought_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cefens9",
"ceffd40"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Given a potentially infinite number of universes, over a potentially infinite timespan, then it can be assumed that anything which is physically possible will occur at some point somewhere.\n\nTo answer the point about the laws of physics and how they may apply in another universe.... no one knows. We know that there are fundamental rules which apply in our universe - the speed of light like you mentioned is a good example, but in another universe the rulebook may be TOTALLY different. We simply dont know.\n\n",
"Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot is a great book that can give you a lot of information on the subject. The way i understand it is that time does not exist, there is only now. This now is contains everything in existence, i like to call it All that is. From this All that is you perceive the reality or universe that you are in tune with. Much like a radio that can pick one channel when all the radio channels exists at once. The linear experience of all that is, is what we refer to as time. Sorry not the best answer but my two cents, i will try to give more sources and experiments that lead to this theory when i get home and do some digging. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1s33a9 | why is second hand smoke about four times more toxic than mainstream smoke? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s33a9/why_is_second_hand_smoke_about_four_times_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdtfgq3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"When people make these claims they usually mean over time rather then immediate. If you smoke in a confined space such as your house and then leave your kid in there for years they may get the exponential smoke inhalation. For the most part phrases like this are not based on realistic situations and are scare tactics. \n\nThat being said exposing your child to second hand smoke even if it only equal to your exposure should be child endangerment and should be punishable in court. It is morally evil and is no better then any other form of abuse. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9ulhpu | how does a digital camera know when something is close or far away? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ulhpu/eli5_how_does_a_digital_camera_know_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"e957p1s",
"e95alx5"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"The passive form of autofocus analyses the image until the edges are sharp. If the focus area is wrong, the picture will be blurry where you want it to be crisp. The lens itself moves around to find the right focus. \n\nActive autofocus uses a different type of light (or even ultrasound) to focus. If there are two lights, the object's position can be triangulated. The autofocus then sends the information to the lens to focus the image. ",
"The simplest way is to use contrast auto-focus. The camera moves the focus around until it finds the point where the image is sharpest. This is a relatively slow technique because there's no way to tell which way to change the focus to fix a blurry image; you just have to try one way and, if that makes it worse, go back the other way.\n\nA better technique is to have sensors that look at the image through different parts of the lens, i.e., left and right or top and bottom. The camera can then triangulate to work out whether it needs to focus in or out. These sensors used to be separate from the camera's main sensor; they'd only work in a DSLR when the mirror was down, so autofocus wasn't possible when taking movies with the mirror locked up. In the last few years manufacturers have been using split pixels on the main sensor to overcome this limitation. This is the technology enabling the new EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens\") cameras that are challenging DSLRs.\n\nSome old cameras did try to use active ultrasonic range finding, like sonar, for focus control. These systems were prone to focusing on the wrong subject. Modern autofocus can be smart and selective about what to focus on, or at least allow the photographer a range of choices. It can do things like recognise objects in the field of view (e.g., faces) and automatically focus on those."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
32djzy | why are peanuts banned from schools but not workplaces? does the danger of an allergic reaction decrease with age? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32djzy/eli5_why_are_peanuts_banned_from_schools_but_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqa79yk",
"cqa7dx1",
"cqa7e4r",
"cqa7fbh",
"cqa7ita",
"cqa7qht",
"cqa7wxt",
"cqaawmz",
"cqaceiw",
"cqadbmo",
"cqadbvx",
"cqagcu2",
"cqagvjd"
],
"score": [
46,
225,
4,
26,
23,
9,
8,
7,
2,
4,
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"One would hope that, by the time a person with a dangerous allergy has left school, they would be able to deal with their allergy. This probably means carrying an epi-pen and knowing how to use it, and so on.",
"Schools are responsible for the safety of their students. Businesses assume you are capable of managing your own allergy in the real world. ",
"No, by the responsibility of those who are allergic increases.",
"Because workplaces are filled with adults and schools are filled with children. Children, especially young ones, may not always know the best way to handle their own allergies and will have far worse impulse control (as that part of the brain is still developing). There is just a bigger risk of kids forgetting to wash their hands or accepting a treat they really shouldn't have or trading their lunches despite having been told not to. And because schools assume responsibility to kids while they are under their roof, someone could even sue them saying that the teachers should've prevented it from happening. (Of course sueing doesn't automatically mean they will win, but schools like to avoid lawsuits. It's bad press and a lot of money and time even if they win) When you work as an adult, your boss doesn't have that same level of responsibility over you and therefore would not be at risk of getting sued unless they were going around rubbing peanutbutter in everybody's faces. ",
"My kids school doesn't ban peanut butter. In fact we offer it as a choice with our morning breakfast program that I help run. \n\nWe obviously have a list of kids that can't have it and the older ones know better. \n\nThe classes have individual rules, there's a girl in my son's class that is extremely allergic so we can't send snacks with peanuts. However other classes with no allergies allow peanut butter and peanut included snacks. \n\nI love that our principal had adopted this way if thinking because it shows kids at a young age how to avoid it without completely banning it for everyone. \n\nSo in short: No. Not all allergies decrease with age. I have adult friends who can die within minutes of exposure. We just learn to watch for allergens and treat them as necessary. ",
"In part, because the ban for schools is a little bit ridiculous. When I grew up, kids all over took pb & j to school and the world did not come to an end. It's both over-diagnosed and improperly-diagnosed (parents who think they are allergists). It is genuinely serious for those who have it but here are the [stats](_URL_0_). ",
"They are banned in some schools, not all schools. And it is due to a heightened state of paranoia of some parents forcing school boards to set those policies. ",
"Adults who have an allergy, know they have an allergy. The danger at schools is that there might be a child who develops and allergy and doesn't know it, or is a kid and didn't bring his epi-pen.\n\nIn the work place, more responsibility is placed on the worker to take care of themselves.\n\nSchools are set up to care for the students, they are responsible so if anything happens, they are responsible.\n\nWorkplaces aren't responsible for workers (in most situations).",
"Chances are any schools you have with a ban on peanuts have at least one student with an allergy currently attending them.",
"Schools are public institutions. In most cases you have no choice but to go there.\n\nA business is a private institution. They can, as long as it doesn't violate a law, do whatever they want. You are not required to be there, but rather choose to be there.",
"The first time I encountered the same question was this: \"Why is it illegal to passed stopped school buses, but not regular buses?\" Society generally protects kids from things it expects adults to be able to handle.\n\nThere may be different rates of peanut allergies between different age groups. I don't know about that. But I doubt that rates would be the real reason.",
"Kids will hand each other things all the time and not even discuss what they are and then consume it. \n\nAdults are like, \"Is that a fucking peanut, I don't want that.\"",
"Sometimes kids grow out of allergies. Schools are also responsible for the safety of the kids. It's a liability thing. But also, kids are kids. Hopefully, an adult with severe allergies will be more conscious of the issue and more careful than a 10 year old. Also, hopefully, adults working with someone who is allergic will be more aware of what that means and be more careful as a result. Hopefully. It's also a lot harder to police what adults eat in a workplace than it is to police what kids eat at school. Cross contamination would still be an issue though. I don't doubt there are some offices out there that are peanut free though if someone works there who is highly sensitive. But it would be by choice."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.businessinsider.com/accidental-death-more-likely-than-allergy-death-2014-1"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
bbet2c | if the sponge is dirty, how do your dishes become clean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bbet2c/eli5_if_the_sponge_is_dirty_how_do_your_dishes/ | {
"a_id": [
"ekieacz",
"ekikiz1"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Plenty of studies on the bacteria levels in sponges, and the ways to sanitizer them such as putting a squeezed out sponge in a microwave for 10-15 seconds to superheat the bacteria.\n\nA sponge mostly works to mechanically remove food particles from the plate, the soap will break up proteins and fats, the hot water will rinse it off. And any remaining bacteria on the plates will die of starvation and no water.",
"There are two types of \"dirty\":\n\n1. Stuff stuck to the dishes.\n\n2. Bacteria and other nasties on the surface of the dishes.\n\nYou should be using soap or sanitizer to clean #2. However, nasties can hide from sanitizer in the nooks and crannies of #1, so an important part of cleaning something is also removing the hiding places.\n\nThe sponge's jobs are both to remove the stuff stuck to the dish, and to distribute the sanitizer. If there are bacteria in your sponge, the sanitizer on the sponge deals with it the same way it deals with it on the dish. However, your sponge *can* be dirty enough to still cause problems, so replace them regularly.\n\n---\n\nOn a related note, this is why cloudy or brown water is *never* safe to drink, regardless of how much chlorine or iodine you put in it. You need to filter out the \"stuff\" before you can be sure you can kill all the \"nasties\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1efo6l | what happens if you're not a citizen of any country? | Got me curious, if I lost or got rid of citizenship to a country what would I identify myself as? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1efo6l/eli5_what_happens_if_youre_not_a_citizen_of_any/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9zs9rg",
"c9zso79",
"c9ztuk0",
"c9zu75x",
"c9zvj82",
"c9zw4fy"
],
"score": [
19,
77,
12,
52,
10,
4
],
"text": [
"You could identify yourself as whatever you want to. From the few cases available to read on Wikipedia, it seems you just get bogged down in finding a place to take you. Some Americans who renounced their citizenships while abroad either got kicked out of the country they were living in, or the country they were staying in didn't bother them.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Well, [this movie](_URL_0_) leads me to believe that you sit in an airport...",
"If you're from any of the more developed nations, you probably can't lose your citizenship. Most governments refuse to allow voluntary renunciation or the involuntary removal of citizenship unless the person already has another. \n\nAs an example, the US State Department will not allow a US citizen to voluntarily renounce US citizenship unless it can be demonstrated that the person already has some other citizenship to fall back on.\n\nThe problems that come along with statelessness are pretty serious, and it's not at all a situation you want to find yourself in. You can't travel, can't work, and can't do pretty much anything at all. Whichever country you find yourself stuck in is most likely going to be more concerned with getting you to leave than with helping you. ",
"Nothing happens. I used to be a person with no citizenship. My family renounced their Soviet citizenship in 1990 and moved to Finland, and it took us about 8 years to gain Finnish citizenship. So we had \"[Alien's Passports](_URL_0_)\". Basically the host country grants you a residence permit which, in Europe's case, allows you to move visa-free within the European Shengen area. \n\nSome coutries do have a problem with alien's passports, and don't grant visas to people without citizenship, but most don't have that problem. Border formalities can also take up more time than with a usual passport.",
"Would be cool if you were, you know, \"free\"...",
"Buddy of mine immigrated to the US as a kid from the Soviet Union as a legal resident in the 80's. Then the Soviet Union dissolved and he was a legal resident of the US and a citizen of nowhere. He traveled around with his old Soviet passport. He's now an american citizen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statelessness#United_States"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Terminal"
],
[],
[
"http://www.migri.fi/asylum_in_finland/applying_for_asylum/obtaining_a_travel_document/aliens_passport"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ewpqv | if i buy a software or a pc-game and upon installation i decide that i do not agree with the eula can i return the package and have my money back? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ewpqv/eli5_if_i_buy_a_software_or_a_pcgame_and_upon/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctj3ajj"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Usually, the EULA will state that if you disagree with the it, take it back to the store for a refund. \n\nUsually the store will refuse the refund as you had to open the package to read the EULA. At this point, you can do what others have done: Get a lawyer and force the issue or accept the loss ... good luck.\n\nFor more fun, read:\n_URL_0_\n\nedit: or this link: \n_URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.eff.org/wp/dangerous-terms-users-guide-eulas",
"https://wiki.fsfe.org/WindowsTaxRefund"
]
] |
||
3lpeho | the logistics of the legality of marriage from state to state in the united states | So I was thinking about this: before the SC ruling on gay marriage, there was speculation that some states would not legally recognize those marriages performed in states that gay marriage is legal. How is that even possible? Do you technically have to get legally remarried or reapply for a licence if you move to a different state?
I find it odd that marriage is not nationally/federally organized, considering how important that information is for taxation purposes. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lpeho/eli5_the_logistics_of_the_legality_of_marriage/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv853el"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In order to get married, you need license from the county courthouse. Between that, and paperwork signed by you and your witnesses and filed with the courthouse, that's what makes a marriage legal. (In most places, at least -- common-law marriages are something else entirely.) \n\nNow you don't have to reapply for that paperwork if you change states -- most states have reciprocal agreements with other states. The only time when it's a problem is when (like now) you have states disagreeing with each other over who can be married; same problem as back in the 1950s and 1960s with interracial marriages. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2dihqa | what would happen if we cured cancer? | Say we find a cure for all the types of cancer. Would we see a spike in population growth? Would we see other diseases become more prevelant? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dihqa/eli5_what_would_happen_if_we_cured_cancer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjpvdgw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Lol, i was wondering this just yesterday. If we cured cancer and heart disease, what's the next big thing that old people would die of, and at what typical age? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
cf2h11 | why do males typically have longer eyelashes than females? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cf2h11/eli5_why_do_males_typically_have_longer_eyelashes/ | {
"a_id": [
"eu6rulg",
"eu6rupe",
"eu7phxz"
],
"score": [
21,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Males on average are hairier than women, so their lashes too are thicker and appear longer (on average)",
"Evolution, men in general naturally have thicker hair than women. This is no different for eyelashes.",
"Those serve a purpose of incoming water barriers (where eyebrows are first barrier for raindrops from above, serving same function but in bigger scale, and eyes are buried into the skull, thus shape of the face helps it as well), and there is thousands of years of difference in what sex was specialized to go hunting outside to the rain and what sex was in cave parenting new generation. This specialization is still present in our genes and even though nowadays is not really useful for continuing of this evolutionary advantage, it is still big part what makes males and females different (other examples are basic size, strength, temperature handling, and even the *way* of using brain for same goals). And because those differences aren't really usable anymore in most cases, they probably will degenerate into one form same for both sexes over time.\n\nYou might be able to actually test it on yourself. If you keep your head perfectly straight and place a shower head over yourself, you should be getting total minimum of water into your eyes, most of it will be shifted by eyebrows, and eyelashes should be able to catch the remaining droplets. The shape of the eye also helps to this effect, as water tends to stick to the surfaces (surface tension) so it will rather roll on curved sides of eye towards the nose or the eye corner, than it would go directly down into the eye.\n\nAdditionally, they also serve a purpose of barrier for other particles, let's say insects. Again, that's what you have to deal with when being outside. And if you actually get something into the eye and it will tear up, they will help to move the water outside the eye way faster than if you had no eyelashes. \n\nCheck out that ears have quite similar protection against such incoming water, but mostly just by the shape of them.\n\nIt is definitive evolutional advantage to be able to see well in bad weather or in general, at all time. If you hunt, you need to have full attention 100% of time, because even single second of lost attention means no food today and possibly extinction of your tribe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6uvyzs | does the water included in a cup of tea count towards the 2 litres a day you're supposed to drink? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6uvyzs/eli5_does_the_water_included_in_a_cup_of_tea/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlvs78l",
"dlvv31s"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Absolutely. Many people point out that tea is a diuretic and makes you urinate more. However it does not make you urinate more than the volume of the tea you've drunk, so there's a net gain in water in your system. \n\nAlso bear in mind that the figure of \"2 litres of water\" was never based on any sound research, it was more or less a \"2 litres sounds and feels about right\" statement made years ago that people have latched onto. \n\nThat figure, unsound though it is, doesn't just refer to water you drink. It includes water ingested from all sources, including your food, beer, tea, coffee etc. ",
"Caffiene is a diuretic, but a study this study on 50 men who drink 3 to 6 cups of coffee a day showed that coffee provides similar hydrating qualities as water. One study only 50 people, and on coffee not tea. In a separate study, coffee didnt effect the hydration of athletes either. It is understood that if you regularly drink coffee you build up a tolerance to the diuretic.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe food board did recommend that people needed 2.5 liters of water a day, but in the next sentence it says most of that water is contained in prepared food. So you don't need to drink much more water to reach the 2.5 liters. Studies on drinking more water doesn't show much benefit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15467100",
"http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0084154"
]
] |
||
1z8eho | does your car heater get warmer faster if you turn it all the way up to high, or if you use the "auto" setting that waits for the heater to warm up. | I have always turned heat and fan all the way up because I think it is faster... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z8eho/eli5_does_your_car_heater_get_warmer_faster_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfrgjpf",
"cfrhqrk"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"the auto setting. Blasting the air will only keep the heating system cooler longer and the moving air will make you colder. However, you might want to turn it on defrost on low to help defrost your window if you live in a climate that cold.",
"Most heaters use heat from cooling system of the engine. It takes several minutes for the engine to heat up enough for the heater to work. In 'Auto', the fans will only run slow until there is some warmth for them to distribute.\n\nThe system will also run the fans quickly as long as the temperature in the car is below the desired setting. So the fan will run at high speed until the car is warm.\n\nSo Auto is probably the best place to leave it, permanently."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1bsv79 | why are film studios trying to get google to take down their own dmca infringement notices? what were those notices doing in the first place? | _URL_0_
I just don't understand what's going on, what the different parties' (film studios, google) motives are, what their means of achieving whatever goals, etc. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bsv79/eli5_why_are_film_studios_trying_to_get_google_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c99sev0"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"It's hard to be certain, but the article does posit a guess which is in line with what I would expect. It's probably an automated bot problem.\n\nRecently, Apple put out an app for the iPhone that can tell you the name of the song by listening to it. This is because they basically have a library of music and are able to match the sound of the music to the library and find the name of the song. \n\nIn the same way, many film studios have bots (automated programs) that can either listen to music or view videos and compare them to their own library of music and movies. When the bot finds a video on YouTube, for example, that contains a movie or sound recording in their library, the bot automatically sends a takedown request to YouTube (which is owned by Google). (This is why you will see things on YouTube like news reports and the like that are backwards - it looks like you are watching it in the mirror. The bots specifically looks for the video in their library and when it is reversed, the bot can't match it).\n\nThe problem is, it's not illegal to submit content to YouTube if you own it. Some studios are legitimately posting their own content, but then their own bots find them and report them. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.geekosystem.com/copyright-holders-recursive-google-request/"
] | [
[]
] |
|
1qux92 | why is being a lawyer drastically different from other professions? | Particularly law school | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qux92/eli5why_is_being_a_lawyer_drastically_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdgr2jf",
"cdgrdq4"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It's not really unique -- doctors of all sorts have to go through a similar process. Basically what it comes down to is that they are jobs that require a great amount of trust from the customers -- doctors and lawyers are both in a position to *really* fuck over their customers without them realizing it. They go to school and are taught in a very intense manner, both because there is a lot to know, and also because it is very important that they understand it well, because it's their role to understand it so everyone doesn't have to.",
"I think you need to specify what you mean further. In what way is it drastically different?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
15uuy3 | how a consumption tax could possibly work and the arguments against it. | From how it was presented to me, it seems like the most efficient way to target the wealthy, rather than income or capital gains taxes. What are the downsides, other than increased prices? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15uuy3/eli5_how_a_consumption_tax_could_possibly_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7q0e8a"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Right now, the most popular consumption tax proposal is called the FairTax. There would be a 23% (inclusive) tax on all new goods, and there would be no income taxes, no tax on used goods, no tax on capital gains, etc. The 23% tax rate is estimated to collect the same amount of revenue as our current tax code.\n\nBut, the tax is progressive. Part of the FairTax is that everyone would get a monthly check from the government to basically un-tax the amount of money you would have to spend on basic necessities. They call this the *pre-bate* (like a rebate, but it comes before you buy stuff). So, the folks that don't have *any* income would actually be getting free money. The low-income folks would even-out to about paying 0% in taxes. The middle-income folks would pay somewhere between 0 and 23%. And the highest income folks would be paying just under 23%.\n\nIllegal aliens, tourists, and other people that don't get the pre-bate would be paying the full 23%.\n\nNow, this has it's pro's and con's, just like any other tax plan. But I think I've outlined the basic features of the most-popular consumption-tax proposal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3y807a | why do all of the east asian ethnicities seem to hate each other? | I understand the cause of animosity between Japanese - Chinese - Koreans, but what about all the other ethnic groups? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3y807a/eli5_why_do_all_of_the_east_asian_ethnicities/ | {
"a_id": [
"cynsutn",
"cybatag",
"cybaz9a",
"cybceq3",
"cybgkiz",
"cybhu72",
"cybj84x",
"cybkruh",
"cybl6xg"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
127,
9,
6,
2,
12,
10,
12
],
"text": [
"Well, imagine what it would be like if Germany didn't admit their crime and kept their facism. Imagine them saying \"Auschwitz is a lie\" or \"F*** Jews and other nations\". Most of us Koreans are fine with individual Japanese. We don't go up to them and say \"Hey! We hate you\". But when it comes to historical facts, people have this.. thing about Japan as a nation. It USED to be nation but after seeing all these radical Japanese right wings, people began to gave up their hopes and those surveys usually show about 40~60% of Japanese people acting in accordance to Abe's cabinet, or act in accordance to imperialism.\n\nAs for Chinese, we don't actually have much hatred against them... Except when it comes to illegal fishing and how they treat North Korean defectors.\n\nBut of course, this is just my opinion. It can be different and there are always those idiots who just hate 'everyone' with and without a reason. Hope this clearifies your question :)",
"The only real hate is against the Japanese people from most, if not all the East Asian ethnicities, because of the World War 2 atrocities committed. A lot of \"hate\" you see among Asian ethnicities to other Asian ethnicities, excluding Japan, stem from narcissism and inferiority or superiority complex. \n\n\n",
"They don't hate each other (well, not too much). They all hate Japan. During the second world war, little of east asia was left untouched by them, and they committed war crimes left right and center everywhere they went as if it was their god given responsibility. The animosity continues to this day partly because the government actively stokes it (in the case of the PRC, for example) but mostly because of the modern Japanese government's refusal to acknowledge said crimes (imagine if Merkel claimed the Holocaust only had a few dozen victims and regularly visited the grave of Heinrich Himmler to pay respects). \n\nVarious amounts of animosity remain between the rest of the east asian countries for various cultural, political, and historical reasons, but it's all chump change compared to how everybody feels about Japan. ",
"Japan invaded and occupied huge swaths of east and southeast Asia before and during WWII, and, as others have noted, viciously brutalized enemy combatants and civilians alike. People who lived through these events are now quite elderly, but certainly most Koreans over 40 grew up with parents or grandparents who suffered under the Japanese. This accounts for much of the enmity toward Japan, at least with respect to Koreans and Chinese. \n\nI never saw much in the way of prejudice involving other Asian groups, but I suspect that Asians from more developed nations (e.g. Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore) may have some feelings of contempt for Asians from less developed countries like Vietnam and Cambodia, and because Asians from more tropical climates tend to have darker skin, there may in fact be some color prejudice. This would be akin to white Americans' dislike of Mexicans. ",
"Quick question relevant to this thread: I've heard often that there's a lot of racism in Japan against Korean people, is this true and why?",
"The reason is they all think they're better than each other....and worse, they all know that.\n\nWatching sporting competitions in asia is fun...\n\n",
"I'm Chinese American and my parents have some animosity for Japan. I go by yoshi among my friends and they fucking hate it because it's \"japanese\". A lot of it has to do with the rape of nanking and the atrocities there. The Japanese were in dicks in general during WWII to entirety of eastern asia, committing war crimes and such. Thats why there's alot of hate towards Japan.",
"Everyone hates everyone. White people are unfairly portrayed as the exclusively racist race, but truth is, humans in general are prejudice against those different than them. East Asia has several very distinct cultures in a relatively small geographical area, so there's a concentration of differences.",
"Oh the Catholics hate the Protestants, \nand the Protestants hate the Catholics, \nand the Hindus hate the Moslems, \nand everybody hates the Jews.\n\nIn general, everybody hates, to an extent, his neighbors. They have a thousand years of history -- invasion and counter-invasion, war and atrocity -- that they can whip out whenever they feel the need to blame someone else for their troubles.\n\nIn general, smaller countries hate larger countries. Cambodians hate their much larger neighbors, Vietnam and Thailand. The Vietnamese and Thai don't think about tiny Cambodia much but the Thai hate the Burmese and Vietnamese hate the Chinese. The Chinese are largely unaware of the Vietnamese and hate the Japanese.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
10cy0f | why does u.s. has different spelling, words and measurements than the other countries? | Question 1: Why does the U.S. use inches, pounds, miles etc and other countries use kilograms, centimeter etc?
Question 2: Why does the U.S. call football "soccer"?
Question 3: Why does the U.S. have a different spelling of words such as color or honor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10cy0f/eli5_why_does_us_has_different_spelling_words_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6ce5r3",
"c6ckz7r",
"c6coy38"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > Question 1: Why does the U.S. use inches, pounds, miles etc and other countries use kilograms, centimeter etc?\n\nWe're used to the system, and there hasn't been a large-scale movement to change it. Even in countries where the metric system has replaced imperial, you'll often see a mix of imperial and metric - in the UK, for instance, speed limits are given in MPH.\n\n > Question 2: Why does the U.S. call football \"soccer\"?\n\nIt's derived from \"association football\". It's actually a term created by the British, and it's common in non-UK English-speaking countries (Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, and South Africa all use it).\n\n > Question 3: Why does the U.S. have a different spelling of words such as color or honor?\n\nNoah Webster wrote a dictionary back in 1828 that was especially popular in America that simplified some spellings, like -our to -or, and making words like \"centre\" into \"center\". ",
"American football and association football are related sports. Football is usually the name for the most popular version of the sport in the area. Soccer comes from the word association.\n\nThe Americans changed the spellings of a bunch of words both to be different than the Brits and also to simplify spelling somewhat. Most of the changes didn't catch on though.",
"Wow. Nobody has said \"cuz 'Murica\" yet.\n\nI'm so proud of us!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1xbb19 | why are tractor-trailer engines designed to last 500,000+ miles while normal car engines rarely go for more than a few hundred-thousand? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xbb19/eli5why_are_tractortrailer_engines_designed_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf9sauw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because tractor-trailers are designed for a lot of long-distance hauling. That's pretty much their entire purpose, so their engines are designed around those needs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3hor5p | why linux usb file transfers lightning fast, and windows transfers at a snails pace? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hor5p/eli5_why_linux_usb_file_transfers_lightning_fast/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu987md"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"By default, windows will write to USB drives in a slower, safer way than Linux (no caching). This means that if you remove the drive without unmounting it, the data written to the disk will actually be there. \n\nYou can go into the drive properties in windows to enable write caching to speed up writes to the drive. But always remember to \"eject\" the drive in windows before physically removing it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
329f3a | what is the evolutionary advantage of humans holding on to our waste byproduct for the toilet instead of just letting loose when it's ready? | It seems that most animals - invertebrates, birds, fish, mammals alike - all just let loose when the pee/poop is ready to come out. Why do we hold on to it inside our intestines and bladders? Is it social thing because fish, birds, and horses are social creatures and yet they just poop anytime they want? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/329f3a/eli5_what_is_the_evolutionary_advantage_of_humans/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq93hlu",
"cq93mnp"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"We're not the only ones to do this. Think about cats and dogs, for instance. The reason is that waste breeds disease. For that reason, it's advantageous to be able to hold it until you're away from the place where you eat/sleep.",
"Most animals don't just poop wherever/whenever they want. Dogs will try to do it far away from a food source, while cats will do it where they can bury it. The reason is that feces spreads disease very easily and taints food/water in contact with it. Some animals are more casual with their pooping -- usually grass-eating herbivores like horses, cows, and rabbits. If you've ever been on a farm you'll know that their feces is a lot less noxious and disease-ridden than human or dog feces so they can afford to be like this.\n\nIf you just pooped wherever you were, your home, bed, family, etc would all be crawling with fecal bacteria, which in large numbers will make you sick at the best of times, god forbid you injure yourself and those bacteria get into the wound. We've evolved to be disgusted by our feces and to want to get away from the stuff, and being able to control when we release it helps us make sure it remains far away from our food and home environment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3uk92g | how do some very healthy people have such adverse physical reactions to cigarette smoke, while unhealthy people smoke all the time and don't have the same reactions? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uk92g/eli5_how_do_some_very_healthy_people_have_such/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxfjtvm",
"cxfk8ld"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Perhaps it is the same reason non-celiac gluten-intolerant have adverse reactions to wheat after eating it their whole lives.",
"I have an IgA deficiency which means the linings of my mouth/lungs/stomach (\"mucus linings\") aren't as well protected from infection/allergens. I'd suggest this is why i have adverse effects to the smoke. Smokers probably build up a tolerance, but don't forget the impending emphasema which i would call a pretty adverse effect"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1cfhx8 | why does cleaning or organizing make a person feel better if they're upset? | I really just don't get it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cfhx8/eli5_why_does_cleaning_or_organizing_make_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9fzg32"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"It's about control. Most of what upsets us makes us feel that way because we have no control over it... or at least we *feel* like we have no control over it.\n\nSo we take control of something else instead. Some people run or workout, some people clean and organize, some people write diaries. These are all acts that make us feel more in control of ourselves, because we are accomplishing something concrete, meaningful and almost instantly rewarding.\n\nWhen extremely mentally disabled people become upset, they sometimes \"take control\" of themselves by rocking, hitting their heads continually, and other repetitive behaviors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
40qjt5 | if the pigment of a plant is a color other than green, then is a different spectrum of light required for it to grow correctly? | For example, since most plants are green, they will ignore green light. Does it work the same way for a purple plant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40qjt5/eli5_if_the_pigment_of_a_plant_is_a_color_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"cywbzfk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Plants are green mainly because chlorophyll reflects more green light than red or blue. The plant is absorbing red and blue light and turning it into energy, whereas they're reflecting relatively more green light, which is why our eye see it as green. If a plant were another color, say purple, it would be reflecting relatively more blue and red light and absorbing the green light and turning it into energy. The plant is reflecting more of whatever color it looks to our eye, and therefore absorbing and turning into energy less of that color."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2jd3b4 | how can car dealerships claim to sell something below cost? wouldn't that be false advertising? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jd3b4/eli5_how_can_car_dealerships_claim_to_sell/ | {
"a_id": [
"clakfmd",
"clakjot"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Not if they're actually selling it below cost. Taking a small hit on a car which just won't sell is often better than letting it sit around and take up inventory space forever. ",
"Most dealers do sell cars for below cost if necessary. Car dealerships make their money from the brand paying them bonus money if they hit a certain number. That number changes every month, is based on the number of cars sold in the area and over the oast few years and a bunch of other metrics, but I they sell enough cars and meet that number, they can receive anywhere from $250 to $3000 per car sold based on what model it is.\n\nSo they don't sell every car below invoice, some people are better negotiators than others, but if they are two days from ending the month and only need 5 more cars sold, your more likely to buy one at a loss to them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
58hewu | why does the left-wing of us politics tend to still be very right-wing and conservative in comparison to european political parties (including the uk even tho it's not a part of the eu) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58hewu/eli5_why_does_the_leftwing_of_us_politics_tend_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d90fjsy",
"d90gz8p",
"d90h0tr",
"d90i7o4",
"d90igpi",
"d90ivso",
"d90jstr",
"d90mdvy",
"d90r2q6",
"d90sp81",
"d90wzsr",
"d90xhw8",
"d90yrew",
"d91bxdb"
],
"score": [
11,
50,
5,
3,
3,
219,
13,
55,
5,
2,
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is no set neutral point. Each country determines its own conservative and liberal spectrum and sets its own midpoint. There are major differences between European Countries too, they just tend to be ignored when compared to the US. ",
"Slight nitpick: The UK *is* still part of the EU. They are going to leave, but have not done so yet. \n\nAs for your question, I think that's rally something that's hard to gauge. There are things that the super ultra conservative US politicians are a lot more *liberal* about than anyone in Europe. Basically what's considered conservative and liberal vary wildly between regions and as time passes. ",
"The United States has pretty much always been more conservative than Europeans. The first settlers who came here were religious puritans who brought a religious \"stuffy\" lifestyle with them, and so we started from a point of conservatism. \n\nThis culture difference shows in a lot of different ways, including more fearful/negative feelings about sex and nudity, drinking and partying, caring for the poor and sick, etc. ",
"Because of McCarthyism. During the Cold Americans were fed anti communist/ socialist propaganda which dragged everything right of center. Also because we are tight asses",
"Curious what you consider as conservative. Personally I think we have two parties that liberally spend, just in different areas, and the real differences lie in taxation and social policies. Much of this stems from Southern democrats fleeing the party during the Civil Rights era and their subsequent courting by the GOP. This resulted in the right wing having a favorable map in terms of Congress but does create problems in the electoral map as much of the population is still in the Northeast and West Coast.\n\nA second issue stems from corporate money in politics. Several recent reports have highlighted that many in Congress spend over half of their working hours raising funds for campaigns and the parties general funds. As a conservative, I do take issue with equating anti-tax and business friendly legislation as a core tenant of conservatism. Those were more recent policy stances that increased in priority for the GOP with the neoconservative movement.\n\nEDIT: Sorry not ELI5 ",
"Communism. No, seriously.\n\nRemember that Communism started in Europe. Marx and Engels were European. They wrote for a European audience. Communism took root very strongly in Europe, much more strongly than it ever did in the United States.\n\nIn Russia, it led to a revolution. In the rest of Europe, governments pulled farther to the left to appease the Communist sympathizers in their countries and (hopefully) avoid what happened to Russia.\n\nThat planted the seeds for it. Then you had World War II, the bloodiest battle in the history of the world. Germany had almost 10% of its population killed, and in Poland it was closer to 20%. Europe was devastated economically, morally, physically.\n\nIn the aftermath of WWII, the causes of which were complex but many of which had a lot to do with Right Wing nationalism, Europe pulled to the left, eager to avoid ever having a war like that again.\n\nAt the end of the day, the Europeans discovered that being that far to the left wasn't necessarily a bad thing. Europe has an older population (due to declining birth rates), and so a strong social safety net for the elderly was considered a boon. Socialized medicine is more efficient by practically every metric. They do some things wrong, but they do some things right. The United States tends to feel that if things are done differently from how the US does it, it's \"wrong\", even when that's demonstrably not the case.\n\nAnother, harder-to-quantify difference was the urban/rural/frontier split between the United States and Europe. For centuries, Europeans had relatively centralized states and were used to dealing with the government. In the United States, there were still frontiers (the Wild West, etc) and the government was often a distant entity that the average person didn't interact with as much. This fomented a distrust of government and statism in the United States among portions of the population.",
"The left wing of US politics is left wing for any nation. They just don't have any political representation because of our system of elections. The US has a majoritarian system, whereas most of Europe has a proportional system. That means that in our elections, whoever gets the most votes gets ALL of the seats. If there are three candidates representing three parties and one gets 38%, one gets 37%, and another gets 35%, the one that got 38% is elected and the other two are not. Those other two get no seats for their party. By contrast, in a proportional system, if there are three candidates who represent 3 parties and one gets 38%, one 37%, and another 35%, then party 1 gets 38% of the seats, party 2 gets 37%, and party 3 gets 35%. In Europe, 21 of 28 countries in have some form of proportional system. A majoritarian system results in two centrist parties that are slightly left or slightly right of each other, with candidates generally being in the middle (at least for large scale elections, like President or Senators). In a proportional system, because getting any percent of the vote gets you some seats, there are usually several political parties, and some of those parties might be quite extreme on the right or left. Because of the possibility of extremism, most proportional systems require a minimum percentage of votes before getting any seats. As to why US politics in general tend to be right of Europe, that is part of our history and constitution that arose from a distrust of government (with roots in the revolutionary war), a cultural norm of self determination, having tons of space and land, idolizing innovators, leftover wariness of socialism from the Cold War, and the notion of the American dream (making your own fortune/life). ",
"So i'm going to contest the idea that the Left in the US is right-wing compared to European mainstream left parties.\n\nLets look at a few things the democrats are proposing in comparison to Europe\n\n* $15 an hour minimum wage proposed by democrats is higher than any minimum wage in Europe. The highest minimum wage in a European country with more than 1 million people in it is about $11 an hour.\n\n* Healthcare - The democrats' proposal for a public option on top of an insurance mandate is essentially the same system they have in Germany, Belgium, or Austria. Depending on exactly how it's implemented it could also end up similar to the two-tier systems in France, Ireland, Denmark, and the Netherlands. Not very many European countries actually have single payer healthcare.\n\n* Corporate Taxes and Capital Gains taxes - The US already has higher corporate and capital gains taxes than most of Europe, and the democrats are proposing to raise them even further.\n\n* Income taxes - Believe it or not, the US tax system tends to be significantly more progressive than the tax system in most European countries. Top Income tax brackets in Europe and the US tend to be about the same percentage, but those brackets tend to kick in much earlier in Europe than in the US. For example in Germany you start paying a 42% marginal rate at around $60,000 a year. Democrats are proposing to raise income taxes on the rich only.\n\n* VAT taxes - European states also tend to rely on highly regressive VAT taxes to fund their governments. VAT tax in most European countries is between 20 and 25 percent. The US has no national VAT or sales tax of any kind. Yes rich people in Europe pay more in taxes. But so does everyone else as well. Adding (or switching to) a VAT tax is considered a conservative talking point in the US.\n\n* Banking regulation - Nothing like Glass-Steagall has ever existed in Europe. There has never been any kind of separation of investment and commercial banking in Europe, ever. Proposing that there should be would get you laughed out of the room in any parliament in Europe. The top 4 largest banks in the US have assets equal to 40% of US GDP. The single largest bank in the UK has assets equal to 98% of their GDP. France 97%. The single largest bank in the Netherlands has assets equal to about 130% of their GDP. No party in Europe is talking about breaking them up.\n\n* Other regulations - Food regulation tends to be stricter in the US than in Europe (thus no kinder eggs or unpasteurized milk). Car emission standards tend to be higher in the US (thus the recent volkswagen scandal). Prescription drug regulations are significantly higher (thus no cheap generics).\n\n* Social issues - Many countries in Europe have stricter abortion laws than in the US, though this varies on a state by state basis. Gay marriage is not legal in quite a few European countries including Germany and Austria. Marijuana is illegal in the overwhelming majority of European Countries, and decriminalized in a few.\n\nI could keep going, but to sum things up - European mainstream left wing parties aren't particularly further to the left than the Democrats. Europe tends to have better established healthcare systems, but the democrats in the US are proposing we switch to a similar system. Europe also tends to have higher (though not more progressive) taxation, which tends to fund a more extensive welfare state than in the US, which would likely be considered further left, though it should be noted that democrats in the US are proposing increased redistribution. In addition the US is further left than many European countries on a lot of social issues.\n\nTL;DR: Saying the US left wing is conservative in comparison to Europe is reductive, and frankly, inaccurate.",
"It is because of the 2 party system. Many European democracies are multi party systems who, when votes are counted, win a percentage of seats in their government. So far left wing candidates who would only win 2 percent of the vote in the US and get nothing, actually get 2 percent of seats in this form of government \n\nContrast that with the US where any candidate to win must get 50% +1 voters of all the people who can vote, that forces our candidates to the middle of the ideology spectrum where most of the voters are. So they have to be more conservative than their European counterparts to get enough votes to win anything at all. \n\nUS is win or lose, in many European countries with multiple parties those smaller parties still can win something ",
"Simples - fear of communism. If they were any more left-wing, they'd get the full Joseph McCarthy treatment, because the American public has been subject to 70 years of teaching that communism is beyond evil. So any talk of nationalisation, taking away guns or anything like that is dismissed as gibberish spouted by the 'Reds under the bed'. \n\nAs a European, it's quite sad to look at. ",
"Strategically speaking, they just want to be to the left of the right-leaning politicians. That way they get support from the largest possible cross-section of the population. People vote for the candidate who is closest to their own point on the left-right spectrum. In the case of the Democratic Party in the US, they will get pretty much all left-wing votes if they stand just on the left side of the republicans (votes for 3rd parties can probably be considered negligible). However, if they stand too far to the left, they would lose some middle votes to the republicans (and many strategy-conscious republicans would likely shift to the left to fill that gap, thus gaining all of those middling voters). This is one reason the Democratic Party could not accept Bernie Sanders as a candidate. The US has a lot of religious conservatives, so the political middle is further to the right than many European countries.",
"I don't know if Europe is actually as far left on some issues as people think. For example, I think many European nations have far stricter regulations regarding abortion. In Germany for instance it is first trimester only, there's mandatory counseling, and a three day waiting period. That's conservative as fuck compared to US law where we just had a presidential candidate defend 3rd trimester abortions without context on national television.",
"*Europe and the European Union are not one and the same. Moreover the EU only includes ~50% of European states. #brexitRocks",
"The UK is still part of the continent and the union. Theresa May isn't triggering article 50 until late March and even then the negotiations take two years to strike up trade deals and all that good stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3hfv6i | how do stds spread so easily to younger generations? | My reasoning is a bit hard to explain, but...you can't just magically contract stuff like HIV, you get it through sexual contact with someone who had it before. But if a younger group of people is only having sex among themselves, how does it get into a community and start spreading? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hfv6i/eli5_how_do_stds_spread_so_easily_to_younger/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu6yz69",
"cu6z7ec",
"cu6z81o",
"cu6z9wp",
"cu75yry"
],
"score": [
6,
11,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The disease obviously works its way in from older people, which isn't hard to imagine. Young people tend to be fairly reckless about sex, so there's plenty of it going on in the youthful populations. It shouldn't be too much of a stretch to imagine a chain of individuals copulating with people a year or two older than themselves, then passing it around people of the same age.",
"Where is your cut-off for younger people? Anyone under 20? What if one of them has sex with a 21 year old? Anyone under 30? What if one of them has sex with a 31 year old?\n\nThe problem with your question is that the population doesn't fall into nice discreet age groups. My ex-wife is 4 years older than me, and my ex-girlfriend is 8 years younger than me. My ex-wife has now married someone who is 10 years older than her. Just in this small group of 4 people, there are age gaps that span a generation or more.",
"Why assume young people only have sex with other young people? I was the 17 year old with the BF in his 30's and was not the only one I knew to date older (though not THAT much older) I may have been a certain level of stupid for my dating habits but I was at least smart enough to be protected so no passing on of STI's from the older generation to the younger via my sex habits, but it remains a viable point that people don't simply date people their age. ",
"Some STDs/STIs can also be transmitted through intravenous drug use. HIV/AIDS spread this way, since you called out HIV.",
"I actually read about this once in a scientific/psychology book (I don't remember which one). Here's the correct answer: \nYounger people tend to have groups of friends, and because of the mutual respect for each other, they won't have sex with the same people. What I mean is that (hypothetically) if one of the guys in my group dates a girl, she's \"off limits\" to the rest of the group. \n\nOlder people, if they do get around, typically stick to the same group. People in an office might only have sex with other people in the same office.\n\n\nAll this to say, std's in younger people tend to travel from \"group\" to \"group,\" where as older people tend to stick to having sex with the same \"group\"\n\nhope this helped"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4w8wbn | when we say a food makes our body more alkaline, what does that mean exactly and why is it healthy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4w8wbn/eli5_when_we_say_a_food_makes_our_body_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"d650inr",
"d650mby",
"d650syn",
"d6511jg",
"d651tcw"
],
"score": [
11,
36,
26,
11,
4
],
"text": [
"The idea is this. Your body has an \"acidity\" (commonly called pH) that is based on diet, stress levels, activity, etc, and the like. Different foods will effect your pH differently. Different diseases can't exist in \"low acid\" environments. \n\nThat's the pH argument in a nutshell. \n\nIt's important to note, though, that it's backed up by absolutely zero reliable science. ",
"It's pseudo-science. Your body very tightly regulates the pH of your blood in a narrow range through a variety of mechanisms. Your diet has little effect on your blood pH. Even if it did, the promoters of this fad diet make claims like lemons make your body more alkaline, despite being a very acidic fruit.",
"It's complete baloney.\n\npH represents the amount of H+ hydrogen ions dissolved in water: if there are lots, it's an acid, if there are few, it's alkaline. It's almost impossible to change your body's pH, and you wouldn't want to. Your body has a bunch of [chemical controls](_URL_1_) to keep your blood's pH between 7.35 and 7.45. If it gets out of this range, you will get sick: if it goes lower than 6.8 or higher than 7.8, you will die.\n\n_URL_2_\n_URL_0_",
"It's fantastic science that my Shaman turned me onto. It basically means that your body's Chi receptors become more organic and *only then* can you begin to actively rid your body of gluten, ultimately making your subconscious COMPLETELY non-GMO so your life can be fair-trade. ",
"There are a great many non-scientific schools of thought that have been exploited by people for money, either as fake experts or companies producing products and I'm a afraid the body's Ph cannot be altered by eating food. Unfortunately we live in a world where lies are presented to us as facts in order to get your money - food fads sell books and DVDs and useless supplements. A really good example of this is \"Detox\" dieting. There is no such thing, it is completely discredited, the body produces metabolic exhaust products that it sweeps up in the kidneys, if it didn't you would die quickly. Eating 25 lemons cannot improve this system. When a food scientist called a company selling detox-tea and asked them to explain what toxins they actually meant, they were unable to tell him because they do not exist. \nIf it's not science, then I'm afraid it's not science. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/PH+level",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeostasis#The_extracellular_fluid_pH_homeostat",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acidosis"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
23c6pc | is sarcasm universal? | Do all known languages have some form of sarcasm, and if so do they express it in analagous ways? Is there any sort of research into the origin and evolution of sarcasm? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23c6pc/eli5_is_sarcasm_universal/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgvk31b",
"cgvls48",
"cgvm64l",
"cgvm70o",
"cgvm79p",
"cgvmkiu",
"cgvml18",
"cgvmplb",
"cgvmrpo",
"cgvn1bc",
"cgvnf73",
"cgvngu3",
"cgvnpbh",
"cgvoc5k",
"cgvq97b",
"cgvr0e0",
"cgvsu0u",
"cgvsuef",
"cgvtw65",
"cgvx2m7",
"cgvxcvx",
"cgw5zjq"
],
"score": [
24,
5,
6,
14,
2,
23,
53,
18,
17,
5,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
9,
3,
3,
2,
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"As far as i know, the Amish are a type of culture that is unfamiliar with sarcasm.",
"No. East Asians don't know sarcasm and will not understand it, unless they're acquaited with western culture.",
"In south Brazil I often ran into people that did not understand sarcasm.",
"Having sarcasm should be a common capability for all languages. After all, if you are able to lie in a language, then you can definitely make sarcastic remarks.",
"I dunno....IS IT?? \n \nOn the serious side, I've travelled in asia quite a bit, and found the Chinese culture to be very devoid of sarcasm (hope that doesn't sound racist, it's just an observation). \nThat doesn't mean, however, they can't be mean or disparaging. They just do it much more directly than we do in Western culture.",
"Obviously I can only speak for the languages i'm familiar with, but English, Urdu, Hindi, Punjabi, Arabic and Spanish all have it.",
"Linguists differ on this. Some say it is universal and some say it's not. As someone who's been studying philosophy constantly for 4 years though, it's all a bunch of crap. The most discussed and referenced theories don't even delineate between sarcasm and irony. It's not that they looked at it and said, \"hey, these are functionally the same thing\". They just straight up don't try and make a distinction. It's also littered with a bunch of other issues that people just keep writing about, but that's neither here not there.\n\nSo, the real answer is, from what I know of sarcasm, any language that allows for different intonation has sarcasm. Those and Chinese. Chinese is a slightly different form of sarcasm, but it definitely is sarcasm.",
"People say that Americans aren't great at understanding sarcasm. That might just be a thing we say in the UK, though. ",
"I'm American and have been living in Thailand for 19 years. I am fairly proficient in Thai. And I will say this:\n\nThais are some of the most sarcastic people I have ever experienced. Much of their sense of humor is based on sarcasm.\n\nIn Thai, they call it \"phra-chote\" (ประชด), which means sarcastic.\n\nSo, while I can't say if sarcasm is universal, it definitely exists in the Thai language and discourse.\n\nUseful link [here](_URL_0_). Look up the word ประชด.",
"how the fuck is this an ELI5 question? ELI5 is a request to explain something which is normally complex and baffling (and long), and condense and simplify it without jargon.\n",
"In dutch, it does also exist.\n\nI don't think it has anything to do with the language in itself though, it's a pure cultural thing.",
"I think in this case it makes more sense to ask the question as to whether sarcasm is universally practiced across cultures instead of whether the mechanics of different languages make sarcasm possible.\n\nJust because there is the mechanical possibility for a certain type of communication to be carried out in a given language doesn't mean that it will be. \n\nI'm going to go with a lot of people here and bring up Chinese again. I live in China, and concur that sarcasm really is not really a thing here (at least in the way we understand it in the west.) Of course you technically can make facetious statements in Chinese, but people are generally not culturally accustomed to communicating that way. I've seen it lead to some really awkward moments from time to time.",
"the portuguese are nearly as sarcastic as the english",
"I went to Germany on an exchange program and they take everything extremely literally. I think it comes from their very serious culture. I'm used to America where sarcasm is known, so when my exchange partner said the closest german ice cream shop was an hour away, when we had school in half an hour I said \"I don't see why that matters\" his whole family started telling at me...",
"I lived/volunteered in Guatemala for a month a few years ago. We were told not to use sarcasm, because the children we were working with would not understand it. Telling a child \"he's in trouble\" just for fun/sarcasm/play would cause the child to actually worry. \n\nSince then, I've worked with a number of spanish-speaking people who DO understand sarcasm and use it. I'm not certain if it's regional (not per language, but per country/region), or if perhaps our movies have affected others' use of sarcasm....",
"I have a funny story about sarcasm transcending languages. \n\nI work at a company that's 60% deaf. My favorite deaf guy here is from India, so his first language is Hindi, then whichever form of sign language they use there (sorry I don't know), then American Sign Language, and finally English.\n\nThe poor man had no idea what sarcasm was when he got here. He was so confused that we would say something that isn't true and then laugh at it. He's trying so hard to pick it up - his new favorite thing to do is to come in in the morning and sign \"Good night\" to me instead of \"Good morning\".\n\nIt's adorable and I love him and I'm so impressed with his ability and desire to adopt the intricacies of each language he learns. ",
"I work with Russians. Absolutely not.",
"No, only you have sarcasm.",
"Children don't understand it. If something is awful and I say, oh that is lovely. They are like why bobo-le-chimp did you say that was lovely? It is not lovely! So I think it is simply something you gradually understand. So yeah maybe some languages are better at conveying sarcasm but in the end anyone can understand it with enough experience.",
"I don't know. *Is* it?",
"NOOO! NOONE KNOWS WHAT SARCASM IS!",
"From my own experience: I was enjoying a holiday in Riga, Latvia and stayed with my mom's best friend, who also had a daughter the same age as me. One night I hung out with said daughter and her friend from school, and we watched a terrible movie (something something cruise ship ocean guns - idfk). Anyways after the movie ended the two girls raved about how great of a movie it was, especially the acting (which was terrible). Then they asked me if I liked the movie. Not wanting to sound like a party pooper I said \"Well... no... not really, but I probably just didn't get it.\"\n\nAfter a moment of bewildered silence they exchanged looks and then burst out laughing. In between guffaws my hostess seriously asked, \"Do you know what sarcasm is?\"\n \ntl;dr - my inability to discern sarcasm led Latvian hostess to question whether Americans also employed sarcasm"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.thai2english.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2cdndx | how can a website like _url_0_ still exist, when google has a virtual monopoly as a search engine? | I can't imagine it's cheap to maintain/advertise for a website like Ask. How are they still up and what are they trying to achieve? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cdndx/eli5how_can_a_website_like_askcom_still_exist/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjehwgk",
"cjenky1"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A few thoughts that came to my mind.\n\n_URL_1_ has it's \"famous\" toolbar. \nIt's their way of gaining attention. It makes _URL_0_ your default search engine and people who don't know better just keep it this way.\nWhich means that they still get thousands of search tasks.\n\nBing is owned by microsoft. At least it is the search engine on the xbox360. Don't know if its on other microsoft hardware too. But they sure get their search tasks too.\n\nYahoo is still widely used as email adresses. As far as I know they also have a toolbar.\n\nThey still have thousands of search requests daily, just less than google. \n",
"Because old people."
]
} | [
"Ask.com"
] | [] | [
[
"aks.com",
"Ask.com"
],
[]
] |
|
8x421t | why is infrared light used to keep food warm when uv light is higher energy? | E: I'm curious at why infrared is used in particular and not other higher energy wavelengths.. Also I guess since you're all here, why can't we go "down the scale" to keep our food warm? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8x421t/eli5_why_is_infrared_light_used_to_keep_food_warm/ | {
"a_id": [
"e20ndxm",
"e20rymz",
"e20st31"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"UV light can cause sunburns and gradual eye damage to people working with it. And infrared is already plenty powerful enough.",
"You're confusing something. UV light is higher energy *per unit* only. If you put the same amount of energy into producing ir light, you'll get the same amount of energy as with UV. There will just be 'more light' with IR, fulfilling the same purpose.\n\nAs for why IR: UV can start to get into ionizing radiation, which definitely causes cancer, and even the spectrum that isn't ionizing is associated with causing cancer.",
"Theoretically you could cook food with EM energy of any frequency of sufficient intensity, but that doesn't mean it's useful or efficient. Microwave ovens use, you guessed it, microwaves, which are lower energy than infrared. Microwaves can heat food well because they're the right energy to excite waters, fats, and oils in food. Gamma and X-rays would simply pass right through the food, ionizing it but not heating it very much, not to mention flooding the room with deadly ionizing radiation. Visible and UV light would be mostly reflected and super inefficient."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2s3n78 | to prevent water and shock damage, why can't the electronic components within mobile phones just be encapsulated in an airtight rubber or plastic coating/mould? | Why are phones still manufactured using screws and glue seals when they could just be integrated into a rugged airtight mould, and just using wireless charging for charging and Bluetooth for headphones etc?
Edit: Spelling. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s3n78/eli5_to_prevent_water_and_shock_damage_why_cant/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnlwsiw",
"cnlxdpd",
"cnly3b1",
"cnlz290",
"cnm338p",
"cnm6d76"
],
"score": [
12,
5,
2,
6,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"The cost of doing so exceeds the off chance you are going to drop your phone in the toilet.\n\nAlso, since most people get a new phone every two years or so, it doesn't make that much sense to invest in durability.",
"I don't think most manufacturers care much about durability... the more durable the product the higher the initial cost, and the less they sell overall because it would last longer and wouldn't need replacing.",
"There is a company you can send your phone to that does exactly that :\n\n_URL_0_",
"Wear of the material and difficulty molding it would likely be the downsides. There would also the difficulties of battery replacement, sim card access and heat dissipation.\n\nConsidering that Sony already makes a phone certified to spend half and hour under water, the issue seems to be covered already.",
"It's called \"conformal coating\" and works fine. When it's thick it's called \"potting\". \n\nIt makes heat management more difficult. Connectors are a problem. anywhere you have a gap between \"needs a coating\" and \"can't be coated\" you have a problem. It makes repair difficult or impossible.\n\nIf you could convince people to entirely abandon card slots, buttons, and speakers (switching to piezo speakers and mics) waterproofing a phone wouldn't be that big a deal. ",
"Because users still want plugs and sockets for SD cards, data, power and audio; and, try as we might, we still can't seem to get rid of the concept of sim cards."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.liquipel.com/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
29o7xs | why can i still smell poop when it's totally submerged? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29o7xs/eli5_why_can_i_still_smell_poop_when_its_totally/ | {
"a_id": [
"cimujtt",
"cimwjyk",
"cimyl5o"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You can't. You smell it from your asshole, from it's trip between your asshole and the water and from the fartiness that snuck out during said poop. If you could smell stuff through water you're entire house would smell like the sewer.",
"After you drop a deuce, what you're smelling are the shit particles dispersed into the air during the shit-logs travel from your asshole to the toilet. It is a violent event, relatively speaking, for your ass and the shit involved, so more than normal amount of particles will be kicked up than if it just laid there. \n\nIn addition, some of the smell can make its way through the water, if it hasn't gone down too deep. Yes, your asshole can smell too, but hopefully it will just be momentary and easily remedied by wiping and covering it with several layers of clothing.",
"We all know you wrote and submitted this while pooping."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2thxda | why is every other version of windows terrible? | This has been a pattern for over 15 years: 98 was good, ME was garbage, XP was great, Vista sucked, 7 is good, 8 was crap, and now I'm hearing that the next version is going to be good. This pattern seems too consistent to be pure chance, is it some strange marketing strategy they have or what? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2thxda/eli5_why_is_every_other_version_of_windows/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnz79tq",
"cnz7ae6",
"cnz9pvb"
],
"score": [
4,
21,
11
],
"text": [
"Microsoft's main clients are governments and big corporations. Basically they have contracts that make them release a new OS every 2 years, no matter if it makes sense or not. \n\nWith that said, I don't think your analysis is accurate.\n\nComing from a programmer:\n\n98 was good, ME was garbage, 2000 was the most stable windows ever, XP sucked until SP2, when it became stable, Vista sucked, 7 was awesome, 8 is weird, 8.1 allows you to disable metro and it's better than 7. ",
"I don't get why people say 8 is crap. Is it because of the Metro interface? It takes less than 1 min to get old start menu back. When people say \"but you shouldn't have to install something to make it like that!. They then state they use Chrome or Firefox....\n\nWindows 8 is a great OS. I used to have to reboot my Windows 7 install once a week or so due to slow down, never had to do that on Windows 8. Games seem to run far batter as well. \n\nAlso, Win 98 was crap. Win 98 SE was good.",
"They aren't. You're ignoring all the ones that don't fit in your pattern. What about 95, 2000, the whole NT line before 2000 (which XP is based on, so it makes more sense to include it than it does to include 98 and ME)?\n\nServer editions? Home theater editions?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
36cqz5 | what is vsync? | How does it affect my in game performance and/or graphic card? Does it turning it on or off would improve my gaming performance? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36cqz5/eli5_what_is_vsync/ | {
"a_id": [
"crcsv0o",
"crcswnl",
"crcsyng"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"It doesn't affect performance, it actually limits your framerate. See, your monitor runs at a fixed refresh rate (usually 60hz), and if the framerate goes over the refresh rate it causes the picture to have tearing errors. Vsync limits your framerate to whatever your monitors refresh rate is to stop that.\n\n\nYou should tun it on.",
"Vsync is telling your game wait for the refresh rate of your screen. So if your screen is set at 60hz your game will only render 60fps. When Vsync is off it will try to render as many as it can.\n\nThe downside with vsync is that it can lead to input lag. The downside with having it turned off is [screen tearing](_URL_0_), which is when the screen updates in the middle of rendering a a new image. (mostly visible when turning fast)",
"Vsync is the setting to synchronise your GPU with the monitor.\n\nLet's suppose your monitor refreshes the screen 50 times per second. (This is fairly typical.) But you've got a really powerful GPU that can draw 100 frames per second.\n\nWhat happens is that the GPU runs ahead of the monitor. By the time the monitor has finished refreshing, another frame has been created.\n\nThis will cause one of two things to happen:\n\n1. Half the frames the GPU draws will be thrown away, and the effort wasted.\n\n2. You'll get screen tearing: the top half of the screen will show one frame, and the bottom half will show a different frame.\n\nWhen Vsync is on the GPU waits for the monitor to refresh before sending another frame to it, instead of just constantly chucking frames at the monitor and hoping for the best.\n\nUsually you should leave Vsync on. Very occasionally it can cause some issues, though, which is why you have the option to turn it off."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://mygaming.co.za/news/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Screen-Tearing.png"
],
[]
] |
|
2m305a | why is social security "running out" ? | I keep hearing that Social Security is running out and people of my generation wont see any penny of the money we are paying now. If this is true, why? And further, how come Social Security is at danger of running out but other welfare systems are not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2m305a/eli5_why_is_social_security_running_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm0h22z",
"cm0odkg",
"cm0pe0c"
],
"score": [
18,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The social security is funded by payroll tax, for the benefit of mainly retirees. Problem is that the population of the United States (and pretty much all developed countries) is aging, and the pool of people paying the payroll tax is decreasing while that of the aging dependents are rising. ATM it is predicted that at its current rate social security will be exhausted in 2033, but it's not hard to solve that problem. Increase the taxes, upping the age at which people can start collecting benefits (logical now that people are retiring older), allow immigration so that more people will pay......... but some are only interested in cutting the benefits. ",
"How is the pool of people who are paying ss decreasing?... Isn't it mandatory? ",
"Had to respond. It is true that SS will \"run out\", but that problem is based on (caused by) CURRENT LAWS. The deal is that SS taxes are based on only the first 120 K (or thereabouts - I don't feel like doing research right now) of a persons income. There are 2 problems with this - 1) the incomes of the Rich (the so-called 1%), have become so huge compared to what they were 30 years ago, that the don't pay SS on most of there income. Think of a person making several million dollars per year, and paying SS taxes on 120 K. The second is that no SS taxes are paid on capital gains. Think of a REALLY rich bastard making tens of millions of $ per year on stock gains, who has no job (income), and paying zero in SS taxes. This leaves the middle class to pay most SS taxes. This is why SS will go broke.----------- There have been numerous articles on Reddit that analyze that, if the \"cap on earnings\" (the 120 K or so mentioned earlier) were lifted, SS would be fully funded forever, right now, with no other changes. The problem is that the middle class has been getting screwed since the Reagan tax cuts. This is why the Rich have tripled their share of ALL wealth in the nation since those cuts, and the middle class has declined."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2hojlb | the difference between newtonian and einsteinian physics. | If possible, could you summarize the difference between (the main ideas of) the two, and why they are looked at as contrasting concepts? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hojlb/eli5_the_difference_between_newtonian_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckukhm3",
"ckuki12"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"First, Newton contributed enormously to science, not only by developing the three laws of motion but also developing calculus simply because math at the time *was inadequate to his needs*, that's hardcore.\n\nWe can still use Newton's equations today as they are generally good enough to provide answers in everyday life. However for more detailed solutions we need general relativity, and sometimes special relativity and quantum physics. So view Einstein not so much as a contrarian, but rather specifying Newton's laws. There are many that say Einstein would never have been able to develop his theories were it not for Newton's massive body of work.\n\nNewton saw Space and Time as two separate constant objects, Space was flat and finite to fit Euclidian geometry, and Time was a constant. Newton also developed the three laws of motion that we still have today, with Euhler and Einstein's caveats.\n\nEinstein showed relationships in space-time, and also postulated that time dilated with velocity and gravity. \nHe confirmed gravity with the theory of curved space and also was able to set lights speed as the Universal speed limit. Newton's equations break down when you look at what happens at speeds closing in on light speed and Einstein's special relativity explained these events.\n\nSo tl;dr Newton was awesome, he invented calculus, postulated gravity, believed space was flat and that time was a constant, Einstein was also awesome and showed time-space relations, that space is curved (explaining gravity), time is not a constant and Universe has a speed limit. ",
"It would be pretty difficult to go into detail without losing the LI5 part, so here's a simplified explanation. \n\nNewtonian physics was made back when Newton was alive (as you may have guessed), which is to say, late 1600-1700s. Back then, science was done with your hands and your eyes. You drop an apple on the ground and you figure, okay, something is pulling it down. What's making it? How can I test that? I'll drop more things and see if anything is different. \n\nNewtonian physics are basically laws of physics for \"ordinary\" sized stuff - things that we can directly see and understand. They work great for things the size of ants or the size of mountains, but if you get super small or super big and look at individual atoms or look at stars, these laws start to break down and stop working properly. \n\nTo be more specific, when I say they \"break down and stop working properly\" I mean the math involved in the laws will say *A* should happen, but instead, *B* happens, and it just doesn't work in the equation.\n\nThis is where Einsteinian physics come into play. Einstein lived much later, in the late 1800s-1900s. By then, we had telescopes and microscopes and all-around much more capability to understand things which are far too large or far too small for us to *directly* study. So Einstein came up with new equations and new laws which work under the ridiculously massive gravitational warping of stars and work with the unbelievably tiny quantum particles that disobey the logic of our \"ordinary\" sized world.\n\nIf you're still having trouble understanding, here's an analogy. Let's say you have a little cube and you're trying to set it down on a sheet of paper that has little marks on it telling you where to put it, and you need to be as precise as possible. You steady your arms on the table and use both hands to carefully position the box so that it's exactly on the lines where it's supposed to be. To your eyes and to the capabilities of your arms/hands, it's as accurate as possible and it looks like it's exactly in place.\n\nBut then you get a microscope and look at the edge of the box and notice that it's actually just a *tiiiiny* bit turned to one side, and the mark to line it up with which seemed so small, suddenly seems really really big. Your eyes and arms/hands are Newtonian physics, which look good to our naked eyes, but if you zoom in too much, then you see you're actually still just a little bit off. Einsteinian physics would be like using the microscope and precision tools to *really* put that box exactly in place.\n\nFor most things in our lives, Newtonian physics work just fine, but for quantum stuff and really really big stuff, you need Einsteinian physics."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
65h6yf | why do you see white when you get hit in the eye in a dark room? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/65h6yf/eli5_why_do_you_see_white_when_you_get_hit_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgaaxrd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You're optic nerve is stimulated and you end up seeing a random selection of colours. Since you're in the dark everything you see appears white because it's in comparison to the blackness. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1p377z | why did public schools stay open during the government shutdown? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p377z/eli5_why_did_public_schools_stay_open_during_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccy9ovs",
"ccy9qzi"
],
"score": [
13,
2
],
"text": [
"They are run by the state, not the federal government.",
"They stayed open because public schools funds have already been approved by congress or at least most have. That means that with a few extortions they have no need to worry about the shutdown. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
67m8rf | why cassini needs to crash into saturn to avoid contaminating a moon? | Hi everyone,
I've been following the Cassini mission since I was 16 and there's one thing that I'm confused about. I understand that because of lack of fuel and the complex motion of the Saturn system, the orbit will be harder and harder to predict. The rationale I keep hearing is we wouldn't want to contaminate one of the moons that could potentially have life (say Enceladus) with any Earth born microorganisms. However the thing I can't wrap my brain around is it seems we already contaminated a moon (Titan) when we landed the Huygens probe there. Is it more that we don't want to risk contaminating a second moon, or there something about Huygens landing on Titan I just don't understand? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67m8rf/eli5_why_cassini_needs_to_crash_into_saturn_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgriodk"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Huygens probe is clean, Cassini is not. It's pretty much as simple as that, but there's also that Titan is significantly less inhabitable than Enceladus so if something was hitchhiking it would most likely die."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
do6pii | why is boiling water a safe way to kill bacteria while they can build up resistances to antibiotics etc.? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/do6pii/eli5_why_is_boiling_water_a_safe_way_to_kill/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5k7m4z",
"f5k7qia",
"f5k7ti8",
"f5k7zdy",
"f5k8bae",
"f5k9lvy"
],
"score": [
15,
6,
4,
3,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"because they can't build resistance to being literally burned/cooked to death at \\~100 **°**C",
"For example, there is no vaccine against bullets. \n\nIt is more difficult to evolve defences against physical or chemical demolition as opposed to biological.\n\nLife is mainly based on water. Steam does support life processes.",
"In a nutshell its like kill it with fire.\n\nWhen you boil the water the hot temperature essentially boils bacteria to death.\n\nAntibiotics kill bacteria by attacking the wall or coating surrounding bacteria. interfering with bacteria reproduction. The bacteria can 'evolve' better defences against this type of attack. \n\nBoiling them to death they have no defence",
"When boiled they rupture, so to avoid that they would need to be able tougher but that would come up a lose somewhere else making a strain like that vunrable to other things like antibodies",
"Because antibiotics attack the bacteria biologically. They can evolve ways to avoid the mechanism with which an antibiotic attacks them. But boiling is killing them with a physical mechanism. Only way they can evolve out of that is to completely change into thermophiles which requires a very long time of gradual heat increase. If you for example heat up bacteria to 50 degrees, take those that survive and culture them, then heat them up to 52, take another colony, and do this with a giant number of bacteria and with very small increments, it is maybe possible you eventually get heat resistant bacteria. But they'll probably all die at some temperature and you'll need to start over and may need to actively induce mutations to accelerate the evolution. When you directly boil bacteria, you just kill them all, no way any survivors will be there for this evolution to ever begin.",
"Bacteria *can* build resistance to hot water. For example, spores (bacteria eggs) of botulinum bacteria can survive the heat of boiling water - which is why canned food must be heated to 121°C for 3 minutes in order to be completely safe. Botulinum infections of improperly canned foods can be lethal, because the bacteria produce a lethal poison (better known under the brand name Botox), and some strains don't give off any noticeable smell or taste.\n\nSimilarly, surgical instruments in hospitals are cooked at 121°C for 3 minutes to kill of any bacterial spores that might have survived the cleaning."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
jet59 | how japan recovered so quickly after ww2 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jet59/eli5_how_japan_recovered_so_quickly_after_ww2/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2bifnz",
"c2bioeo",
"c2bkhqg",
"c2bnkep",
"c2bifnz",
"c2bioeo",
"c2bkhqg",
"c2bnkep"
],
"score": [
15,
109,
2,
5,
15,
109,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Much like West Germany, the United States and Allied Powers poured significant amounts of aid money into rebuilding Japan after the war was over. This included millions a day for food, and a tremendous amount of capital to kickstart the country's economy again (it did, after all, have to rebuild).",
"Japan is a very homogenous country. That means all the people are alike. Now when you have a lot of people who are alike it is easier to work together. Especially if you have a culture that values discipline, hard work, and loyalty. Now Japan was damaged by WWII but not absolutely destroyed like Germany because the main Islands were never invaded. After we dropped two balls of sunshine on them they called it quits. (Note:This is how Godzilla was born.) Now what do you get when you have a highly disciplined, educated, homogenous population+the military protection of the greatest power on Earth+millions of dollars in Aid? It equals recovery. It only took 35 years for Japan to become the third largest economy on Earth. Now to stress how important this unity can be in a well functioning society I want you to go watch some videos of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Then I want you to go watch some videos of the great earthquake/tsunami that struck Japan. What is the difference? \n\n_URL_0_\n\nTL;DR: Godzirrrrra\n\n\n\n",
"Similar question: How did Japan go from samurai to military superpower in about 100 years?",
"One of the simplest reasons for Japan's relatively quick recovery was the fact that after the war, it was occupied by the United States, and *only* the United States. Freed from the violent political fighting that resulted from splitting territory with Communist countries, Japan was able to concentrate on economic growth.",
"Much like West Germany, the United States and Allied Powers poured significant amounts of aid money into rebuilding Japan after the war was over. This included millions a day for food, and a tremendous amount of capital to kickstart the country's economy again (it did, after all, have to rebuild).",
"Japan is a very homogenous country. That means all the people are alike. Now when you have a lot of people who are alike it is easier to work together. Especially if you have a culture that values discipline, hard work, and loyalty. Now Japan was damaged by WWII but not absolutely destroyed like Germany because the main Islands were never invaded. After we dropped two balls of sunshine on them they called it quits. (Note:This is how Godzilla was born.) Now what do you get when you have a highly disciplined, educated, homogenous population+the military protection of the greatest power on Earth+millions of dollars in Aid? It equals recovery. It only took 35 years for Japan to become the third largest economy on Earth. Now to stress how important this unity can be in a well functioning society I want you to go watch some videos of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Then I want you to go watch some videos of the great earthquake/tsunami that struck Japan. What is the difference? \n\n_URL_0_\n\nTL;DR: Godzirrrrra\n\n\n\n",
"Similar question: How did Japan go from samurai to military superpower in about 100 years?",
"One of the simplest reasons for Japan's relatively quick recovery was the fact that after the war, it was occupied by the United States, and *only* the United States. Freed from the violent political fighting that resulted from splitting territory with Communist countries, Japan was able to concentrate on economic growth."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RVHDlPqZWE"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RVHDlPqZWE"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
8qpk24 | how do pillows that claim to cool your head work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8qpk24/eli5_how_do_pillows_that_claim_to_cool_your_head/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0l28ac",
"e0lwzph"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"Thermal conductivity.\n\nEssentially the pillow is at room temperature, but your head is typically ~20°F warmer. Heat, much like a gas, always tries to hit equilibrium (everything at the same temp.) As such. The pillow will absorb the heat from your head. \n\nNow here's where the claim comes in. Different materials will conduct the heat at different rates. If it's very slowly, it's an insulator, like your blanket or the stuff in your walls. If it's doing so quickly, it's a conductor, like the copper heat sink in your computer or coolant in your car.\n\nSo, if the pillow manufacturer makes the pillow out of a material that is w better conductor than insulator, it will absorb the heat from your head faster, then radiate it throughout the pillow, and ultimately into the air or bed, or wherever it can go. The difference in temperature at that point is enough to make it feel \"cool\", even if it's only a few degrees different from a normal pillow.",
"Some of them work by using materials with high porosity and air flow channels that reduce the thermal insulation that is caused by the foam that most pillows are made of. That makes them do a better job of allowing your head to radiate heat and feel cooler. \n\n\nSome of them have gel layers that act as a great sink. The high thermal conductivity of the gel absorbs the heat from your head and then re-radiates that heat into the room. That effectively gives your head a larger surface area, causing it to cool more effectively. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
15amgu | getting started with raspberry pi. | I got my hands of a couple of Raspberry Pis and I wanted to give one to my niece for Christmas. I don't really have and other experience with Linux systems so I looked up directions on a Linux Wiki.
_URL_0_
I tried with Win32DiskImager, but I think I'm missing files from other programs that they are assuming I have. I'm lost.
I tried again with the instructions for flashnul (which seemed more explicit) and it looked like I was writing something to the SD card, but when In load it into the Raspberry PI and power it up I don't get anything on the screen.
I'm getting worried because I hope to have this up and running by Christmas.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15amgu/eli5_getting_started_with_raspberry_pi/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7kppqw",
"c7ksqej"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You should ask in /r/raspberry_pi, you have a better chance of an answer there. Also try the [RaspberryPi forums](_URL_0_)",
"Do not assume that because it doesn't give you a display that you messed up the imaging process. If you have a look at the contents of the SD card after you image it, you should see some files. I think a text file and a couple of others, don't quote me but that's what I vaguely remember. If you do, you most likely imaged it properly.\n\nMany power supplies that are supposed to be 5V 1A are much much less and that kills (non-permanently) the Pi. It'll be screwy or won't work at all. There are loads of fakes iPhone ones floating about, and most of the cheap ones are too shitty to properly power the pi.\n\nThe pi can be picky about HDMI cables and TVs. The TV in the front room of my parents house won't work with it at all, for no real reason. Every other display I've tried works perfectly.\n\nThe Raspberry Pi can be very picky about SD cards. Did you pick one off the compatibility list, and have you got another one you can try? My first one didn't work at all, second worked perfectly. \n\nWhen it goes smoothly, it's literally:\n\nDownload the firmware/filesystem image.\nRun Win32DiskImager and image the above image onto the card.\nPlug the card into the Pi.\nApply power to the pi and enjoy.\n\nSwap out your accessories (SD card, HDMI cable, TV and PSU) and retest at each stage. The problem should become apparent. If you want to have a better go, use the official Raspberry Pi forums, you'll get far better advice."
]
} | [] | [
"http://elinux.org/RPi_Easy_SD_Card_Setup#Copying_the_image_to_an_SD_card_on_Windows"
] | [
[
"http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/"
],
[]
] |
|
2wszt6 | why do different functions of the brain always form in the same regions across humans? | For example Broca's areal is related to speech and is always found in roughly the same spot. Since the brain changes so much during development where is the "layout plan" stored? Is it necessary that all human brains have the same basic layout? Or is there at least some sort of advantage to this fixed layout - like a difference in brain matter optimized for different usages? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wszt6/eli5why_do_different_functions_of_the_brain/ | {
"a_id": [
"cottm5p",
"cottnu3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's the same reason we all have roughly the same organ placement, skeletal structure, the same reason our teeth are all in the same order.\n\nEvolution has proven that this is the best set up that has yet to be provided via random mutation.\n\nEvolution is not intelligent.",
"For different humans/groups of humans to have different brain layouts would mean there would have to be some evolutionary benefit for us to evolve our brains in a way like that. Since evolution deems the current layout the best for survival, then it is. And the layout plan would be the DNA. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3rl1if | why do we need to spend nearly one-third of our life sleeping? why did evolution not bring that number down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rl1if/eli5_why_do_we_need_to_spend_nearly_onethird_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwp0mbg",
"cwp0n9t",
"cwp11kn",
"cwp13dr"
],
"score": [
2,
18,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"To fully answer that question, we would need to know exactly why we sleep. At the present time, we do not.\n\nAlso, evolution does not produce change unless the change allows the organism to reproduce more effectively.",
"For starters, you have the fundamental fallacy of evolution. It does not have direction. HAD a random mutation occurred to eliminate sleep, it might have flourished. \n\nbut then, night time is dangerous, and sleeping is a good way to conserve energy and avoid predators, so maybe wandering around at night would have been bad.",
"Because evolution is the survival of the fittest not the creation of the best or most efficient.\nYou will see sloths spending most of their life on a tree and come down occasion to defecate\nPandas eat a whole bunch of bamboo rather then eating more nutritious and caloric meat.\nLike wise human body isnt about being making the best out of its life span. It's about survival and adjusting with the surrounding.\nThese is my understanding, take it with grain of salt",
"Most creatures are either adapted for light or dark conditions.\n\nSleep is a way of conserving energy during the time you would not be able to operate efficiently. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ksx6m | why are western countries not rioting and revolting against their governments, but middle eastern countries are? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ksx6m/eli5_why_are_western_countries_not_rioting_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbs9jmz",
"cbs9p67",
"cbs9tgj",
"cbs9xxb",
"cbs9yvj",
"cbsaafo",
"cbsaja8",
"cbsatsu",
"cbsaz65",
"cbsbhr0",
"cbsbjns",
"cbsbx84",
"cbsc797",
"cbscsib",
"cbsctdl",
"cbsctl6",
"cbsctvi",
"cbscve6",
"cbscw3l",
"cbsd2cq",
"cbsd976",
"cbsdcbp",
"cbsde6h",
"cbsdehc"
],
"score": [
6,
234,
35,
86,
3,
17,
10,
31,
7,
114,
37,
3,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Comparatively the US and Britain don't have it that bad. While our governments may be doing unpopular things, for the most part life is relatively stable for many people and the country as a whole is doing okay. And overthrowing a large \"stable\" government like the US is very unlikely. ",
"The biggest reason is the difference in the quality of life. Sure your rights are being infringed upon, but are you actually going to do anything about it? No. Your life is too comfortable. You would probably rather watch some TV or hang out with friends than take to the streets, risking your life in a riot. It's only when the quality of life is so bad that people feel they have nothing to lose in risking their lives by revolting against their respective governments.\n",
"US corruption is nothing like Middle Eastern corruption.\n\nUS corruption is Congresspeople working for business and not citizens.\nMiddle Eastern corruption is a military dictator declaring himself President For Life.\n\nAnd despite the slow-moving US system, when we don't like the way the country is being run, we can elect new leaders and/or take the old ones to court. We tried the whole \"shoot people to change the laws\" thing back in the 1860's, and it wasn't our best moment. Since then, we've found that peaceful protest and civic action are very effective for us.",
"Western countries count on elections happening in regular cycles. In America, if you don't like the president, you just wait four years and you'll get a chance at a new one. In parliamentary democracies, you don't even need to wait that long.\n\nMiddle Eastern countries cannot count on that because they have no true democracy, or the democracy is too new to be trusted to operate fairly. In Egypt, people engaged in large demonstrations against their democratically elected leader (Mohammed Morsi) which led to coup. They used this form of \"mob recall\" because they did not trust that an election cycle would occur, or if it did, that it would be free from corruption by legal or illegal means. The large demonstrations in Egypt were a signal to the army that the people would not object if the army wanted to engage in some regime change. The counter demonstrations going on now signal that such extra-constitutional regime change is going to have some costs.\n\nLarge scale protests in America (like the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street) were not a signal to the army to take direct action because the vast majority of America trusts the election cycle to occur, and the results to be free from significant corruption.",
"It's probably because in places such as those, it's much easier to see who the \"bad guys\" are. How to get rid of a military junta is easier to understand than how to get rid of the problems within western countries and these problems aren't just based around on who is or who isn't in the seat of government. The problems we have here, and in the rest of the world, are much deeper and involve how we organise society on its base level, how we produce things. So take for example the UK, it doesn't matter who is in power because whoever is will continue more or less the same reaction towards economic problems but these problems aren't entirely clear to begin with. There were riots in the UK not too long ago, starting in London, but because there was no real \"bad guy\" to topple over, they quickly dissipated.",
"I read it on some other thread here on reddit, but western civilization doesn't have as many riots because of the three basic necessities that are still being met. Food, Shelter, Entertainment.\n\nEverything else that's wrong with the world, is just a minor inconvenience for a westerner as long as the big three are met.",
"I'm well-employed, I have a benefits-package, I have a bank account, I have bills to pay, I have a home to maintain. \n\nOnce you take that away from me, then I'll consider taking to the streets.\n\nI mean.. I swung by the Occupy Camp, when that was going on, a few times and donated food and supplies. I feel for my fellow citizens and I do what I can. However, the people protesting were vastly underemployed or unemployed young people. I simply have more to risk..",
"Why are you not rioting and revolting right now?\n\n*that's your answer*",
"ELI5? Alright.\n\nYou Americans don't have any real problems. Boohoo you've all accepted and elected to live in a Police State. Elsewhere in the world, military dictatorships involve innocent civilians in power grabs, blatantly steal funds, and murder thousands of people every day for not believing in the correct religion. People fight for food, water, security, shelter, and employment simply to SURVIVE, because their government doesn't have any programs whatsoever to aid it's underprivileged. \n\nOn top of that, your government does the one thing the others don't that lead to revolts: They treat their citizens well. Every time some idiot wants to start an armed revolution, they always conveniently decide to ignore the tremendous amount of GOOD your government does for you. For instance, it's because of them that you can even buy guns to revolt with. Obamacare is slowly bringing socialized healthcare to the states, which is a GOOD thing. You all still have the freedom to pick whatever religion you choose, and most of your country accepts your personal lifestyles. \n\nNot to mention, you have the choice of not living in a police state if you so wish. Next election ( LOL elections, another freedom ), you all have the liberty to vote for the guy who's plan is to cut the NSA as his first order of business. \n\nIn short, a revolt in the states over the case of current affairs would finally prove that too many Americans watch Fox News for your country's own good. ",
"Deep down, even the grumpy assholes in western countries know they/we still have it pretty damn good in comparison.",
"It's simple. Like most Americans, I hate what's happening with the NSA among loads of other shit, and I try to keep myself informed about it. However, my life has not actually changed one bit. I can still do everything I did before, and pretty much anything I want. Although all of these scandals are outrageous, they aren't enough for me to do anything because the only way any of it has actually affected me is the extra time I've spent on the internet reading about it.",
"\"I was about to riot, but then I decided to check Reddit real quick.\" ",
"1) Because of the heat and no air con. It would make anyone go mad. \n\n2) Because they have nothing better to do. ",
"The middle east revolts are a forthcoming revolution within islam itself. The uk had henry the 8th. Islam has yet to modernise and the traditionalists are revolting infact everyone is, hence no one is really safe. Even though in the uk i believe we need a different government no labour not conservative. Someone different with new ideas something fresh and interesting that dont go through oxbridge. Then we might see real change as for now we get the same old regardless of whos in power\n",
"Because we have really tasty bread, and our circuses are **amazing**!",
"We're still living quite comfortably here.",
"Because there is nothing to really complain about worth rioting over. Middle East countries have real problems.",
"For me, it is a risk/benefit issue in the US at least. People look at what they are losing (privacy) versus what they stand to lose by rising up (injury, imprisonment, additional scrutiny from intelligent apparatus). If what they perceive they are losing isn't worse than what they STAND to lose, they will stay silent. These people are referred to as rational actors. The same situation applies to illegal immigrants to the US from other countries.",
"The simple answer; because we have jobs. (generally speaking) ",
"Because we will be put in jail for the littlest amount of rioting, and we have bills to pay... and in order to pay those bills we have to be able to get a good job... and you can't get a good job if you're in jail... and with a job market as terrible as this is, you can't afford to get in that situation.",
"Because we have it pretty good.\n\nYeah, people are unhappy about the NSA, banking scandals, corporate money in politics, and police shooting dogs. but these really are first world problems. It is not perfect, but western democracies have free and fair elections, impartial judicial systems that get it right most of the time, and low rates of corruption. The fact it is taken for granted that Obama will voluntarily leave office in 2016 shows a faith in gov't that just doesn't exist in most of the world.\n\nIn addition, and largely because of those things, westerners enjoy a high standard of living. The entire Arab Spring began because Mohamed Bouazizi lived in a Tunisian village with no work while trying to support an extended family. When corrupt officials confiscated the scales he needed to sell his produce, he saw no way to earn a living, he immolated himself in protest.\n\nIn a more economically developed country with greater employment opportunities, perhaps his desperation does not drive him to this.",
"Because my life is easy, I have good food, I have the internet and work. I'm 22 years old, finishing up college, work 3 part time jobs (2 in my field that I want to enter following school) and don't owe too much (even though my state school isn't cheap).\n\nThis is the story of my life and the majority of others around me. Why should I revolt? Nothing has changed for me over the last few Presidents. No freedoms of mine have been impacted (that I have felt. The laws could have changed but still hasn't had an impact on me to make me revolt).\n\nPeople, including me, my age like to complain a lot. But honestly, the US is a pretty damn nice place for the majority of people.",
"Because we aren't being murdered and oppressed, stoned to death, forced to think and act in very specific ways else we and our loved ones face the wrath of our overlords, most of us aren't starving, most of us are working, the government isn't stealing the aid money that comes in to us, our government, while imperfect, is democratically elected...\n\nI mean, really. Come on.",
"Bread and circus :)\nWorks like a charm. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5pv5f3 | what is my computer doing while i'm not telling it to do something? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pv5f3/eli5_what_is_my_computer_doing_while_im_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcu37r7"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"From a purely practical standpoint it is just sitting there waiting for a command. However if you open up task manager you may see 60+ background processes running. So what gives? Most of these processes have to do with maintaining the function of the system. You'll have a process for the touchpad of your laptop, a process for your graphics processor, a process for your speakers, a process for you wireless card, a whole bunch of process keeping your OS running, etc. These processes will just quietly run in the background like the always do. You also may have updaters such as Adobe, Steam, Nvidia, Windows, etc. that check for updates when your computer is idle. Windows 10 also comes with a default setting that performs hard disk maintenance during usual downtime. When your computer goes to sleep or hibernates it is basically cutting down all those background processes to the bare minimum needed to keep the OS functioning and then waiting for a command to wake up. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3mqkv9 | why is volkswagens false emissions test hurting the company's reputation more than other more serious recalls that have killed people? | I understand that it's serious but how is a false emissions test more important than something like an air bag that have killed people?
Is emissions more important than a human life? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mqkv9/eli5_why_is_volkswagens_false_emissions_test/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvh8419"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It is not that emissions are more important than a human life. It is the fact that in this case, it was a very purposeful lie. And it makes people wonder if they are lying about this, what other things might they be lying about that might directly affect their safety.\n\nTo some degree, people accept that production errors can happen, but it is the way the company responds to them that makes the difference. If they cover it up, it'll have more of an effect on their reputation (again, because if they are lying about that, what else might they be lying about) than if they immediately set in order a recall once they have spotted there is a systematic failure. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1zebbz | why do wholesalers need distributors to get into retailers? | More accurately, at what scale/circumstance is a distributor necessary? For instance, a micro brewery wants regional distribution and has the product to supply it. Why would they not hire staffers to do it themselves?
Sidebar: I've worked in grocery retail and from my experience, distributors don't do much besides narrow your margins and cover up Quality Assurance problems from you. So I'm kind of trying to figure out why, I suppose. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zebbz/eli5_why_do_wholesalers_need_distributors_to_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfsw18g",
"cfsxfym"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Just because you have the knowledge to make a good beer doesn't mean you have the knowledge to run a distribution system. Drivers, warehouses, meeting exacting delivery schedules... yeah, if you have the expertise to do it, that's great, but you're probably better at making beer.",
"I used to work for a wine/liquor/micro wholesaler so here goes.. \n\nThe biggest part, especially for microbrewers and microdistillers is that by having a wholesaler sell, ship, and in some cases market their products it's a huge cost savings for them. Look at it this way, without a distributor a micro would have to hire a driver, or drivers, buy truck(s), fuel, maintain and insure those trucks, pay salespeople, etc, etc. Also, in some states, such as Massachusetts, liquor stores cannot buy direct. It needs to go through a wholesaler. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
326uj3 | why do we have to eat and urinate throughout the day, but can make it through 8+ hours of sleep just fine? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/326uj3/eli5_why_do_we_have_to_eat_and_urinate_throughout/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq8g0cp",
"cq8g0gt",
"cq8hihn"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
5
],
"text": [
"Because during that sleep you are sleeping, and not eating or drinking normally throughout the night as us humans do during the day. And there are times when people have a strong urge to use the restroom during the morning meaning they had to go during the night.",
"During sleep, your metabolism slows. Your digestive and renal systems shift into a slow mode so they produce less waste. ",
"1. You are not drinking or eating\n2. Your metabolism slows down so your body can use that energy to repair damages you've done to your body during your time awake.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_and_metabolism"
]
] |
||
9p6rjw | why aren't state sponsored cyber attacks considered an act of war? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9p6rjw/eli5_why_arent_state_sponsored_cyber_attacks/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7zi13h",
"e7zib4v",
"e7zirys",
"e7zj2gt",
"e7zkl77",
"e7zl2zo"
],
"score": [
26,
26,
8,
10,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, everyone's doing it.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIf one nation suddenly decided it's tanks on the lawn time, then everyone else would have the same excuse - You can't claim the moral high ground when proof is released that you were doing the exact same thing to your enemy.",
"A cyber attack is an extremely broad term. It could be as simple as accessing a single network node and shutting it off, or remotely getting into the central data center and stealing Gigabytes of data. The latter is much more easy to detect while it's happening, whereas the former it typically a \"get in, hit the target, get out\", so it's unlikely to catch those in-the-act (they're also far less common).\n\nBecause of the nature of the Internet, even if all signs point to a certain nation-state carrying out the attack, it might not necessarily be an attack authorized, coordinated, or carried out by that nation. Many people online use a VPN/proxy service, which basically works like \"Sure, I'm physically in Paris, but I want the Internet to think I'm in Ontario\", or \"I'm in Russia, but I want anyone who might be tracing my activity back to think I'm in Chicago\". Use of a VPN/proxy isn't, by itself, illegal. Because of that, there's still too much uncertainty with regards to most cyber attacks to be 100% certain that \"yes, this attack did in fact originate from someone working for this country's government.\"\n\nIt is, however, possible to get a good idea of who carried out some cyber attacks, based on a form of digital signature, the manner in which something is done. However, it's also possible that some countries' methods have made it onto the \"Dark Web\", and rogue hackers can follow those methods to try to hide themselves by making the victim think it was someone else.\n\nSorry... this got really long...\n\nTL;DR: it's very hard to catch someone \"in-the-act\", hostile actions can have their locations masked via VPN/proxy, and rogue individual actors can hide behind known methods carried out by countries.",
"they will be, when people start dying as a result of them. the reality is that we’ve not experienced a sustained attack on any critical systems yet that have endangered or cost lives. ",
"For the same reasons that most acts of espionage are not acts of war. One, everyone is doing it. Two, because military response has to be proportional for rational actors (ie gunning someone and their whole family down because they cut you off in traffic isn't appropriate). Three, because the occasions you want to get into war are far far fewer than the opportunities to get into wars. Countries only start wars they think they can win plus benfit from, or because their hand is forced by a legitimate attack/invasion that presents existential threat, or close to one.",
"This is actually an ever-evolving discussion in politics and defense. \n\nThe first problem is determining where to draw the line. What digital attack justifies physical use of force? Would you send missiles in response to a digital bank heist? Do you wait for your adversaries to take down the entire power grid before sending the bombers? The mostly-agreeable consensus is when the attack results in physical consequences (eg. cyber-attack blew up a power plant resulting in xx injuries/deaths). \n\nThe next problem is what is a reasonable physical response to such an attack? How many people do you kill in response? How much infrastructure do you destroy?\n\nAnd that can only happen if you're dead sure you know whodunit. Some attacks are pretty easy to tell where they came from, others are impossible to determine. If you're committing soldiers and killing people, you want to be 200% sure that you're toasting the right bagel. Compounding this problem is the fact that cyber-attacks are not always committed by the nations themselves. It could be an advanced cyber-crime group or other actor. The potential for false-flag attacks in this scenario is also huge. \n\nWar is the very last thing on earth a nation wants to do (at least it should be). You have to weigh the pros and cons of the situation and determine if the benefit in going to war (destroying your enemy) outweighs the costs (lives lost, economy lost, pure financial cost), and that's if you're sure you can win. Georgia is slowly being invaded by Russia, but it's not like they can realistically do anything about it. Ukraine lost a good chunk of land, but it's not like they could have defended themselves. The UK had *nerve agent* used on its soil and kill its citizens, but they have no hope of winning against Russia on their own, so they just move on.\n\n---\n\nThe bottom line is that it boils down to two questions:\n\n- Are you absolutely sure you know whodunit?\n\n- Do you really want to go to war over *this*?",
"It's not worth going to war over, especially as it's mostly major nations who do it against each other. Remember, war tends to grow like wildfire, you can't just declare a small war, either you are at war or you are not.\n\nWar is a last resort, and you really, really want to be sure it's actually worth it. Cyberattacks seldom are, it usually better to just use your knowledge about the attack as leverage or propaganda fuel.\n\nYou should also consider that any declaration of war will be heavily scrutinized. If you are a leader, you better have pretty damn good evidence of the attack, evidence that everyone can understand. \"They overloaded a bunch of our servers for a few hours\" isn't the same thing as \"much of our fleet is burning in Pearl Harbour\" or \"Hitler just attacked our entire western border\". If you can't cough up evidence that has the right emotional load, the people won't support you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
f8uiuf | are people born with empathy or can it be through practice? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f8uiuf/eli5_are_people_born_with_empathy_or_can_it_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"fiozd31",
"fip0r3o",
"fip2rp7",
"finkaa4",
"finl942",
"finll2a",
"finln59",
"finlyvx",
"finlz3t",
"finuckr",
"finx9oo",
"fio679c",
"fio6wn8",
"fio89ul",
"fiob44r",
"fiobfmo",
"fiolcpj",
"fiom2qr"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
5,
7,
2,
13,
13,
597,
44,
3,
13,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"emotional empathy is inborn, cognitive empathy can be learned\n\nemotional empathy is \"feeling what other people are feeling\", like feeling sad for someone in bad situations, feeling sad when others feels sad\n\ncognitive empathy is \"knowing what other people are feeling\"",
"To add to these comments, there are 2 forms of empathy - cognitive and emotional. Some people have cognitive empathy “I understand why someone feels that way” I.e. - being able to identify feeling states in another. Then there is emotional empathy which is more like joining the other person in a shared emotional experience. \n\nBut to answer your question I believe it just depends on the person. For some with ASPD for example, it may be better to get them to learn to make more pro-social decisions rather than building empathy (I.e- what decision will get you better results and treatment by others?).",
"My two cents is that empathy can be learned to a certain degree depending on experiences and environment. \n\nI’m a doctor. My job has altered my capacity for empathy in interesting ways. \n\nWhen I work Emergency for long stretches I start to lose empathy for people because of the environment, goals of the job, how people behave, etc. Let me expand on that. The environment is fast paced and stressful. The goal of Emergency is to rapidly determine if someone’s problem is urgent and/or limb or life threatening. If it’s not then we get them out of there, as quickly and safely as possible. Sometimes it’s not the nicest but it’s what has to be done due to time pressures, the needs of more unwell patients and resource limitations. We are particularly bad at dealing with things like miscarriage, where it’s not dangerous, there’s nothing we can do to stop it, and they don’t need to be in hospital but they are very upset and emotional. Plus in Emergency people are more prone to manipulation such as drug seeking or trying to get something out of you. It’s creates a much more cynical mindset. \n\nWhen I work family medicine I have more time to talk and listen, to get to know people and care about them. I can be there for them to cry and debrief about their miscarriage or divorce or parenting stress or mental health. It’s a very empathetic role. I’ve found that when you hear someone’s side of things their terrible decisions do make sense in the context of their lives. I’ve become a lot less judgemental and am able to find love and empathy for even the most challenging patients. I like who I am better in this job. I’m their person I’m on their side and I’m there for them. It’s nice.",
"Do you mean that someone that is born without empathy can be taught empathy?",
"There is no conclusive evidence, but some people think [mirror neurons](_URL_0_) are involved in processing empathy. It probably stands to reason that if you mindfully apply empathy that you will reinforce brain networks involved in processing empathy similarly to how other cognitive behavioural techniques work.",
"They are born with it! It's pretty amazing even babies that can't speak yet understand when someone needs help and they sympathise with helpful people more than with selfish people. _URL_0_ This is completely amazing! _URL_1_",
"If a person is naturally disinclined to empathic thinking, empathy can be 'learned' or conditioned if the person has sufficient mental capacity and is willing. \n\nExample: The hallmark trait of Autism is *Significant deficits in empathic thinking*. People with autism can often be 'conditioned' to think empathetically in order to be higher functioning. However, if that person also has diminished mental capacity as well(i.e. lower on the 'spectrum) they may not be as able to fully grasp the concept of imagining another person's point of view.",
"I think both. People with ASPD (popularly called “sociopaths” or “psychopaths”) lack empathy, but also are very good at getting what they want. They can be charismatic or charming to get what they want, and that sometimes means they learn to act empathetic. Of course, one can argue that “acting empathetic” is not REALLY being empathetic. But I believe this is somewhat debatable. If you “act empathetic” towards me and I feel like I’ve received empathy and compassion.. I will walk away from that having received exactly the same benefits that I would’ve if I had gotten “real empathy”. So if your “fake empathy” makes me feel like you indeed were empathetic, is it really fake?",
"Most people are born with the capacity for empathy and some natural inclination to be empathetic. After all, it’s evolutionarily advantageous for a community to care about one another’s survival\n\nFun fact: Some historians credit the printing press during the French Revolution with spreading empathy in a new, more visceral way\n\nFor the first time, novels could be mass printed and read by more people, offering intimate accounts from perspectives they would’ve otherwise never considered\n\nSpecifically, there was a book written from the perspective of a servant girl. Wealthy men wrote that they were reading it and sobbing and couldn’t BELIEVE the plight this servant girl went through. It was the first time they’d been able to step inside someone else’s shoes in such a vivid and visceral way",
"”Empathy” is a complex phenomenon of perception, cognition, emotional and cultural response etc. I think there is a general consensus that while children are born with capacity for complex emotional states, environment affects how/whether these are experienced, developed and expressed. Like language, social behaviours, etc, children develop full emotional capacity through interaction with their surroundings, micro and macro social systems etc, so yes, it can be developed, if you’re not suffering from some other forms of pathology...",
"There's a genetic tendency towards or away from Empathy. \n\n\nThe rest is developed or acquired via life experience.",
"Becoming empathetic is a normal stage of development, normally at around three years old. Children can be tested using a story with dolls and props to see if they can understand things from another's point of view.",
"You see my boy, you'll going through changes... with your brain like the chemical reaction of love, empathy can be non present in a person as such is for sociopaths... that's my two bits",
"I'm taking a Psychology class for my Nursing studies, and we are learning about this in the current chapter. It seems that people are born with empathy, but you have to learn how to see the way others are feeling, so you can figure out what to do, to make them feel better. The ability to feel guilt, embarrassment, and shame comes about at around 18 months of age. They are especially influenced by parents’ responses to children’s behavior. If you are not born with it, then I expect you can learn to mimic it. I am not far enough in my studies to tell you about that. I expect autism or psychopathy would change the inherent way that empathy is shown to present itself, though. If someone did not know that they had made someone feel bad, or that something had made someone feel bad, then they wouldn't know how to respond to that, or that they needed to respond to it at all.\n\nu/astronautmyproblem presents an excellent fun fact that it does not even occur to a lot of people, that other people even have a different point of view. So many people are just walking around thinking that we all see and experience things the same way.\n\nThe book is Essentials of Life-Span Development by John Santrock, and it has many resources cited, of course. \n\nEdited: added some words.",
"Most people are born with an innate sense of empathy, though there is individual variation in how empathetic people are [1](_URL_3_). There is some evidence that an individual's level of empathy can be increased, for example there is some evidence that a type of mediation called \"loving kindness meditation\" increases levels of trait empathy [2](_URL_1_), and an interesting recent study found that a video game created to increase empathy was effective in doing so in adolescents [3](_URL_0_), although further study will be needed to see how long the effects of these interventions last. Some people are born with a marked lack of empathy, such as those with a personality disorder known as psychopathy [4](_URL_2_). It is thought that psychopaths can intellectually understand other's emotions, but do not have the same visceral empathetic response that most people exhibit. While cognitive behavioral therapy may help reduce anti-social behaviors in some individuals with psychopathy [4](_URL_4_), there is little evidence that these individuals can be taught to feel empathy afaik.",
"This is an interesting question, because at certain stages in our development, even neurotypical children aren’t great at empathy. Good parenting and teaching helps develop stronger empathy earlier, and you can definitely fuck a child up by not teaching them that other people have feelings or doing it too late, but to a certain degree, *everyone* has to learn and grow into their empathy.",
"Both. Humans have a natural inclination to care about what happens to one another. But experiences and practice can bring out and refine this trait.\n\nThe most empathetic people in my life have been the one's who have been through the worst of it.",
"Most (almost all) humans are born with all the tools necessary to use Empathy.\n\nHowever, most people Choose not to use it very often, because it hinders their ability to take selfish actions"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_neuron"
],
[
"https://youtu.be/HBW5vdhr_PA",
"https://youtu.be/Z-eU5xZW7cU"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-018-0029-6",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6081743/",
"https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130924174331.htm",
"https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02699931.2011.559192",
"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1476179307001553"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
djm68g | why do your eyes get itchy when you’re sleepy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/djm68g/eli5_why_do_your_eyes_get_itchy_when_youre_sleepy/ | {
"a_id": [
"f46ysy5",
"f4888hw"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"I think it's because you forget to blink regularly, which causes them to dry up a bit and that makes them itchy",
"Tired eyes get dry, and rubbing stimulates the lacrimal glands to produce more fluid. \n\n(Stolen from Google)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
40zspu | why don't pcs use arm | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40zspu/eli5why_dont_pcs_use_arm/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyyg8ze",
"cyyhhle"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Laptops and desktops require too much processing power, which ARM processors are not designed for. ARM is primarily designed to be power savvy, so they're awesome in phones and tablets. Intel is slowly getting into the mobile market, but it's laughable at best compared to ARM.\n\nAnother reason is that ARM CPU's have modular designs which allows them to release new processors every six months; that's really fast turn around and great for smaller devices that are built for maybe a two-year lifespan, probably even less. Intel traditionally redesigned the CPU architecture from scratch and then two years later would land that same architecture on a smaller technology, hence the tic-tock release schedules they always advertise. That release schedule is better suited for more powerful machines that typically don't require full refreshes, just incremental upgrades.",
"PCs don't use ARM because PCs are designed to be compatible with the software from earlier PCs. When your CPU first starts up, it's indistinguishable from the 8088 chip used in the first IBM PC back in 1981 until it receives an instruction to enter a more modern mode of operation. The whole ecosystem is based around having hardware that's compatible with existing stuff.\n\nSwitching to ARM would require replacing all the software you use daily. Some of it could easily be rebuilt for ARM but a bunch of other stuff would need to be modified or replaced.\n\nIf all you do is browse the web & work with some documents, you *could* use an ARM system - there's a few on the market. Look at Chromebooks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
btp3gw | why is it impossible to change from first gear to reverse while driving, but not the other way around? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/btp3gw/eli5_why_is_it_impossible_to_change_from_first/ | {
"a_id": [
"ep0utqh",
"ep138av"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"For starters, you shouldn't change from a forward gear to a reverse gear while moving or vice versa. This should be obvious because it causes immense stress to the the entire driveline. You should only change to a gear in the opposite direction when you are stopped.\n\nNow, with that said, I suppose the logic that could be applied to changing from reverse to first while moving is that you're very slowly while in reverse so the stress on the drivetrain isn't AS incredible as it would be if you were reversing at like 30 mph. First gear is usually used to accelerate to a higher speed, so changing direction abruptly while moving fast is going to destroy very expensive things.\n\nIf you want to mention the J-turn, this is possible because the vehicle moves in reverse and turns, at which point the driver either shifts to neutral or disengages the clutch. With the engine and transmission no longer connected, everything is safe. The driver then waits for the vehicle to swing around and start rolling in what is now the forward direction using only the momentum the vehicle had when the driveline was disengaged, which is safe as far as the drivetrain is concerned. Once the vehicle is clearly moving forward, then it's safe to engage a forward gear and proceed.",
"Forward gears have synchros, where reverse gear usually doesn't. Synchros help to synchronise the speed of the output shaft of the gearbox(connected to wheels) to the speed of the input shaft(connected to clutch plate). This helps the gears mesh without grinding when shifting between gears. The reason they are often not found on reverse is that the car is assumed to be stationary when shifting to reverse and thus the output shaft would not be spinning,and the input shaft would stop spinning shortly after you press the clutch in."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
rnb3c | why do most smartphones not have built-in fm receivers? (when they have many other technologies like wifi, gps, 4g, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/rnb3c/eli5_why_do_most_smartphones_not_have_builtin_fm/ | {
"a_id": [
"c476atz",
"c476uy2",
"c478wco",
"c47a5tp"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"This is probably for a number of reasons. For one, people care less about FM radio than before. Second, device manufacturers might have a profit motive in selling audio content and other sources of media rather than FM radio.\n\nThere are some unique complications with FM, though, compared to the other radio technologies in phones. It is on a fairly low frequency, so an effective antenna needs to be relatively large. It is also an analog technology that can be a little bit more complicated to design in than digital communications standards.\n\nIt is very challenging to design many radios close to each other. Mobile phones already typically have, at the very least, a couple of bands of radio for the cellular technology; BlueTooth; and GPS. Many others add near-field communication and WiFi. As you add radios, the chances that some of the radios interfere with or hamper the performance of others increases. This is not insurmountable, but it's already very impressive the number of radios that are put into such a small footprint.",
"Interestingly, there was an [effort](_URL_1_) (Ars Technica link) by lobbying groups to convince congress to mandate inclusion of FM receivers in portable electronic devices. The effort was opposed by a [different group](_URL_0_) of lobbyists.",
"They don't? I guess I've been lucky with my smartphone then.",
"It completely depends on the market. In India and China it's an important feature so manufacturers go out of their way to include it as consumers look for it. In North America, it has so little interest that we've seen some manufacturers disable it because it's cheaper not to test/support than it is to deliver it.\n\nMy personal phone is a Samsung Captivate (Galaxy-S) on AT & T. In tear downs, it has an FM chip, but since so few folks in north america care, they've disabled it via software.\n\nAlso: most FM chips are currently bundled as a BT/FM or BT/FM/WiFi, so ofter footprint isn't that big of an issue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://ce.org/Press/CurrentNews/press_release_detail.asp?id=11945",
"http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/08/radio-riaa-mandatory-fm-radio-in-cell-phones-is-the-future.ars"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ma726 | how can lawyers accept to defend in court some very bad people? i.e.war criminals, genocidal leaders, rapists, pedophiles, serial killers. | For example who would defend Hermann Goring during the Nuremberg trials? How can these lawyers stay professional? How do they live with themselves? Are they all sociopaths with a law degree? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ma726/eli5_how_can_lawyers_accept_to_defend_in_court/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc787ex",
"cc787m2",
"cc788mr",
"cc79rdn",
"cc7a4w4",
"cc7bryi",
"cc7byqa",
"cc7cjw1",
"cc7f8br"
],
"score": [
3,
28,
6,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think you have to divorce your emotions from the process. In the case of Goring he was acting in his capacity as the as the head of the air force. If what he did to London was a war crime then what about the people who bombed Dresden or Tokyo? It does no good to say \"Well, he was the bad guy\" because from his point of view the Allies were the bad guy.\n\nBut even if you want to take some civilian monsters, Jeff Dahmer, Ted Bundy for example, there is always the chance that the government got the wrong guy. Bad convictions happen all the time, even sometimes in high profile cases & every defendant deserves to be defended by someone who will best represent them. ",
"Lawyers who defend unpopular or heinous people, are actually defending that person's rights. If we deny the rights of one person, we invalidate the rights of all people. These lawyers are there to ensure the system of justice in place is upheld.\n\n\nLook at it this way, not everyone accused is guilty. Not everyone who is liked is innocent. While each individual can have an opinion (informed or otherwise) on the supposed guilt of a person on trial, it is up to the jury and judge to determine if, by law, to a reasonable mind, the person is guilty or innocent. For that determination to stick, all laws and judicial rights must be followed. Instead of hating the lawyers who defend monsters, be grateful someone did step up to the plate so that the verdict received isn't refuted because of a lack of representation.\n\n\nWith all that being said, some MF'ers are just greedy and want the press.",
"I can give the answer that anyone who worked at a Public Defender's office (defending alleged rapists, pedophiles, and serial killers) would say:\n\nThe legal system does not function if lawyers are the ones determining guilt. When a client approaches me, I am not in a position to say \"oh, he's guilty, therefore I won't represent him.\" If we allow lawyers to deny access to legal representation on the basis that the lawyer thinks the client is guilty, we're turning lawyers into judge and jury. That's not our job.\n\nWe live with ourselves because the justice system demands that both sides of any controversy are fully represented. We cannot lie, we cannot ask others to lie. All we can do is provide the best argument for our client possible, at the same time that whoever is on the other side is doing the same. And the fundamental assumption of the justice system is that when presented with the two best arguments the truth will out.",
"Because they believe in justice and rule of law.\n\nThe alternative is allowing the gov't to decide people are guilty and pass sentence without a trial. To people who support liberal democracies, that is far more distasteful than defending a monster.\n\nAnd just maybe, they aren't as guilty as you think. Consider a man like Oskar Schindler, a war profiteer who was in bed with the Nazis and who exploited Jews as a source of cheap labor, many of who mysteriously disappeared while working in his factories. It would be quite easy to rush to judgement without hearing his side of the story.",
"You list a massive and varied array of criminal minds, and you somehow question the existence of lawyers to match them?",
"because even criminals deserve a FAIR trial",
"It is not the role of a lawyer to judge that person, it is the role of a Judge. Lawyers must provide the best possible arguments from both sides in order to allow that judge to make the right decision.",
"I have a question related to this. \n\nDo the accused criminals tell their lawyer if they really did it or not? If they don't, do they have to tell lies upon lies to their lawyer as he tries to figure out the best defense? For example, the lawyer decides that he will show that his client wasn't even present at the site of the crime. Does the accused client now have to lie to his lawyer by making up where he was?\n\n",
"They are appointed to those people, and their entire job is to defend people, rather than to accuse.\n\nBut, as to how they remain professional, I haven't the foggiest. There is supposed to be lawyer-client confidentiality, but during some cases, I wonder how they don't put themselves up as a witness and say \"That guy confessed everything to me\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
28s35x | why is it that dash lights in a car seem to last forever, and normal light bulbs "burn out" after a period of time? | There is a similar post about light bulbs burning out but my question is more directed towards the ones that don't such as street lights, signs above business', street lamps etc. Also...(bonus question) what happens when the tube "burns out" in giant TV's such as jumbo-trons in major sporting arena's?
edit:spelling | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28s35x/eli5_why_is_it_that_dash_lights_in_a_car_seem_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cidwgk2"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Okay, well the brightness of a filament bulb depends on the size of the filament and how much voltage you shove through it. The more voltage you run through a filament, the hotter it gets, the more light it produces, and the more fragile it is and shorter the lifespan.\n\nDashboard bulbs run less voltage than normal for a particular filament size, because they don't need to be very bright. ie they are not being 'driven as hard'\n\nAs for street lights, they use a different technology such as sodium vapour (the yellow looking ones) or mercury arc (the bright white ones) which last longer but require special electronics to run them.\n\nJumbotrons are generally made up of a whole bunch of smaller panels (say a foot by a foot) so when a pixel dies (or after a few die, to make it more cost effective to replace) they pull that panel and replace it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2th3wr | how sound waves travel in 3d space | I always see the typical 2D rendering of sound waves going up and down. But how do they fill a 3D space? They are omnidirectional are they not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2th3wr/eli5_how_sound_waves_travel_in_3d_space/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnyzrlv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Picture, instead of the 'rings' you are thinking of from a 2D perspective, spheres instead. Sound radiates out from its source in the form of a sphere if there are no impediments/obstacles to it. Now you may be talking about the waveform, which is *not* a representation in 2D but rather a graph of the frequency and/or loudness of a noise, depending upon the measurement taken."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1tauay | how can the fdic insure a very large amount of investors their money, when something like the "target hack" occurs? | Upwards of 40 Million people are guaranteed their money is safe,through the FDIC. How does this immediately effect the banking system? Does this effect the economy, why or why not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tauay/eli5_how_can_the_fdic_insure_a_very_large_amount/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce639i8",
"ce649b8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The FDIC only protects people's money (up to $100,000 per account) if the bank goes under (like they did in the great depression). If your CC info or your bank account info is compromised and someone takes your money the FDIC does not reimburse you. That is the obligation of the bank, lawyers and possibly the FBI if it's something as large as this target hack.",
"Visa, Mastercard, and the other CC companies have very sophisticated computers that know what and when you buy things. They use this to detect fraud and freeze your account (if the transaction was yours they reactivate the card and update the dataset associated with you). This means fraud is unlikely to go on for long, but if it does, it's the bank's loss not the government's. \n\nIt's always wise to call your credit card company before you travel, their software doesn't always realize your traveling from your purchases and it can be difficult to re-activate your card from the road. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
231h8y | why does hot oil make a sizzling sound when something is put in it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/231h8y/eli5why_does_hot_oil_make_a_sizzling_sound_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgsgqjt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's not the oil, it's the water from whatever you put into it heating rapidly and boiling off."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9yn9h7 | why are cpu speeds measured in gigahertz (ghz) and ram in megahertz (mhz) when they are usually similar? | For example, a CPU like the Intel Core i9 9900k has a base clock speed of 3.6GHz, or 3600MHz. A DDR4 RAM stick (for example) can have an operating speed of 3600MHz, or 3.6GHz. Why, then, do we measure CPU and RAM frequencies in different terms when they are already both similar? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9yn9h7/eli5_why_are_cpu_speeds_measured_in_gigahertz_ghz/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea2nwad",
"ea2o5ut"
],
"score": [
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Up through the 1980's and 1990's all CPU's were measured in MHz. In the late 1990's Intel and AMD were in hot competition to be the first to break the 1GHz barrier on CPU speeds. Once that was achieved, pretty much all CPU speeds were measured in GHz instead of MHz.",
"It was mostly marketing. In the days when CPUs started achieving GHz speeds, the “GHz” portion was heavily, heavily advertised as being ultra crazy fast! Look we don’t even measure it like those other puny CPUs! When GHz speeds came out, the CPU market was a fierce advertising space. \n\nRAM on the other side took far longer to achieve GHz speeds, and by then, convention of RAM speeds was pretty established to be described in MHz, such as DDR3–800, DDR3-1600 etc. RAM doesn’t get the kind of marketing that Intel and AMD throw at their CPUs and few consumers even understand (or care) what speed their RAM is. There’s actually a different way to spec RAM as well, but it’s lesser upfront/customer facing than the one above and generally not important except to some heavy enthusiasts. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3l10ml | how does humblebundle work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l10ml/eli5_how_does_humblebundle_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv28dvu"
],
"score": [
25
],
"text": [
"Each customer pays whatever he feels like, lets say 10 < insert currency here > . That amount is distributed among all of the game creators + some charities and and some money go to huble bundle itself. \n\nFor the most part it's a win-win-win-win situation.\n\nFirst win : you. You win by getting a butload of games for fraction of the cost.\n\nSecond win : the developers. This is sometimes not such a big win, but some bundles could generate 10's of thousands of (~65% of total sales divided by the number of developers in the current bundle) < currency goes here > for each developer for games which otherwise may not sell so well or to serve as a sort of a kickstarter to an upcoming game.\n\nThird win : the charities. Charities like \"Charity Water\", get ~15% out of every purchase .\n\nFourth win : Humble Bundle by default they seem to get ~20% of each purchase you make.\n\nN.B. Please take into consideration that all the estimates above might differ as you are able to change which party gets what amount of < currrency > \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3k36w6 | what is mustard gas and why its use by isis is news? | So some articles about it and was curious. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k36w6/eli5_what_is_mustard_gas_and_why_its_use_by_isis/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuucxws",
"cuucz66",
"cuud6mt",
"cuudj8y"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Mustard Gas is a chemical weapon that burns upon contact. If it touches the skin it'll cause painful blisters. However, its main problem is from being breathed in where it'll damage the lungs causing a person to drown in their own fluids. If not killed by the gas the person faces lifelong problems of DNA mutation and cancer. \n\nTheir use in warfare is banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention. They're a Weapon of Mass Destruction. \n\nEdit - Hitler was wounded in a mustard gas attack during WW1 causing temporary blindness. ",
"Mustard gas is sulfur mustards and was used during ww1. It is a chemical weapon and has since been banned during wartime engagements. Its way of killing is gruesome to say the least. That's why it is making news. It hasn't been used for a long while and breaks a lot of agreements about chemical weapons. ",
"A mustard agent isn't really a gas, it's a viscous liquid that is sprayed, and it has nothing in common with mustard other than the smell. The original mustard gas is a sulfur with two ethylenes with a chloride at the tip, like Cl-CC-S-CC-Cl (omitting hydrogens). The sulfur can attack the chloride end so that the chloride is lost. Then, your body can attack this thing that forms. So, if your proteins attack it, you get misfolding, damaged proteins. If your DNA attacks it, it can't uncoil properly, which kills the cell. So you get a lot of dead cell (it's \"cytotoxic\") that break down and cause blisters. Which is not good in, let's say, inside the lungs.\n\nAny other chemical with the pattern -S-CC-Cl, -N-CC-Cl or -O-CC-Cl can do the same. Usually a mixture of Cl-CC-S-CC-Cl and Cl-CC-S-CC-S-CC-Cl is used, other options exist.\n\nAssad's Syria had stockpiles of mustard gas bombs, because they feared Israel would attack them. They were supposed to be destroyed already. It's news because ISIS has been able to steal them. It's rarely fatal but does cause a lot of unnecessary pain that can't be justified even militarily. For ISIS, it is just about terrorism, or causing fear.",
"It's a breach if international laws of war. The Geneva Protocol (not to be confused with the Geneva Conventions) is a treaty signed by a majority of countries that prohibits the use of chemical and biological weapons in times of international armed conflict.\n\nMustard gas is a pretty serious chemical weapon as others here have described. Ever have people tell you NOT to mix cleaning chemicals? It's because you could accidentally make something similar to mustard gas."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5y4z42 | why do atms eat cards? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5y4z42/eli5_why_do_atms_eat_cards/ | {
"a_id": [
"den7s2f"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In case you are using a stolen card, they don't give it back."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3efo2l | can anyone go to the moon (if they were able to) or is it like some sort of private property of a government ? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3efo2l/eli5can_anyone_go_to_the_moon_if_they_were_able/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctegk6k",
"ctegk8m",
"ctegnla"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"The outer space treaty makes it essentially impossible for anyone to claim anything in outer space as their property, unless they put it there. \n\nSo yes, you could go to the moon if you wanted.",
"No one owns the moon. So you could go there is you wanted to. However I would imagine you need to permits to build a rocket that powerful.",
"You can only lay claim with enough military power to defend your claim. That his how the world works, that is how space will work."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.