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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
25jyzq | how do the snapchat "hack" apps work without a snapchat api? | How can they interact with another app on iOS without needing API access? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25jyzq/eli5_how_do_the_snapchat_hack_apps_work_without_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"chhwo39"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They are jailbroken devices, with full file system access."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3tofif | why do dogs always seem hungry? | Or at least up for a treat? Like, they may have just had food but if someone is eating something a dog will stand there and look at you waiting for a piece. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tofif/eli5_why_do_dogs_always_seem_hungry/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx7v47s"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"Dogs evolved from wolves whose food supply was unreliable -- thus they would eat at any opportunity, because it was never certain where their next meal would come from.\n\nAlso, they evolved to live in packs, where if you didn't eat something right away, one of your mates would eat it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
kskd4 | - how does one cash in on stock market crashes, rescissions and depressions? | I Just watched the [video](_URL_0_) of the analist on BBC talking about how the stock market is going to crash hard and how he's been dreaming of it for a long time. He mentioned that if you had the proper setup you could make a S-ton of money when the market crashes...
ELI5 How. How do I do it? How do I set it up, and how do I make money if/when this happens? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kskd4/eli5_how_does_one_cash_in_on_stock_market_crashes/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2mvb3o",
"c2mvdnr",
"c2mvb3o",
"c2mvdnr"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm assuming he's talking about shorting stock. When you short a stock you borrow the stock from someone else and you sell it. After a (short) period of time, you buy the stock at the current market price and give it back to him. This way if you think the stock is going to go down, you sold it high and bought it back low. ",
"One way is to bet on the market crashing.",
"I'm assuming he's talking about shorting stock. When you short a stock you borrow the stock from someone else and you sell it. After a (short) period of time, you buy the stock at the current market price and give it back to him. This way if you think the stock is going to go down, you sold it high and bought it back low. ",
"One way is to bet on the market crashing."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bbc-speechless-trader-tells-truth-collapse-comingand-goldman-rules-world"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1s36t5 | how is it possible for the universe to stop expanding? | According to this thread (_URL_0_), once we reach a point of maximum entropy, the universe stops expanding? I cant quite grasp this concept, as there should be something on the other side if that makes sense. I suppose I could give a bad analogy, like if I was in a room and a single wall split the room in half, and the side I was standing on was where the universe stops expanding, the otherside would still nonetheless exist, right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s36t5/eli5how_is_it_possible_for_the_universe_to_stop/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdthl1s",
"cdtip9e"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Energy cannot be created or destroyed only converted between different types. For example when you put the brakes on in your car the energy the car has from moving called kinetic energy is turned into heat energy, known as thermal energy, and maybe some sound as well, which is another form of energy. This heat and sound will keep spreading out until it is infinitely weak. In the same way the kinetic energy stars planets and any other parts of the universe that are expanding have will eventually, over a massive amount of time, be converted to other types and spread until they too are infinitely weak and everything is stationary.",
"In actuality, the Universe isn't actually expanding. It's actually making more space within itself. Think about it like this. A room with four walls and the space inside the room is getting bigger, there's nothing on the outside pushing on the walls, it's unlimited. To say the Universe is expanding wouldn't make sense because the Universe, already being everything, would be expanding into itself... since it's already everything.\n\nSo really the planets and galaxies aren't receding from each other, more space is just being made.\n\nPretty cool stuff. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1s2ou3/if_energy_cannot_be_created_and_the_universe_is/"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
48aabv | why bolt action shotguns and pump actions rifle stopped being a thing? | I know both those things do exist and are at least kinda viable, as there were commercial models that were successful. I also know that bolt-action became and still is the go-to operation mode for non semi-auto "one shot at a time" rifles, and pump-action to shotguns. What are the reasons? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48aabv/eli5_why_bolt_action_shotguns_and_pump_actions/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0i0u1l"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The reason the bolt action shotgun fell out of favor is because a rifle action on a shotgun is non-intuitive. Shotguns are typically used for waterfowl or upland hunting, where snap shots are common, and reloads need to be rapid. A pump allows you to keep both hands in position and keep the shotgun shouldered.\n\nBolt action rifles by design, are very simple machines, typically rifle shots are one aimed shot, not a snap shot. Also, many people shoot prone, and the bolt is the easiest action to manipulate in that position.\n\nThe pump action on a rifle is a complicated mechanism, and it is about as easy to just make a semi-auto action. Many people prefer an AR-15 action over a pump action on their rifle, much easier for both hunting and target shooting in all positions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
bsnuw7 | unitary executive theory | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bsnuw7/eli5_unitary_executive_theory/ | {
"a_id": [
"eoolzjg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's the idea that the president of the United States has unlimited or nearly unlimited powers to control the executive branch of the federal government. There are different interpretations as to how far this power actually goes. The most extreme interpretation give the president near dictatorial power, especially in times of war or crisis, and that nothing the president does can ever be illegal by virtue of simply being the president."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1dzj9k | what's the point of a silent letter? | Like in ghost, Django, freljord etc.... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dzj9k/eli5_whats_the_point_of_a_silent_letter/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9vclef",
"c9vd5s5",
"c9vfp0y",
"c9vfqoj"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"While it may not get spoken itself, it modifies the pronunciation of nearby letters.",
"These usually come up because pronunciation changes faster than spelling. Furthermore, it's possible for a language to adopt the spelling of a word from one parent language, but the pronunciation from another - this is the case with the word \"colonel,\" which came up recently here on reddit.\n\nSo, the point of silent letters would be to retain enough of the parent word to be recognizable while allowing the pronunciation to change.",
"You play league huh?",
"As a side note, this bugged me in the movie: the D in Django is not silent. It's just that the J sound already contains a D (the phonetic notation for the J sound is /dʒ/). Just like you wouldn't say \"letuh-ter\" for letter, you don't say \"Duh-jango\" for Django."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
321y4j | instead of all the costly and/or inhumane methods of death penalty execution, why don't they just open convicts' veins and let them bleed out safely and hygienically? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/321y4j/eli5_instead_of_all_the_costly_andor_inhumane/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq735s1",
"cq73afr"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You think opening their veins is the humane way ? Why would it be more humane than putting them \"to sleep\" ? Plus it's waaaaay more messy.",
"Mainly inhumane is judge as \"if they feel pain or not\". Lethal injection is the most humane we have so far. However, the convict can have a reaction to the injection. Similar to a reaction of a shot or allergie."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
40pso7 | when referencing a black hole and speaking of matter, why is it referred to as information? | I love science, and space! I love learning new things, I try to learn new things! Unfortunately I was unable to ever find information about [information](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40pso7/eli5_when_referencing_a_black_hole_and_speaking/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyw7l28",
"cyw7lm9",
"cyw7wml",
"cywao2s",
"cyweuv6"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
15,
14,
2
],
"text": [
"My understanding is that everything in the universe undergoes change in a way where effect can be traced to cause, such that one could \"piece things back together\" step by step, given the theoretical computing power to model the universe.\n \nWith regards to black holes, the question remains whether this linkage is preserved; whether any matter that enters and undergoes could ever theoretically be pieced back together beyond the event horizon, even with such computing power.",
"If you research entropy, you may find something that makes sense to you. Because we can measure black holes in entropy, and entropy and information are equivalent (long story) we can therefore measure black holes in information. ",
"Matter is not the same as information. If I have a rock and I make it vanish, I've destroyed matter. But I haven't necessarily destroyed information. I might remember the rock. Or maybe I've forgotten about it, but there's still light moving away from it that someone far away could see to tell that it's a rock. Or it has in some other way caused the universe to be in a different state than it would be if it had been anything other than that particular rock.\n\nNow imagine I have a rock and I vaporize it. Then I erase everyone's memories and change everything so that the universe is completely identical to what it would be had that been something other than that rock. The matter's still there. But I destroyed the information.\n\nIt's generally accepted that both of these are impossible. But general relativity suggests that black holes should be able to destroy information. Sure people would remember that you tossed a rock into a black hole, but maybe that rock was radioactive, and one of the atoms decayed just before it fell in. Is there any way to distinguish a universe where that atom decayed from one in which it did not?",
"There is a scientific principle that information cannot be destroyed.\n\nI might throw a book on a fire and let it burn down to ashes, but in principle, I could take those ashes, and all the surrounding molecules of gas, and deduces from them the original book.\n\nYou can't do this with something that has passed into a black hole, however. So either the principle of information conservation is wrong, or we don't completely understand black holes. ",
"Information is a bit tricky to understand, lets start with the simplest kind of information that i can imagine, a photon it has a wavelength thats it, that is the only information that it really carries with it. If that photon is captured by a black hole the information about the photon is gone if we didnt measure it before hand, this ties together with quantum phyisics after this.\n\nLets look at a bit more complex information, imagine that you have a machine that builds an object and the information about how it was built is not saved or retrivable at all, it was made in a room without light and the machine worked as a true random. And all the information about that object is that object (whatever it might be) and you put it in a bag and toss the bag into a black hole all the information about that object seems to be lost to us, there is no way for us to retrive any information about that object.\n\nAnd according to physics information can not be destroyed, and physicists are trying to solve this problem and we seem to come to another problem when we do either we have to accept that information can be destroyed which opens up a whole host of new problems, or that locality is not real (IE things that are arbitrary far apart can interact with each other without having to abide by time or the speed of light)\n\nWhichever we try to choose we seem to break physics."
]
} | [] | [
"https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
69jvma | how does sitting close to the tv affect my eyesight? it's not like i have to strain to see what i'm watching because i'm nice and close. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69jvma/eli5_how_does_sitting_close_to_the_tv_affect_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh76060",
"dh7609q",
"dh762cp"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It doesn't.\n\"Contrary to the popular myth, sitting too close to a TV will not damage your eyes but it may cause eyestrain. Children can focus at close distance without eyestrain better than adults. Therefore children often develop the habit of holding reading materials close to their eyes or sitting right in front of the television. There is no evidence that this damages the eyes either in children or adults. With children, this habit usually diminishes as they grow older.\"\n\n_URL_0_]",
"I don't think it does. It affects the view of everyone else in the room when a kid sits in front of the tv. And parents use that as an excuse to make you move. ",
"It affects your eyesight the same as reading a book or staring at a wall at close range. Your eyes don't have to refocus for a long time, so they get lazy and decide they won't change their focus from the distance you're used to.\n\nAlso, needing to sit close in order to see without straining is a sign that you should have glasses already. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.aao.org/eye-health/ask-ophthalmologist-q/can-close-tv-viewing-damage-eyes"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
1pquyg | that feeling you get in the pit of your stomach when looking over the side of a tall building. | Or something else that scares you. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pquyg/eli5_that_feeling_you_get_in_the_pit_of_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd5244l",
"cd52wpm"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's the fight or flight response. When you encounter something that is frightening or potentially threatening, your body releases hormones like adrenaline to help you prepare to deal with it. That feeling is a side effect of the hormones.",
"l'appel du vide yo"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8a9q66 | how do fashion designers gain fame when they start out | How did fashion designers like Ralph Lauren and Yves saint Laurent gain fame when they started out? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8a9q66/eli5_how_do_fashion_designers_gain_fame_when_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwx5wya",
"dwxb486"
],
"score": [
5,
11
],
"text": [
"By being rich and spending lots of money around other rich people in places that are rich...\n\nYou see, the fashion industry is a sham. A showcase for the elites to flaunt their wealth with outlandish, impractical and exotic wares that are only desirable because they say so. ",
"You know how people always laugh at those really outlandish outfits at fashion shows that nobody would ever wear? That's how fashion designers get famous. They make unbelievable, over the top outfits to grab attention, then once they have it they use their renown to sell things people actually wear like jeans or t-shirts."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4jvv3k | how do cultures develop in the first place and what defines a culture? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jvv3k/eli5_how_do_cultures_develop_in_the_first_place/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3a1kc4"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"A little like evolution. Throw shit at a wall until something sticks.\n\nThe collective social practices, behaviour and etiquettes of a demographic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
k9091 | explain like i'm 5 how moisturizer works. | It kind of baffles me and I'm not convinced it does anything beneficial for your skin. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k9091/explain_like_im_5_how_moisturizer_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2if383",
"c2if383"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"All it really does is make your skin LOOK better. Moisturizers make it easier for water to get into your skin, and it brings the water already in your skin to the surface so it looks pretty and feels soft. \nOnce you wash off the moisturizers though, they lose effect. Some stay behind, but if you stop using moisturizers (as with any other \"beauty\" product) you lose the results.",
"All it really does is make your skin LOOK better. Moisturizers make it easier for water to get into your skin, and it brings the water already in your skin to the surface so it looks pretty and feels soft. \nOnce you wash off the moisturizers though, they lose effect. Some stay behind, but if you stop using moisturizers (as with any other \"beauty\" product) you lose the results."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7twjfp | pros and cons of using an ionizer on an air purifier? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7twjfp/eli5_pros_and_cons_of_using_an_ionizer_on_an_air/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtfr9fg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Charged particles in the air a) stick to things (like walls, upholstery, you) and also raise the static electricity level for the particles.\n\nIf the air is being ionized in too great a concentration, you also run the risk of that ionization hitting your lungs, causing those larger particles to lodge in your lungs instead of getting expelled again.\n\nSeems to methat a two-phase ionizer would fix this in a filtration system, but I've never heard of anyone doing that (applying electrons to the particles at the first filter, and then stripping electrons at the next)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
pkv94 | why youtube videos always seem to get stuck at 306 view count. | Is there a reason for this? 306 seems rather arbitrary. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pkv94/eli5_why_youtube_videos_always_seem_to_get_stuck/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3q65nr"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"When a video is getting a lot of views in a short period of time (like right when someone popular uploads a video) it stops, the number they use is about 300, so when it gets to many views in that short period of time, youtube stops counting views for a bit, and makes sure all the views are from different people, and not bots or anything like that. This is to stop people from unfairly getting views on their video.\n\n**TL;DR** It is to check if the views are real people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
16fhek | nasal congestion | So I have bronchitis right now, and as I'm laying in bed trying to fall asleep I have a few questions. I get the premise of why it happens, but I'm more asking about the plumbing I guess. Why is it that when I lay in a certain position it sometimes clears up? Why does that "specific position" change over the course of the day/night? Also, could someone direct me to a diagram of the sinuses and nasal canals? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16fhek/eli5_nasal_congestion/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7vj7j1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The majority of nasal congestion is caused by swelling of blood vessels in your nasal passages. This expands the flesh and blocks off the airway. The reason it changes when you lie in different positions is that the blood will collect in your tissue based on gravity. The reason it changes over time is that there is a 2-3 hour nasal cycle where one nostril will swell while the other contracts and then reverses. This cycle is normal and happens even when you're not sick. You notice it more when you're sick though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7kmms8 | how can some countries that rely on resource extraction and agriculture, like australia for instance, be really rich, but others, like say zambia, be really poor? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kmms8/eli5_how_can_some_countries_that_rely_on_resource/ | {
"a_id": [
"drfitnm",
"drfjj3y",
"drfjww7",
"drfk6zl"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is nothing inherently wrong with resource extraction and agriculture. Those things can be done efficiently or inefficiently. The nation of Rhodesia which changed its name to Zimbabwe, used to have very profitable farms which exported food and provided a basis of the national economy. However the farmers were white colonists so they had to go, and their farms were forcibly handed over to traditional subsistence farmers. As a result the economy of Zimbabwe was destroyed. Such is the legacy of the great and recently deposed Robert Mugabe.\n\nThe wealth of any nation depends first and foremost upon an educated population. If you do not have that, you have nothing.",
"It mostly has to do with who owns the resources and how the income is distributed. In some counties, the income goes to good wages and tax income that is employed t benefit the country. In other cases, the income is extracted by outside companies and/or funneled into accounts for the personal benefit of those in power.",
"There is no simple answer because every country is different. Let's look at the two countries you mentioned though. A few key differences right off the bat:\n\nZambia is landlocked, Australia isn't. That makes it a lot easier for Australia to get its goods to international markets.\n\nAdditionally, this means it loses out on having access to ocean based resources, something Australia makes a significant amount of profit from.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nZambia also has a significant AIDs crises going on, with roughly 17% of its adult population having HIV/AIDs, which comes with significant costs of its own.",
" > How can some countries that rely on resource extraction and agriculture, like Australia for instance, be really rich, but others, like say Zambia, be really poor?\n\nWhen you are considering something as complex as countries it is difficult to point at one thing to explain their relative economic states. However if you had to sum things up it would be this: Infrastructure.\n\nIt is one thing to have natural resources in a country and another thing entirely to be able to access them effectively. Suppose you can find a rich metal deposit in Zambia and want to start a mine. What do you need?\n\nYou are going to need mining equipment, basically all of which you will be able to source from outside the country. No problems there. But when that equipment arrives it will be on a boat and they can't very well just push hundreds of tons of mining equipment off the boat onto a beach. You will need a fairly well equipped port to offload the cargo. Then you will need vehicles to transport that equipment over roads... oh, you also need a network of high quality roads going everywhere you need to travel! Not only will you need them to get your equipment in but you will need them to carry what you mine out. In fact you probably need roads as well as a rail network for the inexpensive movement of heavy cargo both to and from those ports. And let us not forget that Zambia is land locked so those roads and rail networks are going to need to pass through Mozambique, Tanzania, or Angola with the ports in one or more of those countries.\n\nYou are also going to need utilities such as electricity and water. Did you plan to build a power plant and water purification plant as part of your mining operation? Well you probably need to because those certainly aren't available either. With all that you still need workers for your mine; trained workers capable of operating your expensive heavy machinery, not spear-wielding tribal natives. You could eventually educate them of course but now what are you doing, building schools? Where do your workers live, what do they eat, where do they obtain their various necessities? You need hotels, apartments, restaurants, convenience stores, shopping malls, clinics and hospitals, mechanics, banks, etc.!\n\nYou just wanted a mine and you have to build an entire city out of nothing! And what precisely are you going to get out of this enormous effort? The natives are going to want to govern themselves of course, and there is a good chance you are going to be called out for colonialism when the workers are paying to live in your hotels, eat from your restaurants, buy goods from your stores, electricity from your power plant, water from your purification facility, drive on your roads, etc. Might they rebel and seize all that stuff for themselves, stealing your mine and infrastructure for their own use? Of course they would, of course they **did**!\n\nSo outside investors look at such situations and say \"Fuck that!\" which leaves the locals to figure all that out themselves while their politicians nearly universally are corrupt and fleecing what wealth exists from the continent."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://theconversation.com/fishing-is-worth-more-than-jobs-and-profits-to-australias-coastal-towns-67053"
],
[]
] |
||
bw406y | when suspects are being interviewed, why are they advised by their lawyer to say “no comment”? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bw406y/eli5_when_suspects_are_being_interviewed_why_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"epuynqr",
"epuywbr",
"epv0m5m"
],
"score": [
14,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Literally anything you say can be used against you. You wont help yourself by speaking to the police in any way.",
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do say can be used in evidence. Evidence against you, that is.",
"As a defense attorney, I advise my clients only to speak to cops 1) if I’m in the room, and 2) if there’s an agreement for us to get something beneficial out of it.\n\nDetectives are trained interrogators and are often very good at twisting a person’s words. Plus, the burden of proof is on the State, so why potentially help them do their job (which is ultimately trying to convict you of a crime)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cn30wo | what does statistically significant mean? | If the p < 0.05, what does this mean?!
For some reason I just cannot understand this concept. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cn30wo/eli5_what_does_statistically_significant_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"ew6f963",
"ew6gg1k",
"ew6gl84",
"ew6ktte",
"ew6tfho",
"ew71cc0"
],
"score": [
6,
68,
23,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Go get a coin. Flip it a few times. Imagine that it comes up tails three times in a row. You cannot say, from your test, that the coin will always come up tails, because your sample size is too small. Your three coin flips are not statistically significant; your sample size is too small. That's one simple example. Now flip the coin a thousand times. You get 501 heads, 499 tails. The deviation is not statistically significant because the deviation from the predicted result is too small. If you got 999 heads and 1 tail, that would be statistically significant. The idea that p < 0.05 makes results statistically significant is actually a bit controversial, so don't take it as gospel.",
"It means \"it's very unlikely this happened by chance\".\n\nTake a coin, and throw it into the air. It can either land heads or tails. If it's a fair coin, the probabilities are 50/50. Half the time it's going to be heads, half tails.\n\nHow likely are you to get heads twice in a row? 0.5 * 0.5 = 25%\n\nHow likely are you to get heads 3 times in a row? 0.5 * 0.5 * 0.5 = 12.5%\n\nAt some fuzzy point that's really quite arbitrary we just decide \"Well, it's came up heads 100 times in a row. That's very, very unlikely to happen by chance, so it must be that the coin is rigged to fall on heads\".\n\nThe \"p < 0.05\" is just a way to say \"the probability of this happening by chance is below 5%\", and somebody decided that a 5% risk of being wrong because things happened to align just right is acceptable.",
"Let's say you want to study if men and women have the same average height (we know the answer, but it is just an example). You measure the height of 10 men and 10 women and calculate the average.\n\nIn general your averages won't be the same even if men and women have the same average height. You might have picked a few very tall men, or got some very small women, or whatever. If you see a difference, how do you know if it is an actual difference between the groups and not just a random fluctuation in your study?\n\nYou calculate \"how likely am I to see a difference at least as large as observed *if the average height is the same*\". This is called a p-value. If that result is something like 60% (p=0.6) then your study is not conclusive. The difference you see might be real but it could also just have been random chance. If the answer is 10%, it is still quite possible that it was random chance without a real effect behind it. If the answer is 0.00000001%, then you are quite confident that the averages are indeed different.\n\nWhat people should do: Just give the observed difference and the expected amount of random fluctuation, leave the interpretation to others.\n\nWhat is often done, unfortunately: People look if that chance is below 5%, and if yes claim there would be a real effect and call it p < 0.05.\n\nThere are a few problems with that approach. One is publication bias: If you find something where you can calculate p < 0.05 then you are more likely to get the result published. But we know p < 0.05 happens by chance with 5% probability even if there is no real effect. So you don't just publish about things that are real, you also publish 5% of all other things and falsely claim they would be real.\n\nIt gets even worse: Typically studies don't start with a single question (like the height difference between men and women). If you also record the age of people you can look for a height difference in many different age groups. Record their favorite color and you can look if there is a height difference only for people loving blue, or red, or whatever. Each of these options has a 5% risk to be falsely claimed as significant difference. Look in enough places and you are guaranteed to find a few of these, even if there is no real difference. [Here is a comic illustrating this](_URL_0_).",
"Means: less than 1 in 20 (5%) odds that I'm mistaken in this assumption.\n\nBecause coincidences DO happen, you can never be completely certain.\n\nBut statistics and probabilities do have this built in:\n\nOut of 100 research pieces you see, with that p < 0,05, you would get 95-96 right, but you'd expect some 4-5 of them to be wrong. And you don't know which.",
"This following answer isn't really ELI5 but I've tried to keep with the spirit of it because to be honest, just looking at the responses here, clearly there are a lot of people there who think they know what a p-value is, but don't actually.\n\nThis 'p < 0.05' thing comes up in an area of statistics called *hypothesis testing*. For instance, when you flip a coin, the probability of heads should be 0.5 (if the coin is fair). But we may have flipped a coin 1,000 times and only got 20 heads. So we ask ourselves, \"Is it true that the actual probability is 0.5? Is my coin fair?\"\n\nWe would expect that the coin is fair, so the probability of heads is 0.5 (or 50%). This is called the *null hypothesis*. It is what we will test against. We are saying here that **if the null hypothesis is true**, the fact that we got 20 heads out of 1,000 trials is just because of probability and chance. Further, if we flipped the coin 1,000 times more we'd probably get closer to 500 heads. If we actually got 502, no biggie, because that's just probability and chance at work anyway. Again, assuming the null hypothesis is true (that is, the coin is fair).\n\nThis belief we have (i.e. the null hypothesis) seems quite logical to us, so we want only very, very good evidence to reject it. What is our evidence?\n\nWe construct what is called a *test statistic*, which (skipping some statistics) allows us to compare our hypothesised probability of heads (0.5) with our observed probability of heads (0.02 after 1,000 trials). Now, **if the coin is fair** (i.e. the null hypothesis is true), the probability that we flip a coin a 1,000 times and get 20 heads **or less** has probability *p,* which is called the p-value.\n\nNow, at what level do we want to chop it off? By convention, if our observed result (or worse) has less than 5% chance of happening (i.e. p < 0.05), then we will reject the null hypothesis because our observed result is *statistically significant*. What does this mean for us? It means we *reject* the null hypothesis. In our example, we say, \"This coin is biased. It is an unfair coin.\"\n\nAs an example: if we actually conducted the test I mentioned above, **if the coin was fair**, the probability we would get 20 heads **or less** after 1,000 trials is around 0.000001. Hence, our p-value is 0.000001 < 0.05, hence it is *statistically significant*.",
"This is a difficult concept to explain simply but it goes something like this.\n\nLet's say you want to know if carrots cause weight loss. One way you might test this is by sorting people into two groups, where one group eats their normal diet with carrots and the other without. Then after so much time, you measure how much the people's weights have changed.\n\nYou'll get some average change in weight between these two groups and statistical analysis shows p < 0.05. The thing is, you don't really know if it was carrots that caused the weight loss and it could just be random chance. Maybe the people who ate carrots had otherwise healthier diets, had a more active lifestyle, or a million other factors. \n\nWhat p means is that, *if the results were distributed* ***randomly*** *between the two groups*, then the results you observed had a less than 5% chance to appear. As this is such a low chance you can say with some certainty that the results weren't random and that carrots did indeed have some effect. However, your results may still be affected by chance, which is why the lower p is the more certain you can be.\n\nIf you want a clear explanation, I recommend [this video](_URL_0_).\n\nHope this helps!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://xkcd.com/882/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/3MRHcYtZjFY?t=730"
]
] |
|
bk25ay | what’s the difference between a bionic human and a cyborg? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bk25ay/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_a_bionic_human/ | {
"a_id": [
"emd85n9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on the work of fiction you're referring to, but generally:\n From Wikipedia\n\n > The term cyborg is not the same thing as bionic, biorobot or android; it applies to an organism that has restored function or enhanced abilities due to the integration of some artificial component or technology that relies on some sort of feedback.[\n\nBasically what this means is that a cyborg is part machine, and the machine influences the organism's behavior, as well as responds to it.\n\nThink of the Borg in Star trek. Biological and mechanical components, but the mechanical components dictate the individuals actions.\n\nAs far as bionics, imagine you lose an arm, and replace it with a machine arm that responds to your neural impulses. That machine arm isnt influencing you're behavior, it's a slave to your will. If you replace every piece of yourself with machine components, those components don't influence you"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9uo10s | america's midterm election? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9uo10s/eli5_americas_midterm_election/ | {
"a_id": [
"e95m8ag",
"e95mbtn",
"e95nb8j"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Every two years, the entire House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate is up for election.\n\nIn addition, states and cities/counties hold elections every year or multiple of years to fill state legislature/executive/judicial/miscellaneous spots and ask referendums questions.",
"This is what as known as a Midterm election, because it falls in the middle of the President’s term.\n\nAll 435 seats in the lower house of Congress, the House of Representatives, are up for election.\n\n1/3 of the seats in the upper house of Congress, the Senate, are up for election. \n\nIn the States, Governorships and State Legislature seats are up for election as well.\n\n",
"Presidents get elected to 4 year terms, so their election is a Presidential election.\n\nSenators get elected to staggered 6 year terms, so 1/3 are up for election every 2 years.\n\nRepresentatives get elected every 2 years.\n\nSo in a midterm election is a non-Presidential election, that occurs 2 years before or after a Presidential election. All Representatives and 1/3 of Senators are up for election."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
66nh3d | why would intel be interested in making "inferior" 14nm chips, if qualcomm has apparently been making 10nm chips? | Seems like Intel would want to get more transistors on a chip the same size. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66nh3d/eli5_why_would_intel_be_interested_in_making/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgjw2yh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Intel can make 10nm chips. Setting up a new fab is expensive so they have to sell something on the old process before they retire it and spend a billing dollars refitting the fab. Desktop and server chips are high margin parts so they get the new process. Mobile chips get the hand-me-downs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
140oq2 | what does it mean for a sports game to be 'blacked out'? | How come channels such as ESPN or CBS often has both college and professional sports games 'blacked out' in certain areas? Why do they do this and why is it sometimes only blacked out in certain areas (i.e.- the East/West coast or a specific state)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/140oq2/what_does_it_mean_for_a_sports_game_to_be_blacked/ | {
"a_id": [
"c78th9k",
"c78wb7l"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The NFL has a policy that says that if a home game is not sold out within 72 hours of kickoff, no channel which broadcasts less than 75 miles from the stadium can show the game. It's to force people to either shell for tickets to the game, or for cable (both of which the NFL makes money on).\n\n",
"It's usually because another network owns the broadcasting rights for that market. For example, ESPN may pick up a Phillies - Red Sox game for \"Wednesday Night Baseball\" and broadcast it nationally. However, the Phillies and Red Sox both have local cable channels that own the rights to all games in the local market. So ESPN is not allowed to broadcast the game in either Philadelphia or Boston. So everywhere else in the country you can watch the game on ESPN, but in Philadelphia and Boston the game will be on the respective local network. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2dojxd | how do signatures hold up in court? | Like, idk about you guys but my signature changes all the time (sometimes I just make the letters different and shit) and I don't think it would be possibly to 'verify' one of my sigs by comparing it others. So how do signatures (let's say on a contract or something) hold up in court? Couldn't you just deny it if you signed anything and claim you never signed it? How would they prove that you did?
TL;DR why do signatures mean anything when you can't really prove that someone actually signed something without playing he said/she said | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dojxd/eli5_how_do_signatures_hold_up_in_court/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjri2on",
"cjrkcu3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Cause you'd be lying under oath if you said you didnt sign it. \n\nWhat's to prevent you from doing that? Nothing. Just consequences",
"The purpose of a signature is to prove that someone physically interacted with a legal document. Imagine walking around with a contract to sell a baseball for $1000. You walk up to each person and ask them, \"Will you buy a baseball for $1000?\" and you show them the contract. Suddenly, one of them says, \"Sure!\" \n\nLater, that person decides they don't want to pay you $1000 for your baseball. So you take them to court and you tell the judge, \"See? This is the contract I showed them and that they agreed to.\" From the judges standpoint, there's not much that makes your interaction with the guy who said \"yes\" different than all the random people who turned you down.\n\nIn other words, a signature is just a way to show that someone was consciously aware that they were entering into an agreement... and they show that awareness by making a mark on the document.\n\nAnd that's a big point to this too: It just needs to be a mark. I can agree to a contract with a simple swipe of a pencil... and so-long as I intended that swipe to be my signature, then it is my signature. \n\nWhen it comes to \"proving it,\" this opens a can of worms. Perjury (lying under oath) is a serious offense with serious consequences. If I decide to back out of paying you $1,000 for a ball after I signed a contract that I'd buy it... it isn't worth $1,000 to risk lying, especially since circumstantial evidence can be used to prove it was, in fact, my signature or that I signed it.\n\nWhen the amount of money makes it worth it to some people to lie, then forensic analysts may be called in to check the signature for authenticity. In these situations, it is worth it to require more than just a signature from the opposing party. It's why there is so much paperwork for big deals... you're trying to make layers of redundancy to show that everyone is in agreement and reduce any chances that someone tries to act like they never agreed to the contract."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
35enqi | why don't developers in california, and other drought-stricken areas of the u.s., have to include solar panels and drought-resistant landscaping, as well as water-efficient appliances, in all new buildings? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35enqi/eli5_why_dont_developers_in_california_and_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr3ot20",
"cr3p0gg",
"cr3p2xf",
"cr3usss",
"cr3xphq",
"cr3zgeb"
],
"score": [
5,
46,
4,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they don't have to. France just made it a law that industrials area must have solar. Also, hiring a construction company to build a home actually doesn't cost that much, they certainly don't make a million off of building a family home.",
"Because the impact of requiring this for residential homes would be minimal at best. When it comes to the California water crisis, 80% of the water is used by agriculture. Residential buildings just don't have a big enough impact to warrant it. Additionally, measures like this would increase the house prices. House prices in California are already pretty high (in the most populated areas) which means you are not really going to have much support for a measure that increases the prices even more",
"Because the current way is cheaper. Not everyone can afford solar or to convert a yard that way.\n\nI'd agree with the landscaping, but solar like you said costs more which will likely price those houses out of their target market.\n\nDevelopers don't develop to be ecologically sound. They develop to turn a profit and keep their shareholders satisfied.\n\nSuch requirements would just be passed on to the initial purchaser, and 20k could easily keep someone from being able to close the deal.",
"Because this is America and we're supposed to assert dominance over nature in every way possible. Common sense be damned! ",
"Austin TX is the fastest growing city in America. Ideas like \"solar power on every house\" in California are a big reason why, and when those people move they bring a lot of tax money with them.\n\nGreen lawns for new buildings would be a good idea though, as long as it's just a matter of switching out plants and not spending $5,000 extra on a lawn or having 4 people approve a landscaping plan that takes 3 months. You can make your toilets use less water easily too. Just set the valve inside the bowl so less water loads up.",
"All states, not just CA, require low flow toilets on all new construction since 1992. CA just passed a law requiring low flow toilets to be installed with any remodeling job or sale of an older home effective Jan 1 2016.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nI cannot speak to the solar aspects but where I live, the cities themselves often run the utilities, and they would much rather continue to charge you $$$ every month than build in existing savings."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/23/low-flow-toilets-required_n_3800061.html"
]
] |
||
1dfe90 | that jet of warm air as i walk into a shopping mall - what does it do? | So I want to enter the shopping mall complex for some nice air-conditioning, and this blast of hot air sweeps across me over my head as I walk past the entrance.
What merit is there to this great atrocity?
My friend tells me it kills bacteria, is this the truth? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dfe90/eli5_that_jet_of_warm_air_as_i_walk_into_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9prdxp",
"c9priem",
"c9prqo6",
"c9prt20",
"c9ps2bq",
"c9psah3"
],
"score": [
5,
11,
2,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Your friend is full of crap.\n\nELI5: When they take warm air and make it cold, the heat has to go somewhere, so it goes out the vents. One of those is near the door where you walk in. At home you can try going outside and standing behind the air conditioner in the window. It's not as big and powerful as the grocery store AC but you will feel some heat there.",
"Keeps the bugs out",
"The jet of air is too stop the insects from flying inside the store, Making the store a nicer place to stop. (And you don't have a bunch of people running screaming BUGGGGSSSSS!!!) :P",
"I would suspect is also has to do with temperature differentials - less AC is going to escape the doors if there's a layer of hot air between the doors and outside.",
"[They're called \"air doors\" or \"air curtains\"](_URL_0_) and is turned on when an entrance/exit door is opened so it keeps bugs out. They can also be used to keep air from a building from escaping and save on heating and cooling costs.",
"Most comercial buildings have forced air towards the door to keep insects out. It is not air conditioning as the excess heat would escape on the roof where the a/c units are."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_door"
],
[]
] |
|
2fwmfy | i know stores can't legally stop shoplifters anymore, but seriously- why the hell don't they at least have someone standing at the door for appearances? | I'm a late 20's dude and to be honest, I never really gave a shit about shoplifting. I never did it, and while I heard stories, I never really saw it go down.
Well, I recently moved to California and damn, I see kids walking out of the grocery store with shit just about every damn time I'm there. I always see news stories about someone getting canned because they tried to stop a shoplifter, etc. etc. I get that for legal reasons, they can't.
But I'm curious, why not have someone if not just for appearance sake? Would it really cost that much more to pay that one person, than the store would lose without them?
Maybe so, but I'm asking this here in case the answer is more complex or perhaps not so cut and dry. Thanks for anyone's response, especially if you've worked in retail or grocery.
EDIT: I'd like to mention that I've seen a security guard type dude at the front door of Whole Foods Market (In Texas at least), so I know *some* companies seem to do this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fwmfy/eli5_i_know_stores_cant_legally_stop_shoplifters/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckded82",
"ckdeew6",
"ckdekjx"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"why cant they stop someone from shoplifting? That sounds really weird.",
"A lot of stores (Including the one I work in) have specially trained loss prevention agents. They are allowed to stop shoplifters. This is a full sized grocery store, it might not be cost effective for someone to do that at a convenience store or something, though.",
"Both of your premises are wrong. Detaining shoplifters varies by state, it's not illegal across the board. \n\nMany small stores don't bother with loss prevention because it isn't worth it. Hiring a full time guard costs money, so unless you're getting so much merchandise stolen that it outweighs the guard's salary, it's just throwing away money.\n\nMost of the bigger stores though *do* have either guards or undercover people who pretend to shop and look for thieves, who do approach shoplifters when they get caught. They usually try to keep things low key to avoid making a huge scene though, because that can get out of hand really quickly. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3qn17z | why were cigarettes the norm then and now are considered deadly? | When you watch old films, you see people smoking everywhere like it was healthy or something. You can even see it in advertisements and stuff. I want to know, why was it like normal then and no it's like a taboo to smoke? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qn17z/eli5_why_were_cigarettes_the_norm_then_and_now/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwglste",
"cwgltha",
"cwglvu7",
"cwglxmp"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Because there wasnt enough notable research to prove it was bad for you. Consider that in several years people will ask your question about something else.\n\nThe reason why not enough research was done was because people saw little need for it until people started getting lung diseases.",
"Several reasons.\n\n* We know a lot more about the health impact of tobacco than we did then. There's been tons and tons more scientific studies that link tobacco to harmful health effects than back in the 50's.\n\n* Cigarette companies actively worked to quash any links to their product and health concerns. They were very successful at manipulating the governments to protect themselves until things finally started to catch up with them a few decades ago and the general public realized they were selling poison.\n\n* Advertising standards were a lot more lax back then. [You could actually say stuff like \"4 out of 5 doctors recommend Lucky Strike cigarettes\".](_URL_0_) and get away with it.\n\nPeople more or less didn't care as much about antibacterial perfectly clean no-gluten households back then. Not everything, from playgrounds to cars, was as concentrated on being as safe as it is now. So cigarettes thrived.",
"Back then, doctors and scientists didn't know that smoking made you sick. And when they did find out, cigarette companies spent a lot of money in advertising to say it wasn't true. \n\nAlso, cigarette companies paid for a lot of advertising and \"product placement\" so cigarettes showed up everywhere. They even had TV shows that were sponsored by cigarette companies, like the Chesterfield Supper Club starring Perry Como. ",
"Consider this, heroin was first marketed as a cough suppressant. People didn't know shit about harmful effects back then."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Lucky-Strike-Doctor-Cigarette-Ad.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1r7mr2 | synchronous vs. asynchronous, in terms of ajax, ftp, etc. | I've got a very basic general knowledge of the internet, in that I know what clients and servers are, that different protocols (FTP, HTTP, etc) exist, and that data can be transmitted in different ways.
What I don't understand is the term *asynchronous*, as used in the acronym AJAX and so on. So I searched ELI5, and found these explanations:
> Synchronous is like going to the pizza place, making an order, waiting for the order, then taking your pizza and going home. Asynchronous is like calling the pizza place, saying "Hey, can I get a large pepperoni", then in 20 min a pizza shows up at your door.
So that makes sense, I suppose. In synchronous communication, every exchange between client and server happens in order, and the next one doesn't happen until one is completed. Right? But that doesn't explain, to me, why FTP is considered asynchronous. In FTP, aren't you constantly engaged in a conversation with the other side? Isn't that synchronous?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r7mr2/eli5_synchronous_vs_asynchronous_in_terms_of_ajax/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdkebr7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"FTP uses two channels - a control connection which includes things like navigating the file system and starting transfers, and a data connection which performs the transfers. The control connection can queue up multiple transfers without that blocking the control connection, so that's why it's asynchronous. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ag21lm | how are combination and permuation different? | Ive looked it up and I still dont understand
The ones formatted like this
9c4 vs 9p4 | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ag21lm/eli5_how_are_combination_and_permuation_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee30clh",
"ee30erg"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"For the latter: different sets containing the same values picked, just arranged differently are treated as unique sets. \n\nFor combinations, they would be considered the same.\n\n\nIe: \"1 2 3\" and \"3 2 1\" (let's just say out of a set of the positive integers) would be considered the same combination but different permutations.",
"permutations care about order, combinations do not.\n\nSay for your example our nine choices are a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i.\n\n9p4 treats a,b,c,d differently from d,c,b,a.\n\nFor 9c4 we don't care about order, just whether we've seen that combination of letters yet, so a,b,c,d and d,c,b,a are the same thing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
ftbcxc | how distilleries repurpose to make hand sanitizer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ftbcxc/eli5_how_distilleries_repurpose_to_make_hand/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm61smg",
"fm61yne"
],
"score": [
18,
5
],
"text": [
"Hand sanitizer is 70% alcohol (140 proof). The other 30% is water and thickening agents. Distilleries have giant machines for making alcohol. They have water, and with some thickening agents, and bottles, that's all they need.",
"Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) is a primary component of many hand sanitizers because of its effectiveness. \n\nBasically any entity that can normally produce a 40% ethanol-in-water solution (aka vodka) can probably retool their production to achieve a 60-70-ish% ethanol concentration. From there just add a few other commercially sourced ingredients to thicken it a little and add a scent and figure out some way to seal it in plastic bottles. (Which may not be impossibly different from filling glass bottles)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
396hk0 | when did american healthcare become so terrible, ie when did jobs with benefits become the epitome of a career? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/396hk0/eli5_when_did_american_healthcare_become_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs0rwpp",
"cs0u3dr",
"cs0ywer"
],
"score": [
11,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Health care being tied to employment started in World War 2. The government realized that with a lot of young men joining the military, and the increase in military production, that there would be a serious labor shortage. To try to control things somewhat they prevented employers from increasing wages. Once employers couldn't compete for labor using pay, they started looking for other perks that they could offer, one of which was 'free' health care. It stuck around after the war as something that people sort of expected.",
"America as a whole has trouble with worker benefits compared to the rest of the world. Some people have pointed some of the other key reasons here, but one is money in politics. \n\nCorporations lobby heavily, both the health insurance companies and large companies that don't want to pay benefits. They're very good at quashing benefits with the \"You're forcing other people to pay\" or \"you're killing jobs\". \n\nHence no socialized healthcare, maternity leave, or regulations on banking etc etc. \n\nBasically, the people who don't want people to have socialized healthcare or benefits have money to support politicians. People who need socialized healthcare don't. \n\n",
"The decline of the healthcare system into the nightmare it is today began with the rise of the health insurance companies in the early 1960s. They are the very root cause of the toxic mess we have today.\n\nThere had been health insurance, and even talk of universal healthcare for many decades prior to that, but it was the 60s when the insurance companies began to go mainstream and toxic. \n\nAlthough the Republicans had long been violently opposed to the notion of universal healthcare (which they assigned the boogeyman name of \"socialized medicine,\" because they knew people would associate it with Scary Communism), President Nixon was actually originally in favor of universal healthcare, and *might* have been able to put the brakes on the growing problem, but a couple of good old boys from Kaiser came around and had a chat with him, and immediately afterwards, he dumped his support for universal healthcare in favor of private insurance. And that was the last realistic chance we had of getting decent universal healthcare.\n\nAs they moved more and more into the mainstream, they brought truckloads of money with them. When people had to pay their own medical bills on their own, doctors had to charge prices people could actually afford. But when that person has a big corporation paying the bills, well, why *not* raise the price of the $5 office visit to $100?\n\nAnd then there was an avalanche. Healthcare became a *major* for-profit industry, as opposed to the mon-n-pop business nature of most doctors previously. Private for-profit hospital corporations sprang up. Medical device makers started building ever-more-expensive (and TOTALLY necessary) medical devices. The pharmaceutical industry went blasting into the stratosphere. Even private-practice doctors moved into the big time, though they typically don't make anything NEAR what the big corporate medical companies do.\n\nNow it's too late for decent universal healthcare in the US. The only way we could get it is by burning the health insurance companies to the ground and starting over, but that's hundreds of billions of dollars and tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs, so it ain't gonna happen.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xtofh | what are the properties of software licenses? | There are many licenses that you can have for example GPL, MIT, Apache, BSD... Can anyone explain the difference like I'm 5 because when I enter their website I find many legal stuff with formal language which I can't understand as english is not my native language. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xtofh/eli5what_are_the_properties_of_software_licenses/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfemnla"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"### Standard Disclaimer - I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. If you require legal advice, seek the services of a legal professional.\n\nGPL is a copyleft, open source software, Free Software license.\n\nMIT/X11 License (aka MIT) and the various BSD licenses (except the original four-clause version) are copyfree, \"permissive\", open source software, Free Software licenses.\n\nApache License 2.0 is an open source software, Free Software license, and some people consider it \"permissive\" as well, though others do not.\n\nI'll give more detail about the licenses specifically in a bit. First some general stuff.\n\n---\n\nIn short:\n\n\"Proprietary\" is the default state in most industrialized (or \"post-industrial\") nations. The moment you put something down on paper, save it to a hard drive, or otherwise fix it in a persistent form, copyright applies in such nations (e.g. the United States and EU). That basically means someone \"owns\" the copyright and is not waiving (m)any privileges granted by copyright.\n\n\"Public domain\" is the sum total of all works whose forms are subject to copyright but are not covered by copyright themselves. This includes things whose copyrights have expired and, in theory at least, things some people have intentionally dedicated to the public domain before the term of copyright ended. Some jurisdictions (e.g. France) do not recognize a right to dedicate a work to the public domain, though, so one might dedicate something to the public domain somewhere else, then still sue people for using it in a manner of which one disapproves in France.\n\n\"Open source software\" and \"Free Software\" are roughly the same thing, in technical/legal terms: software that you are allowed to use, modify, and share with others, possibly subject to certain restrictions. This status is achieved by using an open source software or Free Software license. The Open Source Initiative maintains the [Open Source Definition](_URL_2_) and the GNU Project (in association with the Free Software Foundation) maintains the [Free Software Definition](_URL_1_).\n\n\"Free culture\" (and some similar terms, e.g. \"open content\") is much the same thing as open source, but for non-software works.\n\n\"Share-alike\", aka \"viral\", is a characteristic of licenses that affect work created by other people, \"infecting\" that work with the same license. Generally how it works is that you have some work someone else distributed under a share-alike license, and you decided to use part of that work as part of another work you are creating, and the share-alike license requires you to use the same license for the whole thing (not just the original part and whatever minor modifications were made to it directly). This can cause problems, because share-alike licenses are by default legally incompatible with other share-alike licenses and, in nontrivial ways, with pretty much every license in the world that is not the same exact license.\n\n\"Copyleft\" is a combination of \"share-alike\" with a legal restriction that requires you to distribute the sources for any modifications you make whenever you distribute it in non-source form.\n\n\"Permissive\" is a very hand-wavy term that means basically whatever the speaker intends it to mean. In general, however, when people say \"permissive\", they mean it isn't proprietary or share-alike or copyleft. Sometimes, weakly copyleft works (e.g. the LPGL, which in some cases can be used for software libraries so that they do not \"infect\" the licensing status of software that uses those libraries, or the CDDL or MPL which are considered \"per-file copyleft\" whereby it doesn't affect things in separate files) are referred to as \"permissive\", however, and there is some debate even among those who reject calling any copyleft license \"permissive\" about whether something like the Apache License 2.0 is \"permissive\".\n\n\"Copyfree\" applies to any license that, in essence, very closely mimics the permissive conditions of the public domain, but without the jurisdictional problems and other uncertainties of the public domain; it also applies to a work released under such a license. The Copyfree Initiative maintains the [Copyfree Standard Definition](_URL_0_).\n\nI hope this helps. I'm leaving out a lot of detail, because I'm trying to keep this relatively short and simple.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://copyfree.org/standard",
"https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html",
"http://opensource.org/osd"
]
] |
|
5ru07g | what are those white stone looking things that come out of you mouth that smell horrible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ru07g/eli5what_are_those_white_stone_looking_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"dda2a2f",
"dda2mlx",
"dda3820",
"dda8wup"
],
"score": [
8,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Tonsil stones?\n\nNot everyone gets them. They are also called tonsilloliths.\n\nThey are basically made out of bone material.",
"Tonsilloliths, sometimes called tonsillar concretions. A buildup of calcium, mucus, and bacteria.",
"Eating carrots supposedly helps. I have these almost every day. I bought one of those water picks that you can adjust the pressure on and wash out the cavities in my tonsils, seems to work. ",
"these white stone secretions i usually cough up from the back of my throat smell like crap when squeezed. ive had this problem since childhood (im 36 now). and ive noticed that the more sugar i eat, the greater the chance i cough a stone up later on at night or early morning. basically, if i eat no sweets nor too much sugary items, then no stones develop."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4wwh5r | how come manufacturers can get pixels so small for a phone screen and can't do the same on big led screens? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wwh5r/eli5_how_come_manufacturers_can_get_pixels_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6af2tp",
"d6afalk",
"d6afi36",
"d6ahjwo",
"d6ahl3o",
"d6ai8f6"
],
"score": [
82,
7,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They absolutely can do this.\n\nHowever, they don't usually bother - because it's very rare that you'd look at a big screen from the same kind of distance (just a few inches) as you'd look at a phone.\n\nCreating this many pixels so close together is expensive, and at the distances from which you'd normally look at larger screens, it's very rarely worth the expense of packing them in this tight.\n\nThis is why, in designing their \"Retina displays\", Apple [take account of typical viewing distances](_URL_0_):\n\n > When introducing the iPhone 4, Steve Jobs said the number of pixels needed for a Retina Display is about 300 PPI for a device held 10 to 12 inches from the eye. One way of expressing this as a unit is pixels-per-degree (PPD) which takes into account both the screen resolution and the distance from which the device is viewed. Based on Jobs' predicted number of 300, the threshold for a Retina Display starts at the PPD value of 57 PPD. 57 PPD means that a tall skinny triangle with a height equal to the viewing distance and a top angle of one degree will have a base on the device's screen that covers 57 pixels. Any display's viewing quality (from phone displays to huge projectors) can be described with this size-independent universal parameter\n\nAt bigger distances, it takes few pixels per inch to get the same number of pixels per degree.",
"They can and they do. It's why we now have 4k TVs.\n\nHowever, while people are more than happy to pay upwards of $1000 for a phone with a 5 inch, it's been well established that they aren't willing to pay proportionately similar prices for a TV (10,000 for a 50+ inch tv?). Now to be fair there is more going on in the price of a phone than just the screen, but screens are one of if not the biggest expenses and scaling the screen up to TV size would make it extremely expensive, well beyond the sub-$2000 price point that almost all TVs are sold at.\n\nBut TV technology is driven directly by the massive amount of pixels phone screens are able to pack into tiny screens. As the technology to make these phone screens advances and becomes cheaper it moves into the TV space where it can be done for an affordable price for consumers.",
"Part of the problem is that each pixel you make has a small chance of being faulty. When you pack a much larger number of pixels into a larger screen, there's a greater chance that some of the pixels will be faulty and you can't sell the screen. Either you invest in better manufacturing processes which make fewer faulty pixels, or you charge more for the good screens to cover the cost of the faulty screens. Either way, a screen with twice as many pixels ends up costing more than twice as much.",
"The actual reason is that there are industry resolution standards that need to be adopted by manufacturers, broadcasters, etc. The industry decides on certain resolution standards (eg. 480p, 720p, 1080p, 4k, 8k, etc.). We've slowly been getting improvements in our resolution standards but the jump to having 500+ pixels per inch in a 70\" tv would be an absolutely huge resolution the industry isn't ready for. Prices for tech have to come down, streaming infrastructure needs to be supported. Eventually, we will have the equivalent pixels per inch of a high end phone in our tv but even then the pixels per inch will vary depending on the size of the device because it will still be rated based on the resolution standard. so if we have a 8000p tvs that means there are 8000 rows of pixels regardless how tall the tv is. There will always be more pixels per inch in a smaller device than a larger device with the same resolution. \n\nEdit: To put in perspective - to get the same 500 pixels per inch that a high end phone has - a 70\" tv would have the resolution of 17,159P. The current highest end concept tv resolutions are 8K (7680×4320) or 4320p. ",
"They don't put tiny pixels on a large TV because you sit far away from your TV (unlike your phone) and you don't need the pixels to be small.\n\nHere's some math:\n\nIf you have a 5\" HD phone screen (resolution = 1920 × 1080 which is 2K video), then you have around 440 pixels per inch (PPI).\n\nIf you created a 60\" TV with that same PPI value it would have a resolution of about 23007 × 12940. That's 297K video. Since nobody makes videos, movies, or TV of that insanely high resolution it's just wasted pixels.",
"Well they absolutely can, there is just no point in doing so. \n\nUntil very recently, graphics cards only had enough bandwidth on their displayport connectors to do 4K at 60hz (60 FPS). Now, with the newest version of displayport, cards can theoretically push 8k at 60 hz. However, these displays don't exist yet and won't for quite a while, as their is no purpose of having them. \n\n4K content is already limited enough, and cable TV providers most likely wont have it for a few more years. 8K content won't be common until at least a decade from now, if that."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_Display#Models"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
60hrgc | why do so many shows for children in elementary school feature characters in middle and high school? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60hrgc/eli5_why_do_so_many_shows_for_children_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"df6gmzn",
"df6ive6"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Just like when kids play with dolls that are grown up, they are drawn to characters older than themselves. They can imagine themselves older and more mature. \n\nThe same goes for books. The first Harry Potter book is him at 11 years old, but it is mostly first read by 8-10 year olds.",
"Shows about children their own age would be the same stuff they do every day, that's not very new.\n\nShows about children younger than them would be a rehash of their experiences, that's why they go from \"love Barney\" to \"Barney's for babies\".\n\nMost folks are looking forward, imagining their future, so shows that could be their future are more interesting. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3ybbez | what happens when someone od's on specific painkillers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ybbez/eli5what_happens_when_someone_ods_on_specific/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyc2sl5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"An overdose on opiates causes respiratory depression to the point where you stop breathing and die. Benzodiazepines also have cause some respiratory depression as well. Both also cause a flood neurotransmitters that are responsible for feeling pleasure. Essentially, an overdose on both would cause you to fall asleep and stop breathing, it's very peaceful. Source: I am a paramedic who regularly uses these drugs and I've also done overdoses as a result of them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1hjquv | how do messages in a bottle work? | I know it seems like a simple question, but is there some form of art behind it, do you have to throw the bottle at a certain time, in a certain direction? or do you just throw it and hope for the best, ALSO, how do people get their replies to the right person with such accuracy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hjquv/eli5_how_do_messages_in_a_bottle_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cav04fb",
"cav2slx"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Pretty much just throw it out there and hope. I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but the portrayals of the practice in BC are largely inaccurate.",
"You just put the message in a bottle and sail it, hoping the ocean / lake / whatever currents take it somewhere where people will find it. It is almost impossible to return a message in a bottle with accuracy, unless one has some kind of supernatural understanding of ocean currents and weather patterns.\n\nYour best bet would be to enclose an e-mail or something with the message. It would go something like, \"Hey! I'm joshjs94, and i wrote this message. email me at [email protected] if you find it!\". You could ask them to tell you the location of where they found the bottle, and what date, so you can get a bit of an understanding where your bottle went.\n\nYou cant really aim a message in a bottle, unless you are crazy prepared, and as was said before, have vehement (intense) knowledge of weather patterns and currents, among other things."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3wdr63 | why does the stock market respond to falling oil prices with sell-offs? shouldn't every sector that uses energy to make and ship their products see increased profits? | I have a lot of money in the stock market right now, and I'm getting frustrated with the constant nosedives the DOW and S & P keep taking being blamed on low oil prices. I get that low oil prices hurts Exxon Mobil and BP, but energy is only 5.9% of the US economy:
_URL_0_
The other 94.1% of the economy *purchases* energy in order to manufacture and ship goods. Cheap oil should do wonders for the profit margins of the vast majority of the economy. What's more, cheap gas means more consumer spending in every other sector. When 20 stocks are trending upward for every one that crashes, my stock ticker should be bright green. Why is it red? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3wdr63/eli5_why_does_the_stock_market_respond_to_falling/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxvd7sd",
"cxvg5sr",
"cxvihqd",
"cxvp95a",
"cxw2c0r",
"cxzt4lz"
],
"score": [
33,
36,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Generally speaking, a falling price of oil means falling demand for oil, since world oil production is reasonably stable. Falling demand means that companies expect to be purchasing less oil in the future (since a lot of oil is purchased on a futures basis), which indicates that they expect to be doing less of all those things you mentioned that burn oil. So, on average, when oil drops it indicates that the economy expects to be less productive in the near future.",
"If you need financial issues explained to you on ELI5, you just *shouldn't* be following the financial news. Your stocks will rise in value over time if you invest them in a diversified, passively managed index fund. Your job as a responsible investor is to only put in money you don't need right now, and not check the balance of your brokerage account for another decade. \n\nFlooey's answer isn't *wrong* - in general, higher oil prices can be seen either as a sign of rising costs of production *or* as a sign of strong global demand. Which side of the equation is more important for assessing future economic growth is a complicated analytical question. But more importantly, *the financial sector has tried to predict both of these effects long before you even thought about them*, and changes in the market reflect a difference between recent information and pre-existing predictions, not between recent information and older information. A price of oil that is lower than last year's price could be either higher or lower than *what analysts were predicting for this year's price*, and that difference is what is likely to move markets. But it gets even more complex than that - the market is anticipating rate hikes from the Fed, which will cut economic production. Good news for the economy tends to push the Fed towards rate hikes, which are (in the short term) bad news for the economy. So current faster-than-expected economic growth can be good evidence that economic growth will slow within a few months. And there are even stranger interconnections between stock prices. Famously, when Russia defaulted on its ruble-denominated debt, the difference between the price of Royal Dutch and Shell (which are the same company, but listed separately as a British and a Dutch stock) spiked. Why? Because a huge hedge fund that was betting Russia would never default on ruble-denominated debt without also defaulting on dollar-denominated debt was *also* betting that Royal Dutch Shell would never pay a dividend to the Dutch stock without paying a profit to the British stock, and when they lost money on the default they had to unwind their position in Royal Dutch Shell, too, selling Shell and buying Royal Dutch. \n\nIf it's not your job you shouldn't waste time thinking about it. Stay diversified, don't pick stocks, invest for the long term, keep money you need in the near future out of risky assets.",
"It's market reaction, to give you the absolute simplest explanation. The movement is not so much based on what happens, but what people *thought* would happen, and their reaction to the reality. Oil plummets, people panic, all hell breaks loose.",
"Lower prices suggest less is being used.\n\nIf less oil is being used, that suggests an economic slowdown.\n\nI think.",
" > I have a lot of money in the stock market right now, and I'm getting frustrated with the constant nosedives the DOW and S & P keep taking being blamed on low oil prices.\n\nSo then stop listening to CNBC and the other feces-throwing chimpanzees who make such absurd claims.\n\nSometimes crude and stocks move in the same direction, and sometimes they don't. Oil plunged by 50% in the middle of 2014, and stocks were mostly flat, being somewhat up.\n\nNo matter which way things move, some hysterical asswipe is going to be on TV or the internet spinning stories about it.\n\nIf this bothers you so much, you need to get rid of some of your stock, and all of your TVs.\n\n",
" > The other 94.1% of the economy purchases energy in order to manufacture and ship goods. Cheap oil should do wonders for the profit margins of the vast majority of the economy. What's more, cheap gas means more consumer spending in every other sector. When 20 stocks are trending upward for every one that crashes, my stock ticker should be bright green. Why is it red?\n\nA few things wrong with your reasoning. First 94.1% may use oil, but to varying degrees, and it may not be that large a part of their business, which would then not really affect the bottom line of the business all that much. Additionally, the 5.9% that represents energy is directly and fully affected by oil, so when oil prices go down, the affect of oil prices on the 5.9% is relatively large compared to the affect on the 94.1%. Second, cheap gas does not mean more consumer spending in EVERY other sector, in fact its been shown that people have largely just spent that money on restaurants.\n\n I agree with simpleclear that it largely has to do with the fact that no one predicted oil to be this low for this long, and this causes a lot of uncertainty in the financial markets because many countries' economies are based on oil production. Market uncertainty increases the risk of all investments, which in turn brings prices down as investors would demand more upside for the additional risk."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.statista.com/statistics/217556/percentage-of-gdp-from-energy-in-selected-countries/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ex46jh | why does the us senate vote on whether witnesses may appear? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ex46jh/eli5_why_does_the_us_senate_vote_on_whether/ | {
"a_id": [
"fg65gnl",
"fg65nex",
"fg672o8"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"There are no actual hard set rules. During Clinton's trial the senate called three witnesses, during Jackson's trial they called around 40. This time around the whole thing is just a political circus that even if they did call any there would be none that actually paid attention to what they said anyways.",
"We say that the Senators are to act as jurors, but it’s more accurate to say that each acts as a judge. As for why they are allowed to vote on having witnesses: the protocol states that only the Senate may try an impeachment, saying they MUST hear testimony is as incorrect as saying the House MUST vote to start impeachment proceedings.\n\nAlso, this question is begging for misinformation. Every impeachment trial in the history of the USA has had witness testimony in the Senate. It’s just common sense that a person passing judgement would want to have as many facts as possible.",
"Impeachment is probably the most direct interaction of the three branches of government. It's very important that the Chief Justice stays in the judicial branch lane no matter what his personal opinion may be. Had the vote for witnesses been 50/50, I strongly believe he would have abstained and let the motion die."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2gz922 | how can companies that sell "aged" goods (e.g. wine, cheese) predict the demand for their goods so far in the future? | Any demand for goods can fluctuate constantly, so how do companies with long-term manufacturing/aging process reasonably match their supply with a demand years in advance? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gz922/eli5how_can_companies_that_sell_aged_goods_eg/ | {
"a_id": [
"cknv94h",
"cknvbvo",
"cknvcsa",
"cko24oz",
"cko6hgf"
],
"score": [
25,
3,
11,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Wine and cheese are pretty common and basic items so the demand for them is pretty stable through time. They look at their previous sales and current demand, look at population growth, and then predict how much wine will be in demand in say 10 years. Unless something major happens there is no reason for wine and cheese demand to suddenly plummet.\n\n",
"Past experience can give you a surprisingly good idea. I did read about a whiskey distiller that ran into supply issues recently due their 12 year becoming quite popular. I'm actually curious if that same distiller will also have issues with their 18 year in a couple years, since I imagine if the demand for one is low they just don't bottle some of it and let it age longer.",
"Most aged goods sell for a premium. Most of the companies will artificially keep the supply of the aged goods low so that the price for each item is higher.\n\nThis means that they usually have much more goods than they would actually sell. In some industries like wine, much of the excess grapes will be sold cheap to other companies that will combine wine grapes from many vineyards (think Trader Joe's Charles Shaw wine). Since it doesn't carry the label of the \"aged wine\" and it usually isn't in the same price category, it doesn't affect the premium price of the aged name brand product. In other food industries, the excess is sold and relabeled as store brands.\n\nOther times, they can just let an excess supply of products age longer and then release them when they're older (and more expensive) for special \"reserve\" editions.",
"It's very difficult and a lot of times they don't. A few years ago if you remember there was a tequila shortage. It takes roughtly 15 years to grow the agave to the point that they can use it to make the tequila, 15 years ago they didn't expect the sudden rise in demand.\n",
"The real answer is big business.\n\nGo to the liquor store today and you'll see all kinds of 10+ year aged boutique whiskey from small shops. Those shops are indeed new and small but their liquor is not. [It's purchased from MGP](_URL_0_), a large company in Indiana that has a bunch of aged whiskey to sell to other whiskey makers (or \"makers\" as the case may be) to help them start or augment their brand.\n\nMGP \"is now a one-stop shop for marketers who want to bottle their own brands of spirits without having to distill the product themselves. MGP sells them bulk vodka and gin, as well as a large selection of whiskies, including bourbons of varying recipes, wheat whiskey, corn whiskey, and rye. (They also make “food grade industrial alcohol” used in everything from solvents and antiseptics to fungicides.) Their products are well-made, but hardly what one thinks of as artisanal. And yet, much of the whiskey now being sold as the hand-crafted product of micro-distilleries actually comes from this one Indiana factory.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/28/your-craft-whiskey-is-probably-from-a-factory-distillery-in-indiana.html"
]
] |
|
1mhgm9 | why, when we see aesthetically pleasing things such as pretty sun sets, do we think they are beautiful? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mhgm9/eli5_why_when_we_see_aesthetically_pleasing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc9n0rl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I think there is something beautiful about something so unique. Aside from that, seeing variations in color that set a sky apart from a typical scene definitely doesn't hurt."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4j8mxk | why do politicians always seem to have two mics at debates/rallies? | Shouldn't one be sufficient? It's not like there are multiple stations airing most of the debates. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4j8mxk/eli5_why_do_politicians_always_seem_to_have_two/ | {
"a_id": [
"d34lzdu",
"d34qohl"
],
"score": [
12,
2
],
"text": [
"It's largely to cope with failures. If Obama is in the middle of a significant briefing, the last thing you want is some technician running up to the podium shouting \"Hold on... can we do that last bit again? The microphone wasn't working.\"\n\nYou can also find that small differences in microphone positioning can really affect how sound is picked up. If the speaker moves, turns their head or whatever, you might find that your single microphone just isn't picking it up that well any longer, but two microphones in slightly different locations might do a better job.",
" > Shouldn't one be sufficient? It's not like there are multiple stations airing most of the debates.\n\nThe second mic is just a backup in case something happens to the first mic.\n\nDuring any major speech there are *always* many stations either broadcasting or recording the event to be broadcast later. The sound engineer sends a separate feed out to something called a \"press box\" which is essentially a professional grade audio splitter. It usually has a dozen or more connections that members of the press can use for their audio recorders or to hook up a feed to their satellite trucks. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
873z42 | why are restaurants owned by the same company always right next to each other? i get offering variety, but isn't it a really bad idea to go into competition with yourself? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/873z42/eli5_why_are_restaurants_owned_by_the_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw9zser",
"dwa00ai",
"dwa09ng",
"dwa0c39",
"dwa0lam"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"One would assume the restaurants are marketed differently and are vying for different segments of the population. ",
"You're not going into competition with yourself though are you, just think of it as the same restaurant with a different menu cause that's basically what it is",
"It's the illusion of choice, they have very different menus and themes but they are both owned by the same company.\n\nThe location was picked by market research which shows there is a high volume of traffic in that area (like in a mall parking lot) so it's the optimal place for restaurants.\n\nAs for competing with yourself, is it really competition when the profits end up in the same pockets?\n\nSure there is extra cost in running basically 2 franchises but the key is that the chains are both profitable, and removing one wouldn't cause the first to get that much more business. More likely is that if there is the room for 2 restaurants than having two in that area is better than letting the competition put one of their restaurants next door and losing customers to them.",
"A building is selling something in a certain location because the location is the best for this business. As competitors develop and try to steal shares of the market, it is in their interest to compete in the most appropriate location, the one you found already. If they find a better location and put you out of business, then you can open a new shop next to them and try to compete them out of business.\n\nIf you sell ice creams outside an office and get your customers from that office on their way out of work, your competition wouldn't make money by opening up across the street as you would be the first ice cream salesman they see. Your competitor would have to open right next to you and offer a better deal to steal the customers from you.\n\nSource: _URL_0_\n\nTl;dr: 3 words are key in business - location, location, location\n\nEdit: added the source ",
"So, there are 3 restaurants on a block. It's a great location. All 3 are packed all the time. Wouldn't you rather own all 3, than just 1?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/jILgxeNBK_8"
],
[]
] |
||
dnz7kh | why do i sometimes see microphones set up facing the crowd during a (music) concert? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dnz7kh/eli5_why_do_i_sometimes_see_microphones_set_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5i9854",
"f5id32x",
"f5ij6vl"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Musicians wear in ear monitors. Headphones. The mics pick up the ambient crowd noise and make their mix sound less like a can.",
"Those microphones are set up to record the crowd.\n\nIn retrospect that seems a bit obvious, but it is a live concert recording so they want all the parts including the reaction of the audience. The microphones they have set up for the singers and the instruments are pretty good at just getting those parts, so the other mics pointed at the audience are to capture those sounds as well.",
"For a few reasons. \n\nOne reason is that the concert may be being recorded. In that case the band will want to record the sound of the audience to mix into the recording. \n\nThe other reason is that many performers use in-ear monitors to hear themselves and the other performers. While this had many benefits, one downside is that they can't hear the crowd as well. So the audio team will setup mics to capture the crowd and feed some of that into the performers in-ear monitors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2kbszm | if gay marriage is made legal (which is a good thing) what arguments would one use to keep polygamy illegal? | What I mean by this is that polygamy was banned for many of the same reasons gay marriage was. It goes against mainstream Christian values, it's viewed as taboo, it's unnatural, etc. If gay marriage is legalized what precedent would we have to deny polygamy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kbszm/eli5_if_gay_marriage_is_made_legal_which_is_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cljre52",
"cljrvuc",
"cljsbmw",
"cljttst"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
4,
18
],
"text": [
"The only real argument I heard against polygamy is the financial burden it could put on companies that employ people in this type of relationship. If employee X has three spouses not working, a company who is obligated to provide health coverage for them would be facing a greater financial burden than with a standard couple. But even that is kind of a sketchy reason. How many poly couples will be working at any given place. \nAlthough, letting a close but very sick friend into a marriage so they can get your company's health plan would probably become a thing.",
"Not that I have any interest in a poly marriage but honestly I don't know that there is a logical argument against it. As long as it's consenting adults then who cares how many adults are consenting? ",
"In theory none. Polygami isn't nothing inherently bad or evil. Problem is basically every polygamous society was enforced by men, for the benefit of men. And woman was treated mostly as a belonging etc... \n\nThe point is nobody is really lobbing for polygami in the more \"civilized\" society. So there is really no danger of legalizing it. I suppose the point of why it is not legal is because if we were to legalize it. It would bring more trouble than benefits.",
"It makes an absolute mess of family law.\n\nRight now, a marriage is between two people & a child has, at most, two parents. What happens to the children in a 3-marriage if A divorces B & C because B is abusive? Obviously, we would want to minimize B's custody rights but that would unfairly penalize C. What about a 4-marriage where A & B separate from C & D and A & B are the biological parents of children?\n\nDivorces can also be tricky - what about a 3-marriage where A & C want nothing to do with each other but still want to stay with B?\n\nAllowing gay marriage doesn't require any major changes to the legal framework of marriage - we simply change the definition to allow any two people rather than a man & a woman. Allowing poly-marriage would require a *major* reworking of the laws to accommodate arbitrary family size & structure to satisfy the needs of an *incredibly tiny* minority of people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
pmrqj | the greek protests. how did greece get in such a hole? what do the protesters want? does the government have any other choice? | It seems to me that the EU is demanding Greece pass these measures, so does the government have any choice. What do protesters want? I know almost nothing, but from what I've gathered from cursory looks into it, it seems that the Greeks have a system that's unsustainable in terms of early retirement ages and benefits. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pmrqj/eli5_the_greek_protests_how_did_greece_get_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3qlxab",
"c3qnuic",
"c3qrx0c"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Here's are some previous eli5 posts that might help out:\n\n* [1](_URL_1_)\n\n* [2](_URL_0_)\n",
"I'm not sure if this should be a new topic - but what if Greece doesn't do these austerity measures? I know they passed them, but what if they continue to spend too much and collect too little? What can the other Euro countries do?",
"Greece could default on the debt, which is basically what Iceland did. Iceland is recovering fairly well. Argentina defaulted on their debt 20 years ago, and while they aren't doing great they recovered faster than Greece is projected to. \n\nThe protesters are mad because the government screwed up, and instead of using the \"we can't pay our loans, sorry\" method (which would screw the bankers), they are using the \"cut jobs, pensions, and salaries\" method (which screws the common citizen that had nothing to do with getting into this mess).\n\nIt's like if you worked on a team project, with you, Bob, and Jim. You work really hard on the project for weeks. When you go to turn it in, you find that Bob and Jim didn't do anything. But Bob and Jim tell the teacher it's your fault, so you get an F on the project while Bob and Jim get a B. You would be pissed too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lhlz9/eli5_what_the_protestors_in_greece_want/c2suvl3",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lnukb/eli5_why_is_greece_in_such_a_horrible_depression/c2ub7y3"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
440634 | what are the lingo/acronyms to enable me to converse on reddit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/440634/eli5_what_are_the_lingoacronyms_to_enable_me_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"czmaxic",
"czmb491"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"AFAIK: As Far As I Know... \nAMA: Ask Me Anything \nAMAA: Ask Me Almost Anything \nDEA: Does Anybody/Anyone Else... \nFTFY: Fixed That For You (correcting you, possibly jokingly) \nIAMA: I Am A... \nIANAL: I am not a lawyer \nIIRC: If I Recall Correctly... \nIMHO: In my humble opinion \nIMO: In My Opinion \nIRL: In Real Life \nITT: In This Thread/Topic \nNSFW: Not Safe For Work (mature content) \nNSFL: Not Safe For Life (graphically disturbing content) \nOC: Original Content \nOP: Original Poster \nOrangered: Your Reddit Inbox (Envelope) \nSMH: Shaking My Head \nTIFU: Today I fucked up \nTIL: Today I Learned \nTL;DR: To long; didn't read (summary) \nWoosh: Previous comment went over your head (you missed the joke)",
"also r/outoftheloop explains the memes and concepts you don't understand and everyone else seems to"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5kpcg9 | how did earth and other planets get moons, and is it possible for earth to get more? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5kpcg9/eli5_how_did_earth_and_other_planets_get_moons/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbplto6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Sometimes they were just things that were in the neighborhood that got captured by a planet's gravity. Sometimes they formed alongside the planet. Just as the planet formed from a particularly dense bit of dust and gas gathering up more and more mass through gravity, a moon can form from a separate, smaller dense bit of matter that creates a separate gathering point for matter and you end up with multiple bodies all orbiting around each other. The way the Earth's moon is theorized to have been formed is by a huge object smashing into the Earth early in its history, blasting off a bunch of material from the Earth which eventually formed together into the moon.\n\nThis theory is supported by the fact that the moon is made up almost entirely of stuff found in the upper layers of the Earth's crust. If it was a captured body that had arrived from elsewhere, we would not expect it to be so similar to Earth. If it had formed alongside the Earth, we would also expect it to have some of the denser stuff found lower down in the Earth's mantle and core in a similar proportion to what we see on Earth. However, the moon has barely any of that stuff."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
66r7cj | how does running improve your oxygen uptake capacity? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66r7cj/eli5_how_does_running_improve_your_oxygen_uptake/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgkmgiz",
"dgkn6se",
"dgkw6dj"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"When you run you are doing what's called aerobic activity, meaning your respiration increases. But what doesn't change immediately is the hearts ability to pump more at a time during this activity. Over time your heart gets stronger and is able to pump more blood to your muscles over the same period of time. Red blood cells are what carry oxygen to your muscle cells and if the heart can pump more in one beat then more red blood cells can reach your muscle cells in a time effective manner. \n\nEdit: to my knowledge it doesn't affect your oxygen uptake efficiency just your heart strength",
"Respiration is a lung activity. Your lungs suck in oxygen and hemoglobin in your red blood cells grabs it. You can increase lung capacity to increase the amount of air you can breathe in.\n\n\nThis is where your heart comes in. It has to move the blood. So as you run and do whatever, your body thirst for oxygen so your breathing increases and your heart rate rises to pump more and more blood/oxygen to the rest of your body.",
"Physiologist here, some answers are correct some BS.\n\nTo understand how your cardiorespiratory fitness, or maximum oxygen uptake (VO2), increases after a period of running you have to know what this terms actually means. The VO2max is the maximum volume of oxgygen that is used by the body measured during incremental exercise and is expressed in milliliters of oxygen consumed per kilogram body mass per minute. In order to get the muscles moving, oxygen must be extracted from the air, diffused through the alveoli into the bloodstream, transported by red blood cells, while the heart pumps the blood around until the oxygen gets to the exercising muscles. The capacity of the body to do these things is reflected in the VO2max. You have to see the VO2max as a chain, where the weakest link determines the strength of the chain. \n\n\nAfter a period of aerobic training (running/swimming/cycling), the body adapts to the more oxygen demanding circumstances. I'll discuss the most important changes:\n\n- More efficient use of the lungs. Parts of the lungs aren't perfused by the bloodstream which creates a 'dead space'. This effectively reduces the volume of air where the body can extract oxygen out of. Prolonged periods of exercise cause the lungs to perfuse the dead space, virtually increasing the lung volume. Fun fact: where initially more ventilation is needed to provide the increased oxygen demand, the high breathing frequency is a result of the body wanting to get rid out of CO2 that builds up in the blood/muscles\n\n- Exercise places more stress on the heart. The main arteries to the exercising muscles dilate to facilitate blood flow to those muscles. As a result, the (diastolic) blood pressure drops so in order to maintain a normal blood pressure the heart has to pump more forcefully. On top of that, blood flow has to increase to provide the muscles with more oxygenated blood. The heart gets more muscular. The heart chambers also increase in dimensions, resultig in more blood to be pumped **per heartbeat**. This can be seen very clearly in endurance athletes, in contrast to bodybuilders (where the heart is very muscular and the chamber volume decreases). *Note:* a low heart rate is the result these changes, not the cause. But that's a story for another time.\n\n- The arteries to the muscles expand (vasodilation) due to increased friction forces of the flowing blood against the arterial wall, which is called shear stress. This shear stress causes the cells in the inner layer of the arteries (endothelial cells) to release nitric oxide (NO). Smooth muscle cells surrounding the arteries react to the NO and as a result, the arteries dilate. The sensitivity of the endothelial cells to shear stress increases after a few weeks of training.\n\n- There are a couple of muscle fiber types. One of them is type I /red muscle fibers. In short, this is the muscle type that you mainly use during endurance sports because they are heavily perfused and they mainly use oxygen as a source of energy. Training causes a increase in capillary density in the muscles, meaning that the muscles will be more perfused."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
11zlk1 | why is it that when i wiggle my finger in my belly button, i feel it in my penis? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11zlk1/why_is_it_that_when_i_wiggle_my_finger_in_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6qwnk3",
"c6qwrsg",
"c6qx7wf",
"c6qy85a",
"c6qy8pj",
"c6qys7p",
"c6qysan",
"c6qyu6l",
"c6qzhlx",
"c6qzk5f",
"c6qzma7",
"c6r036i",
"c6r04mc",
"c6r0f35",
"c6r0i4g",
"c6r0j5w",
"c6r0uom",
"c6r1dmm",
"c6r1fwe",
"c6r1h50",
"c6r2lqw",
"c6r3zsl",
"c6r4e0y",
"c6r4z0o",
"c6r5w3u",
"c6r5x4h",
"c6ra5gr"
],
"score": [
20,
127,
5,
9,
3,
1379,
274,
16,
4,
33,
3,
2,
4,
5,
2,
5,
25,
4,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I thought I was the only person that experiences this!",
"I have this same thing, but the lady version, and totally thought I was a weirdo. I'm glad other people experience this, even if we don't know why...",
"I know that feel.",
"Hmm... I don't feel an-oop! There it goes. Weird. I desire more knowledge.",
"A few years ago, in anatomy class, our teacher told us that there's a nerve linking the bellybutton to the bladder... ",
"How does it feel to know that, after just typing a few letters and hitting \"submit\", you've forced thousands of strangers to fondle their belly buttons?",
"How deep/hard does the finger need to go? Because I'm digging in and not feeling anything down here.\n\n/greatthingtotakeoutofcontext",
"As anyone who's ever had kidney problems can tell you, the nerves below your waist are unreliable when it comes to location. Basically, there's a lot of information to transmit, and not enough space for the wires.",
"I actually feel it in my ass",
"It's because the bellybuttons function is to keep the penis attached, much like a knot at the end of a rope to stop it from slipping through a hole, so that you can hang something heavy on it.",
"Finally! I asked my dad that once, when I was 7 or 8 and he laughed and said \"that's a funny way to masturbate\".\nI don't feel it in my penis, but my balls. It feels like someone is needling (is that a real word?) my balls. It isn't really a good feeling, I try to stay away from it.",
"Thank you for asking this question OP. I had been wondering this last week and couldn't find a good answer through google.",
"ITT: No one answering op or just speculating.",
"PLOT TWIST: OP is female.",
"You may want to see a doctor.",
"I have an outtie, does this affect my ability to feel my penis in my belly button?",
"So, I've never experienced this, but I can give a reason from Anatomy and Embryology. During development as a fetus, the testes originate right around the level of the abdomen near the belly button. Here, they develop nerves that run to the spinal cord at this level (vertebrae T10-12, if I remember correctly). During development, the testes move downward, travel through the inguinal canal (basically a small tunnel where your leg meets your abdomen), and descend into the testes. They remain connected to the spinal cord via the same nerves, the nerves just get longer. In the spinal cord, there's a network of nerves that integrate signals coming from the organs and the overlying skin at that area. Those signals, 'sensation from the testes' vs 'sensation from the belly button' remain mostly separate, but there are a few overlapping connections. Because we're not really used to feeling things from our internal organs, often times our brain interprets signals coming from them as coming from the same level as that sensation. In the case of the testes, this sensation is referred to the belly button area, so often pain from the testes occurs in the belly button area (this is called \"referred pain\"). I suppose it's also possible that the reverse could happen as well, that sensation from the skin can be referred to the internal organs.",
"I'm gonna go on a limb and say you're actually 5 and your father wanted to know as well so he posted the question?\n",
"Ahh fuck, I feel it in the anus. Now I have to poop. \n\nCurse you, OP.",
"It doesn't happen to me. ",
"Because that's not your belly button.",
"How many people immediatly tried this?",
"Did anyone else try this and not feel anything in their penis...?",
"Because you are a man. You will feel everything \"in your penis\"",
"And I thought I was unique... now I'm just a regular nobody again :(",
"Just lucky, I guess.",
"The reverse is also true; if you stick your finger in your penis hole it feels like it's in your bellybutton. Try it!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dzpori | can a chicken hatch from a non fertilized egg? | a friend of mine told me there is a little chance that in the right conditions a chicken will hatch from a non fertilized egg, is he right? if he is how is that possible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dzpori/eli5_can_a_chicken_hatch_from_a_non_fertilized_egg/ | {
"a_id": [
"f899tth",
"f899v76",
"f89ko1p"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
9
],
"text": [
"No because an unfertilised egg only has half the number of chromosomes - genes compared to a live chicken.\nIt’s essentially like the egg that human females have in our ovaries. You need the other half set of genes from a males to create a living organism",
"This question led me to search how chickens mate and now I'm cracking up. I guess this is where the classic chicken dance comes from.\n\n\"A rooster often employs a type of foreplay by prancing around the hen and clucking before mounting her. The transfer of sperm happens quickly without the penetration normal in mammal mating. The cloaca, or vent, of the male and female touch and sperm are exchanged.\"",
"The general phenomenon is called parthenogenesis, which happens rarely in chickens and I don't think viable hatches are known. They do sometimes happen from other birds I think. Various other species do this more often, right up to some species of lizards that always lay fertile but unfertilized eggs.\n\nAs for why it happens, it varies from place to place but generally speaking the egg, through some screw-up of cell division during meiosis, produces an egg with two sets of DNA instead of one. This egg can then divide and develop as though its second set of DNA had come from a sperm. However, development often fails due to genetic abnormalities."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
54w7hz | why do governments fund private schools? | What exactly are they paying for? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54w7hz/eli5_why_do_governments_fund_private_schools/ | {
"a_id": [
"d85ezbj",
"d85fap1",
"d85rrth"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"It is cheaper to pay a private school than to build a school for example for the students that have a public school far from home.",
"They are paying for the teachers and the buildings and the books and so on.\n\nWhen the government fund private schools, it's because the point isn't to have public schools, but public *education* -- that is, the idea is that the state pays for the education, and not necessarily directly employ those doing it.",
"What do you mean by a private school? Are you in the US?\n\n\nIn the US, a \"public school\" is one run and financed by a local government. There's a variation of that called a \"charter school\", where it's run by a private company but financed by the government. Then there are \"private schools\", which are not financed by the government.\n\n\nIn general, public schools have no admission criteria ie: everyone can enter. Private schools can admit who they want, and usually have academic and/or financial criteria for admission. Charters can vary, but generally they seem to admit students on a lottery basis.\n\n\nFinancing in this case generally means active support, like paying tuition or providing loans. In general the government does not provide active financial support private schools in the US. They do get tax breaks as a non-profit, though.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6hovkj | how are rappers being inducted into the "rock n' roll hall of fame"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6hovkj/eli5_how_are_rappers_being_inducted_into_the_rock/ | {
"a_id": [
"dizz5ra",
"dizzshc"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Agreed: Rcok n' Roll music is something you can go \"cha cha cha, cha cha cha, rock, step\" to. Closely related to swing, jive, and cha-cha.\n\nRappers should be inducted into the hip-hop hall of fame, as they share a history with soul/hip-hop and dance hall, not rock and roll.\n\nThen again, there are all sorts of pop hits that are inducted into the rock and roll hall of fame, despite them having nothing to do with rock and roll. Rappers are hardly the first.",
"The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has essentially morphed into the Music Hall of Fame. I guess this happened because they are the only game in town. There is no Rap HOF or Pop HOF. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5ox3dv | why is it so hard for doctors to make breast implants look natural? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ox3dv/eli5_why_is_it_so_hard_for_doctors_to_make_breast/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcmpgtf",
"dcmqgb8"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"For starters, you're shoving non-biological material into biological material. You'll never match what was naturally grown. \n\nThat is kinda what you're going for in the first place anyway. A great reason to get implants is that your natural boobs were sagging too much. Implants never lose their shape, even when the body around them does. \n\nAlso, it's tough to tell where everything is going to land after healing. You do your best, but it takes some practice and skill to keep swelling and infections predictable. ",
"It isn't. New boob jobs are fantastic. The problem arises when women go for a size that is WAY too big for their body type, or go too big too quickly.\n\nMy wife has a boob job and it is virtually impossible to tell, unless you find the (miniscule) scar."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
w13yv | racism on 4chan | What's the reason? I'm mean really, is it a long running inside joke or what? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/w13yv/eli5_racism_on_4chan/ | {
"a_id": [
"c59bm0h",
"c59c4mr",
"c59cqis",
"c59cze1",
"c59d5vl",
"c59i4ku"
],
"score": [
17,
12,
6,
25,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The most commonly cited reason is that when \"weak\" outsiders come in to check it out, they are scared off by the offensive content. It's used to keep people not fit for 4chan away.",
"Racism is funny if not taken seriously. Besides its a taboo, something that 4chan likes to break. They are exercising their freedom in a way (retarded, very disturbing, but a way nevertheless).",
"I think isn't a good idea explain 4chan for a 5 year old. Try at /r/answers ",
"op is a faggot",
"[\"Internet Aspergers\"](_URL_0_)\n\n**TL;DR:**\"We have used the term because it seems to summarize ... cutting of connections to the outside world\"",
"13 year olds + anonymity = shitfest"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1559"
],
[]
] |
|
4q0kim | how do mres work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4q0kim/eli5how_do_mres_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4p8cuv",
"d4pm767"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"They use a magnesium heater. It's a small, teabag-like, pouch of magnesium in a heat-resistant plastic bag. You pour a small amount of water into the bag, and it reacts with the magnesium to create heat. Then you put the food, also in a heat resistant pouch, in the bag with the magnesium and water, and this reheats the food.\n\nThe gas from the reaction can become explosive, we used to make MRE bombs for fun in the Marines.\n\n*Edit* here's more info on the heater: _URL_0_",
"If you're asking about how they keep fresh, it's because they're vacuum sealed. There is little to no air in the packages. It's like canned food, but instead of a metal can it's a plastic pouch. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flameless_ration_heater"
],
[]
] |
||
6okt01 | how is there always a relevant xkcd? how!? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6okt01/eli5_how_is_there_always_a_relevant_xkcd_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"dki49rf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I imagine it functions along the same lines as Quantum Fetish Mechanics. By the time you think of it, it already exisists on the internet. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
cjqrdv | ; why are tattoos such taboo in some religions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cjqrdv/eli5_why_are_tattoos_such_taboo_in_some_religions/ | {
"a_id": [
"evf4v0n",
"evf5b82",
"evf5x14",
"evf7pkx",
"evfant4"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Some religions believe your body is the physical property of God. You are just borrowing it for your time on Earth and at the end when you die he gets it back. You're not allowed to damage it because it's not yours and a tattoo is damaging the skin.",
"1 Corinthians 3: 16-17 (KJV Bible) says \"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are”. \n\nSince our bodies are temples we should treat them with the utmost respect. Tattoos (and other things) are a disrespectful way to treat our bodies that God gave us.",
"because religion is a method of control. and therefore restricting what people can do / eat etc. helps maintain a grip on the populace. in Catholicism the act of confession was less about confessing your sins and more to do with placing the priest in a position of power by knowing the naughty things you did. giving him the power over the congregation by being able to remind them he knows there darkest thoughts.",
"For hebratic religions is was often to make it clear who was a follower of who. It my understanding that many of the non-Jewish religions used tattoos as ritual markings and branding to show that they are devoted to a specific worship. Since the Hebrew God said have no other Gods before me, and demanded no markings, then one way to stay clearly separate from the other religions was to not have tattoos or body markings. \n\nA good chunk of the Hebrew law was for this reason, and as such many scholars feel like it is not longer relevant today.",
"Tattoos have been used by some religions to mark the bearer as dedicated to a god, and in so doing request the deity's protection as a bearer of the god's markings. In that case, religions that forbid the worship of false gods (Islam, Christianity, Judaism are the most common examples), often also forbid tattooing, so as to avoid behaviors that could lead to worshiping a false god."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5andrx | what are graphics apis such as directx or vulkan and what do they do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5andrx/eli5_what_are_graphics_apis_such_as_directx_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9htq1v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"(Technical note, DirectX actually covers a bunch of things like sound and input, we'll assume we are talking about the Direct3D portion of DirectX which is what Vulkan does)\n\nThey both provide an abstraction layer, a language or set of commands, between the graphics card and the software that wants to use it. It means that even if a card from AMD does things differently then a card from NVidia they will both respond to a DirectX command like 'draw a polygon here'. They might accomplish the task in a different way but the end result will more or less be the same. This means programmers don't have to write a different version for every brand or generation of graphics card.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3jrsto | why don't snakes choke when they devour large prey whole / is it ever possible for a snake to choke ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jrsto/eli5_why_dont_snakes_choke_when_they_devour_large/ | {
"a_id": [
"curq7w0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yes, snakes can choke. Sometimes they start to swallow a prey, and when startled or find that it is too big, they reverse the swallowing process. It's usually not healthy for the snake to do repeatedly, and can hurt the snake.\n\nAlso, snakes have a special extendable tube trachea they push forward to the front of their jaw when swallowing a large prey. It's like a snorkel for eating."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4mprbp | why are basements (even finished ones!) still a smooth 10-15 degrees cooler than the rest of a house? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mprbp/eli5_why_are_basements_even_finished_ones_still_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3xduc6",
"d3xf1e6",
"d3xpbtt",
"d3xtnxj"
],
"score": [
11,
5,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Because basement floors are made of a small cement pad over dirt which is usually a good 8+ ft below grade. This is far enough down to not really be subjected to much seasonal temperature changes.",
"Part of it is that warm air rises, cold air sinks. That's also why it can get super hot upstairs.",
"The dirt surrounding the basement is cooler because of less light penetration and more moisture. It's dark and wet.",
"Underground temperature is pretty constant. Once you go so far into a cave system the temperature becomes constant. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ka71d | why can't you get prosecuted for posting videos/picture of yourself doing drugs while you can for posting a murder you've committed? | I know murder is far worse than smoking a joint but I've always wondered what stops law enforcement, for example, from prosecuting people showing their illegal grows and smoking on camera. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ka71d/why_cant_you_get_prosecuted_for_posting/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbmvo6m",
"cbmvow6",
"cbmvq4q",
"cbmyyw6",
"cbn2qh1",
"cbn3cuv",
"cbn467f"
],
"score": [
58,
11,
2,
5,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Typically the picture is a starting point for an investigation. \n\nIf you post a picture of you doing drugs, they interview you and you say \"fifth amendment\" or \"it wasn't drugs. It was something that looks like but isn't drugs,\" that's where the investigation ends. \n\nIf you post a picture/video of you killing someone, they open an investigation and comb the scene for evidence corroborating what you've said, look for a body, etc. ",
"You can be \"prosecuted\" for anything, you won't be found guilty of it though. If you just have a picture of a dead body but no one is known to be missing then you aren't going to go to jail. A picture doesn't mean you committed a crime.\n\nif they see it though they'll definitely look to see if that person can be identified and if they are alive or not. If they aren't then that's more then just a picture of evidence and they'll pursue it.\n\nFor drugs there isn't likely any other evidence, and it's not really as serious of a crime.",
"It's easy to say it wasn't really drugs, (they make it look very real in the movies) it is hard to say it wasn't really murder...",
"Doing drugs isn't illegal, but the possession of drugs is.",
"Mommy and Daddy aren't going to waste all their rest time after their busy day to find out who ate the cookie that was left on the table. However, if it was something more serious, like leaving a trail of muddy prints all over the white carpet, you're going to get a beating.",
"Proving you had drugs yesterday is a lot harder than proving you murdered someone yesterday. photos or no photos. ",
"Usually, a picture of what appears to be a dead body, coupled with the subsequent discovery of a dead body, is pretty strong evidence of criminal culpability (when combined with other factors) for which no statute of limitations exists. A picture of apparent drug use, on the other hand, is just that: apparent drug use that cannot be easily confirmed. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2jcos2 | the effectiveness of "traditional" advertising? | At this point in my life, I can't help but feel instantly turned off when I see advertisements for items in places like TV commercials, radio ads, advertisement boxes on websites, billboards, etc. In fact, personally, I feel as if I'm less likely to buy a product if I have to experience its advertising through those traditional avenues, and I'm sure there are many others out there who feel the same way.
At this point in time, how effective is traditional advertising, and how are people not completely averse to those advertising methods by now? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jcos2/eli5_the_effectiveness_of_traditional_advertising/ | {
"a_id": [
"clagikj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Companies have often wondered the same, and several have tried cutting the ad budget over the years. Usually they see sales drop by more than the budget is worth. So yeah, it makes a difference. \n\nAsk yourself this - you need to get some random product you don't buy much and have no sense of where to get good ones or what a good one even consists of. Where do you go first? Usually I pick a company name semi-randomly from among the ones I've heard advertisements from, and I don't bother comparison shopping unless it's a big ticket item. That's how advertisements work. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7vygh9 | why do things sound significantly different when you listen to them with one ear vs both ears? for example when only using one out of a pair of headphones, even when listening to things recorded in mono. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vygh9/eli5_why_do_things_sound_significantly_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtw7spc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For the same reason things look different when you look at them with one eye versus with two eyes (or at least, they should!). Just like we humans have binocular (bi-n-ocular, two eyes) vision, we have binaural (bi-n-aural, two ears) hearing. When you see something with just one eye, you lose a whole lot of information compared to seeing it with both eyes, such as the ability to tell how far away from you it is (depth perception). It's the same when you hear something with just one ear - you lose the same kind of information, and things sound much \"flatter\" and less vibrant. Plus there's the influence of whatever the other ear is hearing - maybe silence, maybe room noise, etc. The brain kind of mixes both channels to get a sense of the environment, and so it can have an impact on how you hear what goes into the other ear. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1hx419 | genetically modified organisms | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hx419/eli5_genetically_modified_organisms/ | {
"a_id": [
"cayth13"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Every organism has within it a set of instructions for how that organism is made and what it does. This is DNA.\n\nDNA is like an alphabet with only four letters. By spelling out different 'words' using these 'letters', we get the 'instructions' that describe the organism. \n\nA genetically modified organism is made when a scientist intentionally rewrites part of the DNA to make an organism do something different than it used to.\n\nOften, they'll copy a 'word' from a different organism and add it to the one being modified. For example, the reason daffodils are yellow is because of a yellow nutrient that happens to be healthy for people to eat - but we don't like eating daffodils. So what some scientists did was copy the word for that yellow nutrient and add it to the instructions for rice. This genetically modified rice is now yellow and can be eaten for people to get that nutrient. This example is called \"golden rice\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
n422h | why do some people still think that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military? | After watching the Rick Perry video that is gracing the front page, I was surprised to see that some people still hold this view. Why is it that this view is actually held in a 21st Century society? Is it because they don't trust them being in enclosed situations with the military's future, or is that a naive thought on my part? I'm from the UK and can only think of a recent time of this being raised as an actual issue in a satirical way in an episode of The Office.
Is it just the military or do they believe that homosexuals shouldn't be in the police force and other occupations?
Also, how is it that politicians can openly share such oppresive arguments in what is self-proclaimed 'The Land of the Free'? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/n422h/eli5_why_do_some_people_still_think_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"c363kzn",
"c364a0o",
"c363kzn",
"c364a0o"
],
"score": [
8,
4,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Not really LY5 but here goes:\n\nSome straight men project their own sexual appetite onto gays and then make predictions about the behavior of gays in an overwhelmingly male environment.\n\nSome believe that the military is among the 'most manly' and 'most honorable/virtuous' institutions. Some also believe that homosexuals exhibit behavior that is un-manly and dishonorable. As a result, they feel the open acceptance of gays in the military will diminish the reputation of the institution.\n\nOthers feel that even if gays conduct themselves professionally, the perceived objectification of their hetero comrades will be a constant worry/distraction, affecting the performance of the unit.",
"I'm going to try and portray this issue without bias. You asked for the reasons why people are against homosexuals in the military, so here they are:\n\nSome feel that homosexuals should not be able to serve on the frontlines for the same reasons that women are currently not allowed to serve on the frontlines - it could lead to risky irrational decisions that could jeopardize the safety of others.\n\nFor example, women are not allowed to serve in active frontline combat because some feel that men would subconsciously base their decisions around protecting the female rather than doing their duties. If a female soldier is shot in combat and is not in a reachable position, for example, a male soldier might take an unnecessary risk out of instinct. This might not happen if the shot solider was another male.\n\nIf you replace the female soldier in this scenario with a male solider, and the other male solider with a homosexual male solider, then the argument still stands. The homosexual solider might take a risk a heterosexual might not have if the homosexual felt a personal attraction towards the other solider, which could jeopardize the his own life and the lives of the other soldiers without him even realizing it.\n\nPlus, some would argue that the logistics of having gay soldiers in with heterosexual soldiers would be way too complicated. A squad gets very personal with each other during combat - sharing cramped quarters without any privacy in a life-threatening environment day in and day out for months is complicated as it is without adding in another variable. \n\nPlus, keeping gay soldiers out of active combat protects them - it takes one homophobic and irrational soldier to fuck things up. The homosexual soldier may be subject to intense hazing because of his sexuality, which could destroy his mental (and possibly physical) health, and could lead him to do something he might not otherwise do.\n\nI've only listed the pro-\"Don't Ask, Don't Tell\" arguments - I'm personally on the fence on the issue. The issue is exponentially more complicated than the \"pro-gay vs homophobes\" argument some people see it as. \n\n---\n\nIn response to your other questions:\n\nMost people do not see a problem with homosexuals in the police force. The issue with homosexuals in the military primarily deals with dealing with enclosed spaces for months at a time, along with intense squad-based combat logistics. There are openly gay police officers, firefighters, etc. around America, and most people are OK with it (those who aren't usually aren't OK with homosexuality in general).\n\nFree speech is only free if it's given to everyone, regardless of their views. It's not free speech if you're not allowed to voice your opinion, regardless of how radical it is. Politicians are still citizens under the Constitution, and are granted the same level of freedom of speech as everyone else. Silencing those for simply speaking their minds would be a greater injustice than letting them state their views, no matter how oppressive they can be.\n\n----\n\nSource: I've been around the military my whole life - with my father a former Marine and my mother a civilian working for the Navy, both my grandfathers being multi-war vets, and various friends and family members actively serving, along with growing up near one of the largest submarine bases in the world, I've definitely heard both sides of the issues facing the military. \n\nApologies for the long-winded response, but I hope I answered your questions and showed you another side to a very complicated and controversial issue in American military politics. Also, sorry for any grammar or spelling mistakes, since apparently making a grammar mistake is heresy on Reddit.\n",
"Not really LY5 but here goes:\n\nSome straight men project their own sexual appetite onto gays and then make predictions about the behavior of gays in an overwhelmingly male environment.\n\nSome believe that the military is among the 'most manly' and 'most honorable/virtuous' institutions. Some also believe that homosexuals exhibit behavior that is un-manly and dishonorable. As a result, they feel the open acceptance of gays in the military will diminish the reputation of the institution.\n\nOthers feel that even if gays conduct themselves professionally, the perceived objectification of their hetero comrades will be a constant worry/distraction, affecting the performance of the unit.",
"I'm going to try and portray this issue without bias. You asked for the reasons why people are against homosexuals in the military, so here they are:\n\nSome feel that homosexuals should not be able to serve on the frontlines for the same reasons that women are currently not allowed to serve on the frontlines - it could lead to risky irrational decisions that could jeopardize the safety of others.\n\nFor example, women are not allowed to serve in active frontline combat because some feel that men would subconsciously base their decisions around protecting the female rather than doing their duties. If a female soldier is shot in combat and is not in a reachable position, for example, a male soldier might take an unnecessary risk out of instinct. This might not happen if the shot solider was another male.\n\nIf you replace the female soldier in this scenario with a male solider, and the other male solider with a homosexual male solider, then the argument still stands. The homosexual solider might take a risk a heterosexual might not have if the homosexual felt a personal attraction towards the other solider, which could jeopardize the his own life and the lives of the other soldiers without him even realizing it.\n\nPlus, some would argue that the logistics of having gay soldiers in with heterosexual soldiers would be way too complicated. A squad gets very personal with each other during combat - sharing cramped quarters without any privacy in a life-threatening environment day in and day out for months is complicated as it is without adding in another variable. \n\nPlus, keeping gay soldiers out of active combat protects them - it takes one homophobic and irrational soldier to fuck things up. The homosexual soldier may be subject to intense hazing because of his sexuality, which could destroy his mental (and possibly physical) health, and could lead him to do something he might not otherwise do.\n\nI've only listed the pro-\"Don't Ask, Don't Tell\" arguments - I'm personally on the fence on the issue. The issue is exponentially more complicated than the \"pro-gay vs homophobes\" argument some people see it as. \n\n---\n\nIn response to your other questions:\n\nMost people do not see a problem with homosexuals in the police force. The issue with homosexuals in the military primarily deals with dealing with enclosed spaces for months at a time, along with intense squad-based combat logistics. There are openly gay police officers, firefighters, etc. around America, and most people are OK with it (those who aren't usually aren't OK with homosexuality in general).\n\nFree speech is only free if it's given to everyone, regardless of their views. It's not free speech if you're not allowed to voice your opinion, regardless of how radical it is. Politicians are still citizens under the Constitution, and are granted the same level of freedom of speech as everyone else. Silencing those for simply speaking their minds would be a greater injustice than letting them state their views, no matter how oppressive they can be.\n\n----\n\nSource: I've been around the military my whole life - with my father a former Marine and my mother a civilian working for the Navy, both my grandfathers being multi-war vets, and various friends and family members actively serving, along with growing up near one of the largest submarine bases in the world, I've definitely heard both sides of the issues facing the military. \n\nApologies for the long-winded response, but I hope I answered your questions and showed you another side to a very complicated and controversial issue in American military politics. Also, sorry for any grammar or spelling mistakes, since apparently making a grammar mistake is heresy on Reddit.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7svehy | how does the reusable gel heating pads work? | You know, the ones with a clicky metal thing inside? I'm sick with flu and cooking my pads, and I need some answers. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7svehy/eli5_how_does_the_reusable_gel_heating_pads_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt7uy9i"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is a chemical mixture inside, that when excited (by the metallic disk being clicked) produces a self-sustaining exothermic reaction. What this means in layman speak is that the reaction, once started, will continue on its own until it runs out of material, and that the reaction releases heat.\n\nWhen you heat the pads afterwards, you are using heat to cause an endothermic reaction; ie. a reaction that requires heat. You can think of it as melting the stuff back to liquid (or gel) so you can re-use it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4a7olb | if we know so much about the human body, why is there so much conflicting information on topics like weight loss and muscle gain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a7olb/eli5_if_we_know_so_much_about_the_human_body_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0y2dhe",
"d0y2xz6"
],
"score": [
39,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, because the weight loss and fitness industries are huge, and people want to make money. Really the basics always boil down to \"eat less calories, exercise more\", but plenty of folks like to dress that up in order to turn a profit.",
"Because the studies are often small, which means it is difficult to observe an effect. You can use math to pool them (meta-analysis) but those have their own criticisms.\n\nWhen the effect is small and accurate measurement is difficult, as in muscle growth (hypertrophy) differences between two protocols in only 6 weeks, it will be difficult to tell whether there is a difference.\n\nThere is also a large amount of inter-subject variability in responses. It is very likely you and I would grow different amounts of muscle doing the same workout, just because we are genetically different.\n\nIn terms of resistance training, we know a lot about how the average, young, untrained white man responds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6wzotu | how did french, german and italian speaking (and some other) people decide to become switzerland together, instead of the germans becoming german, the french becoming french, etc. ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wzotu/eli5_how_did_french_german_and_italian_speaking/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmby42e",
"dmbz2y9",
"dmbzvtn"
],
"score": [
4,
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Switzerland was formed when a group of Principalities decided to band together and form a loose confederation in 1291. The various 'states', called Cantons, were allowed to maintain their own language. Other states joined later and the Swiss army also took land (at one time they held Milan Italy). in the 1500's they were beaten back by a French and Venetian alliance. They gave up expansion and chose neutrality which allowed them to form a more uniform, while still diffused, nation.\n\nThere is a lot more but the TL;DR is that a bunch of little states took advantage of different power vacuums and chose to work together while remaining individual. They have been highly successful at this so why mess with success?",
"Switzerland formed before the concept of a \"nation state\" was a popular thing. So people who spoke French didn't necessrily feel like they had to be part of the same country as other French speaking people. Germany and Italy weren't even unified countries by that point.\n\nBy the time nationalist movements gained momentum in the 19th Century, when Germany and Italy became unified countries, Switzerland had already been around a long time as a stable and prosperous country. So most people there were happy to consider themselves Swiss and didn't have a strong desire to join with the other Germans and Italians. They probably didn't see other German/Italian/French speaking people as *their* people, just some other people who happen to speak the same (or similar) language. Kind of like how Americans don't consider themselves English just because they speak English.",
"It began life in the 13th century, when the modern concept of a nation state simply didn't exist. That idea didn't really come into existence until the signing of a treaty called the Peace of Westphalia, about 400 years later, which introduced the then revolutionary idea that sovereign states with definite borders could be created, that they shouldn't interfere in each other's affairs, and that they could be held in check by a balance of power.\n\nThat was still centuries away when a couple of cantons -- essentially microstates -- within the Holy Roman Empire decided to cooperate in ensuring that in the mountains of the central Alps, trade could be allowed to take place in peace.\n\nAt the time, the Holy Roman Empire was a complicated patchwork of tiny states, constantly changing as local ruling dynasties intermarried, died out, split, waged war on each other and so on.\n\nBut these central Alpine communities decided instead to work together, to look out for each other, help each other in times of war and settle local disputes among themselves.\n\nMore and more cantons joined this confederacy, and it's important to remember that at the time, it didn't occur to people to draw national boundaries where there happened to be linguistic boundaries. The language you spoke didn't really have any bearing on who you owed your allegience to.\n\nThis confederacy grew, and partly by conquest: in this first \"heroic\" stage of Swiss history, they would often take territories by force, deposing the local rulers. That phase ended with the Battle of Marignano in 1515, which the Swiss lost; this was the point at which Switzerland pretty much stopped growing.\n\nAfter that, the Reformation came to Switzerland, dividing it into Protestant and Catholic parts. This caused a civil war, but the confederacy survived. When the Thirty Years War raged throughout the Holy Roman Empire, the Swiss -- still split between Protestant and Catholic but still cooperating with each other -- couldn't pick a side and so kept out of it. And that's one reason they were granted their status of sovereign state at the Peace of Westphalia, completely independent of the Holy Roman Empire.\n\nIn the 18th century Switzerland was invaded by France (Napoleon wanted control of the Alpine passes), which imposed on the country a central government subservient to France, reducing the cantons to mere administrative divisions. This was very unpopular, and the Swiss refused to fight alongside the French when Austria and Russia also invaded Switzerland. Eventually, Napoleon agreed to restore some of Switzerland's autonomy and the cantons. A few years later, the Congress of Vienna, which had convened to sort out the mess left by the Napoleonic Wars, officially gave Switzerland back its independence; also, all the other European countries agreed to recognise Swiss neutrality for ever after.\n\nSince then, Switzerland has been quietly getting on with the business of making chocolate and cheese, and staying well out of international conflicts.\n\nTL;DR: Switzerland was created at a time before our concept of the nation state existed, and since then the Swiss have been proudly not taking orders from anyone else."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
22cbwk | how (in) effective is the "pull out" method as a form of birth control? | Weird conversation to be having with a 5 year old, I know. But statistically what are the odds of a "pull out" resulting in a pregnancy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22cbwk/eli5_how_in_effective_is_the_pull_out_method_as_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgleix4",
"cglem2x",
"cglemg4",
"cglezqz",
"cglf66k",
"cglggke",
"cglhxol",
"cglid20",
"cglilki",
"cglioym",
"cglna0w",
"cgm0k0n"
],
"score": [
15,
20,
13,
3,
5,
3,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Theoretically it could be < 100% if executed ideally. Consistent proper form yields rates of 1/20 couples getting pregnant per year with inconsistent form yielding 1/4 couples getting pregnant per year. The 1/20 even when done properly may be partially attributed to precum containing sperm from previous ejaculations in which case urinating would help flush the system. [source and more reading]\n\nedit: Failed with the link and don't recall the site I got the stats from but it was top google.",
"Can confirm. Have child because of this method.",
"I been doin it for 5 years... works for me. that or I'm infertile.",
"If you correctly it is something like 95% effective, however it is rarely used perfectly. ",
"Failure rate is higher than 4 % per year, typically around 22% [(wiki)](_URL_0_). This means if you use that method for one year, you have a 1/5 chance to become a parent.",
"[He is a short video on the subject, which I assume is accurate.](_URL_0_)",
"The Pearl-index is precisely what you're looking for.\n\nThe pull out method (coitus interruptus) has a Pearl-index of 4-18, which means that if 100 women were to use this method for the entirety of one year, 4-18 of them would become pregnant.\n\nA lot more and detailed information is easily available on the web.\n\nDon't they teach you these things in school?",
"For what it's worth, it worked for my girlfriend and me for about 7 years, although I've never been tested for my own fertility. She now has children with another man and my current wife is unable to bear children.",
"This is the only method that the wife and I have used for 15+ years including high school. The only children we have are the three we were trying for. ",
"I've used it for 4 years now and no kids. Girlfriend also takes the pill so I'm not a complete idiot.",
"It works well if done correctly especially since pre-ejaculate has little to no sperm in it. Of course this is assuming first time sex for that day after using the bathroom which flushes out the tubing if you know what i mean. \n\nThe problem is that doing it correctly part first you really need to be knowledgeable about these things which most who are trying it aren't. The second part second is having that mental and physical control which most people don't. Its human male nature to not want to pull out and the main reason your having sex in the first place is because it feels good. This leads to the \"just a few more thrusts\" or wait to the last possible second mentality that makes it an awful choice. That combined with the fact that people also often have sex while under the influence which further lowers your control over your body and you're absolutely playing with a loaded gun.",
"Well shit...shes on the pill, I use a condom and I pull out.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUGvxiNTjDU"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1stkhy | why do we keep discovering ancient artifacts and why are they so rare? wouldn't the world have accumulated mass amounts of stuff over 1000s of years and be common to find? | Have they all been destroyed over time? Or have we already found most of them? With so many civilizations dating all the way back it's not like they could just disappear. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1stkhy/why_do_we_keep_discovering_ancient_artifacts_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce13agu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Things break down and more importantly tend to be reused by descendants. While that piece of Roman armor might be precious *today*, in the ancient world it was just Grandpa Flavius' old helmet, and we really needed to make a new plow, so we'd smelt it down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9hpm0b | how does the anti-shoplifting system in a supermarket work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9hpm0b/eli5_how_does_the_antishoplifting_system_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6dn6df"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It’s these stuck on thing that have a slight magnetic field to them the get activated when you walk through the thing that beep. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
70wd8j | why would a railgun be better than a regular cannon? | Regarding the railgun US Army just tested... It seems like a waste of money if it just fires shells a different way. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70wd8j/eli5_why_would_a_railgun_be_better_than_a_regular/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn6c72d",
"dn6c83t",
"dn6cdsc",
"dn6cg11"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
4,
11
],
"text": [
"I mean, military development since the sling has been trying to figure out how to fire projectiles a different way. If it's a better way, that's important, whether you're talking cannons, catapults, or railguns.\n\nRailguns are capable of higher velocities, which means that the same projectile would do more damage or travel further. Long-term, there's reason to think that they'll be cheaper, and more convenient, since you wouldn't need to use explosives, which can exp....y'know. Go off.",
"It fires at a much higher velocity and is a lot simpler. There will be no powder or even a warhead, just a heavy chunk of metal blasting out of the end\n\nThe higher speed of a rail gun gives it an extremely long effective range, let's it penetrate a variety of targets extremely well, and enables a large number of rounds to hit at the same time by firing them with slightly different trajectories",
"The main advantage for a railgun would be the range. For conventional guns, you need bigger barrel to deliver more damage, but launching such weight requires more explosives, which limits the size of the shell for safety reasons.\n\nBigger shells also means more tonnage and an ammo store is one of the most vulnerable parts of a ship.\n\nWith a railgun the shells are easy to manufacture and are nonexplosives, also smaller and lighter than conventional shells and capable of delivering massive damage with the speed of the impact alone.\n\nThe only thing needed for a railgun is electricity and large ships can be fitter with nuclear reactors very easily.\n\nAs long as such ship will have its reactors functional, it could take out any number of ships from a distance well past the horizon, then cannibalize them, make more shells and repeat.\n\nIf a fleet of such ships work in conjunction with spy planes/satelites/drones, it can wreck absolute devastation onto an unprepared battlegroup.",
"A few reasons:\n\n1) muzzle velocity. The theoretical speed of a projectile is much greater, providing better range, accuracy, and penetration.\n\n2) projectile size and cost. Using EMF to launch a projectile instead of gunpowder dramatically shrinks the inventory of firing charges and shells you need to keep on a ship.\n\n3) safety. Removing most of the explosives from a ship that may itself get shot at eliminates the catastrophic secondary detonations that sank so many ships in WWII. The torpedoing merely wounds large ships, it's often the ammunition or fuel cooking off that actually destroys them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1qo3sz | why are consoles/phones so limited at launch and sold out for a while after? these are huge companies, it seems they could supply as much as needed. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qo3sz/eli5_why_are_consolesphones_so_limited_at_launch/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdeqmhk",
"cdeqo50",
"cdeqx50"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Almost all consoles come out selling at a loss - meaning, it costs them more to make the console than they actually make back from selling it. Over time, the cost of producing the console's parts goes down (as they're relatively older), so it's more cost-effective for them to wait a little longer to meet the demand.",
"These companies enjoy market conditions in which they can act like monopolies. Without going into too much technical details over firm dynamics, it is in a monopoly's interest not to over-saturate the market with their product. This drives up demand and makes it more inelastic. Put simply, those who will buy it, will pay more. \n\nMost of these products like iPhones and Xboxes could probably be sold at $100 or $200, but because monopolies (or ones with good marketing strategies) can more or less sell with impunity, they enjoy large profits from each units sold. \n\ntl:dr The companies make more profit by under-supplying, driving up demand, and the price consumers are willing to pay. ",
"They COULD have a huge production line, but after that initial launch, those production lines are going to be half useless. The launch rush is not sustained for a long time. You build up a stockpile with what will be your regular production line and release at a strategic time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
qq228 | why do most people need complete silence to sleep? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qq228/why_do_most_people_need_complete_silence_to_sleep/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3zjgrf",
"c3zjn5p",
"c3zjo59",
"c3zk0qa",
"c3zkags"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they cannot sleep with noise.",
"It's difficult for me to sleep without a fan or another type of constant, white noise. When it's \"completely silent\", it's really not because any sudden, quiet sound becomes audible when you normally might not notice it. So unless you're just about to fall asleep you're forced to focus on it and your brain stays awake and so do you. My two cents. ",
"I have a hard time sleeping if it's completely silent.",
"Yeah, *most* people don't need complete silence to sleep. Most people live in cities, no complete silence there. I live in the woods, I fall asleep to the sound of the creek every night. I couldn't easily sleep with complete silence. ",
"noises distract me, distracting me keeps me alert,I can't go to sleep if I'm alert."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3khd4e | why would an automaker choose an inline 6, v6, or horizontally opposed 6 cylinder engine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3khd4e/eli5_why_would_an_automaker_choose_an_inline_6_v6/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuxfeh9",
"cuxfs2e",
"cuxhzpt"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Sometimes it helps fit the car's design (for example, a horizontally opposed engine could be mounted lower, resulting in a lower hood. Most carmakers choose a design type and stick with it, perfecting the design to get better performance from the engine.",
"A lot of it is habit and tradition. BMW for example has always done I6s not V6s and continue to do so. American automakers do V6s in part because the first ones were made by removing two cylinders from V8s. That got them into doing V6 engines and they have stuck with that mostly. \n\nThere are some advantages and disadvantages of each that can play into it. V6 engines are really compact compared to the other types. Straight-6 engines on the other hand are balanced by design and don't require additional counterweights or other balancing mechanisms. Automakers will also take these into consideration. ",
"Packaging is probably the single biggest factor. Front wheel drive cars tend to have very crowded engine bays, with the engine, transmission, and suspension components all competing for the same space under the hood. Narrow angle V6s are a naturally compact design which makes them very popular in front wheel drive sedans.\n\nBMW uses a lot of inline sixes. The cars they make are almost exclusively rear wheel drive, and their brand identity focuses pretty heavily on handling and performance. A long narrow engine puts more weight towards the center of the car and gives the guys engineering the front suspension more space to work with. This combined with the inline six's natural smoothness makes it a good choice for a performance sedan.\n\nFlat sixes are kind of a niche design, only really used by Porsche and Subaru in modern times. Porsches are rear engined, so a short wide engine works well because the engine has a low center of gravity and doesn't have to compete for space with the front suspension bits. Subaru's signature thing is their all wheel drive system which has (AFAIK) always used a flat 4 or 6. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b60wdm | why do 3rd party booking sites (agoda, booking etc.) have cheaper rates than the hotel itself? and why does the hotel price match the rates on the 3rd party booking sites? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b60wdm/eli5_why_do_3rd_party_booking_sites_agoda_booking/ | {
"a_id": [
"ejh8zg8",
"ejh98hx",
"ejhesnu",
"ejhi3nu",
"ejhi9f1",
"ejhie7n",
"ejhjzv0",
"ejhlhzh"
],
"score": [
71,
10,
3,
6,
4,
3,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"The hotel doesn’t want to insult the guests that paid full price and make them feel like they’re getting ripped off. Unrented rooms are a waste. There still going to exist whether occupied or not. As long as the revenue received is greater than the cost of operation (maids, electricity water gas etc) any money made is better than nothing. So they let the third party sites sell at a discount in hopes of filling up the rooms that would otherwise go unoccupied. \n\n\nChances are if they overbook and nobody no shows if you booked via a third party value site they’ll bump you for a full paying guest. ",
"Hotels pay those booking sites a fee to be on the site.\nThe booking sites use part of that fee to offer a lower room price.\n\nThe hotels can choose to give you a discount if you book there directly, but they won't straight up lower their rates, because it would cut their proffits.",
"In addition to the other things mentioned in this thread, there's the scam that sites like _URL_0_ run where you book a room at a hotel at a reduced price for that hotel, but when you get there the hotel says \"Oh, sorry, we overbooked and are full, we've reserved you a room at this far less nice hotel around the corner.\" and keep your money.\n\n\nScummy business.",
"I shop around diligently. I no longer find booking sites to be less expensive. They were WAY CHEAPER in the heyday and I used to get AMAZING Priceline deals. Now I shop around, visit the hotel home page, find the same price and book there. My 14 year old daughter has noticed a pattern, she thinks it’s thrilling that I “always get free upgrades.” I don’t always, but I do often enough that she’s noticed and my best friends have noticed. I’d LOVE if you could direct me to deals, but right now I’m getting the most value by booking direct, showing up about an hour before advertised check in and being super polite “hey, I know we’re early, can we leave our luggage with bell services, we’re early, we’ll just explore the neighborhood..... oh you DO have a room:.. it’s a suite? Well, sure, thank you SO MUCH!” \n\nETA: I’m not angling for this. It’s been coincidence. Who LANDS so late in the afternoon that it’s time for a 4 pm check in? ",
"They pay even less than that. I had a hotel once accidentally give me the receipt from the 3rd party booking site. I don't remember the number, but I paid something like $130 to the 3rd party, and then the 3rd party only Gabe the hotel like $80.",
"Third party sites have contracts (or should have contracts) with the hotels. The rates probably depend on the hotel’s strategy (for example, if the third party sites have more reach than their own direct sales, while some hotels have the cheapest option by booking directly with them). Then you also have to take into consideration the restrictions (full payment in advance or flexible payment). Or it could be hidden behind memberships. Also, some sites don’t show the full price (taxes and service charges) until the final confirmation page, so when you compare, you have to take that into account.",
"Buying in bulk is a large part of it. These companies are able to buy thousands of 'room-nights' from the hotel chain, and then sell them back individually to guests online. By doing so, they by them at a discount and get to name a price somewhat higher than that during reselling.\n\nThe reason why individual hotels (most don't belong to, for example, Hilton or Holiday Inn, they are franchised out and owned by people who just pay to be part of that company for a number of benefits) will price match 3rd party rates is because when you book through one of those, you're making a contract with the .com site, and that site is making a DIFFERENT contract with the hotel. So while the hotel might cost $100, and the .com might sell it to YOU for $75, they are paying that specific hotel only $50 for that night. The hotel would rather get your $75 than the 3rd parties $50.",
"Hotels know people use online travel agencies (OTAs) and 'opaque' channels to book and will not visit _URL_1_ to book a room.\n\nHotels dont want to miss out on those 'channels'.\n\nHotels pay the channel a commission on any room booked. Channel uses that to subsidize (their own points programs, not directly), but there is also price competition. \n\n_URL_0_ ends up having to match to keep guests happy, but the hotel doesnt pay commission so it still works better. Obviously the hotel would prefer everyone to just book through _URL_1_ (hence loyalty programs to encourage that).\n\nSource: former director of finance of a hotel and I work for a large hotel owner.\n\nA revenue manager would have more technicals than me. Revenue management is way to min/max for me and I avoid it like the plague, but god bless them.\n\nEdit: this might help, too. Revenue managers will open and close channels based on demand. If demand is high, third party sites will be cut and only _URL_1_ will be left open. The best available rate (BAR) will be talen down and only RACK (think msrp) is available. \n\nWhen demand is low, we need heads in beds so cheaper channels are opened and _URL_1_ BAR is opened for loyalty members."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"hotels.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"Brand.com",
"brand.com"
]
] |
||
7htolc | how can facebook identify people in photos before they're tagged, but computers have difficulty recognizing other objects in a photo? | I've done several of those captcha tests where I had to identify things like windows or street signs. How can a computer not identify those, but be able to recognize faces in Facebook pictures?
Relevant XKCD: _URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7htolc/eli5_how_can_facebook_identify_people_in_photos/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqtqf80",
"dqtqiv4",
"dqu6yj7"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Computer vision is developing rapidly. In just the last few years, capabilities like this have become routine.\n\nThe pictures in captcha tests have been specially chosen to be a mixture of ones computers have a hard time with, and ones computers already know the answers to.",
"You've misinterpreted those captchas as something that computers are *never* able to do\n\nIn fact, they've identified millions and possibly billions of windows and street signs. The ones that it gives you are the weird ones that have tripped up the algorithm and it wants a second opinion on. Bots are unlikely to be able to solve those efficiently because they were built for trolling the internet, not for identifying street signs and they don't have millions of correct identifications to draw quick conclusions from unlike a person\n\nMatching things *most* of the time is infinitely easier than matching things *all* of the time, the only ones you see are the hard ones. You'll notice that facebook often can't identify all the people in pictures, or it guesses weird ones because it pulled from data such as who it thinks you were likely with at the time.\n\nBig data is weird, and don't believe for a minute that google is outsourcing all of its sign locating to captchas",
"The captchas are designed to keep out spammers who create fake accounts or whatever. They're doing this in large quantities, and don't want to spend much computing power on any one site, so anything that slows them down means they're more likely to move on to easier targets.\n\nFacebook is a multi-billion dollar company and uses large server farms and has lots of computer power at their disposal. And of course, they want to keep their users happy. Programmers have spent a lot of time optimizing the programs to find faces in particular (not so much street signs and things). I remember years ago, my iPhotos program thought that a bowl of potato salad was my dad. Facial recognition has improved considerably since then!\n\nSo yes, those captchas won't work forever, but they are currently keeping out spammers."
]
} | [] | [
"https://xkcd.com/1425/"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
kp923 | why technology develops in a somewhat linear order? | I realize that it's not exactly linear, I'm essentially talking about Moore's Law here.
What I don't understand is why this law applies. E.g. my older computer has 2 GB of RAM, my newer one has 4 GB of RAM and I see computers on the market with 6 or 8 GB of RAM. Why doesn't one company spend the time to develop a 256 GB stick of ram that fits current computers?
A possible answer to this is that the companies want to sell more, so they can sell you upgraded RAM every few years rather than one giant stick of RAM that will last decades. My counter-question to this is, if it's the case, why wouldn't giant projects, like the formerly extant NASA space program develop this technology for space shuttles and other equipment that demanded perfect performance?
**EDIT:**If I had to summarize the answers here, it sounds like it's all about economics. Despite the advantages of beating out the competition, it seems to be most cost effective to develop tech in order. Great discussion, guys. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kp923/eli5_why_technology_develops_in_a_somewhat_linear/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2m2mu3",
"c2m3mx5",
"c2m2mu3",
"c2m3mx5"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"1) In the typical Moores law graph, the Y axis is not linear, thus the growth is not linear \n\n\n2) What your describing is doubling and not really 'linear'. Going from a Commodore 64 (w/ 64K memory) in early 80's to a home computer with 8Gig Ram is 5 orders of magnitude. At that growth rate, computers in 2030 will have close to a terrabyte of Ram. \n\n3) going back over a period of 1000's or even 100's of years, there are technological \"explosions\" ... there was one at the turn of the last century, 1900, which led to some 'futurists' at the time to proclaim \"we have learned everything that can be learned\". \n\n4) Going from each generation of chip (pentium 4, pentium 5, --- > Core 2 Duo, Intel I7, etc) is pushing the extreme bounds of manufacturing and technical know how. If you can push the boundary and be 10x faster then your competitor, it is not commercial advantageous or viable to spend 1000 times more on research cost to get to be 1000x faster. It simply wouldn't sell.\n\nRight now if you could buy and I7 CPU for $400 that was 6GHz fast!!!!! ORRRRRR, you could pay $400,000 for a CPU that was was 600 GHz FAST!!!!!! ... really ... which one will you buy.....which one will sell a million units come Christmas time? Most people already rationalize cost/benefit analysis and find the sweet spot\n\n\n Computer XYZ#1 == $1,500\n Computer XYZ#2 == $2,500 (2 times faster then #1)\n Computer XYZ#3 == $4,000 (just 1.5 times faster then #2 )\n Computer XYZ#4 == $6000 (.75 times faster then #3)\n\n\nMost people say ... well #2 is the \"sweet spot\", and #2 would probably sell the best\n\n\n",
"256 GB of ram would be almost enough to play dwarf fortress at full graphics.",
"1) In the typical Moores law graph, the Y axis is not linear, thus the growth is not linear \n\n\n2) What your describing is doubling and not really 'linear'. Going from a Commodore 64 (w/ 64K memory) in early 80's to a home computer with 8Gig Ram is 5 orders of magnitude. At that growth rate, computers in 2030 will have close to a terrabyte of Ram. \n\n3) going back over a period of 1000's or even 100's of years, there are technological \"explosions\" ... there was one at the turn of the last century, 1900, which led to some 'futurists' at the time to proclaim \"we have learned everything that can be learned\". \n\n4) Going from each generation of chip (pentium 4, pentium 5, --- > Core 2 Duo, Intel I7, etc) is pushing the extreme bounds of manufacturing and technical know how. If you can push the boundary and be 10x faster then your competitor, it is not commercial advantageous or viable to spend 1000 times more on research cost to get to be 1000x faster. It simply wouldn't sell.\n\nRight now if you could buy and I7 CPU for $400 that was 6GHz fast!!!!! ORRRRRR, you could pay $400,000 for a CPU that was was 600 GHz FAST!!!!!! ... really ... which one will you buy.....which one will sell a million units come Christmas time? Most people already rationalize cost/benefit analysis and find the sweet spot\n\n\n Computer XYZ#1 == $1,500\n Computer XYZ#2 == $2,500 (2 times faster then #1)\n Computer XYZ#3 == $4,000 (just 1.5 times faster then #2 )\n Computer XYZ#4 == $6000 (.75 times faster then #3)\n\n\nMost people say ... well #2 is the \"sweet spot\", and #2 would probably sell the best\n\n\n",
"256 GB of ram would be almost enough to play dwarf fortress at full graphics."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
267id9 | - how does amazon estimate delivery time? | I ordered 2 things on Amazon from the same seller. Both were ordered at the same time, they're both exactly the same size and weight, and they're shipping from the same facility. One is expected to get to me tomorrow and the other on June 11th. How do they get these dates? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/267id9/eli5_how_does_amazon_estimate_delivery_time/ | {
"a_id": [
"chodpdr"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Past experiences and logistics from past shipments."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3b4ci3 | why this goat faints. | * _URL_0_
I'd like an explanation to why this goat so happens to faint when he touches the grass.
Thank you!
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b4ci3/eli5_why_this_goat_faints/ | {
"a_id": [
"csipr1b",
"csiq3fl",
"csitzd2"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Fainting goats aren't rare. They usually do it as a defense mechanism or a reaction to being scared, like a possum playing dead. For some reason, this goat is afraid of grass.",
"Fainting goats (usually when younger, they often grow out of it) have a condition where, when startled, their leg muscles stiffen suddenly. This usually makes them fall over and look as though they appeared to faint.\n\nIt's a genetic disorder, as far as we can tell. We domesticated them because they produce lots of cashmere whilst being really easy to keep, so it's likely the disorder appeared in them after domestication, meaning evolution didn't get to weed them out because we were protecting them from predators that would otherwise have an easy meal. That's mostly conjecture though.\n\nIn this particular case, the goat is apparently startled by grass, at least enough to trigger the muscle reaction.",
"The goat doesn't faint. It doesn't lose consciousness. It's just a muscle spasm. They exist in numbers because humans bred them in numbers. In the wild they would all be dead because they would be eaten by wolves."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsAgNl1p974"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5iunn8 | why is water a liquid? | Dumb question maybe, but, how can heavier materials like carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide exist in a gas state while H2O exists as a liquid?
Edit: As stated in comments; at room temperature. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5iunn8/eli5_why_is_water_a_liquid/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbb7ial"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The state of any given material is based mainly on the interaction between two different things: The amount of energy in a given amount of the substance, and the strength of the attraction between the molecules/atoms of the substance. The stronger the attraction between molecules, the more likely it will be in liquid, or even solid, state, because it take more energy to overcome those attractive forces.\n\n\nIn the case of water, water has Hydrogen bonds, which draw the hydrogen of one molecule of water to another molecule. It also is polar, meaning one end of the molecule is positive, and one molecule is negative. This increases the attractive strength between the molecules. Carbon dioxide has neither of the these, and so can exist more easily as a gas because it takes less energy to break the attraction between molecules. Same Applies to sulphur dioxide."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
29vir5 | why are "bad" drugs sometimes ingested through snorting or smoking, but never "real" drugs? | Cocaine is snorted. Tobacco and cannabis are smoked. Why don't I ever get a prescription that is taken in in these forms? It's always a pill or syrup. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29vir5/eli5_why_are_bad_drugs_sometimes_ingested_through/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciovz97",
"ciovzgq",
"ciowwfx",
"cioxofx",
"cioxt9w"
],
"score": [
12,
6,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Some medical drugs are inhalants (many asthma and allergy drugs).\n\nMany other medical drugs are injectable.\n\nI imagine smoking and snorting are harder to control dosage with (how much are you inhaling versus letting escape into the atmosphere) and getting precise dosage is important when treating an illness.",
"I believe it is a matter of dosage--it is easier to know the exact dosage you are taking when you take a pill or syrup.\nThere are some medicines that are inhaled (steroid treatments for asthma for instance), but these are definitely the exception.",
"Some medics carry this adapter that screws on the end of a syringe replacing the needle, it is a foam triangle that sprays a very fine mist into your nose. It is used when starting a line on someone would take too long or is too difficult. I believe its mostly used with Narcan, which is used to treat heroin overdoses. If anyone one is really interested in what it looks like, I have a couple in my car, I can take a picture next time I'm in it. On another note, most pills can be snorted and have the same effects, they take affect quicker when snorted, but you don't get the same dose because not all will be absorbed into your bloodstream. I'm sure that they don't advertise this because most people wouldn't want to have to snort their daily med and you wouldn't want to crush up and snort something that is time-released. I have, on a couple of occasions snorted oxycodone because I was in an immense amount of pain and didn't want to wait 15-20 min for it to kick in if I just swallowed it. I did it at a hospital once, in front of a nurse. She flipped out until I explained why I did it and then just told me to ask for morphine via IV next time.",
"Both snorting and smoking are (or can be) bad for you. Smoking involves inhaling particles into your lungs, which is not something they were designed for. Snorting can damage the nasal cavity, and ruin the nasal septum. \nAside from smoking there are other forms of inhalation though. The drug/medicine can be vaporised (basically heated to the point it gives off the effective elements, but below burning temperature) or put into a mist in some other way. This is done both with recreational drugs (cannabis, e-cigs, etcetera) and with certain medicine such as asthma medication.",
"Well, Inhalers, you, well, inhale, Epi-pens for allergy you inject into your thigh, some Insulin you inject, and some insulin pumps are tubes going straight into your body, and i dont think many meds are \"smoked\" because almost anything besides air into your lungs isnt too good for you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
78hydj | what are vectors and scalars? what is magnitude in this context? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/78hydj/eli5what_are_vectors_and_scalars_what_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dotxpws",
"dou3l3i"
],
"score": [
24,
2
],
"text": [
"A scalar is basically just a number. E.g. I am moving at 30mph. 30 is a scalar.\n\nA vector is a scalar plus a direction. E.g. I am moving *north* at 30mph. Here, the 30 is the \"magnitude\" of the vector, and north is the direction.",
"Picture a town, with a grid layout. You get on your bike and start cycling. Your bike has an odometer attached. That odometer will go up no matter which direction you go in. This is a scalar. It just has the one dimension. Total distance travelled. \n\nNow, instead of just the total distance you travel, you care about where you're going. You cycle north for a block, east for a block, north again, then west 2 blocks. You've travelled a total of 5 blocks, but you're not 5 blocks away from the start. \n\nYou can work out the distance and bearing, but it's just as useful to say you're 2 blocks north and 1 block west. This is a vector. The key here is that there are two components - Two dimensions. The north/south component (2 blocks north) and the east/west component (1 block west, or -1 block east), and we can write this as (2, -1). You can take multiple trips, and add the components together separately if you want. You could add a third dimension if you found a way to go up and down. \n\nMagnitude is the actual length of the vector. You can treat the north and west as two sides of a triangle, and work out the length of the third side to get the magnitude, using Pythagoras' theorem."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
cjczkg | how does a software input into a computer physically change a transistor | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cjczkg/eli5_how_does_a_software_input_into_a_computer/ | {
"a_id": [
"evchykw",
"evcieg3",
"evcl85m"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Input is made on a wire by turning a voltage on and off. (We call on 1 and we call off 0.) Transistors respond directly to voltage.",
"* As far as the hardware is concerned, everything is a value in memory. \n* Software tells the processor what values to put in memory.\n* Software tells the processor where in memory to get values from. \n* Transistors are part of the hardware they just react to changes in voltage.",
"Engineer here, this isn't 100% the entire story, but it's ELI5.\n\nSoftware input doesn't change the shape, state, or move or do anything physical to a transistor. A transistor is just another component whose shape and material will manipulate the flow of electricity in a specific and predictable way, just like any other component such as a resistor, inductor, or capacitor. What makes transistors so special is that they have three pins, where varying the power applied to one input can vary the amount of power that gets through from the other input.\n\nThese transistors can be arranged into units called logic gates, of which the most commonly used for commercial applications is the NAND gate. The way the NAND gate works is that it is always on (1) unless both inputs are on (1), in which case the gate turns off (0). By some clever methods, these NAND gates can be arranged to form any other logic gate.\n\nThese logic gates can then be arranged into something even larger, like an Arithmetic Logic Unit (ALU). Which takes inputs of high (1) and low (0) power on each individual wire and can do basic math like addition and subtraction and other things by assuming that the arrangement of these wires means a number.\n\nWhen someone writes software, they're writing a series of mathematical and logical operations that get put into a queue of sorts where they get fed into this big lump of logic gates in order."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3urd39 | why does the peanut butter in a reese's peanut butter cup have a different texture? | It feels totally different from regular peanut butter in a jar. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3urd39/eli5_why_does_the_peanut_butter_in_a_reeses/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxh514l"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Oil and chocolate are quite buddy buddy and want to mingle together. Peanut butter contains peanut oil which makes it easier to spread. However, this oil will mix with the chocolate covering the peanut butter cup and cause the chocolate to get soggy and melt off. So, the peanut butter inside the cup is peanut butter with reduced peanut oil.\n\nIf you get peanut butter brands with just peanut butter and no other additives, you'll often find a layer of oil on top of all the peanut butter. If you manage to scoop some of that peanut butter without mixing the oil, you will get a texture similar to that of Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. Regular mainbranded peanut butter (Skippy's, Jif, etc.) have added ingredients that prevent the peanut oil from separating from the peanut butter."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8xvuc2 | the 15(+) different logical fallacies. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8xvuc2/eli5_the_15_different_logical_fallacies/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2675hz"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"**Slippery Slope:** If we allow this to happen, it will lead to this other (loosely/hardly related) thing happening!\n\n**Hasty Generalization:** I know I'm right despite having little or biased evidence!\n\n**Post hoc ergo propter hoc:** This happened after this, so it must've caused it!\n\n**Genetic/Origins Fallacy:** This person/place/thing came from this other person/place/thing so it can't be any good!\n\n**Circular Argument:** Of course my argument is good because I argue well!\n\n**False Dilemma:** Only this or this can happen, no alternative bucko!\n\n**Ad hominem:** Sincd I cant think of counters to attack your argument with, I’m going to attack your character instead! Who’d even listen to a fortnite cheater!!\n\n**Ad populum/Bandwagon Appeal:** The good people put there will agree with me, you wannna be a good person right?\n\n**Red Herring:** What if I took your counter argument....and redirected it to an unrelated issue?\n\n**Straw Man:** What if I took your counter argument...and over simplified it to make me look better by comparison!\n\n**Moral Equivalence:** You're literally worse than Hitler when you cheated on fortnite.\n\n**Begging the Claim:** This law-abiding suspect shouldn't be convicted in this trial!\n\n**True Scotsman Fallacy:** Only true Americans vote for me....the ones who don't vote for me obviously aren't true Americans.\n\nI'm not sure which ones I'm missing, but that's the most common ones!\n\n---donated explantions from /u/deep-rabbit-hole ---\n\n**Argument from incredulity:** it seems so impossible... it couldn't have happened that way. e.g. evolution etc.\n\n**Argument from ignorance:** I cant think of any other way this happened so it must have happened that way.\n\n**Argument from authority:** she is an expert on this so she must be right."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2lawx1 | in an election, how is a write in candidate determined and notified if he/she wins? | In most, if not all, ballot questions there is an opportunity to write in your vote if opting to not select one of the supplied choices. In the event that one of these write ins won, say John Smith, how would it be known if all John Smith write ins were referring to the same person? Could every John Smith claim to have won? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lawx1/eli5_in_an_election_how_is_a_write_in_candidate/ | {
"a_id": [
"clt2md2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Most write-in campaigns that actually win are public and fairly well organized. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a candidate that is simultaneously popular enough to win a write-in campaign, and unknown enough for officials to have difficulty establishing their identity.\n\nTheoretically it could happen, and cause a problem, but it has just never come up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4ctirl | what the heck is going on with r/hearthstone right now? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ctirl/eli5_what_the_heck_is_going_on_with_rhearthstone/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1lbkv4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's April first in some parts of the world (in the US in just a couple of hours). Thus this is some sort of April fools joke, the purpose of which has not yet been revealed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1ulp7h | why americans won't name their sons jesus? | Virtually every other religion honors their gods by naming children after them, and while I know it's common in Latin American countries, I have rarely come across a white Jesus. Why is that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ulp7h/eli5_why_americans_wont_name_their_sons_jesus/ | {
"a_id": [
"cejcnip",
"cejcqb7",
"cejcwy5",
"cejel3u"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"We use Josh.",
"Because the name translates to Joshua in English. Edit: And we differentiate the Son of God by using Jesus, (the Greek name for Joshua). ",
"Americans do name their sons Jesus, if they are in hispanic families.",
"To flesh out and correct a couple of comments here:\n\nRe: Jesus/Joshua. The New Testament was written originally in Greek, and Jesus is the the English spelling of the Greek word. It is equivalent to the Hebrew name Joshua (hence why the Old Testament characters are called Joshua).\n\nThe name Jesus is associated uniquely with Jesus Christ (because there aren't any others mentioned in the New Testament).\n\nThe difference between white and latin american cultures I suspect may be a protestant/catholic divide. The latin american/hispanic cultures are predominantly catholic-rooted and name their children Jesus in much the way other religions do. Due to the Reformation, much of northern Europe (white) became protestant. For protestants, the concern is that naming your child Jesus is a bit like calling your son 'God' (note that you only get Muslim kids called Mohammed, not Allah) - it could be considered blasphemous, and that has become embedded in the culture - so now for an English family to name their child Jesus would come with a bunch of connotations.\n\nEdit: tl;dr: Protestant-background Americans don't call their kids Jesus because it could be considered blasphemous. Latin cultures have a Catholic background and therefore do, similar to other faiths."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1y241w | tesla's worldwide wireless system and why did it fail. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y241w/eli5_teslas_worldwide_wireless_system_and_why_did/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfgokar"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"It failed because of the inverse square law. Whenever you radiate something (sunlight, heat, or whatever) from a central point, the intensity decreases according to the square of the distance from that point. So, if you double the distance between you and the sun, the intensity of the light reduces to a quarter. Triple the distance, and it's a ninth. Etc. \n\nSo if you transmitting wirelessly over any considerable distance, you're wasting most of it, and you have to drastically increase the power in order to increase the effective transmission distance a bit. It's horrifically wasteful. This could just possibly be worthwhile in an age where there isn't much that needs to be electrically powered in a customers home - a few light bulbs, perhaps. In an age where everything requires it, you'd burn through insanely and almost criminally wasteful amounts of power to get it to customers wirelessly. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1t57o2 | why former spanish and portuguese colonies replaced their languages with spanish and portuguese respectively but former british and french colonies didn't? | or why did Spain and Portugal forced their language onto locals but Britain and French didn't ?
EDIT: e.g Only educated in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh can speak English and they still use their own languages primarily. Brazil, Mexico primarily speak Portuguese and Spanish as their first language.. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t57o2/eli5_why_former_spanish_and_portuguese_colonies/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce4jgsg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"European colonization in the Americas started in the 16th century, opposed to African and Asian colonies which were established much later, under larger populations and a smaller interest in settlement. In less than a century, most indigenous American peoples were wiped out, along with their cultures.\n\nStill, during colonial times native and mixed languages were spoken by large groups, like the Jesuits using them to teach religion. Spanish and Portuguese were only for government matters. But as colonies went for a stronger administration and independence, the use of a single language was encouraged in education to integrate and unify all ethnic groups with a national identity."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5ecgyg | why isn't there a standard for microwave wattage? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ecgyg/eli5_why_isnt_there_a_standard_for_microwave/ | {
"a_id": [
"dabc7o9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A 1,000-watt microwave will cook quickly and efficiently. Microwaves with 700 watts or less are slower and may not cook evenly. In general, the higher the wattage, the faster the cooking time.\n\nHowever, Lower watts cost last and that's why they are out on the markets. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
xnsru | how well-supported is the big bang theory? are we fairly certain it's true? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xnsru/eli5_how_wellsupported_is_the_big_bang_theory_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5nzxd6",
"c5o0d80",
"c5o0ws8",
"c5o1k1q",
"c5o2fam"
],
"score": [
81,
2,
5,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Yes, and overwhelmingly so. However, you have to be careful about what you mean when you say \"Big Bang Theory\", for it is *not* a theory about how the universe was *created*, but rather how it has *evolved*. Despite what anyone will tell you, we physicists currently have no idea how the universe was created.",
"It's the best explanation based on current understanding and experimentation. ",
"Well, \nmy ELI5 version is:\nif we look at the universe, everything is getting bigger, like blowing up a balloon, or an explosion, so if that's true, then you can follow it back and imagine a time when everything was crunched up into one small bit of of stuff and it exploded and that's where we are today, in the middle of a big huge lost lasting explosion. ",
"you may need to ask /r/askscience ",
"We have a lot of evidence. The big two are the cosmic microwave background and the expansion of space/Hubble's Law.\n\nHubble was the guy who figured out that there are other galaxies. He found a super bright star and when he did the math on how far away it should be, it turned out to be outside of the milky way. He also figured out that space is growing. \n\nIt's a lot like the Doppler effect. When a train runs past you, it's louder when its moving toward you and quieter when it has passed you. Light has a similar effect, where stuff moving towards you is a teensy bit bluer and stuff moving away is a teensy bit redder. He discovered that the further away stuff was, the redder it got, which means that it was moving away faster. Hubble's Law measures the rate of this expansion.\n\nWe use Hubbles Law for a lot of things. Since we can use it to see how fast things are moving apart, we can use it to guess how things were in the past. If you know how fast a car is moving, you can guess where it was a minute ago. When we take the universe today and use hubbles law to see where things probably were 13.7 billion years ago, everything is mushed together in one spot - this is consistent with the big bang theory.\n\nThe Cosmic Microwave Background is another huge piece of evidence. Everywhere we look in space, we see microwave radiation. The microwaves are even redder the further away they are. We also see that everything is about the same temperature. In order for the radiation and temperatures to be so consistent everywhere, everything must have been touching at one point. We also know that Hubble's Law predicts a point in time in which everything was in the same place.\n\nThe last major piece of evidence is the distribution of elements. Right after the big bang, it was too hot for atoms like hydrogen to even form. When space cooled off a bit, atoms started to form. Simulations of this predict that mostly hydrogen would be made with a bit of helium and very, very tiny amounts of other elements. When we look in space, we see this distribution of elements everywhere."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6wghqv | why do so many sicknesses and diseases start with the basic symptoms? (fever, rash, headache, vomiting, etc.) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wghqv/eli5_why_do_so_many_sicknesses_and_diseases_start/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm7v5ah"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"It's because those symptoms aren't something the disease does to your body, it's something your body does to the disease. Fever puts your immune cells in high gear and hampers some pathogens. Vomiting and diarrhea eject the contents of your gastrointestinal tract; because your body suspects it may be poisoned or contaminated. Rashes and headaches associated with infections are typically caused by inflammation, which is another response to infection - the body pumps immune cells and plasma out of the blood vessels and into the affected flesh to kill pathogens and get rid of dead cells."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8juzsu | if the universe is constantly expanding, why do the stars appear as if they haven’t moved? | Isn’t there a place in Egypt where the pyramids line up perfectly with the Belt of Orion? How does this make sense if the universe is expanding outward from a point of origin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8juzsu/eli5_if_the_universe_is_constantly_expanding_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"dz2lydq",
"dz2lyji",
"dz2qlb8",
"dz2v7by",
"dz30nxu"
],
"score": [
19,
3,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Expansion of the universe occurs at *extremely* large scales. Far larger than even the entire Milky Way galaxy. \n\nAll the stars you can see with the naked eye are *relatively close by* and within the Milky way. Expansion is simply not significant on this scale.\n\nAlso it is not expanding outward from a *point of origin,* like an explosion. Rather, it is decreasing in density over time. If you take any two extremely distant points, then over time they become increasingly far apart. There's no preferred direction of motion from a center or towards an edge, nor is there believed to be such a thing as a center or edge to the universe, in currently well regarded theories. ",
"The stars have moved. They're moving constantly for multiple reasons (not just expansion). They are just very far away so it isn't readily apparent that they're moving without precise tracking and measurements.\n\nAnd the universe isn't expanding outward from a point of origin. Every point in space is expanding. No matter where you are in the universe you'll see everything moving away from you. ",
"All of the stars we can observe are in the Milky Way galaxy. The galaxy is not expanding, although all the stars are circling about a massive blackhole that is approximately 30,000 light years away from us.\n\nThe universe however is expanding, but the universe is trillions times the size of the galaxy. Generally speaking, the galaxies are drifting apart from one another, but this can only be observed through extremely powerful telescopes over a long period of time. ",
"They do. The light from stars are red\\-shifted \\(That is, all of the light is shifted toward lower frequency, higher wavelength, areas of the spectrum\\). This is essentially a visual form of the Doppler effect. It is because of this red shift that we know that they are moving away from us and that the universe is expanding.",
"The whole Orion thing is a crock of shit.\n\nIt was invented by a mining engineer who noticed the belt of Orion isn't quite a perfect line and claimed the pyramids of Giza were misaligned in the exact same way, and they cherry-picks various Egyptian and non-Egyptian legends to manufacture some sort of mystical significance. His ideas are rejected by actual scholars, and only really embraced by the ancient aliens crowd and other crackpots.\n\nThe theory is wrong on a number of counts:\n\n* the pyramids and the stars are *not* in the same configuration, the angles are more than a few degrees off\n* the misalignments are in the opposite direction\n* the pyramids are in fact designed to be in a perfect line with respect to one of the corners, not their apexes\n* they were arranged not to have astrological significant, but to look striking from boats traveling along the river\n\nTurns out that Orion has changed [quite a bit](_URL_0_) over the years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Orion_2.gif"
]
] |
|
4r2aq4 | why are there so many rules on the american flag? | Also, do any other country's have such a hard-on for their flag? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4r2aq4/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_rules_on_the_american/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4xpu43",
"d4xxuz3"
],
"score": [
20,
4
],
"text": [
"Most customs regarding the American flag are not uniquely American, and are shared (in at least a similar form) with most countries of the world. For example, not flying the flag in darkness, flying it half-staff in mourning, or not letting the flag touch the ground or get dirty. However, Americans are known for their patriotism and love of the flag, so knowledge about proper flag etiquette is a bit more widespread here than in other places.",
"Mexico has a pretty strict set of rules (even though violations are not necessarily punished) that are all listed in the constitution, and their violation constitutes a military crime.\n\nThat's why you won't see any underwear or swimwear with the flag (unlike the American flag, that I've seen in every single piece of clothing I can imagine) unless special permission has been acquired (representing Mexico in the olympics, for example).\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
93gcc9 | what are the differences between a parliament, senate, assembly and so on? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93gcc9/eli5_what_are_the_differences_between_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3d2sor"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"These are names applied to legislative bodies, and the specific authority and structure varies with each version. There's no official definition of what a specific term requires.\n\nThey may be quite powerful like the US Senate, or practically useless like the Iraqi Parliament during the Hussein regime."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits