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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
16g0qt | why semen smells like the pool | Always wondered | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16g0qt/eli5_why_semen_smells_like_the_pool/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7vowy4",
"c7vpv4b",
"c7vqpg2"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The pool should smell like chlorine semen should not.\n\nEither see a doctor, or stop frequenting your local pool. One of them is not right.",
"It's worth talking about what gives things their smell and taste. The quick answer is it's the shape of their molecules. The longer answer isn't worth talking about here.\n\nWe taste and smell through \"receptors.\" To simplify, think of it like [this](_URL_0_). Each receptor takes molecules of a certain shape, and when it's filled sends signals to your brain: \"Hey I've got something!\" Your brain knows what shape the yelling receptor accepts and uses this knowledge to perceive smell and taste. \n\n(Quick aside: hearing and vision come from receptors too, but instead of dealing with matter they deal with energy (light waves and sound waves). It's easy for us to manipulate energy -- look at television and radio. It's a lot harder for us to recreate matter. That's why there will likely never be a smell-o-vision, because we'd have to recreate the molecules' shapes. The day the smell-o-vision is created will also be the day the first rudimentary teleporter is invented.)\n\nSo in short, things smell and taste similar because they have similar shapes at the molecular level. These similar shapes set off the same receptors, and the brain is presented with similar information from each.\n\n",
"Semen smells like bleach because semen and bleach both contain a lot of alkaline (\"basic\" or \"not acid\") chemicals. Vaginas have acid on the inside that try to kill sperm. Semen tries to protect the sperm by surrounding it in alkali (which neutralizes acid, which is also why we put baking soda [alkali] into a litter box to neutralize the ammonia [acid]). A lot of alkaline chemicals smell similar to each other. Think about cleaning fluids. A lot of them, even if they are meant to clean different stuff, kind of smell the same.\n\nIf you don't want your spunk to smell like bleach, you can reduce (but not eliminate) that smell by changing your diet. Eating sugary foods will make your semen more sugary, so it will smell sweeter and less harsh.\n\nOr, like you're five: Who told you about that?? That's not appropriate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/DdSYz.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
6zdkzo | why do ancient chinese buildings have those curved roofs? | I recall hearing one time that they were believed to deflect evil spirits from the heavens back into the air, but I'm not sure if that's bullshit or not. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zdkzo/eli5_why_do_ancient_chinese_buildings_have_those/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmuji3r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's a bit like asking why Gothic architecture was covered in gargoyles. A variety of people likely included them for a variety of reasons, but most likely used them to imitate those who had used them before.\n\nThe sweeping roof designs of Chinese architecture were reserved largely for palaces and temples and other buildings with a lot of ornamental exterior. There's little doubt that it's visually striking, and that alone may have been the factor for many who designed palaces to use it. If you're building a palace, why not go for the fanciest style of roof in the empire?\n\nAncient and Medieval China is also known for putting a lot of thought into the spiritual significance of the layout or design of a building. A mirror here, a garden there, the facing of a door, these details would matter to someone who studied and believed in the popular mysticism of the time. Whether or not the original architect of the sloped roof assigned it a meaning, others would have, as was the style at the time for everything from polished surfaces to indoor gardens.\n\nYou see similarly that there are folk tales of gargoyles scaring off or warding away evil creatures, but whether that was the original architect's vision hardly matters - most just used them because it was in style at the time, and similarly, a Chinese palace or temple that didn't have a roof like a palace or temple would be a huge investment that risks ridicule for evading the architectural styles of the time. The style became common throughout Eastern Asia because it was elegant and eye-catching, and that's why the bulk of the ancient Chinese likely enjoyed it as well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
12q3b9 | official eli5 united states presidential election thread | Here we will be having an open forum about the race as it progresses throughout the day and as we receive returns!
Of course you can start your own question threads, but this is just a place to aggregate and comment. It worked for Paul Ryan over the summer, and if it works again we'll start doing it more frequently.
**There are no excuses for you to not vote if you are qualified to do so. Get out and do it!**
***
Links:
[Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight](_URL_4_)
[CNN Election Center](_URL_0_)
[Find your polling place](_URL_3_)
[ELI5: Necessity of the electoral college](_URL_1_)
[Register to vote](_URL_2_): It's not too late in many states! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12q3b9/official_eli5_united_states_presidential_election/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6x79bt",
"c6x7jck",
"c6x7k2q",
"c6x7lu1",
"c6x7lwn",
"c6x7r0y",
"c6x7yyq",
"c6x826v",
"c6x82jc",
"c6x835o",
"c6x879a",
"c6x8h2m",
"c6x8o9o",
"c6x8wde",
"c6x92cp",
"c6x95we",
"c6xa0il",
"c6xaceq",
"c6xaqq8",
"c6xaw4d",
"c6xb84w",
"c6xbnd4",
"c6xcgf7",
"c6xd74s",
"c6xe5tg",
"c6xei1u",
"c6xezx0",
"c6xf2gx",
"c6xgtks",
"c6xh00h",
"c6xh30e",
"c6xi0vv",
"c6xi3k1",
"c6xi6t4",
"c6xix3o",
"c6xjapi",
"c6xjfj4",
"c6xjikw",
"c6xjk6c",
"c6xjuyo",
"c6xjyyd",
"c6xkdda",
"c6xkxv5",
"c6xlyk8",
"c6xmbqd",
"c6xmjs6",
"c6xmmos",
"c6xmsh2"
],
"score": [
149,
17,
96,
12,
4,
60,
14,
145,
337,
30,
15,
4,
7,
11,
5,
2,
2,
11,
2,
2,
5,
5,
2,
2,
19,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
9,
2,
2,
14,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I heard that when you vote it's for the electoral college...\n\nSo on the ballot you're voting for a senator (or congressman?) who then goes and votes for the president later that day? I hear they used to all go down to D.C but now they do it wherever they want.\n\n\nCan someone please explain this? \n\nI'm studying politics and I'm not American so I'm kind of curious.\n\n**Edit**: Okay so I looked it up and...\n\nEach state gets 3 base votes and the rest are population dependent. \n\nYou then vote for your elector(s) which there are 538 total in all of the U.S. Then in early December they go and vote for the President depending on who the people choose....But they can *really* vote for whoever they want...if they want.\n\nWhat the fuck\n\n**Edit**: thanks I get it now",
"Assuming that there's no clear result and we go to recounts, how long is it going to take before we know for sure which candidate has won? On what date can I expect to be certain?",
"How on earth can some people be queuing for six or seven hours to vote? Is it done on purpose to dissuade people from voting or something, or are there just not enough stations? ",
"When do we find out who won?",
"I have always read that the electoral college \"helps small states,\" by making sure the candidates don't ignore them. Yet, the number of electors is, at least in part, based on the number of representatives, which, in turn, is based on population. How, then, does this help small states?",
"What are the ramifications if someone like Gary Johnson actually gets this 5% of the popular vote many (myself included) are hoping for? Will the Libertarian Party be lawfully given federal funding and visibility, or will we continue to be forced to have lawsuits to get anywhere in Washington?",
"I've seen stuff on the internet and reddit about voting for propositions, amendments and laws to be added, most notably marijuana legalization in a few states.\n\nDo you vote on theses propositions every election? Is it just on a separate ballot on which you indicate yes or no? Why do you vote on laws? Is that not done by Congress?",
"Here all of the relevent [CGP Grey](_URL_2_) videos you could ever want about the election.\n\n* [**How the Electoral College Works**](_URL_1_)\n\n* [Issues with The Electoral College\n](_URL_6_)\n\n* [What if the Electoral College Ties?](_URL_4_)\n\n* [Issues with First Past the Post \\(Winner takes all system\\) \n](_URL_3_) \n\n* [Alternate Vote Explained](_URL_0_)\n\n* [How the Primaries Work](_URL_5_)",
"I've heard this brought up before once or twice, but is there any particular reason election day is *not* a national holiday? It strikes me that making it one would increase the voter turnout, but I'm not well-versed in politics or sociology(or history).",
"What I want to know is, why the fuck we even need the electoral college?! Why can't the popular vote just be it?",
"If anyone here lives in VA, could they explain to me question one(imminent domain I think). Everyone is saying yes=no and no=yes.",
"why do we have specific polling places? why do we, as american citizens, have to register to vote? Why not show up at ANY polling place, show proper identification, and vote/ they mark you off the national register as having voted, BOOM. you're done. can someone explain this to me? I realize this also meas some polling places will be busier than others, but I don't see that as enough of an excuse.",
"Eil5 how the electoral college favors the two party system. ",
"5 year olds could use Google's new election tool to show you who you can vote for. It shows you each available canidate, and then links you to their website, Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Non-American here, just wanted to know what the summary (if possible) of both candidate's policies were (pros and cons) of what you are voting for today. What changes will America see when one or the other wins?",
"What's the best website to keep me updated during the day? I'm at work until 5 EST and not anywhere near a TV.",
"It took my about 20 minutes to vote in Venice, CA (clearly not a swing district or state). Why do I see 3 hour lines in Ohio, Virginia and Florida (the states who will actually elect our president)? Is this the model of democracy we want the world to take seriously?",
"Just because this will be a popular post and i figure I'll get some diverse opinions on this, I want to share some thoughts I've had recently:\n\nSo every election cycle there's always this big push to 'get out the vote,' right? Everywhere you look, you'll see things like \"It doesn't matter who you vote for, just GO VOTE!\"\n\nMy question is... why are we pushing people so hard to vote? No one had to get in my face about it. I registered when I turned 18 and I've been voting ever since.\n\nI'm thinking... if you need to push someone to vote... if you need to bombard them with 'Rock the Vote' ads until they begrudgingly register... do we really want those people voting?\n\nI'm not saying we should prevent *anyone* from voting. All I'm saying is that while voting should be an easy and accessible process, we shouldn't push people into it. If they don't want to vote, fine. I want people voting who care enough to take the initiative and get registered and show up on election day.\n\nAny thoughts on this?",
"I really hope someone who knows gets around to answering this.\n\nWhy is virtually every media outlet, including respectable and non-partisan ones (BBC, for example) calling it a neck-in-neck dead heat, too close to call, whereas Nate Silver, who everyone seems to agree is a prediction wizard, is saying there's a 90 percent chance of an Obama victory?\n\nI know the conspiracy theories on Reddit are that the media want to increase their ratings by making it intense, but I can't see a mechanism for that happening without somebody from within a newspaper or news network knowing it's a policy and telling us about it.\n\nSo why the discrepancy?",
"What would the best US news website to watch the results live on be? ",
" > There are no excuses for you to not vote if you are qualified to do so. Get out and do it!\n\nWhat if I recognize my ignorance on the effects of policy decisions and don't feel like I can make an informed decision? Or how about the fact that individuals have literally no impact on the election outcome, so voting is basically a waste of time. \n\nAre these not excuses because they're reasons?",
"As a US citizen from Puerto Rico all I can say is. \"I wish I could be a first class citizen with the right to vote for the president and have representation in congress\" ELIM5 How I'm not a 2 class citizen.",
"Why are so many Democrats saying that the only way Romney can win is if he cheats? I am a Libertarian, so I *KNOW* my candidate is not going to win, but I am looking at polls like this one - _URL_0_ - and seeing that the battleground states are in a dead statistical tie. \n\nAs an independent, I am looking at this and saying, \"50/50 chance - either guy could be President tomorrow morning. I won't be shocked either way.\"\n\nSo why are so many people on Reddit seeming to think Obama has no way he can lose the election unless the Republicans cheat? Am I missing something? Just trying to understand.",
"I'm confused on the whole gay marriage thing. \n\nFrom what I can tell, Romney wants to add an amendment to the constitution defining marriage as 1man+1woman, and Obama wants equal for all.\n\nI would like someone to please give 1 example where gay marriage should be banned based on something other than religion.",
"Why is Ohio considered more important than Florida as a swing state?\n\nThe media are going on about Ohio. The candidates can't stay away.\n\nBut Florida has 29 college votes, Ohio only has 18. And according to the last poll, the voting will be split virtually 50/50 in Florida.\n\nSo why is Ohio considered more important?",
"When are some preliminary results coming in? Where can they bee seen?",
"I was told there would be punch and pie...\n",
" > There are no excuses for you to not vote if you are qualified to do so. Get out and do it!\n\nWhat about being uneducated? I would not want to cast my vote for anyone I wasn't sure I supported. Maybe there is no excuse for not getting educated but at this point in the game there are millions of people for whom voting would be terribly irresponsible, in my humble opinion. As they say, majority rule doesn't work in mental institutions.",
"Why do we read about all this voter fraud, yet it seems nothing is done about it?",
"A question I haven't seen asked yet: Why do all electors in every state (except Maine and Nebraska) have to vote for the same candidate? What happened in Maine and Nebraska to make them choose the thug life?",
"47% of the time, It works every time.",
"What I'm looking for is a website that lets me design a \"My Elections\" homepage where I can pick like, 20 elections going on tonight and see them all at once, as opposed to letting CNN choose for me. CNN actually did this in 2008. Anyone got any help for me?",
"I know this doesn't have anything to do with the election, but I have you tagged as \"Fights against the stereotyping of Muslims\".\n\nYou're good people.",
"What has to happen for a recount to occur?",
"Okay so do people vote for who they want in the Electoral College or does the public vote carry any other weight? On Election Day in The US, is it just presidency and vice presidency contested or are other positions with states contested. Very confused European here lol.",
"Guys, I have a question but not sure if this is the right place.\n\nWhat happens right now if the US was attacked and went to war with another country? Is the election postponed?",
"ELI5 Why voting isn't mandatory in the US. Here in Australia it is, and it seems to work fine, so why isn't it mandatory in the US?",
"Could someone explain how [this](_URL_0_) makes any sense?",
"Why did South Carolina give its Electoral votes to Romney if Obama won the popular vote there?",
"So, I thought that Virgil Goode was from the Constitution Party and Rocky Anderson was from the Justice Party. Why, on the pictures of ballots I see, does it list Goode as the \"US Taxpayers\" and Anderson as the \"Natural Law\" parties? (I won't be 18 until February so I couldn't vote myself.)",
"Maryland has 2% of precincts reporting, yet Obama has already won the state. How does this work?",
"Not sure if this was asked already so I'll go ahead and ask it:\n\nWhy is it thousands to millions of people per state vote, but only the electoral college votes count towards that 270? \n\nWhat if (if this is possible) a state has 62,000 votes for a democrat and 51,000 for a republican, but the electoral college has the majority of the votes on the republican. Does that means everyone's votes didn't matter at all or what?",
"Canadian here,\n\nCould someone please explain to me what makes a state a battleground state and their significance? From what I can tell, 5/8 battleground states have 10 or fewer electoral votes, yet states like California that has 55 electoral votes and NY that has 29 electoral votes are not considered battleground states. Therefore, how can battleground states be considered more important than these ones?",
"Why are elections always so close between two candidates? How can the American population be so equally divided? ",
"ELI5: I'm looking at the HuffPo live election results, and it says Obama has 244 electoral votes, but needs \"270 to win\". Does that means whoever gets 270 first wins the presidency? Then what is the importance of the popular vote? And what happens if he gets 270 electoral votes but loses the popular vote?",
"When does the electoral college actually vote? When do we get the actual official decision?",
"According to CNN, Obama just won. [Here](_URL_0_)",
"So, people are saying all over the place that Obama has won. Is this true? Is it legitimately over now?"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/?hpt=elec_racenav",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xo6do/eli5_why_we_need_the_electoral_college_in_the/",
"http://www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Voting/Register.shtml",
"https://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/vote",
"http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=26&feature=plpp_video",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUS9mM8Xbbw&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=18&feature=plpp_video",
"http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&feature=plcp",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=2&feature=plpp_video",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHEDXzOfENI&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=1&feature=plpp_video",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_95I_1rZiIs&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=15&feature=plpp_video",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k&list=PLqs5ohhass_TpkWBnZrgA-71yOvdbchdE&index=19&feature=plpp_video"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/vote"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83380.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/8lYns.png"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/5KpIp"
],
[]
] |
|
8ar1gq | the physiological difference between tablet, gel-cap, chewable, and liquid medicines? | I went to the pharmacy to pick up some Claritin and saw that it came in 3 different forms--tablet, gel cap, and chewable. Not knowing what to buy, I asked the pharmacist what the difference was, and she basically said there was no difference. If there is no difference, why have 3 versions of the same medicine? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ar1gq/eli5_the_physiological_difference_between_tablet/ | {
"a_id": [
"dx0uvi7"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There really isn't a ton of difference. There is a reason that over-the-counter meds generally come in more forms than prescription meds, and the reason is that consumers like variety while doctors just like to pick the one that works. Over-the-counter meds have more bells and whistles because the average person likes bells and whistles, so companies can sell multiple versions of the same product in the guise of choice. \n\nTo get to the nitty gritty:\n\nTablet - medication in a base that dissolves at a steady rate. \n\nGel cap - medication in a gel with a coating. The coating dissolves at a slower rate, then the gel dissolves at a faster rate. Generally a little easier to swallow than tablets. \n\nChewable - medication in a gummy base that gets broken up into small pieces and then dissolved. Good for kids or people who hate swallowing pills. \n\nLiquid - dissolves the fastest. Good for people who want fast relief, kids, or people who hate pills. Bad for people who suck at pouring out the right dose. \n\nThe faster dissolving methods are going to give you relief a little faster and wear off a little sooner. But really, assuming you take the same dose of each version you probably won't notice a ton of difference. So just buy the one that's the cheapest or whatever your personal preference is. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2k24z0 | what is that horrible painful massive 'lump' in your chest when you drink or eat something too fast? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2k24z0/eli5_what_is_that_horrible_painful_massive_lump/ | {
"a_id": [
"clheyzg"
],
"score": [
37
],
"text": [
"Food and fluids get transported through your esophagus. Where the esophagus connnects to the stomach, a) it has to pass through an ligamentous opening in the diaphragm, which is a rather narrow passage and b) there is a sphincter muscle that is usually contracted to prevent stomach acid to flow back into the esophagus. When you swallow your food too quickly, the sphincter may need a few extra seconds to relax and let the food into the stomach. In these - usually - seconds, the food is stuck in the esophagus, which is unfortunately located right behind the heart. And your heart really dislikes something pressing against it, therefore causing that uncomfortable feeling."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
47pvb9 | in the nba, what are "waivers" and how does it affect the "salary cap"? | I have read that Joe Johnson and Andre Miller have had their contracts "bought out", and if they clear "waivers" they can be free agent. Otherwise a team with "cap space" can pick them up.
I am a long time basketball fan but don't really understand how any of this works. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47pvb9/eli5_in_the_nba_what_are_waivers_and_how_does_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0er7qm",
"d0erkkm",
"d0erm22"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"A buy out is pretty simple: it is an agreement between the team and player that they are going to terminate his contract, and they are going to reduce the total amount he would be owed to some other amount in exchange for tearing up the contract. In the NBA, a buyout is technically a reduction of his pay, and a waiver.\n\nWaivers is a status. Generally, a team cannot just release a player. When the team releases a player (or, in this case, when a buy out is agreed), the player is said to be placed \"on waivers.\" During this period, other teams can make a \"waiver claim.\" This means that instead of ripping up his contract, the team is willing to pay him under his old contract. To do this, they have to have enough cap space in order to afford his old contract. If more than one team makes a waiver claim, typically the team with the worse record will get the player.\n\nIf no team makes a waiver claim, then after the waiver period, the player becomes a free agent. He can sign with any team, for any amount of money that they can mutually agree.\n\nMuch like everything else with the NBA salary cap, there are 100 exceptions and other small rules that apply, but that is the general process.",
"waivers work like this\n\ntake the teams from worst (76ers) to best (GS Warriors) and rank them in order based on standings. This is the priority list for waiver claims so when players hit waivers, each team has a potential chance to land that player. \n\nNBA teams release players to the waiver wire, where he can stay for 48 hours (during the regular season). While he is on waivers, other teams may claim him, for his existing salary. If he is not claimed, he is said to have \"cleared waivers\", and is treated like any free agent, able to sign with any team.\n\nFor example, Joe Johnson has a rather large contract that teams would need to absorb, so it is unlikely that he will be claimed on waivers. Once he clears, the Cavs have said they would sign him a veteran's minimum contract. He is making significantly less money but gets a chance to play for a contender.\n\nThe salary cap is the maximum amount that a team can spend on players without paying luxury tax. Successful teams like the Spurs manage the cap with a nice mix of cheap rookie contracts and pricey ones for their studs. Terrible teams like the Knicks and Nets overspend on mediocre talent and bleed themselves dry.",
"Joe Baller is in the third year of a 5 year contract that pays him $5 million a year. \n\nHis team decides he is not worth it, and waives him. Ever other team in the league has the opportunity to claim him and take over his contract, the remainder of which is applied to that team's salary cap. If they don't have enough cap space to cover the new salary, they have to make addition moves.\n\nIn basketball, contracts are typically guaranteed, so teams can't just cut players. Instead, they might enter into a buy out agreement. The team pays Joe less than he would have made riding the bench the rest of the season, and Joe gets to try to find a team where he will get to play more and a chance to increase his value. Payouts are usually contingent on clearing waivers."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2e7cwr | why don't muslim leaders speak out against violence? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e7cwr/eli5_why_dont_muslim_leaders_speak_out_against/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjwqmzn",
"cjwqo5u",
"cjwqwbw",
"cjwrvvd",
"cjwrwqt"
],
"score": [
7,
9,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Many leaders to speak out against violence. But there are numerous islamic groups, and the violent ones tend to be the ones the news likes to focus on.",
"They do. It's not their fault that the media prints every \"call to violence\" announcement but never prints the responding \"call against violence\" announcements.\n\n[Here's just a few](_URL_0_).",
"So is it just the media's fault?",
"In the United States, news is very sensational. It is based around what will attract eyes and attention spans (i.e., in order to sell advertising) rather than delivering best quality information. So compare a Muslim group beheading a journalist gets lots of publicity, to a council of Muslim leaders talking about non-violence (yawn!) and you use newspaper rule #1: \"If it bleeds, it leads.\"\n\nIn referring to international affairs, consider that 'peace-loving' Muslims are usually not as well armed as their more aggressive rivals. So they are more likely to be oppressed, and less likely to speak out, or be able to speak out, against violence.\n\nThat said, I find that extremism in Islam is a much bigger problem than extremism in Christianity. For example, you will find a much higher percentage of Muslims, particularly outside the US, who really believe that a death sentence for leaving the faith, or homosexuality, is appropriate. Westboro Baptist may be a bunch of fools or jackasses, but they aren't actually killing the homosexuals that they are protesting. In Muslim nations, that's happening.\n\n",
"They do, it's just not reported much in the media."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
faqh1a | why the smoke out of factories sticks around in the sky for so long? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/faqh1a/eli5_why_the_smoke_out_of_factories_sticks_around/ | {
"a_id": [
"fizraxy"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"If your cigarette was 50m tall and 10m wide the smoke would probably hang around a lot longer too.\n\nIt's quite simply pumping out millions of times more than your cigarette is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2auweu | how do the call in competitions for radio stations work? | How does the 'seventh caller' get through? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2auweu/eli5_how_do_the_call_in_competitions_for_radio/ | {
"a_id": [
"cizah39"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You guys really think they're sitting there counting phone calls? Come on. They just pick up a random caller when they're in a break and can record the call, and say \"you're the seventh caller!\" The point of doing the contest isnt to give away the dumb tickets, it's to get people calling into the station and excited about \"maybe I can get these tickets!\" So just picking the real seventh caller would mean the promotion would go on for approximately 50 seconds. They let it roll for a while, then tape the call when they can to play it back whenever. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
84071u | how do doctors anchor an artificial heart? | I wonder if the veins and arteries at the base of the heart are extremely rigid?
edit: context. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/84071u/eli5_how_do_doctors_anchor_an_artificial_heart/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvlwf8u"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"A donor heart is used for the ventricles, so the ventricles attach right to the native atria. The vessels are pretty durable, but the atria moreso I believe. There's a pretty long rest period post surgery to give stuff time to heal back into a more natural pace as well, which helps."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2b7kpm | how do the web sites that charge for reverse number lookups and background checks get their information? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2b7kpm/eli5_how_do_the_web_sites_that_charge_for_reverse/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj2kfqo",
"cj2kh26",
"cj2kinz",
"cj2kkqk",
"cj2kq2t",
"cj2kucc"
],
"score": [
69,
4,
13,
7,
21,
5
],
"text": [
"They buy the information from other data aggregators.",
"I'm convinced that it is all one big scam",
"There are several companies that collect information on people such as credit agencies, grocery store shopping cards, in some states drivers license databases, background checks, warranty card submissions, employment applications, and pretty much anything you do. They cross reference these databases to build master databases of name, address, and any phone number you give out in the course of living. \n\nThen they can age their information so if someone else gets your old phone number they give it a lower score on your link so the new person gets tagged with it. \n",
"A lot of it they [buy](_URL_3_) [from](_URL_4_) [market](_URL_0_) [research](_URL_2_) [firms](_URL_1_). Every time someone fills out a voluntary mailing card, that information may be subject to getting rolled up and resold.\n\nInevitably background-check information is also supplemented with acquired public records of law enforcement, real estate and property tax transactions, and of course credit bureaus.\n\nWhat cannot be acquired in bulk, in advance, is often accessible as a paid service behind the scenes, with volume discounts.",
"Basically, any time you give your phone number (even if you don't), it's collected and sold. The pizza delivery you ordered is a great source for current phone numbers. \n \nSource: a few years in collections and skiptracing. ",
"For apps that showed up the last few years, they upload each user's address book and use it to match the numbers they got.\n\nThis data may later be sold."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://connect.data.com/",
"http://www.epsilon.com/solutions/product-solutions/data",
"http://www.experian.com/marketing-services/marketing-data.html",
"http://www.directmailtools.com/",
"http://www.melissadata.com/"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
37l5c2 | do any of the 'close relatives to humans' (apes, monkeys and the like) have a relationship with another species like the one humans have with canines (or even equines)? | Or are there any other examples of this sort of relationship in the natural world. I don't mean simply like birds cleaning the teeth of alligators, or remora fish hitching a ride, but actual 'domesticating' of another species for mutual benefit. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37l5c2/eli5_do_any_of_the_close_relatives_to_humans_apes/ | {
"a_id": [
"crnkr28",
"crnkt9x",
"crnktep",
"crnl4x8",
"crnl9n5"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Ants \"farm\" aphids, but that's a more symbiotic relationship. The real answer is that no other species keeps pets or domesticates other animals the way humans do, but some have symbiotic relationships that come close.",
"Additionally when humans and chimps became two different species, from that point on humqns evolved away from that point but the chimps we see around now, have they also evolved away from that point? Or are they still the same chimps they were so many years ago?",
"Humans were long thought to be the only species that domesticated other animals. In recent years, however, we've come to find that some species of ants [will domesticate other insects for \"honeydew\" and even meat](_URL_0_).\n\nThere are no other known species that domesticate other species, though.",
"To give a higher level answer:\n\nDomestication only became possible once we as a species were able to stockpile food. It wasn't until we had \"jobs\", where some provided food for the many, that it was an option to provide food to other animals and spend time domesticating instead of searching out food to stay alive.\n\nOur \"close relatives\" do not stockpile food, nor do they have \"jobs\" as we'd consider hunters/gatherers. Because of this, domesticating other species has never been an option.\n\nIt's worth noting, they do keep a similar relationship with \"pets\" as we do. Some [great apes in captivity](_URL_0_) have been known to \"adopt\" a cat or dog, play with it, groom it, feed it, cuddle, even mourn when their pet is gone. They'd never domesticate animals on their own, but certainly interact with domesticated animals in a very similar way to humans. ",
"There have been [reports](_URL_0_) of baboons kidnapping feral puppies and keeping them as members of the baboon family. This is from the Discovery Channel, so it doesn't have the same weight as an academic article would, but it indicates that the potential exists. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20630-zoologger-the-first-nonhuman-meat-farmers.html"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fffuQ6VIOyA"
],
[
"http://blogs.discovery.com/animal_oddities/2012/10/baboons-with-pet-dogs.html"
]
] |
|
3chmy8 | what does my dog stop every 5 feet to smell something? | And what is he smelling?
Edit: well I butchered that title. It's supposed to say "why" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3chmy8/eli5_what_does_my_dog_stop_every_5_feet_to_smell/ | {
"a_id": [
"csvmh0w"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In the same way we would admire a sunset or a beautiful picture of the ocean, dogs admire things by smelling them. It helps them become more familiar with their surroundings and it's just enjoyable for them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5bt26j | why is it that the quality of light at sunrise tends to seem so much bluer and brighter, and the quality of light at sunset tends to seem so much redder and dimmer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bt26j/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_quality_of_light_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9r2mcq",
"d9r55zz",
"d9r8fij",
"d9r94dc",
"d9r9qep",
"d9rd0p5",
"d9re185",
"d9realu",
"d9rfafi",
"d9rfk3b",
"d9rgjpp",
"d9rh5ut",
"d9rjb90",
"d9rjvxg",
"d9s052n"
],
"score": [
169,
82,
11,
880,
9,
7,
2,
3,
2,
87,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Previous question and answers on reddit: _URL_0_\n\nEdit: from the top answer:\n > two factors, both human:\n\n > The First\n\n > The first is in our heads. \"At sunset, our eyes are daylight adapted and may even be a bit weary from the day's toil,\" Lynch and Livingston write. \"As the light fades, we cannot adapt as fast as the sky darkens. Some hues may be lost or perceived in a manner peculiar to sunset. At sunrise, however, the night's darkness has left us with very acute night vision and every faint, minor change in the sky's color is evident.\" In short, you may perceive more colors at dawn than at dusk.\n\n > The Second\n\n > Human activities also drive a divergence between them. \"At sunset the sky is full of pollutants and wind-borne particles,\" the authors write. \"During the night, winds die down, smog-producing urban activity eases and the atmosphere cleanses itself. The dawn is clearer than any other time of day.\"\n\n > Neil Degrasse Tyson is also quoted in the article, in reference to being able to differentiate between a sunrise and a sunset without the perception of time,\n\n > \"When viewed from all latitudes north of the Tropic of Cancer (23.5 degrees north latitude), the sun always rises at an angle up and to the right, and sets and an angle down and to the right,\"\n\n",
"It's not air pollution. It has to do with the way light refracts on particles in our atmosphere. ",
"I am simply commenting to help remove error from the answer, as /u/plusECON has stated a fairly good explanation. That being said, when I first read the question, Doppler shift popped into my mind. I realized that Doppler shift due to the rotation of the Earth is too small to effect this in a great way, but since this is reddit, I did the math assuming that we were using a standard wave of blue light (which is not true, but it works in this situation) and found that there was less than even a nm(nano-meter) of difference between sunrise and sunset. See the link for the math. _URL_0_",
"The difference between the colors observed during a sunrise and the colors observed during a sunset is most likely caused by differences in the ~~density and temperature~~ composition of the atmosphere. If atmospheric conditions are held constant, the colors during a sunrise should in theory look identical to the colors during a sunset.\n\nLight appears redder during a sunrise/sunset because the light from the sun must travel a greater distance through Earth's atmosphere to reach us ([graphic](_URL_5_)). Earth's atmosphere preferentially scatters short-wavelength light (e.g., blue light); the more atmosphere the light must travel through, the less blue light will reach us ([graphic](_URL_1_)).\n\nBut then why aren't sunrises just as red as sunsets? ~~This is because the density of the air tends to be lower in the morning than the density of the air in the evening. As the day progresses, the heat from the sun increases the humidity of the air (i.e., increases the number of blue-light-scattering water molecules in the air). Pollution also increases during the day as the number of active power plants, factories, cars, etc. increases. As a result, the density of the air is often much higher in the evening; and, consequently, more blue light from the sun is scattered, leaving a much higher proportion of red light.~~ Edit 2: Evening air often contains more particles than morning air. This is potentially due to changes in atmospheric conditions caused by thermal radiation from the sun and/or due to increased human activity. The increased number of particles in the air scatters even more blue light, making sunsets appear redder.\n\nEdit 3.1: Many users have mentioned that there could be a subjective aspect as well. And I agree. It's certainly plausible that certain biological and/or psychological mechanisms could influence or exaggerate our perceptions of visual phenomena like sunrises and sunsets. u/Gonzo_Rick most accurately [summarized](_URL_2_) this part of the answer:\n\n > When light hits the retina, it sends neural impulses directly to sleep regulating parts of your brain ([more specifically, the suprachiasmatic nucleus]) that wake you up. Blue light in particular elicits the strongest reaction. Coupled with the fact that [the concentration of active rhodopsin (the night-vision protein that drastically increases your sensitivity to light) in the rod cells of your retina is probably much higher], that blue light might seem more piercing and prominent than other wavelengths in the morning.\n\nEdit: u/positive_root gave a more accurate [explanation](_URL_0_) regarding the struck-out portion of the third paragraph, which I have added below. Thanks for clearing that up!\n\n > Holding pressure constant, atmospheric density is a function of temperature. So in the morning the atmosphere is cold, has multiple stable layers, typically much higher density than in the evening when convection is still settling down. Also high humidity typically leads to haze particles, large enough to be [Mie scattering](_URL_3_). You say \"blue-light-scattering water molecules\" but all relatively un-clumped molecules with a dipole [scatter blue light](_URL_4_) preferentially, most notably nitrogen, the main constituent of the atmosphere.\n\nEdit 3.2: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ TL;DR ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \nSunrises and sunsets are both caused by the scattering of short-wavelength (e.g., blue) light by particles in the air. In the evening, there are usually more particles in the air than in the morning. The increased number of particles in the evening causes even more blue light to be scattered making sunsets appear redder. Sunrises may also appear bluer because our eyes are usually more sensitive in the morning and our brains are most sensitive to blue light in general.",
"Piggy backing on this with a similar question.\n\nIs it just my imagination, or is sunlight more orange during fall and winter than during spring and summer?",
"Unfortunately, it seems that many of these answers aren't quite right. I'm going to try to ELI5.\n\nThe main reason is due to the same principle that gives us the blue sky in the first place: Rayleigh scattering. Here is a decent ELI5 picture to help: _URL_0_\n\nTo answer your question, though:\n\nAs the sun rises, the horizon starts out mostly red and transitions to blue. This is because the light has to travel through more of the atmosphere than when the sun is directly overhead. Much of the \"blue\" part of the spectrum (shorter wavelengths) is removed and you get mostly red (longer wavelengths) that makes it through. As the sun travels to its peak, you have a nice, blue sky. At this location, blue is scattered more than red and you get a sky that looks as if not is blue everywhere. As it goes down, you get the reddish color again, for essentially the same reason you did earlier. \n\nThe big difference between sunrise and sunset is the direction of motion of the light. As the sun rises, the light sweeps across the surface of the earth and is transitioning from red to blue. As the sun sets, you are transitioning from blue to darkness. So what you are transitioning to determines the character of what you see.",
"I won't pretend to have all of the answers, but just something to consider...\n\nThe atmosphere at sunset has had the sun hitting it for many hours. The atmosphere that light passes through in the morning hasn't had daylight all night long.",
"There's a lot of similar explanations that try to explain the science of light refraction and scattering etc, but nobody seems to mention the fact that you used the key word in your question already which is \"seem\". \n\nThe fact is that there is no significant difference between the average atmosphere conditions in the day time and the night time that would affect the colours of sunrise and sunset.\n\nGenerally, because sunrise for much of the year happens prior to you actually waking up, you probably miss a lot of the remarkable/colourful ones that you see in the evening. This is especially because during the summer, when the sun rises earlier, there is more dust in the air and more likelihood of a remarkable sunrise. \n\nIf you only see 1/2 of the sunrises as you do sunsets, statistically speaking, it will seem like sunsets are more remarkable just because you notice them more often. ",
"Perception.\nGenerally, the sun has already started to come up when you watch a sunrise, so it's already a bit blue, and when you notice a sunset, it's already started to shift to red. \nAs others have mentioned, also moving towards a blue sky vs towards a red sky influences your perception as well.\n\nIt's about where in the sky the sun is, and that's it. A still image really shows this:\n\n[photo1](_URL_0_) \n[photo2](_URL_1_) ",
"Interesting discussion here about the different state of the atmosphere between sunrise vs. sunset. As an atmospheric scientist, I'd like to list what I think might be the most relevant points.\n\n* There may be some selection bias. The time relative to the sun's position near the horizon at which you notice the sunset vs sunrise may be rather different.\n* Dark eye adaptation is a big deal, your ability to see the first light of sunrise (or the false sunrise, the [zodiacal light](_URL_1_)) is likely very different than your ability to see the last light of sunset.\n* The atmosphere really is different between morning and evening, human effects like light pollution as well as particulate matter are likely to make a difference. But even without humans, physics demands the formation of a [nocturnal boundary layer](_URL_0_) whose structure is slightly different from sunrise to sunset.\n\nHope some of these ideas lead you to even more interesting topics. I could talk about atmospheric optics all day, it's just so absolutely amazing, you can see why some languages don't even have a different word for \"heaven\" or \"the sky\".",
"Basically, it's because the sky is bugged and the the IT department can't be arsed to fix it properly. The reason for the bug is a GPU that is broken and this gives the sky a blue tint when booted up. Instead of buying and installing a new gpu, they just reinstall the drivers. Unfortunately this is a temporary fix and after a while the sky start tinting towards red/orange. But by that time everyone is finished using the sky and they just turn it off.\nPlease forward any complaints to the IT department and if we're lucky they might get around to do something about it eventually... (though HIGHLY unlikely)",
"Could the Doppler effect have something to do with it? It seems during the morning the earth is spinning towards the sun, and away form the sun in the evening.",
"Mostly selection bias. You have probably seen lots of sunsets - literally - in terms of the sun actually approaching and dropping through the horizon. There is only about a 20 minute window where the real \"orange\" sunset is in effect. Prior to that, the light is just as clear and blue as the sunrises you describe.\n\nMy bet is you have seen far fewer real sunrises... where the sun is literally below the horizon for 10 or 15 minutes, then touching the horizon and rising above it. Virtually every \"sunrise\" we notice is when the sun is already well past the horizon - even if we only miss it by ten minutes or so, the drama is passed. \n\nIf you get up in the pitch dark, and watch the sun slowly come over the horizon, the reds and oranges you expect will arrive before the sun appears, and when it comes over the horizon it pretty much is just as glorious as a sunset. But its far harder to catch that (and remember it) compared to the many many sunsets we witness by comparison. \n \n",
"Sunlight is white, which is really a color that combines all the colors of the rainbow ROYGBIV (Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Indigo Violet). It is scattered by dust and other tiny particles in our earth's atmosphere and that means that it is split into is components. While Red and Orange are composed of large wavelengths, Blue is of much shorter wavelength and scatters much more easily. When it scatters, it bounces off of those particles and strike our eyes, which makes the sky seem blue, while those colors that aren't scattered are not seen by our eyes. \n\nThe position of the sun changes throughout the day and this change leads to a change in which colors are reflected (has to do with density and all these other things but then it's not LI5 anymore). Anyway, I can't explain it more than that but coincidentally I saw this video here [(For the Love of Physics — Prof. Walter Lewin's Last Lecture)](_URL_0_) today which just so happens to touch upon the subject. ",
"Two reasons:\n\n- the air is more polluted at the end of the day, and common pollutants tend to filter bluish light more than reddish light, and;\n\n- in the morning you are moving towards the sun at a high rate of speed, which makes things look bluer, at sunset the sun is moving away, which makes things look redder. \n\nBoth of these are caused by the same underlying phenomenon, which is that higher-frequency light wavelengths look bluer, and lower-frequency wavelengths look redder. \n\nInterference (such as pollution) tends to slow down or filter out high-frequency blue light, while letting through more of the slower red spectrum. Similarly, the sun moving towards you causes a \"blue shift\" that turns to red as the sun starts moving away."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/20dp27/why_do_sunrises_and_sunsets_look_slightly/"
],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/a/hfcl1"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bt26j/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_quality_of_light_at/d9rgetl/",
"http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/5007838+_8e2a290d045683a599312059327f6eea.jpg",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bt26j/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_quality_of_light_at/d9rnmet/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mie_scattering",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering",
"http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/light/u12l2f3.gif"
],
[],
[
"http://www.scienceline.ucsb.edu/images/sunlight-scattering.png"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://photos.smugmug.com/SunsetsSunrises/i-wbcZkwp/1/S/IMG_6009-S.jpg",
"http://www.stevechristianphotography.com/images/photography-of-sunrise-sunset/Sunrise%20over%20Lake%20Michigan_g2i1.jpg"
],
[
"http://http://lidar.ssec.wisc.edu/papers/akp_thes/node6.htm",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiacal_light"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/4a0FbQdH3dY?t=29m39s"
],
[]
] |
||
304nc3 | how do recycling centers sort between aluminum, plastic, cardboard, etc? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/304nc3/eli5_how_do_recycling_centers_sort_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpp1fc1",
"cpp1izy"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"People with hands and regrets about their life choices. This is why many systems request you sort them yourself.",
"It's not as high-tech as you might think. [This is typical](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/gallery/090629/GAL-09Jun29-2239/media/PHO-09Jun29-167681.jpg"
]
] |
||
3zmwfq | a digital rental (amazon etc.) clearly takes less resources than a redbox rental (aka create disk, ship disk, maintain machine etc.) yet it costs ~6x as much. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zmwfq/eli5_a_digital_rental_amazon_etc_clearly_takes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyneaa1",
"cynebql",
"cynef37"
],
"score": [
20,
9,
7
],
"text": [
"cost has nothing to do with prices (except to say that if cost > price, you wouldnt offer the product)\n\nWillingness to pay dictates price. And people are willing to pay more for a digital rental because they are easier to use on impulse without driving to a physical location.",
"Redbox is $2 for Blu-ray and Amazon is $6 for HD rental (much lower bitrate than Blu-ray). Still, 3x is a large difference. \n \nThe main factor is convenience/impulse, it's the same reason a bottle of soda is 75¢-$1.25, yet some stores sell a 2 litre for $1.",
"Redbox purchases the single disk and they can re-rent that single disk a hundred times and their cost for the media remains the same.\n\nEvery time you rent something from Amazon they have to pay for the rights each time you rent. They work out the contracts in the back end. They get a lot of stuff in bulk which they make free for members (as does Netflix), but the stuff that is not Prime eligible they have to pay a fee which is why you'll see different pricing for different movies depending on how new they are, etc. The studios rate for each movie fluctuates."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5bjrva | difference between salt, spices, and herbs | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bjrva/eli5_difference_between_salt_spices_and_herbs/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9p1hs3",
"d9p200a",
"d9p8deh"
],
"score": [
6,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"These types of things don't have strict scientific definitions. It all comes down to convention.\n\n\"Salt\" is actually a chemistry term with a specific definition, but in cooking 99.9% of the time it means sodium chloride. Depending on the source and any impurities you can get different \"kinds\" of salt, but it's always primarily NaCl.\n\nHerbs and spices are similar in that they are used to flavor or preserve food, often in relatively small amounts. The difference (again, conventional) is that herbs are leafy while spices are seeds, fruits, bark, roots, buds, or some other plant part.\n\nSo for example cilantro is commonly considered to be an herb (being made up of leaves and stems) while coriander is considered to be a spice (being ground dried seeds) even though they're the same plant, Coriandrum sativum.",
"Herbs are leaves (and sometimes nearby structures, like stems), spices are specifically not leaves.\n\nBoth herbs and spices are additives, which means whether they are herbs or spices can be situational. In culinary terms, onions and garlic can be a spice or they can be a vegetable, depending how they are prepared.\n\nSalt is a mineral, it is neither herb nor spice, although it shares many of their properties.",
"Another thing to add: in my opinion, herbs are best when used fresh, straight out of the garden (or store packet). For the most part, dried herbs are simply a matter of convenience. \n\nBut, thinking of all the spices in my spice rack, I can't think of any that didn't need to go through some kind of drying or curing process. Maybe not so much for a flavor process, but rather to get it to a grind-able state. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5pgn8f | what would happen if you are in a submarine 10.000m deep in the ocean and a window cracks and breaks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pgn8f/eli5_what_would_happen_if_you_are_in_a_submarine/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcr1qre",
"dcr4lue",
"dcrlipd"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Assuming you mean 10 thousand meters. (Damn standardisation), and assuming that you could even break glass that was built to withstand that pressure in the first place.\n\nThe water from outside would rush in, and possibly even widen the fracture made in the glass, crushing everyone and everything inside with just sheer force in the beginning, and then as it fills gradually equalize in pressure till everything gets squished tighter than a tin can. You'd be dead far before that though, crushed ribcages and/or skulls can't be good for the body",
"besides all of the destruction of the sub, you and especially compressible things there would be an effect present called sonoluminesce. As the bubble of air in your submarine gets smaller and smaller due to the water rushing in the air gets so hot that it will start to glow for a very short amount of time. like a twinkly star at the depths of the ocean while your skull is being crushed.",
"Not sure if submarines that go that deep have windows ? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1tfm5h | do twins have the same voices? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tfm5h/eli5_do_twins_have_the_same_voices/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce7g1uv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They tend to be similar, because the have the same genes and share the same experiences. But nongenetic factors can make their voices drift apart.\n\nIf one lived in Maine and the other Mississippi, they'd start to pick up the local accent. And if one became a professional opera singer while the other became a professional pig caller, their voices would develop physical differences."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3ldqni | how do wifi packets know which device to go to? | Specifically the radio waves themselves, not how packets in general know where to go. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ldqni/eli5_how_do_wifi_packets_know_which_device_to_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv5fx5e",
"cv5gyj0",
"cv5l7cy",
"cv5p1ag"
],
"score": [
12,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Each individual device has an address called a MAC address (different to an IP address). When a wireless hub (your WiFi access point) broadcasts a 'frame', which is the digital information containing a packet of data for a computer, the frame has the MAC address of the intended client included in there.\n\nBecause wireless technology broadcasts, any wireless device nearby can actually receive that frame - much like any radio near a radio tower will receive the radio signal.\n\nWhen a computer/device receives the frame, it checks if the frame was intended for it by comparing it's own MAC to that embedded in the frame. If the MAC matches, then it processes the data as usual. If the MAC doesn't match, then the data is dropped.\n\nThis is the reason why we need super strong encryption for wireless networks - because with the right software, anyone can capture those frames/data packets and 'snoop' on what you're doing.\n\nReference: CCNA training :P",
"LI5: All the devices receive all the packets, but each device has a unique number assigned to it (its \"MAC address\") and the packet has the number of the device it's intended for. Devices ignore^([1]) packets that aren't for them.\n\nLI10: There are also a handful of different radio channels (different frequencies). Each access point is on a specific channel and the device tunes itself to that channel when it connects to (\"associates with\") that access point.\n\nLI15: There are also a bunch of power saving modes in WiFi which allow devices to turn their radios off most of the time and only wake up a few times a second to receive a periodic broadcast from the access point indicating whether they have traffic. If there is, they stay on for a while to receive it.\n\n[1] Unless they're in \"promiscuous mode\", in which case keep all the packets they receive. Useful for some legitimate things and some illegitimate things.",
"They don't know which device to go to. Even before you start talking about MAC addresses (layer 2) you have the physical layer (layer 1) which in the case of wifi is the UM layer aka radio waves. Each packet is broadcast out and any wifi device in range can receive the signal. In order to decode the signal though it needs the wifi key which will allow it to get the frame (layer 2) which includes the MAC address it's destined for, and the devices that belong to that network that aren't that MAC simply discard the frame. \n\nIt's similar to how non routable networks used to work. You might have dozens of computers on a hub or on a thin net network, all broadcasting frames, but if a frame isn't tagged with it's MAC address it discards it. It doesn't have to discard it, this is how packet capturing works. \n\nMost wired networks today are switched networks though, so the switch actually makes the call of which device a frame is destined for and it will only send the packet out of the interface that will reach that device. If it doesn't know where the device is then it broadcasts it out of all interfaces until it gets a response, then it updates it's arp table with the location. \n\nSince wifi is broadcast to all devices because it's the nature of radio to broadcast, it instead works more like the hub network where devices just ignore the frames. You could describe this as being in a common collision domain. If you have many devices all transmitting in the same collision domain, the bandwidth will get eaten up quickly with devices talking over each other and interrupting frames. This rises exponentially until nobody can talk. To get around this, most large wifi networks like in your office, will use smaller wifi cells, with multiple wifi access points joined by physical cabling and each operating on different channels so that traffic is localized to just the part of the building near the access point, allowing frequencies and channels to be re-used in areas adjacent. ",
"The radio waves don't know where to go, they just spread out from the antenna into the surrounding space. Every device within range of the access point recieves every packet that is sent. Each packet contains the MAC address of the device it is intended for, and normally, devices will ignore packets that aren't intended for them. You can put your network card in promiscuous mode, which causes it to accept every packet, regardless of its intended destination. This allows you to analyze all the traffic passing over your network (doing this on an encrypted network requires a bit more work. You have to connect before the other devices, so that you can see them authenticate and get the key required for decryption)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
19ikuf | why it seems to take longer to walk towards a place (like a store) vs walking away from a place (going back home)? [x-posted to elic] | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19ikuf/eli5_why_it_seems_to_take_longer_to_walk_towards/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8oczgk",
"c8odg28"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Novelty -- and you'll find this applies to driving as well as walking. The trip takes longer going out because it's the first time, so every detail on the trip is new. Your brain is creating \"landmarks\" as you go.\n\nBy landmarks, I mean things that you pay particular attention to. You might notice a red door on a house, a particular sign on a store, a cracked driveway, whatever. It's all new information, and your attention to it makes time seem to go more slowly.\n\nComing back, you tend to notice the landmarks but this time you're remembering them instead of learning them, and you're paying less attention to the details in between, so time seems to go more quickly.",
"You associate a much larger area as being \"home\" than the area that is the store. On the trip there your brain doesn't feel you have arrived until you enter the store, but on the return trip your brain feels at home as soon as you enter your neighborhood."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1amw0w | what did old movies mean when they said "[this movie] has been formatted to fit this screen." | I never told them how big my screen was, so how did they format for it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1amw0w/eli5_what_did_old_movies_mean_when_they_said_this/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8yv74e"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Movie screens where always wider than the normal home television. They have to alter the film in order to correctly fit your television screen. \"Full Screen\" versions of movies have black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. What many people don't realize is that the black bars aren't covering anything because there wasn't anything there to begin with. Because the original screen format was designed for movie theaters(usually twice the width then its height) so nothing ever existed there to begin with.\n\nNext time you go to the movies, take a look at the size and shape of the theater screen. With most theaters, the screen is significantly wider than it is tall. Then take a look at your television. If you notice that while it is also rectangular, it is nowhere near as wide as the theater screen is (relative to its height).\n\nnot everything is visible in the fullscreen version of the movie compared to the original format. By expanding the image to fill the screen, unfortunately the sides of the image are cut off. On average, about 30% of the picture is cut off on the sides, especially on movies filmed in 2.35:1 format. Movies like Star Wars and Mad Max are filmed in 2.35:1 format. Most people never realized or even noticed the loss of the movies footage.\n\nThe reason you don't see this warning anymore is because most of all modern televisions are now widescreen. They can support the original format the movie was filmed in. Almost all movies are filmed to fit modern televisions now."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4c1xn9 | why is1/x divergent but not 1/x^2? | In both cases, the number gets smaller and smaller but is still nonzero, and both approach zero. I don't see the difference. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c1xn9/eli5_why_is1x_divergent_but_not_1x2/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1ebo7q",
"d1edgcn",
"d1edne3",
"d1eeh39"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Ignoring the 1, if you group together the first term, then the next two terms, then the next four terms, and so on, you get:\n\n(1/2)+(1/3+1/4)+(1/5+1/6+1/7+1/8)+⋯\n(1/2)+(1/3+1/4)+(1/5+1/6+1/7+1/8)+⋯\nwhich is greater than\n\n(1/2)+(1/4+1/4)+(1/8+1/8+1/8+1/8)+⋯\n(1/2)+(1/4+1/4)+(1/8+1/8+1/8+1/8)+⋯\nwhere now each group is exactly equal to 1/2. This shows that the sum of the first 2n2n terms is at least 1+1/2⋅n1+1/2⋅n, and so the sum of all the terms is unbounded.\n\nIf you know a little bit of calculus, ∫dx/x=logx∫dx/x=logx, so 1+1/2+1/3+⋯+1/n≥∫n1dx/x=logn−log11+1/2+1/3+⋯+1/n≥∫1ndx/x=logn−log1.",
"1/x doesn't go to 0 fast enough to overcome the fact that there's an infinite number of terms. 1/x^2 does.",
"Because convergent and divergent don't mean, *gets closer and closer to a certain number* (or don't), they mean the **sum of the terms** gets closer and closer to some number. /u/oralexam's answer shows why the sum of 1/x^i when i goes to infinity doesn't ever stabilize.",
"To hold it simple, 1/x is big enough to be added up to infinitely, while 1/x^2 is way smaller and does not. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
37au8q | how does cat litter work | Like how do cats know to go in the cat litter not just on the floor. Is it because in the wild predators could track them if there poo was not hidden? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37au8q/eli5_how_does_cat_litter_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"crl4ajf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's also conditioning. We teach them that this is where they go and since they naturally want to bury their droppings it works for everyone "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6245qe | how does the new internet bill that reddit hates so much work? will i actually be able to call and request any person's web history? how will companies take advantage of this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6245qe/eli5_how_does_the_new_internet_bill_that_reddit/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfjv916"
],
"score": [
26
],
"text": [
"No, definitely not. Basically, companies can collect data on you either to sell or for their own use. Other companies can buy this data. It helps them get insight in trends for their users. While good for the business, that means your personal life is being used for monetary gain. That's what happens with grocery store cards. You get a discount and they get to track your purchases.\n\nIt's more of a problem with ISPs because they act as a utility but are trying to run as a business. Imagine if your power company sold your usage to another company. The big problem is ISPs not being treated as what they are, utilities. If they aren't utilities, they're a monopoly. They want to have it both ways."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3y7usk | why child support is based on income rather than what a child would need monthly. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3y7usk/eli5_why_child_support_is_based_on_income_rather/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyb9fp6",
"cyb9jkl",
"cybbn59",
"cybbxig",
"cybcd01",
"cybcdu1",
"cybcji6",
"cybcu6y",
"cybcyay",
"cybd2rs",
"cybd8by",
"cybd8fq",
"cybdjc3",
"cybdjoa",
"cybdjs2",
"cybdoj1",
"cybdw92",
"cybe50a",
"cybe5fm",
"cybeisr",
"cybej4i",
"cybelzm",
"cybem4l",
"cybewrw",
"cybfb55",
"cybfe9j",
"cybffb2",
"cybfhps",
"cybfi2m",
"cybfl3r",
"cybfl4i",
"cybfqcn",
"cybfqp3",
"cybfv6a",
"cybfvkk",
"cybfxs4",
"cybfy2r",
"cybg34y",
"cybg3d0",
"cybg4oo",
"cybgej2",
"cybgfj9",
"cybglen",
"cybgqo5",
"cybgtd5",
"cybgukm",
"cybgwve",
"cybgxuh",
"cybgzyx",
"cybh3n2",
"cybh4ps",
"cybhhca",
"cybhhfs",
"cybhi7z",
"cybhik0",
"cybhivg",
"cybhjq1",
"cybhl87",
"cybhm2u",
"cybhok9",
"cybhtrd",
"cybimpe",
"cybio6r",
"cybiwsy",
"cybiz2v",
"cybjegx"
],
"score": [
173,
115,
7,
58,
18,
4,
62,
9,
3,
8,
24,
18,
11,
2,
13,
11,
15,
24,
10,
13,
4,
14,
7,
2,
6,
3,
3,
5,
3,
7,
2,
14,
2,
36,
26,
2,
3,
3,
2,
4,
2,
3,
2,
5,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
5,
3,
3,
2,
4,
4,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5,
8
],
"text": [
"Child support is partially based on income. It is also partially based on the number of children and their age, the cost of basic living expenses and school in that general area, and whether or not any special needs are present. Which sometimes leads to a very high ratio, but that is also something that can happen when both parents live with their children; not all jobs pay a wage that covers a child's reasonable expenses. That doesn't mean those expenses don't occur though.",
"It is because it makes the payments easy to calculate. Calculating how much a child actually needs would be a burden on the courts as people brought in expert witnesses and evidence every single time. It would vary over time and you'd have to change court ordered withholding every few years. Basing it on salary is easier for everyone. In Texas, there is kind of a cap unless you can prove special needs.",
"What a child 'needs' is subjective. Sure we can all agree on clothes and food. But what about things like music lessons? Organized sports? A personal computer? Obviously a child can survive without them, but these are things a parent should provide, if they can afford it. A child's needs increase when you have more money to pay for them, so child support should increase too",
"The children are the first priority and the state doesn't want the children to suffer a change in circumstance just because of a divorce. If they were rich because of the parent that left they should not suddenly struggle, if the supporting parent still has that income. A friend pays 5600 a month on a salary of 160k with child support and alimony combined. 3600 is temporary alimony. Spouse earns 48k. In this case, unfortunately, the needs of the child (and upkeep of 'standard of living accustomed to') may have been exploited in court as an excuse to support the spending habits of the spouse. ",
"A very good reason that child support is the way it is is that in the past, if a young man knocked up a young woman out of wedlock, it was designed to support her as well. Think of it like a shotgun wedding. Back then a young woman would find it extremely difficult to find a husband with a kid. She would be left supporting herself and the kid for the rest of her life. Well, if you're not going to marry her...\n\nOf course in our modern world its unnecessary and even detrimental to men and our society. But it was a very valid reason at one point.\n\nIt is my opinion, and most of you would not agree, that there should be no mandatory child support anymore. In a world where a woman can unilaterally decide whether or not she will have a child even after she is pregnant, or even if she will care for it after it is born, it is unethical to hold someone to a decision he has no say in. If a woman doesn't have to have a child even if she's pregnant, or doesnt have to raise a child when she has one, why should a man?",
"So I have a question. How would it work when the dad has 2 children from 2 different women? Wondering bc I am about to divorce my husband bc he has knocked up some other gal. He is trying to convince me to stay married so that he isn't paying 2 child supports. I am planning on divorcing him but at the same time don't want to screw him over for child support.",
"This unfortunately is the result of one or both parties involved NOT being grown ass adults regarding the best interests of their kid(s).... And thus, bureaucracy is the only mediator remaining. Sprinkle in time + continued stupidity and you get this \"system\" (relative from state to state) that becomes the rule and not the exception. \n\nIf adults would just act accordingly and make choices based on merit and understanding instead of malice and contempt, I believe this would not be such a problem. ",
"I make 9.50$ I don't have a license or car I brig home roughly 650 before child support every 2 weeks and after I bring hone 300 I have to survive off 600 a month I can't afford to save ever barely afforded presents this year life is gonna suck for another 12 years ",
"Something I'd really like to see happen with child support is that the money goes into an escrow account which only releases funds when both parents agree on a purchase for the child. Once the child reaches 16, they get added to the escrow account and get a say on how their money is spent. If the kid thinks his parents are abusing *his* money, he can say no to the withdrawals. At 18 the parents are removed from the account and it becomes available to the child directly.\n\nThe absent parent has assurance that their monetary support is being used for the kid and not being abused by the other parent. School books, food, clothes, field trips, summer camp, gas money, Disneyland... anything that *both* parents agree on is fair game.\n If the supported parent thinks the the supporting parent is being stingy on what they are releasing for the account then they can complain and have the account audited. If the supported parent doesn't use all the money each month then it simply builds up in the account for a rainy day to eventually be released to the kid for whatever they want to use in the future. Car, college, ect. \n\nedit: additionally, the kid gets an opportunity to learn some personal finance when they added to the escrow account and have a say in how their money is spent.",
"It's based on maintaining the same lifestyle the child was experiencing while with both parents.",
"Out of curiosity, everyone here seems to agree the various systems are wrong. Does anyone have an eloquent solution that a real legislature could pass as a law that would universally solve the issues for everyone? \n\n",
"Or vis versa. My best friend (female) makes 100 a year on an executive track to pay her ex husband and his new wife (who refuse to finish a college degree or job with benefits between them) half of her monthly income. Between that, mortgage, and her student loans she's basically broke. It's absurd, but don't make it sexist too. ",
"I was told by a clerk in the Child Support System that the reason it's 20% of your pay is because they expect you to not only provide the support, but provide enough of it that the Child can effectively live the same lifestyle they would be living if you were still in the home. \nSo if Mom is a server at a restaurant and Dad is a CEO, little Susie is supposed to be living the life of a CEO's daughter, not that of a server's daughter. (I am not looking down on anyone's job, I only said server because that's what I do.)",
"My husband was ordered to pay $1,200 a month for his 2 kids plus health insurance. Part of his expense was child care while the mom (custodial parent) \"looked for a job\". If the custodial parent is a student, working, or \"looking for a job\" and needs child care to do so, it comes out of the non-custodial parents pocket.\n\nWell, at the time they went to court, she had the kids (not of elementary school age at the time) set up in a private Montessori daycare program that her GRANDMA paid for as a freebie gift. She printed off a couple emails as proof of seeking employment. After court, the kids were out of the school within 2 months. Friends and grandparents watched them. Then she stayed home to do school online and he still had to pay.\n\nThe screwed up part is, when you have to move because you can't afford anything and have to live in a lesser environment and maybe not enough bedrooms, how does that not affect the kids? And financially, if you get a 2nd job or a higher paying job, they can take you back to get money out of those checks too.\n\nI've seen the games. I've seen the way she reaps in the benefit. It's lose lose for him, and she's also always in contempt of visitation, since she only views him as a child support check, always withholding the children intentionally. You can't do that, whether the dad pays or doesn't pay!\n\nChild support is only half the battle. Enforcing visitation, communication, and trying to not let the other parents spite dictate... is the other half.",
"Brutal topic I know all too well. I really feel for the stories I've read here. It will get better, and no matter what our kids are worth it. I'm a remarried dad, we have 50/50 legal but I have residential custody, and have him 75% of the time or more, we offered to pay all of his concrete expenses w childcare and health insurance, she and court agreed, and we feel very satisfied. The system with which they figure things out is unrealistic and I believe cause more problems than it solves. Nothing used to bother me more than to send 700 a month to find out she was being evicted or losing her car, or didn't pay bills, it was pathetic. If your taking this much money from people you should come up with a way to ensure its spent on its purpose. Good luck everyone.",
"It's not fair. It's not based on what is in the child's best interest. The mission of child support enforcement is to get as much money as possible. Period. If that ruins the father financially, then so be it. If it means incarceration for inability to pay, then tough shit. CSE doesn't count that as a loss because the judgement is still there even if the father is in jail. The fact that the child will suffer financially and emotionally by the father being in jail doesn't mean shit to CSE. Don't believe me? Check out their mission statement: \n\n_URL_0_",
"In Australia the calculation starts with a basic minimum amount for living that both parents are entitled to, and then a ratio based both on care % and income, so that care % and money equal out overall. If the person with the greater care percentage also has a greater income above the minimal survival income rate, the child support rate owed is less. If otherwise, the rate is directly proportionate to income.\n\nThe idea is explained in the calculations that they don't want the child to be at an economic disadvantage when in either parent's care, so the lower % care parent has to be economically stable, but the main custodial parent also needs assistance when it's available. The other idea in all this is that hypothetically, the ceiling on the amount of money that could benefit a child's development is so high that it can be ignored, so once the first idea is honoured, it only scales with income. The more income, the better for society, statistically speaking.\n\nSource: I used to pay my ex child support, and now I have my son living with me, I receive no child support because I have a job and my ex doesn't. I know the US is different but I still think you could probably remove the gendered assumptions in your OP there, especially for all the single dads out there who never get recognition. My apartment sure as fuck isn't free; I never had to work 60 hours to support my son from afar, but could probably use that 60 hours worth of pay now that I do it on my own.",
"It's your kid and you're obligated to support it in the same manner as if you had custody. I make a ton of money, and my daughter gets expensive private school, lives in an awesome apartment with pool, etc. I shouldn't be able to save money on her by leaving my wife. ",
"Child support is determined, 99% of the time, by a straightforward calculator. Often this takes into account cost of living. There are a lot of indirect expenses. An extra room, a premium to be in a good school district, etc. Child support is also the right of the child. So even if I wanted to, I can't legally absolve my ex of support, because it's not mine to turn down.\n\nRe: the comments here about courts favouring mothers - maybe in some areas, but generally, that's not the case. It's often sour grapes. Any family lawyer will tell you that.",
"Many men can't. It drives some to suicide and others to poverty. \n\nWhy do you think marriage rates are declining? Changes in social dynamics over the past 50 years combined with laws like this play a huge role.",
"Why can't fathers decide to whether or not to keep the child? If they don't want it, then they pay for the abortion. If they don't want it, but the mother does, why should the father be force to pay? It was the mother's decision to keep it so it should be her responsibility if the father is more than willing to pay for the abortion.",
"The idea that a child should continue to live the same lifestyle as before a divorce is ridiculous. It is not founded in reality. Everyone suffers financially from a divorce. You take one pool of money, be it the income of one or both spouses and then have to divide it into thirds: one third each for new homes for each parent and the other third goes to supporting the divorce industry of lawyers, two sets of clothes, books, toys, etc. To act like the predivorce money covers the family in the same way is irresponsible of the courts. And child should feel the effect of it so they don't live in a fantasy world, just as they would if the parents were still married and suffered a financial setback.",
"What gets me is people having to pay support when there is 50/50 custody... Like why?",
"Child support is something that should be paid, but the way it is implemented now in the US is pretty broken and highly in favor of the wife. I have heard similar if not worse stories in Canada and the UK as well so I assume it is a broken western system. \n\nOn the flip side, Japan (where I live now) is pretty fucked and broken in the complete opposite manner. There is no such thing as joint custody and the father typically goes on to his next phase in life with zero contact or support... Which is the norm and there is no taboo about it for the husband. Child support can be ordered in court but there is no enforcement... Likewise if the father wants to see his children, the mother doesn't not have to commit to the time he is given. So Japan has this label for being a child abduction black hole as if the mom doesn't want you seeing the kids, she can take measures to make sure you don't. But on the flip side, if she wanted to claim unpaid child support, the courts wouldn't have much power to do anything... ",
"Well, this is my story. When I was 32 I dated a recently divorced woman with two kids for two months. She lied about using birth control, I did not use a condom every time, it was my mistake. Five weeks into our dating relationship she started talking about wanting a kid with me and that threw up red flags and I cut things off with her. Two months after that she is with another guy. She calls me out of the blue and tells me she is pregnant, wanted to get back together. After doing the maths it was determined that it was my child most likely and she stated that she was not sexual active with the other guy. I supported her emotionally through the pregnancy, after baby was born he did the parental testing and I am bio dad. She ended up getting an apartment right next door to me and I supported her and my child for the first two years but we were not in a relationship but I was single for the first year while she was dating someone else. \n\nShe did not accept child support from the father of her other two kids and he was also in jail for domestic abuse and stalking awhile she was pregnant. She turned down child support from me as well when offered through the state because she deemed it unfair to expect me to pay child support when her ex husband did not. \n\nThe mom was on state healthcare at the time and it covered the pre-natal and hospital costs for the complications at birth which ended up having a mild form of cerebral palsy. Mother later confided that she became depressed and abused alcohol and chain smoked while pregnant in hopes that she would miscarry.\n\n My son needed a lot of therapy, medication management, and surgery and was accepted into Shriners and had a lot of care provided at no cost. Mom ended up going completely on welfare by not working so that she could take care of baby. I worked full time, lived next door to mom and baby, and provided financial support when needed/asked to cover medical and basic needs.\n\nThree years later after my son was born the State filed for child support on behalf of the mom to recoup costs for mom being on welfare. I was ordered to pay $400/month and from day one of final support order I was in arrears of three years of backdated child support from time of my sons birth amounting to $20K. Since I was automatically over the limit of 10K they took my passport and suspended my drivers license and wages were automatically garnished. My child support + arrears is 60% of my gross paycheck before taxes. At the time of the calculation I was making $13/hour full time at 40 hours as the Resident Care Coordinator at an assisted living facility and was a CNA.\n\nI was making around $2K a month at the time of the calculation and they take about $750 off the top before state and federal taxes. After Insurance and Taxes my 2K gross turns into about $900 net. They also take all of my federal and state tax returns. \n\nI was able to get my drivers license back by applying for a hardship as my employment requires driving.\n\nI now work about 60+ hours a week between two jobs just to make up the offset of income due to child support and arrears which is easy for me to do since I work in the behavioral/mental health Adult Foster Care system as a Resident Manager/Certified Substitute Caregiver and my shifts are either 16 hour or 24 hour shifts. I have three day weekends though, which is nice.\n\nWhen it's all said and done, mom only gets a couple hundred of month out of the $700/month I pay. She is not hurting all though - she gets around $15K a year from taxes for three kids and she gets SSD for my son while also working part time and living with her fiance for the past five years in his house who makes a decent paycheck as well.\n\nMom and I are still friends and on good terms - I see my kid every week and while she longer lives next door to me we both have moved and live about 15 mins from each other. My kid is pretty awesome, he is very high functioning although he will forever be at a age 7 on a cogitative level otherwise he has a pretty normal life. Physical defects are not visible, he has internal problems with partial paralysis affecting muscle control on the left side of his body and a seizure disorder but you would not know it from looking at him - he runs, jumps, plays hard, tumbles around, rides bikes, thrown balls. etc. With finer motor skills he has more of an issue like with writing or painting.",
"I suspect that a lot of the stories you've been hearing are just that - stories. I work for a payroll company and see exactly what people are paying. To say that the majority or even a measurable minority of custodial parents are living it up on child support is pretty laughable. Unless you consider $17/week \"living it up.\" That doesn't even buy school lunch! Father of The Year right there.",
"Child support payments is the most fucked up law ever. I fucking rage when i read some of these comments.",
"A long time ago I had a guy who worked for me in a warehouse. He took home about $400 a week. Before he worked for me he had his own BBQ place bringing home about $800 a week. His child support was $370. He worked 40 hours a week for $30. Really nice guy too. White guy from West Virginia, Muslim just a salt of the earth kinda guy. Was thrown in jail cause he couldn't keep up on his child support. How is he suppose to live on $30 a week. Tried for two years to get child support reduced.",
"Either party should have to prove what the Child Support is going to, like some will get the child support and it goes to what they want and not enough to the child. \n\nOr as soon as child support is paid, it should be transferred in to food and items fund, where you only get what you need depending on the children's age. Clothing, Food, Toys ect. Not talking about Donations of reused items, Like give them a voucher for like Wal Mart that can not be transferred in to cash. ",
"I'm a father in Texas. My ex lost custody of all three of her children due to drug addiction and abuse. CPS gave my son to me on two different occasions and his mom came and kidnapped him. I received zero assistance from anyone. I was told by CPS that if she hurt my son I would be held liable and prosecuted but I couldn't physically remove him from her because she was the mother. I paid child support the entire time I had him. My ex received disability and SSI payments for my son while I had him and I was paying for daycare and child support. The last time I got a text from her saying that I needed to come to a different city and pick him up or CPS was taking him (she moved against court order but I had to hire a private attorney to enforce it and I didn't have the money ). When I picked him up the place they were staying had no working sewage and my son had lice. The state of Texas has offered only hurdles for me even though my ex has screwed up repeatedly. I just found out recently that my ex filed a complaint and now my sons medicaid is being terminated and I will have to pay $1000+ a month for his doctor visits and medication because she decided that if she wasn't getting all of the money then no one would get it. I was told I would have to hire a private attorney to get his benefits back even though she only had to file a verbal complaint to end everything. Texas favors the mother. End of discussion. ",
"One more reason to never marry. The facts are that the woman spends most of this money in herself",
"The custodial parent should have to account for how the money received was spent. If they don't use it, they lose it. I think of the thousands of dollar in \"child support\" my own mother drank away. It's disgusting.",
"I have a friend who is a dentist. When he divorced he was ordered to pay his bat shit crazy wife $795 per kid (two) per month plus $4500 in spousal support for life. It was egregious. \n\nHe offered her a settlement. She accepted. It saved him $250k.",
"I'm an attorney in Texas, but there are too many non-replies for me to think this will be seen... So, it'll be kept short and I shall expand if this comment gets visability.\n\n1. The ultimate standard is the need to the child with past income levels dictating what the child needs... A child who is attending private school should continue. A child who goes skiing every winter, and summer camp every summer continues. A child that lives in a nice house, eats out with their parents every day, and a new toy every day is suppose to continue that lifestyle.\n\n2. The income percentages are a base line, they are where you start but if you want to prove in court that those levels are not correct one can do that... That said, dropping 30-50k on a full divorce trial is not crazy numbers. Most people just do not have that. So, the economy class solution is to just not fight over this and get the standard percentage.",
"Because the system is fucked.\n\nChicago Blackhawks player Duncan Keith had his settlement, and as a successful sports star, makes a lot of money. His support to his ex wife is like $16k... a month. The cost of having a child before college is around 250k, 300k MAX, from 0-18 years. \n\nShe's getting 200k. A year. Almost enough to support a new child every year, for the next 18 years.\n\nEdit: changed some things with updated facts",
"Some things to remember are that every state has different rules. For example in Texas, it's a flat 20% for the first kid and an additional percentage for every kid thereafter. NJ has a sliding scale where they look at each parents individual income over the last 3 years and compare that to a chart that is based on those numbers that shows what a child, with parents who make that amount of money, will cost to raise per week. The non custodial parent (99.99% of the time that's the father) pays half of that rate. \n\nOverall it's not TOO BAD. Where it really gets out of hand is when you realize the non custodial parent, the one paying thousands of dollars per year, can't claim that as an expenditure on income tax. Also, the custodial parent, one receiving the money, dosent have to claim that as income. \n\nIn many states the custodial parent is afforded many low cost and free legal advice and consultation as well, they are guided how to apply for COLA increases as well as how to petition the court to make the non custodial parent pay for daycare, medical expenses and even after school and extra curricular activities that you would assume would be covered under the base child support. \n\nIt's not only a broken system, it's also terribly biased against the non custodial parent (again 99% of the time that's the father). \n\nSource- I paid child support in NJ and TX. When my ordeal began, I was making 2200/ a month gross. Out of that I paid $800 a month in child support. ",
"Double standard: Women have an absolute say in aborting or not a baby, while men are absolutely never given the option not to acknowledge and \"provide\" for the kid.",
"Shit like this, in addition to being the only gender not protected from genital mutilation at birth. This is why MRA and The Red Pill are desperately needed and why feminists are evil scumbags for directly creating and supporting this state of affairs.",
"I'm trying to figure out how the system doesn't encourage women to have kids by multiple men.\n\n\nIf she has 1 or 2 kids with the same guy, he can only give the same 20%. But 2 dads? She gets 20% from one and 20% from the other. \n\n\nI just don't see how responsibility or encouragement to maintain a family unit is promoted.\n\n",
"Part of the reason they go by percentage is for wealthy living families. If my kids, for example, are 15 and in the best private school in the country and used to living a certain lifestyle than the $1500 a month that would support a normal child might not support this example child. \n\nThat being said the whole system is fucked from the experiences of those around me. ",
"I'm late to the party and this will never see the light of day but I'll write it anyway to make myself feel better.\n\nThe answer to OP's question is that we have an antiquated bullshit system based on a time when it was assumed that the mans job was to make money and the woman's job was to raise the kids. I filed for divorce in 2012 because my wife was cheating on me and wouldn't stop doing it or lying about it despite me catching her red handed and dragging her to marriage therapy for months. I gave up and filed for divorce.\n\nWe had a one year old girl and was (still am) an excellent father. My lawyer and the mediator both told me, essentially, that despite the circumstances of the divorce that unless I could prove my wife was criminally negligent (drug addict or physically abusive, basically) that she would get primary custody if she wanted it and I would pay child support. My lawyer went as far as to jokingly refer to this as \"the penis penalty\" of divorce.\n\nAt multiple lawyers urgings and advisement that a fight in court would just cost me more money with the same ultimate outcome, I caved and agreed to \"joint custody with mother as primary\" in mediation. Despite having my daughter essentially 50% of the time I pay child support to my ex as is I was a deadbeat dad. In a sense, I pay twice to support my daughter - all her expenses at my house and all at her moms house (and then some, I pay $1800/month due to what I make). My ex owns a house and a condo. She has a good job that pays plenty. I try not to think about how unfair the situation is but its hard sometimes.\n\nPeople talk about how the world is stacked against women all the time and I get it - I've seen some of it in my career and I empathize for sure. But in the realm of family law it's disgusting how men - good men and good fathers - get shafted and fucked over by unscrupulous women and the laws & judges that perpetuate and even encourage the behavior. ",
"There are several reasons why it is based on the parent's income rather than the child's needs. I think the first important reason is that support is a floor. That is, it is the minimum needed to keep a child fed, clothed, housed, etc. The court cannot order parents to go above and beyond, because then it would be veering off into the realm of defining how parents should parent on a day to day basis. This is absolutely unconstitutional. So the courts have to balance competing interests within this constitutional framework that respects a parent's rights.\n\n\nMore directly, if child support is based solely on the child's needs, then what is the standard of determining what is a \"need\" and what is not? This dovetails nicely with the above, but it is slightly different. For example, you will end up with the paying parent saying, \"She doesn't need new clothes, what she's got is perfectly good.\", just so they don't have to pay more. The receiving parent might retaliate by signing the kid up for ballet and violin and swimming just to make the paying parent cough up more money (people actually do stoop this low in family law, btw). Result: cue endless litigation.\n\n\nAs well, income based support provides predictability. This is similar to the above, and courts love predictability. So do most people. Because the amount that a child needs can fluctuate based on many different factors (age, health, activities), setting support relative to the child's \"needs\" would create unpredictability. That isn't great for either parent. The paying parent will continually see requests for more, and more, and more, while the other parent would have the ability to manipulate those amounts as they please. And people do try; I've seen it.\n\n\nAnother factor is that, at least in Washington, support can only be modified in one of two ways. One is a substantial change in circumstances, which would be something like losing your job. The other circumstance would be by right once every two years. So here, you would be asking the court to look at the paying parent's income and adjust child support accordingly. So if the paying parent has gotten a couple of nice raises (say a $5,000 raise and then a $2,500 raise) over the last two years, that can be accounted for. What this does is it prevents people from clogging the courts with petty requests for adjustments.\n\n\nIf on the other hand, it was based on the amount that a child needs per month, you would see many more of these petty requests. For example, let's say the paying parent goes out and buys a new car. The receiving parent sees them pull up in their sweet new 'Vette, and then decides the kid needs a bunch of new things - and that the paying parent should pay for it. It's pretty easy to see how this can get out of hand. And if you think that people aren't this silly, well, go work in family law for a few years.\n\n\nSomething else worth considering is that many of the child's potential needs are usually sorted via other clauses in the order of child support. Here, it is standard to allocate certain expenses (medical, educational) in proportion to each parent's income. So if little Jenny gets in a horrible accident and racks up $30,000 in medical expenses, the paying parent (if they make say, $55,000 out of $100,000 combined between the two parents) would be required to pay 55% of the balance after insurance kicks in. The receiving parent would pay 45%. Similarly, the parents can also agree to share costs above and beyond medical and education. They might agree, for example, to split the cost of putting little Tommy in youth sports, or to split the cost of summer camp. So parents can consider what a child needs, and factor that into their final order. If it is a litigated expense, like little Tommy has *always* participated in AYSO, but now one parent suddenly doesn't want to pay, then the court will step in and require them to pay their proportionate share.\n\n\nTLDR: The court orders are going to be formally set based on what you can actually pay. Courts can't reach into families and tell parents how to be parents, only that they have a floor beneath which they cannot go. This protects both parties from abuse and retaliation, and promotes judicial economy. At the same time, people aren't precluded from coming up with their own method of accounting for things that go above and beyond basic necessities, education, and medical.\n\nSource: am family law paralegal, will be family law attorney from January 15 on.",
"@OP: To maintain the lifestyle they're accustomed to, as best possible. A family that makes $1,200/month is used to a very different lifestyle than a family making $12,000/month, and the entire goal of the process is to protect the children -- and their lifestyle they've grown accustomed to -- as best as possible.\n\nBut ITT: Deadbeat dads. \n\nIf you ever need to see how gullible people are on the internet, just visit these kind of threads. Nobody tells the total and complete truth about their fuckups, and yet this thread is littered with plenty of deadbeat fathers hoisting themselves up high on that cross.",
"If you marry a shitty person, or you are a shitty person who truly wrecked someone, managing child support payments is not a problem. Almost all mothers will work with a father on hard times, if only to keep their own children from hating them. is the system broken? Of course. It's just horrible, but it's not the system fucking you, it's the person on the other side. If you marry a terrible person, or you are terrible to your spouse you will have a bad time. I have seen good divorces and bad divorces, and it really comes down to if there was a bad person in the marriage. \n\nSo my advice is, don't have a kid with someone unless you are married to them. Do whatever it takes not to have that kid until you are married. Next make sure this is a good and decent person. Not just good and decent to you, but is good and decent when no one else would know if they weren't. Someone who is good to another even when they would never see them again anyways. When in a fight, cuts the middle and negotiates. Is willing to lose to save a relationship. Next be that decent person too. So even if, things don't work out, you'll always be able to come to an equitable arrangement. If you don't do this, if you marry the hot girl/guy who is entertaining and takes advantage of others, is not considerate when no one is paying attention, just don't be surprised when they turn on you and abuse you.\n\nTl;dr The system can be abused, but it usually works. Where you see it breaking down is when people are abusing it because they are a shitty person",
"My mother had custody of me until I was 7. I'm not sure if my dad had to pay her. When my dad remarried, he and his wife got custody of me and all my mom had to pay was 50% of the bills directly related to me (school, doctor, etc).",
"I'm 32. Own a company. Not married nor will I ever be. Never want kids. Make $300k. For Christmas I bought myself a watch, a laptop, a new set of golf clubs and am taking a trip. I also pay as little as taxes that keeps me out of prison. Life is good",
"Why dont women pay child support? If the kids are older they should work too",
"My boyfriend has been paying tens of thousands of dollars for his 2 daughters for the past 10 years and hasn't seen them in 7. And he's pretty sure their mom isn't spending that cash on them, since they always ask him (via phone) for money. ",
"As a very short answer to this, child support is supposed to satisfy the needs of a child at a certain standard of living. Thus children of wealthy parents will receive more to maintain that standard of lifestyle, than would children of parents with lesser means. ",
"Reading through this thread adds on to how important finding the right person is. Personality and character trumps good looks all the way",
"To give you another end of the spectrum, my ex-husband refuses to work, and lives off his girlfriend. He calls his addiction to drugs a \"disability\" (un-certified, no sdi payments, and no jobs in the last 3 years). He pays no child support despite having two children, one of them severely deaf. I work 60 hours a week raising and paying for 100% - including $1500 hearing aides, speech therapy, ASL classes, and a special school. There are severe stories on both sides of the fence. There are shitty people out there who just know how to work the system, and dont have the morals to stop themselves. ",
"It is a dated system. Back when it was first introduced, most households relied on a single income, and divorces were really quite rare (usually granted for serious problems only). The idea was that one member of a couple would sacrifice their career to stay at home and raise the children, the other would earn the money. Ideally, the money earned would be split among the members of the household (so typically a decent sum was given to the stay-at-home parent, for the purpose of taking care of the children). Based on that notion, a recipient of child support gets a \"split\" of the payees wages, to simulate the wages that would have been allocated to the children's expenses. \n\nAs for the second part of your post, people getting free apartments and pulling in bulk money for no real purpose is the result of the model being so dated. Often a divorcee will find a new partner and double dip. It is also far more common for households to be dual income these days, so the concept is really silly now (given both parents can now pursue a career AND still raise their children). \n\n\n\n\n ",
"I think The receiving parent should be required to submit receipts for what the money is used for. My brother's ex-wife spent hers in rent for a house beyond her means but my neice never had clothes that fit her or enough food. But by god her mom had a \"fancy\" house. ",
"I need to get knocked up. This paying more in taxes and not getting an extra income sucks.\n\n\n\nTotally kidding ",
"Seems that no one here is actually answering the question.\n\nIt's based off of income because the idea is that the child should maintain the lifestyle it had before the separation of the parents. At least, that's in the US. I can't give any insight into other countries child support laws.",
"I got custody of my 2 daughters after 7 years of complete and utter bullshit in MA. They were meal tickets to my ex who used them as pawns to make her life as cushy as possible. She even filed a false diability claim on behalf of our younger daughter (who legitimately has a pysical disability) and she pocketed the money for 7 years.\n\nThe only thing I did that saved me was that I didn't pay through the state. I paid her directly and it kept me with some power. At the time I told her if she went through the department of revenue, I'd fall off the map and she'd never get a dime. I wouldn't have, but it worked and gave me some leverage.\n\nI got my girls every weekend, every school break and all summer. It allowed my ex the time she wanted to get her floozy merit badges and allowed me to bond with my girls. They finally just decided they didn't want to go back. I got lucky....\n\nMassachusetts is a brutal place for Dad's rights, I know countess dudes that lost everything to crazy ex's. I paid 490 a week for 7 years and never missed a payment. My kids saw none of it. I bought back to school clothes and supplies, phones, etc... I had no issue with supporting my kids, I just wish that there was some mandatory accounting oversight to ensure the children benefited from the support. \n\nBooze, hair and nails shouldn't be allowed. I now have a support order against her of which h she made the first payment of 20 bucks a month, per child and then hasn't made a payment since. She says she has no income and is awaiting a disability claim and is living with her boyfriend who pays for everything. Unreal...\n\nOn a good note, my oldest is a junior in college and my youngest is applying to schools as a HS Senior now. It took a while to get them pointed down range, but they were worth all the pain. The system is just broken. Very very broken.",
"To add to the reasons of everyone else I have to say child support is not only indemnifying but also punitive in nature. The country prospers when families are nuclear and stick together. Child support is a means of giving incentive to families to stick together.",
"So, let me get this straight.\n\nTwo people meet, they both have completed their education etc. and both earn exactly $50,000 a year each.\n\nThey save the exact same amount of money every month and they spend the exact same amount a month. They get married and use their savings, totaling 50% of each persons savings, and buy a house.\n\nThey then have two kids together.\n\nNone of the above has changed, wage is identical, saving and spending identical etc., now they get divorced.\n\nMan applies for joint custody of Children, woman gets full custody. Why?\n\nMan then has to pay 50% of his income to ex-wife to support children.\n\nWoman remains in the home as she is with the children, but he is still liable for 50% of the debt owed on the house.\n\nSo with all things being equal, in a divorce, he loses his kids, his home - even though he's still 50% liable for it's expense, he now operates on 25% of the marital income to try and find somewhere else to live whilst still paying for the original house, and she operates on 75% of the original income and is only responsible for 50% of the cost of the home she now owns.\n\nHow is this legal?",
"I feel for all of the dads on here. The laws certainly do not favor you in Colorado. We pay my husband's ex $2,400 a month alimony for life and $1,600 a month child support for two girls. The child support doesn't even bother me, although I guess what does bother me is instead of saving for their future with the $1,600 portion, she spends on hair extensions and plastic surgery. Fathers get absolutely no say in how these women spend the child support either and I think that's absurd! I think Congress and the Judicial system are pretty backwards and corrupt though so I doubt much will change.",
"I got a buddy we call last chance lance. He is over half a million backed up on child support, he said they give him 50 bucks a day for jail time but he would have to do about 19 years to even it out. Kicker is he raised the child alone and the mother skipped town. She is 30 now. The system sucks for fathers without lawyer money.",
"The premise used to justify it is \"maintaining a lifestyle.\" \nReally, most times, its so the mother doesn't hafta buy fewer things with money thats no thers. \nBUT, there are some legit reasons this stays alive. \nIf the child is in private school, tutoring, medical bills- the same amount of money needs to go to that regardless of marital status. \nAlso, continueing bills, like car loans, mortgages, and etc. \nThe system gets real ugly at anything in the middle, like selling off and splitting assets (and often times, both people have seen enough of that in a divorce), so, they go this route to make custofy-winners not lose cars, homes, etc that would affect the childrens lives. \nThe big problem is, these reasons really only look good on paper. In practicality, it's INCREDIBLY abusable (cause it's literally free money), favors the mother (and sadly, gender has no actual tie to care-giving ability or goodness of character), and doesn't account for extenuating circumstances. \nIt's an old, archaic system. \nAnd fixing it really requires looking at cost of living more accurately.... \nwhiiiiich points us at things like minimum wage..... \nwhiiiiich puts us right in the political quagmire of not accomplishing a damn thing.",
"Middle GA checking in. Was paying 265 a month and that was my part. She was also required to come up with 265. I covered insurance. Problem is, she didn't let me have her. I only got her for a few hours on holidays and whenever she wanted to have a Saturday to herself. So I took her to court for visitation, chil d support went up on both sides, her part? 305. Mine? 655 and that's with insurance. The really fucked up part is she also put down my child needs child care and had money added to the amount owed every month. My daughter doesn't go to daycare but because she said it, she got more money. No proof required.Two months after getting the increase, baby mama buys a new car. Fun. I pay 66% of our daughters needs but due to the fact she lives with her, I can't claim her on taxes. Sorry for not really answering the question, just needed to rant. ",
"My 2€. It's a shitty situation for both party's, but it's a solution that scales.\nIf you have a dead-beat partner that isn't \"willing\" to provide financial support, then in a majority of cases they aren't willing to provide any overall positive support. Therefore the child is better off in the custody of the parent / guardian that will do what what's best for that child, and provide the best quality of life - no matter the sacrifice.\n\nOther side of the spectrum the child's quality of life argument still holds up. We are products of our environment, and that environment can drastically differ according to wealth. Analogy of some animals raised in captivity cannot survive in the wild can also be applied to humans and expectations of silver spoons.\n\nI'll end my drunken rant with everything in life should be solved on case by case basis, but the overall blanket protection provided by child support laws makes sense to me in helping more humans than it hurts. Only a shrinking handful of laws I could same the same...\n",
"I had a conversation with my boss about this once. He mentioned that he actively discourages the president of the company from giving him raises. Mainly because although his ex wife has remarried, and makes as much as he does, because she has primary custody, he's been saddled with a hefty payment. Because it's calculated pre tax, and the more he makes the more he has to pay, and because of his tax bracket, if he got a raise, he'd effectively just end up giving that additional money to his ex wife, or losing a little money because of the higher payment and higher taxes.\n\nHis kids are already extremely well off financially because his ex wife has remarried and because of his payments, he could get the raise and smile because he's giving his kids and even better life, but his words were \"they don't really need a second jet ski at their cottage, they really don't need my raise\"\n\nThe system is so broken is encourages the spouse making payments to get paid under the table illegal, or to not try to make more because they'll just get fucked a little harder.",
"I'm someone who works for an agency having to do with child support. Obviously this is a throwaway. First, a child deserves two parent incomes and to live the lifestyle their actual parent can provide. If you were still together and had the kid, you'd want the best life for your kid, right? Why should that be different because you chose to bring a kid into the world and you're no longer together? If you make $100k and she makes 30k and you have a kid, obviously you're going to be paying child support if a kid enters the picture. This is no surprise. \n\nBased on these posts, I'm sorry reddit's other seems half sucks, but the truth is you choose him or her. Was she into being manipulative when you first got together? Was he a shady person to begin with? Was he/she a one night stand? Did he/she get money under the table and now you can't get monet from him/her for child support? Then you KNEW what you were getting into. \n\nI know most of you believe that support isnt being used correctly, but the fact is that most dads are deadbeats and don't pay (when we know they can afford it) and the moms are whiners. Dude, You can pay to go on vacation, but not child support? He's supposed to help support your kid lady, not pay your entire rent. Child is NOT going away. You will pay it forever unless your child or custodial party dies. Having another kid with the same or multiple woman is just going to get you deeper into debt. \n\nIf you have any doubts about having a kid or having one with your partner, don't do it! You know how the system works and even if you're one of the good guys who wants to help out your child by paying the custodial party directly, you can still end up and be stuck in a system that caters mostly to deadbeats. I understand that people get upset when their license is taken away and they can't work, but for a lot of cases, no money would have been paid otherwise. Go to court and get an attorney if you really can't make ends meet. The attorney may be costly in the short term, but will help in the long run. Even if you can't afford an attorney, represent yourself and bring all the information requested. \n\nBe prepared that once you bring a kid into this world, your relationship may not work out and you will owe a lot of money! Actually, by even bringing a kid into this world, you will still owe a lot of money. Kids are expensive. Period. \n\n And if you're not married (the kid is automatically yours if conceived during marriage)don't sign anything saying you're the father until you have a DNA test. I've seen fathers devastated 5 years after when they find out little Billy isn't theirs and they still have to pay child support. You signed a legal document saying you were the father. I didn't make you sign. If you aren't married, get a DNA test done just to be sure he's really yours. I don't care I'd she yells or screams. She probably will yell about something else, too, anyway. I've had women come to me and name 5 possible fathers and we have to rule them out one by one. \n\nAlways - for goodness sake - use a condom if you don't want a kid! Thats your life savings right there. \n\n\n\n\n",
"I'm currently in a situation that has almost made me not see the point in living anymore.\n\nI was married for 8 and a half years to a woman that was extremely unfaithful, I knew this from the beginning since she was married when I met her...The biggest sign. But when you're young dumb full of cum and on a mission, you ignore the obvious.\n\nEver since a kid I wanted to raise kids, some people have goals to be astronauts etc., not me. I wanted to raise kids with a life better than I had.\n\nI ended up having 3 beautiful kids in this relationship I constantly tried to make work for them. She couldn't handle being alone with the kids and insisted I be a stay at home dad, I had no issue with this since I loved raising muh babies. I was the primary guardian for my lil ones almost the entire marriage. I even helped raise her two younger brothers from the ages of 13-17 and 16-18 because my wifes mother could not handle them anymore in her own words. The 13 year old was failing all his classes, stealing credit cards, etc. He comes to live with me becomes a straight A student and is a good kid. The 16 year old graduates and goes to college. Meanwhile I'm raising 4 kids at this point at the age of 22. No problem, I love children!\n\nFew years down the line she runs away with my kids to a different state, of course I move there and she begs me to come back I do. Maybe 15 minutes away from where her mom lives. Ok. Her mom visits maybe once a year? Meanwhile my family drives halfway across the country to see the babies, flys my kids back home so they can enjoy them as well. They are great kids extremely healthy etc.\n\nI'm completely illiterate when it comes to do with anything court related and my ex is taking full advantage of it. She files for divorce I let it default because we wrote out terms and had them notified thinking they were the terms we agreed upon. NOPE. She gets full custody of my kids she barely raised even though I spent day in and day out changing diapers, raising them with good morals etc. Now I have to pay to see my kids along with child support even though I've never had any kind of altercations around my kids ever. She's court ordered to let them call whenever they want and vice versa. A span of 4 months go by without a word me sending emails begging to just let them call because I can't afford visitation without a word. I finally get on my feet enough to afford to pay someone for visitation and it costs the same as the child support so I'm forced to either pay it and not see my kids or pay for visitation. After telling the visitation lady about the scenario she says she's alienating you from the kids.\n\nIt's put me under tremendous stress, I'm so depressed to the point now where I don't even function correctly anymore, I've lost nearly 50 lbs, recently lost my job so there goes visits, but wait I can at least talk to my kids, nope. She cuts off phone calls again, fathers day and my birthday on the same day and I hear nothing. Finally get to talk to them and the first question they ask is \"dad why haven't you been calling.\" It's christmas and the only thing that would make me happier is to be able to say merry christmas to them, nope. This is the cruelest joke I've ever been in. I can no longer afford anything and it feels like i'm withering away. I'm to the point now, do I even want my kids to see me like this.\n\nNow I can possibly go to jail for not paying child support on top of it, it's debilitating."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ncchildsupport.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ek824 | what is the difference between a voxel and a pixel? | Edit: wow, thanks for the replies everyone! This is the link to the meme I was referring to, sorry for the late response. _URL_0_
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ek824/eli5what_is_the_difference_between_a_voxel_and_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctfozw5",
"ctfrg40",
"ctfslxq",
"ctft3ll",
"ctfuneg",
"ctfwopw",
"ctfwrm1",
"ctg0zxe",
"ctg9tje"
],
"score": [
740,
31,
9,
6,
23,
2,
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A pixel is part of a 2-D image - like all the dots that make up your screen.\n\nA voxel is a 3-D element, like the cubes that make up Minecraft.",
"Pixel: Picture Element. A 2D square with a very small size (usually) and a single color, to represent a portion of a 2D picture on a screen.\n\nVoxel: ~~Volumetric Element~~ Volumetric Pixel. A 3D cube used to represent a portion of a 3D environment. Not all 3D environments use voxels, though. It usually looks much more realistic to use polygons instead of voxels.",
"Adding to the conversation, a common place where you can find voxels is in Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI), where the 3D rendering of the models is based off volumetric information obtained from the sample (usually organic tissue). ",
"The same as the difference between a sphere and a circle, or a cube and a square.\n\nThe former is 3D with volume (the 'vo' in *vo*xel). The latter is 2D like a *pi*cture.",
"An important thing to keep in mind though, is that voxels and pixels are not cubes or squares inherently, but they are just rendered as such since squares are easiest to lay out in a grid, and they are space filling",
"Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, vs 3D Dot Game Heroes. A great example is in the [intro to 3D Dot game heroes.]( _URL_0_) (The part with the transformation is right around the 2 min mark.)",
"Most ELI5's are just a Google search away, but then again, I didn't know what a voxel was either. ",
"its funny i didn't know what a voxel was either, but I used this thing called google. Missed out on some karma, but didn't waste anyone's time. ",
"The movie \"pixels\" that just came out, along with a post on the pcmr sub reddit, is what inspired this question! "
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/o0CHzZd.png?1"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/XyZJ_nNAmtU"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dnt2gh | why does the skin dry up when you shave? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dnt2gh/eli5_why_does_the_skin_dry_up_when_you_shave/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5fpyse"
],
"score": [
30
],
"text": [
"Your skin has a layer of oil on top of it. And hair follicles will produce an oily layer too, called sebum. When you shave, you're taking away all of that so your skin feels dry"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
o12n3 | why "from concentrate" juice tastes so different from "not from concentrate" | So to produce juice from concentrate, they remove a load of water, transport the concentrate and then add water back in to put it in cartons. Presumably either something else comes out with the water, or the act of removing it causes chemical changes, or over time the concentrate changes chemically. Can anyone explain which of these happens and how? Failing that, describing the procedure to remove the water would be very nice! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/o12n3/eli5_why_from_concentrate_juice_tastes_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3diuhi",
"c3djn4l",
"c3dka9g",
"c3dlc1n",
"c3dlom9",
"c3dnmke"
],
"score": [
145,
37,
31,
34,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"they remove the water by heating it up. heating foods and drinks alters them chemically. ",
"As long as you don't mind watching this documentary, he explains the process behind it, the differences between the two and attempts making it himself. It's from a programme here in in the UK called Jimmy's Food Factory which I personally love: _URL_0_\n",
"\"Not from concentrate\" also tastes different from actual fresh squeezed juice.... you guys saying the not from concentrate is obviously just regular juice know this, right?\n\nSince so many people have told you about concentrated juice, I'm going to tell you about not from concentrate. Not from concentrate (like tropicana) is pasteurized then stored in vats for possibly years. After which period, it tastes like crap. So they add flavour packets back in. These flavour packets don't show up on the ingredients list because they come from the fruit they juiced, just somewhat modified.\n\nThere you go. Try squeezing your own orange one day and note how different it tastes from either tropicana or concentrated brands. It's because neither of them are actually all that close to what you get when you squeeze a fruit.\n\nI drink concentrated juice now... it's less adulterated. You could add some flavour to those concentrated juices and they'd taste similar to the not-from-concentrate, in fact some brands do. I found a brand at my local store that tastes different from the rest and I bet that's what they do.",
"My father in law refuses to drink orange juice from concentrate (or anything from concentrate) because it is so \"chemically processed\" and is really bad for you.\n\nAll while smoking a cigarette.",
"Heating the juice removes all the yumyums. Without the yumyums, the juice will never taste as good.",
"Ok so there are two types of juice fruits : \n1) \"from concentrate\" type : this means that, in order to gain money (with cuts in transportation and in raw materials), the producers of the juice heat fruits and extract the \"concentrate\", ie a solid fruit syrup. Then they dilute it in water and sell it as \"from concentrate\" fruit juice. Thus, as it contains less \"true\" fruit extracts, it is cheaper (and argueably less good).\n2) \"pure\" type : here it's simply raw fruits pressed into juice and voilà. As fruit is much more expensive than water with juice extract, \"pure\" juices are much more expensive !"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLdTRXde5-A&t=2m23s"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5m4l05 | why does great singing evoke such a strong emotional response in humans? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m4l05/eli5_why_does_great_singing_evoke_such_a_strong/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc0vgmg",
"dc11etu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Not easy to answer, partially because it's hard to get funding to study something like this.\n\n\nGenerally speaking though, music is math. The pitch of different notes in a melodies are just the number of sound waves every second (hertz). Every time the frequency doubles (or is cut in half) you get a note that sounds like the \"same\" note even though it's lower or higher. Like if you look at the repeating pattern on a piano, each time it repeats you have half or double the frequency.\n\n\nNerve cells in the brain communicate based on frequency of electronic pulses primarily, and they \"translate\" the sounds you hear into complex patterns of these frequencies. So the melody of the singer's voice probably influences this pattern in a way that it affects the rest of your brain, especially the emotional parts.",
"Despite all of the devices we have created to make music, the human voice remains the single greatest instrument of them all. It has the most variables possible in any quality of sound. And it has one thing no invention of ours can ever have: the ability to appeal directly to our higher brain with speech. It's making neural pathways between the intelligent and emotional areas of our brains. And the creation of those connections is inherently euphoric."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6f0r26 | why do certain substances (drugs, pharmaceutical drugs) need to be carefully injected in your blood in order to be effective, while others (tranquilliser darts, poison from a bite) can work regardless of where they puncture you? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f0r26/eli5_why_do_certain_substances_drugs/ | {
"a_id": [
"dieintq",
"dieuwzd"
],
"score": [
107,
9
],
"text": [
"It is mostly question of dose and pharmacokinetics (the speed the substance acts). When you carefully inject something into bloodstream (some bigger vein), pretty much all of it spreads around the body fast. That way you can exactly control the dose and make the most out of what you have. If you injected it elsewhere, the odds are it would work too - but if it hit a muscle (intermuscular application), it would take much longer to get where it needs to be, which generally means lower \"maximum\" effect over longer period of time. \n\nWith pharmaceutical drugs you want the best controlled outcome you can get. With bad drugs you want to get the most out of the dose. Both is better achieved by getting it right into blood. (Unless you go for intermuscular application on purpose)\n\nWith poison darts and bites, the substances are so efficient and/or in dose large enough that you dont really care. Yes, hitting a vein WOULD make it faster and stronger, but even muscle is good enough.\n\nedit: typos",
"There are also drugs like IVIG that are composed of immunoglobulin that we have in our blood. Medicines like these are injected into the vein, given that their goal is to elevate levels of antibodies in the blood in order to help patients with immune disorders to fight off recurring infections."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1e1bfo | why countries around the world teach students multiple languages at a young age, and most american students don't have the option to learn a language in school until much later? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1e1bfo/eli5_why_countries_around_the_world_teach/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9vtwk5",
"c9vv1sh",
"c9vvzqr"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"English is the language of business in Europe and Pacific Rim.\n\nAmerican kids learn English as their primary language. European and Asian kids don't, so they learn it as a secondary language at a young age.",
"Aside from the issue of English being the lingua franca for a lot of countries, I think geography has a hand in a lot of the comparatively limited language education often found in the US. America is nearly 4 million square miles of a single primary language, and a very low percentage of citizens ever travel more than 500 miles from home in their lives. Because of this, language education isn't given a high priority. ",
"It's more of a geographical thing. In Europe for example, the countries are very close-knit and it is much more common to encounter someone from the next country over with a different language. \n\nEven in the US, that is true to an extent. Depending on the region, it is mandatory to learn Spanish starting from elementary school (from age 5-10), and then from middle school on wards (age 11-16 or so into the first two years of high school), a second language is still required, but there tends to be a choice depending on what schools offer -- the most common still being Spanish. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3zt0qv | what is the point of scientists creating new elements if they are all extremely unstable and can only exist as a few atoms for a few fractions of a second? | The main reason I ask is it seems like these super heavy elements basically aren't "real." Doesn't their instability demonstrate that they can't actually exist in any significant way? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zt0qv/eli5_what_is_the_point_of_scientists_creating_new/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyosn4a",
"cyosnv8"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Solving a really hard problem usually requires one to solve many less hard problems, some of them for the first time. In solving those problems and documenting them you make it easier for future work which may come across those same problems. That's one of the cornerstones of science. \n\nIn addition there's a hypothetical \"island of stability.\" An element with so many protons and neutrons that its mass holds it together, resisting instability. This element would be totally new and near impossible to find in the known universe and could have completely unpredictable properties, which makes it of interest to scientists. \n\nSynthesizing these elements is a stepping stone to that island. \n",
"Science. Some of them can exist for hours. Unstable elements can be pretty useful... Thorium is unstable and could be the key to energy production. They decay into other elements but release energy in the process. You can't study it until it exists."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3fit0y | if we have a treasury of the united states, then why did we need a bank of the united state or federal reserve today? | Seems redundant | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fit0y/eli5_if_we_have_a_treasury_of_the_united_states/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctozg1i",
"ctozxab",
"ctp0ndq"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
4
],
"text": [
"We don't have a Bank of the United States (Andrew Jackson abolished that). Treasury is used to manage govt. funds (paychecks, revenues, budgets etc.). Federal reserve prints money, controls monetary and fiscal policy to change economic conditions. ",
"Treasury of the U.S. and Federal Reserve serve radically different purposes. \n\n**TREASURY OF THE U.S.**\n\n- Works for the U.S. Gov't as we know it (White House and Congress). \n\n- Carries out all the financial work that must be done to fund the bureaucracy that runs the country, including printing money. \n\n- Executes fiscal policy (how and how much gov't brings in revenue and spends expenditure)\n\n\n**THE FEDERAL RESERVE:**\n\n- Operates as an independent institution; the President nor the Congress is its \"boss\".\n\n- (specifically in u.s.; diff in other countries) works with two aims: lowering unemployment and controlling inflation. These oftentimes are exchanged for one another, so the Fed must work to achieve a balance.\n\n- executes the monetary policy (setting min. interest rates to spur or slow the economy to avoid crazy volatility in the business cycle, which allows for businesses and citizens to have certainty within the system)\n\n- DOES NOT PRINT MONEY OR CONTROL FISCAL POLICY.\n\n\n**WHY SEPARATE THE TWO?**\n\n- Biggest Reason: Insulation from politics\nThe monetary policy requires high economic expertise with long-term strategies--something that the political process both absolutely SUCK AT. We basically need to keep the politicians out of the Fed so the experts can do their work without interference. \n\n",
"I want to add a bit to what /u/GMATinSept said.\n\nThe purpose of a bank is to lend money - it is a risk amplifier.\n\nThe US operated without a central bank for a long time but during that period the economy had several near-misses at systemic banking collapses during downturns which were corrected by coordinated actions of private banks marshaled by individuals (usually JP Morgan). That's incredibly dangerous - you don't want the economy of the whole country to be dependent on the persuasive skills of an unelected, unaccountable old man.\n\nHaving a central bank with a distributed, accountable leadership provides a lender of last resort and a moderating influence on the economy which is good. Making that institution independent of micro-management of politicians is good because politicians will always manipulate a central bank for short-term political benefit if they can.\n\nThe Federal Reserve compromise is to have the bank overseen by Congress and the President but for that oversight to be limited and for appointees to serve lengthy terms. In that manner the Fed remains accountable to the people but not subject to the whims of the moment of the politicians."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
nm473 | the slash and axl rose fued? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nm473/eli5_the_slash_and_axl_rose_fued/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3a5sdo",
"c3a60t6",
"c3a7ktl",
"c3a5sdo",
"c3a60t6",
"c3a7ktl"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
3,
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Axl Rose is bipolar, which means he gets really mad/happy/sad for no reason. One time, when he was really mad, he said he would quit unless he got rights to the name (Guns N' Roses) incase they break up. A few months later, he made a whole new band with the same name, and all different people. He kicked Slash and all the other members out. ",
"Sex, drugs, and money.",
"Slash is another word for a girl's naughty bits.\n\nAxl Rose is 'oral sex' unscrambled, which is something grown ups do.\n\nPut them together, it's like brussel sprouts. \n\nNow who would want that?",
"Axl Rose is bipolar, which means he gets really mad/happy/sad for no reason. One time, when he was really mad, he said he would quit unless he got rights to the name (Guns N' Roses) incase they break up. A few months later, he made a whole new band with the same name, and all different people. He kicked Slash and all the other members out. ",
"Sex, drugs, and money.",
"Slash is another word for a girl's naughty bits.\n\nAxl Rose is 'oral sex' unscrambled, which is something grown ups do.\n\nPut them together, it's like brussel sprouts. \n\nNow who would want that?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ly952 | how do mortgage works? | When you go to a bank, and you want to Mortgage your house... what happens? how do this works? what happens to your house? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ly952/eli5_how_do_mortgage_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3r3a5p",
"d3r3m9h",
"d3r3n7p",
"d3r46d0",
"d3r521v",
"d3rewsv"
],
"score": [
6,
14,
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It's quite simple. A mortgage is just a loan from the bank that uses your house as collateral. This means, in essence, that if you fail to repay the bank, then you must offer up your house and they will sell that to try and cover your remaining debt.",
"A mortgage is just a special term for \"home loan.\"\n\nBasically, since houses are too expensive to just buy, you need to get a big, huge bank loan to be able to pay for one. But banks don't just give away those kinds of loans - they need some kind of collateral, something they get to keep if you don't pay them back. And since you're buying a house, they use the house itself as collateral. If you don't pay back your mortgage loan, the bank gets to keep the house.\n\nThe upside is that while you pay them back, you get to live in the house. So it's like you're buying more and more ownership of the house each time you make a payment.",
"A mortgage is a debt you accept to take to purchase a house. The bank lends you money and you agree to pay it off over a period of 15, 20, 30 years. Banks will charge you interest for this money. This amount of interest due diminishes with time as you pay off your debt.\nat the same time you are paying \"principal\", which is the actual debt you are paying off. You can also have insurance on top of that.\n\nMortgages usually have fixed monthly payments (interest + principal) and the further you are in the repayment, the higher the principal you pay off.",
"You want to buy a house. If you're like most people, you don't have the hundreds of thousands of dollars you need lying around, so you have to borrow the money. So you go to a bank and work out an arrangement. You pay a portion of the cost of the house (usually around 10% of the cost) directly, and borrow the rest. The bank requires you to make the down payment to prove that you can earn and save enough money to pay them back. The money you borrow is paid back over a long time (usually 15-30 years), with interest. The bank also requires that you put up collateral for the loan, something they get to have if you don't pay them back. You put the house you're buying up as collateral, since you don't own anything else valuable enough. ",
"Others have correctly explained the mechanics of the mortgage loan. But in terms of what happens to your house is that a mortgage *lien* is filed against the home at the government office where real estate records are kept (often called Registry of Deeds, but the name can vary). This lien givens the lienholder (the bank) the legal right to their fair share of the proceeds if you sell the house. When the next buyer comes along, they'll usually do a *title search* to make sure there are no unexpected liens. They usually won't buy the house unless all the previous liens are cleared, because such liens will apply to them otherwise. In other words, the lien is an obligation attached to the land instead of the people. From a traditional legal perspective, the mortgage is the lien, not the loan. \n\nEDIT: typo (lie holder - > lienholder)",
"So you want to buy a house, right? Well, do you have $200,000.00 in your bank that you want to buy it with? No, but the bank has LOTS of cash, and they aren't using all of it, and you talked to your buddy, Steve, who ended up being a \"mortgage loan officer\" for them, and he and his buddies (called underwriters) did some checking on your background, made sure you worked where you said you did and have the money that you do, and that the house is worth what you're buying it for (this is important to tell them how much they should lend to you) and determined that you seemed like you'd probably pay them back for doing you a solid like buying 80%-96.5% your house for you, so they lend some money to you at interest, you know, since it's not a charity and they need to make some money too (but usually the interest rate is fairly low, and right now it's actually crazy low and has been for about four years). \n\nThey also really are worried about ALL that money. What if you didn't pay them back like they thought you would? In order to incentivise you beyond your own integrity, they basically use the house as collateral. They do this by putting a lien on the property. A lot of people think that having a bank's lien on your house means that you don't own it, and that the bank does, which is wrong. You own the house, the bank just has a contract with you that has been recorded with the government that says that you have to pay them a certain amount every month, usually for thirty years, or else they can start a process that allows them to take ownership of the house once a judge agrees that you breached the agreement. This is called foreclosure, and is usually not good for anyone involved. \n\nThat's essentially the long and short of it, there are a lot of intricacies to how the whole mortgage application process works that I'd be glad to get into more detail about if desired."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8z9b45 | when it comes to bullet calibers what do the numbers indicate? e.g 7.62x39mm, 5.56x45mm, 9x19. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8z9b45/eli5_when_it_comes_to_bullet_calibers_what_do_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2h0cs4",
"e2h0f1n"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Example: 5.56x45mm\n\n5.56 means the diameter of the bullet\n\n45 means the length of the casing ",
"To make it simple, we'll use the 7.62x39. \nFirst things first, the 7.62. That indicates the diameter of the bullet itself (the part that actually leaves the barrel of the firearm) in millimeters. Imperial measurements would refer to it as .30 Caliber. \nThen the x39 the 'x' simply indicates a break to separate the bullet diameter from the casing length, In this case, 39mm. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3hcsoi | what exactly is happening when we suddenly don't need to use the bathroom anymore? | You eat a meal, and then you feel that seemingly imminent release of at least a quarter-pound of waste making its way to within millimeters of daylight. You're nowhere near a restroom, and you're not mainland Chinese, so you hold it... and hold it... and hold it...
And then you're sitting around hours later and you realize you've still not relieved yourself, but you feel absolutely no need to, either.
So, what gives? Why one minute does it feel as though it's an inevitability but then the feeling just goes away? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hcsoi/eli5_what_exactly_is_happening_when_we_suddenly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu6buju"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"That never happens to me with poop, but rather urine quite frequently when I'm active. Maybe it sweats out? Pissing your pants by sweating? ha "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3k2twl | why is it legal for someone to have sex with a 16 year old in most countries and most states, but if they film or take photos of the encounter, they have created child pornography? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k2twl/eli5_why_is_it_legal_for_someone_to_have_sex_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuuatjm",
"cuubj6e"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"For the US it has to do with the difference between Federal and State level law making authority. \n\nBecause child pornography, as well as standard pornography laws are Federal laws they are set to the Federal age of consent which is 18. The reason that they are federal laws is that they deal with materials that cross state borders either through distribution (child porn rings, internet), or through economic trade (sale of porn).",
"Pornography can very quickly get out of your control. Once someone gets a copy of it they could blackmail you and many people have had their careers and relationships ruined because of it.\n\nSo at 16 you can understand the short time consequences of sex such as pregnancy and diseases but law makers apparently don't expect 16 year olds to always be able to understand the long term consequences of creating pornography."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
35y52h | if a virus works by injecting its dna into healthy cells, why dont we re-program the virus to inject our own healthy young dna into our cells to prevent us from aging? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35y52h/eli5if_a_virus_works_by_injecting_its_dna_into/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr8wac5",
"cr8wevz"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"They are working on things like that.\n\nAging is more complicated than that. But it does include the fact that the Chromosomes in cells show aging. Cancer is a result of uncorrected genetic damage.\n\nGenerally a virus is much smaller than our own DNA. So it is like wanting to use a back pack for a shipping container. The sizes do not match up.\n\nOur tissues are specialized. The cells in our organs are specialized. They function the way they do because their genes have been turned off and turned on specially for what they do. You cannot just inject even your DNA into a specialized cell and expect it to work.\n\nThere is a lot of research which needs to be done before what we want can be done. Study to go into the field. Support research. Tell your congressional delegation that you want more Federal money for research instead of for bombs, and guns, and drones which make others hate us and want to destroy us.",
"Do you want a zombie outbreak? Because that's how you get a zombie outbreak."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2nusfw | how can airlines oversell flights and then expect passengers to give up their seats? | Didn't we buy the tickets in exchange for a service and then they cannot promise that service will be provided?
EDIT: And if no one does, what happens to the last passenger? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nusfw/eli5_how_can_airlines_oversell_flights_and_then/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmh1mgf",
"cmh1xr6",
"cmh2lkk"
],
"score": [
13,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"When this happens the airline will offer perks to any passengers willing to give up their seats and will steadily increase the perks until someone cracks. The money they save by overbooking and ensuring the plane is full more than makes up for the money they lose by paying people to give up their seats.",
"The fine print associated with a ticket makes it clear that you won't always make your flight for a variety of reasons...weather, mechanical issues, etc.\n\nIf no one gives up their seat, they pick someone, usually the last person to check in.",
"Airlines typically will oversell the tickets, because there is always a \"No Show\".. they arrive at this number, based on multiple parameters like the sector being flown, time of flight, time of year etc....Based on this algorithm they will sell x amount of extra tickets.. and mostly this works. \n\nThe base intent is to load the airplane to max to be able to generate higher revenue..\n\nNow if their calcs go wrong, as they do sometimes... they will either upgrade the passenger to a higher class (if they have availability) or will offer another flight to the passenger. They may also throw in freebies depending on the passenger. Even with the freebies and other things thrown in, it works out better for the airlines to offload a passenger and still have a full flight.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
85cbk9 | why does a wine glass make a sound when a finger is spun on the top? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/85cbk9/eli5_why_does_a_wine_glass_make_a_sound_when_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvwbwpe"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Any object has a harmonic frequency at which it vibrates best. For a thin wine glass, this might be a relatively high note which you can hear well. For a tire, it's likely too low for you to hear.\n\nWhen yo run your finger around the edge you stimulate vibrations, but you finger is slippery enough to not require a specific frequency. As a result the vibrations in the glass cause your finger to slip free in phase, reinforcing the preferred tone."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
f3gt4k | why hasn’t antigravity been discovered and used yet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f3gt4k/eli5_why_hasnt_antigravity_been_discovered_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhimqxm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Gravity appears to be one of the \"fundamental\" forces of the universe, meaning that you can't explain gravity in terms of anything else and you can never turn it off.\n\nFor our universe to exist, it appears gravity has to exist the way it does."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
b7mn01 | how come doors inside the house slam shut when one to outisde is open, but i don’t feel the slightest breeze of wind myself? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b7mn01/eli5_how_come_doors_inside_the_house_slam_shut/ | {
"a_id": [
"ejsqvhw"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It's because of pressure. The higher pressure on one side of that door causes it to shut, it doesn't necessarily need wind to cause it to shut. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1v5vxo | how did people manipulate photographs before computers? | What first got me wondering is the famous airbrushed[ photo of Stalin with Yezhov removed](_URL_0_)
[Here are other pictures of doctored photographs](_URL_1_)
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v5vxo/eli5_how_did_people_manipulate_photographs_before/ | {
"a_id": [
"cep0fhe"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Literally cut and paste. With hands and scalpels. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Yezhov#Execution",
"http://twistedsifter.com/2012/02/famously-doctored-photographs/"
] | [
[]
] |
|
3oemb0 | what was delivering a baby like for early man? | How did they know what to do with placenta and umbilical cord? What did they think was wrong with them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3oemb0/eli5_what_was_delivering_a_baby_like_for_early_man/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvwjgje"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You know animals have babies in the wild, right? I would say it was pretty much like that. They didn't think anything was wrong with them, they done whatever they wanted with the extra stuff (discarded it, ate it, whatever). \n\nGranted, many more babies and women would have died as they weren't equipped to deal with complications, but besides that it's a natural process that pretty much works itself out in most cases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
cf55fv | why do old movies and videos have this sorta staticky sound in the background and modern ones don’t? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cf55fv/eli5_why_do_old_movies_and_videos_have_this_sorta/ | {
"a_id": [
"eu7hgh3"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A lot of reasons: \nOld movies had the soundtrack imprinted on the film, it was analogue and intrinsically noisy - like cassettes, the same was true of video. Also copying the film to make a new print or change the format would introduce more noise. To deal with that Cinemas had quite sophisticated analogue noise reduction to minimize the background noise. \n\nOld TVs were pretty quiet so we weren't as aware of the background sound. Older equipment tended to have less treble and more bass so hiss was muted.\n\nModern TV speakers are smaller have a lot less bass so we notice the treble hiss more. \n\nModern recordings have digital sound which pretty much has no background noise like tape hiss - and copies are identical to the original so the hiss level doesn't go up when copied for modern recordings."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3eqfw8 | in court why can you represent yourself but if you want someone else to represent you they need to accredited? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eqfw8/eli5_in_court_why_can_you_represent_yourself_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"cthf4jr",
"cthffs4",
"cthghre",
"cthh9df"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Representating yourself is a bit harder than it appears. The judge determines if you're able to. It's for your own good. Just as getting a lawyer needs to be accredited.",
"Quite likely so that you cannot claim later that you weren't represented by someone who knew what they were doing and demand a retrial.",
"Because if you are incompetent, your choice to represent yourself only harms yourself. \n\nIt is the same reason you can work on your own house, but contractors need to have certification.\n\n",
"They want the courts to run smoothly with competent counsel on both sides, but the right to represent yourself if you want trumps that consideration. \n\nThe right to have some random other person represent you does not trump that consideration."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2sz738 | why are graphing calculators so expensive when you can download them for free? | I searched first and found that this question had been *sort of* asked before, except most of the answers amounted to something like "Texas Instruments has a monopoly and can charge whatever it wants."
Except I can download graphing calculator apps on my tablet or smart phone, for free, that are every bit as good as anything TI makes. Including one which emulates the TI-83 Plus perfectly. Seriously, it's on Google Play. And it isn't the only graphing calculator app by far. And I sincerely doubt it would be hard for a programmer to write their own if they wanted to spend the time at it.
So really, why can they get away with charging $100 or more for something I can download legally for free (or cheap) and run on a $30 device? Anybody?
*Edit*: So the basic explanation I'm getting is:
1. Schools and institutions mandate the physical calculators just because the smartphones and tablets have internet access. Because Googling an answer is cheating, but punching numbers into a calculator certainly is not...
2. Because consumers are stupid and will buy anything if it's in front of them for any price, even if there is something free that's just as good that they have to expend a little energy to look for.
Is that an accurate assessment? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sz738/eli5_why_are_graphing_calculators_so_expensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnu7o0b",
"cnu7phb",
"cnu7xxn",
"cnu80bt",
"cnue5eh"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"TI has convinced teachers to require students to use these calculators. They can charge it so long as you're willing to pay it. ",
"They keep selling. When they don't, they'll charge less, or stop offering them for sale.",
"One of the major issues with TI emulators is that, if you let students use an app on their smartphone during a test, then you're also running the risk of giving them internet access, and other capabilities of the phone you might not want in a testing environment.",
"You can't use that phone app on your math tests or on the SAT for obvious reasons. So if you want a calculator that you can use for school, you need to buy one of the TI calculators. ",
"Yes. Crazy how they costs so much when the hardware probably costs $5 to make. But you have to have them for school so they can charge 30x more than what they're worth\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
33ar4k | why do football fans give tim tebow so much attention? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33ar4k/eli5_why_do_football_fans_give_tim_tebow_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqj3x2q",
"cqj5as1"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"He wasnt a great NFL player. Coming out he was one of the most hyped College Players in YEARS. 2 National Championships and a Heisman to his name during his time at Florida.\n\nBasically Johnny Manziel if Johnny had actually won more games in college. That and his strong social example made him easy to cover. ",
"He's a very publicly religious player who was arguably one of the best quarterbacks to play the college game and he played at a school with a huge following in a conference and region that's rabid about college football. \n\nAs a result he got a lot of media attention and developed a pretty big and vocal fan base between the religious types and the fans of the sport. On top of that the media built a lot of hype around him because he brought in ratings. \n\nAll of that is well and good, but being a great college quarterback doesn't necessarily translate to the NFL. The media hyped the crap out of him and he didn't even see the field for a long while when he got to the NFL. This inspired a fair amount of backlash. When he did finally see the field he had some flukey wins that drove the hype levels higher and made the backlash stronger. \n\nBasically he was an elite college player who was very publicly religious and the media hyped him up but despite him having a string of wins he was a terrible NFL player. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
aob1hf | why can't people donate insulin like they donate blood? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aob1hf/eli5_why_cant_people_donate_insulin_like_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"efzk4q9"
],
"score": [
25
],
"text": [
"Your insulin is released from your pancreas as you need it to deal with the sugar in your blood. We can’t remove your pancreas to get at the bits that make the insulin because that would not only be inefficient but would also make you a diabetic. And you may carry diseases in your body parts that could infect someone else, which is not possible with the current manufacturing process.\n\nWe used to grind up and inject animal pancreases (dog and cow) to use their insulin, but people had allergic reactions to them sometimes, and we worried about the possibility of contracting diseases. When synthetic human insulin was created, it sidestepped those problems entirely. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
oe7vt | why disposable razors go dull in a week or two, but electric razors take years. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oe7vt/eli5_why_disposable_razors_go_dull_in_a_week_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3gjadr",
"c3gjv6x",
"c3gkf3e",
"c3glntf"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Eletric razors have thicker blades and depend on repetitive mechanical force for cutting so sharpness is a secundary factor. \n\nDisposable razors depend on sharpness and angle accuracy for cutting which is lost withing 3-5 uses. so the blade has to be either replaced or resharpened. ",
"Many electric razors cut more like scissors where the hair has to go past a stationary guard which has a rotating blade on the other side. Feel a good pair of scissors and you will notice that you will probably not get cut touching the cutting edge, but a razor is much sharper than scissors. The cutting edge of the razor will wear down much faster than the scissors due to the sharper angle. Also some electric razors are self-sharpening due to the blade constantly rubbing against the inside of the guard which maintains the angle of the cutting surface.",
"Other answers describe the difference between disposable and elecric, but I would like to add that it's possible to resharpen disposables by [stropping](_URL_0_) them like an old fashioned razor.",
"So you pay crazy amounts of money on cartridges which you attach to toy razors.\n\nIf you want to use a proper razor, visit [/r/wicked_edge](/r/wicked_edge). They'll teach you how to get and use a decent razor and start enjoy shaving.\n\nAnd a proper razor is much, much cheaper in the long run (until you start collecting them that is)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.wisebread.com/want-to-keep-your-dispoable-razor-blades-sharp-use-your-arm"
],
[]
] |
||
1k120m | if cockroaches are able to survive nuclear radiation,what the hell do they put in anti-cockroach sprays like raid? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k120m/eli5if_cockroaches_are_able_to_survive_nuclear/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbk9dqk",
"cbk9eqb",
"cbka17e",
"cbkafq7"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"This has been answered on here many times, but the simple answer is:\n\n* Raid is an insecticide, a chemical weapons that targets insect nerve systems. It is specifically tailored to bugs.\n\n* Invertebrates in general can handle more radiation than large mammals, but they do not have an infinite capacity for radiation. Cockroaches are not particularly more resistant to radiation than most other invertebrates, and there are others that would be better at it.\n\n* Radiation effects and chemical effects are apples and oranges in terms of comparisons — they have very different modes of operating on living organisms so it isn't too surprising that they vary a lot.",
"First off, cockaroaches aren't immune to radiation, they are just very tolerant to it. They can be killed by radiation exposure, as demonstrated in a Mythbusters episode.\n\nSecondly, resistance to one particular hazard does not mean you aren't immune to other things.\n\nRaid uses various chemicals from a family called, pyrethroids. At low concentrations, these are basically paralytic agents. They're favored because they breakdown naturally in the presence of sunlight after a couple of days, so you don't have to worry about contamination when spraying around your home. ",
"As this has been answered already, let me just state a simple fact with you. Cockroaches are indeed sturdy mofos. You can chop the head of one and it will continue to live on for a week, eventually dying from hunger instead of infection. However, chemical poisoning is faar different than radiation poisoning. Chemicals affect the cells and how they work, while radiation works on a smaller scale as it brakes the molecules in the body of an organism.\n\nIn addition, the fact that cockroaches are the insect most resistant to radiation is a lie. As far as i know, Braconidae (a wasp) tops the score on that one.",
"**TL;DR**: Roaches cells don't divide very often which protects from radiation poisoning, but they have no real defense against the neurotoxins in raid.\n\nIt basically boils down to the mode of action for why causing death. \n\n**Radiation and YOU**\n\nTo understand why radiation is considered bad for people, and not (seemingly) for roaches, we must first understand how radiation kills things. For this, let us consider a sunburn. Sun burns are caused by high energy light from the sun, and when too much of that light is absorbed by your skin cells they can get damaged. This damage is in the form of DNA damage, and if a cell gets DNA damage it can either try to fix it or it will die. Cells are actually quite good at repairing DNA damage, which is why most people don't immediately get a sunburn when they go outside. BUT, if there is too much damage, the cell will die, which is why you get a burn that eventually peels, significant cell death. Once and a while, the DNA damage happens in such a way that the cell gets mutated and becomes cancerous, hence things like melanoma. Now, cells are most vulnerable to significant DNA damage when they are dividing (Fun fact: this is why radiation therapy works against cancer treatment) . In humans, cells all throughout your body are dividing, which means you are at constant risk for high doses of radiation. Now, cockroaches are different...their cells only divide when they molt, and they molt only every few weeks, so a burst of radiation (like from a nuclear bomb) would certainly harm any roaches who were molting. BUT, not all roaches would be molting at the same time, so no a population wide scale, a number of them would survive. However, the lingering fallout would still have significant damage on their ability to survive.\n\n**Raid and Roaches**\n\nNow raid is effective at killing roaches because the two main ingredients are Tetramethrin and Pyrethrin which are nerve agents. Basically, it causes nerve cells to become hyper active ultimately leading to death (specifically, it keeps the sodium channels on the nerve cells open). This is why when you spray insects with it, they tend to freak out for a short time before perishing. Roaches do not possess any biological mechanism to prevent these toxins from acting on their cells, so it ends up having an effect.\n\nSources:\n[Radiation sensitivity](_URL_1_)\n[Roaches and Radiation](_URL_3_)\n[Active ingredients in raid](_URL_0_)\n[Mode of action for Tetramethrin](_URL_2_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ehow.com/how-does_5183091_raid-bug-killer-work_.html",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiosensitivity",
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8071852",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockroach"
]
] |
||
auc255 | what makes a modern internal combustion engine built today different from the ones fifteen, or even ten years ago? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/auc255/eli5what_makes_a_modern_internal_combustion/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh73gm4",
"eh73pel"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Electronics and the degree of monitoring and control are really what sets engines apart. Fuel injection that is tailored at all times to the needs of the engine allow cars to be much more powerful, much more efficient, and at the same time produce far less pollution. The general ideas of the combustion engine are not new, just refined. \n\nFor instance, I have a 1976 Chevrolet pickup truck that got somewhere around 8 miles to the gallon when it was new. I have built an engine with a homebuilt fuel injection system that gets 19 miles to the gallon on low octane fuel, using a block that was cast in 1975 and heads that were produced in 1981. The differences are not mechanical, they are poorly electronic sensors and controls. The engine makes almost twice the horsepower with double the mileage. ",
"The big change that have happened is the electronics. A ten year old engine would have a lot of mechanical adjustments. So if you for example wanted to change the type of fuel you used or wanted to make the engine run more optimally in a certain temperature range or pressure you had to adjust a lot of different components and maybe even change some components for different variants. However today there is a lot of electronics that does these adjustments on the fly based on different sensors. So for example if you fill up with a different fuel then you usually use then the engine control system will detect this and tune the timing and fuel ratio to better fit the new fuel. Same thing when the temperature of the intake air or engine changes or when the pressure or humidity changes. The next generation engines will likely get rid of a lot of mechanics and instead of having the computer adjust the mechanical components it would do the operations directly. We already see some of this in for example fuel injection and high performance racing engines may have computer controlled valves. This does allow for far better control of the engine by the computer and can also allow for engine types that would otherwise be impossible."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
edfdrc | the burj khalifa cost 1.5 billion $ to construct. what stops the richest people in the world to simply "outperform" that by building the bew tallest building? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/edfdrc/eli5_the_burj_khalifa_cost_15_billion_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbhgetm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Nothing, but building the tallest building in the world doesn't necessarily mean it will be a good investment on you money. That's a lot of money to spend on bragging rights."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2ct1mf | why is there a buffeting sound when my car passes guard rails or other evenly spaced things? | When I'm in a moving vehicle I always hear a buffeting noise when it passes an evenly and closely spaced set of objects on the side of the road. Why does that happen? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ct1mf/eli5_why_is_there_a_buffeting_sound_when_my_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjioxl6"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"That's just the sound of your car reflecting off of the objects as they pass by. Since the objects are evenly spaced, the sound gets reflected again and again at regular intervals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
33z5or | why does torrents have such weird names? | Like for example: Game.of.Thrones.S05E01.HDTV.x264-Xclusive4iPT or Breaking Bad Season 2 Complete 720p.BRrip.Sujaidr. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33z5or/eli5_why_does_torrents_have_such_weird_names/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqpqask",
"cqpqdnm",
"cqpqgcy"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It's a naming standard for the servers that the uploaders use.\n\nThe full standard is: Title.Of.The.Movie.YEAR.Source.Codec-GROUP\n\nFor example, BDRip is a file ripped from a blu-ray disc. x264 is the coded used to compress the video. Sujaidr is the name of the group/person responsible for the upload. ",
"It's done to differentiate where they have come from and their quality. Otherwise you'd have 100 different torrents all called Breaking Bad Season 2\nIt is usually done as\n\n1. Name of Show / Movie\n2. Season & Episode\n3. Video Quality (i.e. HDTV, 720p, Cam, etc)\n4. Source (i.e. DVD rip, BR (blue ray) rip, screener, etc)\n5. Creator (i.e. Sujaidr)",
" > Game.of.Thrones.S05E01\n\nName/description of the content. Pretty obvious. \n\n > HDTV\n\nType/source of the rip. Gives you an overview of the possible quality of the torrent - Wikipedia even has a [whole site](_URL_0_) dedicated to the types of pirated releases, explaining what those terms mean. \n\n > x264\n\nThe video codec. x264 is probably the most commonly used codec, but divx for instance is rather popular as well. \n\n > Xclusive4iPT\n\nName of the guy/team/crew that ripped the movie and/or created the torrent. Some crews are known for quality releases, so rather than gambling on the quality of a download by some unknown team, people will often go with \"established\" names that have delivered good quality torrents in the past. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirated_movie_release_types"
]
] |
|
38uty6 | why do most keyboards limit what keypresses register when certain other keys are already held down? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38uty6/eli5_why_do_most_keyboards_limit_what_keypresses/ | {
"a_id": [
"cry1dep"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Buttons on most keyboard are not in fact buttons in the usual sense, keyboards have three plastic layers to which two have a grid of wires on them and the third between them holds them seperate with holes where the keys are. (Think of a sandwich with swiss cheese). When you push a key on the keyboard, a rubber plunger attached to the key and over those holes goes down and pushes the two \"grid\" plastic layers together, completing a circuit. If you attempt to push multiple keys on the same \"gridlines\", it only accepts one or two at most since electricty favours the most direct path it can find or in the worst case, registers a key you're not in fact pressing because it's a related key on the grid.\n\nThese are called membrane keyboards and chances are you're using one, they're effective since they're cheap to make. The only circuit board on these keyboards is usually where the caps/num/scroll lock lights are and not that large. (This is why those rubber roll-up mat keyboards are possible). On laptops, that is handled by the motherboard and there is no circuit board on the keyboard itself.\n\nOn higher end keyboards, the hardware is designed not as much as a dependent grid and more that each key is electrically and programmatically independent from one another, usually through having real mechanical buttons on a full-size circuit board meaning each key press is seperate and unique, dependent upon no other portion of the hardware. This permits what is called n-key rollover, allowing many keys to be pressed at once and all registering with none blocking since they're electrically and programmatically seperate on the keyboard hardware.\n\nNot only this, but there's also a matter of programming: most operating systems have software drivers — that is programming that tells the operating system how to talk to hardware, that takes into account the most common of keyboard hardware, ergo there can be limitaions in through there as well, such as the list or \"buffer\" having only a limited number of spots for pressed keys. Some high end keyboards need their own drivers installed as opposed to generic drivers to remove this limitation.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1zvnk2 | can someone please explain why they always insist on specifying the counts of "infants" separate from "people" and or "citizens" after mass casualty incidents. | I think I understand why they do it, connect a tragedy with the face of a baby and increase emotional reactions to stories leading to some sort of transference of emotion to the station so they retain viewers.
But from a purely news stand point is there a reason to itemize the people into age groups? They are all people and all could have, or grown into being capable(in the theory of all people are born equal) of having the same amount of positive or negative influence on the world, so why are they reporting their deaths in a way that makes one seem more important than the others? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zvnk2/eli5_can_someone_please_explain_why_they_always/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfxe8rg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In some peoples' moral beliefs, an infant/child life could be considered more valuable because they have the most potential in life. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3a7891 | if we had an abundance of all the elements, could we have a machine which uses the elements a like toner in a printer to make whatever we want? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3a7891/eli5if_we_had_an_abundance_of_all_the_elements/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs9wqsw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"No. If I gave you all the ingredients necessary to build a human body (they're all cheap and widely available), would you be able to build a machine that could construct a human body?\n\nAvailability of raw material is only one part of making something. You have to be able to put the parts together properly as well. For the overwhelming majority of things, it would be very complex and energy intensive to produce them from scratch from their constituent elements.\n\nedit: that said, as we improve 3d printing technologies, more and more things will be economical to make and more and more materials will be economical to use."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2buiy3 | why do we tip bar men and women in america 1 dollar per drink? doesn't this mean they would earn well over 100 dollars per hour in a busy bar? | I'm missing something I'm sure. Just can't see what. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2buiy3/eli5_why_do_we_tip_bar_men_and_women_in_america_1/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj914ra",
"cj915av",
"cj916n5",
"cj918js"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Not really. 1. There's usually two or three of behind the bar plus a bar back. 2. Most people tip on the round or at the end of the tab. 3. A lot of people are cheap asses. But hey, customers like you make the job swell and a good bartender will usually buy a good tipper a drink or make sure they get fast service.",
"I am a bartender, can confirm most people don't tip 1 dollar per drink. I'll give tonight as an example. I work at a casino and the bar I was working at was rather busy. 5 people working at it. Our total sales just for our bar was around $7300. So if everyone tipped $1 per drink(we will say an average drink is $5) that would be $1460. And divide that by the 5 workers at the bar we should have made $292 each. However, we each pulled in about $145 so pretty much half of that for an average of 50 cents per drink. So even though it may be an expectation to tip $1 per drink it's not very realistic on most nights.\n",
"Unless people are ordering a million shots, it's very difficult and stressful to serve 100 drinks in an hour. There's probably no bar in the country where more than 75% of the patrons will tip appropriately. And even the hottest bars are only really *busy* for 3 or 4 hours a night.\n\nSo a very good bartender, at a popular upscale nightclub, will end up earning $50-60 an hour. That's certainly good money, but it's not clearly unreasonable.",
"Probably not a good answer, but most people typically don't tip a dollar a drink. When I was 19 I may have tipped $1 drink. Now I generally tip 20-30% at the bar, more if they hooked it up that night. Bartenders (service industry in general) are hardworking mofos and earn whatever tips they get, or don't get. Shitty Bartenders don't even deserve that dollar. Also keep in mind Bartenders usually are splitting tips with each other, as well as tipping out bar backs and security. \n\nIf you are worrying about how much money to tip, you probably shouldn't be spending the money at the bar anyway. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5u3ku8 | why do people seem to get more personal and open when speaking to them at night? | They don't even have to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol etc. it just seems that, in my experience, if you start talking to someone at night, conversations seem to get more deep and personal than they would be during the day. Most of the stuff I know about my mates came from them calling me up at night; we never speak or share stuff personal things during the day. Is there a reason for this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5u3ku8/eli5_why_do_people_seem_to_get_more_personal_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddr7x2b",
"ddr99vt",
"ddradzh",
"ddrc4ph",
"ddrc5dm",
"ddrgjah"
],
"score": [
14,
3,
46,
5,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"Well I guess it's cause people are usually too busy with their work, school, obligations, etc. during the daytime and usually reflect on the day by evening. When people are settled in their homes and done for the day they can then focus on their thoughts and are likely to talk more openly.",
"Since the nighttime is for unwinding or other free-time activities, maybe people are just a little looser? Also, the darkness gives a person a sense of anonymity, like they won't be held accountable for their actions; why dimming the lights is a good way to \"set the mood.\" Maybe that has something to do with it.. Just some speculation.",
"Perhaps it's associated with [decision fatigue](_URL_0_)? At the end of the day, people are tired, their \"filter\" is slipping, they're more likely to open up and let things out. I know I've had countless experiences where something I've said in conversation at night seemed perfectly rational, even *important*, but felt terribly regrettable and much too personal the next day. I blame end-of-day fatigue and lack of clarity.",
"All the other comments here seem pretty good, but I'll add that it might just be more likely to get into one on one, personal conversations with someone at night. \n\nDuring the day, you're probably at work, school, or something with more people around, and night just happens to be more relaxed and more probable to produce situations where people open up more.\n\nAnd you know, there's sometimes booze, too.",
"Most of the comments hint at a few things, but they're forgetting one major aspect of sociability: proximity. At night, when it's darker, you could be in an empty field but your mind acts like it's enclosed. A smaller space implies security of information.\n\nJust like being in a tent, or on the water at night. Your voice will carry, but you can't see that so you feel safer talking about more sensitive topics.",
"Less distractions. Same reason I like to get creative in the evening and through the night. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/magazine/do-you-suffer-from-decision-fatigue.html"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cu6cwa | why are umbrellas made out of metal rods? shouldn’t they be made out of skinny pvc pipe or something? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cu6cwa/eli5_why_are_umbrellas_made_out_of_metal_rods/ | {
"a_id": [
"exrpi12",
"exrpip5"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There are several reasons but most easily to say:\n\nTradition - Wooden and metal umbrellas have traditionally been the materials of choice in use for the umbrella shaft and skeleton.\n\nWeight vs. Strength - Metal can be made thinner, lighter and stronger than pvc and it is more versatile than plastics are. As ubiquitous as plastic can be, plastics are stronger in bulk and become weak and brittle when made in a very thin form. Metals are able to handle much more strain with less material.\n\nCost - Metals are generally cheaper than plastics at the size and form needed to make umbrella shafts and skeletons.\n\nmanufacturing process - Making the tiny pieces takes time, and the process to make equivalent parts out of plastic with the above considerations doesn't work very well and goes against a smooth process.",
"Metal doesn't attract lightning, it just conducts electricity. Someone who gets struck by lightning while holding an umbrella is just coincidence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
43vq1p | do the lithium ion batteries in "hoverboards" pose a notably greater fire-risk than the batteries in laptops, phones, and other devices? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43vq1p/eli5_do_the_lithium_ion_batteries_in_hoverboards/ | {
"a_id": [
"czlbnt3",
"czlbyqq"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There's nothing about a \"hoverboard\" which means they have to more dangerous, except perhaps that the battery is likely to have a higher capacity and therefore there's more stored energy there to cause an exciting explosion if something does go wrong.\n\nHowever, since they're new and very popular, there are lots of dubious Chinese companies making them with little regard for safety standards. They're more likely to use a cheap battery which is more likely to be physically damaged, or a cheap charger which doesn't properly shut off the current when the battery is fully charged. Those companies could in theory be exporting cheap phones and laptops with all the same problems, but mostly they're not.",
"The batteries are not more risky, the overall circuit is more risky. Laptops, phones, and other such gadgets consume very small amounts of electricity at mostly consistent rates. This is the least stressful way for a battery to be used, and so they have pushed for very high power densities.\n\nAlas, the \"hoverboard\" uses electric power in short bursts of high current. This has always been the place where designers used lead acid batteries, because they are self regulating in this application. That's what your car uses to start, and why. Alas, they are heavy (lead = heavy). To make the hoverboard smaller, it uses a more delicate Li-ion battery. These can be used safely in high current applications, like Tesla's electric car, provided that good power management circuits are used. To keep the hoverboard cheap, there isn't as much power management electronics inside as is in a Tesla. It's this combination of how power is used and how the battery is managed that leads to the substantial risk of a fire."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
dowr8q | why is it considered unhygienic to use wooden cutting boards (due to their porous nature) but most chefs recommend using wooden spoons regularly? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dowr8q/eli5_why_is_it_considered_unhygienic_to_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5r06rs",
"f5r06wh",
"f5rb9mt",
"f5rgzqc"
],
"score": [
11,
7,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"how often do you stick your cutting board in boiling water? Anyway, using wooden cutting boards is fine.",
"A wooden cutting board gets covered in raw meat juice. A wooden spoon gets submerged in boiling liquids. The hygiene issue is very different between the two since the spoon is used in the course of cooking the meal, the cutting board gets used to prepare raw ingredients.\n\nThe main reasons wooden spoons get recommended are not hygiene-related though. Wooden spoons don't heat up and scald your hand, don't scratch the pots and pans, or react with acidic food. All of the above is a risk with metal cooking utensils. Wooden spoons work with all cooking vessels and any kind of food.",
"Whether or not it’s unhygienic depends on who you ask. There have been a few studies to show that wood has natural antibacterial properties and as long as you clean the board properly with hot soapy water, you’re good. Of course, you can’t carve up raw chicken and then immediately chop up a salad on the board.",
"When worn wooden cutting boards can be preferential to worn plastic boards. FDA guidelines does not care if it is wooden or plastic, as long as it is properly cleaned and cared for. Plastic ones will need more regular replacement, since you can sand your wooden one."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7xsx7q | what is "grim trigger" in game theory, and what would it look like in international relations? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7xsx7q/eli5_what_is_grim_trigger_in_game_theory_and_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"dubuglg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This answer was posted in another thread after yours, but answers the same question perfectly:\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > Grim trigger is a game theory term that means once the person on the other side of the game \"defects\" (meaning does the selfish thing) then you defect for every play of the game after that point, with no exceptions.\n\n > So, in the relationship context, a grim trigger might be never letting go of an argument. It's any situation where, even the next time the issue comes up, the person \"pulling\" the grim trigger assumes that the other person is going to act negatively, and so behaves as though they did so.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7xubxw/eli5_what_is_grim_trigger_and_how_would_it_relate/dubgkmq/"
]
] |
||
6gl770 | how can birds see depth (for example, when landing) if they can only see with 1 eye? | My understanding is that you need 2 eyes facing the same direction to see depth. But birds like pidgeons have 2 eyes looking a different direction. So how do they do it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gl770/eli5_how_can_birds_see_depth_for_example_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dir42vx",
"dir47b4",
"dir8gs8",
"direufv"
],
"score": [
3,
14,
19,
3
],
"text": [
"The Wikipedia article [on Extraocular anatomy](_URL_0_) explains it far better than me.",
"There are also plenty of monocular (one eye) depth cues. Like occlusion, that if one object blocks the line of sight to another object, it must be closer to you. And relative size, that if two similar objects are differently sized, the larger one must be closer. There are more, but point is binocular vision is not necessary to perceive depth (albeit poorly). ",
"Motion. If you move your head from one place to another, you have two images to compare, just like having two eyes. You only need stereo vision to have motionless depth perception.",
"To some extent, they can't. Watch your backyard bird feeder sometime and see how birds basically plow into things. Not the best pilots!\n\nI think they have good spatial memory, as once they \"find\" a feeder, they seem to have less trouble landing on it. Take away the feeder or replace it with a different type, and watch the fun begin. They will try to land on a non-existent feeder, or plow into the side of the different type you installed.\n\nCardinals seem to be the worst at this. It's like they're drunk."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bird_vision"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7s5uze | how efficient are humans at generating electricity (through an exercise bike for example) relative to food intake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7s5uze/eli5_how_efficient_are_humans_at_generating/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt26t2x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Let's take a man who works hard and eats 4 million calories/day(about what's recommended for intense physical work), he also can sustain solid 75 watts of work for all of his 8 working hours.\n\n1 watt is 1 joule/second, so it's 75\\*8\\*60\\*60 = 2160000 joules of mechanical energy. Let's say you can convert it to electricity with 100% efficiency(though you probably can't in reality)\n\nOn the other hand 1 calorie = 4.184 joules so he ate 16736000 joules worth of food energy.\n\n2160000/16736000 = 13% efficiency"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
15w3q2 | the light dependent and the light independent stages of photosynthesis. | I'm currently studying for my A-level Biology exam and am really struggling to grasp knowledge of the light dependent/independent stages of photosynthesis.
Any help outlining the process of what happens in these stages would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15w3q2/eli5_the_light_dependent_and_the_light/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7qc438",
"c7qe64k"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The light stage is the part where light excites electrons in the photosystems; the energy of the excited electrons is used to generate ATP and NADPH.\n\nThe light independent stage is the stage where Carbon is assimilated through the calvin cycle. This uses the energy and reducing power derived from ATP and NADPH which was generated in the light dependent stage.",
"The light dependent stage is where the leaf take in the energy from the sun and turns it into energy it can use (ATP and NADPH) for the next step (the light independent stage).\n\nThe light independent stage is where the leaf takes that energy (the ATP and NADPH) and uses it to break apart CO2 molecules and put them back together again into glucose molecules (which is a very convenient way to store energy for later use, since ATP and NADPH don't last very long on their own and can't really be transported around the plant's body to be used by other cells)\n\nFor a much more in-depth explanation of all the steps (more appropriate for A-level biology than my ELY5 attempt) I highly recommend you watch [this](_URL_0_) video."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/sQK3Yr4Sc_k"
]
] |
|
32eszi | why while cell phones continue to get slimmer, house phones are still bulky? | How come house phones don't look more like cellphones? Do they need to be bulky for some technical reason? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32eszi/eli5_why_while_cell_phones_continue_to_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqajr8h",
"cqajrzz",
"cqakm9i"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Because cell phones are portable, they are small and compact by design. House phones are bound to a nearby outlet anyway, so size doesn't matter",
"Because a cell phone is made so you can carry it with you all the time. While a house phone is meant to stay in your house, so it doesn't matter if it's a bit bigger.\n\n",
"It's expensive to make technology small. So while it's perfectly possible to make a house phone that's the same size and shape as a smartphone, if it was in the stores at $250 when there other, larger house phones sitting next it to it for $30-$40, few people would go for the expensive option. After all it might look cooler, but unlike a smartphone it doesn't convey any \"brand coolness\" on the purchaser, because nobody else sees you using it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5d09dr | i've read a lot of comments saying that politicians use war for their own gains. let's say it's true, how? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5d09dr/eli5_ive_read_a_lot_of_comments_saying_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"da0rqrt",
"da0vgyq",
"da0vhxl"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"1. They have financial interests in companies that profit from war--arms manufacturers.\n\n2. They will profit from the outcomes of war, by expanding their power and influence over a subdued territory or area. Business interested in expanding in the area or use resources from it may engage in donating or even kick backs to the politician.",
"There's the idea of Diversionary Wars. Basically the idea is that leaders may instigate war in order to shore up support from some specific group. One arguable example is the Uganda-Tanzania War. The arguement goes that since Idi Amin relied on the military to keep power and there was growing dissent within the military, he may have gone to war in order to appease the military. There's also the idea that a leader could launch a diversionary war to shore up domestic support through the Rally Around the Flag Effect. Basically, people tend to have favorable views towards their leaders during periods of war or after attacks (think post Pearl Harbor or 9-11). The evidence for this kind of diversionary war is less obvious, however, and I don't personally buy it. Other than that, you could say that politicians gain if they are succesful at achieving political goals through war, since this makes them appear strong.",
"Lots of the support element in war is no longer done by the military itself. Companies like [KBR](_URL_1_) do the support functions like launder clothes for 250,000 troops, feed them and maintain the buildings they live in. These companies operate on multi-million dollar contracts from the US government.\n\nedit: Here's the link for the lazy I'm not sure how to include the ) in a link _URL_0_ "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KBR_(company)",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KBR_(company)"
]
] |
||
4feizb | where did the strange idea of astrological signs effecting someone's personality come from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4feizb/eli5_where_did_the_strange_idea_of_astrological/ | {
"a_id": [
"d285etm",
"d28g3q8",
"d28ls3j"
],
"score": [
62,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Astrology was first developed both as a curiosity and a necessity for temperate agrarian societies. Learning to track when to plant and harvest and how much longer winter would be was tremendously important, and astrologers could determine the season based on what stars were coming up over the horizon. The astrological signs were the first 'months' on our human calendar, and being able to say 'In two moons we should plant the wheat' was tremendously valuable.\n\nOnce people knew that the position of the stars in the heavens controlled or predicted the forces of nature, using them to predict human behavior became somewhat obvious. \n\nIn the early agrarian societies, the month you were born in actually was something of a predictor for what kind of person you were going to be. For example, people conceived at the beginning of winter and carried to term would have rich, powerful, and healthy parents, so you'll see that the astrological sign for Leo is a strong leader or a king.\n\nMany of the readings were derived from mythology, as the constellations had names and stories before they were used for timekeeping. Considering how unerringly the stars predicted the length of the day, the weather, the migrations of animals and all of the other forces of nature, the false positives that came from the natural tendency for people in certain trades or economic classes to *successfully* bear children at certain times of year was enough to convince people that it was fairly reliable.\n\nOnce it became reliable, playing up astrology became a good way to keep your funding. It's easier to convince your brother (who is a general) that he should build you a nice observatory in the hills if you tell him it can predict when he should try for a kid or when to have his troops ready, so astrologers who believed that sort of thing rose to greater prominence, coloring the discipline and marking the first example of academic culture superseding scientific results, a problem that has continued to plague us throughout history. It's easier to agree with the greats than build a career in opposition to them.",
"The notion was part of the prejudices and fantasies of ancient people. Anybody who even thinks the signs matter should read up on where the ecliptic of the solar system travels these days. This plane of the ecliptic determines where the sun \"resides\". For instance, astrologers will tell you that we are now at the end of Ares (Mar 21 to April 19). Guess what? Ares actually has the sun from April 18 to May 13. The ecliptic has slipped since Roman days, and the constellations don't line up. Scroll to the bottom of the text in the link for the dates. Read the article for the reasoning. _URL_0_\n\nHere is where the sun is these days:\n\nCapricorn - Jan 20 to Feb 16\n\nAquarius - Feb 16 to Mar 11\n\nPisces - Mar 11 to Apr 18\n\nAries - Apr 18 to May 13\n\nTaurus - May 13 to Jun 21\n\nGemini - Jun 21 to Jul 20\n\nCancer - Jul 20 to Aug 10\n\nLeo - Aug 10 to Sep 16\n\nVirgo - Sep 16 to Oct 30\n\nLibra - Oct 30 to Nov 23\n\nScorpius - Nov 23 to Nov 29\n\nOphiuchus - Nov 29 to Dec 17\n\nSagittarius - Dec 17 to Jan 20",
"Living in Australia I never understood astrology here - we've completely different stars and constellations here so it wouldn't work anyway, right?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.livescience.com/4667-astrological-sign.html"
],
[]
] |
||
2jzonr | if heterochromia is a dominant trait why don't more people have it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jzonr/eli5_if_heterochromia_is_a_dominant_trait_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"clgk6jb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A dominant trait means that the trait will manifest if you get the dominant gene from at least one of your parents. On the contrary, if the trait is recessive then it means that you have to get the recessive gene from both your parents in order for it to manifest.\n\nHowever, the gene's dominance doesn't directly influence how common it is - if your parent has both the dominant and the recessive alleles, then you still have a 50% chance of getting either one of them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
42mn9w | what is the reason fake facebook profiles keep trying to add me? | All fairly good looking girls, but when I go to their profile they have mostly ~10 friends, and all the friends that they have are bots with similar profiles too. What do they want from me? I'm not even active on facebook...
I've heard of mobile games try to befriend their playerbase to find out about personal interests, but they should know I never spent money on them, so I doubt that's it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42mn9w/eli5_what_is_the_reason_fake_facebook_profiles/ | {
"a_id": [
"czbfxq8",
"czbfzu2"
],
"score": [
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Because, while you see through the thinly veiled deception, many people do not and just add anyone that friends them, especially if they look young and cute. Science.\n\nTheeeeen, another arm of the company is selling likes to stupid marketing companies, using those same bot accounts to like stuff for money. Facebook's social graph weights accounts with lots of friends much higher than accounts with few friends. \n\nSo, your like gives their accounts more social weight. Then, when you see a YouTube video shared 100,000 times, it's those bot nets that don't get detected as such because they have \"real\" friends and that ranks their output higher on social indexes.",
"Phishing, probably. \n\n**1.** Become facebook friend with target. \n\n**2.** Search for friends that share a last name, find mother, research maiden name. \n\n**3.** Find out where target went to school, was born, where they live.\n\n**4.** Log on to bank websites or paypal or similar and request a password reset, provide information gleaned from facebook. \n\n**5.** Bend target over a table and financially have your way with them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1e64c5 | what are the advantages of driving on the left side of the road as opposed to the right? | Like why do some places drive on the left side of the road as opposed to the right. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1e64c5/eli5_what_are_the_advantages_of_driving_on_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9x4z1c",
"c9x5f4w"
],
"score": [
7,
8
],
"text": [
"It's just a convention. (Why do you think that driving on the right side of the road is the default?)",
"Two major reasons.\n\n* Who colonized you.\n\n* Who is your major source of vehicles.\n\nKeeping to the left while walking, driving etc is an English custom while it was customary to drive on the right in continental Europe. Countries like America and Australia were colonized by England and so had 'drive on the left' rules. America later annexed these for driving on the right around 1800.\n\nHere in NZ (and Aus), we import the vast majority of our cars from Japan. Japan is a left hand side driving country and their cars are built for such. It makes economic sense and plain straight forward common sense to also drive on the left side. If you imported cars from America or any right side driving country, it would be fairly straight forward that you also drive on the right."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
69ukus | how does minute rice work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69ukus/eli5_how_does_minute_rice_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh9j1q7"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It is rice that is already cooked, and subsequently dehydrated, so you don't have to heat it long enough to actually cook it, but rather just long enough to heat and rehydrate it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
x12ef | why is the american keyboard set up so seemingly jumbled? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/x12ef/eli5_why_is_the_american_keyboard_set_up_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5i88r1"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"The QWERTY keyboard was designed to space out frequently typed keys to prevent typewriters from jamming, and when computers came out so many had devoted the QWERTY setup to memory they just continued using it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6pljb5 | why does the us have a president, but canada and the uk have a prime minister? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pljb5/eli5_why_does_the_us_have_a_president_but_canada/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkq9uij",
"dkq9xms",
"dkq9y8p",
"dkqa302"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because Canada/UK have a Queen.\n\nThe role of the executive actually consists of two jobs: Head of Government and Head of State.\n\nThe Head of Government is the person who actually does the day-to-day tasks of making government function. In Canada and the UK, this person is the Prime Minister. In the United States, it is the President.\n\nThe Head of State is the person who represents the nation. While this can vary quite a bit from nation to nation, they are the visible face of the government. In Canada, it's the governor-general (which is admittedly on the low-end of 'visible' face of government, but traditions persist). In the UK, it's the Queen. In the U.S., it's - again - the President.\n\nWhen the founding fathers were writing the Constitution, they understood this distinction but they didn't have a hereditary monarchy - or officials tied to one - for the Head of State role. So instead they just bundled the two together. In the modern day, most Americans don't even realize there *is* a distinction and are often surprised at how other governments divide up responsibilities.",
"The U.K. has had a parliamentary system with a Prime Minister for a very long time. The real question is why is the Canadian system more like the U.K. than the American system? Canada's separation from the U.K. was far more amicable than the US's was. America and Britain being friends is a late 19th century and beyond concept. In the post revolution period, attitudes were hostile, and the US was willing to go their own way, and try their own things.",
"The United States has a much stronger divide between the executive functions and the legislative function. \n\nWhen the Constitution was being written, the general goal was to create a government with a strong legislative center (Congress) and an executive that would help to balance Congress by holding the powers of execution (the President). Likewise, the President's king-like powers (leading the army, signing laws), could be limited by a distinct and powerful Congress with competing authorities (funding the army, writing the laws), and both could in turn be checked by a separate judiciary. \n\nLater on in the development of democracies and republics, people began to move more toward a parliamentary system. This is the case in England, where the King didn't get formally replaced, but slowly lost power to the legislature in bits and pieces over time. The checks and balances in such a system are weaker---since the head executive official is always the head of the legislature---but it also means that government is more efficient. \n\nIn a parliamentary system, the parliament chooses the Prime Minister, who heads the government. Canada, gaining independence later than the U.S., also went with a system like the Parliamentary system in England, as did many of the other states that gained independence at the end of the colonial era in the mid-20th century. ",
"Because they are not the same position.\n\nThe US President is the Head of State and the Head of Government. The US President is in charge of only the executive branch of the government. The president choose who will be a member of the executive cabinet, but the legislative branch need to vote on who is accepted. The president doesn't have total control on that and can't change how is appointed easily.\n\nThe Prime Minister are Head of Government, but not Head of State. For both the UK and Canada, the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II (Canada have a Governor General representing the Queen). The Prime Minister is in charge of the executive branch, but it's also a member of the legalistive branch. In Canada the Governor General appoint the executive cabinet choosen by the Prime Minister (it's only ceremonial, the Prime Minister have pretty much full control on who is appointed and can change who is a Minister almost as he wish).\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5985a9 | how are action movies and fight scenes made? | Recently watched an action movie and made me wonder how the movie is made. How is all the fighting, gunfights and fights with weapons included in a movie so that no one actually gets hurt? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5985a9/eli5_how_are_action_movies_and_fight_scenes_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"d96e66q"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Careful choreography, prop weapons, and editing tricks. A big part of filming violence is making the viewer think they saw something they didn't actually see. For example, in a show like Supernatural you'll often see one of the brothers swing a knife or bat at something, then the camera cuts to their face while squishy sounds play and blood splatters. You think you saw a monster get decapitated but you didn't. For higher budget films, they use more elaborate effects to show the violence. Fake body parts and digital editing allow the filmmaker to show all sorts of trauma without hurting anyone. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
36eb6e | why does am talk radio have such a disproportionately large amount of commercials compared to fm music stations? | It seems like AM talk radio breaks for a six-minute commercial once every eight or ten minutes. It seems like 20 to 25 minutes of every hour is advertisement, news, or traffic and not actual program content. At the same time, all the FM music stations tout 55 minutes of music every hour and seem to rarely break for commercials. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36eb6e/eli5_why_does_am_talk_radio_have_such_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"crd7mcu"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Your FM station has sneaky ways of putting in advertising even though it might claim to have 55 minutes of music. It's advertising when the DJ comes on between songs and reminds you that they will be at a certain business (AD!) tomorrow from 4 to 6 and they'll be giving away a certain item (AD!). It's advertising when in between songs, the DJ comes on and casually reminds you that the artist they are about to play has a concert coming up (AD!) in a couple weeks and reminds you tickets are still available at a certain website (AD!). I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
102u98 | megapixel camera, is this actually something to do with the quality of the camera? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/102u98/eli5megapixel_camera_is_this_actually_something/ | {
"a_id": [
"c69yigd",
"c69z3qb"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"In science and technology,\n\n kilo = 1,000\n\nmega = 1,000,000\n\ngiga = 1,000,000,000\n\ntera = 1,000,000,000,000\n\nSo 1 gigabyte = 1000 megabytes, etc.\n\nA 5 megapixel camera has 4 million more pixels than a 1 megapixel camera.",
"An 8 megapixel digital camera means that the camera has ~ 8 million sensors that detect the color and intensity of light. Each sensor basically tells the camera, \"I'm at position x,y and I just detected a value of E01B1B (which might translate to a certain shade of red).\n\nWhen you take a picture the camera asks all the sensors where they are located and what they saw and stores it in a file so the image can be reproduced on a screen or printed.\n\nNow image that you are in a dark room and one wall faces the outside world or to better exemplify low light situations maybe the wall is to another room that is dimly lit. Imagine there are holes in the wall that you can look through and \"sense\" or \"see\" the other side. In order to see out you can either make lots of really small holes or fewer big holes.\n\nIf you use fewer big holes you can see more clearly out of each hole but there will be more spaces between the holes that you can't see out of. If you use a lot of smaller holes it will be harder to see clearly out of each hole but there will be less area that you can't look out of. [This is an example picture that illustrates my point.](_URL_0_)\n\nThere's a trade off between megapixels and sensor accuracy (noise to signal ratio).\n\nIf you have a large lens that lets in a lot of light like a big DSLR camera then it will be easier to see out of even the smaller \"holes\" from my analogy. But if you have a very small lens like on a cell phone camera then having a lot of megapixels will actually hurt you because it will be really hard to \"see\" out of the \"holes\". You would be better off having slightly fewer holes but larger holes to a degree.\n\nSo depending on the situation more megapixels are better but sometimes not after a certain point...\n\nDISCLAIMER: This is my opinion. Basically if you are buying a digital camera that costs less than $200 USD then you might be better off staying below 10 or 12 megapixels. Unfortunately the average person does not know how a camera works and so they think more megapixels is always better. If Canon comes out with an entry level point and shoot camera that's 10MP then Nikon might come out with one that's 12MP. Unfortunately the average buyer is more likely to think the Nikon is better because it has more and therefore it's easier for Canon to come out with one that is 16MP than explain to the average person that their 10MP camera is better than Nikon's 12MP camera.\n\nIf for some reason you want to take a photo and blow it up (make it really big like the size of a poster) then you will need more megapixels but if the lens is too small you will again get a bad signal to noise ratio.\n\nHope this makes sense."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://huestones.co.uk/system/files/images/sesn1.jpg"
]
] |
||
2uzoln | what's going on with brian williams? what did he do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uzoln/eli5_whats_going_on_with_brian_williams_what_did/ | {
"a_id": [
"cod3zst",
"cod43lj",
"cod4rfv",
"cod5m3m",
"cod773v"
],
"score": [
5,
13,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"He told a story about how he was shot down in a helicopter in Iraq. Turns out that didn't happen; he actually just saw a crash that happened 30 minutes before his flight. It seems a lot of people think it is a bit silly that he would have mixed up such a significant part of his memory of his own life to not remember if he was in a helicopter crash or not.",
"He claimed that he was in a helicopter that was struck by an RPG and forced down, contradicting previous accounts where he claimed the helicopter he was following (in a seperate helicopter) was struck.\n\nThe crew of the helicopter that was forced down, claimed that Williams was in fact an hour behind them, and simply learned about the account by questioning them on the events.\n\nWilliam's pilot claims they were close behind and able to witness the event, but did not land immediately.\n\nWilliams retracted his claim that he was shot down, with the explanation that he had conflated his experience with that of the other helicopter accidentally.\n\nSeveral commentators have been less than thrilled with that explanation, believing that the memory of being or not being struck by an RPG and forced to land would be a difficult one to mistake. ",
"He exaggerated his involvement in an incident.\n\nIt involved a military helicopter in Iraq that had taken fire and struck from an RPG. He stated that he was in that helicopter when in reality he wasn't.\n\nHe has told others (e.g. when he appeared on David Letterman) that he had first-hand experience with it. Others that were there has called him out on it and now he states that it was taken out of context.\n\nAs a journalist, it's expected of him to report the truth and it seems that this was a publicity stunt to boost his public image.",
"And because of all of this there are new allegations that he lied about a story during hurricane Katrina. He reported that he witnessed a dead body float down the flooded street in front of his hotel. The hotel was located in the French quarter....which did not flood.",
"He told a story about a helicopter he was in being shot down, which proved to be untrue.\n\nHe claimed he just mis-remembered, but a lot of people feel it intentionally exaggerated to get some some war correspondent street cred.\n\nEither way, a journalist, especially the face of an entire news organization, who can't keep is facts straight is troubling to a lot of people. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9ysp7h | why do old people seem to bruise so easily and so severely over their face and body parts whereas younger people don’t? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ysp7h/eli5_why_do_old_people_seem_to_bruise_so_easily/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea3r767"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Lots of old people take blood thinners for various circulatory disorders. These make them very prone to bruising because their blood doesn’t coagulate in he same way. \n\nAdditionally, their skin is weaker and less elastic with age, so the repair processes that happen when you bump your arm and break some blood vessels go quickly. Whereas in older people, those processes aren’t as efficient. This, bruising. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6arlio | why some europeans countries like france or spain are these big united countries while eastern europe is full of all these small separate countries. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6arlio/eli5why_some_europeans_countries_like_france_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhgtcos",
"dhguadf",
"dhgzwcj",
"dhhc923",
"dhhhfuy"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
26,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"France, Spain, Germany, and Italy all have a history of combining from smaller principalities. Much of Eastern Europe belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire or to Poland. Poland was nibble away by neighbors. When part of an empire regions are expected to be different, different languages, different religions, certainly different cultures. The empire was broken up. The pieces are still sorting themselves out. For a while there was Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia under the domination of the Soviet Union. Then it fell apart and they did too.",
"Just look at former Yugoslavia. Nationalities down there are mixed so much that it's impossible to form a unified state. There you'll have cities with 60% group A, 30% group B, and 10% group C. If A wants independence, B and C go to war. If B wants independence, A and C go to war. If C wants independence, A and C go to war. It's like that in many states. Macedonia for example is almost 50% Albanian and 50% Greek. There's Serbs in Croatia. There's even some \"ancient\" German settlements in Hungary and Romania. And so on.",
"In the past, language/culture wasn't of great important for an country because most common people had nothing to do with the government so they didn't care what language their leader was speaking. But in the 19-20th century this started to change drastically. More people were able to read and implicated in the political system of their country. At that point it become more important for people to have leaders that speak the same language as them. \n\nSo the difference is that some of these country were able to unify the culture/language/religion before the rise of nationalism and others didn't and that could happen for different reason. \n\nIn France for example, the monarchy was strong from early in their history. It was able to develop a big Domain (lang owned by the King) so it had enough money to keep control over the land for a long time. During that time, the seat of government was Paris and the language of Paris became French and spread as the official language throughout the country. France also had strong geographical defences with the Pyrenees in the South, the Alpes in the east and the Ocean on the West, the only big threat was the Germans in the North-East. So it was easier for the king to keep the country together.\n\nCompare that to the West Slavs. Today we talk about Polish, Czech and Slovak. But we could be speaking about one unified country today spreading from Denmark to Belarus, from the Baltic Sea to the Hungarian plains. They are all culturally similar, at least more Similar than the Bretons, French and Occitan were in the past.\n\nBut the Czech were always isolated from the Northern plains with mountains ranges. It protected them from invaded, but it also made near impossible any unification of the Western Slavs. Poland did unified most others west Slavs in the region and it became a superpower in the middles ages. But if France and Bohemia (the czech republic in the past) had good geographical border, Poland never had. With Germans from the West and Russian from the East, Poland was never able to keep control over their territory and if you can't keep control over your territory, then other culture become dominant over yours.",
"Just my thoughts on it (I'm not a historian), land versus sea borders? England consolidated into the UK (taking over Wales then Scotland, and to a lesser extent Ireland), as invasion from the sea is difficult. Spain is on the Iberian peninsular, so somewhat isolated, same for France, they were fighting England on and off for hundreds of years booted the English out then only had to watch two borders, southwest towards Spain, and then East.. Which had been used a a battleground by every army going by then (Romans, Carthage, Gauls, Franks, Saxons, Mongols, etc) trying to form a unified nation is tricky when your country is a battlefield for hundreds of years. ",
"The answer you are looking for is nationalism and its differences between east and west Europe.\n\nIn these West nationalistic writers often called for unification and a sense of national identity in the existing country or system itself such as seen in France or Germany into unifying the lose system that had been called the Holy Roman Empire into a singular nation.\n\nIn the East you had the Hapsburg dynasty and the Ottoman empire that effectively ruled over large areas as more or less foreign rulers for the majority of their existence. There where never large self organized systems to unite them together like there had been for Germans to unite all their varied groups. Thus each and every group down in the Balkans called for self rule as their own separate little group. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
28g5tp | when you're downloading two files on your computer and your bandwidth is maxed out (limiting factor), how does your computer decide how much bandwidth to allocate to each download? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28g5tp/eli5_when_youre_downloading_two_files_on_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"cialrd7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The remote servers decide.\n\nThe computer has no control over what data arrives. Well, very little, anyway.\n\nComputers sending data rely on two things to know how fast they should keep sending data out. Firstly, when a router between the server and the client has more data than it can send on, it will start deleting, or dropping, packets of data. The server will notice this and re-send the data, as well as slowing down in future. \n\nThe second way is that they measure how long it took. When a packet is received, it is acknowledged. The server measures the delay between sending a packet and receiving the acknowledgement. If it was a long time, then the server knows the packet was delayed, and knows it should slow down.\n\nThis last method allows the receiving computer some control over speed, in that it can delay sending back the ack, imitating a congested link. But few systems actually use this method. Mostly, they just try to receive them all as quickly as they can, which is at the speed that the other servers send the data.\n\nEdit: ELI5: If two people are spraying you with water, how do you decide whose water makes you wet?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9i7z2d | why rain harvesting is beneficial to us, aren't we disturbing the natural cycle ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9i7z2d/eli5_why_rain_harvesting_is_beneficial_to_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6hhsto",
"e6hjjja",
"e6hldf7"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Not really cause when we drink it we piss it out which evaporates into a cloud and then rain again",
"Human beings are part of nature. Why is our consumption of it not part of the natural cycle?",
"First, the part you harvest is just a tiny fraction of what pours down.\n\nSecond, the water you harvest isn't destroyed, it eventually evaporates going back into the cycle."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
co9x3g | why do we have both coal and oil? | As I understand the oil and coal comes from organic matter like trees. How it happens that some of it turns into coal and some of it turns into oil? it was decided by the kind of organic matter, location or something else? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/co9x3g/eli5_why_do_we_have_both_coal_and_oil/ | {
"a_id": [
"ewh0101",
"ewh7uzy"
],
"score": [
12,
6
],
"text": [
"Coal is pretty much fossilized prehistoric trees and other forest plants. Before bacteria and fungus evolved the ability to breadown the lignen and cell walls of trees, the forest floor was covered with piles of dead trees. Those trees became buried under dirt and eventually with heat, pressure and time became coal \n\nOil is the same thing but piles of dead sea creatures, mostly algae and similar sized plankton.",
"Coal happen on land with plant matter, while oil is produced underwater with dead organism like bacteria, algea and plankton . That's why a lot of oil come from offshore platform. Now you could ask, well some oil is extracted from the land. True, but if you look at those region millions of years in the past there was water there. The mediterran sea and the Persian gulf were connected and divided Eurasia from Africa, today a lot of oil field are around the Persian gulf. In the US most of the oil is near the Gulf of Mexico and go North-West on the US land in Texas. Pretty much exactly where there was an Ocean seperating the East and West part of what today is one continent. The eastern continent of North America at that time was and still is land and so this is where we found most of the US coal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
42j1x4 | how do chiropractors practice making adjustments? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42j1x4/eli5_how_do_chiropractors_practice_making/ | {
"a_id": [
"czardpy",
"czarqq4",
"czarwpq",
"czas666",
"czasbr6",
"czaseb7",
"czaspn7",
"czat2xw",
"czattn8",
"czau01v",
"czauj8c",
"czaup9z"
],
"score": [
23,
13,
182,
11,
34,
5,
10,
19,
14,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Chiropractic adjustments are very gentle when performed correctly. You essentially find a joint that is restricted, take the joint to tension and thrust lightly through the restriction with a high velocity low force and a specific line of drive. That being said, licensed chiropractors are extremely knowledgeable in anatomy and physical medicine. These procedures should ABSOLUTELY NOT be performed by an untrained and unlicensed individual. ",
"The question you should be asking is what does an \"adjustment\" do, what does a neck or spine pop do, is it any different from popping my knuckles?\n\n_URL_2_\n\n > Unsubstantiated claims about the efficacy of chiropractic have continued to be made by individual chiropractors and chiropractic associations.[3] The core concept of traditional chiropractic, vertebral subluxation, is not based on sound science\n\n\n > Chiropractors historically were strongly opposed to vaccination based on their belief that all diseases were traceable to causes in the spine, and therefore could not be affected by vaccines\n\n_URL_1_\n\n\n > Chiropractors are not medical doctors. They primarily treat back pain, but they claim to treat a wide range of other conditions, which some of them believe are related to mis-alignments of the spine, called subluxations. This belief has no scientific basis. \n\n_URL_0_\n\n",
"I'm a 3rd year DO student, which is an actual medical doctor, with some manipulation mixed in during the first 2 years of school. It's called OMT (Osteopathic Manipulative Technique), which includes \"back-cracking\" or \"HVLA\" as we call it\n\nWe practice on each other. Even though we're all relatively healthy, we also spend all day sitting at a desk studying, so theoretically, we can all get dysfunction vertebral segments. We then feel the landmarks on our spines to figure out which way the dysfunction is, and correct it by going opposite to the dysfunction. For example, if someone is twisted too far to the right, we twist them to the left, then twist them a little more quickly, but without a ton of force.\n\nEssentially, it's like cracking your knuckles, but in your spine. You don't need a dysfunctional finger to crack your knuckle.\n\nA few points to mention:\n\n* Chiropractry and OMT aren't based in science or scientific evidence, studies from independent journals show its about as efficacious as someone who doesn't know the techniques pretending to do the techniques (literally)\n\n* Both Chiropractors and OMT doctors can believe in some crazy voodoo bullshit.\n\n* D.O. are actual medical doctors, and have a full medical license equivalent to an M.D. in America.\n\n* The vast majority of DO doctors recognize the limits of OMT and don't use it, instead they become cardiologists, surgeons, radiologists, and any other type of doctor.\n\n* In real life, patients love OMT and think it works, so some doctors still use it.\n\nEdit: Some of the techniques we learn are used in Physical Therapy and other medical fields and are probably legit. Some other techniques we use are based in \"Well, this crazy guy 100 years ago did it this way...\". So it's really a split 50/50 between stuff that probably works and stuff that objectively does not.",
"Chiropractic \"medicine\" is pseudo-science. There is no academic, peer-reviewed evidence that a chiropractor can actually help/cure any patient.",
"Talking to my chiropractor, she says that they practice on each other. How insane is that? Imagine that in any other doctor profession.. \n\n\"Lets pretend you have a burst appendix! I'll take it out!\"\n\nBut she also said it's amazing she made it out alive, because half of the people don't graduate!",
"There are plenty of cases of chiro's hurting their patients during these \"adjustments\". They supposedly learn how to do it correctly, but there isn't any correct way really. It's all a bunch of pseudo science mumbo jumbo. ",
"I used to work at a chiropractic office and worked with two DO's. If we weren't as busy, they'd practice on each other or one of my perks was I got free adjustments.\n\nLoved it. Felt so good afterwards and put ice on my shoulders to reduce any swelling, if any. ",
"I've always gathered chiropractors were a bit of a sham. My dad's girlfriend mentioned she loves her chiropractor and has been going to him for 10 years. Being a university athlete that has utilized physiotherapy and atheltic therapy, I get sour at the thought of someone only being \"maintained\" rather than rehabilitated. \n\nAnyone mind confirming or disagreeing the credentials of this field?",
"Everyone please be aware that chiropractry has minimal consistent evidence to support its use and does have significant risks including arterial dissection and stroke.",
"Everyone is freaking out about the fact that HVLA techniques are practiced by students on their classmates.\n\n\nAs a third year PT student, I can confirm that we practice loads of techniques on each other all the time, including HVLA. But we take a LOT of classes first, understand the anatomy, pathology, and finally the treatment long before we say \"yeah, go ahead and crack my joint for me\".\n\n\nOn a side note, HVLA is waaaay more specific than what a layperson does with a chair or what many chiros do with general alignments/adjustments. When you understand the anatomy, pathology, and treatment well enough, you can often move a joint far enough to elicit a cavitation (pop or crack) without applying a thrust manipulation. When you get a cavitation on set up, that's when you know you're really doing it right.",
"How come chiropractors are allowed to call themselves doctors?",
"The wonderful thing about Chiropractic is this: Every adjustment that he or she performs on you, he or she has had performed on himself by another chiropractor or in the case of education, another student. So they should know what it feels like and understand what it does. With that being said, there are quite a few snake oil dealers in the chiro world, and drug pushers in the MD world. Like many have said here: find a good chiropractor with a good reputation when you need one. Ask around, people swear by them for pain for a reason.\n\nIf you're concerned about research check out Dr. Colloca's site. It's incredible: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1e5oco/",
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2014/04/20/new-medicare-data-reveal-startling-496-million-wasted-on-chiropractors/#4eee710d6678",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiropractic_controversy_and_criticism"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.neuromechanical.com/original-research/"
]
] |
||
5w673a | ; why is jesus on a cross the symbol for the religion and used against demons? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5w673a/eli5_why_is_jesus_on_a_cross_the_symbol_for_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"de7l6h2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Jesus on the cross is dying for our sins, to absolve and protect all the rest of us. He protects us from our own \"demons,\" that is, our sinful nature.\n\nRemember, being crucified didn't destroy Jesus. He was resurrected shortly thereafter. It was merely an ordeal he went through on our behalf.\n\nI think I've got this right. Perhaps a better theologian can correct me on the nuances."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1v7qas | what is literary theory/criticism, and what is its purpose? | In college, I always easily grasped the purpose of social science papers and I could make sense of how they contributed to human knowledge. But, I can't say the same for lit papers. I never really understood 1) what I was aiming to achieve/prove, and 2) what the utility of the exercise was.
Can anyone help me understand? Bonus points if you can explain using references to social science! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v7qas/eli5_what_is_literary_theorycriticism_and_what_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cepiuro"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My SO is pursuing a grad degree in English, and this is how SO (heavily paraphrased) describes it:\n\nLiterary Theory/Criticism is an exploration of humanity - how we interpret the world, how we perceive and understand information, and how that effects out physical, mental, and emotional responses.\n\nFor instance, Milton's Paradise Lost might be seen as too old to still relate to modern society, but a skilled reader/writer can interpret the themes lines of thinking in Milton to explain human behavior in the past, present, or future. Milton's particular portrayal of the fall is interesting, specifically how it seems that Adam *knew* what he was doing was wrong, but was in love with Eve, and for that reason *chose* to fall. \n\nLooking back at that scene, there is meaning that can be extracted and still applied to contemporary life and living. That literature is the history of the human heart, in a sense - how people thought and felt, and the theories applied as to *why* we thought or felt that way. \n\nFor Theory in particular, one I'm familiar with is Reader Response Theory - the idea that the reader imparts some critical existence to the work and, in the reading of the work, creates an interpretation - meaning that the reading of a piece is in and of itself an art, as the reader creates in their minds their own, possibly unique, text-related performance. \n\nCriticism might delve into the plight of Troilus and Criseyde, and specifically target Troilus' death and the scene that follows after. My SO dug deep into this one, noting the disturbing way in which the once gentle Troilus now looked down upon those weeping for him with a sense of near contempt. What does that say about the nature of the afterlife? Of love, of sorrow, and of those who pass on? I'm paraphrasing heavily, but I think you get the idea.\n\nAs far as a relation to social sciences, the way I've come to think of it is this - history is not just the physical actions of humanity over time. It is also the way humans have evolved in their thinking, their art, their interpretations, that define human history. Literary Theory and Criticism take part in that greater dance of Human History."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3rfx54 | several candidates in the us presidential election have called for overturning citizens united. how can a supreme court decision be overturned? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rfx54/eli5several_candidates_in_the_us_presidential/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwnpwaq"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Two ways, one official and one unofficial. \n\nOfficially, once the Supreme Court has ruled that should be the end of it. A Constitutional amendment can reverse it, but (especially in a short timeframe) nothing else can. \n\nUnofficially, the President appoints justices, and the Court can overturn itself (in fact, it did in *Citizen's United*, overruling *Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce*). If the President replaces justices who retire or die with ones who want to overturn *Citizens United*, the decision can be reversed that way. People normally don't want to admit decisions depend on which individuals are on the bench or that they can be overturned like that (the Court is supposed to be apolitical), but it's generally true. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xbgeb | if our bodies adapt to certain things, weather, temperature, etc. would our bodies adapt to smoking, if the human race did it for long enough? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xbgeb/eli5_if_our_bodies_adapt_to_certain_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf9u2ti"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In terms of evolution, it's possible but unlikely. The reason is because animals evolve for certain traits that affect their ability to reproduce. Most people who die from smoking-related illnesses do so well beyond their reproductive years, and so it would not affect which genes get passed to the next generation.\n\nBut theoretically, it's possible. But it wouldn't be through adaptation, it would be through evolution."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1g8u1g | plato's third man argument. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1g8u1g/eli5_platos_third_man_argument/ | {
"a_id": [
"cahwnyd"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Basically it's a criticism of Plato's theory of forms. Plato believed that, for example, chairs were only chairs because they shared an essential quality of chair-ness. This chair-ness is a Form, and chairs are like shadows of chair-ness cast from a higher level of reality.\n\nThe third man argument goes like this:\n\n1. Alice, Bob and Clint are all \"human.\"\n2. You can imagine a Form (\"human-ness\") which all \"humans\" are shadows of.\n3. Alice, Bob and Clint are all like each other, but they are also like \"human-ness.\" We can form a new group of things that are \"human\": Alice, Bob, Clint, and \"human-ness.\"\n4. Just as there was a Form which the first group were shadows of, there must also be a Form which this new group is the shadow of. You can call this Form \"extra-human-ness.\"\n5. Now you have a new group of things which are \"human\": Alice, Bob, Clint, \"human-ness,\" and \"extra-human-ness.\" You can keep coming up with Forms which a group is the shadow of, and making a new group by including that new Form. This will go on forever and be an infinite regress, which usually indicates your reasoning went wrong somewhere."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5rospz | how game developers can simultaneously work on a game from different computers? | when working on a game such as GTA V, how can somebody design parts of the map at the same time as somebody else, while making sure everybody's changes get applied to the "final copy" of the game? can game developers decorate levels from different computers at the same time and see eachother's changes in real time? how does this work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rospz/eli5_how_game_developers_can_simultaneously_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd8xa35",
"dd90u6g"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Good programming techniques come down to breaking pieces apart into their smallest elements. In your example, two people wouldn't be 'painting' on the same map at the same time, instead they would have different things that they're responsible for.\n\nThe map would be broken down into things like 'roads', 'hills', 'buildings' and 'objects'. Each of those objects would have one or more pieces, each of which could be worked on separately.\n\nImagine you and a group of friends both working on painting a car. You could take the panels off the car (hood, roof, doors, bumpers...) and paint them all separately at the same time, then put them back together on the car when you're done.",
"Former game developer here,\n\nOn the software side of things, we use a Version Control System (VCS) whose function is to manage concurrent work among the developers. If you change file A and I change file B, the VCS can combine the work into a single, congruent whole. If we modify the same file, these programs can often deduce how our changes are to be merged together. Only if the VCS is confused will it require developer intervention to sort it out, and this is typically if two developers change the same part of the same line. VCS systems track change history, divergence and convergence (branching and merging), and authorship.\n\nRegarding assets such as models and level designs, there doesn't really exist a solution that can track these data sets, and often histories aren't recorded (which can be done and I think is a mistake if it isn't). How work can be performed concurrently is by good design. Art assets can be individual models that are composited by an automated system (called a build system), following scripts that explain how. Or the game itself can composite these assets at runtime if it makes more sense to do so.\n\nWork is divided, developers are principally concerned with how the software works, not how the assets look, so they can happily test with old or stand-in models. Certain designers are focused on gameplay, story line, and interaction, and don't need to care about what things look like. An art director is going to want to see how the visuals come together.\n\nTypically, when work is done it's \"pushed\" into the build system which will generate a new version of the entire game, which testers can pull once available and as necessary. I know some studios have a robust tool set where the video game's render engine is embedded into the 3D editor as a preview window; the work they do is thus displayed as it will be seen in the game. There are similar setups where changes can be pushed right to a running console, but these things are rare and often just unnecessary. It's typically far easier, and more in line with the typical workflow that work would be batched together and released as an incremental version of the whole package."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3o97rt | could there be any business/financial-related reasons it is taking valve so long to develop/announce half-life 3? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3o97rt/eli5_could_there_be_any_businessfinancialrelated/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvv3sue",
"cvv8mr9",
"cvv9fmi",
"cvvadpt"
],
"score": [
79,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There's a few reasons. \n\nFirst, Valve has a pretty loose command structure. For the most part, people just kind of work on what they want to work on. Unless you've got a bunch of people who want to make HL3, there's no HL3 team.\n\nMore importantly though, they're facing the Duke Nukem Forever problem. People have been waiting for this game for, what, almost a decade? The hype and expectations for it are unreal. No matter how good the game is, it will *never* be as good as people expect.\n\nAnd making matters worse, it might not be good. Both technology and story telling have changed a lot over the years. Half Life may have been revolutionary when it came out, but most of what it did is old hat now. There is nothing in HL1, HL2, or any of the episodes that hasn't now been done somewhere else. So that means that, in order to keep their edge, Valve will need to come up with some new gimmicks and features. But that's hard, and they might not work. \n\nAnd of course, they also can't stray too far from the source material. If they make a game which is *too* different from the originals, they risk alienating their old fans.\n\nSo what's going to happen? Probably nothing. Half Life 3 will probably languish in development hell indefinitely. If they release a game it'll probably flop (though I hope that against all odds it will be amazing). ",
"On top of the reasons bobdole said, they're waiting to finish the Source 2 engine and were waiting for now current gen consoles. ",
"Well, there was also a new engine with HL2, so maybe we see a new engine together with HL3.",
"Would HL3 increase Steam's profitability? I don't know the numbers, but I suspect that a 30% share of a large part of PC gaming for minimal risk is a lot more money than HL3 could ever hope to bring in. I don't think we can truly overestimate how much money Steam brings them in.\n\nFrom a brand perspective (which given increasing competition to \nSteam is very important), HL3 is a massive risk, as it would almost certainly be a disappointment. HL1/2's strong points are now very mundane and merely base level. What would be HL3's USP? They don't have a crack development team to live up to the hype, and doing so would be high risk, high cost, minimal reward, and detrack from developing Steam and PC gaming more broadly (which is all about furthering Steam's revenue).\n\nTL;DR: It'd be a disappointment, and even if it went well, would make them less money than focusing on Steam."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7safq6 | what do investors gain from buying shares of companies that don't pay dividends(e.g. amazon)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7safq6/eli5_what_do_investors_gain_from_buying_shares_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt38a36",
"dt3i1lh"
],
"score": [
10,
4
],
"text": [
"You hold a non-dividend stock in hopes that the price will increase over time. Amazon is a good example of one that has done just this. If you went back to January 2005 and bought 100 shares of AMZN at $40/share then came back to today, you could sell them for $1300/share. Your $4k would have turned into $130k.\n\nYou don't hold the stocks forever, at some point you start selling off chunks of your portfolio to provide an income to live off of.",
"Traditionally, publically traded companies have two phases, a growth phase and a maintenance phase.\n\nDuring the growth phase, the company is trying to expand rapidly to lay claim to their market before someone else does. If you are a small tech company, you want to make a big splash before Google or Amazon or Microsoft decide it is easier to copy your idea than to buy it from you. During this phase, you are basically telling your shareholders reinvesting all profits into the company is the best way to make you money.\n\nIf the company doesn't go bankrupt or get bought out, they will come to have a solid position in their market and no longer have much room to grow. Ford or Wal-Mart or Proctor & Gamble or Merck are not likely to double their profits in a year or two, no matter how much they invest in growth. But they do have solid profits they can expect to make for the foreseeable future, and that is what they have to offer shareholders instead of growth. We won't double your money, but we won't lose it, either, and we'll give you 5-10% growth plus a 1-2% dividend, and that's a better deal than you'll get at the bank."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3bxqtg | what the fuck is going on with reddit and their admins? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bxqtg/eli5_what_the_fuck_is_going_on_with_reddit_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"csqid37"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They are trying to save reddit from sinking like the titanic. Problem is it has already hit the ice berg....lol"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1d52f1 | why many wine bottles have an inverse dome at the base. | Why do some wine bottles do this? Is it purely for looks or is there a structural reason? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1d52f1/eli5_why_many_wine_bottles_have_an_inverse_dome/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9myp4d",
"c9n0c6l"
],
"score": [
2,
20
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nA few possible reasons but mostly plain old tradition of unknown origin or reasoning.",
"It's called a punt and it was originally developed for sparkling wines to strengthen the bottle and enable them to cope with the high internal pressures.\n\nSource: worked in the wine industry for years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art14236.asp"
],
[]
] |
|
5knvlq | why do nfl teams fire coaches with one or two games left in the season? | Even after an unsuccessful season, one more loss (or one win) doesn't really seem like it will make a difference, so why not just let the coach finish the season and fire them afterwards? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5knvlq/eli5_why_do_nfl_teams_fire_coaches_with_one_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbpb27x",
"dbpbv68",
"dbpcu08"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"The theory is that a team that fires its coach early can get a jump start on contacting and recruiting replacement coaches. It's not a well-tested theory in the NFL, because until this season it had only rarely been done.",
"Another theory is that the temporary replacement coaches will be less successful.....which is good when u want a early draft pick.\n\nAnither theory is maybe you have an interim coach the gm really likes and would consider keeping them if their 2 week trial period were successful **(success is not only defined in wins and losses....the gm might inform them...what i would really like to see this last two weeks is (----!!!----???) \nCould be improvements on rushing offense or improvements in cover 2 defense or more productive special teams etc etc\nAnd they may tell them....focus 90% effort on improving those areas and not so much focus on winning these games.",
"There comes a point where the relationship becomes toxic.\n\nEveryone knows the coach is going to be fired, the players know there won't be any consequences to ignoring him, and the fans aren't interested in seeing them half ass it on the field for a lame duck.\n\nFiring the head coach and naming an interim coach reignites some of the interest. The interim coach sees it as an extended job interview, the players can no longer blame their lack of effort on the last guy, and the fans are at the very least curious rather than apathetic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1wt5gs | are there any real benefits to buying things duty free? if so what are they | I travel a lot to and from Canada and the US, every time I'm at an airport or border crossing I see signs for Duty Free products (mostly alcohol) but the price doesn't seem all that worthwhile. What other benefits might there be for buying something Duty Free? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wt5gs/eli5_are_there_any_real_benefits_to_buying_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf54z77",
"cf555q1"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Well, no duty...",
"Duty is taxes. \n\nThe listed price is the price you pay. They don't add alcohol or sales tax to the price. \n\nDepending on where you live, this can be a significant savings. \n\nAlcohol is taxed quiet highly in Ontario meaning fairly significant savings over the LCBO. \n\nLike any other purchase, it's important to know what the item would cost you if you bought it elsewhere. If you know your favourite bottle of scotch costs you 95 dollars after taxes at the LCBO, and is listed as 80 dollars at Duty Free, you save 15 dollars. \n\nBut you can't go crazy. When you get to boarder control you have to declare all alcohol purchased on your trip, including Duty Free. If you are over your exception limit for the time you were gone, you have to pay Duty on the excess. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.