q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4jqf88
|
why are deep voices relaxing to most people, as opposed to high pitched ones?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jqf88/eli5_why_are_deep_voices_relaxing_to_most_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d38nujl"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"No clue if this is \"official\" or correct, but many times I associate high pitched voices with either panic, anxiety, or whining. My voice gets higher when I'm upset."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6akevf
|
why isn't there any skin colored tattoo ink that can be used to cover up bad tattoos?
|
Recently saw a picture of a woman who got a tattoo covered up by just getting a big black square tattoo over it. Why couldn't they do the same thing, but instead of using black ink, they use ink that matches her skin color?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6akevf/eli5_why_isnt_there_any_skin_colored_tattoo_ink/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhf6b2r",
"dhf6cvz",
"dhf90uf",
"dhfcal7",
"dhfcdc9",
"dhfft5e",
"dhftstm",
"dhfyyqc",
"dhgduy4",
"dhggx4x"
],
"score": [
124,
2,
19,
67,
898,
37,
12,
9,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Tattoos aren't like paint where you can just put a coat of something new over the top. Instead you are injecting ink into a layer of skin which already contains ink; you can add more ink alongside the existing ink but if you put skin-colored ink there then it would just be beside the dark ink from before.",
"I'm not an expert, but one problem that comes to mind is that the skin changes colour. When you tan, when you're working out, when you're hot, when you're cold. It will never really perfectly match. I guess a black tattoo is cheaper and generally looks better. ",
"There are uses for skin colored ink, hiding stretch marks and scars and such. Cosmetic tattooing has taken on a lot of life in the past few years. ",
"Think of a tattoo being similar to painting watercolors on paper. Your skin absorbs the ink, like the paper absorbs the watercolors. You may be able to put a darker color over a tattoo it to obscure what came before, but a lighter color would either do nothing or just deepen the dark color.",
"Tattoo artist here. Tattoo ink isn't actually \"ink\", it's pigment in a carrier (usually sterilized water and alcohol), which means that when it goes into the skin, it's staining the skin at a depth where the skin heals (anything above that dies and falls off during the scabbing process). Have you ever stained white fabric black? Now try staining that black with a lighter colour... doesn't really work. Mostly because the darker colour will still show up through the lighter colour. \n\n*Edit*scabbing, not scanning.",
"Just to be pragmatic, even if this was possible, your skin doesn't stay one color all the time. even if you color matched the skin tone perfectly at the time of the tattoo, even moderate sun exposure would likely result in changes to the overall skin color resulting in an area of discoloration. That's not really considered an attractive trait in skin. Basically you'd be giving yourself what would look like a big birth mark most of the time. ",
"You ever try colouring over blue/black ink on paper with a lighter colour? It no work.",
"Why haven't tattoo artists invented pigment that disappears after like 5 years? That way people can choose either permanent or semi-temporary.",
"Ooh, something I can contribute to as the recipient of a \"skin colored\" tattoo. I got one to cover up a deep red/purple birthmark on my face. The tattoo artist used a very light pigment to offset or lighten the birthmark to a less noticeable hue. While not as successful as I hoped, the result is better than it was. As I understand it, the other posters are correct in that the best you can hope for is a slightly less than perfect match when tattooing to match skin tone.",
"To give a little extra detail: It has to do with the way that that light interacts with different materials, and the difference between colours and shades.\n\nYou’ve probably heard it said black, white and grey aren’t colours (strictly speaking they’re achromatic colours, but for simplicity sake I’m just going to refer to them as shades), but what does that mean exactly? The colour of a material is determined by the wavelengths of the light it reflects. Materials that appear to be black or white generally reflect roughly equal amounts of the visible wavelengths.\n\nThe brightness (shade) of a material is determined by the amount of light it absorbs. Speaking generally, the more light a material absorbs, the darker it will look. The more it reflects, the lighter it will look.\n\nThe way a material reflects light is also important. Scattering occurs when a material reflects light at many angles rather than just one. *Sub surface* scattering occurs when light enters a translucent object and exits it at a different point. To quote Wikipedia “light will generally penetrate the surface and be reflected a number of times at irregular angles inside the material, before passing back out of the material at an angle other than the angle it would have if it had been reflected directly off the surface.”\n\n**Tl;dr** if you add a bunch of lighter pigment to an area of skin that already contains a much darker pigment, the light that gets reflected off the lighter pigment will mostly get absorbed by the darker pigment before it has the chance to reach your eyes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
k3n77
|
what is a master's degree, bachelor's degree and phd?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k3n77/eli5what_is_a_masters_degree_bachelors_degree_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2h98fc",
"c2hciln",
"c2h98fc",
"c2hciln"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
8,
7
],
"text": [
"A Bachelor's degree is awarded in the completion of an undergraduate education in a university. Usually it involves four years of post-secondary studies.\n\nA Master's degree is one step up - it's one or more years of graduate studies _after_ one has received their Bachelor's. Some Master's programs are purely course-based, while others are research-based (with courses too).\n\nA PhD, or a Doctorate degree is the final step in this spectrum. It is awarded after many years - 4 - 5, often longer - of study in a specialized field. One could enter a PhD program immediately after a Bachelor's if the academic grades are high enough, or after a Master's.\n\nBeyond that, career academics will have to pursue post-doctorate positions - purely research positions in a lab with no course work.\n\nFinally, after one or more post-docs, one can pursue teaching positions, eventually moving up the ladder to run your own lab, becoming a full-fledged professor.",
"The best way it's been explained to me is through an image like this: _URL_0_ (warning: crappy iPad doodle)\n\nImagine a circle. That circle represents all human knowledge.\n\nGetting a bachelor's degree is like getting a grounding in the core of that knowledge. It's a little specialized, so it's not at the exact center, but it's well-rounded. This is the green area in the picture.\n\nGetting a master's degree means you become an expert in one field of knowledge. This could be literature, or genetics, or ancient Sumerian pot making. You know most of what there is to know, right up to the edge of what human beings have discovered. This is the slice of pie that's blue in the drawing.\n\nGetting a PhD is different. A dissertation has to be new and original work that pushes the boundaries of the circle. When you get your PhD, your work is actually pushing the edge of the circle of human knowledge out a little bit, so that it's bigger than it was before. You're just made humanity smarter.\n\n(This is an idealized version of how the system is supposed to work. For lots of reasons, it's not always the case.)",
"A Bachelor's degree is awarded in the completion of an undergraduate education in a university. Usually it involves four years of post-secondary studies.\n\nA Master's degree is one step up - it's one or more years of graduate studies _after_ one has received their Bachelor's. Some Master's programs are purely course-based, while others are research-based (with courses too).\n\nA PhD, or a Doctorate degree is the final step in this spectrum. It is awarded after many years - 4 - 5, often longer - of study in a specialized field. One could enter a PhD program immediately after a Bachelor's if the academic grades are high enough, or after a Master's.\n\nBeyond that, career academics will have to pursue post-doctorate positions - purely research positions in a lab with no course work.\n\nFinally, after one or more post-docs, one can pursue teaching positions, eventually moving up the ladder to run your own lab, becoming a full-fledged professor.",
"The best way it's been explained to me is through an image like this: _URL_0_ (warning: crappy iPad doodle)\n\nImagine a circle. That circle represents all human knowledge.\n\nGetting a bachelor's degree is like getting a grounding in the core of that knowledge. It's a little specialized, so it's not at the exact center, but it's well-rounded. This is the green area in the picture.\n\nGetting a master's degree means you become an expert in one field of knowledge. This could be literature, or genetics, or ancient Sumerian pot making. You know most of what there is to know, right up to the edge of what human beings have discovered. This is the slice of pie that's blue in the drawing.\n\nGetting a PhD is different. A dissertation has to be new and original work that pushes the boundaries of the circle. When you get your PhD, your work is actually pushing the edge of the circle of human knowledge out a little bit, so that it's bigger than it was before. You're just made humanity smarter.\n\n(This is an idealized version of how the system is supposed to work. For lots of reasons, it's not always the case.)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/Y6x6w"
],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/Y6x6w"
]
] |
||
3nto7a
|
why should i upgrade to windows 10?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nto7a/eli5_why_should_i_upgrade_to_windows_10/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvr4tow"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"You shouldn't. I always give a new OS a few months to allow for compatibility and service packages to patch any existing bugs before I update. Since I really on my computer heavily for work I can't risk bugs and compatibility problems by updating early."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5e5i3s
|
how do lighthouses find their homes?
|
I always see pictures of lighthouses being bombarded by the waves and surf, but have no clue how they get there in the first place.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5e5i3s/eli5_how_do_lighthouses_find_their_homes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"da9snwa",
"da9snxo",
"da9stwh"
],
"score": [
4,
12,
3
],
"text": [
"They are built by construction workers, like all other buildings. The huge waves and surf crashing into it is only during storms.. the lighthouse is built during calm weather.",
"The most dramatic shots of lighthouses are during the winter months with big wind and waves. The weather is not always like that - construction would be in the gentler spring and summer months where your only problem would be getting the construction material over there, which would have to be by boat. \n\nThis is that famous one [Le Jument in Brittainy.](_URL_1_) \n\n[But here it is on a calm day.](_URL_0_) ",
"First thing's first. Lighthouses exist to ward off ships from shallow waters. Don't want ships running aground or smashing into rocks. That's why you see lighthouses on cliffs connected to land as well as tiny little islands of their own.\n\nSo most lighthouse locations are chosen due to necessity. If ship's are coming close to crashing or there's a serious land hazard along a popular route, like a chunk of rock sticking out of the ocean, they'll build a lighthouse on it to warn passing ships that there's land there for when they're sailing in low visibility.\n\nAs far as the actual construction, back in the day, chances are they would make a temporary bridge or just boat the construction materials to the tiny island and get to work. Nowadays they'd likely build the land up around the light house in order to connect it to the mainland."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://media.gettyimages.com/videos/aerial-shot-towards-the-la-jument-lighthouse-near-the-island-of-video-id540066547?s=640x640",
"http://www.jean-guichard.com/sites/default/files/styles/photography_full/public/photographies/la_jument-00012_0.jpg?itok=2-ugAjvT"
],
[]
] |
|
cgp89m
|
how do you immigrate to the united states of america?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cgp89m/eli5_how_do_you_immigrate_to_the_united_states_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eujayeq"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Since it may be a while before you get a *serious* answer that goes into real detail, I'll give you what I know: You have to file for citizenship, take a test, pass a background check, and pay substantial fees every step of the way. This is a short explanation, but in reality the process takes many months and often years. The agency(ies) that process applications and application-related information are slow and understaffed, and the process itself is anything but streamlined. When and if you are approved, then congrats! You're a citizen!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4kxd7x
|
why are the kentucky derby, preakness stakes, and belmont stakes the triple crown? what makes them special amongst horse races in general?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4kxd7x/eli5_why_are_the_kentucky_derby_preakness_stakes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3intrp"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"All three events have been running for ~ 140 years, and by the early 20th century they were the largest and most prestigious events of their kind, draw the best horses and the largest prizes. It was recognized that it took a very special horse to win all three events, and so eventually the \"Triple Crown\" term took hold. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3dt8rf
|
if stalking is a crime,why are paparazzi tolerated?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dt8rf/eli5if_stalking_is_a_crimewhy_are_paparazzi/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct8eyca",
"ct8hwge",
"ct8i9v1",
"ct8jdbd",
"ct8m7j6",
"ct8or6y",
"ct8qtu3",
"ct8r1jg",
"ct8rkaa",
"ct8se0j",
"ct8tdx9",
"ct8tk0t",
"ct8tonp",
"ct8tw35",
"ct8uqlt",
"ct8vx9y",
"ct8vzz1",
"ct8x6po",
"ct90gye",
"ct91jki",
"ct91n17",
"ct941ef",
"ct98j35",
"ct9eydq"
],
"score": [
1911,
80,
107,
338,
24,
26,
2,
8,
22,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
8,
5,
3,
5,
3,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm going to quote the California stalking statute. Other states and countries will be different but this is an example.\n\n > (a) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another person and who makes a credible threat **with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family** is guilty of the crime of stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison.\n\nThe emphasis is mine. In order to be guilty of stalking you have to make the person afraid for their safety. Paparazzi might be annoying but most people aren't worried for their safety around them.",
"they're taking pics in public places, where you have a lower expectation of privacy. they find them, take their pics, and b/c they are public figures (i.e. they choose to put themselves in the public's eye through TV/movies/sports/etc.), these celebs generally have a higher threshold for invasion of privacy and related torts.",
"Most of them do not actually stalk. They do not follow someone with the intent to cause harm or to threaten them. They also generally take their photos from public property. ",
"This hasn't been addressed, but there are also times that celebrities really want the paparazzi to be filming them. Their careers sometimes thrive on the media attention and it helps their \"brand\". For some people this is a really big deal, like Paris Hilton who isn't really famous for much other than paparazzi attention. At the same time a celebrity may want to develop the image of being a sort of playboy big shot so being filmed at a club helps that.",
"Long story short - they are public figures in public places(though zoom lenses are stretching the boundaries of law and will probably come up in a court case soon enough). As long as you don't touch, the photo is legal. ALSO, and this is important, plenty of celebrities coordinate with the paparazzi as to when they are leaving a place, where they are going, etc. Don't think for a minute that they are all being chased. I read a story i can't find in GQ years ago about a teen paparazzo and he was texting Kardashians. Their whole family business is working with paparazzi. It's a tertiary market for Hollywood, after the films and merchandise, plus free publicity. That's another reason why you get the falling losers like Lohan in the rags. It's the shit bin of dollar DVDs, they're just staying relevant long enough. People like Clooney or Bullock, they just walk the carpet with the date, smile, wave and give nothing, because they don't need to and know how to work. It's all a business, is my point.",
"How does this apply to the stalking done by scientologists? ",
"The next and perhaps better question is why so many people consume the crap the paps provide? ",
"As a photojournalist. It's legal to take photographs on public grounds, of anything. With a mm lens no greater than 300. It's the photographers responsibility to legally use those photographs.",
"Police officer here! Albeit, I live far from California, so the way I interpret stalking may be entirely different from the way it is enforced there.\n\nIn the area I police, misdemeanor stalking can occur as long as one persons actions would reasonably cause another to fear for their safety, feel frightened or alarmed, or suffer emotional distress. \n\n\"Stalking\" means to, on multiple occasions, follow or threaten an individual, interfere with damage or unlawfully enter a persons real or personal property, OR to use their identifying information.\n\nThe crime of voyeurism could be charged when one is surreptitiously recording a person changing or undressing or engaging in sexual activity. \n\nSo the question of whether a paparazzi can be charged with stalking is complicated. If the issue is where the recording is happening(namely private property), the charge would likely be unlawful entry. If the question is about the sexual nature of the recording, it may be a voyeurism charge which would likely be a felony when it is disseminated. \n\nStalking would really only be a charge if there was a threatening nature to the interactions between the celebrity and the photographer. Otherwise, there are other charges that better fit those crimes.\n\nOne way that paparazzi likely get around voyeurism charges is by selling their pictures to magazines under the table. Additionally, the individual's right to privacy on public property is not as strong as one would think",
"I wonder if many law makers and politicians don't want the media focusing on anything other than our shallow fascination with celebrity. Imagine if our media spent the same effort on corruption and policy as Kardashian's underwear decisions. \n\nWe'd have a form of accountability developing. ",
"Because they take pictures and earn money stalking people. It's like why porno is good, prostitution is bad.",
"honestly probably because the rules regarding celebrities are different than the rules for just normal people. we worship celebrities every move. we have to know what they're doing at all costs. ",
"Not a lawyer. \n\nWe talked about it in business law a little. Random people have a reasonable expectation of privacy that public officials and celebrities do not have.",
"It isn't really stalking if you call them to say \"hey i am going to be at the beach this weekend at 2:35pm\"\n",
"Think of American law in layers that supersede each other. You have local law on the bottom, but that can be overruled by state law, but that can be overruled by federal law, but that can be overruled by constitutional law.\n\nIn the stalking/paparazzi question, we have state and federal law: see _URL_0_\n\nNote how the above language could easily fit the paparazzi's under the statute -- \"emotional distress\" is one of the standards, which certainly seems to describe some paparazzi activity, and we also see the term \"place under surveillance.\"\n\nSo far so good -- paparazzi journalism seems to fit the statute squarely.\n\nBut over and above federal law is constitutional law, to wit, the first amendment's protection of a free press. So think of that as a barrier or limit on any other law, including a federal law. The government cannot infringe on the press doing what it does. Does that mean the press is never punished or regulated? No. It means that the press in America is given a wide berth, a much wider berth than nearly everywhere else in the world, especially Europe, where paparazzi cannot simply harass anyone they please to sell a photo.\n\nIt's simply a value system we've adopted in the U.S.: when value a (no stalking) conflicts with value b (free press), value b wins.",
"Can regular people, as well as the celebrities themselves, take pictures/videos of the paparazzi and paste them across the internet in the same manner they do?\n\nIt's something I've always been curious about.",
"The big issue is that public figures have very little rights ti privacy. Their comings and goings in public is considered in the public interest, and as such does not get the same protection they had as non celebrities.\n\n\"In the public interest\" is the big catchphrase here. The good papparazi make friends and try to present people in a good light. The bad ones will not get access to parties and such which are on private property, but they still might try to get in.",
"just walk around with some reallly bright flash lights and blind those fuckers, problem solved.",
"In most states in the U.S., stalking in a legal sense is more than just following someone around with a camera, checking their Facebook page repetitively, or constantly calling them. Stalking requires a credible threat, as well as elements of pursuance.\n\nSo for instance, if a paparazzi followed a celebrity around and had threatened to kill him or her, then the crime of stalking would be applicable.\n\nOn the other hand, if a paparazzi is simply following a celebrity around with a camera and *does not* threaten him or her, then that is not stalking. Sure, it's annoying, but it's not harassment nor stalking.\n\nThe definition of stalking is very skewed nowadays. If someone threatens you and then follows you, they are stalking you. If they check your Facebook obsessively or show up to your work every day, but don't threaten you, they aren't stalking you.\n\nSource: I'm a military policeman and photographer.",
"You don't have to be a celebrity for it to be okay. There's a guy here in Seattle who follows random people around with a camera to make some point. He's an asshole, but as far as I know he hasn't been arrested for stalking. \n\n > [‘Creepy Cameraman’ pushes limits of public surveillance — a glimpse of the future](_URL_0_)\n\n > People have come to accept surveillance cameras as a part of everyday life. But what happens when someone is carrying the surveillance camera instead?\n\n > That’s the question raised by a series of online videos in which an unidentified man takes a camera around Seattle and other parts of Washington state, walking up to people and recording them for no apparent reason other than to make a point: How is what he’s doing different than those stationary surveillance cameras tucked away in buildings and public places?\n\n > He has been called the “Creepy Cameraman,” and for good reason. It’s clearly more than a little unsettling for the subjects of his surveillance. Just check out the angry reactions in these videos.\n\n > It’s not clear who the person is, or what type of camera he’s using, but technology author and blogger Brian S. Hall makes the point that this could be a preview of our future, with technology such as Google’s Project Glass making cameras and recording devices even more pervasive in our daily lives.\n",
"Freedom of the press.\n\nThat's why Angelina Jolie (I think) moved to France, where this law isn't in effect",
"In the United States: the First Amendment. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of expression, particularly in regard to the press and particularly regarding celebrities. It is perhaps the most respected of all the rights afforded by the Constitution. There are states that have statutes that try to limit the paparazzi ability to do what they do. I have not heard of any legal case that has challenged these laws, but it is likely such statutes would be struck down unless they were very narrow. Legally, it is fairly easy to distinguish between a stalker and a paparazzi. One is an individual with a irrational desire to impose himself or herself on another. The other is trying to take photos to sell and make money. And, as we all know, in America, as long as you're trying to make money, you're good. \n\nSource: Lawyer. ",
"By and large, stalking isn't actually a crime. It's only when someone's behaviour would reasonably make you fear for your safety that it's a crime. Since it's well understood that paparazzi are just trying to get their \"scoop\", they don't meet the criteria of \"reasonably making you fear for your safety\".",
"I don't know how much of this is legal, but the people who get hassled by paparazzi also need those paparazzi, its mutualism even if the are don't like each other."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2261A"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.geekwire.com/2012/seattles-creepy-cameraman-pushes-limits-public-surveillance/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
20cfzy
|
why is it difficult for a camera to produce an image in poor lighting that i can see very clearly?
|
I've done a mild bit of research and in general, even many higher end camera's (DSLR etc.) have great difficulty producing vivid, non-grainy images in lighting that I can see just fine. Am I just looking at the wrong camera's or is this a general issue with a majority if not all camera's? I understand the quality can differ greatly from camera to camera but in general even "high end" cameras struggle in dimly light scenarios.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20cfzy/eli5_why_is_it_difficult_for_a_camera_to_produce/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg1va9s",
"cg1vg3w",
"cg1w5g9"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Your brain can both remember details of what it saw with better lighting (and add them to what you \"see\" now) and can collect information over a long period of time to make an image (your eyes transmit images pretty constantly so there's lots of data for the brain to do \"noise reduction\"). Putting the camera on a tripod for a long exposure (or stacking 30 images) helps the camera quite a bit to capture better images in low light (at least for stationary subjects). \n\nThe camera gets a single exposure and you can look at it closely to spot every error. ",
"A camera only captures light for a fraction of a second, while your eyes capture light over a longer period of time. as your eyes take in more light you start to see more and more details of the image.",
"The simplest and most correct answer is that the human retina is vastly more sensitive than camera sensors in low-light conditions. The brain's image processing plays a role as well, but the chief reason is simply that we have not yet come up with a film or digital sensor that is as sensitive as the human eye. \n\nIt's not the lens (the human eye only manages a maximum aperture of about f/2.1 with a fully dilated pupil, which isn't all that special), it's the receptors in the retina that make the difference."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1is3ww
|
how do they get modern military equipment for movies?
|
I know many guns are probably air soft guns, or props, but what about tanks, aircraft, or drones?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1is3ww/eli5_how_do_they_get_modern_military_equipment/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cb7huoo",
"cb7jfra",
"cb7p1md"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There are movie prop companies that purchase military surplus equipment for just this purpose. In some cases they can also get the cooperation of the actual military. If they can't do either one of those, they have their prop department build something that looks close enough to pass or use CGI.",
"A lot of equipment isn't modern by any means, specially tanks. But Hollywood knows that most people either can't tell the difference or don't care about it, as long as its metal made and with tracks that's a tank.",
"My unit at the time was 3d ACR and they actually got orders to Fort Polk LA to film the movie, They brought two tanks and two fully staffed crews, and they got credited in the movie for being a \"Tank Operator\". So they actually reached out to Fort Hood and they sent our unit"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
10zb2e
|
"schroedinger's cat is alive"
|
This link is on the front page right now (_URL_1_), and I frankly can't understand it! Can someone ELI5 it?
Reddit thread: _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10zb2e/eli5_schroedingers_cat_is_alive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6hxham",
"c6hxi0v",
"c6hxlih",
"c6hxoph",
"c6hykby",
"c6hzowo",
"c6i0fk9",
"c6i0lht",
"c6i3jx2"
],
"score": [
33,
2,
389,
18,
3,
7,
3,
31,
2
],
"text": [
"I probably won't be able to do that great a job, but this super simple explanation might help. \n\nBasically before this they had a cat that was both dead and alive because the cat could have been killed at any unpredictable time. If they looked at the cat they would have killed it, even though if they didn't look at it the cat *may* have stayed alive. \n\nNow they are able to take a quick peek at the cat without the cat (or any variables in the box) knowing they're taking a peek. They take a peek and the cat has stayed alive. I can't tell you why the cat has stayed alive, something about decaying radioactive atoms but hey, I'm only 14 - an actual physicist can tell you that.\n\nEdit : read the article, understand it better, ok here you go. \n\nWhen I said \"taking a peek at the cat\", what they're doing is taking a very weak measurement of the property, which in the article was a quantum bit of data which changes between being a 1 and a 0. They could observe the qubit changing, and using a new machine were able to 'nudge' the qubit back into the position it was in when it started to become unstable. Does that help any more? ",
"ALSO ELI5: Quantum superposition - it has to do with the whole subject",
"Humanity has observed the world and made many conclusions about how things work. There are fundamental rules and laws of nature. Like gravity and mass and velocity. \n\nWell, some people realized that the smaller things are, the more our fundamental rules fall apart. On the quantum level, and that is really tiny, things work a little different than we are used too.\n\n Look at a light switch, like the one in your room. At any moment in time, that light switch is in one of two possible states: off or on. \n\nNow let's bring that light switch down to the quantum level. Well, first, it's now really very small and we cannot actually see it. But, we can move stuff around and kinda figure out what state the light switch is in. \n\nAnd this is where it gets confusing, because the light switch is behaving as if it is actually a combination of both off and on, not only one if them like we are used too. \n\nAnd that doesn't make sense, so it's time to break out a super magnifying glass and take a look to see if that light switch is actually on or off. And after repeating these experiments and observing many tiny lightswitchs, scientists figured out that merely observing the quantum particles has an affect on them, effectively forcing the state to be one or the other instead of a combination of both. \n\nThis guys research is about observing quantum particles and then offsetting the effects of the observation. It allows researchers to look at a light switch on the quantum level without the act of observation changing the behavior of the light switch \n\nIf it's legit its a step towards quantum computing. \n\nEdit: instead of a cat in box being alive or dead, I used a switch on a wall being on or off.",
"[This simple wiki article](_URL_0_) helped me understand a little better. FYI, I usually go to wiki and if it's still too complicated I'll just add \"simple.\" in front of wikipedia and it will take you the same page but in much simpler terms like this.",
"Quantum states are explanations for contradictions that have been measured, usually involving very small particles that behave very randomly and kinda shizophrenic. Light for example spreads like waves and like particles at the same time, while both behaviours can result in very different patterns that depend on how you observe it: 2 small waves can easily add up to a bigger wave while 2 small particles likely will just bounce off each other. The light example is a lame comparison but simple enough and it makes more sense than a cat unknown to be dead and alife untill you observe if it is one or the other.\n\nA quantum state is a state that is to different states at the same time that would otherwise be exclusive to each other. A bit of any type is either 1 or 0 while a quantum bit can also be both 1 & 0 at the same time.\n\nA quantum state stops being a quantum state as soon as you observe/measure it in a large scale, resulting in only one of the 2 different states of its quantum states and losing the ability to be in the other state without external forces.\n\nThe article says that you can measure a quantum state in a carefull enoug way on a small scale that does not set it to 1 or 0 forever, but that keeps reading both results, not destroying its quantum state.",
"I won't bother restating the Schroedinger's Cat thought experiment because I'm sure you've all heard it before. But the point is this: nobody believes that a cat can really be in a superposition of states. It's a thought experiment designed to show how our understanding of quantum mechanics is incomplete.\n\nWhen quantum effects were first discovered, the leading scientists at the time (Bohr and Heisenberg) came up with the Copenhagen interpretation as the \"standard\" explanation for what's going on. Put simply: at the very small scale, things behave very differently to how we see our everyday world, and a particle can be in multiple states at the same time (superposition). When you observe it, the particle collapses down into a particular state. The act of observing it affects the outcome.\n\nSchroedinger devised the Schroedinger's Cat thought experiment to show that this interpretation is incomplete, because it doesn't define what an \"observer\" is. Is it the Geiger counter (that triggers the gas to be released)? Is it the cat inside the box? Or is it the human, when the box is opened? Unless this is properly answered, the Copenhagen interpretation is incomplete (and it seems like it still hasn't been adequately answered).\n\nSchroedinger described this thought experiment as a \"quite ridiculous case\" to show the flaws in the theory. But unfortunately it's become quite famous and lots of people seem to think that it actually describes how quantum theory behaves.",
"Much of the complication in quantum mechanics comes from this idea of destroying the superposition. It's fairly simple to accept that, to entities external to the box, there's no way of knowing if the cat is alive or dead. If there's no way of knowing, you *cannot* make any assumptions, so both possibilities are true. Often, people ask \"Yeah, but there's an underlying answer surely? We don't know it, but it's there.\" This is a valid question. Was the cat either alive or dead (and not both) the entire time, or did we kill the cat, for example, by looking at it? Obviously, looking at a cat won't kill it (unless your Scott Summers), but perhaps the question of whether or not it was dead doesn't mean anything before we look.\n\nI suppose you could think of it in the same way as \"What's north of the North Pole?\" or \"Where does a circle begin?\", both of which also have no meaning. The cat has an answer the whole time. It knows if it's alive or dead. But this also brings up questions. Is the cat's answer to the question \"Am I alive or dead?\" the 'true' answer to all observers? No. Different points of view have different answers. Just like in other theories in physics, and the real world. Ask a kid what the best TV programme is. He probably won't say Breaking Bad or The Sopranos. But an adult might say one of those. Is there a 'true' answer? Of course, this is hugely simplified and doesn't really relate, but it helps to show how objective answers are very rare.\n\nIn reality, this isn't something physicists (or at least physics students) spend much time on. You pretty quickly learn to live with Schrodinger's cat and it's implications. All these guys have done is take a little look, and then reset the system, so to speak.",
"So you're playing \"red light\" with your friends, the game where you turn your back to your friends, count to 7, and in that time your friends try to walk towards you. You say \"RED LIGHT!\" and turn around, and your friends have to stop without you seeing them move. If you see them move, they're out!\n\nSo basically until you turn around and observe (interact with) your friends (particles), they could be anywhere: at the start, in the middle, right next to you. But when you look at them, they stop firmly in one place and you know where they are. You turn around again, and they could (once again) be anywhere.\nThen you come up with a brilliant idea! You take a small mirror, and now you can see your friends moving about, but without you turning around, which makes your friends stop in their place! Hah, suckers.\n\nSo basically, these guys found a good, unnoticeable \"mirror\" which shows them what the particles are doing, without scaring them with your big curious eyes.",
"These explanations are not explanatory to a five year old.\n\nELY5: Put an object in front of you and close your eyes. When you open them, it could be there, but it could also not be there. Therefore while your eyes are closed, it is both there and not there."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/10yemu/schr%C3%B6dingers_cat_is_alive_scientists_measure_a/",
"http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22336-quantum-measurements-leave-schrodingers-cat-alive.html"
] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21lr4y
|
if we switched out all of ones organs with bionic organs that do the same thing, would that person be able to live a much longer life than a normal person?
|
(besides the brain)
Let's say we had the technology
I'm not talking by a few years, I'm talking like 50 years longer or so.
Also, all the bionic parts do the same function as the part they are replacing and they don't age or anything.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21lr4y/eli5_if_we_switched_out_all_of_ones_organs_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cge8xrd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That would depend on the quality of your bionic organs, of course. And it would assume it was one of those organs that would have failed in the first place, otherwise it would be pointless. And everything ages. If it didn't it would be trapped in time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
59isk1
|
how do they decide which roads to fix and when? why are roads fixed a different way (black top, total fix)?
|
Was driving on a commercial road that's been pretty awful to drive on for awhile. I thought to myself "I wonder if anyone has reported this road being terrible to drive on". Made me wonder who actually decides what roads to fix and how bad they need to get before they are fixed.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59isk1/eli5_how_do_they_decide_which_roads_to_fix_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d98raq3",
"d98uuha"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Who makes that decision depends on the road. Surface streets are usually managed by the city. Freeways are managed by the state DOT. \n\nRoads, especially ones driven on often by large trucks, experience tremendous wear and repairing them is never cheap, and never permanent. It is a constant race to keep roads drivable and many slip through the cracks. The most wear is in high-traffic areas, and those are the areas that are hardest to repair because blocking traffic during the repairs is extremely disruptive. That's why many are repaired bit by bit, line by line, and it takes a long time but at least traffic can (kind of) flow during repairs. \n\nRoad maintenance is largely funded through gas tax. But there are *many* other things that are funded through gas tax as well. New road projects, public transportation projects, bike lanes, all these things with the goal of *alleviating* high traffic. But people keep moving into the city and cities keep growing, it's nigh impossible to keep up. \n\nThe black top is not necessarily a different material than the road. When asphalt is worn down by cars, heat, radiation from the Sun, and weather, it starts to look more grey and gets more brittle. The asphalt they lay on top of it is fresh so it looks much darker. After a few years, they will look more similar.\n\n",
"Every road has a maintenance schedule. For simplicity, it's usually baed on the amount of traffic using the road. It's more than likely that someone has as their primary job to put up temporary sensors counting all the traffic passing by.\n\nThe statistics are used to predict how often a road needs to be repaved, and it sets the standard the road ought to have.\n\nIf you want to move the argument further on point you also end up asking yourself how traffic will be affected if you close one lane to repave it. If you do a poor job fixing the road, perhaps you only need to close the lane for a day and a night but you will have to do it again in a year, while a proper restoration will close the lane for two weeks and still needs to be fixed after two years.\n(imagine that you can choose to spend a million repaving a road entirely and it will last two years if you do, but the second year you instead do repair patches for a tenth of a million. Patches are of course not as good, so you have to do them again next year, again at the rate of a tenth of a million. In fact, you can patch for five-six years, and then you will have to repave entirely. You will maintain well enough but the road will *look* like crap for six years before it's well and proper repaved.)\n\n\nAll these things weigh together, and the end result is not necessarily the same every time.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1n8rtl
|
why on maps and globes do they show antarctica with ice caps but not the arctic?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n8rtl/why_on_maps_and_globes_do_they_show_antarctica/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccgddgd",
"ccgddmt"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Because Antarctica has land underneath the ice. The Arctic is floating sea ice.",
"Basically, under ice cap of Antarctica there is land, and thus it is counted as a continent. Arctic consists of pure ice, without any land."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3kq91t
|
why is mocking the jewish faith so common in popular entertainment?
|
From shows like south park, Simpsons, family guy, etc that use borderline racist jokes towards Jews , how is this allowed? And why is it so prevalent?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kq91t/eli5_why_is_mocking_the_jewish_faith_so_common_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cuzjtgd",
"cuzk3yb",
"cuzkjjh"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I just wanted to point out that Matt Stone is Jewish and that South Park rips every religion a new asshole, not just Judaism. They also wrote a massively successful musical called \"The Book of Mormon\" which completely destroys a particular religion. Can you guess which one? I'll give you a hint: NOT JUDAISM. ",
"South Park doesn't make fun of Jews. It makes fun of people making fun of Jews. \n\nKeep in mind South Park isn't merely a Comedy, but more importantly a Satire. The purpose of Satire is to make fun of an idea and change minds. For example, South Park makes fun of anti-semites by making Cartman look so stupid, that people don't want to be like him.",
"I have to point out that a lot of this is *self-deprecating* humour written by people who identify (sometimes strongly) as Jewish. It's actually kind of part of Jewish culture. \n\nFor example, a few years back someone in Iran decided to have a holocaust cartoon contest. Seriously, a contest for cartoons mocking the holocaust. \n\n...so people in Israel started their own antisemitic cartoon contest. Because, they figured, *nobody* makes fun of the Jewish people better than *they* do. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2rcl7d
|
if i jump how long must i be above the ground for the earth to noticeably rotate below me.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rcl7d/eli5_if_i_jump_how_long_must_i_be_above_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnelo62",
"cnelocf",
"cnelpls",
"cnem4sy",
"cneqsbq",
"cnetqea",
"cnevwrx"
],
"score": [
111,
8,
2,
2,
6,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You won't notice it for two reasons.\n\n1) You are rotating at the same speed as the earth, so when you jump, you will continue to rotate with the Earth rather than staying still.\n\n2) You are being pushed on by the atmosphere in the direction of rotation, so there is no drag to slow you down once in the air. The air around you rotates at the same speed as the Earth.",
"As I understand it both you and the Earth are moving at the same velocity so there woulndn' t be any effect.",
"Its not a matter of \"how high\" you jump, its a relation to \"How fast are you going in relation to the surface at which you are trying to see move.\"\n\nIf you go 100 miles up, and are locked in geo-synchronous orbit, meaning that you are going relatively the same speed as the spot on the earth you are orbiting, then you will not see a large change in the speed of the mass beneath you.\n\nHowever if you start in a non geo-syncronous orbit, then you will be able to move and see it moving and rotating away from you.\n\nTechnically, if you got in a plane and flew from new york to england, you aressing the earth \"rotate\" below you.",
"On the if we take the length of the equator (40.075km) and divide it through 24 the time needed for it to rotate once. We get a velcitiy of 1670 kilometers per hour.\nIf we convert this into meters per second we get 463.8 m/s. I do not think that you could jump high enough as the gas in the atmosphere rotates with the earth. If there was no atmosphere and there would be no gravity i think a jump of one second would be enough. Yes your location does matter as you make a rotation a day but the closer you get to the poles the less kilometers are part of a full rotation. According to the NASA \"This (your velocity) decreases by the cosine of your latitude so that at a latitude of 45 degrees, cos(45) = .707 and the speed is .707 x 1670 = 1180 kilometers/hr.\"",
"Won't matter. Imagine you are in a train. It doesn't matter how high you jump in the train, the train will never pass by underneath you. Same principle applies with your question. ",
"If you jump while riding in an airplane, do you shoot out the rear of the fuselage at 500 mph? Or do you land in the same spot you jumped?",
"It's easier to discuss if we make it Mars, with little or no atmosphere. If you jump a foot or two, you remain so close to the surface that you continue to move forward with it and land in the same spot. ie both you and the planet's surface have the same horizontal vector. However, if you fire a rocket straight up thousands of feet, it probably will not fall back to the same spot, as the surface of the planet is actually moving in a circular, not straight direction, so the horizontal vector of the rocket will not exactly match the curving vector of the surface of the planet. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1mpxbh
|
why can't we create a suit or apparatus that allows us to fly like birds?
|
I've seen the wingsuits for gliding, and I've seen very tiny airplane-like machines. My question is, do the laws of physics prevent us from creating a "bird suit" that would allow us to flap our "wings" and fly. Perhaps with mechanical assistance for the flapping? ELI5 please?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mpxbh/eli5_why_cant_we_create_a_suit_or_apparatus_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccbhw44",
"ccbhwqc",
"ccbix0v",
"ccbjllw",
"ccbk8ip",
"ccbkoyy",
"ccbmqg6",
"ccbmvbj",
"ccboguz"
],
"score": [
81,
10,
2,
20,
15,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Extremely unlikely. For starters, our bodies are just too heavy. Birds evolved for flight by reducing their mass and streamlining efficiency in their systems. The term 'hollow bones' is a bit of a misnomer (they're not really hollow) but it reflects how much lighter their bones are. Their musculature is also more resilient to fatigue compared to humans, and their lungs are significantly more efficient. As humans, we're just too heavy, and such a frame would require enormous wings that would likely tear itself apart due to the necessity of a light-weight construction. Mechanical flapping would require an energy source, which would only add more weight to the contraption.\n\nPerhaps one day in the future with better construction materials, but I imagine it'd be easier to find alternative means to personal flight than a flying suit.",
" > My question is, do the laws of physics prevent us from creating a \"bird suit\" that would allow us to flap our \"wings\" and fly. Perhaps with mechanical assistance for the flapping? ELI5 please?\n\nWithout mechanical assistance we don't have enough strength to flap ourselves.\n\nIf we had mechanical power it'd be possible, but then that's just an inefficient helicopter.",
"hang gliding is akin to soaring.",
"Everybody is too fucking fat",
"With everyone saying \"too heavy\", I want to add another perspective. Bird wings are an extremely intricate, and every part of the wing has a role in flight, from the bone structure to the feathers. While we understand the basics of how they achieve flight, it is a whole different ball game to model this ourselves. For example, in flight, bird feathers adjust and move with the air flowing over them, making the bird more streamlined. Try to think of a material we could use to match this capability. Also, unlike an aircraft wing, a bird's wing is porous and allows communication with the airflow above and below the wing. It's a pain in the butt to understand, let alone model (and airflow over porosity is what my current research is focused on). While one day we might have enough knowledge one day, right now (afaik), we don't know enough about their flight in order to imitate it.\n\nSource: MS student in aerospace engineering.",
"[We have.](_URL_0_) It just doesn't look much like a bird. For two reasons:\n\nIt needs a large surface area to provide enough lift, because humans are heavy. Small, compact \"wings\" won't cut it. (Basic scaling: If you double the size of a winged animal, its wing surface area and lift goes up by 4x (area = dimension^2 ). However its weight scales as volume, which goes up by a factor of 8x. So the lift-to-weight ratio has dropped.) Think about large birds like the albatross; they always have outsized wings compared to small birds. Scale that up to human weight and we need a huge wing.\n\nAlso it needs to be powered by the legs, not the arms. Birds are adapted to have large pectoral muscles to flap the wings (hence all the chicken breast meat). People are adapted for walking and running, and more of our musculature is in the legs.",
"Its possible for humans suffering from \"avian bone syndrome\" to fly like a bird due to the fact that persons afflicted with the disorder have hollow bones. Its a rare condition that typically affects Caucasian females from Great Britain. ",
"Take a look at the Snowbird human-powered ornithopter. That has a wingspan of 32 meters... kind of ungainly to flap with your own arms.\n\n_URL_0_",
"In addition to the concerns of weight, density, and strength already mentioned, there's an issue of efficiency and practicality.\n\nTake a step back from the sky and think of ground transportation for a minute. Nearly every animal uses some form of legs, and [we can copy that](_URL_0_) just fine. But we still use wheels on 90% of our ground vehicles, because they're more efficient. Walking isn't all that great, but living organisms can't have wheels because the veins and tendons would get all wrapped up. So they walk.\n\nFlying is the same way. We've [just barely managed human-powered flight](_URL_2_) (because of those issues with strength and density). But [mechanical flight in the style of birds](_URL_1_) has been around for quite a while. The reason we don't spend a lot of time tinkering with it is that it's not as efficient as carefully-shaped rigid wings. Unlike wheels, animals *could* have rigid wings, but they'd still need a method of thrust. Bird wings serve double duty to provide that thrust without any rotating parts."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syJq10EQkog"
],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E77j1imdhQ"
],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn5pPy9BX3w",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syJq10EQkog"
]
] |
|
4fadsw
|
why did sparta train their males at the ages of six years old, when other greek states waited at least until late teens?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fadsw/eli5why_did_sparta_train_their_males_at_the_ages/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2781bf",
"d278dvq"
],
"score": [
20,
2
],
"text": [
"The entire society of Sparta was focused on creating the perfect soldier. Spartan men did not have trades, they did not plant crops, they did not really craft anything either. Those things were done by the slaves they took in battle. Spartan training started early because it was what Spartan life was about. You trained and fought until you either died or were physically unable to do so anymore and then as an old man you switched to supervising the younger men and children in their training. ",
"Also things are much easyer to engrain in children same reason u hear off all the kids going missing in war torn countries they are quickly indoctrinated and easy to sway an once grown are loyal to there teachers like a family rather than teens who are head strong an may already have dicided who holds there loyalty and may aslo have formed bad habits/weeknesses. The Japanese also started training children as young as 5 to be woriors \nSorry about the bad english 😑"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
edi4vf
|
why are radio commercials arranged into large blocks instead of being spaced out?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/edi4vf/eli5_why_are_radio_commercials_arranged_into/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fbi0azn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because large radios have more commercials than the smaller/local radios, in my country law is that in one hour you can have 12 minutes of comercials. So, it is stupid split to play one song/one commercial,perhaps is better to play 3 songs and then 3 commercials, or maybe more, in that 12 minutes you can have like 36 commercials who are 20 seconds long. And there you have it, it is all business. I know its bad for listener to listen large block of commercials, but that is radio politics. One radio for example here is playing 12 minutes of commercials in a row and the outro of them is \"now you will have only 48 minutes of music. Great tactic"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
arl8kf
|
why do roosters have whole a different name than chickens?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/arl8kf/eli5_why_do_roosters_have_whole_a_different_name/
|
{
"a_id": [
"egnws0p",
"egnwvji"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"I don't really have a good answer for you other than that's a feature of the English language. Many animals have different words for the males and females. For example: bulls and cows; does and bucks; sow and boar.\n\nA lot of this comes from German which has gender for their nouns and where English derived from.",
"Chicken is the non-gendered name for the species, like \"dog\" or \"human\".\n\nMale chicken is rooster/cockerel/cock.\nFemale chicken is hen.\n\nHen is such a nice short word. Why we don't use it more is beyond me. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
956d59
|
if there is a 'speed limit' to how fast objects can cool down or heat up.
|
I understand lota energy is needed to cool down or heat up something quickly, but is there a limit to how fast that will happen? I hope I'm asking this in a way that makes sense.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/956d59/eli5_if_there_is_a_speed_limit_to_how_fast/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3qcaek",
"e3qcjau",
"e3qcp9t"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Typically, cooling is more of a passive process where warming is an active process. That's why drinking room temperature water or warm water is more efficient on a hot day than drinking cold water. You conserve energy with room temperature water. Your body has to work to warm the cold water up. ",
"Gain/loss of heat can occur through direct contact (conduction), air flow (convection), or radiant heat loss (thermal radiation). Each type of transfer can heat up/cool down at different rates, and they can vary within each type based on ambient heat, air currents for convection (blowing on your hot food), etc. \n\nIn short, there's no hard and fast rule, but it's possible to know enough data to actually calculate the heat transfer rate if you know what type and the other factors.",
"No and yes. \n\nNo because heat transfer is proportional to the temperature gradient from your hot thing to your cold thing and there's no limit to the gradient, just how hot you can make something practically speaking. (remember if you're talking physical contact [conduction] you need something that's already hot). However, when you get down to the molecular level all your energy exchange is still limited by the speed of light interactions between subatomic species. \n\nHowever when you heat something up quickly you will probably encounter a phase change (like gas to plasma) which will change the thermal conductivity etc etc) sorry for being scatterbrained. \n\nTldr: speed of light applies to energy when it is in the form of heat too"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1fkbzn
|
the plot(s) of "silent hill".
|
I've seen someone once posted a similar post on here about the Metal Gear series so I was wondering about the "Silent Hill" series.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1fkbzn/eli5the_plots_of_silent_hill/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cab45b2",
"cab5l25",
"cab5tnr",
"cabaptl"
],
"score": [
2,
23,
111,
2
],
"text": [
"Silent Hill is one of those games that can be interpreted in different ways. I highly suggest watching a play through on Youtube. Not quite as good as getting to play the game, but it'll get you through the story.",
"Well, more or less each game is about facing one's \"dark side\" and all sorts of mental trauma or emotional turmoil. Silent Hill - and the monsters within it - is the manifestation of that \"dark side\" and forces each person to face it rather than run away and keep it suppressed. It's all very symbolic.\n\n** < WARNING SPOILERS OF A 10 YEAR OLD GAME AHEAD: > **\n\nFor example, Silent Hill 2 is about James Sunderland having to face up to the fact that he killed his wife, and his feelings during her hospitalization. Pyramid Head is particularly important, as he represents James' guilt over the event and a will to \"suffer\" for what he did. What he decides to do during the game decides his fate - whether he faces up to what he's done and gets over it, or whether he refuses to change and ends up worse for it.\n\n** < SPOILERS END > **\n\n\nAs for the overarching plot of Silent Hill - the location - there was more or less a monstrous cult who used to run the place and did terrible things in order to appease their lovecraftian god. Their high priestess's daughter - Alessa - was discovered to have humongous psychic powers and so they decided to try and use her to give birth to the physical manifestation of their god. She gets impregnated with the demon baby but apparently burns to death in the process.\n\nShe doesn't die. The cult locks her up in the bottom of a hospital and she spends the next seven years in agony, strapped to a bed with the demon baby stuck inside her as she is unable (unwilling) to give birth to it. This is about where Silent Hill 1 starts.\n\nNot to spoil the game, but to \"help\" the protagonist of 1 along, Alessa uses her massive powers to tear Silent Hill into an alternate world and cover it with fog, and the town gets warped around her personal experiences and trauma. This creates the horrible monster infested hell-world of Silent Hill as we know it.\n\n*(disclaimer: this was all from memory and is probably inaccurate)*",
"_Edit: Spelling and formatting_\n\n**SILENT HILL FOR FIVE YEAR OLDS**\n\nSomewhere in America, there is a lake, and a town right next to it. It's a very beautiful town and people always liked to go there.\n\nAt some point, people noticed that many of the people that came there were bad people who did bad things. There was a lot of killing in the name of made up gods, there were desasters, it was all very bad. And soon the town needed prisons and churches and hospitals for the sick of mind. \n\nBefore the town could be destroyed by all the bad people, religion helped to keep them busy and secret, and they wrote down explanations and stories to make sense of it, and this religion became very powerful and influenced everything that happened in the city.\n\n\n\nAnd still the town on the lake was beautiful, and people started to like to go there again. The town build hotels and motels and grew bigger and bigger!\n\nBut at the same time, the religious people got crazier and crazier. They felt like this town was special, and they tried to explain why it made people bad, and one day they decided that if they could just capture and use that power, they could turn the town into paradise!\n\nBut they were crazy, you see. Just like the religious people many years before that, they thought that the best way to talk to the town was to kill and torture innocent people and offer them to the town as gifts. So they did that a lot. And they tried using drugs to make people look at the town the same way that they did.\n\nOne day, a crazy woman and a doctor made a plan: Instead of killing people, they would make a baby, one that would have the power of the town inside of it! And so they did. But it didn't work. The baby girl seemed to be just a normal baby girl, but when she grew up and went to school, the other children didn't like her very much, and called her a witch, and she never had any friends, and only her mother, the crazy woman, to love her. And the girl did love her mother.\n\n\n\nAnd then something terrible happened. The mother and the doctor were frustrated that the girl wasn't as powerful as they wanted. So they decided to kill her, just like the others, in the hopes that this would please the town. They locked her in a house and set her on fire. And then they let the little girl burn, and she burned and suffered terribly!\n\nBut she didn't die. And nobody understood why. The girl was locked in the house, burned, in pain, suffering, trying to understand what had happened to her, trapped in her world of misery. The crazy woman and the doctor just left her there, and the only company she had was a nurse the doctor had drugged and forced to look after the little girl.\n\nDid I mention yet how crazy that woman was? The first thing she did after trying to kill the girl was to convince the doctor to have yet another baby! Maybe it would work this time! \n\nAnd so they did. But again it didn't work. And then something happened that they didn't intend: The nurse, scared that they would burn the second child also, took the baby away! And she drove away from that town, and left it somewhere for someone, someone normal, to find. Nobody knows what happened to the nurse, but they say the doctor found her, or she came back to him because of the drugs, and he killed her.\nSomeone did find the girl. A young man, whose wife had died, found the little girl and adopted her. \n\n\n\nAnd for seven years, they lived a happy life. And he loved her very much.\n\n\n\nUntil one day, the man decided to take his daughter for a holiday. He put her in the back seat, and they drove to what the man has heard was a beautiful holiday resort. The very town his daughter had come from: Silent Hill.\n\n\n\nThis is where the first game begins.",
"You could always go for the special endings which chalk it up to _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.qkme.me/3pz0np.jpg"
]
] |
|
4nrods
|
what is walmart's "great value" brand, and should we be concerned that it is hurting other, smaller businesses?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nrods/eli5_what_is_walmarts_great_value_brand_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d46b4ck"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Every grocery store has their own generic/store-brand products. This is not unique to Walmart.\n\nIf you're worried about the negative social consequences of Walmart, there's tons of bigger issues than having store brand products. Their low wages forcing workers to get on public assistance, their aggressive pricing forcing out local businesses, the environmental impacts of shipping cheap shit from China, etc. are all bigger than competing against some product of another."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4d8rta
|
the panama papers
|
Please use this thread to ask any questions regarding the recent data leak.
Either use this thread to provide general explanations as direct replies to the thread, or as a forum to pose specific questions and have them answered here.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1oqg2a",
"d1oqg8y",
"d1oqogv",
"d1oqs4c",
"d1oqxdi",
"d1oqzt9",
"d1orcyk",
"d1orkkq",
"d1os9lu",
"d1osnlt",
"d1osr9p",
"d1ot31e",
"d1ot4s2",
"d1ou9ce",
"d1ouw2v",
"d1ovdin",
"d1ovemc",
"d1ovi1f",
"d1ovnwe",
"d1ovv06",
"d1ow88i",
"d1owchu",
"d1owd7d",
"d1owxn5",
"d1ox2dd",
"d1oxlbm",
"d1oxn90",
"d1oxt12",
"d1oy3o8",
"d1oy5xk",
"d1oyc0p",
"d1oydud",
"d1oye65",
"d1oyp6d",
"d1oypkh",
"d1oyrsk",
"d1ozf8m",
"d1ozgbk",
"d1ozmfc",
"d1ozq1o",
"d1ozz0j",
"d1p01qd",
"d1p03ai",
"d1p0aus",
"d1p0d4j",
"d1p0g27",
"d1p10dy",
"d1p16s4",
"d1p17va",
"d1p19iz",
"d1p1myl",
"d1p1p24",
"d1p1sx4",
"d1p298j",
"d1p2xy8",
"d1p3df2",
"d1p3sn7",
"d1p4lem",
"d1p4lln",
"d1p4qcb",
"d1p52xz",
"d1p5825",
"d1p5rj8",
"d1p5y3v",
"d1p5yx9",
"d1p620i",
"d1p67ps",
"d1p6959",
"d1p6a7r",
"d1p6cbd",
"d1p6gsg",
"d1p6iy1",
"d1p6qjp",
"d1p76jw",
"d1p7d9j",
"d1p7hza",
"d1p7ykl",
"d1p8f2v",
"d1p8ffv",
"d1p8o4f",
"d1p8x1c",
"d1p951p",
"d1p9dfk",
"d1p9ldb",
"d1p9p3d",
"d1pa472",
"d1pamfl",
"d1pb5rg",
"d1pb9a1",
"d1pbah3",
"d1pbj6a",
"d1pc6kt",
"d1pckqm"
],
"score": [
6,
17,
65,
544,
4653,
49,
78,
208,
29,
8,
3,
5,
30,
15,
6,
6,
1514,
19,
3,
4,
13,
6,
5,
8537,
4,
13,
4,
6,
8,
34,
3,
2,
4,
3,
5,
2,
5,
12,
2,
35,
3,
269,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
2,
13,
2,
4,
3,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
15,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
5,
3,
3,
3,
4,
23
],
"text": [
"Someone please! I would love to know how leaders other than Iceland are going be held accountable?",
"What's going on with this and why should I be concerned? ",
"I dont understand... What is actually in these 'papers' and where did they come from? Will people be going to prison and will those who leaked it go to prison too?",
"I'm going to be real. I'm not that bright. Every time I hear about articles like this it all goes over my head. I just read \"People made money in a way that we don't think they should have\" and have no idea how it's supposed to effect me. And 99% of the time it doesn't feel like it does. I never notice anything change.\n\nSo can somebody please explain in layman's terms what is going on, why it is bad and what sort of effect it will have that is relevant to a young 18-25 part-time employed male?",
"Credit to /u/turcois for [this comment](_URL_3_)\n\n\nYou can watch the live thread of unfolding news [here](_URL_2_).\n\nIn business, you can avoid taxes by investing in something. If a company makes one million dollars, but spends 500,000 on investing in new technology for their product or something like that, they're only taxed from the remaining 500,000 because that's all of their \"profit.\" (I'm not a businessman so I'm not sure on the complete legality of all the kinds of spending but I think this is a basic summary). This is all normal and fine; all companies require investing in order to grow their company.\n \nSo a company in Panama basically made a business in creating fake businesses. Companies could \"invest\" million of dollars and then it wouldn't be taxed, because according to legal documents it isn't profit, it's an \"investment,\" which is untaxable, and then they would get their money back from the fake business. So imagine if that $500,000 of investments from my above example was fake, and after awhile 90% of the money was given back to the business (I'm assuming the Panamian company took a cut of the money as payment). 2.6 TB of data in total, over 11 million documents and over 200,000 fake companies. According to [the website that published the news of the leak](_URL_0_), they were contacted by an anonymous source with encrypted files with the data sometime in 2015. Here's am exerpt from the article:\n > Over a year ago, an anonymous source contacted the Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) and submitted encrypted internal documents from Mossack Fonseca, a Panamanian law firm that sells anonymous offshore companies around the world. These shell firms enable their owners to cover up their business dealings, no matter how shady.\n \nApparently there's several trillion dollars of money that should've been taxed and wasnt. Not sure if that means trillions that should've been taxed off of, or trillions of dollars of straight tax money, but either way it's a LOT.\n \nMany political leaders (many seem to be in the Middle East), and celebrities are involved as well. To prevent any one person from being blamed for the leak, hundreds of news organizations are going to release further full details tonight (that's what Ive heard, not sure how true it is) but the list apparently has thousands of people/companies on it. There's 11 million documents though, and even though hundreds of journalists have been going through the data for months, there's still information that has yet to come to light.\n\nThis goes much farther than tax evasion, and includes Syrian war crimes, human trafficking, and more. [Here](_URL_1_)'s a video explaining it.\n\n**TL;DR Big names in business, politics, and sports used fake companies to evade trillions of dollars worth in tax money.**",
"The leak showcases the extraordinary means wealthy people will use to avoid taxes. As of right now, I have not heard of any outright criminal activity, but these 2.6 TB of legal documents which span from 1970-2016 have been looked at for less than half a day.\n\nThese documents likely show morally questionable behavior and legally grey activities. There are so many individuals and countries involved, the legality of all the activity needs to be looked at in a case by case way. The offshore accounts were used to hid trillions of dollars from taxes from hundreds of countries. \n\nPapers of this nature had been sold to German papers about a year ago, but where older and had less scope. Many homes and a bank were raided. It resulted in ~20 million euros in fines.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nFrom /r/PanamaPapers\n\n > PanamaPapers is the biggest secret data leak in history. It involves 2,6 TB of data, a total of 11.5 million documents that have been leaked by an anonymous insider. These documents contain all kinds of information from Panama based Mossack Fonseca, a law firm that specializes in the creation of off shore accounts designed to hide wealth in tiny island tax havens. While the phenomenon is not new, this leaked data provides the largest ever glimpse into how the large scale tax evasion business works.\n > \n\n > The Munich based newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung was offered the documents. They quickly realized that their capabilities would not be enough to properly evaluate all the confidential data they had obtained. This then turned into an international research effort, spearheaded by the International Consortium for Investigative Journalism and their partners. An overview of who was involved in the revelations can be found here. (that is, if the website is back up again)\n\n\nand their legality\n\n > Using offshore structures is entirely legal. There are many legitimate reasons for doing so. Business people in countries such as Russia and Ukraine typically put their assets offshore to defend them from “raids” by criminals, and to get around hard currency restrictions. Others use offshore for reasons of inheritance and estate planning. In a speech last year in Singapore, David Cameron said “the corrupt, criminals and money launderers” take advantage of anonymous company structures. The government is trying to do something about this. It wants to set up a central register that will reveal the beneficial owners of offshore companies. From June, UK companies will have to reveal their “significant” owners for the first time.\n\n\n\n_URL_0_",
"[The Guardian](_URL_0_) wrote that \"though there is nothing unlawful about using offshore companies, the files raise fundamental questions about the ethics of such tax havens – and the revelations are likely to provoke urgent calls for reforms of a system that critics say is arcane and open to abuse.\"\n\nIs there really no legal repercussion for the world leaders involved? Isn't tax evasion or, in some cases, money laundering a crime? \n\nWhat are some examples of financial transparency that can be applied to this scenario? What can be done, or is already done, to combat tax evasion and money laundering worldwide?\n\nIs this leak tied to any other current events, like the 1MDB case for instance?",
"Who are the people that are involved for sure ? ",
"Devil's advocate: The fiscal heavens are legal frameworks in the countries where they exist. The rest of us are calling those countries \"fiscal heavens\" because we knew all along that the rich are keeping their money away from the taxman. Is this legal? Probably it may turn out that it is legal as far as the law is concerned, the fiscal heavens were created by the rich with the help of armies of lawyers exactly for this purpose so nobody can say that it's illegal.\nELI5: Is there any accusation other than on moral grounds that can be made on the rich for using offshore companies when doing business ?",
"Why has the top post been lowered from 16k to under half? It's been bleeding up votes ",
"Okay so what does all of it even mean? It's not like we can arrest Putin or the PM of Iceland for this. Everyone is talking about what the papers say, but nobody is saying what effect this info coming out will have. \n\nAnd what reason would the leader of a government have to do this? \n\nPeople are saying its gigantic, but I can't imagine there being much we can even do about 99 percent of this. ",
"So considering this is a leak, is it technically illegal for a US citizen to download the files to read through?\n\nI'm assuming yes.",
"1) Why wouldn't the anonymous person have leaked it via wikileaks?\n\n2) Are the offshore firms the variable that keeps the economy stable(compounded interest problem)?\n\n3) So this is only the 3rd largest offshore account firm, what possible refuge will account holders and their offshore firm do to cover up their tracks?",
"In a lot of gangster detective movies there's a pivotal scene where they find the criminal's ledger. It's usually a black book that contains all the criminal's business deals. The bad guy needs it to keep track of their own money, but it contains revealing information about why they're a bad guy, so they keep the ledger secret.\n\n\n\nThis is sort of like discovering that ledger (it was stored on a computer and an anonymous source released it). However, the ledger is owned by a fake company, and the business deals described in it suggest that the many wealthy, powerful customers are also criminals.",
"What kind of impact (if any) will this information have on the upcoming primary elections in the US? Will this be a topic of debate for the general election in the coming months?",
"From what I can see it sounds like a massive tax evasion effort by a lot of mega-rich people",
"Ok let me give this ELI5 a shot.\n\nYou guys know income taxes, right? Okay, so companies also have to pay them, but **business expenses are tax-deductible, which means that if companies spend the money they made they don't have to pay the taxes on those moneys.**\n\nStay with me.\n\nSuppose you're a newly rich guy in a capitalist nation and your company has made $300m in profits. You owe about ~35% in income tax, or $105m. I know right? That's a lot of money.\n\nNow let's assume that you're a good guy and aren't inherently evil or anything. You go to a cocktail party with some also-very-rich friends (because, you know, that's what rich people do, they flock together)\nand you're talking to the \"cool kids\", trying to mingle and stuff, and you complain that you have to pay this mind-boggling huge amount of money to the gov't and how *\"that sucks, right guys?\"*.\n\n**Instantly they laugh at you and go like: \"You silly, you must be new here. You're not really thinking on paying all those taxes right?** All you gotta do is spend most of that money so that your profits are close to $0, and you have to pay no income tax, *duuh*!\"\n\nNow, you can't buy things for yourself with your company's money prior to income-taxation (that's against the law) and you don't even want to spend it all at once, so you *just transfer them to another fake company in Panama and label that as \"expenses\" in your company's income tax papers.* Yes. **~~The same one your friends use.~~ Incorporated by the same law firm your friends use.**^((Mossack Fonseca)^)\n\nIf you transfer $295m to Panama Co. and declare a $5m profit, you pay only ~$1.8m in taxes, about 1% of the amount you really owe the gov't. And no one has to know that company belongs to you as well.\n\nAnd voilà, with a simple combination of group-pressure and *\"well-if-everyone's-doing-it-since-forever-and-nothing-has-ever-gone-wrong\"* thinking you've dodged the law and effectively stole millions from the gov't and the peoples. Except that, well... things don't always repeat the past, and now they have gone **terribly wrong**. Oh shit.\n\nAlright. But it doesn't stop here. These offshore companies in Panama aren't obliged to disclose information about the owners, sources and use of the proceeds they incorporate.\n\nAnd so, they can also be used to hide money earned from/used in criminal activities such as financing terror groups and ~~prostitution~~ forced prostitution/people trafficking and pedophiles and all sorts of disturbing inhumane things.\n\nHope I made a decent job explaining :) \n\n\n**EDIT:** Thank you very much for the kind words! I will need help from fellow redditors to answer all the great questions you've made. Also, made a couple minute technical changes to the text, so it's more accurate.",
"A question re: media coverage. \n\nWhen this news came out earlier today, all mainstream media companies had it on their front pages, including BBC and Bloomberg. \n\nThe same cannot be said for a similar controversy, the [unaoil leak](_URL_0_) a few days ago. \n\nI'm surprised that the unaoil story is still isn't news on mainstream. Why? ",
"Why do people keep mentioning Iceland's role in this? \n\nI'm not sure how to word this- if the money was hidden to evade taxes, will those people/companies have to pay money taxes for those hidden profits now? \n\nHow did they get the money back after \"investing\" it? ",
"Rich and powerful people don't like to pay taxes. \n\nThey use \"shell\" companies in remote, usually island, nations with poor financial enforcement to hide assests they control from authorities (or their own government and the public) in their home countries. \n\nEveryone knows this happens, but no one want's to stop it, because the rich people that control the police are the same. \n\nSomeone leaked a bunch of legal documents showing who really owns all those hidden assets. Regular people who actually pay their taxes are pissed. Some politicians might lose their jobs, like the prime minister of Iceland. Most won't, because everyone already knows this happens, and most of them also control the police and/or army. ",
"I asked this in the /r/worldnews thread but it got stuck at the bottom. \n\nHow will this interact with the leak last week of the Unaoil information? Will these two leaks being so close together mean anything? Will this overshadow that? Do they have anything in common? ",
"It basically confirms what the public always suspected was going on, similar to how people said \"the government's always watching\" before the Snowden leaks happened.\n\nWhat's this leak about? The overlying theme of the wealthy (individuals and corporations) storing money overseas to avoid taxes on it. As above, the public has always kind of \"known\" but didn't have concrete evidence. By the looks of it, we do now. Funny thing is, I actually learned about this when I was a kid, through the Simpsons: _URL_0_",
"I wonder if the name(s) of any current presidential hopefuls is on that list?",
"When you get a quarter you put it in the piggy bank. The piggy bank is on a shelf in your closet. Your mom knows this and she checks on it every once in a while, so she knows when you put more money in or spend it. \n\nNow one day, you might decide \"I don't want mom to look at my money.\" So you go over to Johnny's house with an extra piggy bank that you're going to keep in his room. You write your name on it and put it in his closet. Johnny's mom is always very busy, so she never has time to check on his piggy bank. So you can keep yours there and it will stay a secret.\n\nNow all the kids in the neighborhood think this is a good idea, and everyone goes to Johnny's house with extra piggy banks. Now Johnny's closet is full of piggy banks from everyone in the neighborhood.\n\nOne day, Johnny's mom comes home and sees all the piggy banks. She gets very mad and calls everyone's parents to let them know.\n\nNow not everyone did this for a bad reason. Eric's older brother always steals from his piggy bank, so he just wanted a better hiding spot. Timmy wanted to save up to buy his mom a birthday present without her knowing. Sammy just did it because he thought it was fun. But many kids did do it for a bad reason. Jacob was stealing people's lunch money and didn't want his parents to figure it out. Michael was stealing money from his mom's purse. Fat Bobby's parents put him on a diet, and didn't want them to figure out when he was buying candy.\n\nNow in real life, many very important people were just caught hiding their piggy banks at Johnny's house in Panama. Today their moms all found out. Pretty soon, we'll know more about which of these important people were doing it for bad reasons and which were doing it for good reasons. But almost everyone is in trouble regardless, because it's against the rules to keep secrets no matter what.",
"Basically all of these companies that already rake in Billions a year found a way to avoid taxes completely. Meanwhile you, someone struggling to make ends meet, is taxed out the ass.",
"[The NPR podcast Planet Money did a great story on setting up a shell company a few years back.](_URL_0_) They have also recently added updates to the story.",
"/u/teaearlgraycold doesn't this post violate one of the sub's rules? I posted something similar and got booted b/c it \"violated\" a rule. ",
"I'm not sure if this has been asked yet, but is there \"another side\" to all of this? A way that the bad guys don't look so bad? I'm just looking for another perspective, even if it's a little crazy, so long as it can be fairly solidly backed up.",
"Why the hell are the mega wealthy so hell bent on amassing ungodly wealth above and beyond their already disgusting hoard of riches?\n\nIf I'm already a multi-billionaire, what benefit is it to me in any way to attain another billion through tax evasion? I couldn't possibly spend a fraction of it in several life times. This mentality doesn't make sense.\n\nThe only thing I can think of is there's really nothing left in their lives to accomplish because nothing is unattainable, therefore, just pile it on even more.",
"So which candidate's off shore funds get found first? Hillary or Trump?",
"Why is the USA not mentioned in this, what types of realistic outcomes can happen because of this, and is anyone going to get in trouble, are my questions. Thanks!",
"Will these people be brought to justice?",
"Is Panama part of the Caribbean Banking Centers? If they are it makes this make a little more clear [MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES](_URL_0_)",
"If offshore accounts are entirely legal, then what's the fuss? Is it simply that Mossack Fonseca's systems are not secure, because that's weak tea.",
"ELI5:\n\nSome very wealthy and famous people got caught cheating on their taxes, and in two weeks, it will be completely forgotten and things will move on as usual.",
"I just want to bring to light that none of the major news outlets are covering this story. ",
"I feel like everybody knew this type of behavior was happening long before the papers were released. How will the Panama papers change anything? Will they even change anything?",
"does this affect Panama? ",
"How is a company like Mossack Fonseca even allowed to exist?",
"One important thing that I haven't read so far is this ....thousands of companies that actually do this legally. Here's how:\n\n1. Setup a Panamanian company. Many specialized law firms in Western countries will help you do this for about 10k.\n\n2. Have your home company bought out or transfer ownership to the new company. \n\n3. Operate as you have before. Taxes on income are payable to Panama. Not in say Canada. Think about it? Why would you owe taxes on income earned on a foreign country. From the IRS and CRA perspective all very legal. Morally ambiguious? Yes, but you need to decide if you'd rather pay taxes or keep more money. \n\nMany wealthy Canadians have done this. Former PM Paul Martin runs his business out of Panama. The Mcain and Irving brothers all offshore. I'm of the opinion that you should point the first get at tax authorities before blaming the individual.\n\nI can expand at length on this topic and how similar process like this work. But typing on a phone is a pain.",
"Why should the average person care about this though? Sure, from a journalism and fascination factor, it's a find of the century. But on the other hand, it's not like having this information benefits us in any way, other than being able to go \"Ha! I knew there were rich corrupt people out there!\", which anyone with a lick of common sense knew anyways.",
"My ELI5:\n\nMessi: hey gov, I can't pay 10 mil in taxes man.\n\nGov: why? \n\nMessi: I'm investing in this company so most of my income is spent already. I have barely any left.\n\nGov: oh, that's cool Bro. I understand. Just pay 10,000 and we're good.\n\nMessi: aw sweet! Thanks!\n\nThe next day, messi goes to the company he is investing. Turns out that company is phony and messi never invested in anything. They were just holding messi's money for him while he shows the government his seemingly empty wallet. Messi gets his millions of dollars back while only paying 10,000 in taxes when he should've paid 10 mil.\n\nDid I nail it? \n\n",
"\n\nAskers | Questions | Answerers\n---|---|----\n- |[What are the Panama Papers about?] (_URL_4_) | /u/TheMy5teryMan; He gives credit to /u/turcois\n/u/itroitnyah | [How should this affect the average Joe?](_URL_0_) | /u/jloome \n/u/mrllamas_ | [Where did they come from?](_URL_5_) | /u/nighthound1\n/u/snorkl-the-dolphine |[Why is this becoming public knowledge now if this was leaked a year ago?](_URL_2_)| /u/nighthound1 \n/u/K-eleven |[Who are the people that are involved for sure?](_URL_1_)| /u/nighthound1 \n\n/u/lucaspon did a pretty good job over [here](_URL_3_). ",
"A lot of people in this thread are explaining how tax invasion affects the average Joe, but could somebody explain the cover up like the sex trafficking and funding Syria's Air Force? Does this mean that these businessmen are investing money is shady things like this? ",
"Can anyone explain why the primary thread that was started about the papers, which originally had 15,000 up votes, now only has 9,000?",
"This all explains a lot to me. I've been saying for years now, \"Where the hell is all of this money that everyone says we have?\"\n\nIt is \"being invested\" into \"businesses\".",
"Below is an excerpt from my book \"Foliage\", which I thoroughly researched. But many of the facts came from the 1993 book that was mostly ignored at the time, \"The Outlaw Bank: A Wild Ride into the Secret Heart of BCCI,\" Jonathan Beaty.\n\n\"In the United States, the size of the underground economy in the 1980s was estimated to be $350 billion to $500 billion a year, equivalent to more than 10 percent of the U.S. gross national product. That represented $100 billion or more in lost tax revenue for the U.S. government. Economists at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund estimated that a similar 10 percent of the Western European economy and 70 percent to 80 percent of the economies of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were “black.” Most of the money was completely untraceable. \nTo illustrate how completely off in the stratosphere and beyond the purview of anyone all of this activity is, one need only consult the Balance of Payments tables. These tables track global deficits and surpluses—a minus in the U.S. balance sheet is matched by a plus in the Japanese ledger, and so forth. By definition, the world must be in balance with itself. Yet from being approximately in balance in the early 1970s, an inexplicable black hole deficit of $20 billion had developed by 1978, and in 1982 the deficit hit $110 billion...\n",
"So how much damage will it cause the Hillary and Trump campaign's if they show up in the list?",
"The Panama Papers today is the biggest leak in history. Why should we care how the rich spend their billions? Because this is not legal tax minimisation (like negative gearing on your investment property), it's systematic and illegal tax evasion. \n\nInstead of paying tax on profits, corporations, politicians, athletes and dictators paid a law firm in Panama to create fake companies in their names, they then created fake transactions back and forth. The tax man saw these transactions and it looks legit, like transactions flowing back and forth between them. Meanwhile several trillion dollars has avoided being taxed and hidden away. \n\nApple, Google and Ikea avoiding paying tax in the countries they operate in is very slimy, but at least those companies exist and contribute jobs to the countries they operate in (so you can pay tax of course). Lionel Messi and Vladimir Putins fake companies contribute nothing except sheltering their money from being taxed. \n\nI'd say prep the gallows but few mentioned will ever be charged let alone see the inside of a jail cell. Except for maybe the Icelandic PM, that country jailed 27 banker's after the financial crisis. \n\nHowever this kind of leak could be massive. It could certainly play a part in the upcoming American and Australian elections.",
"What does 'shell company' mean?",
"Can we already see the full list of people involved in this?",
"throwaway account\n\nPanamanian Lawyer here,\n\nI've noticed that the trend seems to be to think that what these people did was wrong. Indeed if they used it to hide from the law of their countries the should be liable, but I would like to explain why these types of companies exist.\n\nFirst, I do not know about the tax regime of the other countries mentioned in the papers, but in Panama you do not pay taxes for any activity that does not take effect in Panama. Simply put, if you are a Panamanian and sale a condo in Miami, that would not be taxable under Panamanian Law.\n\nThis is especially useful if say you are a company that wants to open a Latin American branch but do not want to open an office in every country. You could have you HQ for Latin America in Panama, and pay only taxes for those sales within Panama, even i you sold millions abroad. \n\nThese companies can even be used to pay taxes. Say I am living abroad, but I want to pay social security so I can get my retirment money from the Panamanian government, I can set up a company, give myself a monthly income and have them take the SS money. That will allow me to have acces to my retirement money.\n\nNow, since this are private companies, they do not have to publish anything. \n\nOne point that people seem to confuse a lot is thinking that setting up a company is easy. Planet MOney just had a re-run of a couple of episodes on shell companies. Setting a company up in Dellware is actually easier than in most of the countries mentioned in the papers.\n\n\nAs a personal comment, I do not feel that paying taxes to a country I do not reside in is fair or logical. That is why the Panamanian system is designed in a way you only pay if the business takes place in Panama, i.e. you used Panamanian roads or facilities to make money.\n\nAt any rate, I hope this helps explain the situation a little better.\n\n\n",
"CNN Live doesnt even have this as a top story lol.\n\n\nI also laugh at Redditors who in large part pay no federal income tax being up in arms over other people not paying enough. ",
"I have a feeling this will just get swept under the rug. Didn't the US banks cause the housing collapse in 2007 and get away scott free? Didn't that affect the world economy when trillions of dollars vanished?",
"The real joke is gonna be: \nThese same people appointing one of them self to \"investigate\" deeper...\n(No one laughing) ",
"At the end of the day nothing is gonna happen. It'll be business as usual for all the rich crooks that control us. They are our owners. The system was designed to screw us. Its a small network of global crooks. They are all in it together. ",
"How and why do firms allow themselves to store terabytes of data documenting every illegal activity they took part of? \n\nApart from the financial statements and stuff that is necessary to launder all the money and evade taxes, how in the hell are there 2.6 terabytes of data? Millions of documents? How can that possibly serve any purpose other than evidence against you, especially if it goes so far back?\n\n",
"How can we trust that the panama monies are even real? \n\nIt's all digital. In hidden accounts. How are we sure that there are no zeros added to bank statements?",
"How does it escalate from tax evasion to 'funding a civil war' and 'engaging in child prostitution'? I understand how rich people hide their money using offshore companies in tax havens but the video on the Panama Papers website makes it seem like they were involved in funding the Syrian civil war or having sex with underaged sex workers.\n\nWhat are some legitimate uses of an offshore company? Are monetary transactions between companies that take place in (or under; not sure about the terminology) a tax haven for the sake of reduced tax considered tax evasion as well?",
"Why, when I go to CNN, is this story not one of the ~70 stories on their front page?",
"Here's a question, why did the original post disappear from the first page of r/all already? It had more than 15,000 in score when I first saw it, yet now it's only close to 8,000 - Even though the post has \"*93% upvoted\"*.\n\nDoesn't make sense.",
"There once was a boy named Peter.\n\nPeters parents were insistent that because they paid for food, housing, cable, the cell phone bill, clothing, etc. (This includes the money given to Peter and his siblings to buy lunch, or to add to their already existing money so they could afford a new laptop for example, which without their parents money they would have no chance at affording). That all peters siblings must pay a percent based on their annual total income. \n\nThis annual fee was in reparation to Peters parents for the invaluable help the children received throughout the year, because without their parents assistance, Peter and his siblings would have no cell phone to list on their job applications, nor would they have Internet to establish an email address. This was all made possible by their parents. \n\nA number of peters siblings believed that an email and cell phone plan were human rights and that the Internet was merely a magical system that existed without a rhyme or reason. When really, even just the daily upkeep costs were more then one sibling could imagine let alone afford to pay for. \n\nThese siblings found that if they shoved half their money in their matters they would pay less and therefore get the same resources for less then they would if all the money was put in to the account their parents set up for them. \n\nWell because Peter and his parents aren't stupid and they can clearly see they are being fucked, they checked everyone's mattresses and found the hidden money. \n\nNow not only are the coveting siblings in trouble with the parents, Peter and those who haven't been hiding their money are also pissed because they ultimately pick up the slack their greedy bastard siblings left for them. \n\nPeters siblings are assholes. ",
"A Man, A Canal, A Papers, Panama.\n\nDoes that do it?",
"Can someone ELI5 who currently has access to these documents?\n\nI see a list of affiliated organizations at _URL_0_\n\nthat includes lots of different papers/stations/sites from many countries, do they all have access now? Columbia University seems to be one of the affiliates, can someone there say whether it's just a few researchers there who has access, or the whole journalism school, etc?\n\nAlso, has anyone seen anything related to Japan in the leaks thus far?",
"Can someone eli5 to me that why this leak is bigger than the leak from last week (_URL_0_) and why none of the Newswebsites are reporting the leak from last week? \n\nI know Kellog is involved in the scandal of last week and they are one of the funders of the leak from today..\n\n",
"Quick question: \nSay I make a 300 million profit, write off 295 as a business expense to my firm in Panama and therefore only pay taxes on the 5 million remaining. How the heck would I get my hand on the 295 stacked away in some firm in Panama? Sure i'd avoid taxes, but what does it bring me, or my company, if i can't use the money? ",
"What I'm most interested in is how didn't the word get out that those journalists had such an enormous data received and were working on it.",
"Why haven't any Americans been implicated yet, because I find it impossible that no American had any part in this.",
"Just googled \"cnn panama papers\" got one hit, posted 34 min ago, written from the perspective of the political elite denying any wrong doing. \n",
"Where are USA and Israel?",
"When you get a quarter you put it in the piggy bank. The piggy bank is on a shelf in your closet. Your mom knows this and she checks on it every once in a while, so she knows when you put more money in or spend it.\nNow one day, you might decide \"I don't want mom to look at my money.\" So you go over to Johnny's house with an extra piggy bank that you're going to keep in his room. You write your name on it and put it in his closet. Johnny's mom is always very busy, so she never has time to check on his piggy bank. So you can keep yours there and it will stay a secret.\nNow all the kids in the neighborhood think this is a good idea, and everyone goes to Johnny's house with extra piggy banks. Now Johnny's closet is full of piggy banks from everyone in the neighborhood.\nOne day, Johnny's mom comes home and sees all the piggy banks. She gets very mad and calls everyone's parents to let them know.\nNow not everyone did this for a bad reason. Eric's older brother always steals from his piggy bank, so he just wanted a better hiding spot. Timmy wanted to save up to buy his mom a birthday present without her knowing. Sammy just did it because he thought it was fun. But many kids did do it for a bad reason. Jacob was stealing people's lunch money and didn't want his parents to figure it out. Michael was stealing money from his mom's purse. Fat Bobby's parents put him on a diet, and didn't want them to figure out when he was buying candy.\nNow in real life, many very important people were just caught hiding their piggy banks at Johnny's house in Panama. Today their moms all found out. Pretty soon, we'll know more about which of these important people were doing it for bad reasons and which were doing it for good reasons. But almost everyone is in trouble regardless, because it's against the rules to keep secrets no matter what.",
"_URL_0_ I was going to post this exact thread yesterday then found this. I thought it explained it pretty well.",
"How do people leak 2 Petabytes of data?",
"ELI5: Why are many people suddenly anti-privacy after the Panamapapers? The same people who supported Apple in not leaking terrorists' data.\n\nWhat is the main differences between the two cases?",
"Maybe nothing will happen just like when the bank's black mailed the gov into the bailout. It was dramatic but it happened but basically the banks got away scot-free. ",
"Is the full list of people involved out yet ? I keep reading \"it is coming\" and \" they are still looking through it\".\nDidn't they get the papers for over a year now ?",
"How the hell does something that big just get leaked? Who the hell managed to get that information? I mean if MF is dealing with important people shouldn't they have better security?",
"Your ELI5 explanation is Nothing will come of this. Everyone implicated will lie their way out of it or buy their way out of it. Most of them have the authorities in their pocket already.",
"Do these papers and what they reveal have any relation to the recent corruption shown throughout the oil industry? If not, could it be possible they're throwing the public off and throwing others under the bus by being responsible for The Panama Papers? ",
"ELI5: from my understanding, for example, Saudi Arabia King does not care about tax evasion from Saudi's authorities, why is he hiding his wealth? from whom? why he wants to tax evasion in the first place?\n\nsame goes for Emirates.",
"This would be the best opportunity to establish a worldwide government so companies cannot just go to some 3rd world place to avoid taxation or oversight.\n\nWe have the UN, why not give it some legitimate power??\n\nSeparate government from business and religion, and include all the countries. Then oversight can exist throughout all jurisdictions. Create the system to avoid corruption - term limits on ALL positions. No lobbying.\n\nSucks that this is a dream, when it really shouldn't be. The internet has made it essential for this kind of change. ",
"Anyone know much about a Craig Murray?\n\n\nHe reported yesterday that the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists is funded and organised entirely by USA' Center for Public Integrity. \n\nFunders include : Rockerfeller Family Fund, Ford Foundation, W K Kellogg Foundation etc. thus advising us not to expect a genuine exposure of dirty secrets among Western Corporations.\n\nHe reported to expect hits at Russia, Iran Syria and then some 'balancing' countries like Iceland in the west.\n\n_URL_0_",
"In light of this new information, could US Citizens on the list of people now be audited and be forced to pay those back taxes?\n\nAlso has anyone parsed out a list of people that we can look through? If so, has twitter blown up with people contacting these famous people and reminding them to pay their taxes? :)",
"Can someone please ELI5 how these people actually spend their money?\n\nAssume I've hidden away $100 million though a shell company. I now want a mansion and a yacht. What do I do?\n",
"Quick show of hands, who is surprised? ",
"To add to this, certain offshore places operate with 0% tax for businesses. So you can register a business in these locations, and send all your profits there from worldwide trade, and pay 0% tax on the profits. However, when the directors or shareholders withdraw that money - then they must pay personal tax in the country they are resident. There are strict laws that have been put in place to prevent people flitting between countries to make use of lower tax rates.\n\nThis works in several ways, the government of these locations loses out on the Tax, but as a result it attracts many businesses and a lot of wealth to the country, which results in low unemployment and a stable economy. It is not immoral, or illegal or dubious, it is a valid economocal plan for a country, shall we say, with limited natural resources.\n\nThere are many laws in place to ensure things are fair, such as at least 50% of the Directors need to reside in the country. This gives rise to other companies, which provide corporate services - they will register companies for people, and provide the quota of resident directors, to enable people outside of the country to taske advantage of the advantageous tax laws.\n\nSource: I ran a company in one of these places (Because I lived there, not because I was avoiding tax).\n\n",
"And a quick note...despite not actually producing oil, or being an actual state, FIFA also has folks caught up in this.\n\nHow corrupt must FIFA be, to be in on an *oil* scam?!?",
"Is Wolf Cola by chance a shell company linked to this data leak?",
"I used to work for a small bank in the Netherlands which was 100% owned by a major Russian bank. Whilst I was there I was responsible for the SWIFT routing system amongst others which is the worlds primary bank transaction network.\n\nWhile we I was there I learned about how you could send money to ships, but that some were money laundering centers and were flagged if any such destinations appeared in a transaction. There were certain countries that were no go areas. North Korea obviously but interesting at the time was Panama. I learned it made Switzerland look like an amateur for hiding money.\n\nOne of the main things the bank did was act as a go between for rich investors who wanted to make money on loans for logging projects in Chile and all sorts of things. I had one guy who always had issues and would call me directly for assistance setting up huge transactions. He was a Russian based in NY. Lots of the investors unsurprisingly were Russian.\n\nI learned a lot working there, and reading as this stuff came in my experiences working there helped me understand a bit how this might technically occur.\n\nI also read one report this morning where the bank I worked for has been named for investigation. I'm not really surprised.",
"In how many countries is this actually a crime, rather than a \"grey zone\"?\n\nThese are very rich and influential/powerful people. How can we bring this to justice? Can we expect that these people will be prosecuted, or is that too naive? Or, will they just settle for a few millions (which is peanuts) and then just keep doing what they've been doing?",
"How someone leak these kind of stuff? Where does he sends the data? Of I have secrets that I want to leak how can I do it anonymously?",
"Is there going to be any accountability? I understand in many cases it may have been done legally and thus there technically can't be any criminal charges for tax evasion, but I just have a hard time believing *nobody* would take any initiative to prevent the richest 1% from continuing to do this.",
"I animated /u/Jaredlong's ELI5 from the original thread: \n\nVideo: [EDIT: video is down for some reason]\n\nGif: _URL_0_\n\nOriginal Comment:\n\n > Taxes sure do suck, right? Imagine how much money you could keep if you simply didn't pay them. Generally, for businesses, they only pay taxes on their profits, so what if you could hide some of those profits from the government? After all, they can only tax money they can prove exists. One method for lowering profits, is to increase spending, by re-investing in the company, making higher quality products, maybe even paying your employees more, OR you can \"spend\" that extra profit buying fake services from a fake company. What has been happening in Panama is a company has been selling these fake businesses, that corporations then use to make massive fake transactions. Officially, the taxman sees money flowing into these fake businesses, but now we all know for a fact that those fake businesses are in fact fake. This accounts for potentially several trillions of dollars worth of money that should have been taxed, but has been illegally hidden.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/articles/56febff0a1bb8d3c3495adf4/",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6XnH_OnpO0",
"https://www.reddit.com/live/wp1fvdxxwb45/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/4d8563/whats_this_panamanian_shell_company_data_leak_on/d1okaxn"
],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/PanamaPapers/comments/4d8ewj/what_you_should_know_about_the_panama_papers_an/",
"http://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/articles/56febff0a1bb8d3c3495adf4/"
],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/the-panama-papers-how-the-worlds-rich-and-famous-hide-their-money-offshore?CMP=share_btn_fb"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/4cvehu/the_headquarters_of_the_monacobased_oil_company/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BJEh78MAWc"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/27/157499893/episode-390-we-set-up-an-offshore-company-in-a-tax-haven"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1osnsw",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1owdj4",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1owwyh",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1ovemc",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1oqxdi",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4d8rta/eli5_the_panama_papers/d1owawa"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://panamapapers.icij.org/pages/reporting_partners/"
],
[
"http://www.theage.com.au/interactive/2016/the-bribe-factory/day-2/global-investigation.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-panama-papers"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/corporate-media-gatekeepers-protect-western-1-from-panama-leak/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/4OjlNY1"
]
] |
|
4blyqg
|
why is voting still done with (mostly) paper ballots?
|
This interests me because of the technological advances that we have made. Why is voting by cell phone not a thing yet? I know the typical security argument, is that the only reason?
For comparison, Estonia has electronic voting and has had 30% of votes cast over the Internet for the last two years.
Source:
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4blyqg/eli5_why_is_voting_still_done_with_mostly_paper/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1abaln",
"d1acqbj",
"d1acxr6",
"d1agz5z",
"d1aiki7",
"d1ajjhk",
"d1anxi1",
"d1avmcj"
],
"score": [
2,
137,
45,
2,
6,
5,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Perhaps [these previous posts](_URL_0_) will help. Apparently Estonia is ahead of the curve.",
"Electronic voting is terrible because it just makes it easier to cheat. If you use papers, it requires a lot of effort to change even a small amount of votes. If it's in a computer you have to trust the voting machines, and the central system that counts them all up. So you are both at risk of corruption and hacking.\n\nAnd remember that there are literally billions of dollars on the line and the power over nations, so the incentive to cheat could not be higher.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I'm one who supports the paper ballot, and here's why.\n\nMy voting paper goes into a box, along with everyone elses. When the ballot closes, the boxes are taken to the counting house where they are emptied, and the ballots counted. At every stage, people can watch what's happening, nothing is hidden. There is little chance of fraud.\n\nIf there's a dispute, a recount can be done, and again, everyone can see what's happening.\n\nNone of that can be done with any computer program. We have to trust the coders, we have to trust the people controlling the computers, and that's without any hackers who want to play.\n\nKeep it Simple. Paper Ballots work.",
"[In August 2003, Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold, announced that he had been a top fund-raiser for President George W. Bush and had sent a get-out-the-funds letter to Ohio Republicans. In the letters he says he is \"committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.\". Although he clarified his statement as merely a poor choice of words, critics of Diebold and/or the Republican party interpreted this as at minimum an indication of a conflict of interest, at worst implying a risk to the fair counting of ballots. He responded to the critics by pointing out that the company's election machines division is run out of Texas by a registered Democrat. Nonetheless, O'Dell vowed to lower his political profile lest his personal actions harm the company. O'Dell resigned his post of chairman and chief executive of Diebold on December 12, 2005 following reports that the company was facing securities fraud litigation surrounding charges of insider trading.](_URL_0_)",
"In The Netherlands we had electronic voting. After some issues with the machines (the signal of the voting could be picked up outside the building why can't this happen with phones?) the machines where disposed. In the Netherlands voting goes very quick, it's always on a Wednesday and on the same day in the evening the counting is complete, so the speed argument isn't really a thing. An other argument for non-electronic voting is that the voting booth is only for one person. There can't be a person watching you voting (telling you what to vote) this can be done electronically by (for example) cell phone. There is also a problem with elderly people who aren't used to technology these days. What if you battery runs out? With electronic voting there is also a change that they know what you voted; this is almost a crime in my humbly opinion. Never ever should there be a connection (or a probability) between you and your vote.\n\nIf you don't trust the counting you can be in the room while the counting happens, they close the doors so you can't get in or out while the voting happens. Most of the time it takes for (i think 3 times counting) a couple of hours.",
"Mostly useably, corruptibility, anonymity, and reliability.\n\nEveryone should know how to use a paper and pencil. \n\nIt is very difficult and ineffective to change paper votes (as compared in hacking an electronic system). \n\nI doubt that anyone can read the handwriting of your \"X\" and paper has no time stamp. On the other hand an electronic system would have to take great measures to create anonymity (very expensive and code heavy). \n\nAnd finally pencils and paper are not vulnerable to power outages, system crashes, and bugs. \n\nHave a great day! :-) ",
"The biggest reasons are:\n\n1) Accountability. If there's a dispute, you can always go back and re-count the paper ballots. There's no way to re-count electronic voting if there's a suspected problem/bug in the software. Sure, with electronic voting you could give voters some sort of \"receipt\" which confirms that they voted and who they voted for, but that runs into the next big problem...\n\n2) Anonymity. In the US, ballots are secret. There should be no way to personally identify how a citizen voted. The folks who check IDs at the polls are different from the people who count the ballots. This is rather easy to accomplish with paper ballots. This however, is a big challenge with internet voting as voting most likely need to be tied to a specific voter PIN of some sort. And since it's all electronic, we would then be in the position of \"just having to trust\" that the powers that be would keep the data separate.\n\n3) Security. Paper ballots being low-tech is actually a huge advantage to the security of the ballots and the genuineness of the election. It's *significantly* harder to alter the thousands of paper ballots needed to sway an election. But simply changing a few lines of code and/or installing some sort of malicious software could easily accomplish this, and we wouldn't have the physical ballots to recheck if this possibly happened.",
"Paper ballots are far more tamper resistant than any form of electronic voting. It takes a lot of work to introduce new ballots. It takes a lot of work to change existing ballots. It takes a lot of work to make existing ballots disappear. You have to have direct local, on the ground, physical access\n\nChanging electronic records is incredibly easy, and if you are networked, you can be hacked by anyone, from anywhere. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia"
] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?sort=relevance&t=all&q=subreddit:explainlikeimfive%20vote%20online"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI"
],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_Election_Solutions"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
xpmft
|
how does a tire stay on the rim in pretty heavy conditions? (burnout, high cornering speed etc.) what exactly is holding it steady on the rim?
|
Look at [this](_URL_0_) for example. I would imagine that such a big power would just spin the rim inside the tire, but that never ever happens. Why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xpmft/eli5_how_does_a_tire_stay_on_the_rim_in_pretty/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5ohrwg",
"c5ojijg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Each edge of the tire contains a thick metal wire inside that sets in a special \"lip\" in the edge of the tire. [The first diagram in this page sums it up nicely.](_URL_0_)",
"Here's the short version. The inside diameter of the tire is smaller than you think. It tales a huge amount of force to stretch the tire over the rim. It's an amazingly tight fit, not glue. \n\nP.s. In some ultra-high-torque applications \"rim screws\" are employed to secure the tire to the rim."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfJejgODr3E&feature=related"
] |
[
[
"http://www.croberts.com/tire.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
2dvy7i
|
why are concert volumes so high?
|
I've been going to concerts since I was young. I have never understood why the volume has to be so loud that ear plugs are required. It eventually just sounds like distortion. Does the sound engineer actually think it sounds good?
The question was prompted by a recent small outdoor show in my hometown. It was a latin festival attended by maybe 200-300 people. A professional audio company was commissioned for the band to provide background noise while people ate tacos. The volume was so loud that no one could sit or even walk within 100ft of the stage speakers. The sound engineer was wearing ear plugs. This was a small community event for pedestrians passing by. Was it really necessary for it to be so loud? Could the sound engineer just dial that volume knob down a little?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dvy7i/eli5_why_are_concert_volumes_so_high/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjtl9dg",
"cjtlt55",
"cjtm835",
"cjtny0z",
"cjto8zy",
"cjtos7n",
"cjtq6rp",
"cjtt295",
"cjtvzhi"
],
"score": [
46,
3,
11,
22,
2,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Concerts are usually too loud anyway, like hearing damaging loud. SOME people genuinely think louder=better \n\nHowever, the sound has to reach everyone in attendance. This is a problem if you only have 1 set of speakers and a large room but not so much if you have a rig set up with lots of speakers in different locations. Either way it is gonna be louder nearer the speakers in a large environment.\n\nI always wear a pair of musicians ear plugs to concerts (yeah yeah cue the old man comments... i'm 21.) It gets rid of the loudness and you wouldn't believe the quality improvement of the sounds of the bands.\n\nIn your case the sound engineer probably just got too carried away and turned it up too loud unless it was a large park or field and they were trying to reach as far as possible.",
"You raise such a great point. It's ridiculous how loud speakers and concerts can get. Even bars and nightclubs when you end up having to scream in the face of the person standing right next to you just to have a conversation. I believe there is a particular DB level at which point music begins to diminish in quality. I'm young and I wear custom made ear plugs. I think it's just that they think louder equals better, as noted by another commentator. ",
"I've wondered about this too. Related CMV thread: _URL_0_\n\nThe simplified answer from that thread is that live drums can be naturally very loud, so they turn everything else up to keep it from being drowned out by the drums. Makes some sense, though of course it's no excuse if the band doesn't have a drummer!",
"A certain amount of volume is necessary for the experience to be immersive, to make the audience feel like they're at a rock concert. If you've ever been to a show that's too quiet it's a very weird experience, feels like you're just listening to the radio and it's easy to be distracted by anything other than the band. It's a delicate balancing act as a show that's too loud is also bad. When setting the volume you have to factor in the type of music, the expectations of the crowd, the acoustics of the venue, etc.\n\nAnother factor is the quality of the equipment and the skill of the sound mixer - a lot of shows that seem too loud are really just too distorted. A show that's nice and clean can sound great at 110 db while a show that's a distorted, mushy mess can be painful at 90 db. Also given bad equipment or a poorly designed venue, the same show can sound fantastic in one area of the venue and horrendous in another. Try to get near the soundboard if you can, it tends to sound the best, and stay away from overhangs, U-shaped areas, etc. Picture a soundwave as it comes from the speakerd straight to you, you want as clean of a path as possible.\n\nAs for the scenario in the OP, that's just rediculous, nobody should ever have to wear earplugs at an outdoor background-music community event. Your sound crew and/or band were simply incompetent.",
"a lot of music today is influenced by second wave punk, where the volume was turned up and distorted a bit too far on purpose. Especially in punk, there is a certain self-destructive element embedded in the art. It reflects a subcultural lashing out at at the aesthetic and political norms that assume art is supposed to be consumed for pleasure, within the traditional economy.",
"Gotta turn them amps up to 11. The louder - the better.",
"Perhaps not directly related to the example given but sound engineers for live music will often wear plugs due to the way that hearing damage is caused by sound level and exposure time. They listen to the loud sounds longer than the audience (sound check, system check, etc) so wear protection to reduce their exposure back to safe levels. Their plugs often reduce the sound by small amounts : - 6dB is a common choice. \n\nDepending on the event, it may be worth letting someone know it's painfully loud. It's not possible to please all the people all the time, but a pattern of complaints may have an affect. \nIdeally get hold of the people who are paying the sound company (eg the promoter) as they typically have the final say. \n\n\nIn the UK, if the music is above a certain level then ear plugs must be available to anyone that asks for them and are often behind the bar. \n\nLarger concerts may have \"noise police\" who monitor average levels and can enforce audio level changes if needed, although ultimately they may only be able to enforce fines and the band/promoter might prefer to pay than comprise the audio level they feel is \"right\" . ",
"The reason is so that everyone can hear the music, and hear it over the crowd. However, a good FOH mixer doesn't usually mix at high levels, but rather low but still putting out an exciting mix. [Here's an article from one of my favorite FOH guys](_URL_0_)",
"All too often the venue is a big part of the problem. I was a bit of a speaker nut starting in high school, and going to concerts I would often wonder why the sound sucked. Mushy and distorted and just a big mess.\nI saw Pantera at a huge venue (15k people) and it was a rectangular concrete bunker with no wall hangings. During sound check the roadie would kick the bass drum and half a second later you'd get the return from the back wall. The concert was still a blast but the venue was just bad. \nI saw Megadeth and Skid Row (not together...) in a fairly small venue (2k people), a former cinema. The place was oval, with a domed ceiling. No standing waves anywhere... Great sound. Still my favorite concert location. \nIn my experience, great musicians usually have good equipment and good sound guys. Was true for Joe Satriani, Steve Vai, Marty Friedman, Stuart Hamm. Yeah I'm a guitar nut too. \nAnd on a side note, most serious guitarists will take a high level output from the headamp and forget the speaker output. A lot of the huge stacks at rock concerts are just for show."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1otx5t/indoor_live_music_gigs_are_far_too_loud_and/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.performing-musician.com/pm/aug09/articles/vandruten.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
3c6s30
|
where the hell do people in countries like india/afghanistan get buckets of acid to throw on people?
|
Seriously seems like everyone's just got a spare bucket of acid laying around
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c6s30/eli5_where_the_hell_do_people_in_countries_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cssr8r0",
"cssuh9l"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You can buy some pretty strong acids like hydrochloric acid over the counter and online. I'm not sure what is being used in these attacks but I'm sure it's readily available for purchase without regulation. ",
"In India, using acid to attack women is a common way of revenge by spurned lovers. This is more common among the smaller towns than in cities and there too it is rapidly on the wane, for good. So those that are saying the source of acid being car batteries etc. are right to an extent but that is not the case most of the times. Believe it or not, many people in India, even today, use acid as a toilet cleaner. Although normal toilet cleaners have been readily available in the country for decades now, there are some who still cling to the age old way of using diluted acid to clean ceramic surfaces of the toilets. To cater to these folks, you'll find concentrated acids in some of the smaller grocery stores, especially in small towns. It is sold just like any other grocery item with no regulations or questions asked. When you have access to corrosive materials like that, all it takes is the desire to hurt someone and a wild leap of thought resulting in such acid attacks. The most common way is to use a hollowed out lightbulb filled with the acid and throw it at the victim. The intention usually is to disfigure the victim's (usually a woman) face with the rationale being \"if you rejected me then no one will ever accept you after this\". In other cases, they threaten the victim (also most women) walking down an isolated street with an acid attack on the face if they don't part with their jewellery/valuables etc. All this used to be more common but thankfully is rapidly declining as a result of modernization of culture and more and more people having access to education."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1mbdi6
|
how can a car run over a hand and not break any bones
|
I was recently the victim of a 'slow-go'. A car pulls along side a walking person (me). They attempt to snatch whatever they can from you (me) and then they speed away. In my case they grabbed my t-shirt, I pulled away, they accelerated away as I was pulled down and the rear left tire ran over my left hand. So we've got from top to bottom: 2,000lb car, hand, pavement. Shaken not stirred I ended up with a laceration (6 stiches to close) between my pinkie and 4th finger bur no broken bones. Besides luck, what's the math here.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mbdi6/eli5how_can_a_car_run_over_a_hand_and_not_break/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cc7knya",
"cc7l6qj",
"cc7l7u4",
"cc7ni5r"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Well when one tire is on your hand, it's not the whole 2,000Ibs of the car, it's just a fraction of its weight. And duration plays a factor, if the car quickly rolled over your hand, your bones only had to endure the weight for a short period of time. The longer the car is on your hand, the more likely it is to break bones.",
"The weight of the car is spread out over a relatively large area, so the pressure on your hand isn't that high. \n\nEach wheel of the car is carrying about 500 lbs. Your hand is something like 20 _URL_0_ when flat, so the contact pressure is roughly 25 psi. This is high but well within what your body can stand, especially for body parts that don't have air inside (your lungs or ears would be far more vulnerable to that kind of pressure).",
"As /u/stylz05 said, if the car has 4 wheels then only about 500 pounds would be on your hand. While that is the weight of a couple of big guys, it's possible to survive that without bones breaking. Helping that, tires are filled with air and made out of rubber, so they're slightly squishy. That would allow the tire to slightly deform around your hand so the force is applied evenly across your entire hand. If you dropped a 500 pound table and it landed on one finger, you can bet that finger would break, but distributed across your entire hand it's not as bad. If the tire was big enough, some of it would still have been in contact with the road, further reducing the force on your hand.",
"Bare with me on the math. 2000lb divided between 4 tires is 500lb per tired. Granted the weight of a car is by evenly distributed. If it was a tire opposite of the engine it would probably have even less force. Anyways, pressure is the term used to describe the force per area. Lets say the contact area of your hand is about 20 sq in. That means the pressure on your hand is only 500lb/20sq in or 25 psi. The average bone requires 7,000psi to crush it (shear stress). Because your hand was probably already flat on the ground, there were no weird torques on it. I broke my thumb a couple moths ago, but it wasn't crushed, it was snapped at the join where it weaker.\n\nBottom line, a flat hand being run over probably won't break, but it will definitely tear you up, and your skin will take most of the beating.\n\nSomeone double check my math. These are just some loose numbers but clearly a bone under shear stress of only 25psi will not break. The ground beneath his hand was also helping to prevent fracture."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"sq.in"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3gwelo
|
how does gas get " trapped" in your abdomen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gwelo/eli5_how_does_gas_get_trapped_in_your_abdomen/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu22nsp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Like, in your GI tract? It generally gets there by you swallowing air or the bacteria in your gut releasing gas through breaking down your food."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
38ti9a
|
how does my dog know when something is wrong with me?
|
Like sometimes I'll get home from work, depressed or sad or what have you, and he'll come to my side, wagging his tail and just look at me with a curious face. But he doesn't do it when I'm feeling happy or whenever life is going great. I swear not even humans can read body language that well.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38ti9a/eli5_how_does_my_dog_know_when_something_is_wrong/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crxpnze"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When the answer that you want\n\nIs in the question that you state\n\nCome what may, come what may\n\nCoheed and Cambria - Blood Red Summer"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
56fwp6
|
why do e-cigs need to use propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin? why can't they just emit water vapor?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56fwp6/eli5_why_do_ecigs_need_to_use_propylene_glycol_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8izva5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The nicotine and flavorings that go into it are not water soluable and it wouldn't mix. \n\nAlso water boils at 212F and inhaling steam would burn you pretty badly. It's also hard to get water really pure, and it's possible that mineral deposits in the water could make their way into your lungs and have no way to leave. \n\nMany of the flavorings are oil or alcohol based and while alcohol mixes with water, we know oil doesn't. The nicotine also comes from the producer in a solution of polypropylene glycol. \n\nThe vegetable glycerine is added in order to make the vapor appear more like smoke, as PG creates less visible vapor. The idea was to replicate the experience of smoking and for that you need to see smoke when you exhale. \n\nThe other thing to think about is contamination. Bacteria and other nasties can grow in water environments unless you add a lot of alcohol. PG tends to kill bacteria on contact. It is also proven safe from years as an ingredient in asthma inhalers and over the counter drugs. \n\nI make and mix my own e-juice and I've worked with laboratory nicotine, and many different flavorings, PG and VG for a few years. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3mbvz3
|
why is data on a phone not recoverable after a factory reset the same way data on a pc is recoverable after deletion?
|
My wife's phone randomly stopped loading Android earlier this week. We ended up having to factory reset it to get it working, and lost all her contacts along with photos of our son's recent 5th birthday and a video announcing a new pregnancy to all our friends and family. Why is it not possible to recover these photos the same way we'd recover photos accidentally deleted on the PC?
And yes, before I gave it back to her I set it up to backup her data remotely to reduce the chances of this happening again.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mbvz3/eli5_why_is_data_on_a_phone_not_recoverable_after/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvdtdf4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Very simply put, phones use solid state memory. It deletes data differently. A disk drive as is in a computer just changes the pointer. Its like telling your debt collectors that you dont live at a house anymore by changing the mailing address. Its still there but all the people mailing you would get their mail sent back to them. For solid state drives, its like destroying the mailbox with a wrecking ball, you will probably destroy some of the house in the process. \nMore detailed is that disk drive can edit data a few bytes at a time whereas a solid state drive has to edit whole sectors of data sometimes several several kilobytes (or even megabytes) at a time. In this case changing 1 byte takes just as much time and energy as changing the whole sector, so that's usually what they do."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4c714q
|
economic darwinism.
|
How can a social theory be applied to economics? When did it become popular in the US? And finally is it good or bad?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c714q/eli5_economic_darwinism/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1fm71c",
"d1ft19i"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
" > How can a social theory be applied to economics?\n\nPeople are always looking for a way to justify not caring about their fellow man. If you can find a way to dress that justification up as science, even better. Social Darwinism was popular because it gave brutal people a justification to support policies that were brutal towards others without offending their fellows.\n\n > When did it become popular in the US?\n\nThe late 19th and early 20th century.\n\n > And finally is it good or bad?\n\nIt's incorrect, and has caused a lot of human suffering. That's reason enough to put it in the 'bad' column for me. Your mileage may vary.",
"Economic Darwinism basically means that the business that better serves their customers eventually get all the customers while the ones that don't go out of business. Take Uber vs taxis.\n\nYou can't apply social theory to economics. That's working backwards. Take economic and form social theory from it.\n\nIt's been popular in the US since the inception of the United States.\n\nLike natural selection, economic Darwinism is not good nor bad. The customers get a better product, the business with a better product or service makes money, but the business who can't compete disappears. Morality comes from sympathy, a feeling. It has no meaning when studying what happens, why it happens, and using the study to predict outcome. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
38thga
|
on d-day why was the siege of omaha beach considered one of the largest undertakings in the history of war? was it thought to be a suicide mission?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38thga/eli5on_dday_why_was_the_siege_of_omaha_beach/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crxp0iu",
"crxqj00"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"No it was just really big. That is not a joke. It was among the largest coordinated movements of troops and armaments in the war, and by extension in all history. \n\nThen on top of that, the strategic importance of victory, and the possible consequences of failure. ",
"Here are some of the numbers for only Omaha Beach:\n\n**Allies:**\n43,250 infantry\n2 battleships\n3 cruisers\n12 destroyers\n105 other ships\n\n**Nazi:**\n7,800 infantry\n8 artillery bunkers\n35 pillboxes\n4 artillery pieces\n6 mortar pits\n18 anti-tank guns\n45 rocket launcher sites\n85 machine gun sites\n6 tank turrets\n\nAnd Omaha was only one of 5 beaches the Allies were attacking that day, there was also Utah, Gold, Juno, and Sword Beaches"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4uiybh
|
how does a swab test detect traces of narcotics in luggage just from a small wipe down?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4uiybh/eli5how_does_a_swab_test_detect_traces_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5q0qmf",
"d5q1ymd"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they are designed to show the chemicals found in drugs. They show up as certain colors for different chemicals found in different drugs (for some) if they show up on the swab: drugs are or have been inside or on the luggage. ",
"From what I recall in College chemistry, drugs, and many explosives as well, contain high amounts of nitrogen. That swab will indicate if there are elevated or higher than normal quantities of that element. If confirmed they will then begin to process the potential candidate more thoroughly. \nThe swab is just a pre screen for dangerous or illegal substances."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
164br9
|
the debt ceiling and amendment 14
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/164br9/eli5_the_debt_ceiling_and_amendment_14/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7slyqz"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I can ELI-High Schooler:\n\nWhen you use a credit card to buy, say a TV, you swipe the card, and the computer checks to make sure you are not at your credit limit, or the most amount of debt you can have on that card. If you try and go over that limit, you will be denied and unable to buy the TV.\n\nNow that's how debt and limits work for an individual, but debt and limits work different, and more dysfunctional, for our US government. Under the rules of the US (the constitution) only congress can really spend money (the have to approve or appropriate all the money to the rest of the government that they use). So congress is the one who really sets the budget and spends all the $$$.\n\nNow usually the US congress spends more money than we take in via taxes, this is a deficit. To make up the difference we borrow money (other eli5s do this well, check them out). How much we have borrowed and owe all these years added up is our debt. \n\nCongress has passed a law years and years ago that set a limit on how much debt the US government is allowed to hold at any given time. The issue is congress keeps passing budgets with large deficits, thus requiring the US borrow more money, and grow the debt. So each time the US is about to hit is credit card limit, congress changes the law to raise the debt ceiling.\n\nTheoretically, if the US were to 'hit the debt ceiling\" the US government will no longer be able to borrow money to cover the spending already approved by Congress.\n\nIf you think this sound convoluted and absurd, you are correct. Congress essentially has made a path where it is impossible to get the money to pay for the things congress already bought. \n\nCongress (specifically the House of Representatives under the control of the Republicans) like maintaining control of the debt limit. Obama wants to avoid hitting it because many economists think it will be a huge disaster. Our credit rating (or how trustworthy the government is with money) took a small hit for even coming close last time and actually hitting it will cause borrowing costs and the trust in the $$ to drop. If you don't know anything about economics, know this, ALL MONEY TODAY DEPENDS ON TRUST.\n\n**The 14th Amendment option** is a proposed, but never used solution around the debt ceiling. There is a line in section 4 that says \"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.\"\n\nWhat does this mean: It was passed as part of a series of post civil war amendments trying to clean up some of the legal messes left over from the war. The point was to say clearly, the US government is not responsible for the debt the Confederate government.\n\nWhat it could mean: Any spending legally approved by congress must be honored by the government. Essentially it could mean the law creating the debt ceiling is unconstitutional. I say could because the law has never been challenged to the supreme court.\n\nLegal scholars are divined on how the court would or should rule. Either way, Obama would instruct the treasury, the guys who spend the money and borrow the money that congress already spent in the annual budget of the US, to simply ignore the law and continue to borrow. Then congress would sue and the courts would try and sort it out. Best case, the debt ceiling is found to be unconstitutional and the law is revoked. Worst case is the debt ceiling is constitutional, but Obama bought the country a few months to years before congressional ineptitude brings us into crisis. \n\nEdit: Spelling & Grammars"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
958o4e
|
why is it against the law to make false statements to the fbi but not against the law to lie to other law enforcement agencies in the us?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/958o4e/eli5_why_is_it_against_the_law_to_make_false/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e3qv45e",
"e3qv55l"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Cop here:\n\nThe FBI is federal law enforcement that operates under different rules than state or local law enforcement.\n\nIn my state, lying to a police officer can be considered a crime under certain conditions, like giving a fake name. In my state it's the same as resisting arrest, which is a catch-all charge for obstructing in general.",
"Laws very by jurisdiction, you'd have to check each state and see if such a law exists. \n\n_URL_1_.\n\nHere's one example for the state of California. It's [illegal to lie to any federal investigator, not just the FBI.](_URL_0_) There are a lot of different federal law and regulation enforcement agencies. \n\n_URL_2_\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-916-false-statements-federal-investigator",
"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=148.9",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States"
]
] |
||
1yi1wg
|
when i open a file and see a bunch of crazy, meaningless (to me) symbols - what am i looking at?
|
You know, like [this](_URL_0_)
What is it? What does it all *mean*?
Thanks in advance.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yi1wg/eli5_when_i_open_a_file_and_see_a_bunch_of_crazy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfkp2j7",
"cfkp8uj"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"means you tried to open a file that wasn't saved as a simple text file.\n\ndata is encoded. simple text has an encoding structure. the file you opened does't follow that structure.",
"If a file is meant and formatted to be something else than a simple text file, trying to interpret the bits and bytes as text will result in that. You can write simple programs in paint with that logic. A specific sequence of colored boxes can read \"hello world\" if you change the extension from \".png\" to \".txt\"."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/khSKhM3.png"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
7ursp7
|
why do stickers easily come off on fabric but hard to peel off on metal or other surfaces also leaving behind a sticky residue and sometimes not even being able to peel it all off?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ursp7/eli5_why_do_stickers_easily_come_off_on_fabric/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dtmm31l",
"dtmo051"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"It’s the difference between the adhesives used on the stickers (different receptors from different manufacturers) not necessarily the material it’s sticking to.",
"Fabric is a relatively \"rough\" surface, so the sticker is only sticking to the highest points on the fabric, so there's less surface contact. Take the same sticker and stick it to the sandy side of sandpaper, same thing. Or, find a very smooth piece of silk to stick the sticker too, it likely still stick better.\n\nLastly, when you peel the sticker off the fabric, look at the back of the sticker: it probably took a lot of fabric with in the form of lint, rather than leaving residue behind."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3caxff
|
how can in-n-out burger offer a double-double animal style for ~$3 but a big mac averages ~$5?
|
My question is how can In-N-Out offer seemingly much higher quality burgers with veggies and buns that are more fresh for considerably cheaper than a comparable burger at McDonald's and other much larger fast-food chains that promote themselves as low-cost competitors?
Note: My prices are just estimates based on my recent experiences at both restaurants in my area and may not apply to all of the US
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3caxff/eli5_how_can_innout_burger_offer_a_doubledouble/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cstt4hv",
"cstvf75",
"cstzlyh",
"csu1wdz",
"csu2ngm"
],
"score": [
48,
21,
13,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"McD's spends vast amounts of cash on worldwide marketing, and on a much bigger menu. In-N-Out has a simple, streamlined menu and doesn't do big huge marketing campaigns.",
"Also because the Big Mac is a rip-off. Ask for a mcdouble with shredded lettuce and Mac sauce and it's exactly the same as a Big Mac with no middle bun. Only 2$ that way.",
"I'm also pretty sure that In-n-Out is underpricing their burgers, though that's apparently part of their business model. When the drive-thru line at your burger joint is that long every night, you may not be meeting demand.",
"they don't have east coast operations, so we cant drive up the demand and price!!\n\nIn -n- Out in NJ or NYC they could rule the world.",
"There are other good answers but when you buy a Big Mac you are buying a brand. If you are traveling you are assured food you are used to. This brand has been advertised and normalized. Buying a Big Mac is ultimately more than the ingredients, but also the experience of the Big Mac and the immense quality control in making sure that experience is the same everywhere.\n\nThe Double Double, Animal Style is a better burger, most people would agree. But it is not a brand. In and Out, being a smaller chain, has cheaper quality control. In and Out also has to compete with the \"Big Mac/McDonalds experience.\" The average consumer will go with the normal they know(McDonalds) than the unknown (In and Out) when they are choosing a fast food restaurant. By having lower prices, In and Out entices customers to buy their burgers. McDonalds was like this when they began, having ridiculously cheap burgers that encouraged customers to eat there.\n\nMenu size is also a factor. The Big Mac's high price may be supplementing other items on the menu that make less, or no, profit but increase customer size and interaction by providing more options or produce a better feeling about McDonalds to patrons(healthy options for instance). While at In and Out there are very few items, so there are fewer variables to worry about."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
75ab6p
|
why can't we pronounce words and sentences backwards?
|
If you hear a reversed playback of someone speaking, it sounds like an odd, almost alien language. My logic tells me that the sounds we make should be able to be replicated in reverse, but it seems almost impossible.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/75ab6p/eli5_why_cant_we_pronounce_words_and_sentences/
|
{
"a_id": [
"do4l8ir",
"do4qdqh",
"do5jk0b"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm pretty sure it has to do with the fact that we just don't speak backwards. In all your life, you've probably tried, but never had a full on conversation speaking backwards. It'd be like a different language, no?",
"Take a very simple word, like \"pa\". How do you pronounce it?\n\n1. First press your lips together so that no air can escape, and pull your tongue down. Build up pressure with your lungs.\n2. Open your lips to release the pressure. Allow the first bit of air to escape in a little puff.\n3. Start your vocal cords vibrating.\n\nOkay, do the same in reverse:\n\n1. Have your vocal cords vibrating. Then stop.\n2. Suck in a little bit of air, then abruptly press your lips together.\n\nIt's the \"suck in a little bit of air\" bit that's important. It has to sound like a tiny explosion going in reverse. That's very different from saying a word like \"app\" normally: for that, you pronounce the \"p\" simply by clamping your mouth shut; if you then immediately pronounce a vowel sound, you can then make another little explosion, but it's an explosion *forwards*, and it comes *after* you've closed your lips and then opened them again.",
"In the context you provided. I think it's due to the fact that we can't physically speak backwards in the way that reverse playback works.\n\nThink about a drum beat. When the stick hit the drum. It's a loud explosive sound. And then it slowly mellows out to nothing. When speaking, it works the same way. You first make the boom and the it slowly dissipates. The boom is created by holding air in your mouth and increase the pressure inside your mouth to push open your lips. We physically can't reproduce this backwards. \n\nWe surely can pronounce all the syllables in a word backwards. But we can't really reproduce the process as you hear it in reverse playbacks."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5yr191
|
why is it so easy to kill a virus with hand soap but so difficult to kill a virus once it has infected us internally?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yr191/eli5_why_is_it_so_easy_to_kill_a_virus_with_hand/
|
{
"a_id": [
"des9r7h",
"desdt23",
"desfwzi",
"desv13l",
"det35te"
],
"score": [
78,
5,
8,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Soap does not kill viruses, it binds with viruses and when you rinse the soap off your hands they go with the soap down the sink.\n\n_URL_0_\nEdited for the link to scishow video",
"Once it's inside and replicating itself like a Xerox machine, it's hard to get rid of all the copies. On the outside you can rinse (not kill) it with soap.",
"Viruses hijack your own cells, and in some cases (retroviruses) your own DNA. Once your cells are producing virus particles in your system, your immune system has to track down all the particles and stop the rising tide.\n\nOn your hands, you simply end up washing away the virus particles before they infect you.\n",
"It's easy to kill a virus. I can whip out a blow torch and sterilize the hell out of a surface. But that method tends to have a negative reaction with a living creature. \n\nThe challenge is to find things that kill the desired virus/bacteria, but doesn't harm the host. ",
"A virus is like an ant on your counter soap sicks it together and water flushes it away. \n\nA virus inside your body is like an ant in a jelly cube. Sure fire way is to get a hammer or jelly poison but your made out of jelly. Jelly poison inside a person who is made of jelly = dead person. \n\nHammers could work but we aint that precise yet. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://youtu.be/9dExiRwh-DQ"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
jm6sh
|
what is the pressure i feel on my face when i'm sick and my nose is stuffy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jm6sh/eli5_what_is_the_pressure_i_feel_on_my_face_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2d97je",
"c2db78f",
"c2d97je",
"c2db78f"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"your sinus cavity is an open space that is now clogged. The pressure from an unadjusted atmospheric pressure and excess mucus is literally pressing to get out.",
"Press your tongue on the top of your mouth and lightly push with your thumb between your eyes. ",
"your sinus cavity is an open space that is now clogged. The pressure from an unadjusted atmospheric pressure and excess mucus is literally pressing to get out.",
"Press your tongue on the top of your mouth and lightly push with your thumb between your eyes. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xjrlv
|
how is the movie "airplane" only rated pg?
|
There is a topless women and pornographic magazines in the movie where you can clearly see nudity.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xjrlv/eli5_how_is_the_movie_airplane_only_rated_pg/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfbyl7r",
"cfbylog",
"cfbyv9y",
"cfbywav"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Mostly because PG-13 didn't exist until 1984, and Airplane came out in 1980.\n\nBut also because people were less sensitive and lazy.",
"Because there wasn't enough objectionable content to raise it to an R rating, and at the time the movie was made, there was no PG-13 rating.\n\nIf it were rated today, ~~surely~~ Shirley it would receive a PG-13.",
"Oh man, the 1970s were *awesome*. You should have been there.",
"The odd thing about the rating is that it is highly biased towards the human body, but not if it is gore. I'd rather have my kids see some skin and even some implied sex if it is done in a way where the partners are shown as equals. The blood and mutilation that seems to be fine with the (American) pg-13 rating is much more damaging imho."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9uk2if
|
what actually happens when you “tweek” your neck and it hurts to turn it in one direction?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9uk2if/eli5_what_actually_happens_when_you_tweek_your/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e94v7ny"
],
"score": [
61
],
"text": [
"This is a \"neck spasm\" - the muscles which move your neck involuntarily contract, and may remain tense and partially or fully contracted for several days.\n\nOther spasms include foot/hand cramps, abdominal muscle cramps, and charlie horses. These don't tend to last as long as neck spasms.\n\nThis is very often your muscles attempting to prevent damage to your spinal cord. Poor posture, sleeping weird, or rapid head movement can trigger your body's reflex that says \"uh oh, the spine is moving in a way that could cause serious injury!\" Your muscles tense up as a way to immobilize you - just like a neck brace worn after an injury. Muscles can also spasm for other reasons, like fatigue or potassium deficiency.\n\nMovement is difficult and painful because you're trying to use your muscle when it's already trying very hard to not move."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
9ta58f
|
why are there so many different types of police?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ta58f/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_different_types_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8uofjj",
"e8uoft0",
"e8uohzl",
"e8uon5n",
"e8uorlj",
"e8uorv8",
"e8uphzp",
"e8uplv1",
"e8uqitn",
"e8uqkfz",
"e8us7on",
"e8ut0s1",
"e8v5ylm",
"e8vbahn"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
36,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm sure someone will give better details, but generally, each jurisdiction has the right to police itself. \n\nSo, you end up with local/town/city police, then county police, then state police and state troopers. The FBI are federal/US Govt police. \n\nSometimes the police are split into subgroups. For example, city police may have an arm for drug crimes, a separately named arm for gang investigations, and a separately named and uniformed arm for something else.\n\nOccasionally these groups can step on each other's toes. But there are protocols to help establish who can take charge of a particular situation. Like, a single crime can break local, state, and federal laws. So when the local cops, state cops, and FBI all arrive on the scene, some drama can take place.",
"Different jurisdictions and responsibility. \n\nIf you call 911 you'll get your local police dept. if you live in a town or city with one, or your sherrif's department if you don't but live in a county with a sherrif's department. \n\nIf you live somewhere that doesn't have local PD or a sherrifs dept. (and in the states I think this is rare, in Canada its more common), then policing duties are taken up by the state troopers or provincial police. In Canada a few provinces have worked out an arrangement where the RCMP (aka Mounties) provide provincial policing as well. \n\nThen various federal agencies also do policing - but they're concerned with crimes that aren't local in nature. For example, the FBI doesn't care about traffic or angry spouse stabs their SO. They care more about crimes that break federal statutes or cross state lines. Or, when the local PD doesn't have the appropriate resources. E.g. if you watch any police procedurals, tracking down serial killers - the FBI have specialists like psychologists and profilers etc. \n\nThe secret service cares about executive security and money / treasury stuff (forgery, bank fraud). ",
"Because we have many different governments.\n\nRegular police have jurisdiction in their cities. They respond to emergency calls in their cities.\n\nSheriffs have jurisdiction in their counties. They run the county jail system and they patrol the parts of the county that don't have a regular police force (some cities and towns are too small to afford one, or don't have enough crime to justify the cost).\n\nState Troopers/Highway Patrol (some states have one or the other, some have both) patrol the state highways. The state police might also assist with major crimes that local police can't handle.\n\nThe FBI investigates federal crimes (the ones before investigate state crimes), involving large criminal organizations.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nNone of these are \"above\" the others. They each have specific jobs to do.",
"It’s more or less regional. The city I live in is large enough to have its own police department. These are city/municipal employees. They get the job through application. (Apply, get the job. Maybe one day move into chief position through merit. Or get hired from another police department to chief, b/c of experience/years of service.) \n\nI grew up one town over, and they are too small for their own police and fall under the county. The county has an elected sheriff. Other positions are application - but even in my city, I am part of the constituency which votes for county sheriff. \n\nThen we have a state police. Honestly I don’t know what their set up is, but I don’t think I have ever voted for state police anything. \n\nAnd the FBI is federal (largest level of government - national level). \n\nSo for me it’s city- > county - > state - > federal. \n\nBut not everyone has city police. It’s largely population/revenue dependent. ",
"In general this is relating to the size of their respective jurisdictions in the states. I used to work for the County Sheriff and in general we oversaw everything in the county, whereas state troopers oversee the state and so on.\n\nTypically it looks something like this.\n\nPolice then Sheriff then State Police\n\nMunicipal Police have a jurisdiction the size of their city. Anything outside of their city they technically need a County representative such as a deputy there, unless there are exigent circumstances. They can still pull you over on a county road if you were breaking a law, but the county official will still be handling the ticketing and such.\n\nSame goes for County Sheriff's too. We had deputies pull people over on state highways all the time, but we had to wait for dispatch to get a State Officer there to take care of the ticket and such.\n\nThis is pretty broad strokes but Yea... Hope it helps",
"In general this is relating to the size of their respective jurisdictions in the states. I used to work for the County Sheriff and in general we oversaw everything in the county, whereas state troopers oversee the state and so on.\n\nTypically it looks something like this.\n\nPolice then Sheriff then State Police\n\nMunicipal Police have a jurisdiction the size of their city. Anything outside of their city they technically need a County representative such as a deputy there, unless there are exigent circumstances. They can still pull you over on a county road if you were breaking a law, but the county official will still be handling the ticketing and such.\n\nSame goes for County Sheriff's too. We had deputies pull people over on state highways all the time, but we had to wait for dispatch to get a State Officer there to take care of the ticket and such.\n\nThis is pretty broad strokes but Yea... Hope it helps",
"I will tell you how it works in Georgia, other states may vary somewhat.\n\nEvery level of government has its own force of people with arrest powers that enforce the laws of that level of government.\n\nLocal police enforce local and state laws, and are paid by city and county taxes (usually property taxes). These are local police who investigate everything first usually ... from murder to speeding tickets. There are a lot of these officers.\n\nState police (highway troopers and state police) enforce state laws, primarily, and are paid with state taxes (usually income taxes or non-property taxes). There are very few state officers. Troopers generally just write speeding tickets and patrol the highways. They revenue from those tickets usually goes to the local authority, it does not stay with the state police. State police (like the Georgia Bureau of Investigation) generally DO NOT respond to crimes first. They are consultants and usually have to be invited to join (usually take over) a case from local police, who always investigate first. State police almost always take over incidents where police have killed someone, for example, because this allegedly eliminates bias in the investigation (but probably does not). Local police always respond to emergency calls, though a state trooper in the area might also respond. \n\nFederal police enforce federal laws, primarily, and are funded generally by federal income taxes. There are several other federal agencies with arrest powers, other than the FBI, but generally the FBI is the one arresting Americans. Federal officers also generally get their cases from local police, or state police. \n\nIn general, local police are the first level of crime detection and they pass the cases up the food chain. If they think a federal law has been broken, they hand it over to federal police. Local police usually keep violations of state law, but can refer them to state police IF the case crosses out of their jurisdiction or involves several cities ... like a car theft ring or drug dealer doing business in multiple counties. \n\nLocal police have to do most of the footwork because they have the manpower (and a much better tax base since state income taxes are usually small). There are more police officers in the city of Atlanta than there are state officers in the state! \n\nI just re-read you question and will tell you about the sheriff's office. In small towns, the sheriff is pretty much the law of the county, and police officers work for the cities in the county. But in most places where there is a decent population there is a county police force that acts like a city police force. The city police enforce laws in the city limits, the county police in the unincorporated rural areas. The sheriff's department usually just runs the jail, provides security at courthouses and courtrooms (baliffs) and at the jail (jail guards). Deputies also serve warrants, meaning they go to people's homes and arrest them for not appearing in court. This is a dangerous job.\n\nThe sheriff is charged with making sure the jail is operational and the courts are secure, and people show up to court when they are supposed to.\n\nThe FBI is not really \"over\" local police, but they can take over cases if they wish. The local police work for the mayor, and the mayor does not work for the US Justice Department. State police work for the governor, who also does not work for the US Justice Department. The FBI works for the US Justice Department (Attorney General of the U.S.).\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;",
"Policing and the application of the general police power in the United States is primarily a state responsibility. In every state, police agencies are generally organized as follows:\n\nIf you live in a large enough town or city, you will have a municipal police agency. \n\nIf you live outside of the city limits, or in a town that's too small to support a municipal police force, you will usually receive police services from the county sheriff's office. The sherriff's office also supports municipal police forces in the county, as necessary. \n\nMost US states have a statewide police agency. In some states, like California, the agency is primarily engaged in traffic enforcement. In other states, the agency is a full staffed police agency that provides investigative and other support to small, rural, municipal and county agencies, and, in some cases, provide direct police service to small communities.\n\nAll of these agencies are independent of each other, so this is not a hierarchical system of organization.\n\nThe federal government has limited police powers over a fairly small subset of federal crimes. The FBI is technically the primary criminal investigative service of the US government, but, frankly, the US government has a weird patchwork of law enforcement agencies. US Marshals secure federal courts and hunt down fugitives. Postal Inspectors investigate mail fraud and other mail-related crimes. The DEA investigates drug-related crimes. The Secret Service investigates counterfeiting and other Treasury/money related crimes, in addition to protecting federal officials. It's insane, but there are, like, 30 federal agencies that have law enforcement powers.\n",
"Each government entity has its own police force. So lets take the closest major city to me: Dallas, Tx. \n\nThe city of Dallas has its own police force: Dallas police department. Dallas resides in Dallas county, and the county has its own police department. We call those guys the sheriff's department. So if I'm outside the dallas city limits and I see a Dallas city cop, I can give him the metaphorical finger because he doesn't have jurisdiction over me. If I saw a Dallas county sheriff, though, he would have jurisdiction, and I'd better not give him the finger if I know what's good for me. \n\nSo we've seen 2 entities: the city and the county. What do they do if I commit a crime in Dallas, then run down to Houston? For that, they need a police force with jurisdiction over the entire state. In the case of Texas, we have several different state-level organizations. We've got Texas state troopers, who are state police. We have the highway patrol, who patrols the state's highways. Then we have the famous Texas Rangers. They do a lot of specialized functions. One of their jobs is to work with the police forces of smaller towns to provide special investigation resources that the town can't afford. For example, a rape and murder happens in the small town of Crawford, Texas (famous home of G.W. Bush's ranch). They don't have a homicide department with fancy forensics, so they call the Texas Rangers to come help investigate. \n\nSo, now we've got up to state level, but what happens if I commit a crime that runs across state lines? For that, we need a nation-wide police force. There are several entities charged with various aspects of law enforcement, such as ICE, DEA, ATF, and NSA, but the one most like an actual police force is the FBI. They handle federal crimes. When they're able, they work with state and local level police forces. They have no jurisdiction over state crimes, though. They can't give you a speeding ticket, for example, or arrest you for shoplifting, because those aren't federal crimes.\n\nSomething that happens in movies a lot, but never in real life, is that an FBI guy comes in and starts ordering around the state and local cops. The FBI doesn't have any authority over state and local police, and if one of them tried that, he'd probably get in some trouble. Each police force answers to its own executives, such as they mayor, governor, or president. \n\nEdit: to answer about 911 calls, the entity with the lowest level of jurisdiction usually answers. So if I'm in Dallas, the city police will answer the call. If I'm in the middle of nowhere, a sheriff would show up. ",
"Different jurisdictions and specific responsibilities. \n\nCity police have jurisdiction for the city only, it ends at the city limits. \n\nSheriffs have jurisdiction for the county and while they can operate within a city focus on outside of the city in rural areas and suburbs unless asked to help. They also tent to run the local jail. \n\nState police operate within the entirety of a State. Some like highway patrol focus on transit on the highways, while others like the Texas Rangers specialize in major crimes like riots, mass murders, serial murders, etc. They also operate on investigating the actual police lower in ranking. They will also deal with prisoner transfers across county lines.\n\nConstables. In the US this is normally not interchangeable with city police like it is in some other countries. Constables here tend to be limited in number and specialize in running security for courthouses (Bailiffs) and sometimes for jails if the Sheriff is not in charge of it, as well as actual full prisons. \n\nFederal level police such as the FBI and US Marshals have jurisdiction across the whole US, but all have specialized tasks. The FBI tend to be investigative of various federal crimes, while the Marshals tend to be more protective being in charge of things like witness protection and prisoner transfers. ",
"FBI deals with federal crimes - in the US some crimes are federal and the rest are state crimes.\n\nMurder is a state, not federal crime. Kidnapping is federal, if one crosses a state line while committing a crime, it's federal.\n\nIt's a complex system because each state in the US has it's own government, own constitution and handles everything that isn't expressly federal.\n\nSo if I go out and kill someone, the FBI isn't going to be involved.\n\nIf I kidnap someone, drive across a state line and kill them, the FBI will have the first right of arrest and a Federal Court will try me for kidnapping with intent to murder, then the state where I killed the person has a the chance to try me for murder and I'll have two trials.",
"Cities have their own police forces, whether a large city like New York and Chicago, or smaller towns. State Troopers mostly patrol interstate highways (because they pass through many local jurisdictions). Sheriffs have different roles depending on the area -- in rural or unincorporated areas (part of a county but not city/town), they serve as primary law enforcement. In placed with municipal police, they run the jails and court security -- basically once police arrest somebody and they're charged, the sheriff is in charge of securing them until they are convicted or released.\n\nFBI are federal police, and investigate specific types of crimes that are interstate (cross state borders) or federal-level crimes like financial crimes, organized crime. ",
"I've got to be honest with you here: my wife works in public safety, and we've had this discussion several times before. It always ends up with her getting to \"yeah, I know, it's really kinda *weird*\", with lots and lots of caveats of \"well in *our* jurisdiction it works like this, but it can vary and I know that these three other nearby jurisdictions all do it three different ways\".\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThe broad strokes answer is:\n\n* State troopers are employed by the state government, and have jurisdiction statewide (but will *generally* defer to local police for a strictly local issue). This means that, for example, state troopers are more likely to be the ones doing traffic enforcement on interstate highways.\n* Police officers are employed by the local government, and only have jurisdiction within their locality (but will *generally* cooperate with either nearby police officers or state troopers for cross-jurisdictional issues). This means that, for example, police officers are more likely to be the ones doing traffic enforcement on local roads.\n* Sheriffs are *weird*. Not everywhere has them, and places that do have them don't use them the same way. The Sheriff themselves is *elected*, not appointed. This means they essentially can't be fired before their term is up (they'd have to be impeached and that's extremely rare). Their position is often mandated by the state constitution, which means the Sheriff's Department can't be disbanded and must be funded. However, while those things might make it sounds like they have more power than police, they often deal with the \"back end\" of law enforcement: the police officers might be the ones on the \"front lines\", responding to calls, making arrests, and being the primary investigators, while the sheriff's office handles courthouse security and runs the local jail. And, again...all of that may be **completely** different jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction.",
"This is speaking strictly for the state of Georgia, since I don't have enough knowledge of police and laws elsewhere.\n\nCity police generally handle whatever comes at them, with exception to some things that are delegated to other agencies. They can pull you over within city limits, they check on domestic violence cases, etc. More on what they don't really focus on ahead.\n\nThe Sheriff's Office is the county police. The sheriff is an elected official the presides over the department, in similar context to how a \"chief\" is the head of the city police. Technically speaking, at least in the state of Georgia, the Sheriff holds the most authoritative, non-political (as in not similar to the mayor or city hall, but they certainly can influence local politics) power in his county, period. Now, if the FBI shows up and says \"We're in charge now,\" they're probably gonna be in charge anyway, even if that isn't right on paper. \nAlso, this is where the \"You're out of your jurisdiction!\" argument falls through in our state. You see, deputies (Your \"standard officer\" in a SO) of *any* county in the state of GA have legal arrest power in *every* county in GA. So if you see (for some reason) Cobb County Sheriff's Dept. in Rabun county, they can still arrest you all the same and it will still carry weight.\nAs for their duties, it is kind of in between city police and state troopers. They generally tend to deal more with the investigation after-the-fact, as opposed to being first on scene, though they do that, as well. They also do speed traps and patrols.\n\nNow, State Patrol is a little more iffy in my mind since I don't have quite as much experience with them, but for the most part, they take precedence over the highways/interstates and patrolling them. Of course, it would go without saying that a state trooper has legal authority all over the state. However, they do have seperate barracks (which is their term for their office, essentially) throughout the state, and to the best of my knowledge, they don't all just patrol the entire state. As in, the ones that live and work in the north GA probably wouldn't be patrolling in South GA, but I don't know well enough to be certain, so take that with a grain of salt.\n\nOn a side, Game Wardens are also official Law Enforcement Officers, and carry (I believe) authoritative power around the level of a deputy, but they don't really have a jurisdiction finer than the state lines. They concern is more with poaching, illegal operations in state parks and varied forests, and so on. Essentially the \"forest police\", in laymans terms, but certainly not to be disrespected or treater as a lesser officer, as they can definitely fuck your day up.\n\nThe FBI are federal level, and have jurisdiction anywhere that is legally considered the USA. They spend most time hunting big ticket criminals or fugitives across state lines, and tend to do more \"investigating and finding people\" than \"pulling people over and giving tickets.\" Technically, the only person on here they wouldn't be above is the Sheriff of whatever particular county their in (if they're in GA), but if the Men in Black says so, so be it.\n\nSo, to summarize, essentially;\n\nCity - Daily occurences and getting a situation under preliminary control, some speed traps.\n\nCounty - Daily occurences, investigation, speed traps.\n\nState - Highway patrol, investigations.\n\nNow, these lines get blurred every day, and there is no \"This is our job, this is your job\" between them for the most part. Some things they are better suited for, but they generally do a little bit of it all, just depending on where they are. But they all deserve the preliminary respect the uniform carries, none of them are \"more badass\" than the other or anything like that.\n\nSome of this may be a little iffy or not totally correct, like terminology, but to get the gist, that's their difference. Anyone please feel free to correct me if some of this is wrong.\n\nSource: LEO family that work and reside in the state of georgia, I've asked a lot of similar questions."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
jaers
|
how does the us credit rating that went down from a aaa to aa affect me, the average consumer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jaers/eli5_how_does_the_us_credit_rating_that_went_down/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2aguxz",
"c2agvn7",
"c2agwhq",
"c2agzhq",
"c2ah4ep",
"c2ahhlc",
"c2ahmol",
"c2ajb1c",
"c2ak1xd",
"c2akawm",
"c2aguxz",
"c2agvn7",
"c2agwhq",
"c2agzhq",
"c2ah4ep",
"c2ahhlc",
"c2ahmol",
"c2ajb1c",
"c2ak1xd",
"c2akawm"
],
"score": [
21,
27,
5,
76,
385,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2,
21,
27,
5,
76,
385,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'd like to know how this will affect me as an average Canadian consumer. LI5 of course. ",
"As a college student seeking a student loan with so-so credit, holy shit how might this affect me ):",
"The S & P is only 1 of 3 rating agency's to downgrade us...until the other's do there isn't much to worry about. The Fed is going to have to increase interest rates though which will mean higher interest on student, car, and home loans. ",
"To be honest, it probably won't. We're talking about one of the three agencies (S & P, Moody's, and Fitch) downgrading, while the other two affirm AAA. They asked for $4 trillion and got 2 or 3, but the truth is they could have cut nothing and not damaged the integrity of the US's debt. I personally view a lot of the ratings agency drama to be generated by Washington not making deals (particularly one party) and making a huge deal out of the usually quick and easy limit increase. Also, you know those guys who gave shitty, shitty subprime mortgages AAA or AA ratings, and the same with the dangerous morons at AIG? Oh yeah, it was these guys. If you look at Japan their debt rating lowering had no effect on the economy during their lost decade, so I don't see why anyone should be so alarmist.\n\nEDIT: *Like you're five?* *Fine*: (this actually goes into the *entire* issue of the debt ceiling, too)\n\nYou and your friend Annie want to get some money to build a lemonade stand. You ask your other friends to give you some money, and promise you'll pay them back with a bit extra. They give you $14 trillion, or so. You *always* *always* pay back the people who give you money, and *never* stop business. Annie says she doesn't want to borrow any more, and is worried that you won't be able to pay it off. You agree that something should be done with this ridiculous amount of borrowing, but favour raising the prices a bit, because just spending less would be really hard, because you'd have to pay your suppliers for lemonade less and your cashiers less too. \n\nThis is where David, Jerry, and Lisa come in. They're the people who from the beginning of your stand had assured people you'd pay them back, they even gave you a AAA (very, very good) rating for it. So no one is afraid to pay your bills. They notice you and Annie fighting over the money, though, and start to question themselves even harder on the rating. They realize that $14 trillion is a lot of money for a lemonade stand, and that it makes up about 90% of everything you're buying and selling, and since you're already fighting over the money, decide to call for $4 trillion, which even they know is totally ridiculous, considering the risk of you *never* paying for it is virtually zero. \n\nEventually, you iron out a deal, and David and Jerry remind everyone you're just fine, with a little bit of a warning attached, though. Lisa, well Lisa's mad and advises people to be a bit more careful when giving you money, lowering you to AA. The thing is, you never *haven't* paid the people who gave you money, you've always been very good to the people who gave you it. So they are still fine with giving you more and more money. But there's more, looking into your kindergarten newspaper you notice that Lisa once said that people should give money to Leonard, for him to buy a bunch of turkish delight. *Who the fuck eats turkish delight?* People believed her too, and lost *tons* of money. I guess they thought there must be someone buying big turks.\n\nYou're not worried though, because people don't trust Lisa as much as they used to, and besides, Jerry and David are still cool with you. Besides, the same thing happened to Anne, and *all* of those guys told everybody to stop giving her money, and it didn't make anything worse (though things were already bad). \n\nMan, five year olds really have to get their economics and current events together if they expect short explanations.",
"Your dad is the head of the household. He's is real good on paying back people and makes a lot of money and is rather wealthy, so people trust lending him money. In the last couple of years, your dad did some irresponsible things and even threatened to not pay even though he can. Finally, one of the community leaders/experts said that your dad may not be as trustworthy as everyone thought.\n\nSo either people ignore that suggestion or people start asking more money (interest) when not only your dad asks for money, but when anyone in your family does. \n\nSo anything with interest from credit cards to variable rate mortgages to private student loans COULD, but may not, increase. What if you don't owe any money? Well states and cities may also find their borrowing rates higher and may struggle keeping things running while maintaining services and not raising taxes. ",
"AAA very reliable, will pay you back quickly if you loan them money.\n\nAA reliable, will pay you back soon if not immediately\n\n And your AA rated government has less cash because they now have to pay more money when they borrow from a bank, even though it's the same amount of money they borrowed last year when they had an AAA rating. Worst of all the cost gets transferred to you even though they screwed up, the government messed up citizens have to pay. ",
"Thank you for asking this...was wondering the same thing.",
"What does this mean for the strength of the dollar on the currency markets?",
"Thanks for posting this -- instant payoff for joining ELI5 this morning.",
"Welp, I guess [no one](_URL_0_) cares until it happens.",
"I'd like to know how this will affect me as an average Canadian consumer. LI5 of course. ",
"As a college student seeking a student loan with so-so credit, holy shit how might this affect me ):",
"The S & P is only 1 of 3 rating agency's to downgrade us...until the other's do there isn't much to worry about. The Fed is going to have to increase interest rates though which will mean higher interest on student, car, and home loans. ",
"To be honest, it probably won't. We're talking about one of the three agencies (S & P, Moody's, and Fitch) downgrading, while the other two affirm AAA. They asked for $4 trillion and got 2 or 3, but the truth is they could have cut nothing and not damaged the integrity of the US's debt. I personally view a lot of the ratings agency drama to be generated by Washington not making deals (particularly one party) and making a huge deal out of the usually quick and easy limit increase. Also, you know those guys who gave shitty, shitty subprime mortgages AAA or AA ratings, and the same with the dangerous morons at AIG? Oh yeah, it was these guys. If you look at Japan their debt rating lowering had no effect on the economy during their lost decade, so I don't see why anyone should be so alarmist.\n\nEDIT: *Like you're five?* *Fine*: (this actually goes into the *entire* issue of the debt ceiling, too)\n\nYou and your friend Annie want to get some money to build a lemonade stand. You ask your other friends to give you some money, and promise you'll pay them back with a bit extra. They give you $14 trillion, or so. You *always* *always* pay back the people who give you money, and *never* stop business. Annie says she doesn't want to borrow any more, and is worried that you won't be able to pay it off. You agree that something should be done with this ridiculous amount of borrowing, but favour raising the prices a bit, because just spending less would be really hard, because you'd have to pay your suppliers for lemonade less and your cashiers less too. \n\nThis is where David, Jerry, and Lisa come in. They're the people who from the beginning of your stand had assured people you'd pay them back, they even gave you a AAA (very, very good) rating for it. So no one is afraid to pay your bills. They notice you and Annie fighting over the money, though, and start to question themselves even harder on the rating. They realize that $14 trillion is a lot of money for a lemonade stand, and that it makes up about 90% of everything you're buying and selling, and since you're already fighting over the money, decide to call for $4 trillion, which even they know is totally ridiculous, considering the risk of you *never* paying for it is virtually zero. \n\nEventually, you iron out a deal, and David and Jerry remind everyone you're just fine, with a little bit of a warning attached, though. Lisa, well Lisa's mad and advises people to be a bit more careful when giving you money, lowering you to AA. The thing is, you never *haven't* paid the people who gave you money, you've always been very good to the people who gave you it. So they are still fine with giving you more and more money. But there's more, looking into your kindergarten newspaper you notice that Lisa once said that people should give money to Leonard, for him to buy a bunch of turkish delight. *Who the fuck eats turkish delight?* People believed her too, and lost *tons* of money. I guess they thought there must be someone buying big turks.\n\nYou're not worried though, because people don't trust Lisa as much as they used to, and besides, Jerry and David are still cool with you. Besides, the same thing happened to Anne, and *all* of those guys told everybody to stop giving her money, and it didn't make anything worse (though things were already bad). \n\nMan, five year olds really have to get their economics and current events together if they expect short explanations.",
"Your dad is the head of the household. He's is real good on paying back people and makes a lot of money and is rather wealthy, so people trust lending him money. In the last couple of years, your dad did some irresponsible things and even threatened to not pay even though he can. Finally, one of the community leaders/experts said that your dad may not be as trustworthy as everyone thought.\n\nSo either people ignore that suggestion or people start asking more money (interest) when not only your dad asks for money, but when anyone in your family does. \n\nSo anything with interest from credit cards to variable rate mortgages to private student loans COULD, but may not, increase. What if you don't owe any money? Well states and cities may also find their borrowing rates higher and may struggle keeping things running while maintaining services and not raising taxes. ",
"AAA very reliable, will pay you back quickly if you loan them money.\n\nAA reliable, will pay you back soon if not immediately\n\n And your AA rated government has less cash because they now have to pay more money when they borrow from a bank, even though it's the same amount of money they borrowed last year when they had an AAA rating. Worst of all the cost gets transferred to you even though they screwed up, the government messed up citizens have to pay. ",
"Thank you for asking this...was wondering the same thing.",
"What does this mean for the strength of the dollar on the currency markets?",
"Thanks for posting this -- instant payoff for joining ELI5 this morning.",
"Welp, I guess [no one](_URL_0_) cares until it happens."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2fcs/can_someone_explain_what_would_happen_if_americas/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2fcs/can_someone_explain_what_would_happen_if_americas/"
]
] |
||
2mj2nz
|
what is the function of a world trade center?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mj2nz/eli5what_is_the_function_of_a_world_trade_center/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm4qviv",
"cm4qwad"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The world Trade Center association exists to promote exchange between corporations and governments internationally. ",
"To be clear The World Trade Center had no affliated organization or function. The name had nothing to do with the function or purpose of organizations that were headquartered there. It was just about real estate marketing. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1qyj4m
|
why are some mammals more self sufficient at birth than others?
|
Cows seem super sufficient at birth, why aren't humans or other mammals? Some mammals don't even need much help after birth. Humans would be dead without their parents.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qyj4m/eli5why_are_some_mammals_more_self_sufficient_at/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdhtaov"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"All mammals require some assistance from their mother, milk. It is true humans require, at minimum, 5 years to learn the basics of being able to live. Many mammals also have similar periods. Cats and dogs for example spend time with siblings and the mother. Our time is longer, partially because we live, even in ancient times, much longer than most mammals.\n\nEvolutionarily, dependence, while burdening the parent, increases survival rates of the progeny. Which increases the chances that your genes will survive. Hence it is favored. Animals which do not spend time with the parents tend to have high rates of death early in life. They counter this by producing a larger number of offspring per go. Where as we have one or two children per go, snakes or other reptiles have dozens. Most of the snakes will get eaten, but some will survive because there are more than can be eaten.\n\nHumans, on the other hand, put all of their resources into a couple of offspring, so to make sure they don't die, we raise them. Because it would be a huge loss to lose one human, when you might have one or two, compare to losing one snake of two dozen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
8hjox9
|
why does our vision look black and white when it is dark and our eyes get adjusted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8hjox9/eli5_why_does_our_vision_look_black_and_white/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dykacn4",
"dykcbve",
"dykn48o"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"In our eyes we have two different recepters called rods and cones. Cones help us see color and rods help us decern between light and dark. Cones are only useful if there is light, because color is a reflection of white light. Rods, on the other hand, are fantastic at making out shapes and figures when there is no light around. With no cones active, we are using only our rods making everything appear black and white.",
"There are two types of light sensitive cells - rods and cones. The cone cells each contain one of three different rhodopsin proteins which respond to different wavelengths of light - red, green and blue - allowing perception of colour.\n\nRods are more sensitive to light and can be activated by much less light than cones. Rods only contain one type of rhodopsin however so you cannot differentiate colours in low light.",
"We have two types of cameras in our eyes. \n\nOne's great in taking colour photos but is blind in low light – cones. The other has great low light performance but can't tell colours — rods.\n\nIn the dark, our mind has to settle for what the rods say. Night blindness is caused due to weak rods.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
g3m2e8
|
is it true that if you learn another language it become much easier to learn another after that.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g3m2e8/eli5is_it_true_that_if_you_learn_another_language/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fns1wnb"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It depends on multiple factors\n\n1) Your native language\n2)The language you have learnt\n3) The language you want to learn\n4) Which language branch they are a part of \n\nFor example German is a Germanic language. French is a Romance language. Those languages have no close connection. So, if you learn French, German won't be easier to learn. However, if you learn Dutch, which is closely related to German, German will be much easier to learn."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
brrrk9
|
why is it that babies like being rocked to sleep yet as we get older rocking can be uncomfortable such as on a boat?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/brrrk9/eli5_why_is_it_that_babies_like_being_rocked_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eog1hxv",
"eog29jg",
"eog557z",
"eog7ar0"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The womb is a fluid-filled sac, and when a mother moves about the baby is very slightly rocked thanks to that fluid. The baby becomes used to this feeling before birth, so rocking helps to calm them afterward for a time. \n\n\nAdult humans don't live in fluid-filled sacs. We're not used to being moved or rocked outside of our own willpower.",
"Humans sense of balance is largely derived from bubbles of fluid by our ears. The fluid moves around as we move like a bubble in a carpenter's level. But the fluid gets thicker as we age and is less accurate for tracking movement. So while children like merry go rounds and usually don't get carsick, as humans age they find such things to be less pleasant and get car sick more easily",
"Being rocked in someone's arms is generally a fixed rhythm and gentle. Being rocked on a boat is generally more violent and random.",
"I don't think that rocking becomes uncomfortable as we get older. Many people like rocking chairs, for example.\n\nBoat rocking or airplane turbulence is uncomfortable because it's not steady, it's uncontrollable, and can be dangerous (like in a storm).\n\nBut slow and gentle rocking at a steady pace that you're in control of? That shit is the tits."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
zrof8
|
the "texture" problem with in-vitro meat.
|
One of the biggest problems with in-vitro meat is that it is soft and textureless.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but ordinary meat gains its texture and firmness by exercise when it is in the animal. Exercise that in-vitro meat doesn't get.
Now, muscles work by contracting when they receive an electrical impulse.
Couldn't in-vitro meat simply be hit by constant, repeated electrical impulses as it is being grown to make it contract over and over to "exercise" it in order to give it the desired feel?
I'm not about to assume that I can think of something that the technicians who work on this stuff haven't thought of, so there's obviously some reason why that doesn't work. What is it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zrof8/the_texture_problem_with_invitro_meat/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c674p8h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Meat derived from animals is not even *close* to just muscle. There's fat and connective tissue all combined and distributed in very complex ways, which we can't currently replicate without growing the entire animal."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
f68l51
|
why do some glues require you to apply onto both pieces and wait hours till dry before sticking them together?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f68l51/eli5_why_do_some_glues_require_you_to_apply_onto/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fi3a5mn"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Because they contain a solvent that allows the glue to be fluid and seep into the material you are trying to glue, to bind to it. But this solvent makes re glue not too sticky. It needs tk flash off. Once the solvent evaporates it becomes super sticky to it self. But less so other objects. So having both objects covered and allowed to flash off gives you the best result. \n\nIf you where to not do this you might have to wait months for the glue to cure. Because the solvent will slowly leach out from the sides of the glue area."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2a6wsr
|
what would happen if someone could theoretically dig through the earth? would they eventually find themselves digging "up?"
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a6wsr/eli5_what_would_happen_if_someone_could/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cis3gy5"
],
"score": [
27
],
"text": [
"\"Dig\" is a little bit generous for what would actually happen. The earth is only dirt for a relatively shallow distance, then it's solid rock followed by magma. You can't dig to the center of the earth any more than you could dig to the bottom of a pool (assuming that pool is filled with lava). \n\nWe can imagine digging through a planet-sized ball of solid matter, though. Perhaps the moon, let's say. It turns out that when you're calculating gravity there are some nice simplifications you can do if you're just concerned with the gravity from a spherically symmetric object (like a planet or moon). The earth isn't perfectly symmetric, but it's pretty close. Basically, you get to count all of the mass below you as if it were concentrated at a point at the center of the sphere, and you get to ignore all of the mass above you. So if you're 50 km deep into a 100 km radius sphere (of constant density) then gravity will feel the same as if you were just on the surface of a sphere 50 km in radius. The math to prove this is fairly complicated, but it's ultimately depends on the fact that while there is more mass \"below\" you than \"above\" you, you are closer to the mass \"above\" you so it pulls harder. Conveniently, these exactly cancel out.\n\nSo if you're looking at just the gravitational effects then the diggers would find themselves getting lighter as they dig down. For earth the highest gravity is actually around the boundary of the mantle/outer core (as you descend you are traveling closer to the dense core while canceling out the gravity of the relatively low density crust). Gravity peaks at about 11 m/s^2 (it's 9.8 m/s^2 at the surface), then reduces to zero at the center—gravity is pulling you equally in all directions. You can see a graph of the gravity with depth/altitude in [this](_URL_0_) chart. \n\nIf you were to create a tube through the earth (and could stop the earth from spinning, since that screws this up) you could jump into one end and, neglecting air resistance (let's pretend we've pulled a vacuum on the tube) you would be accelerated up to a maximum speed as you approached the center of the earth, at which point you would start slowing down. If you haven't lost any energy by hitting the walls or due to air resistance then you will come out of the tube on the opposite side of the planet and would stop moving just as you got to the same altitude as you jumped in from. If you didn't step out at that point then you would fall back into the hole and oscillate either forever (no friction) or until you came to rest at the center of the tube (with friction). The trip would take about 42 minutes.\n\nInterestingly (and I know I'm diverging from the original question), you could tunnel from any location to any other with a straight vacuum tube and a vehicle powered only by gravity would always take the same amount of time to go from A to B (you have to assume that the earth's density is constant here). This is because shorter paths wind up not accelerating or decelerating as quickly as paths that travel close to the center of the earth.\n\nAnd before anyone asks, no: this is not a reasonable technology. We will not be putting tubes through the earth in our lifetimes; probably ever. The cost would be insane if it is even possible and there are enough assumptions in the design that it becomes impractical. This is just a physics thought experiment to show off some of the cool properties of spherically symmetric gravitational fields. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth#mediaviewer/File:EarthGravityPREM.svg"
]
] |
||
52icof
|
beer and rate of consumption...
|
From a health standpoint, is it "healthier" to drink 2 beers a day for a week or drink 14 beers in one day? Is potential damage or dependency independent of the rate and/or frequency at which the alcohol is consumed when the total amount consumed is equal.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52icof/eli5_beer_and_rate_of_consumption/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7kjlay"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"2 a day would be healthier.\n\nWhen you drink 14 at once, your body is going to struggle to deal with it at once, you're taxing your system a lot more. \n\nWhile a couple a day, your liver can deal with that without a bunch of backlog, you're not going to be sick, not going to be dehydrated etc..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1ue1rw
|
why is my income taxed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ue1rw/eli5_why_is_my_income_taxed/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceh3nrj",
"ceh3nvp",
"ceh3p5c"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You, like all people in your country, enjoy goods and services provided by the government: police, firefighters, public roads and schools, the benefits of regulated commerce, safe air, food, and medicine, and military protection from adversaries, to name a few. To pay for these goods and services, the government collects taxes. Income taxes are one effective means by which to pay for these goods and services. ",
"Because governments around the world have found that to be an effective and useful way to derive much of their funding. So they all do it, with a few minor exceptions like Monaco. ",
"Keeping it very simple.\n\n* Governments need tax money to pay for stuff, such as schools, roads, parks, health inspectors and so on.\n* Most people agree that people who earn more money should pay more tax.\n* Taxing a percentage of your income is a simple way to do this."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
yqw6a
|
why do people still use high street estate agents?
|
Having gone through online and high street estate agents myself, I can't see any reason why people use high street agents.
I read [this article](_URL_0_) saying that people are "turning" to online agents (and the comments section said that some people were eschewing all agents, and doing the work themselves), but I don't understand why people are still using high street agents at all, when the amount they charge seems to be so out of proportion.
There must be *an* advantage, otherwise people wouldn't do it. Reddit, can you explain to me what that advantage is, as though I were but a wee bairn?
PS - No, I'm not [that](_URL_1_) James Duval. Just a guy with a similar name.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yqw6a/eli5_why_do_people_still_use_high_street_estate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5y1gxy"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is reassuring to see an official business with an office so if anything goes wrong you know they will be there to go to in person and are unlikely to be able to suddenly vanish leaving you in a mess.\n\nMost if not all, advertise houses online anyway and if they have the house you want or have most of the market in the area you want then you will need to deal with them."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-2181050/Homesellers-turn-online-estate-agents-avoid-hefty-charges.html",
"http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001166/"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
35njlh
|
why are people now saying bin laden is alive?
|
And that Obama lied.
Just saw it on the news, and on Yahoo. Im confused.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35njlh/eli5why_are_people_now_saying_bin_laden_is_alive/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr61ywn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The latest news is that there's a guy saying \"Hey, I looked into this, and bin Laden wasn't just discovered in that compound in Abbottabad (sp?).\" Basically, he's claiming that bin Laden had been held captive there by the Pakistani government for years, until the US sent their force to go in and execute him. There was no battle, no Zero Dark Thirty stuff, just a few soldiers flown in to kill the one guy.\n\nI haven't researched enough to know if he is making a valid point, but he is making a claim that goes against every government and military record, interview, etc. But in both stories (his and the official one), bin Laden was killed in the raid, so I don't think that anyone's claiming that he's still alive."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2upen8
|
how did the british decide what intelligence from breaking enigma to act on and what to let go?
|
I just saw "The Imitation Game" and it claims they used statistical analysis to calculate what was safe to act on and what was not. I can't figure out how that could possibly work because it would require knowing how much German intelligence new about British intelligence, and that seems impossible for them to have calculated every single day.
So how did the British make decisions about what intelligence to act on and what they couldn't?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2upen8/eli5_how_did_the_british_decide_what_intelligence/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coagbp0",
"coakrcy"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well the good news about breaking Enigma is that they now would know everything that German intelligence knew. The Germans communicated with their troops and generals through the Enigma transmissions, therefore, if you had broken Enigma, and the Germans didn't know you had, they would continue using it as if no one was hearing what they were saying. \n\nBecause of this, they could listen in and make statistical decisions on what strategies to use to win the war slowly. Because of the Statistics, they could stop certain attacks and allow others to happen. By doing this, Hitler wouldn't suspect that they had broken Enigma because why would you let your own soldiers die if you knew an attack was coming. It is an ethical nightmare but that's war for ya. ",
"The idea that the British were selective in reacting to Enigma intelligence is overstated. There were a few isolated incidents when the allied decided not to tip their hands, but the Axis pretty much considered the code unbreakable, and continued to rely on it despite evidence to the contrary.\n\nAlso note that Enigma messages will had to be intercepted, and not all were, giving the Allies an incomplete view into German operations. Not all intelligence was able to be put to good use."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
32fzbw
|
if plants have both male and female organs why can't they reproduce with themselves?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32fzbw/eli5_if_plants_have_both_male_and_female_organs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqatkku",
"cqatlay",
"cqatu74",
"cqau2ma",
"cqauzmb",
"cqbiqap"
],
"score": [
31,
10,
7,
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"They can, but that's not good for genetic diversity. Natural selection has favored species that \"seek out\" other individuals to reproduce with.",
"many can - through autogamy or geitonogamy. its not all that common, but...peanuts are the example that comes to mind.\n\nIt's not common most likely because it has disadvantages - the adaptation to the environment is based only on mutation and never upon combination.\n\n\n",
"Some plant species can reproduce asexually (by themselves) and sexually (with another plant). \n\nSexual reproduction is more common as it allows of a greater mix of genetic material/DNA, meaning that plant populations are more diverse. \n\nA more diverse population allows some plants to survive things like diseases wist other plants in the species cannot, and then allows the sexually reproducing species of plants to then continue reproducing. \n\nWhereas an asexual plant species that all have the same DNA would be able to be killed by the same diseases, as all plants in the species are identical.\n\nSo while many plants can reproduce by themselves, reproducing with others is prefered.",
"Not only can they reproduce with themselves, they can also develop unfertilized \"eggs\" into fruit (so called parthenogenesis). But such a thing is not profitable since they don't get the genetic diversity they would if they reproduced with other organisms\n\nEDIT: I just remembered, there are common species that are all clones of eachother, for example bananas. The common banana that we all love to eat is completely infertile, and can only be multiplicated through cloning (splitting plants into several saplings). The problem with bananas is that they are greatly endangered because there is a disease that easily kills them. If bananas would reproduce in a standard way (cross-genetic) there would be a very small, but real chance that once of the \"banana offspring\" would be immune to that disease, and would allow the species to last. As of now the only way to solve the problem is genetically modifying bananas and hoping they will \"learn\" how to defend themselves that way, but that takes much more effort and costs much more money.",
"Many plants do auto fertilize I.e. Tomatoes. But the beauty of plants sexually reproducing is the diversity of genes introduced by other genetically different plants. ",
"They can, but it reduces genetic diversity. If you want to see this in action, go to West Virginia to see this in action on a human population and zee how well that works out."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ch1x2
|
why is the current in a series circuit with multiple loads constant throughout the circuit? how do the electrons "know" to send less current in a circuit with more loads?
|
My teacher explained this concept using Kirchoff's Current Law: since all the current entering a load must come out, a series circuit cannot have different currents in different parts of the circuit.
Here's where I get confused:
If I hook up a 5V battery to a 1 Ohm resistor, I get 5A of current in my circuit. However, the moment I add another 1 Ohm resistor "downstream" of the first resistor, I get 2.5 A of current everywhere in the circuit, even "upstream" of the first resistor.
Since I'm thinking about this with the water analogy, I'm confused by how the battery "knows" that there's an extra load and it better send only half the current.
Essentially, I guess my question is how the electron flow automatically changes to fit whatever load is in the circuit.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ch1x2/eli5_why_is_the_current_in_a_series_circuit_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpps5qq",
"dppuihe",
"dpq0j6t"
],
"score": [
13,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The battery doesn't know anything, the amount of current is determined by the load\n\nIf i put a 20 pound backpack on you and tell you to go for a run as fast as you can you'll make it in some certain speed\n\nIf i put an 80 pound backpack on you and tell you to go for a run as fast as you can you'll be going much slower\n\nWould it be because you thought \"I am moving more load so i should run slower\" or because you aren't strong enough to move that larger load at the same speed(hint, its the second one)\n\nSame thing happens for the electrons. If you put more resistance in the circuit it is harder for them to squeeze around the circuit. Series devices all share the same current because an electron can't move forward without pushing another out of the way so you end up with the same number moving into the battery as out of the battery\n\nThat last bit works like a straw. If i give you a big straw to blow down its not too challenging, there is some resistance. Now pinch the middle and try to blow, its a lot harder and you can't get as much air through even with more force, that's increased resistance.\n\nYou're not choosing to get less work done because there is resistance, the resistance is causing you to get less work done",
" > Since I'm thinking about this with the water analogy, I'm confused by how the battery \"knows\" that there's an extra load and it better send only half the current. \n\nBatteries don't send current. Batteries are a voltage source and (ideally) provide a fixed voltage regardless of the load. \n\nFor the water analogy, how does a watter tower or pump station know to send more water to your garden hose when you swap the nozzle from the from the wide open high flow one to the narrow low flow one? It doesn't, it just provides a fixed pressure and whatever happens with flow happens. If you open a really really big valve, you will greatly increase flow and cause a pressure drop all the way along the pipe back to the source. The pressure wave travels at the speed of pressure waves, also known as sound. \n\n > Here's where I get confused: \n\n > If I hook up a 5V battery to a 1 Ohm resistor, I get 5A of current in my circuit. However, the moment I add another 1 Ohm resistor \"downstream\" of the first resistor, I get 2.5 A of current everywhere in the circuit, even \"upstream\" of the first resistor. \n\nIt doesn't the moment you add a new resistor. He skipping what is known as the transient state and going to the next steady state. He's skipping the actual change process and telling you how it will end up. \n\n\nLet's say we swap a very very fast acting instantaneous switch that makes the resistance somewhere in the circuit higher. At that instant, the electrons in that new resistor, and that new resistor only, start to encounter more resistance and slow down. The rest of the circuit is unaffected. \n\n\nNext, the electrons before the new resistor start to catch up to the slowed down one. Current is higher upstream than it is down stream at this instance. They are like charges, so they repel each other. Them getting closer together is building up a voltage repelling then from getting any closer to each other. This creates a kind of back log, and will propogate backwards upstream all the way to the battery. On the downstream side, thanks to these slowed electrons, the ones ahead of then get further and further ahead. This gap of missing electrons (which are negative) is positively charged and wants to pull these electron back. This also propogates further downstream all the way to the battery. They'll be tugging back and forth and the current will fluctuate up and down all along the circuit as all things try to equalize. Current will not be equally everywhere, in places you will be building up or depleting charge to accomodate this. Eventually, this rippling in the current will settle down to zero and you will have a new steady current in your circuit, the one your teacher is telling you about that obeys KCL. \n\n\nHow fast do these changes propogate at? Effectively the speed of light, that's why you can't notice them. The electrons attract and repel each other because they are electrically charged. Electrical chrages interact through voltages and electric field. Speed of light is just the speed a changing electric field propogates at in a vacuum. Inside of a wire is a little slower, but not far off. How long does this transient period last for? Probably millionth or billiotnths of the smallest time frame your brain can proceess. These aren't effects noticable to humans. \n\n\nIt's really no different than a traffic jam in a highway. Just because one guy has to slam on the breaks to slow down for something doesn't mean the entire highway will instantly slow to his speed. There's a human reaction time and breaking time and this will propogate backwards as some speed until all the cars behind him slow down. Replace electrons with cars and human reaction time with the speed of light, and you have the circuit. \n\n\nIs your teacher wrong about KCL? No, KCL can be made to hold at all times. What he's skipping over is another two electrical circuit components, capacitors and inductors. Capacitors store charge and let through a displacement current, so all this minute charge build up and seperation would be represented by capacitors. Even if you don't have an actual physical capacitors in your circuit, you resistors and wires have inherent capacitance and inductance and to properly model it would have the actual physical resistor replaced with an ideal resistor and an ideal capacitor. Why did he skip capacitance and the actual change process when you add a new resistor? Because you'd need advanced mathematics including calculus and imaginary numbers to deal with it. In addition to being not all that important or even noticable. \n\n\nAlso, as I've stated these changes happen way to fast for a human eye to see. However, if we stuck an actual capacitor in the circuit, a one that can hold a lot more charge than a resistor can, you could actually see these changes happening on a human timescale. ",
"* Resistance is basically a measure of how much stuff there is in the wire for electrons to smash into as they move through it. \n\n* Current is the amount of charge that moves through the wire in a given amount of time.\n\n* If there is more stuff for the electrons to smash into, then logically fewer of them will pass through the wire in that given amount of time.\n\n* So by adding resistance, you are slowing down the electrons and thus, less current. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5wuux8
|
how do different eyesight problems differ to each other? i.e. long sighted, short sighted, astigmatism
|
I have an astigmatism and often see the pictures at the optometrist showing a diagram of an eye affected by each eyesight problem, the explanations never make much sense about oval eyes or long eyes vs. rounded eyes, what causes these problems? How does an astigmatism differ to being near sighted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5wuux8/eli5how_do_different_eyesight_problems_differ_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ded3j3o"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"To see, light has to hit our eye, and then reflect back onto the retina. This image is then sent to our brain and then comprehended.\n\nIf you are short-sighted, the eyeball is either curved wrong, or too long, and instead of hitting the retina directly, the light goes in front of the retina, causing you to not be able to see things far away. \n\nLong-sighted is the opposite, with a too-short eyeball causing light to go behind the retina. This means you can focus on things far away, but not too close.\n\nAstigmatism is something else entirely. It just means that your cornea or lens ( the visible,curved, clear part of your eye) isn't smooth. This means the light rays again aren't refracted properly.\n\nYou can have astimgatism and be near-sighted ( I am!) it's just a double whammy of not refracting the light properly.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
b2k9ay
|
how do you not get food poisoning from perpetual stew? (a stew that boils constantly for days)
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b2k9ay/eli5_how_do_you_not_get_food_poisoning_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eit4hf9",
"eit9iy2",
"eith6sq"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because when you keep the stew boiling the temperature is too high for bacteria to grow, as well as killing the bacteria that was in the ingredients to start of with",
"The microorganisms that cause you food poisoning cannot thrive in boiling liquid. They are perfectly happy and thrive at room temperature, making food spoil quickly if you leave it out. ",
"Food poisoning is caused by bacteria, extreme temperature kills bacteria\n\nYou’re essentially putting the stew in an anti-freezer"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
20em48
|
if u.s./cuba relations are poor enough to not allow tourism, why is the u.s. permitted to have guantanamo bay in cuba?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20em48/eli5_if_uscuba_relations_are_poor_enough_to_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg2gnwh",
"cg2gr77",
"cg2gxjr",
"cg2ia2r",
"cg2ocii"
],
"score": [
10,
135,
59,
20,
2
],
"text": [
"because we signed an essentially permanent lease back when Cuba became independent, and continue to pay the \"rent\" even though Cuba stopped cashing the checks IIRC. \n\nCuba doesn't want the base there, and claims the lease is invalid, but they don't really have anything they can do about it. The UN can't/won't do anything, and Cuba can't exactly force us off.\n\nedit: a word",
"The US has had the naval base at Guantanamo Bay for many years, since before Castro came into power. The US has a lease for that land which is perpetual, and can be terminated only by mutual agreement or US abandonment of the base. So, basically, as long as we want it, we can stay there.\n\nThe current Cuban government does not recognize this lease that their predecessors made, but the US does. And the Castro regime did cash one of the rent checks early on, but since then [hasn't cashed any of the checks](_URL_0_).",
"First of all, relations between the US and Cuba are not poor, they are pretty much on good enough terms. The US has banned travel for Americans to Cuba from a long ago conflict, and has never reversed it (the reasons why is very complicated). \n\nThe base in Cuba is completely unrelated to any of this. The US established a naval base in Cuba in the late 1800s, with an indefinite lease, and have been there since. Legally, the lease is still valid, the Cubans want them out, but they couldn't do anything to get them out through any means, legal, military or political. The base is there to stay. ",
"After the 1898 Spanish-Cuban-American War, the United States gave Cuba its independence in 1902 with a few strings attached. The Platt Amendment to the Cuban Constitution stipulated that the U.S. could militarily intervene in Cuba if American interests were threatened. \n\nIt also allowed America to have a base in Cuban soil, which is how Guantanamo Bay came to be. ",
"From the Cuban point of view: USA citizens do not need a visa to visit Cuba. In fact, from the Cuban side it is very easy to visit Cuba. There are almost no visa hassles. \n\nFrom the USA side, USA citizens need an exit visa from the USA government to visit Cuba. \n\nThe Cuban government does not want the USA presence at Guantanamo Bay. And now that it's used as a prison, to keep \"terrorists\" locked up for over 12 years with no trial, the Cuban government wants the USA military to leave. The sooner the better. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/17/idUSN17200921"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1snj5e
|
how is it legal for a car you own to be towed and held by a towing company if parked in a private parking lot?
|
I don't mean parking in an illegal spot. I'm talking about a lot owned by a company that contracts a towing company. It's my vehicle, how can they charge me to get it back?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1snj5e/eli5_how_is_it_legal_for_a_car_you_own_to_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdzbulv",
"cdzbv9q"
],
"score": [
10,
2
],
"text": [
" > It's my vehicle, how can they charge me to get it back?\n\nYou were trespassing on private property. The towing company removed your trespassing vehicle at the request of the owner of the property. As the trespasser, you are responsible for any reasonable expenses incurred as a result of your trespass, and collateral can be held until you provide payment for those expenses.",
"Parking on private property *is* parking in an illegal spot. If you don't have permission to park there then you are parked illegally.\n\nIts standard practice that if your car gets towed that you have to pay for it. They were inconvenienced to move your car, you have to pay for it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
5ys3lj
|
why do some foods seem to taste different when they're in different shapes?
|
For example grated cheese seems to taste different to a slice of cheese.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ys3lj/eli5why_do_some_foods_seem_to_taste_different/
|
{
"a_id": [
"deshx0n",
"deswurg"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a psychological effect, your brain sees it as a different shape and expects it to taste different. It can also be applied when you try to color foods differently.",
"With the example of grated cheese, surface area also becomes a factor. The more surface area of the food that is able to contact your tongue/tastebuds the more taste you'll be able to experience. Grated or shredded cheese most likely exposes more surface area of the food to your tongue making you take a little more of of than a slice of cheese (at least until you thoroughly chew it). \n\nThe psychological effect mentioned is definitely a factor too though. This is why they use artificial coloring in American \"cheese\" for example or why they shame childrens pasta in the form of dinosaurs or stars or whatever. The color has a psychological effect. The shape and texture adds another dimension to the experience of eating the food which your mind may translate into it \"tasting better\". "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
18ow9q
|
why only one person gets knocked out with a head-to-head headbutt.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18ow9q/eli5_why_only_one_person_gets_knocked_out_with_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8go4sb",
"c8go6k0",
"c8gocx4",
"c8govht"
],
"score": [
6,
15,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"How shitty would it be if you gave someone a headbutt and passed out.",
"You get a concussion when your brain gets shaken up inside your skull. So, the cause of a concussion is less about a forceful blow to the skull, but rather a blow that rattles your head.\n\nWhen you headbutt someone, your head is moving rapidly and firmly. When you make contact, your head still keeps moving forward from the momentum; it doesn't shake. However, the fellow that gets hit recoils his head upon impact. It's the sudden recoil that shakes his brain around, giving him the concussion. If buddy held his ground, and didn't move his head or body back, the momentum of the impact would come back at you and stop your movement. That sudden stop of movement could give you the concussion instead.",
"I'm going to assume you mean an aggressive headbutt, as you would see in a fight, where one person deliberately throws their head into another's.\n\nI think the key is that you try to slam your forehead (which is relatively hard) into a softer part of your opponent, eg their nose.\n\nIf you get this wrong though and end up banging foreheads, I don't think there is any guarantee who will be knocked out, it might be both!",
"First of all: Not every headbutt ends with an knockout. In most cases only the nose of the opponent will break (filling his eyes with tears, causing him pain and bleeding like hell). The target area of a headbutt IS the nose. (For the effects i just enumerated) \nYour forehead is harder than a nosebone.\n\n(Source: I have been training MMA and self defense for a long time)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b1vnvx
|
when an animal species reaches critically low numbers, and we enact a breeding/repopulating program, is there a chance that the animals makeup will be permanently changed through inbreeding?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b1vnvx/eli5_when_an_animal_species_reaches_critically/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eiohjce",
"eiohnq5",
"eiolftu",
"eiolyy8",
"eiopxa7",
"eioq2md",
"eioqwec",
"eiorort",
"eioryzy",
"eiou8by",
"eiovoln",
"eiovvuq",
"eiovvx2",
"eiow1do",
"eioz67x",
"eip0y4p",
"eip2q77",
"eip37zd",
"eip643h",
"eip6o9i",
"eip7l24",
"eip8ssg",
"eipasf6",
"eipcc1r",
"eipetaf",
"eiph4n2",
"eiplrek",
"eiq1qv7",
"eiq3oxx",
"eiq4weo"
],
"score": [
5104,
43,
281,
735,
87,
8,
8,
56,
227,
2,
15,
3,
7,
88,
27,
4,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
5,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When the population gets so low, the genetic diversity is *definitely* reduced—no chance about it. This makes the species more susceptible to problems in the future even if the population comes roaring back. They are more likely to all die from the same disease, for instance. The genes are so similar that it is less likely for a few members of the population to have immunity.",
"When a new population is established from a very small number of individuals the population can change because of low genetic variability. In Population Genetics this is called the Founder Effect. ",
"Yes, also causes other issues including genes being lost completely which makes the population less able to recover from disaster events",
"Yep. Which is why its important to protect species / habitats **before** they become endangered! Yes the population numbers might return after conservation efforts, but the genetic makeup of the species/populations won’t necessarily be the same as before. ",
"Yes. But this is also true with *any* sort of breeding, including natural reproduction- the species will be permanently changed. It is usually slow and subtle changes. But because of how sudden and striking breeding programs are, we get to see or think about these changes very vividly.\n\nThis comes down to what a \"species\" is. Part of the criteria is that animals of the same species can interbreed. But in real life, this is sometimes not cut and dry. Take ring species, for example:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nAnimals in population A can breed with population B, which can breed with population C, and so on, because they are closely enough related. But when you get to the ends of the ring, you find that animals in population A cannot breed with population Z because they are genetically too far apart. Even though populations in between can interbreed!\n\nEvery generation causes change in a species, because a species can be thought of as two very different things: an overarching \"stereotype\" of what a \"kind\" of animal is like, but also as a collection of individuals. And natural / artificial selection can be seen as acting on individuals and a species in these two ways as well.\n\nIt just so happens that, because of our lifespans, we rarely get to experience firsthand, with our own eyes, change in a species. And it is precisely in breeding / repopulation programs that we can see such change in our lifetime!",
"This [article in Nature World News](_URL_0_) discusses research from Purdue University. They report that many of the \"counting\" methods that determine if animals are threatened or endangered do not include genetic diversity in the definition.\n\nThis omission may result in a species endangered by low genetic diversity, not simply by number of individuals.",
"Breeding and repopulating programs use a database to determine what individuals breed to reduce the effects of inbreeding. All captive individuals are kept in a database and are paired based on their genetics. This is called a Species Survival Plan. Once individuals are paired, zoos will swap the individuals around so they can be bred. Individuals with less beneficial genes are retired from the program. ",
"Even among established populations, groups of animals can become isolated from each other by busy roads and physical barriers like fences. In Southern California, a group of pumas became isolated from the main population by I-15, and were becoming inbred. One male successfully crossing I-15 and breeding with the females was enough to inject some genetic diversity. You can read about it here: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nThis situation underscores the importance of building animal corridors into our cities and roadways. When a population gets too small and inbred, it will die out. Just adding culverts and tunnels under walls and roads is a start, but it's better still to have long connected green spaces with plenty of cover.",
"Yeah - when zoos do Species Survival plans, they actually take this into account.\n\nGreen SSPs are self-sustaining, meaning that we have enough individuals to avoid inbreeding and maintain a healthy captive population.\n\nYellow SSPs aren't self-sustaining but have the potential to become self-sustaining without seriously harming wild populations - usually means we don't have a high enough reproduction rate in captivity but have enough captive individuals to create a good breeding program with a bit of improvement.\n\nRed studbooks have populations of fewer than 50 animals and are not self sustaining. They can't actually be considered an SSP because breeding under these conditions is not recommended without serious improvement. ",
"Yes but in an ideal situation, you can sort out which animals are breeding to create the mathematically maximum diversity from a small group.\n\nAnimals generally don't want to inbreed. It's instinctively wrong. This makes it a bit easier to prevent in endangered animals.",
"It's called a bottleneck event, when a species is reduced to a small subset, then regrows, scientists have found evidence that man kind may have gone through a few of these events with the global human population being as low as ten thousand.\n\nIt's generally not a good thing.",
"One example of interesting genetic mutations in a dwindling population was woolly mammoths:\n_URL_0_",
"Absolutely. It's not a species, but I know that Cavalier King Charles Spaniel dogs were bred back up from such a small population that most of them have heart defects now because one of the dogs in the initial breeding pool did. If you have a small enough breeding pool and aren't careful, an unusual trait or a health issue one animal has can become a common feature of a species.",
"There’s a term called a genetic bottleneck. When a population is reduced to a very low number from a very high number, the remaining animals’ genes will basically decide the short-term fate of the species. There are only those genes to choose from, aside from mutation which is a very slow process, hence the “short-term” part. That being said, you don’t need a lot animals to have decent variation. Obviously it varies, but around 50 is still enough to not have a negative impact. Also, arguably the surviving animals are the most fit and should have the genes that will best help the species survive. \n\nTo give an example, I once read that cheetahs are all so closely related that you could take skin from one cheetah and transplant it to another random cheetah and it would not be rejected because cheetahs are so genetically similar. This is because something like 50,000 years ago, there was a big cheetah extinction and only a few members were left. Those members’ genes then decided what kinds of immune molecules cheetahs could express (since the immune system is responsible for transplant rejection but that’s a whole other story). \n\nA similar situation occurs when a small population settles a new area. Say ten chimps leave a population of 1,000 chimps and settle the jungle across the river that no chimps live in. And now with the river there is no exchange between the two populations. Those ten chimps that moved will have the genes that determine their descendants genes. This is called the Founder Effect iirc. Given enough time, the two populations may even evolve into different species as long as the two groups can’t mate (in this case due to the river). \n\nSource: I’m a molecular biologist but I did three years of evolutionary genetics research in undergrad. Since it was undergrad my memory is a little rusty so some of the terms I used may not be exactly correct, like Founder Effect. ",
"Yes. This is a common theme in evolution. It is called a founders effect or the islands effect. There are several examples available of that, but let's go over the specifics first.\n\nA low number of animals 'restarting' the species, means their genetic diversity will be lower. This also means any genetic defect present in one of the 'restarting' animals, will have a higher prevalence in all the offspring. \n\nIf you have a population where there are 95% black cats and 5% white cats and their numbers get critically low. There happen to survive 3 black cats and 1 white cat. They are bread and manage to restart the cat population, however, after the 'almost extinct'-event (and oversimplifying genetics in this example) there will be 25% white cats and 75% black cats, so the makeup of the species is significantly changed. \n\nThere are several human examples on that too. It is easy to interpret a racist undertone in the following facts, this is unintentional. \n\nThe occurrence of Huntington disease in white south afrikans of european decend is much, much higher than their european motherpopulations. This is because in the small group of colonists, coming with the boat, their was by chance a higher % of carriers of the disease, and they spread their genes through the population, resulting in a higher occurrence of Huntington in the prevailing population. This is only prevelant in the 'white' south-african population, because there is very little inbreeding between the black and white populations happening. \n\nSomething similar happens with jewish populations, which, due to historic events went through several challenging events, leading to a low number of individuals left. They also form -biologically- a separate breeding group from other humans in the society. Jews tend to marry Jews (many other religions do something similar). It is observable that the genetic background of Jews is distinct from the \"average\" genetic background because of this. \n\nThe massive epidemic of obesity among black people in the southern US can also be attributed, partially, to the founders effect. The black people were shipped on a boat from Africa to work on plantations. This journey was very challenging, and the 'weak' individuals did not survive (many, many died during transport). This means the individuals that did survive were selected for being very efficient with their energy storage and reserves. This selection continued during the plantation days, where strong slaves were chosen to father more children. However, now, the genetic background of much of the black population is optimized to function very well in a scarcity of resources and great at efficiently storing excess nutrients. There is however an overabundance of nutrients in society, hence the extreme obesity epidemic. (there are other sociocultural factors interacting with genetics here)\n\n\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_",
"Lots of yes answers, but just wanted to add that this has happened to humans at at least one point. Some scientists argue that it happened twice. It is believed that humans, at one point, dwindled down to a population of about 1000-2000. There is also remarkably little genetic diversity in humans as a result. To use an example that one of my professors used, \"there is more genetic diversity in one troop of chimpanzees [around 200 individuals] than exists in the entire human population\".",
"Yes, but the effects of inbreeding diminish quickly with every degree of relativeness. So unless the species are critically endangered to only a few members this isn’t really a problem. Even in the wild there is a certain degree of inbreeding that occurs naturally between animals, especially social ones as they form groups, herds, and hierarchies.",
"The problem is not that it will change, in a way it’s that it won’t change enough. If all the individuals are too genetically similar due to inbreeding or even asexual reproduction in some organisms, recessive genes that would be masked by their dominant versions in a more diverse population will be expressed more commonly and these are often faulty or nonfunctional. The overall population then becomes less fit and adaptable, and less able to deal with habitat changes until spontaneous mutations add some diversity back over mulitple generations. This phenomenon is known as a genetic or population bottleneck. Its a bad thing.",
"A question i can actually answer! \n\nYes, reffered to as inbredding depression. However, one generation of genetic bottlenecking is not as harmful as several. In that case over time deleterious mutations start to accumulate over generations and the overall fitness of the species may decline. I say \"may\" since there is some debate over just how much genetic diversity is necessary for a species' fitness to be robust. Some argue that it isn't so much inbreeding ( homogeneous genetic material) vs highly genetically diverse species. But rather, it could be tied to the species' phenotypic plasticity as well. In other words, a species may be slightly inbred (on the genetic level) but it can change it's traits rather quickly in response to changes in the environment, thus increasing their fitness. \n\nLast note on this, conservation biologists take this overall topic into mind, and thus you will find that frequently that sub-species are introduced to combat the inbreeding. It's all a tricky thing though, since chromosonal incompatibilities do exist, and the progeny may not have high survival rates. \n\nTl:dr Yes. Inbreeding happens. Conservation biologists work to mitigate it and research and study just how much inbreeding affects different species. \n\nSource: BS in Biology ",
"It’s called a genetic bottleneck. It happened to cheetahs a long time in the past. All the cheetahs alive today are descended from like one single family, and it causes them huge health issues. More info- _URL_0_",
"Cheetahs are in an evolutionary bottle-neck no matter what we do. Even if we brought their population back, short of doing some sort of crazy dna thing they are too related to survive. They are too specialized. Nature is a cruel bitch.",
"There's a [Radiolab](_URL_0_) episode about raising endangered cranes. I don't want to spoil it, but there's a lot of stuff about how they are permanently changed.",
"In theory we try to start the repopulation programs before their numbers reach the point where they would be affected by inbreeding depression, however in practice this is usually not possible because of several factors, such as sociopolitical and economic pressures. So yes, in most cases a species will be affected by inbreeding when their numbers reaches a critical low.",
"[Word cloud out of all the comments.](_URL_0_)\n\nFun bot to vizualize how conversations go on reddit. Enjoy",
"Most animals, other than humans of course, don’t use makeup, so no, it’s not likely there would be any impact.",
"One study says we got down to 40 breeding pairs of humans at one point. May explain the massive numbers of fuckin’ idiots in most countries.\n\n\n > ”once in our history, the world-wide population of human beings skidded so sharply we were down to roughly a thousand reproductive adults. One study says we hit as low as 40.\n\n > Forty? Come on, that can't be right. Well, the technical term is 40 \"breeding pairs\" (children not included). More likely there was a drastic dip and then 5,000 to 10,000 bedraggled Homo sapiens struggled together in pitiful little clumps hunting and gathering for thousands of years until, in the late Stone Age, we humans began to recover. But for a time there, says science writer Sam Kean, \"We damn near went extinct.\"”\n\nLink: _URL_0_",
"That is one of the reasons humans are very related to eachother compared to other species. Sometime in the Holocene we got down to less than 50 females (as I recall it was 26 but could easily be wrong).\n\nThis happened at a time that humans hadn't even start to leave Africa. I sometimes day dream about what we lost at that time. Purple Iris color? Unique hair? The small possibilities could be almost endless.",
"Why are they wearing makeup in the first place? ",
"Yes it's actually got names too. When a populations numbers get very low and then rise again you get what's called a genetic bottleneck. It can occur naturally too, the African cheetah exhibits near perfect genetic uniformity across the species. So they're all about as related as cousins genetically. It takes a very long time for mutations to occur that are advantageous and stick around so the impacts of a genetic bottleneck can last for a very long time. Of course cheetahs are quite lucky in it seeming to have very little impact on the species, it's thought that Pandas are suffering as a result of being inbred. When the survival and reproductive potential of a species is so negatively impacted by inbreeding its called inbreeding depression.",
"[Bottleneck effect.](_URL_0_) Happens naturally and artificially. Some species can’t survive a bottleneck due to a disease being able to attack all members of the species. This is why genetic diversity is a good thing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species"
],
[
"https://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/16388/20150907/endangered-species-genetic-diversity-explains-decline.htm"
],
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5451821/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/last-woollies-had-mammoth-mutations/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.gaucherdisease.org/blog/founder-effects-influence-jewish-genetic-diseases/",
"http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/a-z/Huntingtons_disease.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck"
],
[],
[
"https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/254840-operation-migration"
],
[],
[
"https://i.imgur.com/KeIrzNp.png"
],
[],
[
"https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2012/10/22/163397584/how-human-beings-almost-vanished-from-earth-in-70-000-b-c"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck"
]
] |
||
34vl1d
|
why do people put monster stickers on their vehicles?
|
I live in a small city and there has to be a dozen cars and trucks with giant Monster sticks on them. I don't get it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34vl1d/eli5_why_do_people_put_monster_stickers_on_their/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqygpw4"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because they think it's cool.\n\nThat's pretty much it. Same reason people get a sticky of Calvin pissing on a Ford to put on their Dodge."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
23px4e
|
does re-boiling water really change the taste? if so, why?
|
I've always heard that, when making tea, you should always pour new water in the kettle and never re-boil the leftover water, or else it will taste "flat".
The usual explanation is that this removes the dissolved oxygen, which alters the flavor of the tea.
But is this really true? If so, why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23px4e/eli5_does_reboiling_water_really_change_the_taste/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgzgd2l"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, it is true that there is dissolved air in water that is removed by boiling (or just leaving water to sit in a cup or bottle). I don't know whether it affects the taste of tea (any more than other variables like water temp, steep time, or type of tea might), but flat water certainly feels different from water with lots of dissolved air.\n\nI have heard a similar thing that you should not even let the water get to a full boil, for the same reason. Beyond that, taste is subjective (\"in the eye of the beholder\" so-to-speak). You and I could run an experiment: create just-boiled tea, boiled tea, and double-boiled tea. We will never agree on taste, just have our own opinions. I know tea-snobs who will use fresh water, and i know regular tea drinkers who find no difference either way. I doubt the average person could distinguish between \"taste\" and \"feel\" on their tongue anyway.\n\nSummary: yes, there is dissolved gas that changes the \"feel\" of tea, and is removed by boiling. Whether or not that changes the taste, we will never agree. Your answer is whatever you think."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2329y9
|
how can a computer be built specifically for a programming language?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2329y9/eli5_how_can_a_computer_be_built_specifically_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgspc46",
"cgsubtm"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Your question doesn't quite make sense. Are you referring to something specific?\n\nWhat makes you think that a computer is built for a specific programming language?",
"You can't build a computer that will only run a particular language, unless the language is very limited - otherwise someone can just write an interpreter for a different language in your language.\n\nYou can build a computer that is *designed* to run a particular language efficiently. It might have extra features that mainly make sense for that language to use, for example - e.g. a computer built for Forth would have specific instructions for manipulating two stacks, which is a very uncommon feature and not widely useful (most CPUs have instructions for *one* stack, though). It might have a special stack memory chip, instead of using main memory to store the stacks. It might also have a compact way to encode \"call\" instructions, since the vast majority of Forth instructions are call instructions (to other Forth code and sometimes assembly code). The CPU might be wired to execute calls and returns very quickly, and other instructions more slowly."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
36m7jj
|
tipping ettiquette
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36m7jj/eli5_tipping_ettiquette/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crf4mhp",
"crf4pai",
"crf4zzv",
"crf7n6u"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"2.50 for an 11.50 tab is plenty. They ultimately should be serving multiple customers and thats how they live with those tips. Now if you order a coffee or something and its a dollar I tend to just tip another dollar. I dont strictly follow the percentages when it gets below 10 bucks. I just tip a dollar or two. If you just order a coffee then they basically dont have to spend time on you and the tips less needed.",
"That is a fine tip. The \"10-25\" percent rule is when you spend lots of money. \nFor dinners I've followed my father's rates which is 30 to 45 percent depending on the service.",
"This actually varies a lot from one country to another. In the UK, waiters are paid a proper wage and tips are simply to show extra appreciation. It's fine to leave no tip at all, and to give a 10% tip in general if you have been impressed by the service.",
"I live in australia. My sister is a waitress in a pub. She gets paid $28 an hour. While tipping is not typical in australia due to the high hourly rate, its starting to become expected in some places. I am a nurse & I also get $28 an hour. I refuse to tip someone who gets the same rate of pay as me with no education & less responsibilities when it is unethical and\n illiegal for me to take tips. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2ih2x2
|
why don't blood donor clinics take blood from certain people.
|
In particular, men who have had sex with other men or women who have had sex with a man who has had sex with a man.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ih2x2/eli5_why_dont_blood_donor_clinics_take_blood_from/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl23vex",
"cl27bkp"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They want to make sure the blood is safe to donate. They look at statistics can come up with a risk assessment. Some people are naturally in higher risk categories than others. \n\nFor example, someone who has travelled to a malarial zone may have contracted malaria. They may even have malaria without knowing it. Therefore (in Canada) there is a period of time, after returning from a malarial zone where a person cannot donate. After this time period is up they are free to donate again.\n\nSome individuals are banned for life. For example, individuals in Canada who have worked with primates, wild or in captivity, are not allowed to donate. This is because primates can carry a host of diseases that are transferable to humans. Some of these diseases like SIV, or simian herpes are quite dangerous to humans. Because these individuals represent such a small portion of the Canadian population its better to ban them for life, then risk transferring a known (or worse unknown) disease into the general population. \n\nIn terms of sexually transmitted diseases, the risks are higher for certain groups of individuals (e.g. homosexual men). That being said, the measures put in place to restrict one high risk group over another can be biased in my opinion - at least in Canada. E.G. heterosexuals engaging in sex with unknown partners are allowed to donate 6 months after their encounter, but homosexual *men* must abstain 100% for at least 5 years before donating even if they have been in a monogamous relationship during this time. I don't believe there is this kind of level restriction for lesbians in Canada. Homosexual men, even if they have only ever had one partner their whole lives - who themselves have only had one partner their whole lives cannot donate unless they have abstained from sexual activities for 5 years. In contrast, a heterosexual male can seemingly fuck whoever and however many women they want, so long as they have abstained from unknown partner sex for at least 6 months. If someone can explain that logic to me, ill be all ears.\n\nI don't know American rules, but I do know they differ.\n\n",
"Looks like this has been pretty well wrapped up.\n\nOther reasons blood is turned down:\n\nIf one had Jaundice as an newborn.\n\nTattooed/pierced in the past 1-2 years.\n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4vnezo
|
how weighted blankets help calm kids with autism, anxiety, adhd, etc?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vnezo/eli5_how_weighted_blankets_help_calm_kids_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5zscb5",
"d607lyk"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The technical term for this is \"deep pressure therapy\" and it can also be provided by vests, service dogs, and other devices. It is helpful for adults with these issues as well. Pressure on the body stimulates the release of different brain chemicals (exactly which ones are relevant depends on the specific condition in question) and it is additionally a simple sensory input to focus on, which is helpful for people who are easily overwhelmed by lots of different sensory input at once (which is a factor in autism and anxiety at least). ",
"pressure-like a tight hug-slows the heart rate when a person is having a fit or is panicked."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
b8joal
|
how does the lego company decide which pieces should they include duplicates of in a set?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b8joal/eli5_how_does_the_lego_company_decide_which/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejy67im"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"As a long time legoist, this seems to be almost exclusive to very small pieces and fairly random.\n\nI've never seen a set be short, but duplicate or triplicate of *some* small pieces is basically guaranteed. Other equally small pieces are not duplicated, which suggests this is a packing error they simply live with rather than a conscious decision.\n\nMore generally in industry, part hoppers are allowed to exceed but never under-fill. Nobody's ever been sued for putting too many chips in the bag or including a few random extra washers."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1qfns6
|
what difference does the mix make on a music recording?
|
I was just reading on Wikipedia about how Nirvana brought Scott Litt in to remix the two singles on In Utero (Heart-Shaped Box and All Apologies). What does that mean to the casual listener? How might it sound different if someone else was brought in to do a different mix?
I assume this is different from remixes, like the dance mix or whatever.
In Utero link: _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qfns6/eli5what_difference_does_the_mix_make_on_a_music/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdcby6r",
"cdcespg",
"cdcgys9"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Well basically its taking all the different tracks that contain all the different things in the song (the guitar, the drums, and the singing, and the bass) and even other recording of the same song and remixing them. As in changing the levels of volume, swapping out one take of an instrument for another, and so on. So the song sounds (sometimes) waaay different. \nif you really sit down and listen to two different mixes of the same song odds are you'll be able to hear differences. ",
"Imagine you had several separate stereos that each played one element of a song; One stereo for the lead vocals, another for the bass, another for the keyboard, etc. In that scenario, you could adjust the volume and equalizer of each stereo separately, turn them on and off at will, change the timing of when each element begins and ends. As I am sure you can imagine, you could get all manner variations of the song with a setup such as that. \n\nThe mixing bored used to mix a music track is essentially a system that allows that level of control of each element of the song, and a whole lot more. So yes, two different people mixing the exact same song can end up with completely different end results. ",
"Say that your favorite recording is a delicious pizza. It's comprised of a crust, sauce, cheese, and pepperoni prepared according to a recipe. The individual audio tracks that the recording is made with are a lot like our four ingredients and the mix is the recipe used to put them all together. Now, when you make that pizza, you made sure to roll the dough out nice and thick, you piled the sauce on, and loaded it with cheese and pepperoni, because *that's the way you like it!* This is similar to what a producer and engineer do in the studio; they take the drum, bass, guitar, and vocal tracks and mix them together in a way that sounds good to them. \n\nHowever, taste is subjective when it comes to both pizza and music--people like to argue about music as much as they like to argue about whether NY or Chicago-style pizza is the best! Imagine that your best friend decides to stop by and try your pizza. He takes a bite and tells you that he thinks that he could make it better! So, he gathers the same ingredients and prepares a new pizza. This time, though, he rolls the crust out so it's thin and crispy, barely sauces it, sprinkles half the cheese and doubles the pepperoni. Though the ingredients aren't any different, the resulting pizza is worlds apart from the original simply by modifying the thickness of the crust and ratio of toppings. This illustrates the fundamental difference that the mix has on an audio recording.\n\nTo continue using the pizza analogy, a remix is like taking that original pizza recipe, adding a few new ingredients, and folding it in half to turn it into a calzone. It still has some of the original ingredients, but the recipe and preparation have been significantly modified. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(band)#In_Utero.2C_final_months.2C_and_Cobain.27s_death"
] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2x2mu0
|
why is voicemail technology still so terrible?
|
Here's something I don't understand. Why is the voicemail technology on most cell phones still at the same functional level as voicemail twenty years ago? Why do I have to listen to a woman's voice and use touch tone technology? Why can't I click on specific messages and listen to them like an audio SMS? Why can't I track through them or rewind with a progress bar? I feel like I've heard about new technology existing that has some of these features, but why has no one implemented it widely?
EDIT: Apparently my mobile carrier is just terrible and doesn't have this.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2x2mu0/eli5_why_is_voicemail_technology_still_so_terrible/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cowc9sq",
"cowcjgc",
"cowcqp9",
"cowdf9q"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
8,
5
],
"text": [
"Verizon let's me do what you say, even does voice text for a fee. Maybe you need to switch carriers",
"You can do all of that on voice-mail on iOS through ATT ",
"It does exist. The very first iPhone was the first phone to do this, which was in 2007, [Here is what it looked like back then.](_URL_1_) Here is what the [current version looks like.](_URL_0_) \n \nIf you don't have this feature, you probably don't have a good smartphone and/or a carrier which allows it.",
"Google voice. I'll never go back. Emails a (crappy) transcript of the message that's just coherent enough to get the gist of the voicemail, but it includes the voicemail recording in the email and there's also an Android voicemail app to let you manage your voicemail similar to how you're describing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.imore.com/sites/imore.com/files/styles/large/public/field/image/2013/12/ios_7_voicemail_iphone_hero.jpg?itok=ntt5J7QK",
"http://www.iphonewzealand.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/iphone-visual-voicemail.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
l1x5s
|
protein synthesis?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/l1x5s/protein_synthesis/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2p51nd",
"c2pb243",
"c2p51nd",
"c2pb243"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I only have a couple minutes so I can help with the mRNA and tRNA, but then I have to leave. DNA has the instructions needed to make every single protein in your body. Proteins are used for almost every single thing that you and your body do. Here's the problem....DNA cannot leave the nucleus to give the tRNA the correct instructions on which amino acids to connect together like a choo-choo train to make your protein. The specific order of those amino acids is important on which protein you make. So mRNA (messenger RNA) takes the instructions of the DNA and delivers them to the tRNA, like a messenger. The tRNA is like the a chef. He takes the order from the waitress (mRNA) who originally got the order from the customer (DNA). The tRNA places all of the amino acids in the correct order and then releases the protein from the ribosome.",
"This may be a little simplistic, but you're five. I'll use the restaurant analogy. \n\nSo, mRNA is the waitress and you (or rather, your body) is ordering some protein. Since you're the customer, it'd be weird and highly frowned upon if you went to the kitchen yourself to place your order (your body isn't a fast-food joint), but that's what your mRNA waitress is for. You and your menu are DNA (and DNA can't leave the nucleus/table). The mRNA waitress takes your order (your protein sequence) by copying it (maybe you're making a few changes a dish/protein to suit your fancy) and then leaves the floor and goes to the kitchen (the endoplasmic reticulum or a free ribosome) to read out your order. This part of protein synthesis is called transcription. However, the chefs in this particular kitchen aren't that clever and need some help. They know how to put a complete meal together and which ingredients they need, but not how to get them. But that's okay, because there's tRNA to the rescue. tRNA is the chef's best friend who goes shopping for the right ingredients to make your protein and brings them right the kitchen. These ingredients are called amino acids and there's 20 different kinds of them. \n\n\nAfter the tRNA brings the amino acids into the ribosome kitchen, the chefs are able to make any protein that you order, provided that you have the ingredients in your body. Some amino acids you produce yourself, and others you have to gain from your diet. Once the chef completes your order, the protein is shipped out of the kitchen (it might be garnished in the golgi apparatus) and then delivered to you. This is the last part of protein synthesis, transcription. \n\n\nAs for RNA Polymerase... I don't know how to fit it into this analogy because I may or may not have been sleeping through that biochemistry lecture...\n",
"I only have a couple minutes so I can help with the mRNA and tRNA, but then I have to leave. DNA has the instructions needed to make every single protein in your body. Proteins are used for almost every single thing that you and your body do. Here's the problem....DNA cannot leave the nucleus to give the tRNA the correct instructions on which amino acids to connect together like a choo-choo train to make your protein. The specific order of those amino acids is important on which protein you make. So mRNA (messenger RNA) takes the instructions of the DNA and delivers them to the tRNA, like a messenger. The tRNA is like the a chef. He takes the order from the waitress (mRNA) who originally got the order from the customer (DNA). The tRNA places all of the amino acids in the correct order and then releases the protein from the ribosome.",
"This may be a little simplistic, but you're five. I'll use the restaurant analogy. \n\nSo, mRNA is the waitress and you (or rather, your body) is ordering some protein. Since you're the customer, it'd be weird and highly frowned upon if you went to the kitchen yourself to place your order (your body isn't a fast-food joint), but that's what your mRNA waitress is for. You and your menu are DNA (and DNA can't leave the nucleus/table). The mRNA waitress takes your order (your protein sequence) by copying it (maybe you're making a few changes a dish/protein to suit your fancy) and then leaves the floor and goes to the kitchen (the endoplasmic reticulum or a free ribosome) to read out your order. This part of protein synthesis is called transcription. However, the chefs in this particular kitchen aren't that clever and need some help. They know how to put a complete meal together and which ingredients they need, but not how to get them. But that's okay, because there's tRNA to the rescue. tRNA is the chef's best friend who goes shopping for the right ingredients to make your protein and brings them right the kitchen. These ingredients are called amino acids and there's 20 different kinds of them. \n\n\nAfter the tRNA brings the amino acids into the ribosome kitchen, the chefs are able to make any protein that you order, provided that you have the ingredients in your body. Some amino acids you produce yourself, and others you have to gain from your diet. Once the chef completes your order, the protein is shipped out of the kitchen (it might be garnished in the golgi apparatus) and then delivered to you. This is the last part of protein synthesis, transcription. \n\n\nAs for RNA Polymerase... I don't know how to fit it into this analogy because I may or may not have been sleeping through that biochemistry lecture...\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3akszr
|
why are japanese commercials/ ads so bizarre?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3akszr/eli5_why_are_japanese_commercials_ads_so_bizarre/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csdjk9z",
"csdk04t",
"csdmjtl"
],
"score": [
7,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The answer is partially cultural and partially practical. Culturally, the ads aren't nearly as strange to them as they are to us. Practically, a memorable ad makes you more likely to purchase a product; a unique ad is more memorable. ",
"[You mean to tell me the best way to sell coffee **isn't** with a substitute super-sayian-esque Tommy Lee Jones teacher?](_URL_0_)",
"The thing is they're totally not any weirder than American commercials! Are you telling me that [this](_URL_1_) commercial or [this](_URL_0_) isnt't strange or wouldn't be weird if you didn't understand English?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS5N8EAOtVE"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJDni6Bopzo",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ15vCGuvH0"
]
] |
||
6vrbik
|
why does my blood pressure spike when i take my blood pressure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vrbik/why_does_my_blood_pressure_spike_when_i_take_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dm2fr9k",
"dm2lqbs"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"This is called as some white cloak disorder or something similar. Had read it on the net. This happens to me every time my doc measures my BP. \n\nThe only remedy to this is to tell your doc that this happens before he measures your BP and while noting it down, the doc might normalise it. ",
"This is caused by anxiety about the result usually. This is typically the case wheteher or not you take it alone of in front of medical personnel. If it happens in front of a medical person then its white coat syndrome. \n\nAlso, sometimes crossing your legs or just not taking it correctly can artificially inflate it. Or you have hypertension. ;)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2j6ywg
|
why is american candy/drinks so much sweeter than candy from other countries, like australia?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2j6ywg/eli5_why_is_american_candydrinks_so_much_sweeter/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cl8ykmq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I'm going to make an assumption that you use either less amounts of sugar or can sugar. In the US high fructose corn syrup is the default sweetener due to its relatively cheap price. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6a76ac
|
(for diy) why is it more common to paint (house) wall with paint rollers but use spray can for cars?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6a76ac/eli5_for_diy_why_is_it_more_common_to_paint_house/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dhc7ihz",
"dhce25w"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Rollers are only really usable on smooth amd flat surfaces. Even when painting walls the edges have to be done with brushes.\n\nVehicles have lots of non-flat sections. Rollers would be extremely inefficient.",
"If you google \"rustoleum roller paint job\" or the like, you'll find plenty of people who have rolled a paint job on their car for ~$50. With the right kind of paint, some thinner, time, and patience, it can totally be done. The hardest parts would be getting in all the tight spaces a sprayer would do better, and highly irregular surfaces where you can't apply an even amount of paint, particularly around the front grill area. The technique is prone to drips and runs.\n\nSpraying is inefficient due to overspray, expensive due to equipment, and hard because you need a fair amount of technique and practice to get it right, but it's also fast and works on all the nuanced surfaces of a car.\n\nYou can also spray rustoleum, if you'd like. You don't have to use expensive automotive paints, and you can roll the expensive automotive paints if you want, you just have to blend the chemistry different so the paint bucket doesn't go solid on you in the time you're going to spend rolling."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
fa7gmh
|
if dialysis is essentially used to clean your blood and filter it, can it cure hiv?
|
Or if the disease dies once it hits air we cant create something to expose the blood?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fa7gmh/eli5_if_dialysis_is_essentially_used_to_clean/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fiwe0xg",
"fiwelkk"
],
"score": [
3,
13
],
"text": [
"No, HIV attacks your t-cells, depleting it. T-cells are housed in your lymph nodes not your blood",
"Blood is filled with many different cells, proteins, ions and other material. Dialysis is able to remove certain small proteins, ionic salts and other small molecules from the blood. The size of the pores in the dialysis filter is carefully controlled so only the things you want to remove pass through it.\n\nHIV virus is far too large for dialysis to remove from the blood. If dialysis could remove large molecules, it would be a disaster as you would start losing useful large proteins like albumin."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
97gq50
|
how can 3 matches in between your lips keep you from crying when cutting an onion
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/97gq50/eli5_how_can_3_matches_in_between_your_lips_keep/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e481x4m",
"e481zmo"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"When you're crying about your burnt face you have no time to cry about that onions you've been cutting.",
"The (unlit) match heads will absorb the compounds released from the onion which would cause your eyes to water."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
dj39ne
|
what do astronomers use as a point of origin to save coordinates of e. g. stars relative to that point of origin?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dj39ne/eli5_what_do_astronomers_use_as_a_point_of_origin/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f40lvt6",
"f40wyjr",
"f412ao5"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Depends upon the scale.\nIn the earth/moon system, I believe they use the earth. In solar system scale, they use the sun. For galactic scale, they use the center of the milky way. Not familiar with what they use for universe scale.",
"Basically, there are different ways of defining coordinates on the sky that we see. The main system (and I think the most intuitive one) essentially extends the idea of latitude and longitude on the Earth into the sky so that when we look at the night sky each point is given coordinates like latitude and longitude (declination and right ascension). In this system, declination is defined to be parallel to the equator and right ascension functions like longitude, where 0 right ascension was chosen to be the location of the Sun on the vernal equinox. So, in this system, the \"origin\" of the coordinates is the center of the Earth. There are various other coordinate systems out there, such as the galactic coordinate system, where points are defined based on their galactic latitude and longitude (this system has its origin at the center of our Milky Way Galaxy), but they can all be transformed into one another through geometry and math.",
"Since I don't think this part of your question has been answered:\n\nAstronomers are aware that objects move over time, and they factor that in by adding a fourth dimension to their coordinates, called an \"epoch.\" An epoch is basically a snapshot of the positions of everything in the sky at a particular moment. The epoch we are using today is J2000, because they are referring to where everything was at noon on 1/1/2000.\n\nAlthough stars do zip around the galaxy at different rates, it's happening *very slowly* and not enough for any of us to notice over the course of our lifetimes (in fact, if you went back ten thousand years, you'd see virtually the same constellations as you see today, with the only difference being the direction the Earth is tilted). We started using J2000 in the 1980s; before that it was J1950. I've seen J1900 being used as well but I think that's more retroactive as this system probably wasn't standardized worldwide back then. I'd imagine they're starting to think about moving on to J2050 but I have heard nothing of it.\n\nAt any rate, we're still close enough to the year 2000 that a map of that epoch will get you precise locations of every galaxy and nebula, and *almost* every star. Some of them do move pretty fast and you have to be aware of it, but really it's just a matter of nudging the telescope over just a little bit."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5zm0r9
|
how can windows update itself when my computer is off?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zm0r9/eli5_how_can_windows_update_itself_when_my/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dez50ag"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It can't. Updates can only happen when your computer is powered on.\n\nHowever, your computer can certainly detect that it has missed some updates when it comes up and start updating itself."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5bxq2s
|
how to small birds survive cold winters with very little fat or food supply available?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bxq2s/eli5_how_to_small_birds_survive_cold_winters_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9sf4na"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Birds that can't find food, or handle the cold die every year. Only the individual birds that can find food live till spring to reproduce.\n\nSome migrate to warmer areas, some manage to survive on whatever food they can find. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3potsp
|
who/what decides the two candidates that will be running for president that we'll vote for?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3potsp/eli5_whowhat_decides_the_two_candidates_that_will/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw87vej"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The short answer is that they're voted for in a series of open elections generally known as \"primaries.\" Primaries take place in the first few months of an election year.\n\nThe slightly longer answer: Republican and Democrat nominees are voted for at the Republican National Convention and Democratic National Convention, respectively. The state Republican and Democrat parties each nominate a set of *delegates* who will go to the convention and cast votes.\n\nThe delegates are chosen in a series of state elections known as primary elections. The particular rules and procedures vary from state to state.\n\nYou are eligible to vote in the primary elections by registering to vote in the presidential election, although some states require you to register as a Republican or Democrat respectively, to participate in that party's primary.\n\nThe people who vote in primaries are generally those most active and interested in politics. This is why candidates start their campaigns with fairly extreme positions and later soften their stances and adopt more centrist positions. In the early days they are campaigning to the party faithful to win the nomination. Once they have won the nomination, they need to encourage the more reluctant party supporters to turn up to vote, and to convince independents to vote for them (both of whom are more likely to be turned off by extreme rhetoric)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
7lcvzo
|
when breathing humid air, what prevents our lungs from filling with water (like a dehumidifier)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7lcvzo/eli5_when_breathing_humid_air_what_prevents_our/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drla9z1",
"drlb2dr"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you breathe *out* humid air as well. A dehumidifier requires special equipment to extract the water from the air.",
"In a hot ( warmer than body temp) and humid room (like a steam room) you do get a bit of this effect, but a lung full of air does not hold that much water.\n\nBut to get the humidity to condense out of the air, you generally need to cool the air. In most case when you breathe in you are warming the air."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
628ubl
|
why is scotland having a second referendum vote? why does it seem like some people view the possibility of scottish independence as a bad thing, rather than a good thing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/628ubl/eli5why_is_scotland_having_a_second_referendum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfkmlk6",
"dfknded",
"dfkni2f",
"dfktjbs",
"dflha69"
],
"score": [
2,
16,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think they'd like to have one but need agreement by the British parliament to hold it.\n\nLooks like a majority of them want to stay in the EU.",
"One of the main points of the original \"vote no to independence\" campaign was that an independent Scotland wouldn't be allowed to join the EU. Many people voted no based on that. The margin in the end was 55% no, 45% yes. Then the Brexit vote happened. Every single constituency in Scotland voted to remain in the EU, and Scotland as a whole voted to remain in the EU 63%-37% (something like that. Certainly in the 60% voted remain). In between these 2 referenda (Independence and Brexit), there was a Scottish Parliament election. The SNP were returned as the largest party, and had specifically stood on a mandate to have a second independence referendum if there was a drastic change in circumstances (i.e. Brexit). So they're just doing what they said they would.\n\nUnionists are pissy because they think the nationalists aren't respecting the result of the first referendum and just want to keep rerolling until they get the result they want. Other people are pissed because they voted no first time around based on the EU lie as mentioned above. Personally, I think that the UK government currently is doing more to advance the cause of Scottish independence than the SNP ever have.\n\nSource: Am Scottish and rather fed up with politics at the moment.",
"It's not about \"good thing\" or \"bad thing\" per se, but rather that being part of the EU is more important than being part of the UK. Until now, Scotland could have both, now they have to choose. ",
" > ELI5:Why is Scotland having a second referendum vote?\n\nIt's having a second referendum because politics. There isn't any 'good' or 'bad' there are different opinions. More like a lasagne is better than spaghetti type thing. It's not objectively true, but people will hold different opinions and be quite emotive about it.\n\nThe Scottish parliament and leader are staunchly pro independence. Really pro independence. They were looking for an excuse to hold another referendum and Brexit provided a good one. Most of Scotland voted to stay in the EU so the argument goes Scotland should have another vote on independence to determine if it wants to leave the UK and try to join the EU (which may not even be possible because of Spanish politics)\n\n > Why does it seem like some people view the possibility of Scottish independence as a bad thing, rather than a good thing?\n\nYou've specifically asked about why people think its bad so I'll only cover those arguments (there are some for both sides). There are arguments that it will cost Scotland more, that it's leaving a 300 year old union (Britain) for a 60 year old union (EU), that the citizens will be poorer, that people are just pushing for referenda again because it wasn't the result they wanted/not respecting the first one, that universities and education will be cut, that health will be cut etc. etc. \n\n",
"It's very unlikely there will be another vote in our lifetimes. It's already been ruled out. This is the UK equivalent of US states grumbling about secession because they don't like the federal government of the day. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6pcvrz
|
what gives objects life?
|
If you create a human body, what gives it life? If electricity can make a heart beat again, is electricity life? If so, are robots alive?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pcvrz/eli5_what_gives_objects_life/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkoe90o"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Life is based on behavioral observations. Something is considered alive when it reproduces, reacts to its environment, adapts through genetic changes over successive generations, grows, metabolizes, regulates their internal environment, and if it's composed of one or more cells. For your robot example, they cannot reproduce, maintain their internal environments, and they aren't cellular, thus they aren't alive. Electricity is not alive, it simply causes a reaction from living things. The cells of a heart muscle are alive and are reacting to the stimulus of the electricity ."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3t4ij2
|
what exactly is the big problem that prevents governments from being totally transparent?
|
I mean, okay, military stuff (where are the submarines, precisely? Where is the head of state and how much security does he have?) makes sense, but New Zealand, for example, can't have a whole lot of military secrets of that kind. I mean, I could go and knock on the Prime Minister's door if I wanted to. In the case of countries like this (so as to discount answers like "We'd lose every war ever.") what exactly is preventing the government from being transparent?
Particularly with regard to things like the TPPA negotiation. That was kept 100% secret from the public–why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3t4ij2/eli5_what_exactly_is_the_big_problem_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cx32hwj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Negotiations become infinitely harder if they are carried out in the public eye. Diplomatic negotiations in general are not carried out in public and never have been. \n\nI think it's a bit unfair to suggest that negotiating in secret on an agreement that will be made public is not being totally transparent. The entire point of representative democracy is that we select people to do this stuff for us - suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to negotiate without putting every single item up for public criticism strikes me as being against the whole idea of representation."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6shtcr
|
what properties in glass causes the prince rupert’s drop to be possible
|
I watched a documentary on this before, but I'm still confused about how it works. Thanks!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6shtcr/eli5_what_properties_in_glass_causes_the_prince/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dlcvx3a",
"dlcvx6z"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Prestress and tempering\n\nGlass is usually an amorphous solid. This means there is not repeated arrangement of crystal structure in side it. When you temper glass by heating it up, you add some structure. \n\nThe warm glass expands. When you cool it rapidly (like by dropping it in water) you freeze the outer layer as it contracts but the inside remains molten and continues to fall through the water crating a tail. The head eventually cools but the inside of the head cools slower and contracts away from the now solid outer sphere. \n\nThis results in stresses like compressed or tensioned springs. The inside has a negative or tension stress and tries to pull in while the outside has a positive compressive stress. This mean that any small cracks on the outside quickly press shut. Glass usually shatters when a small crack forms and pressure is put in that crack it can prepare down the crack like ripping a paper along a perforation. The pre-stresses heal the perforation. \n\n\nwhere there is a large long this tail, these large differences in tension result in a thin layer of defense against cracks. Any crack large enough to penetrate down from the compressed layer on the outside to the contracted layer in the inside will quickly propagate along the boundary deep down into the bulb and explode the glass into tiny shards just like how standard tempered glass crumbles into small pieces do to the prestress. ",
"It's a type of tempered glass. It's formed by dropping molten drops of glass into cool water; the glass on the outside of the drop cools and solidifies immediately. The glass on the inside cools more slowly but it's inside an already solidified shell. The glass inside eventually cools and contracts pulling the shell together. The entire piece is under tension which gives it strength."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
69kw5k
|
if corn just goes straight through you how does it give you any nutritional value along the way
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69kw5k/eli5if_corn_just_goes_straight_through_you_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dh7cdhz",
"dh7cepx"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It doesn't go straight through. It's a partial myth. There is a *chance* that the hard cores of the seed pockets (The yellow \"berries\" on the knob) don't get digested properly, but especially if you break them by chewing on them or when you use corn meal to bake things your body can easily digest the mass. Also the yellow pockets themselves have nutritional value, too.",
"The outside of the kernel is indigestible, not the inside. Your body simply breaks down the contents inside the kernel and leaves the outside."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4vqiod
|
what is the half-circle at the base of your fingernail and why do people have different sizes of them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vqiod/eli5_what_is_the_halfcircle_at_the_base_of_your/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d60lecr",
"d60ocpv",
"d60olzr",
"d60oshu"
],
"score": [
49,
14,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"The \"little moon\" (lunula) is the visible part of the root of your nail - where your nail grows from. If you damage this, your nail will grow permanently deformed. \n\nIn some people, their bit of skin (nail fold) cover it a bit more. Or they may be anemic or malnourished. ",
"Woah. I remember seeing these on my nails as a kid, but when i look now, theyre only on my thumbs. I donno where they went O~o\n\nMaybe im remembering wrong...",
"When i was a kid, my mom told me that when you have those half circles in your fingernails, it means someone out there is missing you.",
"Do I have to worry that \"circle\" isn't visible for me on most of my fingers. Only my thumb and index finger have that \"circle\"\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5vtueo
|
why do dams need spillways? why can't water just flow over the top of the dam?
|
in lieu of recent California events
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vtueo/eli5_why_do_dams_need_spillways_why_cant_water/
|
{
"a_id": [
"de4ta4x",
"de4tons",
"de4uoks"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
7
],
"text": [
"Free flowing water over the top of a dam damages the dam. Spillways are the method of controlling that flow such that it does not damage the dam. The issue in California is that the spillways were poorly built and not properly maintained, and the Californian government ignored all warnings about them not being at risk. ",
"It depends on the method of dam construction.\n\nA lot of dams are just made out of soil (called an earthfill dam). If you have water flowing over the top of an earthfill dam, some of that water will trickle down into the dam, washing away the materials and weakening the dam.\n\nOn the other hand, if the dam is made out of concrete, you can just let the water spill over the top - but you will commonly build a spillway anyways, just so that you can predict where the spill will end up. ",
"Water flowing over the top of a dam can weaken the top and face of the dam, but can also cause scour at the foot of the dam. If flowing water weakens the dam's foundation, that can create a lower path for water to escape. The water at the bottom of the dam is at much higher pressure than water at the top, and any scour at the foot or foundation of the dam that causes a breach can be catastrophic to the dam. It is much safer to have a controlled release spillway, with a gradual slope and an outlet area filled with rip-rap (large boulders or engineered media such as stone-filled wire cages) that will limit scour at the outlet of the spillway. \nEdit: spelling "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3n0ko7
|
how should you go about getting a patent for a product?
|
Additionally, how should you go about starting a business?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n0ko7/eli5_how_should_you_go_about_getting_a_patent_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvjqvix"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If in the US, you would apply for a patent here: _URL_0_\n\nBasically, you'll need to first verify there isn't already an existing patent on your idea. Then you need to explain with words and/or diagrams what your idea is and why it's innovative enough to be granted a patent. Submit the application, and if approved, you now have a patent for that product."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.uspto.gov/"
]
] |
|
7fzj27
|
why do so many companies want to give me access to my credit score?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fzj27/eli5_why_do_so_many_companies_want_to_give_me/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dqfi1uc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are 2 big things it does. First, it encourages you to build your credit score. To do this you need to make your payments on time, and start paying off your debts that you have with the company giving you the information(and others, but the companies providing the scores are more interested in you taking care of their debts). The next thing it does is encourages you to take on more debt... since you've got a great score now, the interest rates are lower, so it's cheaper, so spend spend spend!\n\nFor sites like credit karma, they get referral bonuses and kick backs from lenders when you sign up through them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.