q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
a266le | why must a user enter “cents” in a bank atm machine if it doesn’t dispense coins? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a266le/eli5_why_must_a_user_enter_cents_in_a_bank_atm/ | {
"a_id": [
"eavhq8f",
"eavljo3",
"eavpfq0",
"eaw7679",
"eawtt18"
],
"score": [
22,
20,
2,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"When they're doing this the bank means to be very explicit about exactly how much money you were expecting to get so as to set expectations. ",
"To make sure all requests will be accurate. If it asks for whole dollars, people will most likely not read it. \n\nSo a lot of users would type 2000 instead of 20.00. \n\nIt’s better to give back less than to overdraw. So this way, those who enter .20 by accident will be told to re-enter their amount and those that type 2000 will get $20.00 and so on. ",
"The software is set up for user input for both withdrawals and deposits. Deposits (checks) are not always in whole dollars. ",
"Not all ATMs are identical, or run the same software; my experience might be different from yours.\n\nOne place I go, the machine only dispenses $20 bills. On withdrawals, I can't even enter 13579 as digits -- it just beeps at me. And it doesn't even display cents, so confusing $20 with $20.00 or $2000 is just NOT an issue.\n\nBut I'm sure my machine is different from yours.",
"Not all ATMs do - it is fairly common for machines in the UK at leadt to just have you input the main value in pounds, and on the screen show it with the decimal point for clarity.\n\nSo if I want to withdraw £50, I type in five-zero-enter and the screen displays £50.00 as confirmation.\n\nDifferent machines will vary however, so different banks or operating companies will use slightly different software packages to run the machines, which will use different systems to input and display information, and indeed different countries may also have different rules or standards too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
453vjz | why does a 300$ phone recognise a fingerprint way faster than most fingerprint scanners that cost the same? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/453vjz/eli5why_does_a_300_phone_recognise_a_fingerprint/ | {
"a_id": [
"czuyott",
"czuyt9o",
"czv1kau",
"czv2dat",
"czv7olo",
"czv8x24",
"czvddiq",
"czvfunp",
"czvkbuj",
"czvn8ud",
"czvpztu",
"czvyxzs",
"czvzdjx",
"czw0ebl",
"czw1e2q"
],
"score": [
39,
763,
2,
1430,
4,
28,
10,
8,
7,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"That $300 phone, because it was mass produced, is going to have much better internal circuitry than a $300 fingerprint scanner, which is kind of a specialty scanner. This better hardware is going to result in faster processing.\n\nAt the same time, accuracy has to be considered. A $300 fingerprint scanner is some real security, so it can be programmed to be pickier about who gets in, making it take longer to authenticate each fingerprint. With a phone, speed might take priority over precision security.",
"The phone only needs to recognise one fingerprint, not compare it to a database worth of them.",
"Well first of all it depends on how many fingerprints need to be remembered, a phone only needs to compare one fingerprint while a specific scanner MIGHT have a database of fingerprints that need to be recognized and compared with yours. Beyond that it's probably a lot easier to fool the phone than it is to fool the fingerprint scanner, if the phone recognizes it faster than a fingerprint scanner with only one fingerprint saved for comparison then it probably means that the fingerprint scanner is running more comparisons and thus is more secure.",
"Don't forget to take into account how much of the finger the phone based scanner is actually scanning versus a stand alone finger print scanner which will take a larger picture of the finger for more data points for verification.\n\nFor instance the scanner on my Iphone is tiny compared to the finger print scanner that we used in our Senior project. More image = more data = more calculations = more time to verify/deny.",
"There's a $300 phone with a fingerprint scanner? Which one?",
"Its hard to say for sure, because the software is secret and proprietary, but here are some general reasons:\n\n1. Most phones only have to ID one fingerprint. Other devices may have to be able to compare a fingerprint against hundreds.\n\n2. Some fingerprint scanners simplify the ID process by converting your fingerprint into a number, which may not necessarily be unique. This makes the fingerprint matching process much faster, but it also increases the likelihood that a copy of your fingerprint or a fingerprint similar to yours will work.\n3. Some biometric scanners were certified a few years ago, and it will take time to re-certify with newer, faster hardware and software.",
"Plenty of good thoughts in these comments, but I'd also like to add that the phones are generally made by giant tech companies with bazillions of dollars at their disposal. They can afford to buy the absolute best technology available, and/or pay for extensive R & D to make them better. \n\nDedicated fingerprint scanners are a pretty tiny market compared to smartphones, and so the companies making them are less likely to have the budget and/or inclination to spend as much on developing their systems as the phone manufacturers. \n\n",
"Payroll guy here who works with biometric time clocks. \n\nMost biometric time clocks have all the employees who work for the company stored in their local memory accompanied by a number of finger prints per person based on how many have been enrolled. (Some clocks have 2-3 prints per person). \n\nWhen you go and scan your fingerprint, the reader has to compare what it sees against all of the stored images of other fingerprints to find a match. This can vary depending on the clock's local memory, how many prints it has to check, how good of a scan it got of your fingerprint and how sensitive/strict the company has set the clock to be. \n\nContrast that to your phone...which only has one finger print: Yours. You put your finger on and it checks it against one print in memory. Much faster.",
"Two very important reasons as the current top answer only gets it partially correct.\n\n1) That the sensor only needs to recognize one fingerprint vs accessing a database is true.\n\n2) More importantly though is the sensitivity of the sensor on the phone is significantly lower and it is scanning far less detail than a true scanner. They get away with this in part due to point 1 being that it only has to recognize one and thus doesn't require as many points of verification.\n\nIt is important to note that this is why fingerprint scanners on phones are NOT secure and are quite easy to bypass vs high end biometric scanners which are very secure and Very difficult to bypass. I guess I'll add while I'm thinking about it that the scanners on higher end laptops are only marginally better than those on phones. They again largely do not scan against a database outside very specialized ones, but do scan a few more points for verification. Their resolution is better, but still not great. Unfortunately in most scenarios a laptop fingerprint scanner is even more useless than one on a phone as if someone has physical access to a PC, bypassing this level of security is trivial. ",
"What 300 dollar phone? Its likely more expensive that that isn't it? ",
"Your phone wants to know you, it gets to know you. Finger scanners are based on thousands against thousands, it has to hacmve way more time to access and compare.",
"Your phone is doing \"are you who you say you are\"? A fingerprint scanner is usually doing \"who are you\"? One to one is a very fast calculation. One to many is a slow calculation. \n\n",
"Part of it is volume. When you can move 9 million units (as Apple did with the 5S) vs a few thousand, you get mega volume buying power so it costs you much less to manufacture.\n\n",
"Phone is fine is an 'okay' match, reliable fingerprint scanners need 'jesus our lord and saviour' matches. So where your phone will have an image with an 'okay' resolution, and, say, 'a quite an amount' of points that it looks at, a fingerprint scanner will have images of 'jesus nipples that is crisp' resolution, and 'yo momma's weight in numbers' of points that it looks at.\n\n**In short,** the fingerprint scanner is more precise, and thus has more to look through, which takes time, and thus more expensive equipment.",
"If you're talking about the new LG V10, the fingerprint scanner works about 5% of the time. I'd rather it take more time to read it correctly, then for me to have to keep lifting my finger and re scanning it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9eq4o0 | - chapter 19 in nafta | Can someone please explain to me what Chapter 19 of the NAFTA agreement is all about? Why is it so important and why is the U.S. so pissed off about it?
I did try Google but it just confused me more.
I am in no way asking for your political opinion.
Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9eq4o0/eli5_chapter_19_in_nafta/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5qnro8",
"e5qnvc3",
"e5qod3w",
"e5qoocb"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"From MacLeans (Canadian monthly publication if you are unfamiliar with it)\n\n“Chapter 19 allows Canada to bypass the U.S. judicial review process when the U.S. government imposes antidumping and/or countervailing duties on Canadian products imported into the United States, as has been the case repeatedly with softwood lumber, for example. In such cases, Canada can use NAFTA’s Chapter 19 to create an independent, binational panel of five arbiters, agreed upon by both parties, who will determine whether or not the duties have merit based on U.S. domestic laws. A separate process can be pursued at the World Trade Organization to determine whether the duties are in accordance with WTO rules as well. If they do not, then the U.S. government has to cease imposing them (or impose a lower level of duties) and reimburse what it has collected in excess along with the accumulated interest on those sums.”\n\nIn today’s case it makes it tougher for President Trump’s administration to pass its protectionist mesures as the disputes would have to be resolved by an independent body approved by both sides.\n\nI don’t know where you are from but you can read why it is important for Canada [here](_URL_0_) ",
"Chapter 19 basically says that if you believe that someone or some industry has violated NAFTA you have the right to be heard by a panel consisting of people from both/all 3 countries. If that panel then accepts to try to settle your dispute you then plead your case. From there they will either reject the claim or make 1 side pay money to the other.\n\nThe reason why the U.S. would like to get out of it is because it gives up some sovereignty of the nation to a higher power. In the U.S. if 2 companies had a dispute it would be handled by a U.S. appointed judge, however in NAFTA this is handled by a U.S. appointed arbiter and a Canadian one and a Mexican one. \n\n\nIf the U.S. got its way the U.S. [insert industry here] could sue the Canadian industry by using the U.S. courts, which would arguably be more favorable to the U.S. company than the Canadian one. However until that's changed they have to sue in an international court, which arguably be less favorable to the U.S.",
"Chapter 19 is a provision of NAFTA that sends trade disputes involving anti-dumping and countervailing duties to be decided before an independent panel, rather than domestic courts. Canada likes it, the U.S. distinctly does not.\n\nAnti-dumping = Preventing countries from exporting products at lower prices in foreign markets than in domestic markets to gain a competitive advantage in the export market.\n\nCountervailing duties = Import taxes design to neutralize the impact of a foreign government subsidizing an export. Investopedia has a great example\n\n > Consider the following example of countervailing duties. Assume Country A provides an export subsidy to widget makers in the nation, who export widgets en masse to Country B at $8 per widget. Country B has its own widget industry and domestic widgets are available at $10 per widget. If Country B determines that its domestic widget industry is being hurt by unrestrained imports of subsidized widgets, it may impose a 25% countervailing duty on widgets imported from Country A, so that the resulting cost of the imported widgets is also $10. This eliminates the unfair price advantage that widget makers in Country A have due to the export subsidy from their government.\n\nA few days ago, Canada say that they see Chapter 19 as being critical protection against a President who they perceive as making up his own rules and prone to protectionism. Canada feels that it protects them from having cases filed in U.S. courts, where judges could apply the law in a more protectionist way. \n\nInstead, the U.S. would rather have \"snapback tariffs\" that puts a tax on imports from NAFTA countries that causes, or threatens to cause, harm to a U.S. industry. However, Canada feels that this would make it too easy for the U.S. to enact protectionist trade policies, and that Chapter 19 protects them better in key industries (namely, dairy and softwood lumber). ",
" > Why is it so important\n\nSo if a country wants to, it can collapse the price of a given commodity they have a surplus in, which invariably harms competitors in neighboring countries that can't compete at such a low price. In essentially all trade deals, there is an agreement that allows countries that are harmed by such action to block each other from doing it, called an anti-dumping case.\n\nChapter 19 in the NAFTA agreement is a counter for the anti-dumping cases, allowing the dumping country to argue their case in a neutral court and potentially block the other countries block. While all of this sounds convoluted, it is, in the end, good for free trade in general.\n\nSo, for example because the above can get confusing; Canada puts out wood products because they have a whole bunch of trees. Because of economies of scale, and because Canada has a vested interest in being the king of wood products within NAFTA, they dump a lot of raw wood onto the NAFTA market in order to drive competitors in their neighboring countries out of business. At this point, the US or Mexico could automatically block Canada from doing this, but Chapter 19 allows Canada to argue their point before a neutral party.\n\n > and why is the U.S. so pissed off about it?\n\nBe careful not to confuse Trump being pissed off about it with the US as a whole being pissed off about it.\n\nTrump doesn't like it because Mexico (and Canada, sort of) takes advantage of it to introduce Chinese steel into NAFTA, which US steel has issues competing against. Trump, for reasons, really doesn't like this, and he wants Chapter 19 gone so he can prevent Mexico and Canada from continuing to do this.\n\nHowever, IMO the more sane option would be to subsidize US steel production as opposed to invoking a trade war that's making everything *else* more expensive."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/why-naftas-chapter-19-is-worth-fighting-for/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2882vz | do animals like birds, squirrels, etc. have fun or are they always in fear of predators? | Just wondering if we know that animals have fun or are they always living with some fear and the motive to acquire food, shelter, and avoid being killed by predators. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2882vz/eli5_do_animals_like_birds_squirrels_etc_have_fun/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci8c3eb",
"ci8c4vv"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I know that squirrels have fun. They can often be seen chasing each other around. Other animals, such as rabbits, do this also.",
"Birds, and other animals, are known to do things for the fun of it:\n\n- [Snowboarding crow](_URL_0_)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUBMSnHH7hc"
]
] |
|
29vqn6 | does beating a cold infection make you less likely to get sick? why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29vqn6/eli5_does_beating_a_cold_infection_make_you_less/ | {
"a_id": [
"cioyhd6",
"ciozqh4"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Generally when your body is exposed to infection, it learns to fight it off. Say you are exposed to the flu. It enters your body and your white blood cells come to the rescue. Our body's temperature it almost a perfect temperature for germs to breed, and so when you have an infection, you get a fever in order to kill off the germs. Your white blood cells find the germs in your body and destroy them. \n\nAfter your body is exposed to the infection they recognize it and will be able to fight off quicker because it knows how to react. This is why vaccinations expose a *very* small amount of the virus to your body so it can recognize them. ",
"/u/missalexhere is correct but the thing you have to keep in mind is that the \"cold\" is ever changing, mutating and there is not just one type around."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5xdhdn | why are we using a loud, obnoxious *beep* to censor curse words? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xdhdn/eli5_why_are_we_using_a_loud_obnoxious_beep_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"deh9h2h",
"deh9y0l",
"dehayue",
"dehi297"
],
"score": [
6,
10,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"I'm curious also, although I have heard the loud BEEP a lot less the past few years. Nowadays it seems to be mostly a small moment of silence to censor the curse words.",
"I was thinking the beeps are used for a humorous effect. If we can't have curse words out in the open in case there's children watching, we can at least have a laugh at the obnoxious beeping.",
"Besides what /u/KingRubbish said, silence is mentally disturbing. A beep tells us that there is nothing wrong with our hearing.",
"If we go back in time to when audio was recorded on tapes, the way to censor something is to record over it. If you just record silence over it, you'd still hear the censored content, albeit likely quieter. If you put a nice solid tone over it, it'll for sure eliminate the ability to hear what's underneath."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
23kpej | how someone who is obviously in the wrong can win in court. | You hear stories about how someone who broke into a house hurt himself doing so, and sues the owners. How do they get away with that? Judges can't be that stupid. Isn't it obvious that hes in the wrong? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23kpej/eli5_how_someone_who_is_obviously_in_the_wrong/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgxyfnd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Can you cite an actual case where this has happened? [Most of the cases circulating on the internet were false](_URL_0_). Actual lawsuits of similar nature either have more story behind it (McDonald coffee lady was served coffee so hot that she received second and third degree burn requiring skin graft and she only wanted medical expense paid) or dismissed entirely (Washington DC Pant Suit). \n\nGenerally you are will only going to get medical expenses and at the very most lost wages for inability to work if you can prove property owner's negligence caused your injury. Very large sums money are only given as [punitive damages](_URL_1_) where the defendants are usually large corporations and paying the original amount is not enough of an incentive for them to change, they would likely to continue hurting people if not punished more severely. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages"
]
] |
|
expver | when you buy software, the source code usually is not made public, but doesn’t your computer still have to run the code to use the software? how can it run the code without allowing the user to see the code? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/expver/eli5_when_you_buy_software_the_source_code/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgaztqs",
"fgazuzh",
"fgb0xd3",
"fgb4p6t",
"fgc6391"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
8,
29,
5
],
"text": [
"The computer doesn't run the software directly from the source code. At least not with most programming languages.\n\nWith something like C++ the source code is \"compiled\". Which means it gets converted into machine code, which is what the computer can actually execute.\n\nThis is a one way process. Lots of contextual information is thrown out, so it's impossible to convert it back into the source code. It's theoretically possible to convert it back into valid source code, but it wouldn't be the same as the actual original code and it would be very difficult to make sense of.",
"The code is compiled into machine code, a language that your computer can read and understand. You could try to read the machine code and understand what it does - that's [reverse engineering](_URL_0_) - but it is a difficult process. For example, the original source code contains a lot of data that is only useful for the programmers, such as comments and function and variable names, which are stripped when the code is compiled. Sometimes the code might even be [obfuscated](_URL_1_) which adds another layer of complexity to the code.\n\nBesides, \"open source\" usually doesn't just mean that the code is available, it also means that the code is legally free to use (with or without certain limitations).",
"The source code is like a blueprint to make a car. The blueprint describes all that is needed for the factory to build the car, and the source code describes all the instructions for the *compiler* to build the software. \n\nThe finished product, the software, doesn't need to know how to *make* said software, it just tells your computer how to *run* it - just as a car doesn't tell you how to run a factory to make the same car. \n\nA little more in depth: source code compiles into *assembly* code and it's this that your computer runs (essentially just a bunch of instructions on what to display on your screen for given inputs). \n\nSource code is written in a way that's easy for humans to understand and therefore big projects can be achieved in a relatively small amount of time - but the assembly code this compiles to is much more complicated and not so easily understood by your average programmer.",
"Say you have some source code... in your source code is the line \"if playerhealth < 0, gameover = true.\" Seems pretty easy to understand.\n\nNow the compiler will convert that into binary. It will look something like this \"010111000101010010.\" \n\nYou can decompile it, but the compiler through out all of the variable names and just gave them numbers, so now you're left with\n\"If AE0 < 0, 0F1=1\"\n\nNow maybe you can play around with the game and the code, and eventually you'll figure out that AE0 means playerhealth and 0F1 means gameover... but you'll have to do this with hundreds or thousands of variables. It would be a daunting task for any modern software, to say the least.",
"The code you run is computer-readable. It's incredibly optimised towards making things fast for the computer to do, not easy for a human to understand.\n\nThe original source is the complete opposite.\n\nTo get from the former to the latter is possibly one of the most difficult tasks in computer science, and even for the best programmers. Reverse-engineering published code is simple, right?! So we're all running Windows 7 reverse engineered back to run on a Mac, aren't we? No.\n\nIt can take \\*decades\\* of effort to reverse-engineer mere years of work, and when you're talking about anything substantial, the man-years of work involved in the creation are enormous. We haven't properly reverse-engineered the Windows file-sharing components, not the Active Directory (i.e. logon server) components yet. Samba Project has been trying to do that for about 20 years now, and even received documentation (not source) from Microsoft to do it, under an EU court ruling that said they had to.\n\nIt's more akin to un-scrambling an egg... uncooking it, unravelling it, reassembling it back into something that resembles the original egg.\n\nAnd worse: You're doing it blind. You have no idea what's code, what's data, where the boundary lies, what the code-paths are, what any of the instructions are trying to achieve, how they're doing it, what the original code looked like, or what anything was called. All you see is a bunch of millions of numbers modifying each other. The computer loves that, that's what it was built for. Humans have the worst time interpreting that.\n\nAnd you need to be an expert programmer, in both the language it was written in, the compiler that was used, and the machine language that it ended up with, to even \\*begin\\* to start on it. Even old 1MByte DOS games that sold millions of copies 20+ years ago haven't been reverse-engineered yet. The number of people skilled enough to able to do it, the number of those able to devote that amount of time to it, the number of those that will happily do it for free, the number of those that \\*want\\* to do it, and the number of such other things that - with those skills - they'd rather be doing: it all combines to make it a rare and unusual thing to even start.\n\nIf a game took a team of people 5 years to write, assume it would take a similar team of people 10 years minimum to reverse-engineer. And then... what? You expect them to give the source away for free after 10 years of working 9-5 on it? And you expect not to get sued by whoever owns the rights to the game in the first place?\n\nReverse-engineering software is, sadly, a true waste of an enormous talent that is better put to making new things. Even emulators and the like are incredibly difficult to write, and that's when you know everything the machine can do and can just follow books on how the chips operate. Reverse-engineering machine code back to usable code is really a dark art requiring incredible skill - which is why most people just run an emulator if they want an old game. It's easier to write an emulator that it is to reverse-engineer. And most programmers probably couldn't write a decent emulator."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obfuscation_(software\\)"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6ykgou | why is earth's terminal velocity around 120 mph rather than 9.8 m/s? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ykgou/eli5_why_is_earths_terminal_velocity_around_120/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmo2syd"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"You've made two false assumptions in this query. First, 9.8m/s has no meaning in this context. The acceleration of Earth's gravitational field is 9.8m/s^2, meaning that for each second an object with no resistance will accelerate an additional 9.8m/s. Second, not all objects have the same terminal velocity. The only reason objects have a terminal velocity at all is because Earth has an atmosphere. The maximum (terminal) velocity of an object falling through the atmosphere is determined by the object's mass and air resistance thus a ball bearing weighing 2oz will fall faster than a large feather weighing 2oz. This difference disappears when the atmosphere is removed and both objects would accelerate at the same rate, with no maximal velocity, until they touched the ground."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7scn6m | why is it hard to read books, but easy to surf the web for hours? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7scn6m/eli5_why_is_it_hard_to_read_books_but_easy_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt3r37h",
"dt3r7mo",
"dt3rnze",
"dt3sqk8"
],
"score": [
7,
25,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Searching for the same answer. Books have always been a huge part of my life. But lately the idea of committing myself to starting one gives me anxiety. So instead I read short things on the internet. Same thing with starting new long TV series. It’s easier to start something you know will end soon and give the closure or gratification. That’s the best explanation I’ve been able to come up with for myself anyways. ",
"A constant term that pops around about why the internet is so entertaining is “instant feedback” or “instant gratification”, something among those lines.\n\nEssentially, browsing the internet and going on Facebook or Twitter gives immediate feedback and reward to small actions like simply clicking on an article or loading up the me_irl subreddit. The internet contains so many things that are rewarded almost instantly from a few movements of the hands.\n\nWith reading, it takes time to get invested into what makes it engaging. The setting, characters, and story all take time to dive into. Be it a few pages or a few chapters to introduce these things, our brain naturally craves instant feedback and reward, rather than having to wait patiently through long lines of text to have information fed.\n\nIt’s merely my take on it as someone with ADHD, though I think I tackled it well.",
"I think one of the main things is if you get bored of what you are reading on the internet you just switch to a new article/page. If you get bored 50 pages into a book it's much harder to do so (you've already invested an hour into reading it).",
"Surfing the internet is a thousand small bursts of interest over the course of a couple of hours of clicking around. Reading a book is one long process that requires you to focus on one single thing for that same amount of time without immediate gratification or payoff. \n\nIf this trend is bothersome to you, you might consider committing yourself to a month with as little computer use as possible, including Reddit and social media, to give your brain a chance to re-set, and allow you to re-form an attention span that will allow you to focus on one thing for long enough to enjoy it. The first week is very challenging, but if it's something you're interested in, it can help a lot. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
vhdz2 | what is the advantage of spending more money to buy an unlocked phone? | I see new phones like the Galaxy S3 going for $700 unlocked. What is the advantage of this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/vhdz2/eli5_what_is_the_advantage_of_spending_more_money/ | {
"a_id": [
"c54i7fm",
"c54isis",
"c54m3tz"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The only advantages are that you can choose any provider and you can get a prepaid plan. If you text/ring a lot, it's better to not get an unlocked phone and just get a contract.",
"One advantage is, if you travel internationally frequently, one does not have to pay the extortionate roaming charges of one's home cell-phone company. \n\nFor example: if I used my home cell-phone company's \"International Package\" for data on my recent trip to where I am now, it would cost me $100 for 30Mb ($3.3/Mb). Instead -- since I have an unlocked phone -- I paid $12 for 3Gb ($0.004/Mb): a difference of a factor of ~1000 in dollars per byte. ",
"You aren't necessarily spending more money. You are spending for the cost of the phone *up front* rather than over 12/18/24 months as you would on a contract. If you go for a contract, you will spend $700 plus the cost of your contract (calls, texts, data) in monthly instalments. \n\nThe advantage of a contract of course is a smaller amount of money to pay per month. The disadvantage of a contract is that you are locked in for X months with that carrier. Maybe that isn't so bad, but some people might not like it. \n\nI will give you my UK example. Buying an unlocked S3 would cost me 500 GBP. I can then take my phone and choose my own plan with a carrier that I like. I can choose a 10GBP/month SIM-only plan or any other plan that suits my data-centric needs. Over 24 months, this will cost me \n\n 500 + (24*10) = 740 GBP.\n\nYou can see that I spent a lot of money at first, but I spend a small amount of money per month.\n\nOr, I can go for a long-term contract. I can go for a [contract](_URL_0_) that is 24 months for 31GBP/month. Plus 89 GBP for the handset. That means \n\n 89 + (24*31) = 833 GBP. \n\nSo for my specific needs, it is cheaper to get a SIM free phone. Maybe your specific needs are different. My needs are around data, not phone/text and this works out cheaper for me. \n\nThe advantage of an unlocked phone is that if I get annoyed with Vodafone, I can switch to another carrier for the same monthly rolling contract. It also means that if I go to another country, I can buy a cheap SIM there and start using my phone. Another advantage is that I will get Android updates faster than if it is locked or through a carrier.\n\nA disadvantage of unlocked phones is that if you have trouble with it, your carrier will not care, it is up to you to solve it or return it for repairs. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.vodafone.co.uk/brands/samsung/galaxy-s3/index.htm?icmp=int-vod-hpg-hb-bt1"
]
] |
|
m1ca5 | why shouldn't iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons? | There always seems to be a lot of talk about Iran getting ready to have their own nuclear weapons and I don’t really understand why the US (and other countries) is/are talking about it like it’s the worst thing that could ever happen. Why are the US & Russia (and others) “allowed” to have them if these people also say “you shouldn’t have them”. I don’t understand why any country thinks it can forbid other countries doing what they’re also doing. Thanks in advance. :) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m1ca5/eli5_why_shouldnt_iran_be_allowed_to_have_nuclear/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2x9ksx",
"c2x9lb9",
"c2x9mlz",
"c2x9p3o",
"c2xa0oc",
"c2xa96m",
"c2xaa52",
"c2xae51",
"c2xagj6",
"c2xar3h",
"c2xb07u",
"c2xb7lo",
"c2xbayr",
"c2xbvxy",
"c2xbwtk",
"c2xbzkd",
"c2xm6dn",
"c2x9ksx",
"c2x9lb9",
"c2x9mlz",
"c2x9p3o",
"c2xa0oc",
"c2xa96m",
"c2xaa52",
"c2xae51",
"c2xagj6",
"c2xar3h",
"c2xb07u",
"c2xb7lo",
"c2xbayr",
"c2xbvxy",
"c2xbwtk",
"c2xbzkd",
"c2xm6dn"
],
"score": [
21,
131,
9,
5,
5,
4,
36,
25,
3,
5,
4,
3,
9,
2,
3,
2,
2,
21,
131,
9,
5,
5,
4,
36,
25,
3,
5,
4,
3,
9,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I hate to be horribly obvious, but from the point of view of western governments, they shouldn't have nuclear weapons because they're a potential future enemy. On top of that being a very religiously motivated country they're less likely to be put off using nuclear weapons they might acquire by self preservation. I once heard them described by a gentleman who had lived there for many years as a 'nation of martyrs' people who are happy to die aren't people you want armed with doomsday weapons really. I suppose it isn't technically fair to stop them getting these weapons but it is pragmatic and strategically spot on.",
"Basically its to do with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which almost all countries signed.\n\nYou're right that it basically says \"No-one is allowed to get nuclear weapons if they didn't already have them when they signed the treaty\", which seems a little unfair. However, the treaty is what it is, and every country in the world has signed up except from India, Israel and Pakistan. Additionally North Korea originally signed, but then pulled out, and Taiwan is a bit of a odd-case, but they're effectively covered.\n\nSo the situation is that Iran has signed an agreement that says they won't develop nuclear weapons, and if they were attempting to then that'd be a violation of the treaty.\n\nWhether or not they're attempting to make nuclear weapons is something open for debate. Iran says that, whilst they are doing things that look like they might be making nuclear weapons (enriching uranium) that is only for the purpose of their Nuclear Power station and related civilian power research, and thus it is allowed under the treaty.\n\nThe US on the other hand doesn't believe Iran and thinks that it is doing work to develop nuclear weapons, and thus imposes restrictions on Iran as best it can.\n\nIn the end it is basically the big boys with all the power bullying smaller countries into not having nuclear weapons, whilst they hypocritically keep them themselves. Whether or not you think that's fair, the fact is we are alot safer as a world with less nuclear weapons in, so perhaps the ends justify the means.\n\n\nIts also worth noting that all the countries that aren't covered by the NPT (Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea) have subsequently gone on to make nuclear weapons.",
"Think about it, you're in the playground, and you have a big stick you can swing around and show your power. The other kids listen to what you say, however they also want a big stick too. Should you give them the stick if in the future they may decide they don't like you, and use the big stick against you. ",
"Wow, thank you guys. I really didn't expect to get answers so fast. :]",
"One big reason is the [NNPT (Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) - wikipedia link](_URL_0_).\n\nIran is part of that treaty which says they cannot make nuclear weapons, but can get nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants. If they violate the treaty it can be taken as hostile.",
"To sidestep the political aspects of this question: because no one should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It sucks that so many countries already have them. More is worse, whether or not one could argue that it's in some way fair. I would oppose any country getting them.",
"Nice try, mahmoud ahmadinejad.",
"Because \"some men just want to watch the world burn\". As much as some people here will refuse to admit, there are some nations that can be trusted with nuclear arms and some that just can't, and the US and Russia (despite their gruesome pasts in many respects) can be trusted that the principles of mutually assured destruction will deter them from ever actually using them. Unstable regimes in the middle east just can't be trusted to the same levels. Sometimes ideals like \"fairness\" have to be sacrificed to ensure that we don't all get wiped off the face of the planet. People won't like this response, but its quite simply that we can trust \"ourselves\" more than we can trust others. If you ask me no one should be allowed to have them, but we have to deal with the reality that is the mess now, and prevent it from getting worse.",
"What scares people about Iran (or at least, what is used to scare people about Iran) is the stories from the Iran-Iraq war of the Basij, military brigades who willingly died on the battlefield in suicide missions for martyrdom and even ran into minefields to clear them for Iranian military units behind them. The idea is that a country of people who do not care if they die or not is not one you want to have the ability to start a nuclear war.\n\nIn reality, it's mostly realpolitik. Iran and Saudi Arabia don't like each other, Iran and Israel don't like each other, the US likes Saudi Arabia and Israel. Hence we want to keep the balance of power as is. It has little to do with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty - that's just a tool used in maintaining the balance of power.",
"A better question would be, why *should* any nations be allowed to have nuclear weapons? ",
"They'll blow up Israel if they get one, we think.",
"The ability of certain gov'ts to maintain stable power over states is important. One revolution and who knows who has control of the wrong buttons.",
"1- Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. IAEA Director ElBaradei said that he had not seen a \"shred of evidence\" of a nuclear weapons program. Not even the Israelis really think it does. \n\n_URL_2_\n\n2- No one can \"allow\" someone else to have nuclear weapons. If Iran wants to have nukes, it is perfectly legally entitled to do so. It can quite legally withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty under Art X, and then build as many nukes as it wants - because it is a sovereign country, just like all the other countries that built nukes.\n\n3- Despite the hype and lying, Iran has not violated the Non-Proliferation Treaty, as 6 former EU Ambassadors have written:\n_URL_0_\n\n4- The demands imposed on Iran by the IAEA, acting under US pressure, are illegal and fall outside of the authority of the IAEA. According to the explicit terms of Iran's *standard safeguards agreement with the IAEA, the \"EXCLUSIVE\" function of the IAEA is to ensure the \"nondiversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful uses\" - which is something the IAEA has verified in Iran in every single report, meaning that Iran is doing everything right.\n\n4- Even the US doesn't accuse Iran of having a nuclear weapons program - it accuses Iran of having the \"intention to acquire the capability\" to make nukes, which is something that can equally be said about many countries. About 40 countries already have this \"capability\" because it is part of simply having a nuclear energy program. Brazil, Argentina etc all are enriching uranium, and have a history of seeking nukes too.\n\n5- Iran has repeatedly offered to place additional restrictions on its nuclear program well beyond its legal obligations, as a good faith gesture. These have included offers to open the program to joint participation with the US. Iran even suspended enrichment entirely for 2.5 years. More recently Ahmadinejad offered to cease 20% enrichment of uranium, used to make fuel for a medical reactor, if the US allows Iran to buy the fuel on the open market as it had done in the past but the US ignored that offer too. The US has ignored all these offers because the nuclear issue is a pretext it needs to keep alive just as WMDs in Iraq was a pretext. But in reality this conflict is not really about nukes - that's just the pretext.\n\n6- Much of what you read in the media about \"proof\" of a nuclear weapons program in Iran is what's known as the \"Alleged Studies\" - claims by the US that they have a laptop computer (google: \"Laptop of Death\") which supposedly contained this \"evidence\" but no one has verified this stuff and the US has never fully turned it over to the IAEA. In fact Iran has not been allowed to see this evidence it is supposed to refute.\n\n7- During the Iran-Iraq war, Iran was the victim of (US-backed-) chemical weapons attacks by Saddam. Iran had the legal right back then to return fire with chemical weapons (*under international law back then, the FIRST USE of chemical weapons was prohibited not retaliation in kind.) However Iran did not do so. It took 50,000 casualties from chemical weapons, and did not resort to WMDs itself even though it was legally entitled to do so. \n\n8- THe people of Iran massively support their nuclear program and accorind to some polls even want nuclear weapons. \n\nIAEA head Elbaradei saidL:\n\"I have seen the Iranians ready to accept putting a cap on their enrichment [program] in terms of tens of centrifuges, and then in terms of hundreds of centrifuges. But nobody even tried to engage them on these offers. Now Iran has 5,000 centrifuges. The line was, \"Iran will buckle under pressure.\" But this issue has become so ingrained in the Iranian soul as a matter of national pride. They talk about their nuclear program as if they had gone to the moon.\"\n_URL_1_",
"because they might use it",
"The US and UK want to keep the option to invade Iran for cheap political gain open. If Iran had nukes, they couldn't just waltz in like they did in WW2, 1953 and 1980.",
"There was this school with a bunch of kids who went there. Some of the kids were big and tough, some were small and weak. After a while a big fight broke out between some of the bigger tougher kids. Two gangs which included most every kid in the yard fought for a long time. \n \nOne gang had a kid called Germany and he was joined by another tough kid called Japan. Japan was small but a serious pyscho who never backed down. There were others like Italy who wasn't great in a fight and France who caved after the first punch was thrown but tried to trip Germany up behind his back while pretending to be on his side now. \n\nOn the other side was England and his gang called the Allies who were later joined by a big kid called America. America had more money and stuff than the other kids and one day he got tired of pounding on Japan who didn't seem to care what was done to him. He just kept coming back for more. So America got some brass knuckles and messed Japan up so bad he was finished and gave up. \n \nLater one of England's gang called Russia got a set of brass knuckles for himself. Now by this time America and Russia were sizing each other up. Sooner or later they would have to see who was the toughest kid in the yard. America started bringing a baseball bat to school. Russia brought a baseball bat with nails through it. America brought a pistol. Russia brought a shotgun. \n \nSome people said this was a good thing. No one wanted to fight now because once a fight started everyone would end up dead. The fancy name for this was Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD for short. \n \nAfter a time most of the kids got together and decided that no one new would bring dangerous weapons to school. America and Russia balanced each other out so they kept their stuff. France had a deringer just to look cool in front of the ther kids so he kept that. England had a 45 and a few hand grenades that he kept. A few kids didn't say one way or the other what they might do.\n\nIran said he agreed not to bring weapons but after a while the other kids noticed him reading books on how to make pipe bombs and how to build a gun. He was also seen refining metal suitable for making guns. \"I'm just doing a science project for school\" he claimed. \n \nEveryone knew Iran was a bit of a weird kid and they didn't really trust him. America really didn't like the idea of Iran having a dangerous weapon. Some kids though this was two faced of America since he was the only kid to actually f*** someone up, (remember Japan?), but things had been quiet since the deal and no one wanted another big gang war like before. Most people would get hurt or killed. \n \nIf Iran actually has a gun hidden somewhere and one day actually shoots someone all hell would break loose and everyone would start killing each other. \n \nAnd that why they can't have not nice things. ",
"Because then the Us and Israel can't attack it.",
"I hate to be horribly obvious, but from the point of view of western governments, they shouldn't have nuclear weapons because they're a potential future enemy. On top of that being a very religiously motivated country they're less likely to be put off using nuclear weapons they might acquire by self preservation. I once heard them described by a gentleman who had lived there for many years as a 'nation of martyrs' people who are happy to die aren't people you want armed with doomsday weapons really. I suppose it isn't technically fair to stop them getting these weapons but it is pragmatic and strategically spot on.",
"Basically its to do with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which almost all countries signed.\n\nYou're right that it basically says \"No-one is allowed to get nuclear weapons if they didn't already have them when they signed the treaty\", which seems a little unfair. However, the treaty is what it is, and every country in the world has signed up except from India, Israel and Pakistan. Additionally North Korea originally signed, but then pulled out, and Taiwan is a bit of a odd-case, but they're effectively covered.\n\nSo the situation is that Iran has signed an agreement that says they won't develop nuclear weapons, and if they were attempting to then that'd be a violation of the treaty.\n\nWhether or not they're attempting to make nuclear weapons is something open for debate. Iran says that, whilst they are doing things that look like they might be making nuclear weapons (enriching uranium) that is only for the purpose of their Nuclear Power station and related civilian power research, and thus it is allowed under the treaty.\n\nThe US on the other hand doesn't believe Iran and thinks that it is doing work to develop nuclear weapons, and thus imposes restrictions on Iran as best it can.\n\nIn the end it is basically the big boys with all the power bullying smaller countries into not having nuclear weapons, whilst they hypocritically keep them themselves. Whether or not you think that's fair, the fact is we are alot safer as a world with less nuclear weapons in, so perhaps the ends justify the means.\n\n\nIts also worth noting that all the countries that aren't covered by the NPT (Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea) have subsequently gone on to make nuclear weapons.",
"Think about it, you're in the playground, and you have a big stick you can swing around and show your power. The other kids listen to what you say, however they also want a big stick too. Should you give them the stick if in the future they may decide they don't like you, and use the big stick against you. ",
"Wow, thank you guys. I really didn't expect to get answers so fast. :]",
"One big reason is the [NNPT (Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) - wikipedia link](_URL_0_).\n\nIran is part of that treaty which says they cannot make nuclear weapons, but can get nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants. If they violate the treaty it can be taken as hostile.",
"To sidestep the political aspects of this question: because no one should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It sucks that so many countries already have them. More is worse, whether or not one could argue that it's in some way fair. I would oppose any country getting them.",
"Nice try, mahmoud ahmadinejad.",
"Because \"some men just want to watch the world burn\". As much as some people here will refuse to admit, there are some nations that can be trusted with nuclear arms and some that just can't, and the US and Russia (despite their gruesome pasts in many respects) can be trusted that the principles of mutually assured destruction will deter them from ever actually using them. Unstable regimes in the middle east just can't be trusted to the same levels. Sometimes ideals like \"fairness\" have to be sacrificed to ensure that we don't all get wiped off the face of the planet. People won't like this response, but its quite simply that we can trust \"ourselves\" more than we can trust others. If you ask me no one should be allowed to have them, but we have to deal with the reality that is the mess now, and prevent it from getting worse.",
"What scares people about Iran (or at least, what is used to scare people about Iran) is the stories from the Iran-Iraq war of the Basij, military brigades who willingly died on the battlefield in suicide missions for martyrdom and even ran into minefields to clear them for Iranian military units behind them. The idea is that a country of people who do not care if they die or not is not one you want to have the ability to start a nuclear war.\n\nIn reality, it's mostly realpolitik. Iran and Saudi Arabia don't like each other, Iran and Israel don't like each other, the US likes Saudi Arabia and Israel. Hence we want to keep the balance of power as is. It has little to do with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty - that's just a tool used in maintaining the balance of power.",
"A better question would be, why *should* any nations be allowed to have nuclear weapons? ",
"They'll blow up Israel if they get one, we think.",
"The ability of certain gov'ts to maintain stable power over states is important. One revolution and who knows who has control of the wrong buttons.",
"1- Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. IAEA Director ElBaradei said that he had not seen a \"shred of evidence\" of a nuclear weapons program. Not even the Israelis really think it does. \n\n_URL_2_\n\n2- No one can \"allow\" someone else to have nuclear weapons. If Iran wants to have nukes, it is perfectly legally entitled to do so. It can quite legally withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty under Art X, and then build as many nukes as it wants - because it is a sovereign country, just like all the other countries that built nukes.\n\n3- Despite the hype and lying, Iran has not violated the Non-Proliferation Treaty, as 6 former EU Ambassadors have written:\n_URL_0_\n\n4- The demands imposed on Iran by the IAEA, acting under US pressure, are illegal and fall outside of the authority of the IAEA. According to the explicit terms of Iran's *standard safeguards agreement with the IAEA, the \"EXCLUSIVE\" function of the IAEA is to ensure the \"nondiversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful uses\" - which is something the IAEA has verified in Iran in every single report, meaning that Iran is doing everything right.\n\n4- Even the US doesn't accuse Iran of having a nuclear weapons program - it accuses Iran of having the \"intention to acquire the capability\" to make nukes, which is something that can equally be said about many countries. About 40 countries already have this \"capability\" because it is part of simply having a nuclear energy program. Brazil, Argentina etc all are enriching uranium, and have a history of seeking nukes too.\n\n5- Iran has repeatedly offered to place additional restrictions on its nuclear program well beyond its legal obligations, as a good faith gesture. These have included offers to open the program to joint participation with the US. Iran even suspended enrichment entirely for 2.5 years. More recently Ahmadinejad offered to cease 20% enrichment of uranium, used to make fuel for a medical reactor, if the US allows Iran to buy the fuel on the open market as it had done in the past but the US ignored that offer too. The US has ignored all these offers because the nuclear issue is a pretext it needs to keep alive just as WMDs in Iraq was a pretext. But in reality this conflict is not really about nukes - that's just the pretext.\n\n6- Much of what you read in the media about \"proof\" of a nuclear weapons program in Iran is what's known as the \"Alleged Studies\" - claims by the US that they have a laptop computer (google: \"Laptop of Death\") which supposedly contained this \"evidence\" but no one has verified this stuff and the US has never fully turned it over to the IAEA. In fact Iran has not been allowed to see this evidence it is supposed to refute.\n\n7- During the Iran-Iraq war, Iran was the victim of (US-backed-) chemical weapons attacks by Saddam. Iran had the legal right back then to return fire with chemical weapons (*under international law back then, the FIRST USE of chemical weapons was prohibited not retaliation in kind.) However Iran did not do so. It took 50,000 casualties from chemical weapons, and did not resort to WMDs itself even though it was legally entitled to do so. \n\n8- THe people of Iran massively support their nuclear program and accorind to some polls even want nuclear weapons. \n\nIAEA head Elbaradei saidL:\n\"I have seen the Iranians ready to accept putting a cap on their enrichment [program] in terms of tens of centrifuges, and then in terms of hundreds of centrifuges. But nobody even tried to engage them on these offers. Now Iran has 5,000 centrifuges. The line was, \"Iran will buckle under pressure.\" But this issue has become so ingrained in the Iranian soul as a matter of national pride. They talk about their nuclear program as if they had gone to the moon.\"\n_URL_1_",
"because they might use it",
"The US and UK want to keep the option to invade Iran for cheap political gain open. If Iran had nukes, they couldn't just waltz in like they did in WW2, 1953 and 1980.",
"There was this school with a bunch of kids who went there. Some of the kids were big and tough, some were small and weak. After a while a big fight broke out between some of the bigger tougher kids. Two gangs which included most every kid in the yard fought for a long time. \n \nOne gang had a kid called Germany and he was joined by another tough kid called Japan. Japan was small but a serious pyscho who never backed down. There were others like Italy who wasn't great in a fight and France who caved after the first punch was thrown but tried to trip Germany up behind his back while pretending to be on his side now. \n\nOn the other side was England and his gang called the Allies who were later joined by a big kid called America. America had more money and stuff than the other kids and one day he got tired of pounding on Japan who didn't seem to care what was done to him. He just kept coming back for more. So America got some brass knuckles and messed Japan up so bad he was finished and gave up. \n \nLater one of England's gang called Russia got a set of brass knuckles for himself. Now by this time America and Russia were sizing each other up. Sooner or later they would have to see who was the toughest kid in the yard. America started bringing a baseball bat to school. Russia brought a baseball bat with nails through it. America brought a pistol. Russia brought a shotgun. \n \nSome people said this was a good thing. No one wanted to fight now because once a fight started everyone would end up dead. The fancy name for this was Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD for short. \n \nAfter a time most of the kids got together and decided that no one new would bring dangerous weapons to school. America and Russia balanced each other out so they kept their stuff. France had a deringer just to look cool in front of the ther kids so he kept that. England had a 45 and a few hand grenades that he kept. A few kids didn't say one way or the other what they might do.\n\nIran said he agreed not to bring weapons but after a while the other kids noticed him reading books on how to make pipe bombs and how to build a gun. He was also seen refining metal suitable for making guns. \"I'm just doing a science project for school\" he claimed. \n \nEveryone knew Iran was a bit of a weird kid and they didn't really trust him. America really didn't like the idea of Iran having a dangerous weapon. Some kids though this was two faced of America since he was the only kid to actually f*** someone up, (remember Japan?), but things had been quiet since the deal and no one wanted another big gang war like before. Most people would get hurt or killed. \n \nIf Iran actually has a gun hidden somewhere and one day actually shoots someone all hell would break loose and everyone would start killing each other. \n \nAnd that why they can't have not nice things. ",
"Because then the Us and Israel can't attack it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace",
"http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/05/22/mohamed-elbaradei-they-are-not-fanatics.html",
"http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gShKfmWcoQ1ABBQ_DodMUUh61ckA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/09/iran-nuclear-power-un-threat-peace",
"http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/05/22/mohamed-elbaradei-they-are-not-fanatics.html",
"http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gShKfmWcoQ1ABBQ_DodMUUh61ckA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
66i6xo | why do humans fear rejection? | After seeing multiple cases and being in the situation, Why do humans fear rejection?Be it romantic,team based sports,the workplace etc. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66i6xo/eli5_why_do_humans_fear_rejection/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgin2xq"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"We are social creatures which means we are evolved to be a part of a group. Rejection means we are not a part of the group we attempted to be in (or that we failed to get our mat, a biological imperative). Not being in the group for most of our history as a species meant that the individual was most likely going to die. So we evolved habits that encourage us to stay a part of the group. Avoiding rejection is one such habit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1inya8 | why is a living wage such a bad idea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1inya8/eli5_why_is_a_living_wage_such_a_bad_idea/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb6b1se",
"cb6b2jc"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think a lot of the pressure against living wages comes from companies who argue that it will cut into their profit margin, force them to raise prices, or drive them out of business. I'd say most people working on minimum wage are in favor of it being raised but the people who employ them are against it.",
"Because too many rich people are too addicted to power/wealth to share."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1homz2 | why do people get more upset when for example a dog dies than if an ant dies, even if they have no attachment to either animal? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1homz2/eli5_why_do_people_get_more_upset_when_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cawc2qz"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Empathy. Dogs show similar emotional and behavioral traits to us so we relate to their experiences, their pain, the excitement etc. An ant has no behaviours or notable reactions that we can relate to so we are not able to put ourselves in their shoes. Basically, we see a dog die and picture ourselves in their position. All we can really do is go \"meh, it happens.\"\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2jw2m4 | is a ripped up contract still legally binding? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jw2m4/eli5_is_a_ripped_up_contract_still_legally_binding/ | {
"a_id": [
"clfkfoc",
"clfkndm",
"clfkogh",
"clfkyon"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Of course, otherwise why would you not just rip contracts you wanted to get rid of (I'm looking at you, cellphone contract). Of course you can argue that the contract said something else when it isn't around anymore but that is why both parties get a copy. ",
"If every copy of a contract is destroyed then there is nothing to present to a court. ",
"Lawyer here. Generally speaking, yes. There's nothing magic about paper in the law.\n\nThat said, there's something called the \"statute of frauds\" that requires that certain types of agreements be memorialized in a writing (not necessarily a contract) in order to be enforceable. For example, if you leased me your house for 5 years under a written lease agreement, and I somehow destroyed every copy of the lease, you couldn't enforce that lease in court.",
"Technically, yes. However, it will be harder for the opposing party to prove there was a contract if you destroyed the only copy. Somewhat related, tearing up a will will legally revoke the will."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
20r85y | why are hover boards so impossible to make? | Like i dont mean the hover boards that you ride on the street and water, but why not make a park specificly for that use? A skate park made of positive magnetic pads and boards with positive pads too. That should make the boards float right? What are the limitations and why is it so impossible to make something like that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20r85y/eli5_why_are_hover_boards_so_impossible_to_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg5z146",
"cg5z2t1",
"cg5z666",
"cg5z877",
"cg63qn3",
"cg6cmf2"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
49,
5,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The implementation you're suggesting is expensive. It's possible, but it's expensive.\n\nSkate parks won't see much business if they're $300/hr.",
"Well, cost for one thing. For another, normal magnets on a hoverboard will just want to flip the whole thing over and then the hoverboard would stick to the magnetic floor so hard you'd never be able to pry it up again. Superconducting magnets exhibit a phenomenon called quantum locking that avoids that, and they can -truly- hover over a track of strong magnets. But we're nowhere near being able to make a hoverboard with superconducting magnets.\n\nEdit: Quantum Levitation demonstration: _URL_0_",
"First, you'd need millions of extremely powerful magnets to lift another magnet and a PERSON. We're talking rip lights out of the ceiling and screw up every computer in the zip code strong.\n\nSecond, if you got all those magnets, the boards would all just flip over as soon as they became tilted at all and get pulled to the floor hard enough to turn human tissue and bone into pink slurry.\n\nAssuming you got the magnets on a perfectly level plane with no slant (and no skatboard park-esque fun bits) and had a person with superhuman balance abilities stand on the board, yes, it would work after ripping their braces off of their teeth and out through the soles of their shoes.",
"A couple problems with that from a physics standpoint.\n\nAssume you need magnets strong enough to support a 150lb person, 3 inches off the ground. In addition to the magnets that strong being difficult to produce, if a skater loses control of his board (which they do all the time), you now have a 5lb board with 150lbs of upward force being applied to it. That thing's going to go flying, and likely hurt someone sooner or later.\n\nAlso consider that magnets are not monopolar. Every magnetic has a positive side and a negative side. Net effect being that if someone tries to do a kickflip, or otherwise turns their board over, it's going to be pulled straight to the ground. And then it's going to take at least 150lbs of force to get it unstuck, since magnetic force gets exponentially stronger the closer it gets.",
"I'm not sure magnets are the best way to do this. It might make more sense to use air, like a really powerful motor that pushes air at the bottom. ",
"Its been done with superconductors, but you need to cool the board to liquid nitrogen temperatures, and you need a lot of very powerful magnets to make it work.\n\n[Here's a video of the stunt.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRNU_D_UImk"
]
] |
|
3s380h | why is it that a human brain doesn't fully develop until age 25, even though that would have been around (or even past) middle aged for most humans throughout history? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s380h/eli5_why_is_it_that_a_human_brain_doesnt_fully/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwtole4",
"cwtonhx",
"cwtop42",
"cwtos60"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"This is actually a really common misconception, just because life expectancy was around 30 throughout most of history, doesn't mean that most people lived to be about 30. Infant mortality was extremely high at the time, greatly bringing down the life expectancy, which is an average of how old people are when they die. People who survived to their teens were quite likely to live to their 40s or even 50s.",
"The low life expectancy of the middle ages is mostly due to the high infant mortality rate which skewed the life expectancy way low. If you made it to 10 years old back then you stood a good chance of living to 60 or older.",
"It's true that the brain is technically still developing throughout emerging adulthood (around ages 18-25), but the vast majority of brain development is complete by age 18 and there are generally very few developmental changes that occur after around age 22.\n\nAlso keep in mind that many life expectancy estimates from history (e.g. 100+ years ago) are heavily skewed because children were much more likely then to die at birth or die early from infections, diseases, malnutrition, etc. so even though the average life expectancy may technically have been very low (e.g. 40s or 50s), it was often still common for people to live much longer than that (e.g. into their 60s or 70s).",
"The only things that develop at the later stages are higher thinking skills. Also if ancient humans survived to around 7-8 their life expectancy was around 70-80 years. The reason that people think ancient humans lived to 40 is because infant mortality was included in those statistics and they really through off the data."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
64eg8i | why is is that at fast food restaurants (mcdonald's, starbucks, etc.) that they only give 10 minute breaks when all other places of work give 15? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64eg8i/eli5_why_is_is_that_at_fast_food_restaurants/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg1hs9b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You are incorrect, California only requires 10 minute breaks. [Here](_URL_0_) are the relevant laws.\n\nWhile many places give more than what is required by law (like 15 minute breaks) 10 is all that is required. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.calaborlaw.com/what-break-periods-am-i-entitled-to/"
]
] |
||
267jmg | why do movie producers continue to put lengthy credits at the end of every movie when they know the audience won't watch them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/267jmg/eli5_why_do_movie_producers_continue_to_put/ | {
"a_id": [
"chodn9y",
"choe19j",
"choeaiq"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Because people like recognition for the work they put into something. In a way, the credits are there for the people who are listed in the credits more than the people watching the movie. ",
"Some audience members do watch them, such as people who are interested in film and cinema. Also it can help if you see some actor whose name you don't know and want to find out, or there is a song you want to know the title of. It's not supposed to be something you sit and watch.",
"For people working in the movie industry, it's like a recommendation letter. You can say you worked on this or that project, but unless your name is really on the credits, it didn't happen. So a \"key grip\" can list the movies he worked on, and if a prospective employer wants to check, he can scroll through the movie credits."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5bahx6 | what purification process does water undergo when you open the tap? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bahx6/eli5_what_purification_process_does_water_undergo/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9my8dz",
"d9n0jhx",
"d9n0lm2",
"d9nc5re",
"d9nmy5r"
],
"score": [
8,
40,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Different water systems will use different methods, depending on what's in the water and what's feasible for the size of the system. Commonly there will be chlorine added or other system to disinfect it, and physical filters to remove particulates. Other harmful chemicals may require special treatment, and some systems will choose to soften the water. Systems are routinely tested for things like E. coli bacteria. \n\nIf you contact the water department/company, they should tell you specifically what they use. In the US, you should also be able to get their water quality test results. ",
"Sediments are removed from drinking water by flocculation (a process where a chemical like alum is added that makes sediments clump together) and gravity settling (these clumps sink to the bottom of large tanks and are mechanically removed). The water is later trickled down through a large filter of sand, coal, and rock fragments that remove finer particles that weren't removed by settling.\n\nDisinfection is usually performed by adding chlorine (basically bleach) at multiple intervals along the process. They used to use chlorine gas more but it's fallen out of favor due to safety concerns (especially after the 9/11 attacks). Chlorine is a very strong oxidizer - meaning electrons are very drawn to it. It kills bacteria by basically ripping away their electrons. Before being released to the distribution system, the water is dechlorinated so people aren't drinking chlorine. \n\nA newer technology being used is UV disinfection, where UV light is used to kill bacteria (basically destroys their DNA so they can't reproduce). It's a newer technology so they're still working out some kinks.",
"Many systems use a multi-step filtration process. First there is the floculation and sedimentation phase where large particulates drop out with the help of alum. Alum helps the particulates clump together and sink to the bottom of the basin. Flocculation is the mixing that encourages this clumping. Next, usually, is filtration where the somewhat clear water is dropped through sand and/or charcoal. This removes much of the smaller particulates and organic material. Last is disinfection where chlorine is added in a certain concentration I order to disinfect any remaining organisms. Other chemicals can be added and processes can be adjusted based on the specific characteristics of the water and the needs of the system. There are many more advanced treatment processes like ceramic filtration, bio filters, etc., but most systems still use the old process I described. \n\nSource: Water Quality Specialist at a large water utility",
"To add briefly to what others have mentioned, the question Itself implies that all these processes happen the moment one opens the tap. This is not the case, if it's unclear to some.\n\nMassive purification facilities are used to process the water and remove undesirable contents, as well as to add chlorine or whatever other chemicals the local government/water company decide should be in it. The purified water is then piped through the water supply lines and kept pressurised so that when taps are open, the water flows.",
"River water? Where in the world is river water coming out of the tap?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5tx4gr | since both light and sound could be measured by their frequencies, does that mean they are essentially the same, only that sound is in the audible frequency range and light in the visible frequency range? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tx4gr/eli5_since_both_light_and_sound_could_be_measured/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddpog9j",
"ddpohet",
"ddpoohh",
"ddpow3l",
"ddpoyhk",
"ddpq3pf",
"ddq5rm3"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sound is the transfer of energy as a waveform... Think of dropping a pebble in a pond. \n\nLight is photons(representable particles without mass but with energy due to speed) traveling at the speed of light.\n\nRadio(RF) is also photons, which is kinda cool! Your Router is sending actual particles to your computer. Same kind of particles that light is, just at a way lower frequency. ",
"No, though both sound and light are types of waves, they are fundamentally two different type of waves. Sound waves are compression waves; they involve atoms physically moving and interacting with each other. The atoms \"push\" each other, so to say, like people in a crowd. This also means that sound requires a medium; there must be atoms to push, after all.\n\nLight, on the other hand, is much more fundamental—it requires no medium. It occurs to due to excitations in the electromagnetic field, which is inherent in physical space, and extends infinitely everywhere.",
"No. Your intuition is good -- there are many kinds of electromagnetic energy similar to light and different only by frequency, including radio, x-rays, microwaves, and more. But sound is not one of them -- it's an unrelated phenomenon that also happens to involve waves with a frequency.",
"No. Frequency is the number of times a certain action takes place within a given period of time. Both sound and light measurably \"act\" like waves, however, light also has particle-like behavior. Frequency is simply a unit of measurement. \n",
"Frequency is how often it vibrates. Atoms vibrate at a frequency, water waves in the ocean have a frequency, electric current has a frequency, it's just a way to measure one of the properties of a wave or osscilation",
"No; they're two different kinds of waves. You can have both audible sound and electromagnetic radiation at the same frequency.",
"No. Both cover the same ranges overlapping:\n\nthe difference is that light is electromagnetic and sound is not; sound is vibration of matter and light is not."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9q3v68 | why does it feel good to prove someone wrong? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9q3v68/eli5_why_does_it_feel_good_to_prove_someone_wrong/ | {
"a_id": [
"e86f81f"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Knowledge is power, everyone loves power. It gives you more weight in the balance of power between two relative equals"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3unxoc | what are chocolate diamonds? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3unxoc/eli5_what_are_chocolate_diamonds/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxgdf7s",
"cxgdf86"
],
"score": [
5,
11
],
"text": [
"Impure, low grade diamonds. They have their own novelty, but they are less rare then your pure white diamonds. Before you couldn't sell them as people found them ugly, but this new chocolate tag line really helps change people perspective of them.",
"Diamonds that have a dark brown tint to them. They used to be considered pretty worthless for jewelry use until the diamond industry figured out a way to market them and make them sought after. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
17gtc2 | why dogs are so finicky about where they poo? | My dog didn't shit for three days because every time he found a spot he'd curl up, realize it wasn't good enough, and cancel the poo.
My tiny brain cannot compute the evolutionary need for this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17gtc2/eli5_why_dogs_are_so_finicky_about_where_they_poo/ | {
"a_id": [
"c85dobh",
"c85h8mn",
"c85hq8m",
"c85p7cl"
],
"score": [
21,
2,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Poop has a very distinct smell depending on the diet and predators can smell it from a long ways away. He couldn't find a spot that would be safe, and therefore he did not poop. It's why dogs eat the poop that their pups make.",
"I'd assume for the same reasons you're finicky about where you poo. It smells and is unsanitary, keeping it away from your or in this case your dog's eating and living area is just evolution at work. This also protects against predators since smelling or seeing the poo helps find the pooper, just like we use droppings when hunting an animal; other predators do too. At least that would be my guess, but I'm not a biologist so you'll just have to take my guess.",
"Are you not finicky about it?",
"Are they really looking for \"the perfect spot\" or are they just walking around and sniffing until their bowels are ready to release? I mean most of us humans don't go as soon as we sit down. These things take time. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
f8kg11 | what is lift and drag, and how does it apply to planes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f8kg11/eli5_what_is_lift_and_drag_and_how_does_it_apply/ | {
"a_id": [
"filwwfx",
"filx627",
"filx7d9",
"filxfkx"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Gravity pulls a plane down.\n\nLift is the upwards force generated by the wings. Wings generate lifting force because they're shaped like an [airfoil](_URL_0_), and as the air passes around the shape of the wing, the pressure under the wing is higher than the pressure above the wing.\n\nDrag is the force that pull the airplane back and slows it down, because of air friction. Anything that moves through a liquid or gas has to push the liquid or gas out of the way, and that effort is \"drag\".",
"Air provides resistance when velocity is increased. Sticking your hand out of car provides you with the best tactile example, turn your palm down and your arm goes up, turn it up and the air flow forces your arm down. Same goes for the control surfaces on a plane. \n\nJust don't try sticking your hand out of a fast moving plane, bad things may happen.",
"There are generally 4 directions that a plane can go. \nUp and down, front and back. \nThere are forces that push the plane in each of those directions. \n**Up: Lift** \nDown: Weight \nFront: Thrust \n**Back: Drag** \n \nFor fixed wing aircraft, going forward really fast is required to go up.\nThings that make lift, in an airplane always involve slowing down air so the plane goes up, meaning they also produce some drag.",
"Lift and drag are the names given to categories/types of forces on any object moving in a fluid like air or water. Frictional forces oppose motion, and motion through a fluid is no exception - we call all the frictional forces \"drag\" forces in this case. \n\nLift is slightly different and a little less well defined. The simplest answer is forces due to the fluid that are opposite to the weight of the object. A hot air balloon feels lift equal to or slightly above its weight and thus it rises. However, lift can also be dynamically generated - which is probably what you were referring to. When moving air travels over a wing, the shape of the wing results in a region of low air pressure above it and higher air pressure below. This difference results in a force on the wing pushing it up which we call lift.\n\nFor a dynamic lift vehicle like an airplane to fly, all the forces on it must be in balance: lift and weight must be equal or else the plane will rise or fall, and thrust (the forward force from it's engines) must equal drag or it will accelerate or slow down. Because of how wings work (more speed = > more pressure difference = > more lift = > more drag) these forces are inter-dependent and the subject of complex design choices and pilot skill to keep in the air."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/rbIfxIuF0WRVwqwQcVT_4DFS9GnNAlKahW-Algfk0L95KfeW_LPaROPYsNSz1rVoWftQ1lP2YjrOdt5_AkZ08ldhqYkNkQjPmEkVgIU"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
21dpfw | how does a "board of directors" work? | How are board members of large corporations also leaders of other companies? If they have such important jobs how do they find time to also be board members of another company? What about conflicts of interest? How do they become board members? Are they invited or do they apply? Are they paid a lot? Why do they appear to be relatively secretive (you can find board member bios but you have to dig for them and it's not common knowledge who they are). What is their role? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21dpfw/eli5_how_does_a_board_of_directors_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgc26j6"
],
"score": [
24
],
"text": [
"Board members don't have to be employees of the company and do its day to day decision making, like a CEO.\n\nThey can be independent business figures appointed by shareholders to have a say in the strategic direction of the company. They sign certain documents for the company, call meetings of shareholders, and give directions to the CEO on what projects to pursue.\n\nBecause they don't meet every day, but only every so often, they have time to do other jobs, like practice law or accounting, or to be on other company boards.\n\nHowever, if a board member has a conflict of interest due to their role on another company board or whatever, they can't vote on that issue and may have to excuse themselves from the board roon when those meetings or votes are held.\n\nBoard members are often paid well by big companies, and usually have substantial shareholding in the company. \n\nThey're not that secretive - all companies need to list their directors on a record with the body where they incorporated, so the public can look them up. This is important because directors can act to bind the company, so if you're signing a contract with another company you need to be sure that the person who's signing for that company is actually a director."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8tgqrt | how does repetition of failure lead to improvement? | Things such as skating or surfing where you can’t practice correctly until you’ve got it, you just keep trying and stacking it but somehow you improve by repetition.
It sounds like insanity, making the same mistakes over and over again expecting different results - yet it works | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8tgqrt/eli5_how_does_repetition_of_failure_lead_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"e17cbzs",
"e17cg9s",
"e17clr9",
"e17qqzp"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You learn what you shouldn't do. Everytime you fail you try to do somthing different until you succeed.",
"You don't make the same mistake, you make a slightly different one. Then a different one, and a different one. And the results get slightly better each time (mostly, but if a change makes things worse, you alter the change you're making in the other direction). Until you're awesome. ",
"Yeah I suppose that all makes sense, but can that be subconscious though? Such as for things as simple as throwing a piece of paper into a bin where you feel like you’re doing the same thing over and over but you still get more accurate each time?",
"You usually aren't doing the same thing over any over. You are trying to do slightly different things, make slightly different mistakes until you figure out what works and what doesn't.\n\nThat doesn't always work, though. Sometimes the changes are so subtle you are no longer keep track, so you can't be sure why something worked and why it didn't. Sometimes that task becomes difficult enough you reach the limit of your abilities, even an NBA all-star isn't going to hit every three-pointer. Sometimes you are doing something fundamentally wrong, but since you are better at doing it the wrong way, you have to unlearn it and get worse for a while until you learn the right way. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ar9ui | why does my car continue to rool for a short time after i put it in park?(usually happens on a sloped surface) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ar9ui/eli5why_does_my_car_continue_to_rool_for_a_short/ | {
"a_id": [
"csf7ob3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you put the car in park, what you're doing is engaging a \"peg\" that fits into grooves on the transmission's output. When the peg fits into the grooves, the output can't turn, which means the wheels can't spin.\n\nWhen you step on the brake pedal, you aren't affecting the transmission - you're affecting the wheels themselves. So if you put your foot on the brake, come to a stop, put the car in park, and then take your foot off the brake, the wheels will roll a little. They do this because unless you got lucky and happened to line up a notch in the transmission with the \"peg\" from the parking brake, the transmission needs to turn a little for things to line up.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://auto.howstuffworks.com/automatic-transmission11.htm"
]
] |
||
4bmv5l | why are there so many complaints about how formula 1 is run? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bmv5l/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_complaints_about_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1allpr",
"d1asmjt"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"F1 is supposed to be the highest level of motorsports: the fastest drivers in the fastest cars on the best tracks.\n\nIt is run by the FIA (who are the world motorsports governing body), but Bernie Ecclestone, who is the commercial rights holder (i.e. he has the rights to *sell* F1 across the world) also has a say. Many feel he has too much of a say, and is harming the sport in order to make cash grabs.\n\nRecent complaints:\n\n- Moving to pay TV. F1 always used to be on free-to-air channels, where it was broadcast. The move to pay TV has made it more expensive for fans, and less interesting for sponsors. Sponsorship, via branding on the cars, is one of the biggest methods for teams - and especially smaller teams - to make money. Big teams are less affected. Because of contracts, F1 hasn't entirely moved from free-to-air TV, but it might do in the future. This would be a disaster for the sport since it would only shown (in the UK) on a specific channel you have to pay extra for.\n\n- Drag Reduction System (or DRS). This system, mandatory on the cars, allows a driver to \"open\" the rear wing if they are within 1s of the car in front at certain points on the track. This greatly increases their straight line speed (~30-40kmph, depending on the track, and car set up) at the cost of lack of downforce (which you don't care about on the straights anyway). Because the car in front doesn't get this benefit, overtaking becomes easier. This was done to make overtaking easier, and therefore races more exciting. While it does stop fast cars getting stuck behind slower cars, unable to make a pass, it has made the overtaking a formality in many cases, instead of an exciting battle.\n\n- Loss of classic tracks, and the introduction of boring tracks. Monza, the home of the Italian Grand Prix, and the home race for Ferrari, won't have a race in 2017. Why? Because Bernie Ecclestone kept upping the fees to run the race until he'd priced them out. Why did he do that? Because he cares more for many than the sport. Other classic tracks risk going the same direction. These tracks get replaced by tracks like Bahrain International Circuit, and the race tracks in Russia and Korea and Singapore, which are just samey and boring. Some of the new tracks are more interesting (Turkey, which was sadly dropped from the calender a few years ago, and the Circuit of the Americas in Texas are both excellent) but it is important to fans and drivers that certain tracks and certain countries have races in them. More worrying is that many of the new tracks go to countries run by rich dictators, who may be seeking to endorse their regime by having F1 come to them.\n\n- Move to smaller engines. F1 was having problems with being too expensive. Teams were struggling to survive financially. A decision was made to change V8 engines, with a bit of KERS, to turbocharged V6 hybrid engines. This move - meant to save money - was very expensive and slowed the cars down.\n\n- Generally lowering the power of the cars. The cars are several seconds per lap slower than they were ten years ago. It makes drivers and fans feel like the sport has gone backwards, a bit.\n\n- Tyres. F1 used to have several tyre manufacturers, who would compete to make the best tyres. Now they only have one manufacturer, who makes tyres deliberately designed to degrade in order to force pit stops. (Pit stops are considered important parts of the strategy.) This upsets purists, who want to see the cars being driven flat out, and not drivers tippy-toeing around to avoid wearing the tyres out.\n\n- Fiddling with the rules, trying to \"fix\" things that aren't broken. A couple of seasons ago they decided that the last race of the season would be worth double points, despite being the same distance as all the other races, and on a decidedly mediocre track (Abu Dhabi). The Abu Dhabi race organisers loved this, of course, but no-one else did. At the start of this year (last weekend, really) they tried an \"elimination\" qualifying, where the slowest driver would be eliminated every 90 seconds. It failed awfully, and was dropped immediately. No-one knows why they felt they should do these things, since qualifying was pretty much always good.\n\n- Favouritism to the bigger teams. Only the top 10 teams get prize money. When there are 12 or 13 teams this makes being one of those last two teams very expensive. Ferrari also automatically get a cut of prize money just for being Ferrari. This is considered unfair. (It's been that way for a long time, but everyone wants it to be dropped.)\n\nThis turned out to be a lot longer than I originally though. :-/",
"Potted history lesson helps a bit.\n\nOriginally F1 was run by FISA (essentially now the FIA) and there was a group called FOCA (Formula One Constructors Association). Bernie Ecclestone became a member of FOCA when he bought Brabham and organised FOCA from basically a rough bunch of teams all working separately into one body working towards getting the best deal for the teams.\n\nBernie then fought the FISA for control of the TV rights, eventually winning the right to do so. When that agreement ended Bernie sold Brabham and started FOPA which then became FOM/FOA/FOG (all a buit confusing but basically a company who's sole purpose is managing the financial of F1). \n\nFISA then became the FIA and is responsible for all the technical regulations regarding F1.\n\nSo understanding that we essentially have two groups in charge of F1, both have radicially different ideas over how F1 should be run. You then add into that the Teams themselves who also have influence in how the sport is run (and on top of that how some teams have better deals than others etc).\n\nF1 in recent years has to many fans become overly politcal, though this has always been the case. The FIA tends to want to highly regulate and bring costs down, FOM wants to have the best TV show and grab as much money as possible and the teams want the best for their own team and generally sod everyone else. No one really works together on anything and so rules are pushed through with very little scrutiny such as Duble Points or this seasons new qualy rules.\n\nThe fans as always simply want to see good racing on track which has been sparse for the last few seasons with the dominance of Mercedes and Red Bulls four years of success (though not quite dominance). So you combine poor on track actions, dodgy rule making, overly political arguments carried out in public and you end up with F1 fans who feel F1 is being run badly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1j0zpw | what regulations do banks have to follow that credit unions do not? why are credit unions not fdic insurance? | I am not stupid. I know the difference between banks and credit unions. I have belonged to both. I have looked at Wikipedia and looked on the internet. Yet I still do not under the basic regulations that differ between banks and credit unions, mainly why credit unions do not have to be insured through FDIC. I know they *can* be but are not required by law. I know Federal credit unions are insured through NCUSIF. Why can they be insured through NCUSIF instead of FDIC, like other banks are? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j0zpw/eli5what_regulations_do_banks_have_to_follow_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cba0gee"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Credit unions are taxed as not-for-profit institutions and parlay some of the savings from the lower taxes into better rates for customers.\n\nBanks don't like this because they see it as unfair competition--I tend to agree, but opinions may vary. The \"disadvantage\" of credit unions is that you have to be part of a discrete organization or community, and can't open the doors to the world at large. You are also technically \"member-owned,\" but practically speaking, there's not much difference in how things are run."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ubw98 | this whole x86, x64, win32 thing... | A few months back I thought I understood the whole signifigance of the 'x86' 'x64' and win32 or win64 thing (sorry if any of these terms are off).
Turns out, I still have no understanding. Can someone explain to me why I need to download certain types of programs instead of others depending on my OS type? (I'm running XP and I have to get the Win32 but x86 types, yeah?)
Sorry if this question isn't clear enough. And thanks to anyone replying! :D
EDIT: thanks everyone who answered. Saving this thread for next time I feel very confused about this! All the explanations have been awesome! :D | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ubw98/eli5_this_whole_x86_x64_win32_thing/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4u1iz0",
"c4u1pi0",
"c4u1zqj",
"c4u4pah",
"c4u5jxu"
],
"score": [
5,
18,
102,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Ok first of all x86 and x64 refer to different types of CPU. x86 are 32-bit CPUs and x64 are 64-bit CPU. Win32 refers to 32-bit windows and Win64 refers to 64-bit.\n\nNow the confusing part is that, because x86 CPUs have been used for so long (think 386, 486, Pentium etc.) there is a lot of software written in 32-bit x86 code, when they made x64 they made the CPUs backward compatible with old 32-bit code (so an x64 chip can run both 32-bit and 64 bit code). Previous 64-bit CPUs like Itanium partly didn't catch on because they couldn't run any old software written for 32-bit x86.\n\nNow, if you install 32-bit Windows on a 64-bit CPU it always runs in 32-bit mode and can never run 64-bit software and doesn't get any benefit from the new 64-bit features in the CPU.\n\nIf you install 64-bit Windows you can run 64-bit and 32-bit software, **but** anything that accesses Windows directly like drivers and some software has to be the same version (64-bit).\n\nGenerally 64-bit software runs faster and can use more ram (as described by justicecallicles) so if you have 64-bit Windows installed it's almost always better to use the 64-bit version of things.\n\nOne thing to remember is that the 64 bit version of XP has crap driver compatibility because no-one used it (64 bit CPUs were new when it came out and everyone carried on using 32-bit XP) so no-one supported it, if you want 64 bit you should use Windows 7 instead.",
"In the olden days, everything was 32 bit, running on x86 (called that because it uses the instructions from the Intel 8086). These let you address 2^^32 bytes of RAM in total (ignoring PAE etc) which is 4GB of RAM. This sucks nowadays, because we are used to having more RAM, among other things.\n\nMost modern computers use a 64 bit architecture meaning they can addres 2^^64 bytes of RAM, which is 17,179,869,184 gigabytes. This is a bit more like it! If you can run a 64 bit OS, you should be. The 64 bit version of XP was released at the same time as 32 bit XP in 2001, but it's only in the last 5 years that 4GB+ of RAM has been needed, hence the explosion of 64 bit machines.",
"The \"Instruction Set Architecture\" (ISA) of CPU is the definition of the patterns of bits that the CPU understands and executes. Over time Intel had a bunch of CPUs that ended with the number 86 (e.g. 286, 386, 486), and the ISA of these CPUs became known as x86. The x86 ISA was a 32 bit ISA meaning that the size of a memory address was 32 bits.\n\nOnce you have more than 4 gigabytes of RAM (excluding some exceptions) you need more than 32 bits to give each byte of RAM an address. This requires the creation of a 64 bit ISA. The company AMD did this in a way that was backward compatible with x86, which people liked, because it allowed them to use all their old software on the new 64 bit CPUs. AMD called this instruction set AMD64 but most people ended up calling it either x64 or x86-64. These three terms are synonymous.\n\nIf your windows is 32 bit, it uses only instructions from the x86 ISA, meaning it can only address up to 4 gigabytes of RAM (with some exceptions). Such an OS can run on old (x86) and new (x64) CPUs.\n\nIf your windows is 64 bit it uses instructions from the x64 ISA, meaning it requires an x64 CPU to run. It can also address more than 4 gigabytes of RAM.\n\nIf your OS is 32 bit you need the 32 bit (x86) versions of software to run.\n\nIf your Windows is 64 bit usually both the 32 bit (x86) and 64 bit (x64) versions of software will work, *unless* it has to interact with some other piece of software that requires it to be a particular version. This can happen with device drivers (which are loaded by the OS) and libraries that are loaded by other programs. Any particular program can only contain all x86 or all x64 parts, so an x64 program can't load an x86 library, for example.\n\nAlso, just to clarify Win32 is also used to mean the Windows Application Programming Interface, used by programmers to write software for windows, but I suspect that is not what you meant.",
"* *x86* --- > \"32 bits\". 32 bits means that the **ADDRESS BUS** (the cables that allow the CPU to choose which memory address to look up) and the **REGISTERS** (tiny but extremely fast memory circuits inside the CPU) **are 32 bits long**. Ergo, you have 2^32 possible ADDRESSES in such a computer.\n\n* *x64* --- > the same but with 64 bits. Technically 64 bits is better but for today's software there isn't that much of a difference.\n\nHistorically 32 bits was a giant step from 16 bits because it solved severe limitations with something complicated called memory segmentation, but it isn't really the case *yet* for 64 bits.",
"I am seeing a lack of ELI5 explanations, (like you were actually talking to a five year old) so I guess I'll write one for anyone that doesn't understand this concept entirely. Disclaimer: this is a very simplified version of the concept that I'm trying to explain, and is meant to provide a basic understanding. OK, say you have a box of toys, the box is only large enough to hold a maximum of 4 toys, but that's fine, because you don't play with that many. Now, say you want to put more more in the box, but it can only carry four toys, what do you do? You get a bigger box! (or expand the memory address from 32-bits, which lets you use 4GiB of RAM to 64-bits, which lets you use 17,179,869,184 GiB of RAM) Now, there is also the deal of the operating system, most CPU's produced today are x64, meaning they can use 17,179,869,184 GiB of RAM, but the operating system might only use 4 GiB, meaning it's a 32-bit OS. An ELI5 explanation would be: well, you've got more toys, and enough room to store 17,179,869,184 toys, but now you need to learn how to play with the new toys. (have a 64-bit operating system) Now, remember, you still play with your old toys, you've just added more.\n\nI hope that summed it up well enough, 64-bit CPU's allow for more RAM to be used by the operating system than 32-bit, and you need a 64-bit operating system to use more than 4 GiB of RAM. You also need a 64-bit CPU (most modern ones are) to use a 64-bit OS, but a 64-bit CPU will also work with a 32-bit OS. The term x86 refers to 32-bit, and x64 or x86-64 (or AMD64) refers to 64-bit. ta12121 explained the history behind the terms, and a much more in-depth and technical explanation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3x3rgb | why haven't black holes sucked up everything in the universe yet? | If the gravitational pull of black holes is so strong that nothing, not even light, can escape, and there are currently tons of black holes out there in the universe, how are we still here? I mean, as a black hole sucks in matter, wouldn't the remaining matter of the universe just diffuse to fill the empty space, so the black hole always had nearby matter getting sucked in, until there was literally nothing left? So how the hell is our entire solar system still here? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3x3rgb/eli5why_havent_black_holes_sucked_up_everything/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy17xmc",
"cy1800d"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Because they cannot escape *if they are within a certain range.* Their gravity doesn't reach on endlessly. Also, just because something is in the gravitational pull, doesn't mean it will be sucked in. Our planet is in the gravitational pull of our sun for example. Satellites in orbit our in the gravitational pull of Earth.",
"Black holes don't \"suck\", in that they don't reach out and grab things. They just have a lot of matter packed into a small area, which creates very strong localized gravity. Their gravitational force does extend infinitely, but it drops off in power very quickly. But in order to get trapped by a black hole, matter has to pass fairly close to it. \n\nIf our Sun was somehow magically replaced by a black hole of the same mass, the Earth would not be \"sucked in\", it would continue to orbit pretty much the same as before (although it would get much colder here). \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
e8bejx | . how do you bring back a species from from near extinction? | Saw a post talking about the white Rhino only had 200 animals left but now there are so many more. But how is this done without serious inbreeding. Or is there something I'm missing?
Edit: yes, I know how sexy time works. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e8bejx/eli5_how_do_you_bring_back_a_species_from_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"faaadk7",
"fab2kch",
"fab5zr5",
"fab63f7",
"fab98ce",
"fab9ihf",
"fabb4c4",
"fabb5rr",
"fabjkdi",
"fabnu3u",
"fabsilk",
"fach3td",
"fadea9j"
],
"score": [
5864,
123,
252,
21,
7,
107,
54,
4,
16,
30,
6,
21,
2
],
"text": [
"Serious inbreeding can be avoided with 200 animals. That's enough to introduce enough genetic mixup without causing too much of a problem (if there were only 2 rhinos, and the whole population had to stem from that, you'd have potential problems).\n\nThere is something called the 50/500 rule made in 1980 by Australian geneticist Ian Franklin and American biologist Michael Soule. This rule suggests a minimum population of 50 in order to combat inbreeding, though a minimum of 500 to reduce genetic drift.\n\nThis is a bit of a generalization, and does vary species to species (species who have higher \"litters\" like mice and insects can tolerate lower populations than species with lower numbers (like large mammals or huge trees). So in the case of a rhino, 200 is probably enough to introduce enough genetic variability to avoid major inbreeding problems, but there may be some genetic drift, and if the population were to balloon back to normal wild levels, those Rhinos may be significantly genetically different from the wild Rhinos of old as a result of so many offspring coming from a small source gene pool.\n\nEDIT: Wow, thanks for the silvers, responses, and support! I'm happy to have helped, in some small way, make the internet slightly more useful than a big porn box.\n\nEDIT2: Now GOLD?! You flatter me, Reddit!",
"If i remember the paper correctly, you can re-breed from as few as \\~30, though at that point it requires VERY carefully management and there will be some....unfortunate ones. Anything in the 3 figures is pretty manageable assuming the animals will breed in at least relative captivity, which isn't guaranteed.",
"I remember reading about how all giant squids, regardless of which ocean you find them in, have incredibly similar DNA. This could be a result of giant squids becoming nearly extinct at some point in time, and then later their population is restored, but it came from a limited gene pool, that is, the few survivors.",
"I actually just had this conversation with my professor last week because I was doing a presentation on de-extinction. \n\nIn this case, I believe the last male died, so they impregnated the female rhinos using his preserved semen.\n\nThe larger the population, the less need there is for inbreeding. It’s when there’s only a few members left that it’s an issue.",
"They did this with a type of gigantic vulture in California, they captured the remaining 23 BIRDS left and put them in a breeding program. There are now over 200 in captivity. The trick is to round those fuckers up and do the PewDiePie \"now FRICK\"",
"A very rigorous and extensive planned breeding program. Like others said, as long as they aren't too genetically similar to start with, 200 is easily a big enough genetic pool to produce offspring without inbreeding effects. You just have to ensure, through relocation or captive breeding, that the various populations intermingle and continue diversifying. So you start by cataloging the existing animals and their genealogies as far as you can. Then you closely monitor the existing animals and ensure different lines are interbreeding. If a population becomes too isolated and begins trying to inbreed, then you move some viable adults from a different population into the stagnating one. It's a lot of work.",
"Not only can inbreeding be avoided, but inbreeding isn’t a genetic death sentence. It’s kind of a secret weapon for species coming back. Unless they get really unlucky, the carriers of defective genes die off without breeding, so after a few generations, the species has relatively broken free of any genetic defects caused by inbreeding. \n\nThey lack genetic diversity, and are more likely to have genetic diseases, but they still live on",
"Not only can inbreeding be avoided, but inbreeding isn’t a genetic death sentence. It’s kind of a secret weapon for species coming back. Unless they get really unlucky, the carriers of defective genes die off without breeding, so after a few generations, the species has relatively broken free of any genetic defects caused by inbreeding. \n\nThey lack genetic diversity, and are more likely to have genetic diseases, but they still live on",
"At least in America, the AZA (Association of Zoos & Aquariums) maintains studbooks for each animal, one of the primary goals being to maintain genetic diversity. They can recommend transfers between zoos to make sure the gene pool stays diverse. I'm assuming this is only at AZA accredited zoos. [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"So when I want to join a religious cult living in isolation, gotta make sure they have at least 200 members.",
"Even if there was just 2 there is no 100% guarantee that inbreeding will cause any major affects. The risk is there don't get me wrong but it is possible. As you\nMove further along the tree it gets safer too.\n\nWith 200 you have enough to support normal breeding.\n\nGenetic diversity would be horrible with inbreeding and would leave them vulnerable but it's not a 100% death. With 200 an issue with genetics is not likely to kill them outright. It's cripple the population but those who have not inbreed will most likely survive.\n\nIt should also be noted that any genetic infection issues can be avoided with proper hygiene and viral protection agents. Won't fix it and there will be purely genetic issues but it helps with virus that hate certain genes.",
"Zoologist here who works with critically endangered/extinct in the wild species. My time to shine! I’m going to try to keep this eli5 so there will be a lot of oversimplification.\n\nSo what you are essentially asking about is how to overcome the bottleneck effect. Think of a bottle laying on its side. The fat end that holds the liquid is the whole gene pool of a species or population. Lots of different genes all mixed up in different combinations. Lots of unique combinations of genes in an individual are expressed by various traits/characteristics These traits/characteristics are called phenotypes. \n\nIf we are talking about rhinos these traits (phenotypes) would be every characteristic that makes up an individual rhino. Maybe a random rhino we look at has a long tail, short ears, thick skin, a medium sized horn, etc. All these traits are phenotypic expressions of the genes (each option of a trait is called an allele but we won’t get into that). Different combinations of genes express different phenotypes. So the way this rhino looks is due to its unique combination of looooots of genes to produce different phenotypes. Like a jumbled up code that determines how they look which is written in their DNA. The DNA is a blueprint in each and every cell that are instructions on how to build this particular rhino. \n\nOk so we have this big pool of genes that is essentially a collection of all the genes that exist in all living rhinos. This means we have lots of available combinations. Some combinations are advantageous and work well together and some are not advantageous and are kinda bad combinations that don’t work out so well. Maybe a rhino has genes (given to them by a randomized mix up of its parents genes) that make them very large and heavy but hey also have genes for weak flimsy legs... uh oh that’s a bad combo and most of the rhinos who got similar combinations can’t walk well and end up dying off early. Because these fat rhinos with weak legs don’t live long enough to breed the combination starts to get more rare because it’s not propitiated. The strong legged rhinos have an easier go at things so the live long enough to breed and keep their strong legged genes around. This is natural selection!\n\nOkay now let’s say a big meteor hits rhino-land and wipes out 90% of all rhinos. It’s totally random who survives and has nothing to do with good combinations and bad combinations of genes. Taking this huge gene pool and reducing it drastically is the “bottleneck”. \n\nSo now we have two problems. 1) we used to have looooooots of options to chose from but not anymore and 2) maybe a lot of the options we have left are bad combination options. This is called genetic drift. \n\nSo things go on in rhino-land as the always have and natural selection continues to happen but it’s a little more tricky now that we have less diversity. There is potential for a lot more inbreeding and bad combinations of genes. Some will still be good combinations though and that will keep the population going! But the rhinos have one more saving grace. Mutation! So mutation is kind of a fluke in the genes that could produce a new phenotype out of the blue. Like the DNA says 1+1=2 but one in a million times the DNA gets mixed up and says 1+1=3. Oops! It wasn’t supposed to happen but it did and now instead of just working with 1’s and 2’s we have some 3’s in the mix. The 3 gene could be a bad mutation like the rhino was born with a messed up heart. in that case the mutation would probably die off with the individual. But maybe that 3 gene could be a good fluke! Like the rhino was born extra strong, now that gene will probably continue to get passed on because it ended up being useful. Even if the 3 gene was just kinda neutral and wasn’t much of an advantage or disadvantage... well this is a win anyway. It increased the genetic diversity and gives us more gene combination option and increases the gene pool!\n\nNow repeat this mutation scenario over and over and over and over again. You will start to end up with a lot of crazy genes that weren’t there from your bottle necked gene pool. Sloooooowly the diversity of the pool keeps going up. More options means a higher chance of good gene combinations and the populations genetics become more stable and eventually makes it past the bottleneck!",
"The White Rhino has 2 genetically distinct sub-species, the Nothern and Southern. There are only 2 Northern White Rhinos left alive. Both female and both under 24/7 armed guard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.aza.org/studbooks"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
48rgpx | why do some coins get rejected in vending machines? | Sometimes a coin will work first time and with other coins you have to insert it a few times for the vending machine to accept it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48rgpx/eli5_why_do_some_coins_get_rejected_in_vending/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0lw7s9",
"d0lwdtn"
],
"score": [
19,
2
],
"text": [
"There can be a couple reasons, depending on how the machine identifies coins and what money's inside it. It might try to look at the coin's face and think it's not real (too damaged to look authentic, etc). It might try to weigh the coin to see if it's as heavy as a proper, 'standard' coin of a denomination. A valid coin you put in might have enough pieces knocked off that the weight seems wrong. The machine might also have too many coins and not enough bills, where enough money inserted in bills can't be given correct change (not enough/the right coins). \nEDIT: spelling",
"Sensors on the coin mechanism can get dirty or stuck so it doesn't work as well and if in doubt they'll kick it out. There can also be communication glitches between it and the controller board. You can set the security lower on them but there's more chance they'll take fakes so its rarely done. \nHave you tried rubbing the coin on the side of the faceplate(just kidding, not sure why so many people do this)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
16tnh4 | why won't most websites let you use spaces in usernames? | Thanks everyone for the answers really appreciate it!!! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16tnh4/eli5_why_wont_most_websites_let_you_use_spaces_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7zaul6",
"c7zb3l8",
"c7zbhqh"
],
"score": [
6,
58,
38
],
"text": [
"It's generally a lot easier to parse/store/look-up usernames without spaces, because the spaces have to be treated specially. Some other characters (like $ or #) often also have to be treated specially, which is another reason some (lazy) websites do not let you use them for passwords or usernames.\n\nSince there is not any real advantage to having a space in the username, it's not worth trying to handle this case.",
"Way back in the day, there were computers that didn't have graphics. Everything was controlled by typing commands. For example, let's say I own a music file stairway-to-heaven and I want transfer ownership of the file to my wife, whose username is \"LauraY.\" I would type this command:\n\nchown LauraY StairwayToHeaven\n\nChown is short for \"change ownership.\" That command is pretty clear. But now imagine it with spaces in the usernames and filenames:\n\nchown Laura Y Stairway To Heaven\n\nIt's hard to tell what that command means: Am I trying to give a person \"Laura Y\" ownership of the file \"Stairway To Heaven?\" Or am I trying to give a person named \"Laura Y Stairway\" ownership of the file \"To Heaven\"? It's too confusing, the computer will complain. So to solve it, you have to use quotation marks in the command, like this:\n\nchown \"Laura Y\" \"Stairway To Heaven\"\n\nThat works fine, but it's a pain in the ass to have to keep typing quotation marks in every command. So instead, early command-based computers mostly just didn't allow spaces in filenames or user names.\n\nLater, software got more sophisticated, and many computers lifted the restrictions on spaces - but by then, it was an ingrained habit for many programmers, and many didn't notice that it was now possible to put spaces in usernames. They kept writing software that would check to make sure that a username was \"sane and reasonable\" - ie, didn't contain spaces.\n\nNow, we have graphics, and we don't type commands so often (though we still do). But the software we've been accumulating over the decades - and yes, a lot of the software we use is indeed decades old - contains these traditional \"sanity checks\" to make sure usernames don't contain spaces.\n\nTo get rid of those sanity checks would require a thorough effort to hunt for them in a giant pile of decades-old code. Not an easy endeavor.\n",
"I don't think the other two posts are satisfactory. Spaces are not hard to deal with from a technical perspective on the server side. If they were, why would you be allowed to use spaces in your article title or why would I be allowed to use spaces in this post? Many sites which do not allow you to use spaces in a username may allow you to set a display name which does have spaces.\n\nI can think of a few reasons that may apply:\n\n* Preventing user confusion and users masquerading as one another. HTML collapses spaces. If I say \"Your user name is 'Sir Duke94'\" you cannot tell whether the user name has a space in it, a tab, a new line, or 5 spaces and 3 tabs. I could register \"Sir Duke94\" (with 2 spaces) and it would appear exactly the same on the screen without very careful handling.\n* History. On UNIX-based computers, spaces in usernames are often not allowed or cause problems. Usernames on those machines are used for email addresses (see below) and users have home directories (once upon a time, directory names couldn't contain spaces). For decades, user names couldn't contain spaces so there's some momentum carrying this forward.\n* Email. Email addresses can't contain spaces. If your user name forms an email address, it can't contain a space.\n* URLs. Reddit, for instance, gives each user a URL. You are /u/Sir_Duke94. If we could have spaces in our usernames, you'd be /u/Sir%20Duke94, which is ugly, hard to remember, and hard to identify in comments."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4sr1kw | why is a fly swatter so much more effective than anything else? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4sr1kw/eli5_why_is_a_fly_swatter_so_much_more_effective/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5bhf3p"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"The holes allow the air to flow through them. If it was flat, the air that builds up on the face would push the fly out of the way. At least that's how I understand it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a4i0tm | how to multiply very large integers in programming ? | When we multiply two large integers due to large result we cant do it in the normal way, so we use the 3rd grade multiplication algorithm to solve it, there are lot of tutorials which explains this concept doesnt explain how they implement(actually i can get the concept of taking each digit and multiplying with the the large number and adding it, but i cant understand how it is implemented in programming, i see a lot of modulo operations in most of the examples , i don't know why it is used) can anyone give simplest example with explaining the each line of code ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4i0tm/eli5_how_to_multiply_very_large_integers_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebemm8k"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The simplest solution is BigNum or LibGMP. These are libraries of all the routines you need to do these operations. \n\nEssentially, the \"numbers\" are stored as a structure, like a string. Then the algorithms go through the structures, digit by digit, and do the operation. Want to multiply by a 50 digit number, do 50 one-digit multiply & shift operations and then add up the 50 results."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ac0c0c | how do developers of games and movies create directional audio so that you are able to tell if a sound is coming from in front of, or behind you when using a headset that just has a speaker in your left ear and a speaker in your right ear, and similarly with vertical sound? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ac0c0c/eli5_how_do_developers_of_games_and_movies_create/ | {
"a_id": [
"ed4f4ss",
"ed6btdi"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"I work in the field, specifically on these kinds of systems. Wall of text incoming. \n\nThe most basic method is called panning. It usually as one knob controlling direction by altering the level of the signal in each channel. Something to the left will have a higher volume in the left speaker than the right, and vice versa. Something from in front of you will have the same volume in both speakers. \n\nThis is because if a sound source is at an angle to your head the distance to one ear is shorter than to the other, and since sound decays with distance it will be louder in one year. Directly in front of you will have the same distance, so it will be the same volume. \n\nThat difference in volume between each ear is called the interaural level difference (ILD) \n\nThe next trick is to delay one channel from the other by a small amount. Again, since the distance to one ear is shorter the sound will get there earlier. The time difference between each ear is called the interaural time difference (ITD). \n\nSimple effects will do a little math to calculate what the ILD or ITD should be based on the source's angle and distance from the listener, with an approximation of the average distance between each ear (although everyone is different). \n\nThe problem with that method is that ILD and ITD is not the same for all frequencies. There are two big reasons. The first is that your ear shape acts as a filter, meaning that it cuts or boosts frequencies. Think like an Instagram filter. The filtering done depends on the angle the sound wave hits your ears. \n\nThe second reason has to do with the shape of your head. When the sound wave hits it, it bends around your head, causing delays between each ear. This effect is called diffraction, and it depends on frequency since lower frequencies have longer wavelengths than higher frequencies. \n\nOne way to model that behavior is by pretending the head is spherical (or ellipsoidal) and doing some math to create an equation that models how a sound wave would hit it. This\n\nA better method uses something called an HRTF, or Head Related Transfer Function, and it's an equation that approximates how a sound wave behaves when it hits your head. These are measured by placing microphones in the ears of a user while they sit in a special chamber and recording sounds from different locations in the chamber. This has been done to a lot of test subjects, and you can create a decent average of an HRTF from that data. HRTFs work alright for some people, and the data is actually biased for certain ethnicities and head shapes so it's not perfect. These methods also only work on headphones, it fails with speakers. \n\nA bigger problem is how the sound sources in the game/movie are produced and stored. Your typical stereo recording only covers about a 180° sound field in front of a listener and doesn't help with things like distance or 3D audio. An alternative is called ambisonics, which uses more than 2 signal sources to capture 3D information about the sound source, and then the decoder uses things like panning and HRTFs to generate the stereo signal for the user. \n\nThere are other 3D formats more commonly used in film and music, like surround sound and its derivatives like Dolby ATMOS and DTS. These use a thing called \"object based audio\" where in addition to the sound source you encode metadata like location (and some other stuff) with the audio, and a hardware decoder translates that in real time to render to your speaker system or headphones. Theres actually a new standard for how this works that will be pushed out to theaters in the next year or two. These work better on speaker systems, but they require you to have at least 9 speakers (and up to dozens) to actually play back in 3D. And positioned properly. \n\nThere's a lot of work being down to get a good system to do it on traditional 2 channel speakers, like on a phone or laptop. A lot of them suck, but there are a handful with a lot of promise and they all do crazy shit that is secret or outside the scope of an ELI5 post. ",
"Head Related Transfer Function\n\nThat is, all the the things that go into you being able to locate sound in life, replicated with multiple speaker arrays. \n\nOne example: if a sound happens on your left, it reaches your left ear slightly before it reaches your right ear, and because of the angle difference between your left and right ear and your head being in the way, has a slightly different frequency profile. We can use this difference to place sounds in a stereo field. \n\nThings like this have been studied in vast detail. In fact, I have a book right next to me called “Spatial Audio” by Francis Rumsey which goes into all the physics behind placing sounds in a stereo field, not just left and right but forward and backwards, up and down. It’s a lot to do with specific delay ratios and reverb characteristics. \n\nHowever, because it’s known, Audio plug-in manufacturers and Digital Audio Workstations already made the tools to do it for us, so we can just move sliders around and don’t have to sit there doing physics to work out delay ratios. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
kwx4g | language - can someone explain aspect and tense, and the difference between them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kwx4g/eli5_language_can_someone_explain_aspect_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2nxn1b",
"c2nxn1b"
],
"score": [
7,
7
],
"text": [
"Generally, tense refers to the the relative position in time of an action.\n\nDoes this verb form refer to things that happenned before now? Its in the past tense. Things that will happen sometime in the future? The future tense. Things that happened before now or are happening right now? The nonfuture tense. Things that are happening now or will happen in the future? The nonpast tense.\n\nGenerally, aspect refers to the relative flow of time surrounding the action.\n\nIs the action something you usually do? It's the habitual aspect. Is the action completed? This is the perfective aspect. Is the action not completed? This is the imperfective aspect. Is the action something that is ongoing? This is the progressive aspect.\n\nThe issue is that in most languages--if not in all languages, tense and aspect are conflated.\n\nIn English, for example, we only have nonpast tense and past tense (future tense is nonpast tense with the auxiliary verb 'will'), and also progressive aspect and perfective aspect:\n\n* \"I eat\" (present, not progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I ate\" (past, not progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I am eating\" (present, progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I was eating\" (past, progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I have eaten\" (present, not progressive, perfective)\n* \"I had eaten\" (past, not progressive, perfective)\n* \"I have been eating\" (present, progressive, perfective)\n* \"I had been eating\" (past, progressive, perfective)",
"Generally, tense refers to the the relative position in time of an action.\n\nDoes this verb form refer to things that happenned before now? Its in the past tense. Things that will happen sometime in the future? The future tense. Things that happened before now or are happening right now? The nonfuture tense. Things that are happening now or will happen in the future? The nonpast tense.\n\nGenerally, aspect refers to the relative flow of time surrounding the action.\n\nIs the action something you usually do? It's the habitual aspect. Is the action completed? This is the perfective aspect. Is the action not completed? This is the imperfective aspect. Is the action something that is ongoing? This is the progressive aspect.\n\nThe issue is that in most languages--if not in all languages, tense and aspect are conflated.\n\nIn English, for example, we only have nonpast tense and past tense (future tense is nonpast tense with the auxiliary verb 'will'), and also progressive aspect and perfective aspect:\n\n* \"I eat\" (present, not progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I ate\" (past, not progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I am eating\" (present, progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I was eating\" (past, progressive, not perfective)\n* \"I have eaten\" (present, not progressive, perfective)\n* \"I had eaten\" (past, not progressive, perfective)\n* \"I have been eating\" (present, progressive, perfective)\n* \"I had been eating\" (past, progressive, perfective)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
sysrl | [big bang q] if the universe originated from a single point, why is it (and everything in it) not more symmetrically distributed? | Maybe this is a stupid question, but I would assume that with nothing to impede its outward motion, it wouldn't have any reason not to be a uniform formation... | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/sysrl/eli5_big_bang_q_if_the_universe_originated_from_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4i5eig",
"c4i5fw9",
"c4i7oog",
"c4i926z"
],
"score": [
2,
14,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There is clumping in some spots due to gravity, which forms a lot of the structures that we see like stars, planets, solar systems, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies. However, when you look at the whole cosmos, things actually are pretty uniform.\n\nIf you want to talk historical data, there is the cosmic microwave background radiation, which gives us a baby picture of the universe. What you usually see is the following image.\n_URL_1_\n\nOn that image there are bright spots and dark spots, indicating temperature differences in the early universe. What you often aren't told is that the image is what's called a residual, which is to say that they subtracted off the average for the whole universe, and showed the noise in the image.\n\nWhen you look at the original, you see something more like this:\n_URL_0_\n\nIt is extremely uniform. That is to say the early universe was all more or less the same temperature, and likely a pretty uniform density. As things spread out and gravity had it's chance to do some work, things clumped, but are still mostly uniform.",
"Putting aside the misconception that the universe originated from a single point, here's a simple layman's explanation:\n\nAt the beginning of the universe, everything was as evenly distributed as possible. However, due to the quirky laws of physics, 'as evenly distributed as possible' still isn't perfectly uniform. From there, gravity over time turned the incredibly tiny random imperfections into huge differences in density, leading to the large scale structures you see today.",
"jyvblamo has a good answer. For something more in-depth, I recommend [this /r/askscience thread](_URL_0_). Trust me; it's worth it.",
"Everything in the universe started out being as evenly distributed as possible, or close to it. However, it's not possible to make a bunch of matter be *perfectly* evenly distributed. Though the differences in density were very tiny at first, they grew larger over time, because while the universe was expanding--increasing the average distance between particles--the particles also experienced gravity, which pulled them closer to the particles that were already closest to them. So matter clumped together, but distances between the clumps grew.\n\nAlthough we've now got lots of galaxies (which seem to us like they ought to be considered as things with a lot of structure), if we zoom out much further to look at lots of galaxies at once, we can see that they're actually pretty symmetrically distributed over the visible universe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/media/ContentMedia/990004b.jpg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WMAP_2008.png"
],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/flzut/i_have_some_questions_about_the_big_bang/"
],
[]
] |
|
2s6llz | why is australia so desolate when it is the same relative longitude as african and south american rain forests? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s6llz/eli5_why_is_australia_so_desolate_when_it_is_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnmmnxb",
"cnmnb4r"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's really Papua New Guinea that's around the same longitude as the rain forests - that's why it has so many rain forests. That being said, there were a lot more rain forests in Australia than what's left in the northeast of the country, but many of them were burned away for agriculture.\n\n_URL_0_",
"I think you mean latitude, not longitude. Longitude is east/west, latitude is north/south."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.srl.caltech.edu/personnel/krubal/rainforest/Edit560s6/www/where.html"
],
[]
] |
||
4cz6a0 | how do athletes play with broken bones and serious injuries? | I heard Michael Vick played with the same rib injury as my friend who was severe pain and couldnt breath right at night, our running back played on a broken leg and beasted that whole season, one guy broke his finger during practice and didnt tell anybody until the season ended so he didnt have to sit out. Also there were people playing with other broken parts and torn rotator cuffs in the NFL , college , and high school.
How the hell do they do that? Do they get vicodin or cortisozone shots, or are they that mentally tough? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cz6a0/eli5_how_do_athletes_play_with_broken_bones_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1mhman",
"d1mia06"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Adrenaline, painkillers, and a level of competetiveness the average person can't fully comprehend.",
"I played a water polo tournament with a broken hand because my team manager refused to take me to the hospital (it was from punching a guy so it kind of serves me right). \n\nBut by taping it up and changing my technique made it bearable... plus, just before the tournament one of my favourite rugby players played most of a game with a broken arm so I thought if I didn't play it would make me soft. \n\nNow, over 15 years later the knuckle gives me problems. \n\nSo a mixture of ignorance, stupidity and pride was the answer for me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2t1gw8 | how are women sexually stimulated by anal sex? | Why do some women truly enjoy Anal Sex, and others do it only for the SO (if at all)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t1gw8/eli5_how_are_women_sexually_stimulated_by_anal_sex/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnutuld"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Women have just as many sensitive nerves around the entry to anus as men, the only thing they do not have is a prostrate.\n\nAs far as why one enjoys it more then another ...is like asking why do you like Coke over Pepsi...it is just a preference. I am a gay male who enjoys giving and receiving, I have had partners who did not enjoy receiving at all and would not do it. Just all comes down to a preference.\n\n_URL_0_ explains it as good as anything."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal_sex"
]
] |
|
38qkyj | in the united states why do kids under the age of 18 still have to pay taxes when the country was almost built on the motto "no taxation without representation" | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38qkyj/eli5_in_the_united_states_why_do_kids_under_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"crx1y6h",
"crx1z4b",
"crx20ov",
"crx255e",
"crx43pa",
"crx4cz8",
"crx4w23",
"crx9ahc",
"crx9opq",
"crx9wcn",
"crxab1x",
"crxbyhe",
"crxc8q5",
"crxcqqj",
"crxdcdv",
"crxef7i",
"crxfi5v",
"crxfs2o",
"crxglj5",
"crxgnff",
"crxhlcg",
"crxhons",
"crxjp7u",
"crxkjzv",
"crxl06q",
"crxmhuk"
],
"score": [
1073,
132,
438,
2,
3,
18,
96,
4,
36,
12,
2,
3,
9,
2,
14,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, for one, I'll point out that felons also have to pay taxes despite not getting the vote. There are legal restrictions to the vote that we've agreed on. One of them is that you have to be 18. \n\nSecond, there is far more government spending supporting those under 18 (schools, etc.) than those 18 and up, so it's not like you're paying for nothing.",
"Kids still use roads, benefit from government services, etc., etc. etc.\n\nAlso, \"no taxation without representation\" is an absolute myth and no one should ever think it has anything resembling how things do, or have ever, operated in the United States.\n\nPeople are *constantly* taxed without represented. Ever go out of state and payed sales tax? You're being taxed. Immigrants and those with green cards are present in the United States and taxed, no representation. Felons are taxed-- no representation seeing as how they cannot vote. Own property in another county? You bet your butt you're paying property taxes and aren't represented in local elections. And so on. \n\n\n\n",
"Slogans like that, which are very common, sacrifice nuance for being catchy and easy to remember; they are never meant to be taken literally. Hell, the right for all males to vote wasn't guaranteed until almost fifty years after independence, and it took about a hundred years after that for all women to be guaranteed a vote. Even today, residents of Washington D.C. don't have voting representation in Congress and they're the ones who set the city budget.",
"Their being minors does not stop the fact that they are working. Either they can be taxed like any other worker or they can be banned from working till they are 18. Take your choice. ",
"'No taxation without representation' only ment for adults living in the colonies (1700s) to have a say in Parliament back in England. And remember, children (10+ years old) worked until it became illegal in the early 1900s.",
"Easiest answer is that we got representation, those representatives built the taxing system. The laws are now in place, and we live with them.\n\nNothing to do with who used what, or paid for what.",
"One big reason is people are assholes. If you were allowed to not be taxed under 18 then people would put as much income as they could into their children's name. Stocks, interest earnings, dividend payments etc. It would not do much for poor people, but the kind of people who get a dividend check every quarter and have mineral rights payments would have all that shit in Jr's name.\n\nAlso in most cases if you are under 18 and working an actual job you will get almost all of the federal taxes back. As far as representation, they are represented by their parents who vote. Or should vote in their children's best interest. ",
"As a dependent that can be claimed on your parent's tax return are you really paying taxes, or do you get it all back at the end of the year? ",
"Kids under the age of 18 do have representation. They just can't *vote* for their representatives. But they can absolutely contact their elected officials and make their positions known. ",
"No taxation without representation was a catchy slogan, but a total lie. The colonists didn't want representation, because if they had it they would have been an extreme minority in parliament and would probably have had zero say in any actual matters. ",
"They have representation. The \"representation\" is that fact their state has a representative in the house and senate. That is all. What requirements citizens have to meet in order to get to vote isn't a factor. The Constitution is a document that structures the Federal Government, not the individual states beyond that the states cannot overrule the Constitution.\n\nSadly the federal government in the last 70 years has pretty much been ignored by the Empire.",
"let me correct that, \"no taxation without representation for white male landholding adults\".\n\nnow does it make more sense to you?",
"They have representation. Their parents. \n\nBesides back in the day they only let landowners vote in many states. They just wanted local representation in parliament not representation for everyone.",
"Wait till you hear about workers on H1B and other work visas paying taxes for years, sometimes decades, without any representation whatsoever.",
"One reason kids pay taxes is because parents would exploit tax laws by shifting income to their children.",
"17 year old yank here, we have to pay taxes?",
"Foreigners with a work and a resident permit have to pay taxes but are in general not allowed to vote.\n\nThere are some countries that after they have been residents for some time allow them to vote in local elections but not for national elections. ",
"What taxes do they pay?...",
"Because the US isn't built on that. It's just a nice but meaningless rhetoric. The US employs First Past The Post, for crying out loud. An extremely manipulable and antidemocratic system that has been proven to always lead to a bipartisan or, if you're lucky, tripartisan system. The American political system is designed in such a way that voting on the party you most want to win is a bad idea. You need to vote on the major party you hate the least. It would be more democratic if government officials were elected through dice rolls. \n\nThere is a reason why FPTP is predominantly used in undeveloped countries and some former British colonies. You'll find the system in places like Ethiopia Ghana. But it's not exactly popular in the western world. \n\nNo, I prefer living under a system where things like gerrymandering wouldn't influence results in any way. And where even voting tenth party isn't a waste of your vote. That's a more nuanced and representative system. I often wonder how it could become even more nuanced and representative, without resorting to something like a direct democracy. Perhaps certain aspects of Single Transferable Vote could be used. Although in the current system, only 0.88% of votes are left unused because they were for parties that were too small. If you used the second preference of those votes instead, it might not even result in anything. Perhaps there could be some way of voting against a party as well as for another? I've also toyed with the idea of people getting 5 votes that they can distribute over multiple parties, but I'm afraid that this might result in tactical voting. ",
"Considering the approval rate of congress, it is safe to assume that almost none of us are represented, yet still forced, under threat of gun violence, to pay for and suppirt things which we find abhorrent. ",
"Children are claimed as dependents on their parents' tax forms, and the parents receive tax breaks. So even though the minor's wages are taxed, the \"household\" receives a break. Also, if children's earnings weren't taxed, business owners would hire their children as employees, transfer their income to the child's name, and legally avoid paying taxes. ",
"And what about Washington DC? We contribute more in federal taxes than 30 other states, have a population over that of Wyoming, yet have no federal representation. ",
"They don't want wealthy families hiding their money from the IRS by giving it to their kids. I believe the rule is that if < 50% of the kids income is earned then they pay taxes at their parents rate.",
"Well, this country was built on a constitution, and they've basically thrown that out the window. So....",
"No taxation without representation was a rallying cry, not an official policy. Even in colonial days it wasn't accurate. There was a representative for the colonists in Parliament. He just did not come from the colonies. Someone from Great Britain was basically told \"and in addition to your normal territories you also represent this lot that are all the way across the ocean.\"\n\nThe actually rallying cry was that the person representing them should be a member of their own population. Not that they were entirely ignored.\n\nIt gets weirder in that if you dig into the history a bit more some of the objections that were thrown around had little to do with whether or not they felt they were being ignored or unrepresented. The issue was that the taxes in question were so low it cut into their black market smuggling.\n\nBut that's beside the issue. In the United States a member of congress or the senate is supposed to represent *everyone* in a specific geographic area. Whether or not they are eligible to vote. So, prisoners, immigrants (not necessarily illegal aliens, you can be a legal immigrant who has not been made a citizen), the very young, and people who just moved there so they were not available for the last election. All of them are represented. At least in theory.\n\nSo taxation is with representation. Just because the people aren't a member of your age group doesn't mean they aren't your representative.\n\nAs for the taxation, I assume you mean income tax and the legality of that is a debatable issue. The courts have largely ruled that it is, but some people argue that it gives powers that are outside the scope of the Constitution. As for why . . . that's beyond what I could answer in an ELI5 situation. It has to deal with the idea whether the Constitution was meant as a frame to be built upon or a limiter to powers the government could seize. The debates started as soon as the thing was drafted and, if I recall correctly, John Adams himself had some rather harsh criticisms of how the powers had already been expanded during his own lifetime.\n\n",
"Technically.... Kids under 18 can file exempt and don't have to pay taxes.\n\nI always filed exempt at work before I turned 18."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5ewtqa | why do we draw hearts as ❤ when real hearts look so different? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ewtqa/eli5why_do_we_draw_hearts_as_when_real_hearts/ | {
"a_id": [
"dafr6qq",
"dafrsa5"
],
"score": [
2,
16
],
"text": [
"I have always read the heart represents a woman's butt when she is bent over at the hip, or what it looks like when her (I don't know how to explain this to a five year old) vulva is spread open.\n\nI, personally, like to believe the modern heart shape comes from the butt theory because it fits well with Cupid shooting arrows into butts/the cutesy pierced heart image. \n\nEta: human hearts don't actually look that much different than the heart symbol as far as the muscle goes. It's the tubing (the aorta, the vena cava) that makes the difference.",
"If i remember correctly, it's because of a plant that was used during the roman empire as a contraceptive. it was more effective than \"natural\" alternatives, and was used so often it became extinct. Roman's used it was a symbol of love, which we've continued to do.\n\nedit: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silphium#Connection_with_the_heart_symbol"
]
] |
||
5ysefi | how can a plane fly upside down without the crew noticing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ysefi/eli5how_can_a_plane_fly_upside_down_without_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"desk7ns",
"desmq06",
"desq0c1",
"desqf18"
],
"score": [
21,
12,
13,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a condition called spatial disorientation, usually temporary and resulting from flight into poor weather conditions with low or no visibility. When affected, the pilot may be deprived of an external visual horizon, and lose the correct sense of up and down while flying, specially if he isn't used (or trained) to fly with reference to instruments. \n\nHere's an example where the crew didn't notice for 17 seconds that the plane was 130 degrees off: _URL_0_ [edit: typo]",
"Afaik, the reason it can happen is if the plane makes a roll that keeps the g forces constant, it would never feel like it was upside down. ",
"What this: _URL_1_\n\nAs the plane rolls, the iced tea stays perfectly level in the glass. It always feels as if gravity is directly into the floor of the plane. So your senses can't feel if the plane is upside down. If you are flying in clouds, then your vision can't help you either, so you need to use instruments. If you ignore them or they are fault you can end up upside down without knowing it, but usually you will just end up in a spiral and hit the ground.\n\n_URL_0_",
"In addition to weather, it even more commonly happens at night, especially over water. In those conditions you can see absolutely nothing but black on many nights and places. If you can see stars, they don't give you a good orientation reference because they go all the way from above you to the horizon perceived as below you. It almost always happens from too steep a turn, and when that happens you will generally lose a lot of altitude, which can eliminate gravity (if you're falling fast enough) and or create enough lateral forces where the 'gravity' you feel is in a direction other than 'down'. In addition to that, the psychological phenomenon known as closure can subconsciously convince the brain that what your nerves are sensing must be wrong and change the message sent to the conscious mind so that it matches mental perceptions based on previous experience. That's a lot of what spatial disorientation is all about. \n\nHowever they arrive in that situation, your more advanced planes have some safety features to help with this, but often times those warnings are ignored or misunderstood because they overload the brain. When convinced you're flying straight and level, and an annunciator warning comes on for bank angle or terrain, it may seem reasonable to initially suspect equipment failure, and will at the very least cause confusion resulting in an adrenaline rush that leads to tunnel vision 'fight or flight' reaction, which decreases the senses and ability for complex thought, and that can amplify the spatial disorientation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/ana-pilots-unaware-for-20-seconds-that-plane-was-almost-turning-upside-down"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graveyard_spiral",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9pvG_ZSnCc"
],
[]
] |
||
dztrj0 | is there more specialized treatment for certain viruses besides treating the symptoms | Recently I was admitted to the er because my sinus infection didn't get better after antibiotics, I had high fever, high blood pressure sweating, fear of loud and sudden noises. I was stabilized and given meloxicam. After reviewing my charts I'm sure I had meningitis but only confirmation is with a spinal tap and I have no insurance so lab fees are something I don't want. But the process shook me, is that all the treatment is overall unless you can pinpoint the exact virus. And wouldn't that take a specialist or lots of testing?? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dztrj0/eli5is_there_more_specialized_treatment_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"f8a46qy",
"f8a4ovs",
"f8a5c7e",
"f8allj3"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Depends on the virus. There some are treatments, but most are in the form of prevention instead of treating them after you get sick.\n\nThe prevention is in the form of vaccines.\n\nThere are some very generalized drugs, like interferon, which slow down the ability of viruses to replicate in your body, which helps your body naturally fight them off more effectively, but it doesn't work for all viruses.",
"There are vaccines which prevent the virus, there is one for viral meningitis BTW. \n\nInterferon boosts your immune system and help it fight the virus. That said they are pants shitingly expensive. Other than that it has to be a drug that is tailor made for the virus like HIV meds",
"For certain viruses yes, and they tend to be specialized unless they are supportive therapies like interferon that rely on boosting immune systems. Some anti-viral drugs act by preventing virus attachment to healthy cells (which stops viruses from spreading), some prevent the transcription of viral DNA inside the infected cells, etc etc. If you are seriously worried about meningitis, maybe there’s some free clinics you can get testing done in? Viral meningitis can be really bad.",
"There are lots of things! *BUUUUT* they can be very specific to each virus. For example, my favourite virus, rabies, has two viable treatments. The first is a pre-exposure vaccine, which is given to dogs and wildlife workers (not the *same* vaccine; there's one for dogs and a different one for people) - basically, those likely to encounter a rabid animal. The other is post-exposure prophylaxis given after exposure or potential exposure (like if you were bitten by a vector species in an endemic area, you'd be smart to get the post-exposure treatment). There's also a human rabies immunoglobulin thinger that is given along with the post exposure shots in people who weren't vaccinated, but I don't know much about it. \n\n\nAnyway, after about a week and a half, there's pretty much nothing that can be done for you. We thought there might have been a potential treatment in inducing a coma and then dumping a bunch of antiviral meds and other shit into an infected person (ie, the Milwaukee protocol) because doctors did that and someone actually survived rabies, but turns out the person was just one of a handful of unicorns and the Milwaukee protocol doesn't work. Womp, womp. \n\n\nSide diatribe, my favourite rabies infection story was a man in India (where pretty much half of all rabies deaths happen) who was bitten by a rabid dog. His brother in law cleaned the wound and immediately took him to the hospital, where he received post exposure treatment. And he was totally fine. But the brother in law wasn't! He ended up contracting rabies from infected dog saliva on the wound. Since he didn't interact with the dog, obviously no one thought to treat him too. As far as I know, this is one of the only human to human rabies infections ever documented that didn't involve, like, organ transplants or medical setting exposure. \n\n\n > But the process shook me, is that all the treatment is overall unless you can pinpoint the exact virus.\n\nSo, one factor to consider is that there could potentially be a treatment option but it may not be effective enough or fast enough to actually be helpful. With many viruses, the symptoms of the infection - the fever, vomiting, whatever - are ultimately what kills a patient. Of a viral infection is very short lived, there may be no point in exploring other treatment options - managing symptoms and letting the virus run its very-fast course *is* the best treatment.\n\nIdentifying the specific virus can also be kind of a waste of time and resources. If doctors know it's one of, say, 3 possibilities but all 3 possibilities only last 3 or 4 days and all of them cause mostly the symptoms and all are treated much the same way, there's no need to identify it; it literally doesn't matter. \n\nIf a patient is very sick, identifying the specific illness can become less important. If you're dying imminently, doctors don't have potentially days needed to identify the illness. They'll potentially just treat you for *all* of the most-likely candidates. If the treatments are polar opposites, they might pick one and watch you closely for signs of improvement or further deterioration. If you don't start getting better promptly, then they probably guessed wrong and now they know to switch the treatments. \n\nBecause if the treatment for *x* works, then the patient gets better and you don't have to bother with testing and identification. With medicine, sometimes doctors are only reasonably sure they know what it is because they've definitely determined what it's *not*."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1og7mn | is drinking 3 3% alcohol beers in 3 hours the same as drinking 2 4.5% alcohol beers in the same time span? | Is drinking 4 3% alcohol beers in 3 hours the same as drinking 2 6% alcohol beers in the same time span? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1og7mn/eli5is_drinking_3_3_alcohol_beers_in_3_hours_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccrnhd2",
"ccrni37",
"ccrnk7z",
"ccrnz8p",
"ccrogu8",
"ccrqvy6"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, all other things being equal. You'll pee a bit more perhaps. ",
"In terms of alcohol content, yes.\n\nBut you'd feel more bloated after drinking the greater number of lower-alcohol beers. Because of that, you'd probably not want to drink so much.",
"Overall, you'll still get the same amount of alcohol. But, since you are drinking more other stuff with 3 3% beers, you will digest it a little more slowly. That means that you'll get slightly less drunk but you'll stay drunk for slightly longer.",
"To add to what others are saying, keep in mind that most beers that are limited to \"3.2% alcohol\" are measuring alcohol by weight--3.2 grams of alcohol in a 100 g sample. Virtually every other measurement of alcohol is done by volume, so a \"6% alcohol\" beer is likely to be 60 ml of alcohol per 1 liter sample. (aside: the \"proof\" of a liquor is determined by its percentage alcohol by volume multiplied by two--80 proof is 40% alcohol by volume).\n\nThis wouldn't be a big deal if alcohol and water had the same density, but alcohol is significantly lighter than water. The result is that 3.2% alcohol by weight is about 4% alcohol by volume. Keep this conversion in mind when comparing \"3 point\" beer to \"6 point\" beer",
"There's actually a formula you can use how much blood alcohol you have:\n\n c = V*e*o / m*r\n\nwith c = blood alcohol, V = drink volume in ml, e = alcohol content by volume, p = density of ethanol (0.8kg/l), m = your weight in kg, r = constant depending on the water content in your body, around 0.7\n\nFor a 80kg male drinking a 5% 330ml beer this is\n\n 330ml*0.05*0.8(kg/l) / 80kg*0.7 = 0.236\n\nIn addition there is also a factor of alcohol that leaves the body without getting into the bloodstream, so it's actually a little bit less.\n\nFun fact: If an 80kg male drinks 0.7l of 40% vodka he can have up to 4 promille\n\n",
"No. The 3% beers have more water and will be taken in a bit more slowly. \n\nAcidity and the miscellanous other chemicals in the booze will matter too though, you'd need damn near identical beers to do a real apples/apples test (like the 3.1 Stella Artois vs the original)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dppq5x | how can we not listen to a song for years but as soon as it comes on the radio boom we still know every line? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dppq5x/eli5_how_can_we_not_listen_to_a_song_for_years/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5xdyln"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Memory can be tied pretty closely to emotions, and music can be pretty emotional. I personally enjoy the beat of the music more than the words, so I can't remember most lines of the music I listen to unless I listen to the same stuff daily for awhile."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
431d5s | why do iowa and new hampshire vote before everyone else? wouldn't it make sense to all vote at once? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/431d5s/eli5why_do_iowa_and_new_hampshire_vote_before/ | {
"a_id": [
"czepciv",
"czepmmw",
"czetfff"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Each state gas to decide its primary election dates. These are not general elections. They serve to whittle the field down. This also allows large contributors to focus on fewer candidates before the general election. ",
"Each state sets its own date for the primary election. The early voting states are very attached to their privileged position, and when other states move up their dates to be earlier, experience shows that the early voters will move even earlier. That's why things stay relatively the same.\n\nA lot of states do see the advantage, though, particularly because they are not early on in the field. A large number hold their primary on so-called \"Super Tuesday.\"",
"Removed as a repost. Please remember to search before posting."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
68iofo | why does such a small difference in the amount of co2 in the atmosphere make such a large impact on temperatures? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68iofo/eli5_why_does_such_a_small_difference_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgyrwk4",
"dgyt7we"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Why do you think its a small increase in C02? there has been about a 40% increase in C02 PPM over the past 100 years and it shows no signs of slowing down. At this rate we will probably be at double the C02 in the atmosphere before the end of the century. ",
"in short, bands of CO2 in the atmosphere act like glass and scatter heat; rather than it directly emitting to space more of it spends time at the surface before leaving - doubling CO2 increases surface temp average approx. 4° according to Svante Arrhenius calculations\n\n\nit's not a big impact if you are looking at the planet as just a rock. But if you care about sensitive life that depends on the surface water and atmosphere then it's analogous to a fever or perhaps blood alcohol level; e.g. what causes people to die,... about 0.4%"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
27gltd | why is an icebergs ice a pure source of "freshwater" when the ocean is full of salt? | I have been wondering this recently, Does salt not freeze? or does it seperate? Or were the oceans just not populated with salt long ago?
Answer me...ANSWER MEEEE | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27gltd/eli5_why_is_an_icebergs_ice_a_pure_source_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci0mh32"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Icebergs are not frozen ocean. Icebergs are created from snow that fell on land, was pressed down to make glaciers, which flowed down to the sea, where they started floating and broke off. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
af37jc | if casinos are illegal, why are they bound by other laws? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/af37jc/eli5_if_casinos_are_illegal_why_are_they_bound_by/ | {
"a_id": [
"edv2rvm"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"What makes you think gambling is illegal in the US? It is legal under Federal Law (hence why the Indian Reservations are clear since they are under Federal Law). Vegas and Atlantic City are just two dens of sin and vice."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6irth4 | how all of the gold in the world can fit in less than four olympic sized swimming pools? | I was reading [this](_URL_0_) article on Forbes that said all the world's gold could fit in less than four swimming pools. How is this possible? How could all those stacks of gold bars, gold jewelry, and other countless gold items in the history of humanity fit in such a relatively small space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6irth4/eli5_how_all_of_the_gold_in_the_world_can_fit_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj8l47s",
"dj8l7it",
"dj8mr74",
"dj8ng13"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe it is because the gold used in jewelry and coinage is alloyed with other metals to strengthen it, which makes for a lower percentage of gold.\n\nAlso, olympic-sized pools are huuuuge",
" > all those stacks of gold bars, gold jewelry, and other countless gold items in the history of humanity\n\nGold doesn't go bad & seldom gets lost. Gold that the ancient Egyptians had in their treasury is still sitting around in somebody's possession right now. Sure, it's probably been melted down & recast into new bars or coins or jewelry, but it's still in circulation somewhere.",
"A single olympic pool has a volume of 2 500-3 750m³ depending on the depth (2-3m). Given gold has a density of ~20(19.3)t/m³ hat means 50 000-75 000t of it fit into a single pool, wikipedia tells me that there is about 190 000t of pure gold in circulation today so all of that definitely fits into 4 pools with some room to spare. Interestingly enough ~85% of that gold was mined after 1900.",
"In addition to what's already been said, people didn't have all that much gold in the past. Most people were poor or measured their wealth in land, livestock, horses, silver, or the tools and skills they had.\n\nAlso, the human mind tends to underestimate the hugeness of swimming pools and other spaces. For example, 1m equals 100cm. But 1m cubed equals 1.000.000 cm cubed. That is a *lot* of small objects you can fit in there. \n\nAnd only the surface of gold is shiny. Its volume is kept as small as possible to save money. Often, the gold is just a thin layer of a few molecules thick.\n\nAnother interesting fact, maybe slightly off topic, is that some scientists believe most of the worlds gold is dissolved in the earths mantle and core. It doesn't react so it couldn't bind itself into stone and stay afloat in the earths crust. Same goes for other precious metals like platinum."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2010/11/19/how-many-olympic-sized-swimming-pools-can-we-fill-with-billionaire-gold/&refURL=https://www.google.com/&referrer=https://www.google.com/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
d6p894 | i’d like to hear some simple explanations of the bible. i’d like to hear from history buffs or christians as well as people with other religions or none at all. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d6p894/eli5_id_like_to_hear_some_simple_explanations_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0uvls0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The Bible is a compilation of various books, letters, and texts created over a period of several hundred years. Some dating possibly as far back as the 8th century BC but most from a period of 500BC to 300BC and 0AD to 100AD.\n\nThe Old testament is older Jewish texts and histories, many of which were compiled in a time when Jews were living in exile in Babylon. The first 5 books are what are referred to as the Torah and contain the Jewish creation myth, The Jewish version of the flood myth, and the story of Moses' Exodus from Egypt including the 10 commandments and kosher law. Many of the stories contained within are loosely based on historical accounts and myths from Jewish history (Exodus, King David) and folklore (creation myth) as well as a number borrowed from Babylonian history and folklore (flood myth).\n\nThe New testament is a compilation of letters and books written by the apostles of Jesus some time after his crucifixion. The various texts were compiled into the new testament. The completed Christian bible began to appear in the first and second century AD but it is unknown who was responsible. The Christians were persecuted by the Romans in this era so information is scarce.\n\nEmperor Constantine legalized and converted to Christianity in the 4th century AD and from there Christianity began to significantly spread throughout the Roman Empire and continued to spread throughout Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire.\n\nEarly bibles were written in the original Hebrew and Greek and then translated into Latin. Latin was used as a universal language by the priesthood throughout the medieval era, but by the time this practice started it was already a dead language and had to be resurrected. This resulted in 'church latin' having very different pronunciation than 'classical Latin'. The bible was first translated into other western languages much later such as 1382 for the first english version.\n\nGutenberg Bibles were the first to be mass produced using a printing press, prior to this they were copied by hand. The translation into modern languages and the wide spread availability of bibles began to cause rifts in the Christian church as common folk began to read the text themselves for the first time and began to realize the dominant Catholic church was not following the very tenants written in the very bible they read. Splinter groups like the Lutherans began to form.\n\nThere have also been modern translation attempts. The King James Bible of 1611 for example heavily edited the original text and translated it into english.\n\nThe most accurate translation of the Bible is considered to be the New American Standard Bible which has was translated in the 20th century from the original Hebrew and Greek using modern understanding of the languages and translating it into current english vernacular."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1o7c02 | why can't a coup happen? | This is probably a bad question and I know I'm prone to paranoid episodes, but I'm looking at our nonfunctional United States congress and their 5% approval rating and I'm also looking at our relatively competent and organized defense apparatus that needs congress to be functional enough to keep writing them checks.
Reassure me like I'm five that I'm taking this debt ceiling stuff too seriously and that everything will turn out alright.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o7c02/eli5_why_cant_a_coup_happen/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccpjep0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are so many reasons a military coup could never happen in the USA. First of which is US pride in its self for its democratic ideals! If a military leader tried to take power their troops certainly wouldn't obey them and others would actively fight them. The US population all have access to the media, which is well informed about its governments activities and levies huge scrutiny upon them. There is no way the media would support (be silent throughout) a coup and therefor people would literally be up in arms. To prevent a coup all you have to cry is FREEDOM. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
66cito | how did people talk to people on different continents back when we only had land lines? | I more or less understand why cell phones can work but I don't get how a land line could call people across oceans... | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66cito/eli5_how_did_people_talk_to_people_on_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"dghdqgs",
"dghdx5e"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"We've had [landlines that go under the ocean](_URL_0_) since the telegraph was the only form of long distance communication. So they worked just like any other long distance call (though usually with much higher costs). ",
"There are lots of physical telephone cables under the Atlantic and elsewhere. These trace their history back to underwater telegraph cables that were laid in Victorian times.\n\n[Map of Atlantic cables 1858](_URL_0_)\n\nThe British Empire worldwide was similarly connected in this era.\n\nMore recently (post WW2) saw the development of satellites with ground stations either side beaming telephone signals up and back."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_telegraph_cable"
],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Atlantic_cable_Map.jpg"
]
] |
|
8sxm0o | why can events occurring before the administration of general anesthesia be erased from memory? | For example, you wake up and no longer remember being wheeled to the OR, or talking to the surgeon before, etc. Why are these experiences erased from memory even though you were conscious during them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8sxm0o/eli5_why_can_events_occurring_before_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e133zol",
"e134ik6"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Your brain isn't like a recorder that instantly writes your experiences into a persistent format. It sorts, categorizes, prioritizes, and even edits your experiences as it makes memories. That takes a certain amount of time, and getting hit with a syringe full of night-night juice interrupts the process.",
"Imagine that there's a little person inside your brain, writing things down after they happen. What he writes down are memories. \n\nIt takes a little bit of time for him to write them down, and to put them away so they can be found later. Anesthesia might keep him from being able to finish writing them down, or it might keep him from being able to file them away, so they can't be found later. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
j4x3x | what is 'liberalism' or 'being a liberal' in the us and why is it considered bad or a derogatory term by some? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j4x3x/eli5_what_is_liberalism_or_being_a_liberal_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2967qb",
"c296xtq"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you were five I would tell you to compare politics to your school.\n\nLiberals would be the children who want the teacher to help them and their classmates with \"everything\"\n\nConservatives would be the children who want to do everything on their own with no teacher interaction\n\nThere are positives and negatives to both. For example, the first situation has the negative of limited teachers. The second has the negative of \"what happens if there is a bully or something kids cant deal with?\"\n\nedit: Quotes added to \"everything\" after discussion below. Liberals do not see themselves as needing help with everything, but conservatives see this as the case. \nIts considered to be a derogatory term by some conservatives, just as conservative is a derogatory term to some liberals. ",
"It means different things to different people. To me it means that I care what happens to other people, and that the country and the whole world would be a better place if we work together.\n\nThis is different than conservatism, to me at least, because conservatives believe that everyone needs to look out for themselves, and that's why they oppose government programs like social security, medicare, and welfare.\n\nThat's just what it means to me. It's kind of like your religion: what it means to you may be different from what out means to other people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3kzkry | the australian pm switcheroo | So I see you Aussies are making a commotion down there; why was Tony Abbott bad and is the new guy better? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kzkry/eli5_the_australian_pm_switcheroo/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv1uw83"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Tony abbot was probably one of the most corrupt politicians in control of a first world country. He actively sold Austrailias wellbeing and prosperity to the highest bitter (removed protections on the great barrier reef, dismantled public health orginizations), as well as openly denying global warming for a profit (dismantling carbon emission controls that were already established so corporations had no checks or balances). \n\nin terms of \"why is the new guy better\", he might not be. well, thats not entirely accurate. He's way more liberal so he probably wont be doing anything quite as fucked up as Abbot, but he also might not do much of anything at all. we still have to see\n "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8mykpj | what is the point of studying literature | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8mykpj/eli5_what_is_the_point_of_studying_literature/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzrco6i",
"dzrcxur"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"By the same token, what would be the point in getting a degree in something like astrophysics?\n\nYou may not see the point because literature apparently doesn't interest you.\n\nBut are you trying to insinuate that every single degree out there has some sort of worldly benefit and these people go on to do great things?\n\nIf only that were the case my friend.\n\nThe point of studying anything is to learn more about it because (hopefully) you are passionate about it.",
"You've actually spelled out one of the most important skills you get from studying literature, without realising it. It teaches analysis. I'm often on interview panels, and you'd be amazed at how many people have extremely poor analytical skills. Reading something, reflecting on it, and analysing it \\- that's not an easy thing to do well.\n\nPlus as u/Merishone says, not everything has to have practical applications anyway."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1mdk8z | why is natural gas stored in round tanks? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mdk8z/eli5_why_is_natural_gas_stored_in_round_tanks/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc869bb"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"Because when you store a gas, it exerts a pressure. \n(or more truthfully has a pressure difference between it and the 'outside')\nA round storage container distributes this pressure equally over the surface area so it doesn't put more pressure on weaker parts of the container, i.e. a corner.\nThis is why bubbles and balloons are round, stored gases are much safer in spherical shapes. So we store them in spheres too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1ork52 | linux users of reddit. why and how do you use linux? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ork52/eli5_linux_users_of_reddit_why_and_how_do_you_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccuv8nh",
"ccuv8og",
"ccuvgv9",
"ccuvia7",
"ccuvl34",
"ccuvo8v",
"ccuw657",
"ccuw9rz",
"ccuwa8y",
"ccuwh2x",
"ccuwkjc",
"ccux9p3",
"ccuxcff",
"ccuy9wc",
"ccuya98",
"ccuybr8",
"ccuym6k",
"ccv0xa5",
"ccv12oi",
"ccv3i5q",
"ccv9uus",
"ccv9vlb",
"ccvb7py"
],
"score": [
8,
81,
28,
4,
2,
13,
6,
34,
5,
2,
2,
12,
16,
4,
16,
6,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Web-work. LAMP (Linux Apache MySQL PHP) is (imho) an important part of being a 'web professional,' so I've been practicing to be more experienced with (at minimum) ubuntu and LAMP in general.\n\nPlus learning Linux, to me, feels like I'm learning more about 'why' things work, instead of relying on a GUI. e.g. setting up users, groups, permissions, etc.",
"I use it because everything I want to do with my computer that's not playing games is obscenely easier using one of the modern, larger Linux distributions. Even Ubuntu, the most simplified Linux out there, still happily supports all the lower-level more technical stuff that can be very useful for someone trying to develop software, and it has the simple, easy to use interface on top that reliably doesn't break and reliably takes about 0 maintenance outside of responding to the \"You have updates\" notification. Mint, Mageia, Fedora, openSUSE and others all share this distinction more or less.\n\nI use it for my server because all the server software follows the same standards I'm used to from development work and lower-level work on Linux systems, things like Apache are fairly simply configured by well-documented text files, and one basically never has to reboot the server, all modifications are either unnecessary or can be done in situ.\n\nI use it by downloading and installing it. I'm not really sure what you actually want to know for the 'why'. Even most server distributions with no GUI have a pretty simple text-interface for installing, you barely need to know anything but the basics. Desktop distributions like the ones I mentioned above? Most of them have a graphical application that does just about everything for you but select your timezone and computer name.",
"This is just my opinion but I don't think this is a ELI5 question",
"I use it as my desktop OS. My most used programs are Google Chrome, Kate (a text editor for programmers), Claws Mail email client, the image editor GIMP and Rhythm Box music player. \n\nMy mother uses Linux on her laptop. Mainly all she needs is a web browser, Firefox and the Ubuntu system tools that let her view and download photos from her camera.\n\nI also use Linux as the server for my website. It's the most popular OS for running a web site and is quite stable and easy to use for that.",
"Thanks, the kind of uses aren't as scary as I thought, getting started seems to be though. I've watched a few YouTube videos on building PC which have left me dangerously confident. My main goal is just to learn how stuff works rather than how to do the limited number of things I can do. Believe it or not, I'm considered to be good with ICT in my position because I can alt+ctrl+del people out of their problems.\n\nSome people just want to watch the world learn.",
"I started using it (around 2001?) because it sounded cool and different, and the whole open-source philosophy was very intriguing to me back then.\n\nThese days, I guess it's the command line that keeps me using it. There are some activities that translate really well to the text interface, but mostly I just feel super rad being able to type out some commands and have the computer dance.",
"As a graduate student in computer science who writes a lot of software everyday, I feel a lot more productive in Linux than I ever did in Windows. A lot of the tools I use are built around Linux and need a whole lot of hacks just to make them work on Windows.\n\nI rarely ever have to use the GUI (I use it for reddit), and typing out the commands and using the vim editor become second nature. My hands are always on the keyboard so it's comfortable too. Installing most of the software you need is a breeze thanks to the repositories. And I know I sound stupid saying this, but there's a peace and calm in Linux that I've never felt using Windows. Managing files and the clutter is much easier on Linux. Windows just feels unwieldy and difficult to manage in comparison.\n\nI know many people who feel the same using Windows, so it comes to down to personal preference and the kind of work you're doing.",
"I'm a programmer. Linux is the best operating system for programming, in my opinion. \n\nI'm also a believer in the importance of free and open source software. Linux (and the GNU tools) is the most powerful and important piece of free and open source software ever written. ",
"Why? Because it is open and you do not have to rely on any big companies and proprietary software. It is easy-to-use and, in case of Ubuntu, requires zero maintenance for the usual end user. Then again, if you are more advanced and interested in the OS you have endless possibilities as to how to customize your system. It is also great for developers.\n\nHow? I use it for everything (for gaming I have a console). Working, leisure, just everything.",
"Because its easier to use than Windows. Except gaming, it does everything I want in an easier way.\n\nAlso being open source and free is a bonus. I know Windows can be 'free', but not pirating your OS is always good.",
"I ran Scientific Linux (a DoE RPM distro) in order to properly run simulations egines and interact with the server farms. I guess I just started to use it in my day-to-day life afterwards. I now dual-boot with Win7, because, even though I like linux, nothing beats Microsoft Office.",
"I use Debian Linux as my exclusive operating system, and have for a number of years now, since everything is just... easier for me, excepting games.\n\nGames are hard work, and often just won't run, and that sucks.\n\nBut I am a programmer by trade, I work with computers, program them, fix them, and so on. Everything is just... easier here, and I can work better and more efficiently on linux.\n\nSay I need the development tools for a new language. Instead of googling for a few hours, downloading tools and installing them and their dependencies, I'd go:\n\nsudo apt-get install python libapache2-mod-wsgi...\n\nAnd so on, and it would install python, and a module for making python work directly with my webserver. \n\nWorking under windows, at this point, would be a pain for me, as would be doing most of the things I've come to take for granted.\n\nIn summary, IMO everything but games is just... better.",
"A lot of people are saying that Linux is easier to use than Windows. Are you guys saying this from the perspective of an advanced user, trained in computer science? Or would it actually be easier for regular people? Would you recommend Linux to your grandmother?",
"I just use it because typing stuff in the terminal makes me feel like a hacker. ",
"I use linux [because it's fun](_URL_0_)",
" sudo apt-get update & & sudo apt-get upgrade\n\nAnd now all my software up up to date. ",
"It was free and I'm poor.",
"I use a UNIX-like operating system. I prefer it over your typical Windows setup because it seems more uncluttered, more efficient workflow, the desktop metaphor and CL seem to gel nicely (I can disable the \"desktop\" whenever I want and it won't crash the computer). Don't have to worry about the usual Windows viruses. Better LaTeX support. Better X11 support.",
"I use Linux for a lot of reasons, but here are a few key points.\n\n* It is stable and reliable. I've seen servers that have been running for *years* without a reboot. You don't have to babysit it; you just set it up once and let it do its thing.\n* It is easy to automate things. I manage hundreds of servers at work, and there aren't enough hours in the year to individually hand craft each one. There are tools available to do things like issue the same command to 20 servers at once, or bring up a new server that will automatically be configured in a certain way.\n* It doesn't cost anything. When you run hundreds of servers, paying for Windows licenses adds up to a hefty bill pretty quickly.\n* What you see is what you get. There are no secrets. If you want to learn how an aspect of Linux works, just sit down and read the manual, or buy one of dozens of books available on that particular component. If you're having a problem that you don't understand, google it, and 99% of the time you'll find a useful answer. Contrasted with Windows, Microsoft is a for-profit company. I don't have a problem with that at a political or ethical level, as a lot of vocal Linux proponents seem to, but it does lead to some difficulties as they have very different goals than the people that develop Linux. They have to protect their patents. A lot of the inner workings of the OS are hidden inside of a black box that's difficult to crack. If you can't figure out a certain problem, that's in their best interest, as they run a pay-by-the-hour tech support line, and sell their own books at a price three times higher than comparable Linux how-to guides. \n* Linux does everything that I want it to do. I'm hardly the first person to use a computer, and odds are that if I want a certain functionality, someone else wanted it too ten years ago, and they provided their solution for free. When I worked professionally with Windows I was always running into road blocks. Some things that I wanted to accomplish (especially related to automation) were simply not possible. Other things were possible but were a tedious pain in the ass. With Linux the only road block that I've ever encountered was my own ignorance. Like I wrote in the previous point, ignorance is easily solved. \n\nWith that being said, there are different tools for different tasks, and I use a few different ones. I use Linux on servers at work because I want them to be stable and keep providing their services 24/7/365. I use Linux at home to run a small server with web and FTP services. I also do a lot of development and experimentation on it. I use OS X for most personal computing because I love their laptop hardware, I never have to spend time fixing the OS, there are a wide variety of desktop-focused applications available, and it interfaces very nicely with Linux.\n\nI use Windows on my primary gaming desktop at home, because I play a shitload of video games and it's faster and easier to get most games running on Windows. A lot of people spend the time to get \"Windows-only\" games running on Linux, but I would rather spend my free time playing games than installing and configuring games.\n\nThis is starting to change; more and more titles are being released for Linux, and Valve is making a big push in that direction (as, based on your username, you probably know). Hopefully in a few years every PC game that I want to play will have a native Linux release and I'll no longer have a reason to keep Windows around, but for now it's easiest for me.\n\nDifferent horses for different courses, and in my opinion, Linux is the best horse for a lot of courses.",
"I use it because it's efficient, but I'm still dual booted with windows due to the lack of games available for Linux. My preferred distro: Ubuntu",
"For my home desktop, Linux just frees up my time tremendously. Linux just works, works without stopping. A decent summary its that it has the broad, troublefree hardware support that windows used to have, the reliability of a Mac, and the freedom of choice that neither comes close to ever having.",
"I use Linux because it is a learning experience and I think it is more secure than using Windows.",
"The fact that ALL software can be updated in the same program makes so much sense. I've installed a ton distributions. However since I play all video games on my computer, I don't use Linux as much as I want to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/jqIcv.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
a1cws4 | how does google maps get satellite photos without clouds in them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a1cws4/eli5_how_does_google_maps_get_satellite_photos/ | {
"a_id": [
"eaopihn",
"eaoy278"
],
"score": [
25,
3
],
"text": [
"1) Take many photos.\n\n2) Discard photos with clouds in them.\n\nProblem solved.",
"1) they're not satellite photos. they're not taken by a satellite in orbit. rather they are aerial photos taken by an airplane\n\n2) they don't fly the airplane on cloudy days\n\n3) as /u/wrsaunders said, they take photos of same area weeks to months apart and throw out the ones obscured by clouds. you can see the difference when you pan acros the map and the entire area changes color like it's months apart in a different season"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3z59vk | how/why do the ice cubes on the plane i'm on have hollow cylindrical shapes? | So I'm on a standard Boeing 737, can't remember if this was happening during any descent, when I notice that the ice cubes in my drink have a hollow cylindrical shape, even though they were solid moments before. What is it about them that upon melting, caused them to form hollow round ice cubes melting inside out instead of melting like a standard ice cube, from the outside in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z59vk/eli5_howwhy_do_the_ice_cubes_on_the_plane_im_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyjbomy",
"cyjdy1v"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"They're formed in an ice-making machine which has a freezing plate with fingers sticking out of it. They poke into the water, which freezes round them. When they're ejected they have that characteristic hole down the middle. They're cylindrical because that's how the ice freezes - in a consistent thickness around the finger.",
"The plate they form on in the ice machine has little fingers that retract or otherwise wiggle to release the ice cubes when they are frozen. When first dropped into the scooping part of the ice bin, they are hollow where the finger was that held them.\n\nMy guess is that in the dry, low pressure cabin (and possibly reduced temp) the water in your drink froze slightly inside the ice cube, at least at each end of the ice thing. Like plugs, it froze plugs for itself :). This can happen relatively quickly--in the time it takes to serve a drink.\n\nWhat most likely happened is that following these frozen plugs as the water warmed or the air pressure/temp changed during the flight, those plugs melted, revealing the hole again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
53jtqk | airline/car rental web reservations: they have the records, why ask for a confirmation number when cancelling/modifying? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53jtqk/eli5_airlinecar_rental_web_reservations_they_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7tp7j0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's basically there to add an extra layer to prevent you (or somebody else) from accidentally making changes.\n\nSay you have two booking and you want to cancel one - but you accidentally click on the wrong one - asking you to give your confirmation number just gives you that extra check to make sure you want to do what you are doing. \n\nIn theory they could just have an are you sure y/n button - but even then most people just click through. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2vykt1 | why do many ceiling fans with speed settings go from useless to slightly faster but still useless to category 5 hurricane? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vykt1/eli5_why_do_many_ceiling_fans_with_speed_settings/ | {
"a_id": [
"com0v4q",
"com1w81"
],
"score": [
5,
8
],
"text": [
"Ceiling fans are just there to provide a movement of air, in the winter bring the hot air near the ceiling to the lower levels. Obviously in the winter people don't like air moving on them.\n\nIn the summer, they like the instant gratification of a hurricane.",
"These fans are not designed to be used like floor fans. They are for circulation of air - not really for direct cooling. They are also designed to be used in spaces of differing sizes and shapes. The higher speeds are typically used when they are mounted high above the floor. The idea is to get rid of stratification and some light cooling. Box fans and reciprocating fans are best for cooling and/or pulling air in / pushing air out of a space. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
a8tb50 | why do your feet hurt worse when you sit down? | I’m on my feet all day (flat feet, cement floors) and when I get home my feet hurt like hell, but the second I sit down, they hurt even worse for a few mins. I’ve heard the same thing with other professions where ppl stand all day. Why would it hurt worse? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a8tb50/eli5_why_do_your_feet_hurt_worse_when_you_sit_down/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecdinqi"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"Pressure is off the soles of your feet when you sit down so blood flows freely, with a full supply of blood the nerves send their full allocation of signals reporting how battered they are."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2lwp2w | what happened in history to associate the jewish culture with controlling the media? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lwp2w/eli5_what_happened_in_history_to_associate_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"clyut2h",
"clyv7z1",
"clyz12v"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Jewish people were usually the wealthiest, which meant brightest and with the most influence = controlling the media. ",
"Yet an Arab man actually does own a significant part of our media, including fix news",
"There literally are many jewish men in powerful positions within the movie and TV business. Here's a short list:\n\n\n*Gerald Levin - Time Warner, HBO CEO\n*Michael Eisner - Disney CEO, Succeeded by Bob Iger (who is also Jewish).\n*David Geffen - DreamWorks, Geffen Records\n*All the Warner Bros. \n*The Weinsteins (founders of Miramax)\n*Spielberg\n*Louis Mayer - Founder of MGM\n*President of ABC, Leonard Goldenson\n*Founder of CBS William Paley\n\n\nA very powerful group indeed!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
35r75d | can humans eat leaves and lawn grass to get their fiber? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35r75d/eli5_can_humans_eat_leaves_and_lawn_grass_to_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr70ozy",
"cr70yun"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You already eat plenty of leaves, or at least you should. Lettuce, spinach, kale, collard greens, etc are all example of leaves that you eat.\n\nAs for grasses, you eat the seeds of them, wheat, oats, corn, rice. Humans lack the enzymes and digestive fauna to effectively break down grass, so it would be highly inefficient, and would probably result in malnutrition. ",
"Fiber is quite literally food you can't digest. It can be very healthy for the gut, but it's not strictly necessary for survival. Tons of things \"have fiber\" but all that really means is you don't digest it, and it goes right through you. Most leaves and grasses would do this, but some could be poisonous or make you sick."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
79o2k3 | how is foreign investment raising housing prices in vancouver? | I heard that foreign, mostly Chinese, investors put a lot of their liquid cash into real estate in Vancouver, Canada for tax evasion reasons, but I don't know how this translates to higher real estate prices. If the investor is Canadian, would that also raise prices? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/79o2k3/eli5_how_is_foreign_investment_raising_housing/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp3fdhx",
"dp3k7pl"
],
"score": [
4,
8
],
"text": [
"It is really just a result of supply and demand. Supply of housing in most markets is fairly static. However, when more people come to the market to purchase homes, there is more demand to buy the fairly static supply of housing. Econ 101 teaches us that when demand is higher but supply remains static, prices go up.",
"It's not tax evasion, but security of assets... while China has loosened up and is much more capitalistic than in the past, there's always the threat of a crackdown or attempt to confiscate assets, whether a government-wide thing or going after somebody who crosses a particuar official, etc.. It's a lot harder to do so when the asset is a house/condo in Canada or the U.S.\n\nSo you have an increase in demand (number of people wanting to buy), which is growing more quickly than supply can grow. So instead of having 1 interested buyer for each property, you have 2 and that causes higher bids, potentially bidding wars, and so on.\n\nIn a balanced market, you might see somebody list a house for $500k, be offered $460k and settle for $480k. In a market with low supply and high demand, somebody might offer $510k and somebody else comes in and offers $550k to outbid them!\n\nAnd you have actors with different goals than most real estate buyers, While the traditional home buyer or investor needs to buy something that will appraise for what they pay because the need a mortgage, and because of the real world constraints of budgets they need to get a fair deal. But for a Chinese investor who is most concerned with protecting assets from seizure, they don't care as much about the right price -- they're paying cash (no mortgage approval) and the more money they can tie up, the better.\n\nAdditionally, they are often not using the homes... let's say that there are 100k units and an average of 2 people would normally be living in them. But now you've got 1/4 of the units owned and vacant -- no owners living there, and no renters either. Maybe they come visit for a week each year, or let friends/family crash there, but it's empty most of the time. So now you've got housing for 50k people sitting empty while 50k people are needing housing with that much less supply available.\n\nAnd since these units aren't rented out like a traditional investor might, that cuts the available number of rental units on the market. And it raises the prices of those units sold to investors planning to rent them out, meaning they need to get more in rent to cover their costs. Even all rental building are affected, because the price paid for land, paid by investors for rental buildings are benchmarked against things like rents and sale prices of comparable units."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
20zf6e | why are pests' immune response systems seemingly better than humans'? (full worded question in text) | Why is it plants, animals, pests and germs become more resistant, and ultimately immune to afflictions - man made or otherwise, but yet, the number of humans with allergies (cat/dog fur, nuts, asthma etc) seem to be on the rise - or is that merely a reflection of population growth and media fear mongering? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20zf6e/eli5_why_are_pests_immune_response_systems/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg85o7q",
"cg87vsx"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"They reproduce faster with shorter lives and therfore have a more rapid generational genetic change. Someone is going to explain this much better than I have though. ",
"As far as I know, there are 2 main reasons why pests become more resistant faster than humans. One of them has already been mentioned: shorter lifespans means more genetic change and mutations. The other one is artificial selection.\n\nA genetic mutation can generally only happen when an organism reproduces. Just like in evolution, it's not the organisms that evolve, it's the species over many generations. A wolf never becomes a dog, but it's offspring might be a bit more dog-like.\n\nOrganisms like bacteria have significantly shorter lifespans. For example, in optimal conditions, E.Coli bacteria be born and have offspring within 30 minutes. That number is about 15 years in humans and usually a lot more.\n\nJust as a thought experiment: Our most recent common ancestor with chimps is estimated to have lived around 7 million years ago. That is almost 500,000 generations. For E.Coli to have that many generations, it only takes about 29 years. This is a rough, back of the enveloppe, estimation, but it shows what kind of change is possible.\n\nBut it gets even \"worse\": If we are talking about pest control, we are doing a very directed artificial selection. By killing the part of the population that is least resilient to the chemicals, **we are effectively breeding resistance**. Our ancestors only had natural and sexual selection to go with, which is much more subtle.\n\nDisclaimer: I'm not a scientist."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
53w45f | how does colin kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem help to draw attention to issues in america? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53w45f/eli5_how_does_colin_kaepernick_kneeling_during/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7wrhkh",
"d7wru4m",
"d7wrxka",
"d7wsf3h"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
4,
10
],
"text": [
"Just by making this post you have drawn attention to issues in America, stemming from his actions. So I don't know what your confusion is. \n\nHe does something, people talk about it. That's all \"drawing attention\" means. \n\nSoldiers, officers, and other who serve our country can have views too, and those views don't aways align with our nation's actions. If you believe the US has done something to disrespect our soldiers and officers and citizens, then protesting the anthem is *not* disrespectful to them. It is the exact opposite.",
"That act of kneeling is apparently concerning enough that people who approve or disapprove not only do so, but do so openly. And when people are talking about it, they're gonna be talking about why he's doing it. That's why it raises awareness. Even among the people who disapprove of that action, if they recognize that he's doing it because he has issues with police brutality and violence against black people, then the action is serving its purpose. \n\nThis is one of the most effective methods to cultural change, by the way. Despite what many people believe Kaepernick should be doing, people who agree with his message but disagree with his method, it is truthfully impossible to separate an act of protest with its message. The transgression is what makes it a protest. Otherwise, it's just a stance on an issue. \n\nAnd that's where I'm gonna end my post, because it's probably already evident where I stand on this issue, and I'm not going to get into that in ELI5.",
"As an outside observer my take on the shitstorm this kind of protest stirs up is based on the absolute obedience to authoritative representations of the State, such as the flag, being forcefed to the US populace over the last 50 or 60 years. Rallying round the flag is a time tested method of controlling the populace. Authoritarian states such as the US cannot have the symbols that aid in the control of the populace being ignored. Freedom of expression leads to freedom of choice and we can't have the peons thinking that kind of radical thought.",
"Answering this neutrally...\n\n**Why the anthem?**\n\nOne reason...the anthem is a time when the cameras are on the players, but the players aren't in the middle of playing the game.\n\nAnother...it's symbolic. The national anthem represents the country it belongs to. Standing for it is a sign of respect to that country, and by abstaining it is showing that he cannot respect a country that doesn't treat it's citizens equally.\n\n**How does that help?**\n\nAs others have mentioned...many of a certain background/mindset like yourself may not have even considered the topic deeply unless someone brought attention to it.\n\nAlso, controversy gets attention from the click driven media, and also taps into basic human nature: if we all agree, we may briefly talk about something but then we move on. If there are disagreements, we are social creatures that come together and discuss the disagreement to come to a resolution, peaceful or otherwise.\n\n**To your comment, not the question...** my personal interpretation is that the anthem is not played to show respect to military. It's played in homage of our country. The military has served in wars over the years to protect our country, and many rights we have today stem from conflicts that required armed conflict, but as someone else said we are not our military. You can be upset at how the government, police forces, or any other group in the country operate without necessarily disrespecting the troops. My understanding is that generally vets are favorable to peaceful protest, because it is one of the rights they see themselves as fighting to protect.\n\nEdit: clarity and formatting"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ap9m50 | why do some tv adverts have out of sync audio | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ap9m50/eli5_why_do_some_tv_adverts_have_out_of_sync_audio/ | {
"a_id": [
"eg6pho5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Often because they were originally shot in another language (German ones are common on British TV) and have been dubbed on the cheap."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2866dt | what is going on inside the brain of a person with a speech problem? (stutter, stammer, etc) | I was born with or developed a speech problem when I was a child, I was wondering what exactly is going on inside my brain that causes this. I have a mild stammer / stutter but it was very bad when I was young and caused a lot of social issues and bully issues.
Extra points: Is there a way to "rewire" the brain through therapy or everyday life to "cure" this issue? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2866dt/eli5_what_is_going_on_inside_the_brain_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci7utay",
"ci7vn0j",
"ci7w780",
"ci7xfrs",
"ci7xlpf",
"ci7xp6j",
"ci802y3",
"ci809sy",
"ci81be8",
"ci83pku",
"ci89is5"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
26,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on the person. \n\nBut usually its not the brain. I have a problem with my tongue so basically my brain is sending out orders and my tongue physically just can't do it. Its usually not really a \"brain\" thing. Its more of a muscle thing.\n\nThis is heavily dependent on the person though. There really is no way to \"rewire\" anything and create a cure all because of the different causes. It can be psychology, physical, mental, ect.\n\nSo it should be taken on a case by case basis.",
"I'm not 100% sure but whenever I stutter (which is a good amount) it's be uses I'm trying to use 2-4 words at once, be they adjectives, verbs, nouns, whatever.\n\nI think it's my brain trying to process Multiple things at once and trying to use appropriate words. It often comes out as a fast paced jumble of words till the 5tg word or so.\n\nI use swearing and pauses to avoid the stutter but it still comes out.",
"I was born hearing impaired, making it hard to learn how everything sounded. So I learned \"wrong\" and couldn't enunciate because I didn't hear the difference. It's hard to learn this at 10 in school when I should have learned it at 3 at home.",
"I stutter some times, not terribly often, but for me, I am trying to say something and then my mind just gets ahead of my tongue and I just repeat the same noise over and over again. I often just have to slow down and start over with what I am saying otherwise it will just continue out of my control.",
"I believe that it will be different for each person.\nFor my stutter when I was younger, it felt as if the connection between my mind and mouth was sending info too fast, or deciding to say something different, or at the same time once I started to speak, that my mouth/tongue couldn't handle it. I learned to think first what I was going to say, then basically say that out loud. Stuttering went away.",
"Speech Pathologist here. We still aren't 100% sure what causes it. We know that there is a neurogenic component, there may be some genetic components. You cannot \"learn\" to stutter or \"catch\" a stutter (yes I've had parents ask!)\n\nOne of the gold standard treatments for stuttering does in fact \"rewire\" the brain. For children, we use a program of auditory feedback to re-train kids to self identify and self correct a stutter, thus breaking the pattern. For adults, we use a type of rhythm-rate control which teaches the person a different pattern of speaking.\n\nThe bad thing about stuttering is that anxiety and psychological issues impact significantly on the frequency and severity of the stuttering. E.g. you're anxious about stuttering, so you stutter, which makes you more anxious, so you stutter more!\n\nIf you (or anyone else) would like more detailed information, feel free to send me a PM, I'd be happy to help. \n\nRegards,\n\nSwallowing-Expert\n\n*Edit: Neurogenic = neurological of origin: a breakdown in the messages being sent from the brain when producing motor speech (speech movements).",
"I had a pretty bad stutter when I was younger, still shows up every now and then today. As far as I can tell, my stutter shows up when I'm thinking faster than my mouth can work. Obviously, that won't apply to everybody, but I'm fairly certain that's what does it for me. I think of something and try to say it before I'm done saying something else.",
"According to Samuel L Jackson it's a guy who keeps saying motherfucker.",
"Had a teacher in high school that said he used to studder. He said he taught/forced himself to speak with a fake accent as he would not studder when speaking with a fake accent. ",
"I also used to stutter a lot, although not so much anymore (except if I'm frustrated). Basically, it generally feels like you're thinking WAY WAY faster than your mouth/words can keep up, so there's that little stammer while your words can catch up with what you're trying to say.\n\nNeurologically, I don't know what it is, but that's certainly what it feels like.",
"I used to have a lisp and have somewhat of a stammer, and I can't say that you think about it. With things like lisps, it's an inability to recognise the difference between the sound made. For me, I couldn't even hear the 's' sound was coming out wrong, for me it sounded fine, but I taught myself out of it by feeling my tongue. With stammers, it's a problem with confidence, where you lose control over your mouth from what your brain wants you to say."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3x832z | how are we able to use sophisticated telescopes such as hubble to view deep space, but not able to fixate on closer earth-like planets to search for civilization? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3x832z/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_use_sophisticated/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy2aiis"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because Earthlike planets dont give off lots of light. Cant see something that isnt emitting light. \n\nBasically its way easier to see a star 1000 light years away than it is to see a planet even 1 light year away."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8ody52 | the leveraged buyout of toys r us by private equity firma and resulting bankruptcy | Did the PE firms make money on this and if so how much and why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ody52/eli5_the_leveraged_buyout_of_toys_r_us_by_private/ | {
"a_id": [
"e02pax9"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"No, the firms that bought Toys R Us did not make money from the deal.\n\nThey put $1.28 billion of their own money into the deal to buy the company in 2005. Since that time they have received ~$180 million in dividend equivalents. That means that they lost $1.1 billion of their own money in the deal.\n\nIts also worth noting that Toys R Us was on the verge of bankruptcy in 2005 when they were taken private. The private owners were able to turn it around, and it was an extremely profitable company until 2013. The majority of those profits (about $200 million per year) were reinvested into the store - the private owners pulled very little money out.\n\nAlthough its become trendy on the internet to blame the leveraged buyout for the current bankruptcy, Toys R Us' success after the buyout makes that seem unlikely. Rather, it seems to be a victim of the fact that the retail industry is currently going through a wave of bankruptcies. Sears/Kmart, JC Penny, Macy's, Payless, Radioshack, and Sports Authority have all either gone bankrupt recently or are anticipated to go bankrupt within the next few years.\n\nThose bankruptcies are blamed in large part on the retail industry being unable to compete with Walmart and Amazon. In fact, after the initial bankruptcy filing Toys R Us' owners put together a plan to keep the store operating as a going concern, which is normally what creditors prefer to a liquidation. Their creditors refused citing that Toys R Us' business model of a retail store that sold only toys was obsolete."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
29lw7y | why do religious beliefs get special consideration under the law, but other beliefs don't? | If I strongly believe for non-religious reasons that wars are morally wrong, I'm still required to pay the taxes that fund our military - but someone who strongly believes that contraception is morally wrong for religious reasons can opt not to follow what would otherwise be a legal mandate? How does that work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29lw7y/eli5_why_do_religious_beliefs_get_special/ | {
"a_id": [
"cim73gi",
"cim7crc",
"cim8utv",
"cimetsy"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"(1) Congress passed a law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act giving religious beliefs enhanced protection. \n\n(2) The First Amendment specifically singles out religious belief as being protected. There has been some flirtation in the Supreme Court with the idea that strongly held non-religious views get the same protection, but nothing has ever been clearly said to that effect and plenty of Justices on the current Court (at least four) would go against that position.",
"Without all the bullshit and bias that can go along with this question, its because 1. Religion is profoundly strong in so many people that it effects everyone/thing around them and 2. There are a lot of those people, including just about everyone in Congress. So even though the law is supposed to be neutral towards religion and religious organizations, it isn't. And thats just they way it is, unfortunately. ",
"The United States was colonized by people fleeing religious persecution. The Founding Fathers decided that it would be better to have government be neutral on the subject of religion rather than suffer civil wars like Europeans had.\n",
"The greater question is why beliefs (defined as a feeling of being sure that someone or something exists or that something is true) get any consideration while actual knowledge (the body of truth, information, and principles acquired) is marginalized."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3waz4a | indian giver? | I've been used to saying the phrase, "Don't be an Indian giver!", since I was a child. Now that I'm older it seems a tad racist. Where did the phrase even come from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3waz4a/eli5_indian_giver/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxus3w4",
"cxus4g2",
"cxus4ny"
],
"score": [
7,
7,
3
],
"text": [
" > As observed and documented by Lewis and Clark in their journal, trading with Native Americans had a very unusual aspect - any trade, once consummated, was considered a fair trade. If on one day, they traded beads for a dog from a tribe, then days later, the trade could be reversed - upon surrendering the beads, the tribe expected the dog back. The original idea of \"giving\" in this fashion connotes trade (\"I'll give you this, and you give me that\"), and not presents or \"gifts.\"\n\n_URL_0_",
"It came out of a cultural misunderstanding between European colonizers and some Native American tribes. Some Native Americans were giving items to the Europeans in an attempt to barter, or as part of local tradition that expected a gift in return. The Europeans just thought these items were pure gifts, though, and treated them as such. The Native Americans were quite unhappy about this, which led the Europeans to craft the term \"Indian giving\" to describe the \"Indians'\" apparent expectation that any gift be reciprocated equally.",
"A series of misunderstanding where early settlers believed they were being given gifts, while the natives believed they were engaging in barter or mutual gift exchange. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_giver"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3uoodw | when you smell cigarette smoke from far away, are you necessarily inhaling second-hand smoke or is it just the "odor"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uoodw/eli5_when_you_smell_cigarette_smoke_from_far_away/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxgk4it"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"You smell things by inhaling them. The odor of a thing is it vaporized. So, yeah, you're still inhaling second hand smoke."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6p3kn9 | why do different fruits/vegetables accumulate different nutrients? | For instance: you plant kale, sweet potatoes and a watermelon vine in the same soil next to each other but the food produced will come out with different vitamins and minerals in them even though they grew in soil of the same composition. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6p3kn9/eli5_why_do_different_fruitsvegetables_accumulate/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkmc1w1"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Different plant species (and species overall) have different needs ([their niche](_URL_0_)). Both a tree and a herb can be cultivated in your garden but by their very nature they'll have different needs for nutrients.\n\nIn the case of domesticated plants, like kale, potatoes, or watermelon, besides having those intrinsic differences, we've selected them artificially to have even more drastic nutritious content (when compared to their wild counterparts)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_niche"
]
] |
|
7ranxg | how did humans found out, that they can create paper out of wood? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ranxg/eli5_how_did_humans_found_out_that_they_can/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsveukr",
"dsvhjpq"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Paper way back when came from smaller plants. Papyrus was very popular in ancient Egypt. Hemp was used in China. Basically, once they figured out that plant pulp can be mashed into paper, there are a lot of sources one can use.",
"people in China figured it out in about 105 AD. \n\npeople in Europe didn't figure it out. they used parchment, which is treated animal skin. it wasn't until paper reached Europe about 1000 years later that Europeans started making paper ."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
j2q5a | can some explain the chemistry behind why some fats are good and some fats are bad to me li5? | I watch what I eat meticulously, but was not a science major in school. I eat what I do because individuals smarter than myself tell me its good. I've always been particularly confused about fats; i.e. monosaturated, monounsaturated, etc. Can someone explain to me why different kinds of nutritional fats have different effects? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2q5a/can_some_explain_the_chemistry_behind_why_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28ndo3",
"c28o6lv"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Short version - Your body can't make the good ones.\n\nLong version - You may have heard the term \"omega-3\" fatty acid. This is scientific nomenclature. Fatty acids, and many other biomolecules, have their carbons labeled. In fatty acids, it is important to note where a carbon-carbon double bond is because that creates a \"kink\" in an otherwise straight molecule. \"Alpha-5\" means 5 carbons away from the alpha, or first, carbon in the chain. \"Omega-3\" means 3 carbons away from the last carbon in the chain. This is of course based off the Greek alphabet, wherein α is the first letter and ω is the last.\n\nOmega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids have come into recent notice because alpha-linoleic acid (Omega-3 category) and linoleic (Omega-6 category) have been recognized as **essential** fatty acids.\n\n > Essential (adj): Referring to macromolecules that cannot be synthesized from constituents in the body\n\nThat means we have to get those two fatty acids from our diet. That they have also been implicated in the prevention of heart disease makes them even more important.",
"Sorry if this goes against the rules of the sub reddit but some of the response here are going to cause my head to explode with all the misinformation. Right now the accepted wisdom (read: media) is that saturated fats will cause you do die if you eat them, while fat makes you fat and carbs are required to live. Oh and meat will give you cancer and cause you to have heart attacks.\n\n\nThe majority of what I said above has near zero evidence behind it and seems to have come out of the woodwork by people manipulating the data or circumstances of studies to fit their beliefs (read: china study).\nAlso while I'm semi-ranting here, the majority of doctors know little to nothing about nutrition.\n\n1mfa0 here is a simple and well written article about fats.\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.marksdailyapple.com/fats/"
]
] |
|
4jvxoo | what exactly is neoclassical economics, and what are its prescriptions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jvxoo/eli5_what_exactly_is_neoclassical_economics_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3a2uqj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I am no expert but since nobody has answered yet I'll have a try. So if others could verify or review that would be appreciated. Economics is hard especially when you start talking theories since a lot of theories are similar and economics is not an exact science.\n\nFrom my understanding Neoclassical economics relies heavily on free markets without government interfering. \n\nThere are two important aspects to Neoclassical economics.\n\nPeople make rational choices: For instance when you buy a car you look at the information (price, millage and fuel-consumption) you have and make the best choice. \n\nInformed Consumers: they are aware of all the details of products they wish to consume.\n\nEmployees maximize their utility and firms/companies maximize their profits: You as an employee try to work the most efficient (thereby trying to eradicate wastes/inefficiency) to earn the most money and companies do the same plus also trying to maximize the prices of their goods.\n\nI would also like to point out some critique on Neoclassical economics. \n\nPeople don't make rational choices: People are guided by emotions. Also advertising makes a huge difference. Lets take the car example, people are more likely to buy an expansive brand to impress others. I think Iphones are also an example of this. Another thing is that people often don't have all the right information. \n\nConsumers often don't have all the information and it's profitable for firms/companies to not disclose all the information.\n\n\nPlease don't just take my word on this.\n\nEdit: Added \"Informed Consumers\" thanks to ReddneckwithaD. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
29a88e | where does the stereotypical pirate accent actually come from? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29a88e/eli5_where_does_the_stereotypical_pirate_accent/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciiy06r",
"ciiy3gq",
"ciiy4zg",
"ciiy9xe",
"ciiymko",
"cij0kkw",
"cij2qk8",
"cij3byx",
"cij3jfi",
"cij3l5z",
"cij4zp1",
"cij5l9e",
"cij5myz",
"cij6exh",
"cij6inx",
"cij6n7m",
"cij6obi",
"cij6z9l",
"cij81yd",
"cij82y0",
"cij88wu",
"cij89wt",
"cij93lo",
"cij9gba",
"cij9jby",
"cij9nvd",
"cijd4wd",
"cijeyia",
"cijfc00",
"cijfwpz",
"cijgffc"
],
"score": [
1885,
203,
62,
16,
16,
8,
3,
43,
141,
11,
3,
13,
2,
4,
12,
4,
3,
7,
2,
5,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It comes from the movies. Specifically, from the actor who played Long John Silver in one of the old Treasure Island films. It's an English west country farmer's accent, which I believe the actor had grown up with. It felt right to him, and so he used it, and the film was so iconic that it became what we all think of as \"pirate\" speak.\n\nUnless you're English, in which case it's what you think of as \"farmer\" speak.\n\nOr something like that.",
"The typical accent that people associate with \"pirates\" is quite similar to the accent in Devon and Cornwall (south-west point of England). Cornwall in particular has a strong tradition of sea-faring and fishing. Falmouth harbour is one of the largest natural deep-water harbours in the world.\n\nMost sea-folk (not just pirates) would have come from this part of the world.",
"Geographically that accent is an exaggeration of the type of speech found in South-West England, Cornwall, Devon and Dorset in particular. There would have been pirates from these places as they are traditional places with a lot of sailors/fishermen, but obviously not all pirates would have just been from this area of the world. \n\nThe reason that this is the stereotypical accent, supposedly, is because an actor from that area spoke like that in a film version of Treasure Island, and the image of pirates talking like that stuck. ",
"Bristol. The dude who wrote treasure island wrote it in a pub on the harbour in Bristol. The pirate accent has its origins in the westcountry accent of the UK. \n\nI am on mobile, so shall not provide you with sources. You're gonna have to google it for yourself.",
"Ah I see, you know come to think of it Treasure Island is the first I heard that accent in popular culture. These are all good answers, thank you.",
"It's bristolian. There is loads of pirate history in Bristol.",
"read 'under the black flag' (isbn 0-8129-7722-x)\n\ncorrelates popular pirate images to established historical research. Also read 'the pyrates' by George MacDonald Frazer... just the opposite... every pirate myth rolled into one, and he has a great ear for the dialogue.",
"Bristol, England.\n\nSource: I lived there.",
"A lot of comments here are saying that the accent comes from an actor's interpretation of a Cornish accent from Britain. \n\nAs an American, I had absolutely *no idea* what a Cornish accent sounded like. \n\nHere's a quick little 5-minute video by the BBC exploring the Cornish accent and dialect that was very helpful for me. \n\n_URL_0_",
"Actually, \"Pirate English\" actually sounds a lot like the English Language did before the Great Vowel Shift, a natural progression in the language that happened in the 13, 14 and 1500's. This happened from the top down, as people became more literate, so those pirates in the 15 and 1600's who read and wrote little were actually speaking like their ancestors before them did. Writers who captured their stories used their inflection which became a snapshot of English during this time of change.",
"I work with some Cornish guys and can confirm they totally sound like pirates. Most of the time I can't understand what they are saying. I just smile.",
"Here's a Robert Newton soundboard I made a few years back which is from the Disney film Treasure Island of the fifties. It certainly was a tremendous influence on modern culture with regard to what a pirate should sound like.... arrrrr!\n[Pirate Sound Board - 8M Flash](_URL_0_)",
"The language was actually from Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure island.\nOne of the first TIL's on reddit I ever read.\n\n",
"This blog seems to have a reasonable answer...\n[Arrr, Matey! The Origins of the Pirate Accent](_URL_0_)",
"This isn't an ELI5 question. This is an AskHistorians or whatever question. ELI5 is for when you already have an answer but don't understand it. This is just a simple question with a simple answer",
"To me, a Bristol accent always made me think of the way pirates speak. Sort of like Hagrid from Harry Potter. :)",
"It comes from Cornwall. Some people in that area actually sound like pirates in real life.",
"peter sellars doing so accents, amazing.\n\n\nthttp://_URL_0_ \n \nin the uk, very roughly, every major city has quite distinct accent, then within that, the larger cites - London Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool etc, all have probably 5 or 6 variations on that. \n \nI'm in Birmingham and the accents are different if you drive 5-10 miles. \n\n",
"A while back I heard Robert Newton, the actor who played Long John Silver in The Disney movie \"Treasure Island\" being interviewed on the radio. He said he used a Cornwall accent because he thought it was fitting and believed some of the actual famous pirates had come from Cornwall.",
"TIL: There are more true Cornish/non-local inhabitants of Cornwall (like me) on Reddit than I thought. ",
"Listen to the Plymouth and Dorset accents in England. Southern coastal towns are the same but not harsh. ",
"See this TIL from last year:\n_URL_0_\n\nIt was invented by English actor Robert Newton. The genesis of the pirate voice is explained in his Wikipedia article:\n_URL_1_",
"I'd say the West Country in England. (I'm from the West Country). Pirates and the legend of them are really common here, my home town has \"Harry Paye\" who used to smash the Spanish and smuggle good into Poole town and was the inspiration for [Old Harry Rocks](_URL_0_). Many West Country accents resemble pirate accents. The most famous of Pirates, Black Beard was from Bristol in the west country, so he'd have a [Bristol](_URL_1_) accent, which probably over time just become synonymous with pirates, as did many other of Black Beards traits. ",
"The actor Robert Newton was the first to popularise the \"pirate accent\". They discussed it on QI once. ",
"That is actually what the British accent sounded like 200+ years ago\n\n_URL_2_\n_URL_1_\n_URL_0_",
"Many of the responses here are not quite right. The \"movie\" pirate accent was not specifically from Bristol or Cornwall, it was a generic West Country accent used by Robert Newton in Treasure Island, which then stuck. If you want to be specific, it actually came from Dorset with a mix of a few other West Country places.",
"Newfoundland. On a recent visit there it seemed that everyone sounded like they were pirates, it was amusing and weird.",
"It was basically invented by [Robert Newton](_URL_0_) for [the 1950 adaptation of Treasure Island.](_URL_1_) He based the pirate accent on the lower-class accent in the part of England where he grew up, while throwing in appropriate nautical terminology.",
"It comes from rum.",
"I just wanted to say yargh! and pass rum around the room ... [~]D",
"The arrrrchipelago, matey"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://youtu.be/tcMJWZBzYjU"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://beardcommunity.com/pirate/"
],
[],
[
"http://dialectblog.com/2011/05/24/pirate-accent/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJH-4BNsVlc&sns=em"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1mqfs8/til_the_pirate_accent_is_actually_from_dorset/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Newton"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Harry_Rocks",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwcqKBcpuG4"
],
[],
[
"http://the-toast.net/2014/03/19/a-linguist-explains-british-accents-of-yore/",
"https://m.soundcloud.com/evie-jeffreys/romeo-and-juliet-extract",
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlpphT7n9s"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Newton",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Island_%281950_film%29"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
be5mkf | how do scientists know if they`ve already discovered a certain star or planet? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/be5mkf/eli5how_do_scientists_know_if_theyve_already/ | {
"a_id": [
"el37ro8",
"el37ucf",
"el3b2nv",
"el3dj8v",
"el3nspu"
],
"score": [
1307,
112,
36,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"They don't search by a name, they search by the coordinates of the star they are looking at.",
"There are other parameters to search for. Distant stars are tracked using two primary things: \"proper motion\" (the angle and speed at which they move relative to Earth), and their Doppler shift (indicates whether the star is moving towards or away from Earth).\n\nThe \"proper motion\" is relatively simple to calculate, and is obtained by tracking the star over a period of time (some move *extremely* slowly relative to Earth). **It will also tell the astronomer where in the sky an already-discovered star is going to be, based on where it was first observed, and where it will be now based on movement over time.** So it's simple to discount what is believed to be newly discovered, if its location matches up with a previously discovered star already in the database.\n\nThe Doppler shift doesn't really come into play in this scenario, but is determined by how much the light from the star is shifted towards red or blue - if it's redshifted, it is moving away from us; if it's blueshifted, it's moving towards us. Much like sound waves are compressed when something comes towards us quickly, light wavelength is also compressed in the same way, meaning it looks \"more blue\". It could be used to confirm a star as already discovered or \"new\", should the location be similar enough to be confused.",
"The layout of the stars doesn't really change; stars do move relative to the sun and relative to each other, but in most cases it's only noticeable after hundreds, thousands, even tens of thousands of years. So if a certain star is halfway between two other stars, the Egyptians found it there too. \n\nBecause of how unchanging the sky is, we can make a coordinate system just like we have one on the surface of the Earth. There are \"celestial poles\" and a \"celestial equator\" and a grid with degrees and minutes and seconds. Every star and galaxy known to exist is plotted on this grid and assigned coordinates, and the entire world uses this system.\n\nSo if you see something in the sky, all you have to do is look up the coordinates and see if there's \"supposed\" to be something there. If there isn't, then...well, first you have to get your bearings and make sure your coordinates are right. Then you look at it again. Then you look at it the next night, and then the next. If there's *still* something there that we didn't notice, then you can call an observatory and see if they can see it there too. \n\nBy now, it's unlikely you're going to find a *star* or galaxy this way, but this is how amateur astronomers discover comets, by running into little fuzzy dots that no one has noticed before.\n\nPlanets are discovered a different way. All the planets in the solar system are accounted for (with the possible exception of one *very* distant candidate), so you won't happen upon one in the sky. We are discovering planets orbiting other stars all the time, but this takes special telescopes using special methods. We've only been doing it for 25 years so the catalog of these planets has been kept nice and tidy from the beginning; if you're looking at a star, you'll already know if someone has found a planet around it.",
"You know when you gotta send someone into your room to grab something and you go \"okay from the door, look 11o'clock, just to the left of the window\"?\n\n\nLike that but the doorway is earth, 11 o'clock I think is based from our own direction (northern / southern hemisphere for up and down, eastern / western hemisphere for left and right), and the window is any stars around. It gets pretty specific because there's a lookout of stars but computers and accurate telescopes help keep everyone on the same page\n\n\nAlso generally speaking scientists are collaborative so they'd figure out real quick if another group was investigating the same area at the same time for anything interesting, or if a group had done so several years ago",
"Astronomer here! I rely on the coordinates of the source. We have also done extensive surveys of the sky at many wavelengths. I just did a project looking at some interesting radio sources for example, so in order to see what the sources looked like in optical light I just entered the coordinates [here. ](_URL_0_) I was particularly interested in radio sources coming from within a few hundred million light years from us, and the “SDSS” catalog there for example is complete out to the distances I care about, so if I saw a galaxy at the coordinates I associated it with my radio source. If nothing was there, most likely it was from further away in a galaxy too far to be seen by the survey. There are also catalogs you can search for coordinates to find objects published in the literature, but honestly you save a lot of time by checking out the image before trying to make an association most times. \n\nI hope that helps explain what an astronomer does!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://aladin.u-strasbg.fr/AladinLite/"
]
] |
|
2lh89i | if i'm not attracted to old women now why will i be attracted to them when i'm an old man? | Why will I become physically attracted to old, saggy dustiness when I'm old, saggy and dusty? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lh89i/eli5_if_im_not_attracted_to_old_women_now_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cluq6xl",
"clurmwm",
"clurwxq",
"clux07m",
"cluzbpr",
"cluzja7",
"clviad3"
],
"score": [
14,
5,
2,
14,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Nah, you will still slyly eye up the hottest lasses you eye up now. But, you will be tempered by the fact that you are becoming a dusty old wrinkle and any \"approach\" will be regarded as pervy and dirty old manny. \n\nYou will also develop **taste**. You will seek out a similar mindset and you will start to see past just the physical attractiveness and into a more physical relaxation. \n\nThe two of you will both go \"check that out! \" When some one attractive passes. You will both think of those people in passing while you engage in coitus. You will both, hopefully, be content and satisfied. \n\nOther Scenario : Completely dissatisfied you split up. Both seeking a May to December relationship, the both of you chasing dreams which you should have quenched in the past. \n\nOr, you start swinging. \n\nThen you hit **really** dusty and you're just glad your SO knows how you like your tea, how your pillows like to be arranged and will put up with your damn awful grumpiness. \n\n(re-read, yup, seems accurate) \n\nEdit: Random word",
"In general I think men are physically attracted to the same things their whole lives. When they're 12 they'll probably be attracted to the older mature 20 year old young women instead of their underdeveloped flat-chested 12 year old female peers. When they're 20 they'll probably like girls their own age. When they're 40 they'll probably still think 20 year olds are hot. Same thing when they're 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 years old. But some older men might like women who are their own age and who they feel they have something in common with, instead of just having someone who they think is hot. Then some other men like Hugh Hefner prefer the hot 20 year olds and have the money to get them.",
"I am staring 40 in the face and as I have gotten older, my tastes have definately changed. Don't get me wrong, I stop by gonewild every now and then to check out some of the young girls, but in reality, I could never see myself actually having sex with anyone under 30. As I have gotten older I have learned to appreciate the finer aspects of older women. And to honest 35 year olds are just better at sex than 20 year olds. \n\nNow, whether this holds true into my 70's I have no idea. I am sure I will still like looking at the younger ladies, but that would be it.",
"Probably not. Here's some data from /r/dataisbeautiful, that shows men prefer young women throughout their entire lives.\n\n_URL_0_",
"First, it will be a matter of opportunity. Younger women won't be attracted to your old self, so older women are what you can get.\n\nSecond, you'll have more in common with people your own age, and be more compatible. Being with twentysomething hotness might be nice, but what would you really do together? She is starting her career while you are retiring, she's looking to start a family when you just got yours out of the house. Exchange some physical attraction for someone who wants the same things you do it huge. ",
"1. You will always appreciate the beauty of a lovely, young, 20-something woman. They really can be works of art.\n\n2. You will dream of spending time (sexually and otherwise) with a lovely and exceptionally wise and worldly 20-something woman. That won't happen. What will happen is the lovely young woman will say \"ick\" when she looks at you or you will actually spend time with her and discover how little you have in common. Sex is still great but you are not the drooling horn dog you once were. Sexual attractiveness is not worth being bored and basically incompatible the rest of the time.\n\n3. You will find yourself sexually attracted to the woman whose company you actually enjoy, the woman nearer your own age. Yes, with the old, saggy dustiness and everything. She will be the one you'll want to invest your time in. When you are having sex it's timeless. She loves you old tired body and you love hers. \n\nStill, every now and then you'll see a young woman who is heartbreakingly hot. \n\nAnd by \"young,\" I mean 35-ish. The others are children.\n",
"I'm 40. \n\nI'm not interested in 18yos for the same reason I'm not interested in having a birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese. \n\nIt's not just the emotional maturity - as you get older, pretty shiny young things all start kind of looking the same - mass-produced, factory-perfect, and utterly lacking in any (visible) character. \n\nWhen you get to my age, the handmade look starts appealing a whole lot more. No, it's not all perfectly smooth. No, the curves aren't all mathematically perfect. This bit's a bit bulgy, that bit's a bit saggy, there are some lines here and it looks a bit scuffed there. It actually looks *interesting*, like it's had a unique history, and some stories to tell. It's not like all the others. There's actually a reason to look at it, because you'll always discover something new. \n\nAnd of course, the older you get, the older people have to get before you stop dismissing them as kids, or at least kid's stuff. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/Ijgzwsk.png"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3uat5x | why do bridges from the 17 & 1800s seem to last longer than our bridges today? | I'm not sure if others noticed this or really care, but every time I go to a historical site I am constantly in wonder of why those stone bridges have lasted 300-200 years, yet some bridges today need to be repaired a lot and sometimes entirely replaced. Is it because of the architecture? The materials? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3uat5x/eli5why_do_bridges_from_the_17_1800s_seem_to_last/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxdc8ls",
"cxdcarp",
"cxdcd1j",
"cxdcvfm",
"cxdf94r"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"A well designed stone structure can last for a really long time, just look at the pyramids.\n\nModern bridges take a whole lot more punishment than an old stone bridge ever would. A modern road or rail bridge sees more tonnage going over it in a year than most of those little stone bridges will in 500 years.",
"It's down to design load. You just didn't have things as heavy as a fully loaded 18 wheeler back in the day. ",
"Over engineering. For the most part modern bridges are built to last indefinitely with maybe a bit of regular maintenance and inspection, but things dont always go exactly as planned. But with modern science we can analyze every force that will act on a bridge down to every last nut and bolt. We can predict where and how its most likely to fail and then we build in a safety factor by making the weakest points say 3 times stronger than the largest force we ever expect it to encounter. In the past this was impossible in many cases and impractical in others. You deal with this by over-engineering the bridge. Instead of a safety factor of 3 lets make it 30. Build the thing absolutely fucking bulletproof. Its mostly a huge waste of time and resources when you know exactly what the forces are, but when you dont its the only surefire way to make sure your bridge stays upright.",
"The bridges from the 1700s that are still around are the ones that survived. Or have been steadily repaired or reinforced as times have changed, such as [Hammersmith Bridge, UK](_URL_0_)\n\nPlenty of other bridges from that era have long since been torn down or replaced.",
"In short, simplicity. Old bridges are built with arches, if the structure is solid and the stones don't degrade then there is no reason for it to fail. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_Bridge"
],
[]
] |
|
4a6aqb | how do they measure scoville units? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a6aqb/eli5_how_do_they_measure_scoville_units/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0xpe0a"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I googled your question and this is from the 2nd result:\n\n > To perform the Scoville Organoleptic Test, an alcohol extract of capsaicin oil from a dried pepper is mixed with a solution of water and sugar to the point where a panel of taste-testers can barely detect the heat of the pepper. The pepper is assigned Scoville units based on how much the oil was diluted with water in order to reach this point. As an example, if a pepper has a Scoville rating of 50,000, that means capsaicin oil from that pepper was diluted 50,000 times before the testers could just barely detect the heat"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6hctd7 | why does one hammer with a hammer, chisel with a chisel but sweep with a broom? | Deep thinking I know. Interesting how some tool names reflect their usage while others don't. Some more, you level with a level and brush with a brush. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6hctd7/eli5_why_does_one_hammer_with_a_hammer_chisel/ | {
"a_id": [
"dixh68h",
"dixh9a7"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Hammers rarely hammer but they do tap, drive, pound, peen, beat, and a bunch of other stuff. \n\nChisels mostly carve, cut, plane, and gouge, among other things. \n\nBroom is a bush (invasive species in the west, Scotch/french broom) that brooms are made from. A sweep is a shape of motion. Used in boat propulsion for instance with an oar called a sweep.",
"I think it's because English is such a bastard language, in the literal sense. It's the illegitimate offspring of Norse, German, and Latin, with stolen words and grammar from nearly every language that English speakers encounter. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1y1lrn | what would happen if someone drilled a deep hole into the earth and then connected it to the ocean? | Like in this xkcd comic:
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y1lrn/eli5_what_would_happen_if_someone_drilled_a_deep/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfgjed8",
"cfgjerz",
"cfgjo69",
"cfgkd4v"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"How far into the earth to be exact?",
"The hole would likely collapse, or if not it would fill with water... then collapse/fill with sediment. FYI, the Earth is not hollow.",
"If it reaches the mantle, wouldn't the water hit the magma and seal off the hole then it would either fill up and the water level world wide would lower or the force from all the water rushing in on a concentrated would make the edges at the top collapse in and I'm guessing it would kinda be like a domino effect and it would just keep collapsing.",
"I believe I read that they recently hit a magma pocket at that depth and are having trouble keeping it capped. So, most likely you wind up with a new volcanic island in the ocean."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.xkcd.com/1330/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4yqyvi | why are some people more sensitive to horror fiction than others? | I am completely frightened watching Stranger Things (I couldn't sleep for a few hours because of it) but my friends can easily watch horror movies and sleep soundly | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4yqyvi/eli5_why_are_some_people_more_sensitive_to_horror/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6pth4o",
"d6pv6me"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The only simple answer to this is people are different. It's no different than some people find some jokes funny and others don't. Some people like vanilla and some like chocolate. ",
"It has to do with the psychological traits of fear/disgust which are actually weirdly intertwined in the neuroanatomy. For example, paraphrasing hitler's speeches: \"the Jews are a parasite poisoning the social body of Germany\". Fear and hatred of the Jew was inculcated via associating them with disgust. Its evolutionary advantageous to be a little more cautious than the average Joe when dealing with spoiled food, body parts, bugs, infection and personal hygiene. Most of the time we are intrigued and want to practice increasing our tolerance to disgust when watching horror movies preparing for events in real life that will test us. \n\nInterestingly enough women rate higher on disgust sensitivity tests. This is thought to be because they must be pickier when choosing sexual partners to ensure offspring will have good genes. More disgust sensitivity correlates to being politically conservative. And different cultures teach disgust response to different things. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
cy6mnf | how does tracing a phone call to a physical location work? i see it all the times in movies and wondered how realistic it is. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cy6mnf/eli5_how_does_tracing_a_phone_call_to_a_physical/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyq108y"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Its called triangulation. Basically your cell is always sending signals to the various cell towers in the area, so they take the 3 closest towers to you and see how long it takes for a signal to go from the tower to your phone. By doing this, and some they can estimate your distance from each tower and find a common point (Your location)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xz5gr | why pewdiepie can use extracts from pop songs etc but other youtubers get copyright strikes if they do the same? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xz5gr/eli5_why_pewdiepie_can_use_extracts_from_pop/ | {
"a_id": [
"cffwtjv",
"cffzrbe",
"cffzyos",
"cfg0rak",
"cfg10mb"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
3,
24,
6
],
"text": [
"I'm pretty sure that youtube can't auto-claim copyrighted music if the clip is that short and the only way to have it claimed is if their company was to file for it and they're not gonna search for 10 second clips of their music in everyones videos :P Also he probably gets some privileges. ",
"This has to do with the \"networks\". I don't really know how those work but if you want to use copyrighted material for some \"fair use\", being part of a network seems to be necessary.",
"A friend and I recommend bands on a weekly vlog. We wind up playing ~30 seconds of a track at the end during the credits. They get tagged, but we don't get strikes. YouTube puts ads on them, or whatever. \n\nWe're not looking to make $ off the videos, so maybe that has something to do with it. ",
"He's earning so much, chances are his network (Maker Studios I believe) or Pew is paying for using them. Paying for the rights to use the music would be fairly cheap considering what he can make off them. It keeps his video's 'current' plus the choice of copyright free music is generally pretty poor. Other youtubers like FrankieonPC often reference paying for music so its not unheard of. I wouldn't be too surprised if there is some deal with certain record labels allowing him to use the music due to the size of his audience. Its exposure for the song after all.\n\nTL:DR Dude is so big he can pay for the rights or cuts a deal so he can use popular music",
"I believe it is a combo of a few things.\n\nNetworks have a list of copyrighted material that a partner of the said network can use. I don't have a list of the said material nor do I know what network Pewdiepie is under, so I can't confirm your question.\n\nAnother thing is I believe the fine prints say it's okay to use under 10 seconds of a copyrighted material. This might be outdated, because Youtube has gone through a bunch of changes recently.\n\nFrom my experience, if you own up and acknowledge copyrighted content, you're good. But TBH the whole system of strikes and stuff is really vague."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
oqu9p | if nuclear engines are the zenith of submarine technology why aren't they used more in other applications. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/oqu9p/eli5_if_nuclear_engines_are_the_zenith_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3jb474",
"c3jb8n1",
"c3jboyj",
"c3jbri6",
"c3jdr5y",
"c3jfism"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Former 8-year navy nuke here (operated the reactor and engine room equipment on a submarine).\n\nFirst, it is an awesome, powerful, and safe technology. But, it costs a lot of money to maintain, does not have favorable public opinion for commercial uses, and a power plant takes up A LOT of room, even for small power output.\n\nAnd, it's not a \"nuclear engine\" in the standard sense of engines. A nuclear power plant is a heat source, where the heat from nuclear fission is transferred to water, and that water either becomes steam directly (boiling water reactor), or that hot water boils a different system of water (pressurized water reactor). The steam then spins turbine-generators to make electricity, or (in the case of submarines) spins turbines to make electricity and spins turbines for propulsion.\n\nI don't foresee nuclear power taking over other applications where we typically see conventional \"engines\" anytime soon. It just requires too much room right now for even a small power source, and it is a great deal of power to put into things like cars and planes.\n\nOther than that...were there other specific applications you were thinking of besides consumer based engines? (planes, trains, automobiles, etc)?",
"Because they are expensive and could be dangerous in the wrong hands.",
"It **is** the same basic technology used in nuclear power plants, and I think they use them for some of the navy surface vessels, like aircraft carriers. ",
"Nuclear energy makes lots of sense for a submarine but submarines are strange things. Not everything has the same needs.\n\nA ballistic missile submarine exists so that it can hide underwater with its cargo of missiles. It needs to be able to move and it needs to be able to do so without being noticed by the various people who might be looking for it. \n\nProblem is, that if you run a submarine on coal or oil or diesel fuel or any number of other FOSSIL fuels you hate to set those fuels on fire. Doing that requires oxygen -- air -- and there's precious little of that 20,000 leagues under the sea.\n\nOlder subs that relied on fossil fuels could only run submerged for a few hours before needing to surface again and since -- as we mentioned earlier -- that the whole REASON submarines exist is to hide and stay out of sight, surfacing is a problem.\n\nThat's why nuclear makes so much sense for a submarine. It lets them run for really long periods of time -- YEARS -- without surfacing. That makes them very hard to find and makes the missile they carry very safe. \n\nBy the same token, if you find yourself needing to follow and hunt such a submarine you likewise need to be hard to find, quiet, and able to operate underwater for months at a time... which means you also need to be a submarine and you also need to be nuclear powered.\n\nBut aside from those two applications.... what else needs to be able to produce a large amount of electric power underwater for years at a time?",
"Fissionable uranium, the fuel for the nuclear reactors on submarines, is *very* expensive. A pound of normal Uranium costs $100, and only 0.72% of that is fissionable Uranium-235. Not to mention the insane difficulty of separating out that good 0.72% from the rest of it. U-235 and normal U-238 are chemically identical, so no chemical reaction can separate them. All known methods of separating them are purely physical, and based on the fact that U-235 is very slightly lighter than U-238 by a truly tiny amount - something like 5 x 10^-27 of a gram (the mass of three neutrons).\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe extreme cost is only worth it for something that absolutely can't use air to burn regular fuel. In the case of military submarines, it's worth it. In pretty much all other cases, not even close to worth it.",
"There were prototypes of nuclear planes during cold war, but advantages were not enough. [Wiki link](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/facts/"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft"
]
] |
||
3ua1p2 | nsfw. how come sometimes ejaculation comes quickly and sometimes it takes forever while masturbating? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ua1p2/eli5_nsfw_how_come_sometimes_ejaculation_comes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxd8jrk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Some times it depends on the position. When standing or sitting, more blood flows down and into the tip of the penis, allowing it to achieve a climax faster. When lying down, it can sometimes be harder to reach an orgasm.\n\nOther times, it depends on your mood. Just a slightly sad mood can out off a climax for a good deal longer than a happy or lustful mood.\n\nAside from this, if one has something to get off to, such as a person or a pornographic video, the sense of stimulation can come from that as well.\n\nThere are also varying ways that one masturbates. If you do it one way one day, and a different way another day, you may see some change.\n\nSometimes, the testes need to expel semen, usually in the form of wet dreams. But, if you masturbate regularly, it is relieved in that way, and can therefore be used as a means of lessening the chance of obtaining prostate cancer, as too much semen backed up can be harmful to you.\n\nSo yeah, there are many things that can cause this. Hope it helps."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
anecjm | what are monoclonal antibodies and how do they work? | An immunologist at a dinner party brought these up as a potentially revolutionary treatment for a variety of conditions, but I didn't really understand the basics of what monoclonal antibodies are and how they work/why they change things. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/anecjm/eli5_what_are_monoclonal_antibodies_and_how_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"efsodbj",
"efsohjk"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Basically disease causing cells that cause infection and sickness have a marker on their surface (\"antigen\") that alerts everyone around it that it's bad. \n\nAntibodies are substances that are produced to detect these antigens and then kill the bad disease cell.\n\nMonoclonal antibodies are revolutionary because they are so specific to a really specific antigen. So they can only detect and kill one specific type of antigen.\n\nWhat this means is that, instead of being super general and targeting a range of antigens, you can design the monoclonal antibody to target and deliver a toxin to the specific disease causing cell without affecting other cells.\n\nThink about current cancer treatments. Chemo, for example, is tough because it doesn't just affect cancer cells, but the good cells in your body, which is why people feel so shit after it. If monoclonal antibody technology is developed further, we could possibly create a cancer treatment that ONLY targets and kills cancer cells but leaves the rest of you alone.\n\nRevolutionary.",
"**TL/DR: They're human-modified versions of molecules our body makes to fight infections. They can be used to target extremely specific targets when fighting diseases.**\n\nWhen you're sick, certain types of white blood cells produce a special kind of molecule called an antibody. These are kind of like little homing missiles. Through a process that's wayyy beyond ELI5, they can be produced with almost endless variations on their molecular structure so that they are targeted extremely specifically--like to one protein that's only found on the exterior of the particular bacterium that's infecting you.\n\nFYI, they look [kind of like this](_URL_0_), with the part labeled \"antigen binding site\" as the part that can be modified to attach to specific targets.\n\nMonoclonal antibodies are antibodies that we (meaning people) have consciously modified to target exactly what we want them to target. For example, Humira is the biggest-selling drug in the world right now--it's a monoclonal antibody that we produced to attack only a very specific molecule that controls inflammation. Rituxan is another one we've made that attacks white blood cells that have a particular molecule on their surface that is common among cancer cells.\n\n**The good:** because they're so specific, they don't tend to have the broad, horrible side effects that chemotherapy and other drugs for these diseases have. They allow us to target only the very specific molecules or cells we want and thus are super helpful for complex diseases like cancer or autoimmune diseases.\n\n**The bad:** We can't make them in a factory; we need to make them using living cells. Thus they're *incredibly* expensive. Like, thousands of dollars per dose and $30,000+ per year expensive. Also, because they're large, complex biological molecules, they can actually cause your body to think it's being infected and trigger an immune response. \n\n "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2d/Antibody.svg/255px-Antibody.svg.png"
]
] |
|
npa2n | what is depth-of-field? how does it work? | Examples include "tilt-shift" photography (whatever that means), and the current fad of "narrow depth-of-field" video. I simply don't understand what's going on. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/npa2n/elif_what_is_depthoffield_how_does_it_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3awfh3",
"c3ayrvc",
"c3awfh3",
"c3ayrvc"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
4,
7
],
"text": [
"Tilt Shift lenses do not create any shallower depth of field than regular lenses, the term 'tilt-shift' photography is a misnomer, it is a misuse of the functions to create these effects, and is simply throwing the top and bottom of the image out of focus by rotating the plane of focus to be nearly perpendicular to the sensor plane.\n\nDepth of field (or depth of focus) in reality (and poorly imitated by the 'tilt-shift effect) is caused by the lens. Light is projected through the lens from the scene, and the scene in essence is reduced in size to fit the sensor.\n\nThe lens can only focus at one plane 'cut' through the image at a time, focusing 'moves' this reproduced scene through the focus point. Light that is *not* focused (further beyond or in front of the focused plane) is blurry because the point of light has not resolved to a fine point yet (or already has, and is diverging again by the time it hits the sensor).\n\nShallow Depth of focus is caused by increasing the 'size' of that blurriness or defocus so that it is bigger when it hits the sensor, making the focused and unfocused points more dramatically different. There is never a real deeper depth of focus, but by making the defocussed points 'smaller' instead of larger, more of the scene is rendered with points smaller than the sensor can resolve, making more appear in focus.",
"*Depth of field* is basically the area of your vision that is in focus. The human eye automatically adjusts the our DoF when we focus on something, much like a point-and-shoot digital camera. Hold up your hand about 10cm in front of your face and look at it. Notice how everything in the background is blurry and out of focus? Now hold your hand out as far as you can and look at it, -the background should be a little fuzzy but not to the same extent as it was before. Now as you read this sentence, hold your hand up in front of your face but continue looking at these words, -your hand will be out of focus.\n\nTry to visualize your sight as a straight line from your eye to a point 1 kilometre away, kind of like [this](_URL_2_). Now when you're looking at things close to your face, your depth of field will be very 'shallow', or thin. The only area that will be in focus is from about 5cm away from your nose to 10cm away from your nose, -a 5cm wide DoF. As the object you are focusing on moves further away from your face, the width or the DoF surrounding it will grow gradually wider. The DoF surrounding your hands at arms length will stretch to about 10cm in front of and behind of your hands. When you're focusing on a chair five metres away, the DoF will stretch from 50cm in front of the object to 50cm behind, and so on. The depth of field gets bigger and bigger as we look at things that are further away, so when we look out at a mountain range, pretty much everything from 30 metres to infinity is in focus.\n\nNow look at the 'tilt-shift' photos once more, and take note of what the focus, or DoF is like. Really shallow, right? *Just as we were holding it in front of our noses*! Basically, these 'miniature fakes', as they are sometimes called, work by presenting a scene that would normally be completely clear and sharp to the human eye with only a thin slice of focus. Because of how we are used to viewing the world, the brain says 'well obviously that's not a large scene, if it were it would be in focus', and draws the conclusion that it must be very miniature and diorama-sized. I guess you could say that it's a kind of illusion.\n\nThe way this shallow depth of field is achieved is by physically tilting the lens so that it's at an angle to the camera, which changes the shape of the depth of field and introduces some other concepts like the *plane of focus* and the *Scheimpflug principle*. It's pretty complex, and to be honest, I don't fully understand it. You can't do it with normal camera lenses though, you need ones that can bend themselves. Realistically though, 95% percent of the ones you see online have probably been artificially created in photoshop, as tilt-shift lenses are very expensive and the effect is hard to achieve, whereas it is relatively easy to fake. Here's some \n[before](_URL_0_) and [after](_URL_1_) shots of someone faking the effect on a computer. It's also important to note that no shift (vertical bending of the lens) is involved at all, only tilt (horizontal bend). Thus the name of the style is largely irrelevant and misinforming, I kind of resent that...",
"Tilt Shift lenses do not create any shallower depth of field than regular lenses, the term 'tilt-shift' photography is a misnomer, it is a misuse of the functions to create these effects, and is simply throwing the top and bottom of the image out of focus by rotating the plane of focus to be nearly perpendicular to the sensor plane.\n\nDepth of field (or depth of focus) in reality (and poorly imitated by the 'tilt-shift effect) is caused by the lens. Light is projected through the lens from the scene, and the scene in essence is reduced in size to fit the sensor.\n\nThe lens can only focus at one plane 'cut' through the image at a time, focusing 'moves' this reproduced scene through the focus point. Light that is *not* focused (further beyond or in front of the focused plane) is blurry because the point of light has not resolved to a fine point yet (or already has, and is diverging again by the time it hits the sensor).\n\nShallow Depth of focus is caused by increasing the 'size' of that blurriness or defocus so that it is bigger when it hits the sensor, making the focused and unfocused points more dramatically different. There is never a real deeper depth of focus, but by making the defocussed points 'smaller' instead of larger, more of the scene is rendered with points smaller than the sensor can resolve, making more appear in focus.",
"*Depth of field* is basically the area of your vision that is in focus. The human eye automatically adjusts the our DoF when we focus on something, much like a point-and-shoot digital camera. Hold up your hand about 10cm in front of your face and look at it. Notice how everything in the background is blurry and out of focus? Now hold your hand out as far as you can and look at it, -the background should be a little fuzzy but not to the same extent as it was before. Now as you read this sentence, hold your hand up in front of your face but continue looking at these words, -your hand will be out of focus.\n\nTry to visualize your sight as a straight line from your eye to a point 1 kilometre away, kind of like [this](_URL_2_). Now when you're looking at things close to your face, your depth of field will be very 'shallow', or thin. The only area that will be in focus is from about 5cm away from your nose to 10cm away from your nose, -a 5cm wide DoF. As the object you are focusing on moves further away from your face, the width or the DoF surrounding it will grow gradually wider. The DoF surrounding your hands at arms length will stretch to about 10cm in front of and behind of your hands. When you're focusing on a chair five metres away, the DoF will stretch from 50cm in front of the object to 50cm behind, and so on. The depth of field gets bigger and bigger as we look at things that are further away, so when we look out at a mountain range, pretty much everything from 30 metres to infinity is in focus.\n\nNow look at the 'tilt-shift' photos once more, and take note of what the focus, or DoF is like. Really shallow, right? *Just as we were holding it in front of our noses*! Basically, these 'miniature fakes', as they are sometimes called, work by presenting a scene that would normally be completely clear and sharp to the human eye with only a thin slice of focus. Because of how we are used to viewing the world, the brain says 'well obviously that's not a large scene, if it were it would be in focus', and draws the conclusion that it must be very miniature and diorama-sized. I guess you could say that it's a kind of illusion.\n\nThe way this shallow depth of field is achieved is by physically tilting the lens so that it's at an angle to the camera, which changes the shape of the depth of field and introduces some other concepts like the *plane of focus* and the *Scheimpflug principle*. It's pretty complex, and to be honest, I don't fully understand it. You can't do it with normal camera lenses though, you need ones that can bend themselves. Realistically though, 95% percent of the ones you see online have probably been artificially created in photoshop, as tilt-shift lenses are very expensive and the effect is hard to achieve, whereas it is relatively easy to fake. Here's some \n[before](_URL_0_) and [after](_URL_1_) shots of someone faking the effect on a computer. It's also important to note that no shift (vertical bending of the lens) is involved at all, only tilt (horizontal bend). Thus the name of the style is largely irrelevant and misinforming, I kind of resent that..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Jodhpur_rooftops.jpg/800px-Jodhpur_rooftops.jpg",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Jodhpur_tilt_shift.jpg/800px-Jodhpur_tilt_shift.jpg",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/Depth_of_field_diagram.png/440px-Depth_of_field_diagram.png"
],
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Jodhpur_rooftops.jpg/800px-Jodhpur_rooftops.jpg",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Jodhpur_tilt_shift.jpg/800px-Jodhpur_tilt_shift.jpg",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/Depth_of_field_diagram.png/440px-Depth_of_field_diagram.png"
]
] |
|
f3cfvh | why are big teams of lawyers most likely to beat one very good lawyer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f3cfvh/eli5_why_are_big_teams_of_lawyers_most_likely_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"fhhtdrs"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They can dedicate more time and effort to working the ins and outs of the case. The team of lawyers who put in 1,000 combined hours of work will be more prepared for whatever variables happen in court than the one amazing lawyer who *only* put in 100 hours of prep."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.