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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
97437v | whats the difference between the navy, the coast guard, and the marines? | I can’t stress how much I need this to be dumbed down. I have tried so hard to understand how they’re separate but I just keep going back to “But wait, why aren’t they all just called the Navy?” | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/97437v/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_the_navy_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e45cg00",
"e45cm23",
"e45n85g"
],
"score": [
4,
26,
10
],
"text": [
"The coast guard literally guards the coast. keeping drugs and such out. \n\nThe Navy is our sea force. In a war, they attack from ships and subs.\n\nThe Marines are a reaction-ready force. They can deploy quickly to respond the crisis. \n\nThis is a very very basic explanation, and lacks any sort of nuance.",
"The Navy and Marine Corps belong to the same department (the Department of the Navy [and Marine Corps]), which is a part of the Department of Defense. The Coast Guard actually belongs to the Department of Homeland Security (a department that is at the same level as the Department of Defense), though some, most or all of the Coast Guard can be assigned to the Department of the Navy depending on certain circumstances (war would be a very big reason).\n\nThe Navy operates the big warfare ships and submarines you always hear about (cruisers, destroyers, aircraft carriers, etc.). They also operate a ton of aircraft (some are based on aircraft carriers, some are based on land). There is also a command, Military Sealift Command, under the Navy that operates the support ships (oil tankers, munitions carriers, etc.). \n\nThe Marine Corps is a very heavily specialized form of infantry (with tanks, armored vehicles, helicopters, and other equipment) that is transported by the Navy on ships. The Marine Corps is often called the \"tip of the spear\" - when an actual invasion with troops on the ground is required, the Marine Corps can be the quickest deployed force to establish a presence in whatever country is being attacked. \n\nThe Coast Guard is vastly different than both of those. It also operates aircraft and boats, but the boats are typically much smaller than what the Navy uses. For the most part, the Coast Guard deals with issues pertaining to safeguarding the waters and coastlines of the United States and her territories. This includes enforcing laws in coastal waters, conducting search and rescue operations for lost boats/craft (though the Navy can also help out here depending on where the boat went missing), interdicting drug and human traffickers, etc. \n\nStarting in the late 1980s/early 1990s, the concept of \"joint operations\" became very prominent in the US military strategy. So even though we still have separate Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps and Coast Guard branches, they oftentimes do interact and work as one unit in many different situations and operating environments. This means that even though the Coast Guard \"guards the coast\", you'll still see many Coast Guardsmen and women operating on the same deployments that the other branches are. Just because someone's in the Navy doesn't mean they're stuck to a ship - many Sailors get deployed with the Army and Marines and do vital roles on the ground alongside them. Same goes for the Air Force - not everyone in the Air Force flies on a plane for a living.",
"The coast guard are water cops.\n\nThe navy are water soldiers.\n\nThe marines are land soldiers that the navy carries with them on their boats.\n\n(This is more of a historical ELI5, today's marines don't always go around on boats.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
u56fr | the impact of the european fiscal treaty on ireland | What will the impact be (both positive and negative) for Ireland for both the yes vote and the no vote? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u56fr/eli5_the_impact_of_the_european_fiscal_treaty_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4sfmyi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A yes vote means that Ireland, like the rest of Europe, is slowly moving toward a federation. Basically Euro countries don't have monetary sovereignty, which means they have no national control over their currency, as we do in America with the Federal Reserve. With the fiscal treaty they will give up fiscal sovereignty, which means for some things people who aren't Irish will make decisions on how your government will spend money. \n\nA no vote is a little hectic. It puts you on the path to leaving the Euro, and it makes the entire zone less stable. It does mean, however, that your nation retains more sovereignty. The problem is that the Euro has demonstrated an inability to deal with a crisis, and the two most likely outcomes of this are 1. A federated Europe and 2. A complete collapse of the euro, retention of national sovereignty, and an even more dramatic global economic crisis. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6ue3jk | how do peer-to-peer connection in games work? | For games like Warframe and For Honor, what is the "structure" or "path" of the connections between the game servers, the host player, and the connected players? How is this different from games with dedicated servers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ue3jk/eli5_how_do_peertopeer_connection_in_games_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlrzfgr",
"dls1hfn"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"P2P networks is actually sort of a blanket term that covers a couple types of network structures. Games like warframe dedicate one of the players as a \"server\" and all other players connect to them. if player \"A\" is the host then the only latency that matters is between A and each of the players in the lobby. Games like For Honor connect each player to every other player independently. Because it is a direct data transfer you wont get things like phantom hits or swings that hit on your screen, but miss on your opponents. The downside of this is that latency will be a variable for each player in the lobby. there are also security concerns with this method if it is done improperly. \n\nA dedicated server would work like how warframe does, but instead of a player being the one that data is transferred through it will be a server that everyone connects to. ",
"So the terms \"dedicated server\" and \"peer to peer\" can mean both the way players connect to each other, and where the \"game logic\" runs... I will use the term \"computer\" to generally mean \"PC or console\".\n\nIn **dedicated server** games, there is a server set up to run the game. This server is not a player, and often runs a different version of the game software. It doesn't need a video card, it doesn't need the game assets that are only needed for rendering (e.g, textures, detailed 3d models, etc).\n\nWith a dedicated server, all players connect to that server - this is called a \"star\" topology. The dedicated server runs the simulation. What the player's computer sends to the server is something like: \"I am moving in this direction, I am facing this direction, and I am shooting\". The server updates the simulation and informs all of the players of the new state of things.\n\nThere may be a *lobby host* player who controls the game settings, but that's where their responsibility ends.\n\nIn **Peer to Peer** games, the players connect directly to each other. One player's computer (we'll say Player A) sends packets directly to the other player's computer (lets call them Players B and C).\n\nThere are two common forms here - the game may have a dedicated host player that all the players will connect to (you get A-B and A-C). This is similar to how dedicated servers work. One player is both the server and a player.\n\nA second form of peer to peer game is when all players connect to each other, and there is no *dedicated* host player. This is called a \"mesh\". Everyone runs the logic and then try to negotiate with each other. It is usually something like \"I am here, facing in this direction, moving in this direction, I am shooting, and my shots are doing damage to this enemy\".\n\nFinally, there are the **game services**, the servers that provide non-gameplay-related services. These handle things like matchmaking, grouping up players and picking a dedicated server or (for peer to peer games) sharing IP addresses between plaeyrs so they can connect together. They handle other things such as leaderboards, player progress and unlocks, etc. These are independent of *dedicated servers* - that is they usually not the same machines or software, but they are associated with it. Players talk to these servers, and these servers may be able to communicate with the dedicated servers.\n\nNow... the exceptions to this.\n\nIn any of these situations, players might also connect directly to each other for voice chat purposes, or they might use a dedicated server to handle this.\n\nA dedicated server might be nothing more than a \"packet reflector\", to simplify or protect network connections between players. Everyone connects to the dedicated server, rather than each other, and the server routes packets to the players, but the game still works like a peer-to-peer game.\n\nIn a dedicated host situation, players may still pre-emptively connect to each other so they can quickly pick and migrate to a new host, or share information directly with each other.\n\nIn peer to peer networks (both forms) the game might be able to support \"packet relay\", in case two players can't connect to each other, but they can both connect to a third player. In that case, the third player bounces packets between them.\n\nThere are both \"server authoritative\" where the dedicated server or dedicated host runs and verifies simulation, and makes the final determination if an action was successful, what a shot hit, etc... then there is \"client authoritative\" where clients determine if they were successful and what should happen to them as the result of other clients claiming to have successfully done something. In client authoritative games, cheating is much easier. Dedicated servers are usually server authoritative, but not always - Player Unknowns Battlegrounds is a dedicated server game that is client authoritative. Peer to peer games are kind of a \"hybrid\" because even if the dedicated host is authoritative (server authoritative), he is still a client, and could still use hacks.\n\nIt's a complex enough subject, I've probably forgotten to mention an edge case...\n\n(Edit: minor typos)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
ylfyx | why can't r/eli5 take me directly to r/explainlikeimfive? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ylfyx/eli5_why_cant_reli5_take_me_directly_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5wmy16"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Because that's not the way Reddit was designed.\n\nEach subreddit can only be designed using a custom *template* (using what's called CSS; cascading style sheets). There is a lot of flexibility in how you can customise your subreddit, but there are also certain things you *can't* do. One of these things being the ability to automatically redirect the browser.\n\nIn this case, someone has created a subreddit called \"ELI5\" and customised it to only display a redirection link. Now, of course the site *admin* could edit that page to make the redirection automatic, but regular users (i.e. the creator of that subreddit) cannot.\n\ntl;dr: Admins have disabled it, probably for security reasons."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
37i8s6 | how come in this day and age there is still little or no consistently good internet connections? | I understand that peak times will have more people using so much data, therefor the distribution between everyone is lowered, but why have we not improved on this by now? Has the wifi gotten better and i'm just being oblivious? Or are Internet providers just ripping us off? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37i8s6/eli5_how_come_in_this_day_and_age_there_is_still/ | {
"a_id": [
"crmwpxq"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Most of the issues with internet connections aren't necessarily on the end of the provider. A lot of the problems occur inside the person's home due to outdated equipment, interference from other devices (microwave is a big one), interference from other wifi networks (cause very few people know how to manually switch channels on their router and just use the standard), house layouts (walls, furniture, it can all affect the signal), badly set up devices etc. \n\nI'm not saying it is never the provider. Sometimes there is definitely an issue on their end, but more often than not, people don't seem to understand that if your home set up is really bad, it doesn't matter how great the signal coming into your house is, it will still suck. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2yv8a1 | how does my body know it's time to orgasm? | Edit:holy shit this blew up. Most of these answers do seem like they're for 5 year olds, however if you look hard enough you'll find an actual explanation..
Edit 2:obligatory holy hell batman front page! Id like to thank my penis and its need for understanding itself | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yv8a1/eli5_how_does_my_body_know_its_time_to_orgasm/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpdb37h",
"cpde2cs",
"cpdetih",
"cpdfq77",
"cpdji9e",
"cpdjrl4",
"cpdl3q3",
"cpdn2he",
"cpdqng9",
"cpdsxpl",
"cpdtijr",
"cpdxrrn",
"cpeitdc"
],
"score": [
181,
1670,
50,
3158,
560,
99,
10,
6,
4,
2,
12,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a moot question, the body doesn't 'know' anything...that's like asking how does your bicycle know when to speed up when you apply more force to the pedals. Your conscious mind is the part of you directing your voluntary movements, and it is your subconscious mind governing all the involuntary bodily processes; so it's you that knows when it is time. If it wasn't me who was deciding, then one could argue that my body is just using my mind to pleasure itself - and that is backwards: your mind is directing your body; you direct your mind. This is how I have 4-5 hour long wanks.",
"In response to the large number of joke comments on this thread, please remember that all ELI5 posts are considered [Serious] by default. Jokes are not allowable as direct replies to the OP.",
"I'll take a shot at this. It all boils down to stimulus and cell signaling. Simplified version with a average health human: apply the right stimulus and the body takes in and process the data into information. The body then responds appropriately. When the critical limit is reached the body release feel good hormone/peptide-hormones to create a positive feedback; plus it also tries to prevent over exacerbation of those organ/tissues otherwise they become over damaged if you will. But you get the idea. Obviously when that crucial point is reached you ejaculate as well in a health average human. Sorry if I may have left somethings out or did not accurately answer the question. Edit: will expand upon this once I reach the library. I was supposed to this morning but stuff happens; I'm sorry for that. \n\n\nEdit: expansion. Sorry for the long wait. Busy day. And I apologize if this doesn't flow well. I'm still a bit busy. Well firstly you can treat the human body, or really any cellular organism as a reactor/bioreactor. So you can calculate protein expression levels, metabolism, reproduction (cellular), and anything dealing with rate of change. Disclaimer being that in vivo (in living or within living) experiments/calculations it is difficult to accurately get an exacting quantity. The human body reacting to sensor stimulus or mental stimulus of the right kind will trigger the tissues of your genitals to fill with blood or become saturated with warmth as with females. Now that the bits and pieces are warmed up, sex begins. During sex, the genitals begin to send impulses to the brain using your nervous system. The brain then begins to send signals to the van deferens to move sperm from storage lot to the ejaculatory ducts. While at the same time, your pituitary gland begins to leak out oxytocin. One of the major love/feel good hormones. Two others I know of also begin to leak, dopamine and serotonin. At the same time epinephrine (adrenaline) is also in the mix because sex requires a lot of eagerly and this is not time to sleep. That comes later. This also helps to explain why you feel very tired afterwards and the calorie loss. Where was I, alright these hormones cause the positive feedback, but the amount released now is relatively small. It just to get you to keep up the motions and the mental state. Both are very important to orgasm. Now that we have the ejaculatory duct filling up; the muscle near them begin to creat a pressure on the duct. Once the brain receives/saturated with stimulus it triggers the release of pressure for the ejaculatory duct outwardly. At this moment the pituitary gland dumps oxytocin. Serotonin and dopamine are also released into the brain. This causes that euphoric feeling. Adrenaline release slows. Heart rate decreases. Breathing slows. Pupils still dilated. I hope this helps. Sorry if it contains gaps or errors. It may contain errors. ",
"Imagine a balloon.\n\nImagine it has tiny gates over it's entire surface that can be open or closed, but imagine them all closed, and also that they can only be open at a certain pressure lets say just double (2x) the pressure of the atmosphere and once open the will stay open until the pressure decreases back down to 1 atmosphere.\n\nNow imagine you blow into the balloon. None of the gates are open yet but pressure is building up. 1 & 1/4 atm., 1 & 1/2 atm.\n\n1 & 3/4 atm. \n\nNow the gates are starting to rumble, with each breath you blow into the balloon, they can almost feel that it's time for them to open and release all of the air pressure inside the balloon. \n\nFinally.. you blow enough air for the pressure inside the balloon to reach 2 atm.\n\nThe front velocity of the air blown by your mouth causes the gates at the back of the balloon to open first but the others follow in a wave pattern around the outside of the balloon, so that in about a full second or two, all the gates are open but you can see the wave.\n\nThe air rushes out and the balloon deflates.\n\nThen you apologize and say we can try and inflate the balloon again in about 10-15 minutes.",
"So to understand how your body knows when to orgasm, you need to understand what an orgasm is, and why your body does it. The first question's answer is that, it is an response your body does after recieving a specific signal from the brain, only a response, your brain isn't in too much control of what happens after you send the signal to \"pass the point of no return.\" The second question's answer is, your body does this because your brain has said, \"okay, I have recieved the appropriate stimuli to have an orgasm, then it sends the signal down to the base of your back bone. It doesn't matter if you were really stimulated, if your brain just decided to send the signal without the physical contact, or even if I were to hook a signal up to the specific nerve ending in your back bone and fire said signal, your body will orgasm, and this is evident by the fact that we can even make recently dead bodies orgasm. From there your body has a \"built in\" pattern of contractions it does which we basically call the orgasm, these contractions then send a signal back up to the brain, which release a massive amount of feel good neuro transmitters, until the orgasm subsides. The differences between female and male orgasms start alittle bit before this point, but for the most part they are pretty similar. Anymore questions, just comment and I'll fill in some more blanks\n\nTl;dr- brain sends signal, body receives signal, orgasm is something your body does independent of the brain, orgasm ensues.",
"There's disagreement among scientists, but what we can say is that there's a huge psychological component to orgasm (that means that it can depend on what's going on in your head). That's why it's possible for some people, via thought alone, to make orgasms happen sooner or later... or at the extremes: some people can delay orgasm indefinitely regardless of stimulation, and on the other hand some people can have an orgasm without any physical contact whatsoever.\n\nSo, let's look at orgasms:\n\n## Orgasms\n\nWhat scientists *can* see is that happens to the body before and during orgasm, and they can make guesses based upon that. As you get close to orgasm you reach what's called the \"plateau phase\" (a plateau is a \"levelling-off\"). Your heart rate increases dramatically, your muscles become more tense, and in men the urethral sphincter contracts (that's the muscle that makes it hard for men to pee when they've got an errection: in the final stages before orgasm, men's bodies try to make this completely impossible, probably to help prevent semen, coming from the testicles, from taking a wrong turn and heading towards the bladder).\n\nWhen orgasm comes, what we see is a relaxation of all of those tense muscles, often with spasms (twitching) - especially in the muscles near your pelvis, such as those in the penis, vulva, and anus. When men ejaculate, similar convulsions push 'spurts' of semen. Each moment of tension during these spasms is accompanied by an intense feeling similar to the \"plateau\", and the moments in-between them are felt as a sort-of relaxed euphoria.\n\n## So how does the body know?\n\nSo how does the body know to switch from the plateau to the orgasm? We don't know, but some people think that it's to do with reaching a \"threshold of stimulation\" (that means: getting to the point where you can't take any more). Your nerves are saturated with these sensations and you are (both physically and psychologically) tense, and orgasm provides a way to relieve that tension. As we've already seen, switching from the plateau to the orgasm *can* be done by the mind, so - in the absence of evidence of a simple biochemical change - it seems logical to assume that the mind is *the* way that this change takes place. That's not to say that it's a conscious change (that means: you do it deliberately), although of course for some people, some of the time, it can be. Instead, it can be a subconscious change, just like it is when you pull back from something painful: your nervous system's way of saying \"I've had enough! I can't take any more of this! Relax *all the things*!\"\n\nThe idea that orgasm is the nervous system's way of escaping from too-much-stimulation and not being able to take it any more helps to explain why orgasm can happen (again, for some people and some of the time) as a result of stimulation that is *not sexual*. For example, some people can attain orgasm just by thinking about it, or by taking psychoactive drugs, or by being physically stimulated in non-sexual ways (for example, through massage or even by receiving pain).\n\n**tl;dr: Nobody knows for sure. But it looks like it's something your brain does in order to relieve all of the tension caused by getting so much stimulation at once.**\n\n**Also: for a better 'ELI5' example, full of metaphors, see [this comment](_URL_0_).**",
"A lot of people are explaining the mechanism behind the orgasm, but nobody has suggested why we switch from stimulation to orgasm at that specific time.\n\nWhy do some orgasm after 1 minute of stimulation, while others 1 hour? And why has it adapted to not happen immediately - as surely that would be the most advantageous evolutionary trait?",
"My body doesn't know how. I have a condition called a sexual anhedonia. So it's impossible for me to feel pleasure or have an orgasm ",
"Stimulus. Response. Stimulus, response. Stimulus, stimulus, stimulus, RESponse.... stimulus, stimulus, STIMulus, STIMULUS... RESPONSE!!!!!! and if you're lucky, RESPONSE!!! RESPONSE!!!!",
" > Edit:holy shit this blew up. Most of these answers do seem like they're for 5 year olds, however if you look hard enough you'll find an actual explanation.\n\n\nYeah the sub is called \"Explain *LIKE* I'm 5\", not \"Explain *BECAUSE* I'm 5\". No one wants to be caught teaching 5yr olds about orgasms now do they?",
"Sorry, but you're only five. We'll talk about this when you're older.",
"... and this is why ELI5 is no replacement for /r/askscience. Try x-posting there, you might get a serious reply.",
"What just happened here?!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yv8a1/eli5_how_does_my_body_know_its_time_to_orgasm/cpdfq77"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eaakkq | how does a government like the soviet union just collapse? what does that actually look like? | I am having a hard time understanding how governments can just "collapse" like the Soviet Union, without any foreign threats. Wouldn't an incompetent and dysfunctional government just keep up appearances and continue to operate in the background? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eaakkq/eli5_how_does_a_government_like_the_soviet_union/ | {
"a_id": [
"faoza9g",
"fap1ni3",
"fapgq2b",
"fatya4r",
"fazu9jx"
],
"score": [
76,
7,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The Soviet government was set up *somewhat* similarly to the US in that the country was organized into a bunch of semi-autonomous states under a national government.\n\nThe Soviet system differed from the US system in that the national Soviet government was much stronger than the US Federal government is. None of the \"states\" in the Soviet Union actually wanted to be a part of it - the only reason they stayed in is because the national government threatened to militarily intervene if they didn't carry out national policy. \n\nThe Soviet economy was centrally planned which meant that as it began to break down the states couldn't really do anything to fix the problems that were occurring. \n\nTake Georgia, as an example. Georgia was heavily industrialized but had no national resources. Running its factories required it to import raw materials from the Central Asian Soviet states. When the Soviet economy began to collapse those imports stopped coming in. In a market economy that generally isn't a big deal, because you can just buy raw materials from somewhere else. But that wasn't possible in the Soviet system - the national government only allowed Georgian factories to use raw materials coming from Central Asia and it relied on the local Georgian state government to enforce that.\n\nThat's not a popular policy when there are literally no imports coming in from Central Asia and everyone is out of work as a result. This added pressure to the Georgian state government, which already didn't really want to be a part of the Soviet Union, to split off so that it would no longer be subject to the national government's economic planning scheme.\n\nStarting in 1988 the situation began to get so bad that there were massive protests throughout the country and state level governments began ignoring national directives. Initially the national government used the military to suppress this, but it quickly became clear that wasn't working. \n\nThe national government then held local elections in 1990 as a way to try to pacify the states. Those elections resulted in pro-independence governments being elected in every single state and, rather than militarily intervene again, the national government elected to disband itself. The process of disbanding was somewhat straight forward because the pre-existing state governments were able to take over and function as national governments for all of the new countries that came into existence.",
"Describing it as a breakup is slightly better for understanding it than calling it a collapse, but it’s like the other comment says, it was a collection of republics that all had their own internal systems of government. Soviet means “council”, so it was a union of all those councils, or separate governments. The “collapse” was those states seceding from the union. Many of those states actually went on to sign a new agreement and joined the CIS or Commonwealth of Independent States. Resource management was an issue, so was political infighting at the top, money was short and it was spent in unbalanced ways, a good bit of it on defense spending to try to match NATO (read USA). \n\nTo answer why they didn’t just fake it and remain in the background, they couldn’t, the USSR was big in the world stage and when it collapsed it caught the world by surprise, so you could you could say that they actually probably were keeping up appearances for a while when in reality it was already kaput.",
"Just to give you an idea of what it was like to us back then. This is just a glimpse, not the full story of the fall.\n\nI live about a mile from the Randall's in this story about Boris Yeltsin, President of Russia(?) during those final Soviet years. What the story doesn't say is this: \nTHe Randall's is on the road (Texas Highway 3) directly between the Johnson Space Center and Ellington airfield, where his plane was landed.\n\nHe called an unplanned stop when he realized it was a grocery store that any US citizen, not just VIPs, could go to. He wanted to see how much US propaganda diverged from reality. \n\nAs the article does say, He was stunned.\n\nLinky: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
" It is not just an economic issue. I do not think you can discount the moral bankruptcy of the Soviet Union and other centrally planned economic systems.\n\n* These systems constantly tell their citizens how well off they are and how much better they are than the outsiders. Everyone there knows this is not true.\n* These systems never let anyone leave.\n* These systems all have trouble filling the basic human necessities such as food, toiletries, clothing, etc.\n* The citizens of these places cannot be critical of their own government.\n* Anyone who goes against the government in any way is severely punished up to death.\n\nYou think all of this goes unnoticed? I highly doubt it and this contributes greatly to the desire for change.",
"Being in a country that is right now in the process of collapsing, I can tell you sometimes a government cannot just maintain the semblance of surviving when the system rots to the core. In the face of economic collapse the state risks having angry mobs in the streets with pitchforks. People who have lost their jobs, their savings and are now running risk of losing their homes or their ability to feed their children have very little to lose and will become violent.\n\nIf this happens, even the people in power risk becoming targets of lynching and their families being attacked and their businesses looted. They also run the risk of military personnel who at the end of the day are part of the population and affected most by the economic crises turning against them in an organized military coup d'etat.\n\nWhen the people in power understand that the game is over they will look for whatever lifeline they can find: international intervention, privatization, selling sovereign assets or even the dissolution of institutions or systems that are either failing or seen as incompetent in an attempt to please the people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.chron.com/neighborhood/bayarea/news/article/When-Boris-Yeltsin-went-grocery-shopping-in-Clear-5759129.php"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
nkcm8 | why 2 liter bottles (and 500 ml water bottles) are popular in the us? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nkcm8/eli5_why_2_liter_bottles_and_500_ml_water_bottles/ | {
"a_id": [
"c39rs5h",
"c39s6qe",
"c39rs5h",
"c39s6qe"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"I can't really say when it comes to water bottles, but with 2L bottles of cola, the simplest answer is that they're cheaper.\n\nWhy they're cheaper is a bit more complicated. See, the U.S. has long provided a farm subsidy for corn. That means that the government gives money to farmers who agree to make lots of corn and keep the price low. So we end up having a lot more corn than we generally have of other kinds of food crops.\n\nOver time, that's led us to look for more ways to use all that corn. Before the 20th century, we mostly used it to make alcohol. We made so much alcohol that it ended up being cheaper than most other drinks, and the average American (man, woman and child) consumed about a liter of alcohol per day. Then came Prohibition, and you could no longer buy alcohol legally, so producers started looking for other ways to use all of that corn.\n\nOne thing they stumbled upon was HFCS, or high fructose corn syrup, which is just a super-sweet, thick liquid made from corn. With our subsidies making corn so sweet, HFCS ended up being cheaper to make than sugar, so companies started finding all sorts of ways to sweeten their food products with HFCS instead of sugar. That brought the price of cola way down, and eventually cola companies figured out that they could sell more soda if they sold it in bigger and bigger containers.\n\nSee, if you sell cola in an 8 oz bottle, people will tend to drink just that 8 oz bottle. If you put it in a 12 oz bottle, and put that 12 oz bottle beside an 8 oz bottle, people will still buy the 8 oz bottle because they don't want to look greedy. But if you knock 10 cents off the price of the 12 oz bottle, so that they're paying slightly less per oz, then they'll buy the 12 oz bottle.\n\nThat logic scales pretty well, but after a while it starts to taper off. Coke *does* sell a 3 liter bottle, for example, but it doesn't sell as well as the 2 liter bottle. For whatever psychological/economic reasons, 2 liters is simply the upper limit of what most people are willing to buy at a given time.\n\nMichael Pollan talks a bit about that in his book *The Omnivore's Dilemma*. His bibliography is also very useful, and that's where you can find *The Alcoholic Republic*, which talks about early American alcohol consumption.",
"While the US operates on the imperial measurement system, most of the rest of the world uses metric. Certain sized packages are standard so they can be used & produced (and the machines that produce them) for everyone.\n\nWine and liquor bottles are another case where there's a standard. A normal bottle of liquor is called a \"fifth\" - as in a fifth of a gallon - which holds 750ml (rather than 757ml which would be an actual fifth). Larger and smaller containers are usually multiples of this size.",
"I can't really say when it comes to water bottles, but with 2L bottles of cola, the simplest answer is that they're cheaper.\n\nWhy they're cheaper is a bit more complicated. See, the U.S. has long provided a farm subsidy for corn. That means that the government gives money to farmers who agree to make lots of corn and keep the price low. So we end up having a lot more corn than we generally have of other kinds of food crops.\n\nOver time, that's led us to look for more ways to use all that corn. Before the 20th century, we mostly used it to make alcohol. We made so much alcohol that it ended up being cheaper than most other drinks, and the average American (man, woman and child) consumed about a liter of alcohol per day. Then came Prohibition, and you could no longer buy alcohol legally, so producers started looking for other ways to use all of that corn.\n\nOne thing they stumbled upon was HFCS, or high fructose corn syrup, which is just a super-sweet, thick liquid made from corn. With our subsidies making corn so sweet, HFCS ended up being cheaper to make than sugar, so companies started finding all sorts of ways to sweeten their food products with HFCS instead of sugar. That brought the price of cola way down, and eventually cola companies figured out that they could sell more soda if they sold it in bigger and bigger containers.\n\nSee, if you sell cola in an 8 oz bottle, people will tend to drink just that 8 oz bottle. If you put it in a 12 oz bottle, and put that 12 oz bottle beside an 8 oz bottle, people will still buy the 8 oz bottle because they don't want to look greedy. But if you knock 10 cents off the price of the 12 oz bottle, so that they're paying slightly less per oz, then they'll buy the 12 oz bottle.\n\nThat logic scales pretty well, but after a while it starts to taper off. Coke *does* sell a 3 liter bottle, for example, but it doesn't sell as well as the 2 liter bottle. For whatever psychological/economic reasons, 2 liters is simply the upper limit of what most people are willing to buy at a given time.\n\nMichael Pollan talks a bit about that in his book *The Omnivore's Dilemma*. His bibliography is also very useful, and that's where you can find *The Alcoholic Republic*, which talks about early American alcohol consumption.",
"While the US operates on the imperial measurement system, most of the rest of the world uses metric. Certain sized packages are standard so they can be used & produced (and the machines that produce them) for everyone.\n\nWine and liquor bottles are another case where there's a standard. A normal bottle of liquor is called a \"fifth\" - as in a fifth of a gallon - which holds 750ml (rather than 757ml which would be an actual fifth). Larger and smaller containers are usually multiples of this size."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7k5eyj | how do snow removal trucks not scrape up the streets they plow? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7k5eyj/elif_how_do_snow_removal_trucks_not_scrape_up_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"drbpoh1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Most plows have small slidey things or wheels behind the scrapy parts that keep it from getting too close to the ground. This doesn't always work."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8vju0z | how do newspaper/magazine tabloids make money at store checkout when one could easily read the gossip online for free? | I’m surprised at the abundance of tabloids at the grocery store check out lines, when you have things like the dailymail website. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8vju0z/eli5_how_do_newspapermagazine_tabloids_make_money/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1nwbp6"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There is a large portion of the population even today who are technologically inept. Usually this is a result of their own inaction and unwillingness to learn. These are the people who do not know how to do anything but check their email by \"Clicking the blue \"E\"\" and following the instructions written down by their child or grandchild. Products which appeal to this large subset of the population can still be popular."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1umh3v | why do i see pairs or runners hung up on power lines? | I've seen them in Australia, New Zealand and America so far..WHAT AM I NOT UNDERSTANDING HERE!? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1umh3v/eli5_why_do_i_see_pairs_or_runners_hung_up_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cejjt4l",
"cejk9d6",
"cejlzg1",
"cejmniw",
"cejpeyy"
],
"score": [
7,
9,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"People throwing their friends shoes up there as a practical joke.",
"No one really knows. Snopes has an [article](_URL_0_) on it that offers the theories and legends, but just concludes that no one really knows.\n\nThe idea of the shoes indicating gang activity or drug dealers in the area makes little sense. Why would they want to advertise their presence to the police? Although I have seen references to the police stating that they tend to see shoes dangling from power lines most often after school has let out for the summer. Assumption: it's just kids screwing around.",
"I once heard that it was where a gang member was murdered. They throw a pair of kicks as a memorial. \n\nSo I've heard. ",
"When I was younger I got a girl I was dating at the time to throw her chucks over the power lines with me by her house, my theory was that they would remind her of the awesome day we spent together. I don't know, seemed like a good idea at the time haha. I don't know what she's up to now but it makes me smile every time I drive past cause they're still hanging there.",
"Drug dealers do it so people know where to meet them"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.snopes.com/crime/gangs/sneakers.asp"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
k5u1o | why some people have different rates of metabolism | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/k5u1o/eli5_why_some_people_have_different_rates_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2hqj1d",
"c2hqj1d"
],
"score": [
15,
15
],
"text": [
"Well, one thing is how much brain stuff you have compared to how much muscle you have vs. how much fat you have. The brain burns more calories (per ounce) than does muscle, which in turn burns more calories (again, per ounce) than does fat. However, people rarely have so much brain and so little other stuff to make the brain matter, so you can ignore the brain for the most part.\n\nSo if you weigh the same as someone else but you have more of it in muscle, you'll generally have a faster metabolism. Generally.\n\nAnother thing is how good your guts work. Some people's intestines don't absorb nutrients from food as well and so it appears that they have a \"faster\" metabolism because the calories that don't get absorbed appear to have magically \"burned away\".",
"Well, one thing is how much brain stuff you have compared to how much muscle you have vs. how much fat you have. The brain burns more calories (per ounce) than does muscle, which in turn burns more calories (again, per ounce) than does fat. However, people rarely have so much brain and so little other stuff to make the brain matter, so you can ignore the brain for the most part.\n\nSo if you weigh the same as someone else but you have more of it in muscle, you'll generally have a faster metabolism. Generally.\n\nAnother thing is how good your guts work. Some people's intestines don't absorb nutrients from food as well and so it appears that they have a \"faster\" metabolism because the calories that don't get absorbed appear to have magically \"burned away\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5ksp1o | how elevators work in skyscrapers? | After watching How I met your mother episode where they're standing in line to ride one elevator of Empire State building I became curious about how many elevators are there... Wiki says there are 73 of them and after little Google'ing I didn't find any photos/explanations about how come there are so many elevators. Can anyone please explain why there are so many and where they're located? Like all in one long line or they ride like from floor 34 to 52 and next one 52 to 67? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ksp1o/eli5_how_elevators_work_in_skyscrapers/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbqbnbs",
"dbqbqb1",
"dbqfspx"
],
"score": [
11,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"In very tall buildings, very few if any elevators go all the way from the bottom to the top. Some have them, and they are usually 'express' elevators that only take you from the ground floor to the very top. Since most people are not going all the way to the top in a skyscraper, they have \"elevator banks\" that can take you up a certain number of floors, then you have to take another elevator if you need to go further.\n\nThis saves space (imagine if all 73 elevators went from the ground to the top, the whole building would be nothing but elevators and elevator shafts) and saves time, grouping different floors to different elevator banks so people going to levels near one another will use the same banks, instead of everybody using different elevators that would have to stop at many different floors.",
"There are a few different types of elevators. \n\nFirst, you have the express elevators serving only the ground floors and \"sky lobbies\", which separate the building into vertical sections.\nThe\nEach section has its own set of \"local\" elevators, which only serve from the skylobby (or the ground floors for the lower set) up to just below the next. \n\nNow of course, each section may only be served by a few of the local elevators in the set.\n\n\nSo in one shaft, you may have three or more elevators simultaneously, but each running only in its set of floors.",
"The elevator design depends on the building. In the case of the Empire State Building the elevators are designed in banks, where most of them start from the ground floor but will skip over the successive blocks of floors. You have to get on an elevator in the correct bank to get to the floor you want to get to. This is pretty common in smaller skyscrapers, but in very tall ones like the Empire State Building this design philosophy is outmoded and not used anymore in favour of \"sky lobbies\", where you take an express elevator to a particular floor where you then get on another elevator to get to the actual floor you want.\n\nIn the Empire State Building the banks are broken up into service to the 3rd through 7th floors, 7th-18th, 18th-25th, 25th-41st, 41st-55th, 55th- 67th, and 67th-80th. So for example if you wanted to go to the 34th floor you'd have to get on one of the elevators in the bank that serves the 25th through 41st floors. There are also many service elevators in addition to the passenger elevators.\n\nAbove the 80th floor are the observation decks and mechanical & electrical rooms related to the many broadcasters who have their broadcast antennae at the top of the building; something like a dozen TV stations and two dozen radio stations broadcast from the Empire State Building. As such there are few elevators up there."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dp3lbj | scientists say cell phones are many times dirtier than toilet seats, so why isn't everyone with a cell phone sick all the time? is this a blessing for us to freely lick toilet seats? or have sickness rates actually increased since cell phones became popular? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dp3lbj/eli5_scientists_say_cell_phones_are_many_times/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5scatr",
"f5segly",
"f5sn5b1",
"f5srjsn",
"f5t1sgj"
],
"score": [
25,
5,
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It really depends on what you call \"dirty\". cell phones have more bacteria per cm^2 than toilet seats because they are cleaned less. But those bacteria aren't necessarily harmful. They just live in the environment of your pocket or the ground or the counter or wherever you put your phone. Also, you hold your phone you don't lick it. Few bacteria can enter your body through unbroken skin. Many can enter through mucous membranes (your mouth) \n\nToilet seats get colonized by bacteria from other people who sit on them, not by the environment. If someone with a rash sits on the toilet seat and that rash was caused by fungus or bacteria, now that's on the toilet seat and if you licked it you would be sick. Or spray from feces, fecal bacteria could make you sick. Although total numberd of bacteria are less in the toilet seat, they are more likely to cause harm",
"It's mostly because toilet seats aren't really all that dirty.\n\nSure, poop and pee, but hands are the biggest accumulator of germs, not the butt that has 1 or 2 layers of clothing covering it almost all the time.\n\nYour phone has so many germs because those germs ***came*** from your hands. And hands aren't any germier now than, say, a decade ago. Phones have always been disgusting because people's hands are disgusting.",
"One thing to consider is that when you have a diverse ecosystem of fungi and bacteria they are all competing for the same resources (like dead skin cells and skin oils in this case).\n\nThis means that the few that could be dangerous are kept in check by the many others that aren't so even if an object like a phone (or remote) is really chock full of bacteria is not really a big deal for an average healthy person.",
"Do you usually go around licking your cell phone?",
"The type of bacteria matters a great deal. The bacteria in your poop can make you seriously ill, but we have many other bacteria living on our skin and all around us that have no harmful effects on us whatsoever. So the number of bacteria is a really bad metric of how \"dirty\" something is, and no scientist would actually talk like that. Yogurt is full of bacteria but you wouldn't call it dirty."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1diomi | why are public companies more worried about pleasing their stockholders than their customers? | I don't understand stocks beyond the bare basics, but I was wondering why companies worry so much about their stock prices and their valuation. Aren't they being payed based on revenue? Stocks are traded between holders, so why would a company worry about its price once its done liquidating its shares? If I'm missing something critical (I probably am) let me know. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1diomi/why_are_public_companies_more_worried_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9qog8e"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because the shareholders are the owners of the company. If they aren't kept happy, they can replace the members of the board (though this is in practice hard to pull off when there are literally hundreds of thousands of voting shareholders). If the behavior of the board is particularly harmful, they can even sue in certain circumstances.\n\nThe customers are a means to an end for a public company. That end is increasing shareholder value."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
29wobi | how does having a record label help bands, and how would an indie label differ from a major label? | I've searched this many times but have yet to get a clear answer. anyone have a simple explanation that could be a little more clear? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/29wobi/eli5_how_does_having_a_record_label_help_bands/ | {
"a_id": [
"cip7an6"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Record labels fund production and marketing, indie labels tend to have smaller budgets and cannot fund a large national or international campaign to promote artists, at least not on the same scale or platforms. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
jaaet | computer software licenses (ex: bsd, mit, gnu) | I've always heard the terms being loosely thrown around, but i don't quiet understand it. Can someone explain? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jaaet/eli5_computer_software_licenses_ex_bsd_mit_gnu/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2afz1z",
"c2afz1z"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A quick note first: You mean the GPL instead of GNU. GPL is the license, GNU is the software/project.\n\nWhen someone writes a computer program, the program belongs to that person. We call this \"copyright\". This means that other people cannot use the program or look at the source code used to write the program, unless they have that person's permission. Many people only give permission to others to use their software if those other people pay money to the person who wrote it. For example, if you want to use Microsoft Word, you pay Microsoft, and they give you a license to use it. This license determines how you are allowed to use the software: e.g., can you make copies of it, can you install it on multiple computers, etc. This is why when you install a program you typically have to agree to a EULA (End User License Agreement).\n\nSome people like to give their software away for free, and licenses like BSD, MIT, and GPL are used for this. Software distributed under these licenses are free for anyone to download and look at their source code. You could of course write your own license, but if you're not a lawyer you're probably going to mess it up. \n\nThere is, however, a major difference between the GPL and BSD/MIT (BSD and MIT licenses are basically the same). The MIT/BSD licenses say: you can do ANYTHING you want with this code/program. You can download it and use it. You can make modifications to it. You can even include it your closed source project (a project that does not release the source code for its programs) and sell it for money. The GPL does not let you do everything. You can still download the program and modify it. But you can't use the code in your closed source project. The GPL says that if you want to use source code in another program, then that program also has to be released under the GPL. That means if you use GPL code, you have to make your program and source code available for other people to download for free. \n\n",
"A quick note first: You mean the GPL instead of GNU. GPL is the license, GNU is the software/project.\n\nWhen someone writes a computer program, the program belongs to that person. We call this \"copyright\". This means that other people cannot use the program or look at the source code used to write the program, unless they have that person's permission. Many people only give permission to others to use their software if those other people pay money to the person who wrote it. For example, if you want to use Microsoft Word, you pay Microsoft, and they give you a license to use it. This license determines how you are allowed to use the software: e.g., can you make copies of it, can you install it on multiple computers, etc. This is why when you install a program you typically have to agree to a EULA (End User License Agreement).\n\nSome people like to give their software away for free, and licenses like BSD, MIT, and GPL are used for this. Software distributed under these licenses are free for anyone to download and look at their source code. You could of course write your own license, but if you're not a lawyer you're probably going to mess it up. \n\nThere is, however, a major difference between the GPL and BSD/MIT (BSD and MIT licenses are basically the same). The MIT/BSD licenses say: you can do ANYTHING you want with this code/program. You can download it and use it. You can make modifications to it. You can even include it your closed source project (a project that does not release the source code for its programs) and sell it for money. The GPL does not let you do everything. You can still download the program and modify it. But you can't use the code in your closed source project. The GPL says that if you want to use source code in another program, then that program also has to be released under the GPL. That means if you use GPL code, you have to make your program and source code available for other people to download for free. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9uzgna | what is the use of having two different houses of the govt? like senate and house of representatives or house of lords and house of commons? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9uzgna/eli5_what_is_the_use_of_having_two_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"e983sr0",
"e984bo9",
"e984d8e",
"e984si0",
"e987g7c",
"e987zhh"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
13,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In general more representation is better for the people. However bicameral congresses are often designed to offset each other by how they are filled. \n\nOne chamber may serve to the broader demographic while the other chamber more to elite or other factors. ",
"It reason is usually historic. They had their reason why these houses were created and it would to hard legally to change them today and they work good enough that the system stay the same.\n\nFor the Senate and House of representative. When the organisation of the government was created, the 13 colonies had to come to an agreement on it. The house of representative was to represent the population directly, so each of the representative was to be elected by about the same amount of people. But that give more power to bigger state, which mean that the bigger state could impose law on smaller states. The smaller state didn't agree on that, so they created the Senate where each state have the same amount of legislator. That way, the majority or people and the majority of state need to agree to pass a law.\n\nFor the house of commons and lord. In the UK at first only the King and the big noble to some extend had power to choose the law. As the UK become bigger (more population), there was more and more local nobles and legislation become more complex. The nobles wanted more official power on the national level and there was civil wars about that (see the barons wars). This lead to the creation of the Parliament where the nobles assembled to vote on laws. But the nobles were not the only one that wanted some power to vote on law. See in Medieval period, Town were not always under the control of a noble. Often time, there were made of free citizen that were artisan and merchants, while the country side were made of serf who work on the land of a noble. These town had a lot of economical power and they also demanded to have a say in the law of the country and so representative of those town were invited by the Parliament and that eventually become the house of commons.\n\nThose two houses changed over time, but their basic function stayed the same. The House of Lords are made of Lords, either through hereditary title or title for life, or even religious function. The house of commons evolved to be representative of the population through election.\n\nThose system have deep root in the history of their countries. They would probably be different if there were created today, but it hard to change those organisation, because they are so important to our democracy. If it was easy to change them, it would be easy to become non democratic. A lot of people also think that they work good enough to not go through all the problems to change them.",
"The Senate and House are designed to balance States rights (equal representation of each state in the Senate) with equality of population (House Representatives are portioned by each state’s population). \n\nThis ensures that bills which pass into law are both 1) good for a majority of people and 2) good for a majority of states. This keeps populous states from simply squashing the voice of sparsely populated states, and also gives the populous states some weight they deserve.\n\nAs for House of Lords/Commons, I’m less familiar but I believe it was a similar concept, except the Lords were aristocracy and the Commons were commoners.",
"It made sense when you had a strong class system to make sure the classes had balanced power. This might also have been some of the idea behind the division of the US congress. In addition they did not have to change too much of the old legal framework that had been tested throughout centuries. But there is also a functional purpose for the division. A lot of constitutions are designed so that it is hard to change laws, especially the constitution itself. The concept being that you should only change stuff if you really wanted to. And the more people that have to agree the harder it is to change a law. For example if you wanted to ban socialism and start a dictatorship like Germany in the 30s you need not only the majority of the senate but also make sure you have majority of both houses. In addition you need approval from the president so he does not veto it and you need approval from the supreme court who can declare your law unconstitutional. So even if you are the most popular party in the country by far you still have to hop through hoops to make radical changes to the laws. It takes years and years of negotiations, campaigning, elections, appointments, etc. to make sure you can pass radical laws. And this can be a good thing as you do not want to make radical changes on a whim. One odd election result should not be able to alter the course of your country forever. It is also possible to argue if changing the laws is too hard.",
"It is, at least in part, meant to provide some sort of internal check on the Legislature itself so that if one house, usually the lower house (i.e. the House of Representatives or House of Commons), swings wildly in one direction the other can reign it in. How big of a check this is varies depending on the country. In the US, the Senate is a big check on the House (it takes a lot longer to change the make up of the Senate than the House, which is partly why we saw both parties gain seats in the same election last night) because they actively debate and vote on everything just like the House does. In other countries, the upper house's power is more limited and only really used rarely.",
"I can't speak for the U.K. but there are two main reasons for the structure in the U.S.\n\n1. The U.S. is a Federal system of government, where the individual States are not simply administrative districts like in many countries, but are semi-sovereign unto themselves. As such the States are in some sense co-equal with one another, regardless of their population. The Senate is used to represent this fact, it is the chamber of the States rather than the People at large.\n\n2. The Senate is the chamber of slow deliberation, the House the chamber of fast popular will. The Senate is designed to be more stable (only 1/3 of Senators up for election every 2 years, each Senator holding a 6 year term), and less responsive to shifting political winds. \n\nIMO Point 2 is in general the main reason for an \"upper house\" like the Senate, even outside the U.S. Congress. For instance most States themselves have their own House of Representatives/Senate structure internally, even though each State is a \"unitary\" power within it's borders: there are no semi-independent components to each State. Those Senates are structured like the U.S. Senate, and their purpose is to maintain the slow, stable, deliberative counter-balance to popular will even at the State level."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3p272c | with pets like dogs and cats, why can't their lifespan get longer with modern medicine and diet like us? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p272c/eli5_with_pets_like_dogs_and_cats_why_cant_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw2i56z",
"cw2i93w",
"cw2j8y2"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They have. When you consider 9 years - > 14 that's a massive increase in life expectancy. Do you expect humans to be able to double their life expectancy? Of course not, however a 20-30% increase over a few hundred years to maximize our potential? Reasonable - and this is what we've seen with pets.",
"They absolutely have. A housecat can live to be 20. That's nearly double what it was not too long ago. ",
"As everyone else has said, they do.\nThe reasons why humans have gone from 60 to 90 year expectancy (or whatever the numbers actually are)and pets are still around 20 tops are behavioral and financial.\n\nFor behavior, see cats. Cats are still predators, and territorial ones. They stalk prey even when food is readily available, and kill and eat it, getting infections like worms etc from their wild snack. And they fight with each other, clawing and biting each other, allowing contamination of the blood. Both of these behaviors are rarely seen in humans, and where they are, we have a procedure to keep well- gut, clean and cook prey, wash and bandage wounds etc. This means we don't get exposed to the same amount of crap.\n\nFinancially....well when was the last time you saw an advert about finding a cure for feline aids? Or dog lymphomas? No adverts, no awareness of the charity, no money raised for doggie chemo or kitty vaccinations. So animals die because of lack of research into the subject.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
w0wwq | eil5: why is the idea of 'symmetry' so crucial to modern physics? | Of all the aspects of particle phyiscs, this seems very important - why this facet in particular? What is it's relevance? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/w0wwq/eil5_why_is_the_idea_of_symmetry_so_crucial_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c59di2i"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Basically, the idea is that the laws don't change.\n\nWe have time symmetry: the laws that apply today will still apply tomorrow - we have no reason to expect the mass of a carbon atom to suddenly decrease tomorrow.\n\nWe have translational symmetry: the laws apply _over there_ apply _over here_ - the mass of a carbon atom doesn't change whether it's here or there.\n\nAnd we have rotational symmetry: no matter which direction you look, the laws don't change - the mass of a collection of carbon atoms doesn't change just because you rotate it.\n\nBasically all of physics (well, most of it anyways) _depends_ on these invariances."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3kemn3 | if a tumor pressing down on the pituitary gland stimulates growth, is it scientifically possible to replicate this on people of short stature? | I was reading about how a lot of people who grow gigantic are due to the pituitary gland being pressed by a tumor which can release a large amount of growth hormones. Is it then possible to replicate this artificially, yet stop after a while to not create gigantism?
If not, any hypotheticals on how it could be possible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kemn3/eli5if_a_tumor_pressing_down_on_the_pituitary/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuws3y6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Its possible to produce growth hormone artificially, which is given via injection to people who lack it, there is no need for tumours. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
51q4lr | what happens to your thermal energy if you freeze in space ? | In space, when you cool down, your thermal energy seems to be lost, as there is nothing (almost) to "get" it. Where does it go ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/51q4lr/eli5_what_happens_to_your_thermal_energy_if_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7dxia6",
"d7dz6ie"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your thermal energy isn't lost, it's just spread over the surrounding space around you, and keeps spreading on and on. Think of it like throwing a cup of hot water into a huge pool: the energy stays in the pool, it just doesn't make much of a difference as there is so much to absorb the energy of the hot water.",
"'kay, so, thank you all.\n\nIf I understand correctly, the only way for something to cool down in space is through radiation, which is relatively slow. So, assuming you're protected against everything but thermal lost, you wouldn't die from cold before a long time. Would you even feel cold ?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4v3no0 | bandwidth of satellite television/ television signals | I always wondered how sending video signals over such vast network was so easy, like television signals would span hundred of kilometers. But when streaming something through internet, even playing YouTube becomes so hard with low bandwidths. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4v3no0/eli5_bandwidth_of_satellite_television_television/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5v9gk0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"There's a fundamental difference. Satellite TV just broadcasts a signal, and your dish points to it. That signal can carry thousands of stations, just like old tv antennas with the radio towers (same principle actually).\n\nSatellite internet requires a two way connection, so you have to ask for a video, have the request go to the satellite, down to its uplink site, get the data, and then back through. It's a much longer process, and there's more chance for info to be lost, so it causes slower/choppier connections."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a291b0 | why do some older folks joints start acting up when a storm comes in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a291b0/eli5_why_do_some_older_folks_joints_start_acting/ | {
"a_id": [
"eaw6kse",
"eaw6sep"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Air pressure drops which makes the air push less on your body and in turn their muscle tissue can get bigger which pushes on the joints.",
"Change in atmospheric pressure changes the amount of fluids in the joint to keep the gauge pressure the same. Older people and others with less cartilage in their joints feel this more because they can more easily feel the expansion or contraction of their joints depending on the weather. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5f7o8r | why do we do/watch things that make us angry but seem to enjoy it? | Take for example a guy who watches politics on the news and gets mad about the topics they talk about, but seems to enjoy it and continues watching every night. Another example would be playing games. Certain games on xbox I play I end up getting incredibly angry almost every single time I play, yet I continue to do it, why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5f7o8r/eli5_why_do_we_dowatch_things_that_make_us_angry/ | {
"a_id": [
"dai331p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"* some people are looking for a safe outlet for their anger...yelling at the TV is easier than dealing with your boss or your spouse or yourself\n* getting angry at others' perceived stupidity can make you feel better about yourself\n* in competitions and performances, the high you get from winning might outweigh, or seem to outweigh the anger from losing"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
64mful | why does japan have an anti-inflation policy? | How does this affect their economy? They seem to be just as wealthy as the US which has a huge infatuation with inflation. But inflation in the US seems to be playing a part in diminishing the middle class. Could an anti-inflation policy benefit the US? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64mful/eli5_why_does_japan_have_an_antiinflation_policy/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg3bhz6",
"dg3br0d",
"dg3cdsd"
],
"score": [
2,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"not anti inflation.\n\nnegative interest rates. it's designed to encourage people to spend money instead of holding on to it. people spending money creates a huge ripple effect that affects everyone and stimulates the economy. ",
"Japan is not *trying* to have deflation. In fact, they've been fighting deflation for almost two decades. They have a pro-inflation policy; it just hasn't been working too well for a number of reasons.\n\nAdditionally, the US doesn't have an \"infatuation\" with inflation. The US, similar to most developed countries, tries to hold its inflation rate to about 2-3% per year. This is because economies are hard to really control, and inflation will bounce around +/- 3% no matter what policies you try. So if you aim for 3%, you'll get somewhere between 0% and 6%. That's important because you *never* want deflation. Deflation means that people's money will be worth more later if they stop spending, so people stop spending. But if people stop spending then you get even worse deflation, so even more people stop spending, and so on in a [deflationary spiral](_URL_0_). Deflationary spirals can destroy a nation's economy, so central banks try as hard as they can to never get deflation. If the cost of avoiding deflation is getting a bit of inflation, they're OK with that.",
"I think it's the other way around. The Japanese want inflation but can't get it.\n\nInflation is a product of growth, more people means more demand means more money printing. The more money is printed the higher inflation is. ( I should not that printing money doesn't automatically make inflation) \n\nJapan's population is not growing though. Most people are getting old and not spending as much money and there aren't enough young people to make up for it. So the Japanese economy is starting to shrink. As a response the gov't lowered interest rates. \n\nLowering interest rates makes it cheaper to borrow money. If more people borrow money for things like cars, homes etc, the economy will grow. So lowering interest rates encourages growth. The US lowered interest rates during the recession to recover the economy. Now theyre starting to raise it again to avoid to much inflation because the Econ is doing well.\n\nIn Japan's case bough, they kept lowering the int rates and the economy wasn't getting better, so now they are at the point where they have negative interest rates.\n\nThe ideal number is about 1-2% inflation per year. That is considered 'good' inflation. Higher than that though and inflation is considered bad because people's money loses value too quickly.\n\nAlternatively, there is no 'good' deflation. Deflation is bad. It means your Econ is shrinking. So the Japanese are trying to avoid deflation at the moment. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflation#Deflationary_spiral"
],
[]
] |
|
2cq8p4 | why is mixing red bull with vodka is more harmful than other cocktails of vodka? | Or any other energy drink
Sorry for my English | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cq8p4/eli5_why_is_mixing_red_bull_with_vodka_is_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjhxmuf",
"cjhxouc"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"[Energy drinks](_URL_0_) have a lot of bad side effects to them because of their super high caffeine count.\n\n[Alcohol](_URL_1_) also has a lot of bad side effects to them.\n\nSeparately both have some pretty mediocre side effects and some manageable long term effects. Combine them and you get a pretty deadly cocktail.",
"Energy drinks are stimulants. They prevent you from feeling the effects of alcohol for a while. So you drink (sometimes much) more alcohol than you normally would and can get to dangerous levels. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.caffeineinformer.com/energy-drink-side-effects",
"http://www.drugfreeworld.org/drugfacts/alcohol/short-term-long-term-effects.html"
],
[]
] |
|
5dtl62 | how psychiatric evaluations work for people who intend to hide things? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dtl62/eli5_how_psychiatric_evaluations_work_for_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"da7evf6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Truthful answer? They don't. \n\nIf the person being diagnosed /evaluated has a bit of knowledge and or training they can't fool even the most experienced psychiatrist. \n\nDiagnostics in psychiatry work mostly on two pillars: Exploration (basically talking to the patient) and standardised tests. Former is the gold standard, latter mostly used for screening and objectification of progress in a diagnosed patient (for example for clinical trials) [other stuff like physical examination and lab work play a role as well, although minor compared to other medical fields)\n\nYou can hoodwink both of these. The psychiatrist doesn't know what you don't tell him. This is the reason why sometimes patients in treatment manage to commit suicide: They tell their shrink they're fine, and he has to believe him (believing your patient is Very important for a working relationship between the therapist and the patient). \n\nThere is a classical experiment who showed the inability of psychiatry to detect lying patients(Rosenhan experiment. Well it was part of it and the rest doesn't hold much value in modern psychiatry anymore) \n\nTests can be fooled if you know how they work. Especially since these test usually depend on the patient working for you, not against you. They may have measurements to detect people who just fill Out randomly, for example asking the same question in different words multiple times. But if you determined to fool the test you will get the result you want. Think about personality tests in youth magazines. We all cheated on them sometimes, so our result would be pleasent. \n\n\nAs for 'personality checks' that are used in job hiring: They are mostly bullshit. They are poorly reviewed (if at all), often not standardised and can find out everything and nothing. I would not rely on those tests one bit.\n\nBy the way the possibility of patients lying, or psychiatry being not really objective is the reason I don't like the way psychiatry interacts with the criminal justice system. In my opinion the assessments are too shaky. But that's a different story. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
35t1ed | with the negative views around dlc and preordering, how do kickstarter games make so much money in such a short amount of time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35t1ed/eli5_with_the_negative_views_around_dlc_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr7jbs6",
"cr7jgy5",
"cr7k1ud"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"There are two things that I've noticed. The first is that Kickstarter games usually come with the promise that if the game is crowdfunded, it won't have a publisher's mitts all over it. Publishers (especially the big ones) are notorious for requiring that the games they put out appeal to the widest group of players as possible. This is okay, obviously, because the publisher is putting up the money to actually produce and market the game. However, not everyone wants a game that's meant to appeal to as many gamers as possible. Some want games with complicated systems that they can dig into (such as the mechanics in Wasteland 2 or Divinity: Original Sin), and these gamers are okay with the fact that this will alienate a large portion of the potential player base. As long as enough of these gamers come together and throw enough money at the project, it'll (hopefully) get made and they'll have their deep game that's made just for them.\n\nKickstarter projects also do a really good job at hitting that nostalgia button for people who grew up gaming in the 80s and 90s - the people who now have money of their own and can do with it what they please. A lot of the high profile Kickstarter projects are really homages to the games we had two decades ago - games like Pillars of Eternity, the Double Fine Adventure (which was the first major video game Kickstarter success), the new Torment game, and the aforementioned Wasteland 2 and Divinity: Original Sin.\n\nPeople dislike DLC when it seems to be a cash grab that doesn't add content of any value to the game, but when DLC is done well, such as Dragonborn for Skyrim or Burial at Sea for BioShock Infinite, very few people have a problem with it. Pre-ordering is nothing like backing a Kickstarter game, because you're essentially putting money down for a mass produced game that probably won't experience shortages anywhere and just trusting the publisher and developer with that money. With Kickstarter you're still trusting the developer with your money, but without that money, the game doesn't get made. While the two situations are similar in some ways, there are still some big differences between the two.",
"The negative views on DLC and Preordering are a backlash against the Game *Publishers* (the ones who bankroll the money to make the game, and then manage the distribution chain), who are viewed as trying to squeeze every last dime out of the games that they sell. \n & nbsp; \nMany video game projects pitched on Kickstarter are from well known Game *Developers* (the people who actually make the game), who have an idea for a game that they would like to make, but can't convince a publisher to put up the money for. By going directly to their fanbase, they also allow themselves the artistic freedom of not being bound to make a game that the publisher thinks will sell the best.\n\n",
"Apart from what others have said, it's also important to note that most of the kickstarter games are NOT successful. Obviously you only hear of the wildly successful ones because they make the news, but for each one of them, there are 20 that didn't make it, and 20 more than barely made it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
960smb | if the forth dimension is time, what is a tesseract? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/960smb/eli5_if_the_forth_dimension_is_time_what_is_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3wvuhs",
"e3wvuxx",
"e3wvzno"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"A cube that exists in four spatial dimensions. OUR fourth dimension is time. A tesseract can only exist in a universe with four or more spatial dimensions. Kind of like how, if the universe were a flat plane and we had time, we could not have a cube.",
"Mathematicians and cosmologists use \"the fourth dimension\" in different ways. \n\nTo a mathematician it is a fourth spatial dimension. \n\nTo a cosmologist it is just the single temporal dimension. \n\nThe reason why a tesseract looks strange is because you're trying to represent a four-dimensional object in three-dimensional space; its not going to do it justice. ",
"What's happening is you're hearing 2 different descriptions of the \"4th dimension\"; when people are talking about tesseracts, they're talking about a 4th spatial dimension, not time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5aj36u | is it possible for america to have a coalition government? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5aj36u/eli5_is_it_possible_for_america_to_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9grqys",
"d9h46pq"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"We already have one in a roundabout way. The 2 party system forces different groups into the same party that would likely be Seperate parties in Europe.",
"No, because the system is designed that it would not be needed.\n\nThe Head of State is directly elected, so there is no need for power division there. The houses of the legislature are weak party systems. The party holds no official role in government, each representative or senator may vote as they please. As such there is no formal government or opposition party. The speaker of the house is the leader of the majority party simply because there are more of them to vote him into that position.\n\nCoalitions do exist in the American system, they happen all the time, but they are neither formal, nor long lasting. They pop up on a case by case basis, which is what is going on when you see American TV shows showing political staffers trying to round up votes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4g06sw | why can't the world exist without a currency system? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4g06sw/eli5_why_cant_the_world_exist_without_a_currency/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2dh57o",
"d2dh5ki",
"d2dh6ds",
"d2dh6lc",
"d2dh82v",
"d2dh9ow",
"d2dhcd4"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"the economy originally started with barter (I give you some of my eggs for some of your meat). But it got larger and I started to want Chinese silk, but they didnt want the eggs I have, we were unable to translate that value. So we create currency to make the market much much more efficient. I no longer need to make something you value, as long as im making something of value, I can get the goods I want for it. ",
"Say you have an apple. Say I want that apple but I have nothing to trade you for that apple. Now say you want that apple too and you don't want to just give me that apple. I could simply kill you for that apple, or we could work out a unit of exchange that can be used for goods and services.\n\nThat is why money exists.",
"Because there is no incentive to work rather then to just receive. If there was an OPTION to work eight hours a day for no reward, would you do it or not?\nNobody would, and therefore nothing will get done, leading to our extinction",
"Currency was basically the answer to the barter system.\n\nWhat if you had land, but it wasn't really good for farming, so you have sheep and goats. You need food, but the guy down the road who sells food doesn't want your sheep or goats. How do you bridge that gap? If the people you know who want your sheep and goats are willing to give you \"something\" you can trade for food, that solves your problem. What if that something could trade for anything?\n\nSo currency was a solution. It wouldn't stop rich or poor because the ones with the most resources would then become the rich.",
" > if there was no currency then technically there wouldn't be anyone rich or poor? \n\nWhether or not there is currency, there is wealth. I own some stuff and other people own other things. Resources exist whether or not currency does. What you really seem to be asking about is why don't we have all resources held in common with anyone allowed to take what they please. It turns out that this is very inefficient, doesn't incent people to innovate, and leads to social conflict.\n\nLike, to use a very simple example, why would I spend tons and tons of time growing food when anyone is free to just walk up and take it? There are a great many theories about how to organize societies that do away with private ownership, but they're a good deal more complicated than simply doing away with currency and many people (I make no secret that I'm one of those many people) don't think they're viable social systems.",
"Because the world can't exist without people having a job. People to gather food, gather supplies, gather needs to survive, and create other things we otherwise need or want. However jobs are not all equal. Some more necessary than others, more skill/labor/time intensive, more important. Currency allows us to give a non arbitrary number as to what a job is worth",
"Technically there would still be a rich or poor. Do you have have a farm to support your family? Do you have a factory or the skill sets to create something new? With currency it doesnt matter what good you have or what service you provide. We can all trade through some common item., money.\n\n & nbsp;\n\nGetting rid of money doesnt magically make things free. And you dont have to get rid of money to make certain things free. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3w6krl | does drinking 64 ounces of water in an hour have the same effect on my body as drinking 64 ounces in a full day? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w6krl/eli5_does_drinking_64_ounces_of_water_in_an_hour/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxtsui1"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The point of drinking 64 ounces a day is to stay hydrated so drinking it all at once wouldn't help you stay hydrated throughout the day although it would hydrate you in the moment. However, you will lose some of it that is immediately excreted due to having too much water. Also, don't drink that much water in a short period of time you can basically drown yourself and get what's called water intoxication due to the flushing of electrolytes and salts from your body. You can actually die from that too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7fkp3j | how can you be below sea level and not underwater? | Sorry if this is a dumb question; I know this is a thing but the terminology confuses me. Thank you!! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fkp3j/eli5_how_can_you_be_below_sea_level_and_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqcjj5m",
"dqcjmf0",
"dqckluk",
"dqcknbz"
],
"score": [
6,
16,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Dams, natural or man made block water. Thats it really. The nederlands for example has huge dikes surrounding the sea area.",
"Go somewhere that is 100m above sea level.\n\nDig 200m straight down.\n\nCongratulations, you are now 100m below sea level!\n\nThat's how places that are below sea level work, except that most of them are valleys that formed naturally. ",
"Good example is Death Valley. It's landlocked and in a desert and below sea level. There's no water to flood and fill the basin.",
"Drive to the city of New Orleans. It’s between 5 and 15 feet below sea level for the most part. Levees that were built and are maintained by the Army Core of Engineers keep back water in the Mississippi River and in Lake Pontchartrain. \n\nI should note that New Orleans has its own problems with drainage and pumping. Foundations usually require pylons to be driven into the ground to stabilize the building, and graves must be above ground, because water will fill any holes that are dug. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3nzeqe | why is it that people find animals that are often times extremely dangerous cute or adorable? | I get why dogs and cats and other domestic animals would be considered cute since we have raised/bred them to be beneficial to us, but what about other wild animals that are quite dangerous like lion or tiger cubs, baby snakes etc... | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nzeqe/eli5_why_is_it_that_people_find_animals_that_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvski7f"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Being cute is a genetic advantage for survival. Scientists believe that this is why humans find animal babies so cute. The cuter you are when you are born, the more likely it is that you will survive until adulthood. So that trait gets carried through the generations."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6xfipw | why does it sting when saltwater gets into our eyes but fish and other marine life can always keep it open? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6xfipw/eli5_why_does_it_sting_when_saltwater_gets_into/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmfhjzx",
"dmfp71s",
"dmfx8md"
],
"score": [
15,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Have you ever been swimming in the ocean?\n\nMost people find it easier to keep their eyes open in saltwater. In fact some swimming pools use saltwater rather than chlorinated water and people who swim in those pools find it easier to keep their eyes open.\n\nOf course water splashing in your eyes will hurt, but keeping your eyes open underwater in the ocean shouldn't cause problems.",
"It depends on how clean the water is. Ocean water has, along with just salt, sand, and more than likely various chemicals and trash. It's actually easier for most people to open their eyes in pure salt water than in, say, chlorinated water.",
"When you go swimming in the ocean its not the saltwater that stings, but rather the sand and chemicals in it. Your eyes already contain \"saltwater\" which is why you can keep them open underwater. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9igcal | why do hard biscuits turn soft when left exposed to air? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9igcal/eli5_why_do_hard_biscuits_turn_soft_when_left/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6jfpjs",
"e6jhe9i"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Because they suck up humidity from the air like dry sponges suck up water from... well, water.",
"Everything drier than air like cookies or chips will collect humidity from it and turn soft and spongy. Everything wetter than air will lose humidity and turn hard (like bread)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
ssn89 | why is the front of a bus flat, as opposed to the pointed fronts of cars? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ssn89/eli5_why_is_the_front_of_a_bus_flat_as_opposed_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4gn5ju",
"c4gnt8e",
"c4grkui",
"c4grxfm",
"c4gs775",
"c4gsmcm",
"c4gtcxa",
"c4gttz8",
"c4gtvk0",
"c4gu0hu",
"c4gugdw",
"c4gum9p"
],
"score": [
63,
594,
40,
35,
2,
12,
15,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A bus has its engine in the back and its designed to carry lots of passengers, extra space in front of the driver serves no purpose but in a car it is either where the engine is located or where storage is located.",
"Buses typically have a lot of people walking in front of the bus while getting on/off at a stop. Having the flat front and a large windshield helps the driver see if any people (especially small children) are in front of the bus. ",
"A few reasons:\n\nA sloping front would either remove useful space at the top or add useless space at the bottom.\n\nAir resistance increases exponentially with speed so being streamlined is of much more importance at higher speeds, which buses don't reach, so aerodynamics are not a primary concern.\n\nThis may be incorrect, but I believe resistance caused by air curling behind the object is greater than that caused by air the object needs to push out the way at the front, [so curving the rear of a bus](_URL_0_) is more effective than sloping the front.",
"City buses tend to not go very fast. A vehicle that tops out at 40 MPH in service has little need for aerodynamic modification. Additionally, since a bus is quite tall it would lose carrying capacity if the front was sloped at an angle and the engine is in the back so there's nothing productive that one could put in the resulting nose cone.",
"Related question, how come buses with 2-pane windshields sometimes have them at different angles?",
"This might not be the case, but all trucks in Europe have flat fronts [like this](_URL_0_) because of length limitations. It's better to make the front as short as possible, because then you have more room for the goods. American trucks are [much longer](_URL_1_) because limits are lower and there's enough space to put a small room for the driver in there. Both trucks in the pictures have a bed, small stove and a fridge in there, as they're both for long-distance transportation.\n\nSo yea, my guess is that there are limitations to the maximum length and how much things cost based on that.",
"Buses have flat fronts for a number of reasons.\n\nAs already stated, to improve how much the driver can see.\n\nThe reason drivers sit in front of the front wheels in buses is because: Buses are designed to get in as close the the kerb as possible. You can 'sweep' the kerb with the front of the bus while turning towards a kerb, without hitting the wheels off it. It would be incredibly hard to do this with a long front, plus having the square front makes it very easy to see. \n\nAnother reason is in busy cities, you often get buses that are nose to tail in traffic queues. Having the square front with the driver right at the glass, means you can squeeze incredibly close the the object in front. Same happens at bus stops, if two buses need to get to the same stop.\n\nSource : I was a bus driver",
"Another practical answer: the flat nosed \"cab over\" design is a product of the cab and drivers area not needing to see over the engine or any hood or cowl. Most busses have their engine in the back.",
"By putting the driver on top of the engine compartment, you can fit an extra row or 2 of seats",
"Very few have mentioned interior space. Engine in back + driver over the front wheels= pushing essential equipment as far as possible to the extreme ends of the vehicle, allowing vast amounts of interior room for passengers, which is what a bus is designed to move in the first place.",
"I was under the impression that a flat front made it easier to turn. Since buses are so long they need to make wider turns and the lack of length in the front allows them to swing out wider without the risk of hitting something on the sidewalk. Shorter buses still have the engine in the front. I remember when my school still had all buses with the engine in the front. It was the coolest thing ever when they replaced with \"no-front\" buses.\n\nEdit: Clarity",
"not sure if it's the same with buses, but Mercedes first introduced flat front trucks in Europe because it's easier to turn corners in Europe's smaller streets..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9698000/9698602.stm"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://i.imgur.com/b6Mfn.jpg",
"http://i.imgur.com/hQJbV.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1a5cmf | how north korea could have a nuclear program when they struggle to feed the general population? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1a5cmf/eli5_how_north_korea_could_have_a_nuclear_program/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8u7slr",
"c8ua9hx"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because North Korea is a dictatorship, they don't really need or want to ensure that everyone's getting fed before they do expensive military projects.",
"You know the Smiths down the street? billy bob smith has obviously put a lot of money into his car, but his children barely get enough to eat. His priorities are such that he wants others to be impressed with him, intimidated if you will, more than he cares about his children.North korea is a lot like this, they want nuclear weapons so other countries will fear them but they have not enough money left over to feed their kids. \n\nwhere thet differ is many believe that NK will threaten to use nukes if they dont receive food for their people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2912rc | if china has a large surplus of single men, why is female infanticide still occurring? | Wouldn't female babies be, for lack of a better term, more valuable once they grow up? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2912rc/eli5_if_china_has_a_large_surplus_of_single_men/ | {
"a_id": [
"cigf6uj",
"cigfdxk",
"ciggui4"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"with a 1 child policy everyone wants a male heir to continue their family name",
"Also men are obligated by law to take care of there parents in there old age. As in I as a parent can sue my son for not taking care of me but not my daughter. So there is a big incentive for your one child to be a boy.",
"There are many reasons, but it's not near as prolific as it was 30 years ago. For example, it's illegal for a doctor to tell the parents if it's a boy or girl before it's delivered (to avoid abortions when baby is found out to be a girl)\n\nBut what currently happens now is with the 1 child policy, if you have a girl first, (in some cities) you're allowed to have another child to try and have a boy. In some cases, I personally met a girl who said she was the 2nd daughter, and she was given up to our aunt so her parents could try a 3rd time to get a boy. Apparently this is also very common in rural areas. \n\nI think it's going to cause a lot of problems in the future, not only the male to female ration, but other social issues such as \"little emperor syndrome\", the child is an only child, with 2 parents, and 4 grand parents and is spoiled rotten all the way through their younger years. I work in manufacturing in southern China and I see a lot of younger generation (18-25) who are extremely lazy, especially the boys. The girls tend to work harder, so in the factories I've been working at you can see the work force is 70-75% female. \n\nI think prostitution will raise a lot in the next generation, even though it is currently already a very large business, I think many women will start coming in from vietnam, thailand, mongolia, & the philippines. We will see...."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
15281z | ; why does my vision get blurry after staring at back-lit screen for a prolonged period of time or when i dont get much sleep? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15281z/eli5_why_does_my_vision_get_blurry_after_staring/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7inmzp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Wikipedia quote.\n\n\"Orthostatic hypotension, also known as postural hypotension, and colloquially as head rush or dizzy spell, is a form of hypotension in which a person's blood pressure suddenly falls when standing up or stretching. The symptom is caused by blood pooling in the lower extremities upon a change in body position. It is quite common and can occ\nur briefly in anyone, although it is particularly prevalent among the elderly, and those with low blood pressure.\"\n\nGoogle is your best friend."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
22t55s | why exactly doesn't sound travel as fast as light? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22t55s/eli5_why_exactly_doesnt_sound_travel_as_fast_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgq49zo",
"cgq4cpv"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"Because they are two completely different things. Light is this weird as hell quantum mechanical thing that acts like a particle and a wave at the same time. Explaining the very nature of light is difficult without going into the nature of how the universe works.\n\nSound is just particles bumping into each other. How fast it travels depends on how close the particles are. That's why sound travels faster and better through solids and water, than it does through air. \n\n",
"Light is the movement of energy.\n\nSound is the movement of physical particles/matter"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
52d3a1 | why is the crust of a hearty hunk of bread considered the most nutritious part, when the inside is composed of the same ingredients? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52d3a1/eli5_why_is_the_crust_of_a_hearty_hunk_of_bread/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7jaq0e",
"d7javcs"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"For the most part, this is just a widely perpetuated myth. It's mostly just something parents tell their children so the kids will eat the crust because children are notoriously picky eaters. There's some *minor* evidence that there's a few exotic nutrients that are more prevalent in the crust but it's a recent study & they're nothing super important.\n\nThe main reason you should eat the crust is *because it's fucking delicious*.",
"Never heard this. \nIn our house eating the crust would \"make your hair curly\" and for some reason this was all the motivation we needed"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4u7i6b | what makes your jaw sometimes cramp when eating a first bite of something? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u7i6b/eli5what_makes_your_jaw_sometimes_cramp_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5ni6dt",
"d5nj1sp",
"d5nlm1h"
],
"score": [
30,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"From /u/Blue_Gray 2 years ago:\n\n > Whenever you eat something with a lot of flavor (especially sweet or sour) after not eating anything for a while, your salival glands on each side of your jaw begin to rapidly secrete salive to break down the enzymes in the food. Imagine it like a sleepy cop in the security room with all the screens showing footage from cameras. When he finally spots something, he falls out of his chair startled and calls security. Similarly, the spontaneous secretion of saliva makes your salival glands hurt or \"cramp\" up in a way.\n\nRemember to search for the answer first\n\n",
"Sounds like the salivary gland being activated.\n\nMost people can get a sharp twinge from salivary gland activation with biting into something sour: bite into a lemon, or even better eat one of those crazy super sour candies. If you do the latter enough, you can even condition yourself to salivate (and get a painful twinge) at the mere thought of sour candy, kind of like Pavlov's dogs.\n\nAnyway, if that sounds like what you are feeling and it happens a lot, it's likely the salivary glands being activated PLUS possibly a partial blockage.\n\nThe glands sometimes cause these symptoms when partly blocked from a stone or growth (with or without an infection behind it), and old school remedies were to suck on sour candies for a few days to see if that helps - I guess the idea being if it was something you could dislodge or somehow open the duct more then this might help.\n\nI don't think that's really recommended anymore. Instead doctors will sometimes enlarge the duct, or if infection is present treat that. Of note, some of the things that could block it are more serious (but less common), and so it may be worth seeing an ent doc to take a look.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nEdit - left out a word\n",
"You sound like you have a condition called First Bite Syndrome. FBS is characterized by jaw locking and pain on the jaw and salivary gland on the first bite of food that gradually subsides as chewing goes on. The cause of which is poorly understood so far but it is reported to be a complication of some surgeries. \n\nMany treatment options have been suggested, and mostly the condition will resolve in time. \n\nSource: General Surgeon."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.entnet.org/content/salivary-glands"
],
[]
] |
||
1lv4jw | why does the american government, under the banner of human rights, prepare for military strikes, while there are more blatant abuses of human rights in north korea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lv4jw/eli5_why_does_the_american_government_under_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc31jxr",
"cc31s58"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Syria doesn't have nukes.",
"The American government doesn't go to war over human right violations, it merely uses them as a pretext."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
35s86m | why do people say that they love america or are proud to be an american, when all they do is complain about how bad things are in america? | Before anyone asks, yes I'm an American. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35s86m/eli5_why_do_people_say_that_they_love_america_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr7b58d",
"cr7baob",
"cr7baol",
"cr7bkaj",
"cr7ck8z"
],
"score": [
15,
6,
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Because for all of America's faults... it's still home. You don't give up on your home if its still salvageable (which most people would agree).\n\nSo people are proud to be an American for what America *should* be.. though perhaps they don't like what America has become.",
"The same reason that people who love Star Wars complain about how bad the new movies are. They love what it was, but not what it turned into.",
"People tend to \"accentuate the negative\" -- that is, they focus on the things they don't like, even when they do like most things (or are satisfied with them). This is at least partly because people complain about things they want changed, and things they don't want changed don't need mentioning.\n\nPeople do the same thing with other groups they're part of. Most people love their family, are proud of their family, and complain about their family.",
"You can love something and still see its flaws. And really it's more loving to try to fix the problems than it is to pretend they don't exists.",
"The people boasting about their country aren't always the same people that bitch about it. Your question is very generalized."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4lr18r | why when standing on a cliff a little voice tells me jump | Well, don't tell me that you've never had that little voice tell you that. I mean you won't actually do it, but why the brain does that, why it tells you to jump off, and furthermore, what holds you from not doing it? This is just a little thin line between life or death, or even better, logic and insanity. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4lr18r/eli5why_when_standing_on_a_cliff_a_little_voice/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3pgh7w",
"d3pghhf"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Your brain imagines all the possibilities. One possibility is to jump, and you get an adrenaline rush thinking about it. Of course, your logical brain understands that you would die if you jumped, and since you don't want to kill yourself, you ignore that impulse.\n\nThat voice is what skydivers, bungee jumpers, and other participants in extreme sports listen to. They just have safety equipment to keep them from dying.",
"Genetic heritage. Ever since we were primates in the tress. It’s our body’s way of testing us. Calculating whether or not we can reach the next branch."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2njb48 | what is it about the little triangle in my windscreen that doesn't touch the wiper blades that makes it look different when wet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2njb48/eli5_what_is_it_about_the_little_triangle_in_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"cme44ez"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The wipers scrape off most of the dirt in their path, so that one area they can't reach has a layer of dirt that looks different from the clean glass when wet. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2wewm6 | how does the temperature inside a car on a hot day exceed the actual temperature of that day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wewm6/eli5_how_does_the_temperature_inside_a_car_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"coq72fb",
"coq7453",
"coq7qo5"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Let sunrays enter the car via windows, let the rays heat up the car. Don't leat the heat escape and you got yourself a pretty hot car. ",
"The glass in the car's windows act in the same manner as the glass of a greenhouse, allowing sunlight to enter but not allowing heat to exit.",
"Light of all visible wavelengths can pass through the glass windows. Objects inside the car will reflect some wavelengths and absorb others (this is why things have colour - red objects reflect red light but absorb everything else). The energy absorbed is typically re-emitted as infrared light.\n\nGlass is opaque to infrared and reflects it back into the car. It's the same principle that makes green houses warmer inside.\n\n[This video](_URL_0_) shows that infrared doesn't pass through glass"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsjjdwLFNIM"
]
] |
||
8edwxc | why was euro disney (disneyland paris) such a financial disaster when it opened ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8edwxc/eli5_why_was_euro_disney_disneyland_paris_such_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxudwks",
"dxukwni"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"What i understand from my hospitality and culture classes, is that Disney tried to copy and paste Disney World into Disney Europe. Like everything was the same, company culture, work ethics whatsoever. \n\nSince Europeans and Americans are most definitely not the same type of people that completely backlashed and made them consider the cultural differences. ",
"Many reasons. \n\nFirst, Disney assumed that Europeans would flock to a Euro Disney in numbers like Americans flock to Disneyland and Disneyworld. They didn't. \n\nOne of the reasons was a form of anti-American sentiment that Disney didn't understand. Disney made the entire Euro Disney to be a celebration of America - with different parts of the park to represent different parts of America; with serving American cuisine, etc. As it turned out, a lot of Europeans resent the impact that America has on culture around the world. The French, particularly, are proud of their \"French-ness\" and their ability to do their own thing (i.e. have their own French culture - film, art, music, etc) in the face of American culture constantly trying to make inroads into French culture. So a lot of Europeans saw Euro Disney as a sort of an intrusion of American culture on European culture - as they viewed this as a bad thing that ought to be resisted in order to preserve their own European culture. So Europeans stayed away from the park. \n\nDisney also had a TON of problems getting the park up and running. As it turns out, it's hard to get European workers (particular French workers) to put on that \"Disney smile\" and treat people with that \"over the top\" friendliness and hospitality that Disney is known for displaying. Disney had a lot of problems finding and retaining quality workers. \n\nAlso, Euro Disney opened during a deep recession in Europe, further hampering efforts to get paying customers into the park. \n\nAll in all it was a clusterfuck for a bunch of reasons. \n\n "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3ihemg | why is packaged food required to have nutrition facts, but not served food? | Why does food that we buy at a store have to have a nutrition facts label, but not food that we buy at a restaurant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ihemg/eli5_why_is_packaged_food_required_to_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cugeoft",
"cugii33"
],
"score": [
21,
5
],
"text": [
"Food prepared by a chef has a certain amount of variance in the prep which makes setting a hard number difficult.\n\n(Assuming USA) The FDA has requirements for when a restaurant must provide nutrition info for the foods they prepare. Basically if there is a chain of more than 20 restaurants, they are required by law to make the nutrition info available. Individual states also have laws which may pose even more requirements than the federal government. [Here's more info from the FDA.](_URL_0_)",
"Two reasons, a logistical one and a logical one.\n\nFirst of all, restaurants frequently change their menu and suppliers in ways food manufacturers don't. Coca-Cola needs to be analyzed once, and then the nutritional label is good for billions of gallons. A restaurant that has a new special every few days would have to constantly test and pay for the privilege.\n\nThe second reason is that food labeling is for informing consumers of what they are eating so they can plan for their nutritional needs. For the vast majority of people, eating at a restaurant is an occasional treat, not an every day occurrence that requires detailed nutritional information. An upscale restaurant or a hole in the wall diner don't build their business around the notion that someone will be there every single day. Someone selling groceries or ingredients for meals on the other hand is. No one expects you to buy a quart of sour cream and eat it with a spoon. \n\nLarger chain restaurants sort of fall into the middle of the spectrum. They are expected to provide information because their menu changes are relatively rare and they can certainly afford to analyze one McRib in order to sell millions of them. On top of that, they heavily market themselves as something to be eaten frequently unlike a filet mignon with truffle mashed potatoes. Since they can afford it, and people are likely to need that information, they are required to label. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/LabelingNutrition/ucm248732.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
emqnq9 | why should you not deflate a hot tire/tyre? | My first post in Reddit, please be kind. I was travelling and had lots of troubles with my car tyres, so I finally decided to go through the whole manual of the vehicle to better understand every aspect of their proper maintenance. In the manual instructions, they say in very bold letters: NEVER DEFLATE A HOT TYRE, but they don't say at any point why you should not do it. Whenever you go from tar to gravel or sandy roads you are supposed to deflate your tyres and, in consequence, these will be already hot so seems like an instruction you cannot really follow in certain scenarios. I have not been able to figure out the WHY, why is it such a bad thing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/emqnq9/eli5_why_should_you_not_deflate_a_hot_tiretyre/ | {
"a_id": [
"fdqb2kc",
"fdqdrv6",
"fdrgkcg"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Cause tires on THE road cause friction. Friction causes heat. Heat then expands. So when said heat is cooled it will go back down to a normal tire pressure",
"I don't think anything bad happens at the moment you deflate hot tires. The problem seems to be when they cool down. If you deflated them because they were hot they will be underinflated when they cool down.\n\nThis article seems to cover it _URL_0_",
"The problem is that the layperson, which are like 99% of drivers/car owners, don't understand that the laws of physics including the law of gases applies directly in this situation. Correct tire pressure is specified for when the tire is cold, and when the tire is driven it becomes hot, and the pressure rises.\n\nLaypeople think that because the pressure went up, they should deflate the tire to match the specified pressure. That is false because it would then cause underinflation of the tire, but a lot of people fail to apply the laws of physics here. So the strongly worded warning in the manual is used as a reminder."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.aceable.com/blog/this-is-what-happens-when-tires-get-too-hot/"
],
[]
] |
|
2sshwu | how do modern cars track miles per gallon displayed on the dashboard of some models? is it an accurate read for the most part or do manufacturers set it up to give you a gratifying, if not completely accurate, reading? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sshwu/eli5_how_do_modern_cars_track_miles_per_gallon/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnsfn68",
"cnsljx0"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The car's computer knows how fast the car is going from the speedometer sensor. It also knows how many times the fuel injectors are cycling per second and how long they are running, because the computer is controlling that in response to throttle position, air temperature, and a bunch of other factors.\n\nSo it knows how far it is traveling per time unit, and it knows fuel consumption per time unit. A little arithmetic gives it fuel economy (miles per gallon or liters per 100km). It ought to be pretty accurate if it's programmed well. The main source of error would be inaccuracy in the speedometer - most cars report a slightly higher than actual speed, which would tend to inflate the reported fuel economy a bit.",
"It's usually an instantaneous approximation. Fuel flow is calculated and compared to vehicle speed, engine speed, load and several other factors. That's why the number/value constantly changes.\n\nThe value is then displayed in terms of L/km or whatever you want."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2gnuv7 | energy can't be created or destroyed. when i eat i take the energy that went into making that food and absorb it, changing it into movement. where does that converted energy go to when i use it? how does it get re-used? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gnuv7/eli5_energy_cant_be_created_or_destroyed_when_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckkuipr",
"ckkuiqe",
"ckkujvi",
"ckkuk3o"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Plants capture light energy (electromagnetic energy) and covert it into chemical energy (sugars and such) using photosynthesis. You take in that as food (or other animals do and then you eat them). Your body converts that chemical energy to kinetic energy (movement) and heat. The heat is lost as unusable energy in the long run.",
"Mostly it goes into heat, like most things, this heat goes back into the atmosphere, where it circulates, goes out into space, or is expended back into kinetic through wind.",
"A good chunk gets released from your body as heat, which is why your body remains so warm and when you walk out on a cold day you can see your breath and heat rising from your body.\n\nThe rest gets distributed amongst stool, storage, and maintenance of your body which will then be converted into the bodies main energy source (ATP) and used, converted, and expelled back into the environment.",
" > Where does that converted energy go to when I use it? \n\nHeat and sound, or the motion of other objects (which eventually \"decay\" into heat and sound).\n\n > How does it get re-used?\n\nIt doesn't. Welcome to [entropy](_URL_0_). The universe is \"running down\" as energy gets converted between multiple forms until it eventually dissipates as heat that ends up spread out evenly, and unable to be used anymore."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy"
]
] |
||
1q2804 | why are laws which require identification for voting, such as in texas, being scrutinized by the media? | Wouldn't it make sense that only citizens can vote?
And it seems that everyone having IDs would be safer.
But ELI5. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q2804/eli5_why_are_laws_which_require_identification/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd8fcyr",
"cd8fh6d",
"cd8fjc0",
"cd8gp74"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There are almost no non-eligible voters who are using the lack of ID laws to vote. There are many eligible voters who don't have a valid ID, and thus will became unable to vote under these new laws.",
"GWB commissioned a study in 2005 to study voter fraud. They found that in about 300 million votes cast, there were only 86 incidents of voter fraud.\n\nTherefore, these new laws that their proponents claim would protect against voter fraud are solving a problem that, for all practical concerns, does not exist.\n\nCurrent laws are working fine. These new laws are doing nothing but disenfranchising a large number of eligible voters.",
"Their is no evidence of voter fraud that could be prevented by identification for voting. \n\nThe laws are under suspension because the majority of people they affect (who lack the proper ID) are primarily minorities. Since these populations are primarily democratic, and the states creating the laws are primarily republican, it looks a great deal like the republicans are trying to rewrite the law to take away the voting rights of groups that are opposed to their views.\n\nIn simple terms, to prevent the potential fraud of maybe a hundred votes these laws are going to take the right to vote away from THOUSANDS. Who, btw, are most likely in opposition to the current party in power within that state.\n\nPretty fishy if you ask me.",
"In addition to the reasons stated, there have also been select politicians who have said they passed the laws to discourage and/or prevent Democrats from voting."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2taxnm | why has no other country helped the countries that russia invaded? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2taxnm/eli5_why_has_no_other_country_helped_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnxc1lv",
"cnxc3nk",
"cnxfwm1",
"cnxj90e"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Lots of countries have helped Ukraine by imposing sanctions on Russia.\n\nIf you're asking why no country has yet engaged with Russia militarily, it's because Russia has one of the largest, strongest militaries in the world, and getting into a war with Russia would be extremely costly in terms of human life, and risks escalating into another world war. Instead, countries have opted to isolate Russia economically, since it's very dependant on trade with the rest of the world.\n\nAnother complication of this particular situation is that the local population is not fighting back, the majority of the population in eastern Ukraine speaks Russian and prefers to be under Russian control. Nobody wants to militarily defend a region where the locals will be fighting you instead of fighting the enemy.\n",
"Even though the Cold War is over there is still a balance in the world that is better left alone. The Russians may seem like a shadow of their former selves, but everyone can usually agree that if Russia had a serious threat against it, Russia and it's people would gear up pretty quick to stop it. \n\nAnother thing to consider is that the United States and the United Kingdom, which are two of the most powerful nations in NATO, would be hard pressed politically, economically, and militarily to stand up to Russia after over a decade of fighting in the Middle East. \n\nThat and the people of NATO nations, and the people of Russia all generally don't want to fight each other. I think it's a pretty wide consensus from California to Siberia (if we're going east) that the major powers of the world going toe to toe over Russia's aggression in Ukraine, or Georgia would be a nasty and all around unnecessary war. \n\nI think it's a matter of pros and cons. How bad the Western nations want to keep Russia from annexing its neighbors is outweighed by the Western nations' unwillingness to go into a major war over it. There's no \"police action\" that's going to take place when Russia is on the other side of the line, they would go all out. It wouldn't be a minor thing.\n\nI hope that kind of makes sense. That's why we haven't gone in to stop Russia, at least from my point of view. In a literal sense of stopping them, that is. ",
"Don't provoke the bear. Russia is taking territory that nobody really cares about to begin with. If Russia started taking land that Europe really wanted to keep, you'd be damn certain countries would fight back. \n\nThe area that Russia annexed, however, wants to be in Russian hands. So it's not really a reason to go to war over. If they didn't want Russia to be there, then maybe there would be more people fighting.\n\n\nIt's like why didn't more Arab nations fight the US when we invaded Iraq. They didn't want us to kick their ass and they don't really give a shit. ",
"The US is doing a dollar diplomacy on Russia at the moment, basically since Russia's main export is Gas, we put a bunch of gas in the world trade, and it's making the price of it go down thus making the Russian currency crash"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2nvl5v | why are cop shows so popular? | ie: blue bloods, law and order, csi etc.
Not only are a lot of them very popular but channels like CBS pump them out at an extremely high rate (most of which don't even last a full season). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nvl5v/eli5_why_are_cop_shows_so_popular/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmhaqsf",
"cmhbkli",
"cmhe3tl"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
8
],
"text": [
"US broadcast television shows are 22 shows per season, and successful ones go on for more than 5 years. So these type of shows need 100-200 episodes worth of content. It is really difficult to write a long arc story with that many episodes. So most shows instead tend to write episodic television. Basically most of the stories are self contained within one episode, telling a single short story. The B plot for an episode is where any of the longer arc elements of the stories get told for the most part. \n\n If you are telling a drama life and death stories are generally about as dramatic as you can make a story. So now you need 100-200 stories about people potentially in life and death situations, and there just aren't that many different situations that allow for that kind of story. So you end up with a lot of cop/lawyer/investigator type of crime dramas, or medical dramas.",
"* the characters are empowered, and are able to do great good or great harm\n* exciting action, fist fights, gun fights, car chases, are more plausible than in other lines of work\n* being able to base stories on cases fits well into the sort of episodic storytelling needed for a TV series",
"Everyone else is wrong.\n\nCop shows (and doctor shows, lawyer shows, detective shows, forensic shows, etc.) are popular because, properly produced, they don't descend into melodrama. Stories, particularly novels, tend to be about the most important thing that happens in a character's life. This works fine for a novel, even a trilogy if carefully handled, but 22 episodes a year, year after year? Nope. The story becomes melodramatic.\n\nBut what if the main characters in a story have a job where they help other people through the most important events in their lives? You can plausibly have the stars of the show involved in dramatic events (and even occasional physical danger) on a regular basis, and it doesn't descend into melodrama. But the producers must be careful not to have the story lines be about the main characters too often.\n\nAn example of how to do this right was the show *Law and Order*. Even when the main characters' personal drama was shown (Lenny Brisco's daughter being killed, Lt. Van Buren's battle with cancer), it would be the \"B\" story of an episode, rarely the \"A\" story. Every episode was about the case they were working on.\n\nAn example of how to do this wrong is *Law and Order:SVU*. Personal drama of the main characters intrudes far, far too often."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5ih2iq | what are phobias and what does it feel like to have one? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ih2iq/eli5_what_are_phobias_and_what_does_it_feel_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"db8f3cj",
"db94s0l"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A phobia is a fear of a specific thing or situation that causes so much anxiety it impacts your life in some way--for example, you have a hard time working or going out with friends, it's difficult to go about daily tasks, that sort of thing.\n\nHere's an example. A lot of people are a little nervous about flying. But when they *must* fly, maybe for work or an important family event, they can still get on the plane. Someone with a flight-related phobia might not make it to the airport, even though they know that they may lose their job or make their family angry.\n\nIt's normal to be nervous when you are in a potentially dangerous situation. It's normal to be a bit anxious if you encounter something that has hurt you in the past. However, that sort of anxiety doesn't really impact your life very much. A phobia does cause some sort of barrier or challenge in your life.",
"Most phobias are due to extremely deep-seated evolutionary responses to things that will kill you dead, and are probably part of our neural wiring that has existed since before we had higher level thinking. Being terrified of snakes and spiders makes sense, as does being near high places (you will fall off and die) in tight small places (you will get stuck and die), and even things with lots of sorta-neatly arranged holes in them (weird things are usually either poisonous or in some way bad, you might die). A flight phobia is usually I guess a combination of defence mechanisms against being high up, in a new enclosed space, with no control (no control means something has taken control away from you, that means you're probably going to die).\n\nWhat do they feel like? I have pretty aggressive arachnophobia. If a spider surprises me I will, in some combination, feel my adrenaline spike and I'll lurch away probably throwing whatever I'm holding at it while shouting to warn my fellow ape friends. This happens is less time than I'm consciously aware I've seen it, and sometimes it turns out it was a piece of string, or it isn't there. It's like a short circuit of my upper reasoning ability, and any unexpected moves by the little bastard (spiders are made of surprise and weirdness) may produce the same reaction.\n\nThat's a bit of a warning that if I get a spider thrown at me I will knock you the fuck out before I even know what happened."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8a6n6n | crossbow vs compound bow | I keep reading that my crossbow that shoots a 400grain bolt at 245fps is barley enough to kill a whitetail? How is that possible when my 45lb bear Montana longbow easily takes whitetail out to 30 yards with the same weight arrow shooting 170fps and half the energy. The website said the short stoke gives it less energy than a vertical bow even though mathematically stroke does not determine for, kenetic energy or momentum of an object. Can someone clear this up to me? Link to website down below.
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8a6n6n/eli5_crossbow_vs_compound_bow/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwwbvx8",
"dwwlgxa"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"You can certainly kill a deer with relatively low speed arrows; I see people saying anything above 150 fps is sufficient, and of course traditional hunters with primitive bows and spears were able to kill animals with even slower speeds. The crossbow's performance is fine if used at appropriate ranges and shots placed in the correct locations.",
"The draw weight is only half the equation for the energy of a projectile. The other is the draw distance.\n\nThe reason for that is simple: The longer you push against a moving object, the more it's going to speed up. That means that you can calculate the kinetic energy of a linearly accelerated object by multiplying the force with the distance.\n\nSo a rough approximation for kinetic energy of bows and crossbows is multiplying the draw weight with the draw distance.\nTherefore, a crossbow with a rather small draw distance is not going to have as much kinetic energy as a bow of equal draw weight that can be pulled to the ears. Its projectile might be faster though, since crossbow bolts are usually lighter"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/master-class/2013/05/crossbow-compound-bow-hunting-myth"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
f002dp | what makes some babies come early, and some come late? what tells the female body that it’s time to start labour? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f002dp/eli5_what_makes_some_babies_come_early_and_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgqmnqh",
"fgqoj3g",
"fgqpdx9"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Nobody really knows for sure. There are risk factors but no way to predict 100% that is why OB is so risky",
"Labor is induced by uterine stretching. Once the baby reaches a certain size, it begins to stretch the walls of the uterus (or the womb). This also triggers the release a hormone know as oxytocin. While oxytocin has many different effects in the body, one of them is to increase uterine muscle contraction, further inducing labor. This cycle is know as a positive feedback loop, and is one of the only positive feedback loops in the human body. \n\n\nThis answers only part of your question, which is what tells the body to initiate labor. However, as another poster mentioned, we don’t know exactly why some babies are born early or late. We do know, however, some risk factors:\n\n- uncontrolled diabetes\n\n-smoking/drinking/drug use\n\n-poor nutrition\n\n-infections like UTIs or amniotic membrane infections\n\n-many more",
"This is just a theory I’ve seen in some research papers, but there seems to be suspicion that it’s up to the placenta.\n\nThe placenta is an organ that the mother’s body creates and it’s basically what’s in charge of nutrients for the fetus. The umbilical cord connects the baby to the placenta. If the placenta doesn’t have enough blood flow, or if the baby gets too big and demands more nutrients, it can’t do it’s job (this is a problem seen with twins that share a placenta. Often times these pregnancies are risky because one placenta has trouble supplying for two babies). \n\nAnyways, some speculate that the placenta alerts the mothers body when it can no longer supply adequate nutrition to the baby. This explains why younger girls are at higher risk for preterm birth (their bodies have a harder time supplying nutrients), or why high blood pressure causes preterm birth (restricts blood flow to the placenta). The placenta reaches its “capacity” early and causes the baby to come early.\n\nAgain, just a theory, but that’s the one that made the most sense to me."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5p9vlt | why do we never have any mist in the eyes during a sudden temperature change? | Excuse me for my english, this is not my first language. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5p9vlt/eli5why_do_we_never_have_any_mist_in_the_eyes/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcpjjwb",
"dcpmpvf"
],
"score": [
12,
2
],
"text": [
"Are you asking why eyes don't fog up like glasses do when you go from cold to warm and humid? \n\nThat's because our eyes are already warmed by our body so they aren't really at condensing temperatures, also there are wet so any condensation that formed would just become part of the film of water that covers our eyes anyway. ",
"Because mist can only form on surfaces which are dry. Your eyes are already wet, so any extra condensation from a sudden temperature change will be absorbed by the membrane (a barrier that has tiny holes in it) covering your eye."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
cmt1rs | why is the sun so much hotter when it reflects off glass windows or buildings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cmt1rs/eli5_why_is_the_sun_so_much_hotter_when_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"ew4gyaj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"That should only be happening if you are in the focal point for the sunlight while you are also in direct sunlight. think of it like putting a magnifying glass above you and you're in the bright pinpoint of light. You're having multiple \"layers\" of sunlight shining on you.\n\nThis was actually a problem here in Las Vegas when the Aria resort was first built. It's concave shaped, and if you were out at the pool, depending on where the sun was, it could get focused onto a single point."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5siofc | - what is the difference between linear polarized light and circular polarized light? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5siofc/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_linear/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddfqbgf"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I think it is beast to think circular polarization as two linearly polarized light together.\n\n[Here are few good animations](_URL_0_) \nBy combinign two linearly polarized light at 90° angles (red and green) you get circular polarized light (cyan)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.qsl.net/sv1bsx/antenna-pol/polarization.html"
]
] |
||
27hyy4 | how come humans could easily move and migrate when the environments change to survive yet animals don't? | Humans (ancient) moved regularly, expanding and diversifing. If they were struggling in an environment they would move. However many animals don't. And the thing is animals are a lot better equipped for the harsh conditions out there than humans were and many are used to migrating...
This is inspired by reading this [article](_URL_0_) where it says the Indricotheriinae becomes extinct after the collision of the Indian Subcontient brings about the Himalayas and a global cooling which changes their food sources and they become extinct.
That would have taken time to occur. How come they did not just migrate to greener pastures, so to speak? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27hyy4/eli5_how_come_humans_could_easily_move_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci0zery",
"ci0zmio",
"ci10esx",
"ci1af5z"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's because humans have solved the logistical problems owing to bigger brains.",
"Animals DO migrate to other climates, as demonstrated by the changing locations of all sorts of pests as areas become warmer (e.g. Mosquitos in Alaska). \n\nThat said, not all climate change occurs in a gradient, and most animals lack the ability to think that there might be a better place to live far away. Imagine that you were living in a spot that was becoming worse, but all the surrounding area was even crappier. You might have a hard time guessing that if you wandered in a particular direction for a long time, things would EVENTUALLY get much better. As such, many animals sort of sink into local minima, and don't fully explore geographic space. Humans are more capable of the logistics required to relocate populations through temporarily extremely crappy environments. ",
"Other animals do migrate. For example, European Swallows fly south for the winter and north for the summer.\n\nSome animals migrate in order to continue to find plant matter to graize/browse on.\n\nHowever, humans have the highest long-distance travel speed of any animal. Only wolves and dogs come close.",
"Human adaptability is a result of our unique (at least currently) development of culture. It takes most species a long time to adapt to a new environment. Humans are capable of not only learning things, but communicating them and passing them on. \n\nA group of early human relocates to a new, colder locale. One member of the group finds that by killing and skinning an animal, she can keep warm and better survive the colder climate. Either she communicates this idea to her tribefellows or they see her and emulate her. They have a much greater chance of survival, as will their children and their grandchildren as the tradition of wearing animal skins is passed down.\n\nAlternatively, a herd of deer relocate to a similarly cold location. In keeping with natural selection, the differential rate of reproductive success will result in deer having thicker fur after multiple generations. The herd eventually adapts, but only after a long time and great loss of life. \n\nFrom this example one can easily see the advantage that the capacity for culture gives humans over all other species. \n\nTL;DR Human learning and communication, even in its earliest form, would have been much faster than the slow, steady language of natural selection. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indricotheriinae"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fhyl13 | i know things have certain frequencies but do humans do as well? and what happens when humans are vibrated at that frequency? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fhyl13/eli5_i_know_things_have_certain_frequencies_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"fke19fo",
"fke2e1n"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Everything has a (one or more) resonance frequency. Usually we refer to the spine and skeletal system, but the human body is very complex and [every organ has its own frequency](_URL_0_).\n\nWhat happens when you meet that frequency?\n\nFor the skeletal-spine-muscle system,\n > At the resonant frequency there is maximum displacement between the organ and the skeletal structure, placing biodynamic strain on the body tissue involved.\n\nNote that human beings are complex and not clones of one another, so there are different frequencies (always in the same range, though) depending on mass, height, [posture](_URL_1_) and, theoretically, bone structure or other characteristics.",
"Humans are not naturally stiff enough to stand, you can experiment on a drunk friend or a sleeping child, if you stand them up and let go they collapse into a heap. This means that the resonant frequency of each piece is independent, no one frequency is reinforced in the whole body. Dynamic muscle systems can make the body seem stiff, but that's under brain-control.\n\nMedicine takes advantage of this, kidney stones can be broken up by hitting them with high energy sound at their frequency, the rest of the body isn't responsive to those frequencies."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/37916",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9593207"
],
[]
] |
||
16xhst | what is mega and how do you use it? | Well, that about sums it up, I never really used the predecessor site and I was thinking about starting to use it now on its re-release. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16xhst/eli5_what_is_mega_and_how_do_you_use_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"c809h9a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Simply put, imgur for files(With more privacy)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1lh4f5 | why is the international community mostly apathetic when a government kills its people with conventional weapons, but loses it's mind when chemical weapons are involved? | Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like the countries condoning the Syrian government are focusing more on **how** the killings are brought about than the fact that *hundreds, if not thousands of people are killed with bullets and artillery*.
Syrians killed with chemical weapons: ~1500
Syrian casualty total: ~80,000 - ~100,000 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lh4f5/eli5_why_is_the_international_community_mostly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbz5wsr",
"cbz60i9",
"cbz9ruc"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"conventional weapons cab be met with a conventional counter-force. You have a gun, I'll get my friends and some rocks. But chemical weapons can't be seen, are extremely demoralizing, and then there is the added problem of control difficulty. \"Oh, you tried to unseat my regime, huh? Since I can't find you I'll drop this canister near your home even though I am killing 8 year olds and invalid old ladies in the process\". It's a very dirty trick and not one most people can sit by and watch. If 30 guys with machine guns come into a village, 300 villagers with rocks can kill their attackers. What defense is there against a cloud of gas? Conventional weapons give almost everyone a fighting chance.",
"2 reasons\n\nFirst, after WWI the horrible injuries caused by chemical weapons caused people to realize that there were things that even in war should not be permitted. The industrialized nations (the ones with the ability to make them) agreed to ban them & to punish those who used them. As more nations developed the skill and tools to make them & it is the more powerful countries that have the ability to punish that are expected to do so. The reality is complex but this is the the basis for retaliation.\n\nSecond, chemical and biological weapons can do much more damage. The container that killed the estimated 1500 in Syria would not have killed a couple hundred has it only been a high explosive. Many of the deaths would be much more painful and horrific. So there is a real difference it the type of weapon used & as unforgivable bombing a town is gassing it really is much worse",
"Chemicals weapons are not quick killers. Preceding death is usually torturous and inhumane. The suffering and agony is unimaginable. The victims just don't fall down and go to sleep. Depending on the chemical agent, there is seizures, suffocation, slow burning and degloving of skin. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2opbvs | if dogs can smell so much better than people, how is it that they can stick their noses deep in shit when i need to be upwind with a 10 foot pole? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2opbvs/eli5_if_dogs_can_smell_so_much_better_than_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmp98be",
"cmpa51a"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"Because they like it, it smells different to them.\nAnd it is important to understand that dogs do not just smell \"better\", they smell \"different\".\nThey can differentiate between nuances and components of a complex smell. ",
"Shit is like a fine wine.\n\nYour first sip of wine maybe sour and a little revolting, but as you learn to separate the flavors, and really dive deep into the complex levels of a wine's flavor profile it opens you up into a new world.\n\nSimilarly, dogs smell shit in the same way, they need to really fill their nostrils with the sent, let the oxygen separate the chemicals and perfume their sinus.\n\n\"This one seems to have a deep saturation about it\" Spot proclaimed, *takes another whiff*\n\n\"I would have to agree, do you also notice that hint of Kraft cheese spot\" Lucky explained as he peered over the heaping pile\n\n\"Ahh yes, yes!\" *Spot heaves another whiff* \"And Ballpark Hot Dogs Lucky, my favorite brand. A real winner we found today\"\n\n\"Bud will never believe us about this one, but he wouldn't no the difference between good shit and bad shit anyways!\"\n\n*both dogs bark humorously*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5jtv0s | if the flu mutates so rapidly, why do we experience similar symptoms every time we get it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jtv0s/eli5_if_the_flu_mutates_so_rapidly_why_do_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbixtn5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Not all parts of the virus mutate at the same rate. The parts necessary to keep the virus functioning are going to be conserved from one generation to the next. Other parts are more free to change, because there may be some flexibility in the way the virus uses them.\n\nThe proteins used to attach to host cells and get into them are a good example of the latter. They're also the most visible to your immune system, because they stick out from the surface of the virus. When you get infected or vaccinated, these are among the parts of the virus your immune system sees, and the parts your body creates specific defenses against. Since they're free to change somewhat, those specific defenses don't stay useful for long.\n\n(edited for clarity)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9kh3n4 | what's actually happening in a freshly poured guinness that makes it look like the bubbles flow downwards? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9kh3n4/eli5_whats_actually_happening_in_a_freshly_poured/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6z2s8j"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It's because the bubbles on the outside of the glass stick to the glass and rise slowly due to friction. Bubbles in the middle can go up unimpeded. That happens with all beer. Why is Guinness (and Boddington's) special?\n\nInstead of CO2, if you charge a beer with nitrogen the bubbles are so small and plentiful that this effect is more pronounced. In fact, it is so far pronounced that the bubbles in the center of the glass are moving so much faster than the bubbles on the outside that the upward flow in the center *reverses* the flow of the outer bubbles.\n\nOr: So much up in the middle that it causes down on the outside."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
f9b6ny | why is it uncomfortable to stand with both legs straight for extended periods of time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f9b6ny/eli5_why_is_it_uncomfortable_to_stand_with_both/ | {
"a_id": [
"fiqe4wx",
"fiqfhbm"
],
"score": [
49,
4
],
"text": [
"Muscles in the legs massage the veins when you're walking. This helps the veins return blood back to the heart.\n\nIf you're standing still all your muscles are tensed to keep you upright. This means they're not in a cycle of contraction and relaxation, like when you're walking. No cycle, no vein massage, which in turn leads to less back flow of blood to the heart. This causes your feet to swell with fluid that pools in your legs (if you've ever wondered why the elastic bands on your socks leave imprints on your skin after a long day, it's the same phenomenon).\n\nBesides, your muscles don't particularly enjoy being contracted for very long amounts of time, because when they contract and tense up they tend to shut off parts of their own blood supply.\n\nAll of this contributes to the uncomfortable feeling you're describing.",
"Having your legs extended all the way is not their normal resting state. When you stand up straight certain muscles in your legs have to flex in order to keep you upright and stop your knees from bending under your body weight. They’ll get tired and stiff after doing that too long. It’s really no different than your muscles getting sore from exercise. \n\nStanding too long also effects blood flow and fluid build up. Fluids will naturally build up in your legs due to gravity if you’re standing up and not moving. Bending your legs around while walking keeps the blood flowing, and also gives the muscles a break. No single muscle has to be contracted long enough to get tired that way. Of course they’ll eventually get tired from walking for a long time too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3o43qh | how do green screens work? what sort of software do you need to mess around with green screens? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3o43qh/eli5_how_do_green_screens_work_what_sort_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvtt0bv",
"cvttsd2",
"cvu3ijw"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Any decent video editing software has a green screen function, iMovie which comes with Mac's for instance had this ability. The screen doesn't have to be green, it's just that green and blue are not close to skin color. You just tell the video editing software to remove a certain color and replace it with something else.",
"Software like after effects, photoshop, premiere, Final Cut Pro, etc all have this ability, called Chroma key. It can take all the green pixels and make them transparent, allowing you to place a background layer behind your subject. We use green because there is very little green in human complexion. If you really want to use green clothing or something, you may be able to use a blue screen instead. ",
"The screen itself does nothing.\n\nThe screen is typically green because green is the colour most opposite to flesh tones. If the screen were red, or orange, or yellow, if you eliminated *that* colour, you'd also end up eliminating some of the human you're shooting.\n\nWhat kind of software? If you're using it for video, video editing software. If photos, photo editing software. If audio, you're doing it wrong.\n\nChroma key can be tricky to do well right off the bat. Pick a good green, in a fabric with no wrinkles, with a material that doesn't reflect light especially well. You want the whole screen to have an even brightness with no brighter or darker spots, as best you can. Then, in software, you can often use an eyedropper tool to select that particular green and turn up the saturation before applying the chroma key effect, which will turn everything of THAT green -- within a +/- margin you can set -- transparent. Whatever graphics you put behind it, you'll see.\n\nYou wanna get fancy? Look up things like Ultimatte, which take into account shadows and other things. It's the difference between small-town community-access greenscreen and major-market TV weatherman greenscreen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1z2x0n | how did they manage to make quaaludes completely disappear with all the genius chemists in this world? is there ingredients that are impossible to find or even synthesize? | I would like to know that there is at least a chance that I will get to try these legendary pills one day. Can someone with knowledge on the subject offer some enlightenment? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z2x0n/eli5_how_did_they_manage_to_make_quaaludes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfq0d6w",
"cfq0hrz",
"cfq0inu",
"cfq0sbu"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
5,
16
],
"text": [
"you can get it in south africa apparently. it's not that it can't be done it's that there' not enough demand for it anymore most places.",
"For a person who doesnt fancy googling drugs on a work connection, anyone fancy explaining what the hell these things are?",
"I think the biggest reason (apart from being illegal) they aren't made anymore is they simply aren't popular enough. They were virtually forgotten until The Wolf Of Wall Street. ",
"The main chemical in these drugs, methaqualone, is neither impossible nor even that difficult to synthesize. A few procedures don't actually require anything you wouldn't find in a well-stocked high school or college chemistry department, however they take a longer period of time and produce a lower yield. I'm speaking from reading the literature surrounding this compound of course, I've never synthesized it nor do I have any desire to.\n\nThe reason it isn't synthesized for the black market is, as others have said, there isn't enough demand to justify either the effort or the risk.\n\nIf you're extremely keen on trying them, you should probably go to a country where they're still legal, as a lot of the \"ludes\" on the black market in other countries are just a common tranquilizer like Valium or Xanax sold in a pill form that resembles the old \"gorilla biscuits.\" Honestly though, they're tranquilizers, sleeping pills, and there are scads of other drugs that produce the same effects but are cheaper, legal (with a prescription, of course), and far less dangerous; so going on a quaalude quest is likely to leave you disappointed even if you manage to track some down."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
213fp0 | why do humans perceive time at the 'rate' that we do? does time even have a natural 'rate', or is it just a property of consciousness and our perception? | I guess this question is a bit of a mix of philosophy and physics. I realize that change (and therefore time) still occurs outside of the perceptions of conscious life, but does it actually have a solid rate?
And is our perception of time just some function of our metabolism? Do all living creatures experience time at the same rate that we do, or does, say, a dog see things in slight slow motion relative to what we see (as an arbitrary example). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/213fp0/eli5_why_do_humans_perceive_time_at_the_rate_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg98eht",
"cg99n96",
"cg9aen7",
"cg9c1n9",
"cg9c8i3",
"cg9ci63",
"cg9d03r",
"cg9eioy",
"cg9he7t",
"cg9l19b",
"cg9lbo4",
"cg9nm3v",
"cg9orjj"
],
"score": [
42,
2,
13,
7,
13,
5,
11,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Perception of time is relative. If you ever get into a car accident or other life-or-death scenario, you will know what I mean.\n\nTime, on its own, has no rate, because there are no units to define the rate. We defined the rate to be one second per second, or a year per year. Our units are fairly arbitrary (excepting months, which are lunar based, and years/seasons, which are based on the revolution of the Earth), but are still artificial. If the Earth revolved around the sun on a 400-day per rotation basis, then that's how long our year would be.",
"Can confirm. Near death exp time was super slow....\n\nUngodly slow.",
"I would imagine there are many defining factors, but the majority are indeed perceptual, or at the very least have their basis in human perception. You could also boil it down to energy being exchanged, and entropy trending to become higher if you were to define it using non-human factors, though within that it would still be immensely difficult to define a baseline or natural rate. \n\nIf you're looking for a collection of common factors that can affect the perceptual, experience, or real passage of time, there are a few significant factors I could point to, though, as I'm likely not knowledgeable enough to get through them all, hopefully others might be able to contribute or correct my recollections. \n\nFirst, in defining the basic perceptual passage of time, as we experience it, that would have the most to do with the manner in which our brains function, the speed at which they do, and the shortcuts they take. This can vary immensely, especially in extreme situations, as listed by many other commenters. \n\nEssentially, it is your brain processing the information that it is presented with. \n\nYour brain will seek to process this in the most energy and time efficient way possible, in doing so cut out unnecessary information and the like, and rely on being just good enough. In seeking this path of least resistance, repeated events begin to fall into patterns, are processed and forgotten faster, and in doing are given a shorter perception. This ends up meaning that novel experiences will require the most processing, while practices along the lines of habitual actions will be completed with minimal energy, given very little thought. This is one reason why childhood events often feel as if they had taken longer, or form stronger memories, in that they were primarily novel experiences and required previously unencountered solutions. The second reason behind this being relativistic. If time is considered based on the total lifespan of the person so far, then a second is a much longer fraction of the life of a toddler, than it would be to a decrepit octogenarian.\n\nCertain drugs and chemicals will also affect the user's perception of time, notably adrenaline in the case of near-death experiences will enhance the memory as it is recalled later, resulting in a greater perception.\n\nNext, gravity of course can play a considerable role in determining time's passage. The example most relevant to Earth affairs would be GPS clocks, which need to be placed on a delay in order to account for the differences between the device and satellite. Black holes work well as an extreme example of this.\n\nTime is also relative in other senses, as is the case with objects travelling closer to the speed of light. Even flying on a plane, or driving along will have minuscule differences in time experienced outwardly, conflicting with what is perceived.\n\nFinally, I don't imagine we are actually able to measure any other creature's perceptions of time, though smaller size will affect the speed at which sensory data is transferred, which I believe is an explanation as to why flies are so damn hard to swat. Dogs may indeed experience slow motion. It's an interesting question. \n\nHopefully that covered enough of the significant ones. And for most of you,\n\nTL;DR:\n\nYes it is mainly perception. Novel experiences take longer to be processed, repeated events will have pre-established solutions. Gravity affects time. Speed affects time. Drugs affect time; enhance perception. Relativity affects time. Age affects perception. ",
"I've nothing to add but am commending you for posting an excellent, true ELI5 question. Lately, people have been posting a lot of yes or no queries and it's been driving me nuts. Thank you.",
"I have a weird experience to add. Notable because it happens repeatably, on-demand.\n\nWhen I'm practising something fairly intricate/fast on guitar (some boring exercise usually) to a fixed metronome, it seems a 'reasonable rate', until I am no longer playing - the metronome then seems to instantly speed up. Almost like concentration gives me more time to think between beats.\n\nNo idea if that has any basis in science though.. just wanted to add my exp",
"Here's an excellent [Radiolab](_URL_0_) podcast that explores the subjective nature of time.",
"There's a really interesting phenomenon that fits here:\n\nYoung children experience time differently to adults and the reason is quite fascinating; you see, children haven't lived through many days when compared to people several years older so a random day to a child is a larger proportion of their lives than it is for an adult. They've got less to compare it to so comparatively it feels larger. Children would also not have formed their understanding of the world so they need to be more switched on throughout the day than adults who have formed their routines and already know the basics of what they're doing. An average day for an adult can be tuned out and lived through via muscle memory, it doesn't take much concentration so it goes quickly. Much like the brain can filter out unchanging stimuli from your field of vision, it can also do that for passages of time.\n\nThere are other types of time perception [here](_URL_0_), I particularly like the stopped clock concept.\n\nAnd of course this isn't even touching the fact that time, as a fundamental law of the universe, is relative anyway.",
"Your current awareness is already in some sense a memory. If you touch your finger to your nose it will feel simultaneous, but as a matter of neurology we know the signal from your nose reaches your brain before the signal from your finger. Your brain layers consciousness into what feels like \"real time\" perception of the world. ",
"Not really an answer, but I've always thought it would be interesting to see if the perception of time could be altered through extended exposure to an environment where things were sped of or slowed down.\n\nWhen I initially thought of it I was pretty big in to reaction time based video games. I always wondered if someone played the game at 200% speed for say a month if their reaction time would speed up as a result, thus giving them an advantage over other competitors, or if there were limitations to the human input through sight or sound and the muscle response.\n\nI tried doing it myself for a while in counter-strike, playing against AI with increased movement speed and high difficulty so my reaction times would have to be faster. While it did make a difference when I went back to playing other people at normal speed, the effect didn't seem to last long, maybe a few games, but then I wasn't playing against those bots for extended periods of time and they didn't really have human movement/reasoning (AI wasn't great at that time).\n\nI also wonder if differences in perception in time could be a factor is what some people call \"talent\" in sports and music, etc.",
"They say a if a hummingbird were to watch TV, it'd look like a slideshow. Some animals see things at a faster rate than we do.",
"There are emerging physics models that remove time from equations and work out fine. In fact, it might be the key to figuring out the GUT. If these timeless equations turn out to be true, that means time is not necessary to the existence of the universe. Perhaps humans and other animals only cognate a static fourth dimensional universe by having a stream of change. We can't experience our whole existence at once, so it's experienced in a uniform serial. However, we only exist as a series of moments strung together. Static. Frozen in the universe forever...from our birth to death...just an infinite amount of snapshots. Nothing ever changes. Our whole life is like a wire, each moment is a copper atom in this wire...permanently fixed. The electricity that flows through it is our consciousness experiencing our life over and over again. ",
"Is there anyone that isn't some bullshit armchair expert that can give an answer that isn't just parroting something they read on reddit a couple weeks ago?",
"Time is only experienced as fast as your brain can process stimuli. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.radiolab.org/story/91584-time/"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception#Types_of_temporal_illusions"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5rx0op | how does printscreening exactly work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rx0op/eli5_how_does_printscreening_exactly_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddasrg0"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Yes, there is! It's usually called the frame buffer.\n\nThis is a chunk of memory containing a bitmap image that the video hardware continually reads and sends out to the display. Other programs write to this chunk of memory to edit what picture is being sent.\n\nBeing that it's just a chunk of memory, other programs can read it too and save that data to somewhere else."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
869one | why do you think you look one way when looking in a mirror (good) and then worse when looking at pictires/front facing camera (bad)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/869one/eli5_why_do_you_think_you_look_one_way_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw3euui",
"dw3exqv",
"dw3fd4h",
"dw3fddg",
"dw3fejo",
"dw3fi62",
"dw3fnkp",
"dw3fooc",
"dw3furi",
"dw3fw62",
"dw3fzux",
"dw3gl4a",
"dw3hi1w",
"dw3hiap",
"dw3hn7f",
"dw3hnb1",
"dw3hoqy",
"dw3hsqa",
"dw3i1dy",
"dw3ia99"
],
"score": [
15,
117,
1476,
9,
4,
27,
8,
327,
6,
3,
20,
125,
5,
6,
3,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Mirrors invert images laterally, so when you look at a picture, your “true face” does not look the way you have decided it looks good in the mirror. ",
"Because in a mirror, you're looking at the reverse of your face. The left side of your face is showing in the mirror, as the right side of the mirror images face. You get used to this and accustomed to seeing this daily. \nThen when you look at a picture, you see the left side of your face on the left side of the pictures face. It appears backwards, and looks wrong, when in reality, that's how your face looks to everyone else. You're just used to seeing your face backwards in a mirror, and your brain thinks that's correct.",
"The others have mentioned the reverted image, and to an extent that is correct.\n\nHowever, when you begin to look at cameras, the focal length of the camera can affect what you look like, by exaggerating some of your features etc.\n\nHere is a pretty cool [example](_URL_0_)\n\n",
"The flipped image makes your face look \"wrong\" compared to the way you think you look, but doesn't necessarily make you look worse. Many phones will flip the image that you see through the front-facing camera so that the screen behaves like a mirror, but you probably still think you look bad in that image.\n\nThe other factor is the focal length of the lens, which affects the perspective of the image. A wide-angle photo taken from close up tends to distort the face compared to one taken with a longer lens from further away. Borrowing [these examples](_URL_0_), most phone cameras are equivalent to somewhere between the 24mm and 35mm examples. Your eye sees something like the 50mm example, and somewhere around 100mm tends to be recommended as the ideal for portraits, being slightly more flattering than you look in real life.",
"I was always told that it was cause a mirror gives a moving image and you can see all he subtle movements that make a face seem more human than a still image, so a picture will often seem a little off",
"I think you subconsciously make micro-adjustments while looking at the mirror to look like your ideal self. ",
"we subconsciously make different facial arrangements and angles at ourselves in the mirror that we know make us look better. Like lifting your eyebrows a little or turning your head very slightly in this or that direction, pouting your lips etc. in photos it's a free for all, you don't know your angle or lighting ",
"it's because \n\n1. Main reason: you're seeing yourself in 3d in the mirror\n\n2. You're seeing yourself flipped in the mirror\n\n3. Focal length of camera lens\n\n4. Lighting and shadows\n\n5. Camera angle\n",
"Mirrors reflect along the z-axis. Some cameras \"reflect\" along the x-axis unless told not to.",
"If you think you look worse in a photo than in a mirror, remember that everyone else thinks the opposite. So be proud of those beautiful photos of you on Facebook and Instagram!",
"Try looking at a double reflective mirror to see what you truly look like. I would not advise it, it may leave you depressed for months.",
"I absolutely hate pictures of myself for this reason. \nGetting ready in the morning I think 'yeah I'm looking alright today' goes off about day then BAM someone posts a pic on fb from the day of me and all I see is a beast. : ( \nMore reasons not to go on fb.",
"an interesting fact i’ll mention here, did you know that through out your entire life you’ll never see yourself as other people do. you’re only able to view yourself in reflections, photos, and videos but never in your real true form. ",
"One is in 3D, the other in 2D. You can ask \"why does everything look better in real life than on pictures\" and the answer is that you saw it in 3D. So you should use your \"real\" perception of yourself as the gold standard for how beautiful you are because the 2D images are just shitty approximations. Edit: and if someone looks better on pictures than in real life, its because of photoshop and clever photography.",
"I just learned about this in my social psychology class! Exposure has been shown to have strong correlation with what we find attractive. This is why we find those [photos](_URL_0_) where they merge people's faces attractive. \n\nYou generally see yourself in a mirror most often so it's what you have most exposure to and thus what you find more attractive. If it is of any comfort, other people would find your unmirrored face more attractive for the same reason. \n\nThis could also be why our voices sound better to us when we speak rather than in recordings but that's just speculation on my part. ",
"As far as I know, this has to do with your brain and self perception. Since you typically most often see yourself in a mirror and most selfies now “flip” your image, your brain registers that as how you look. In the other scenario, you see yourself the way other people see you, which your brain recognizes as different and is typically perceived as less attractive ",
"Being used to the mirrored version is definitely part of it. Those who don't think so: take a few photos of yourself and mirror them in a photo editor, a am certain you will find them better looking. I do this whenever I have to select, say, a new LinkedIn photo for my profile. Take a few, then mirror them to make it easier to determine which ones actually look good. Then of course mirror it back before publishing.\n\nAlso, notice that many selfies you see on social media are flipped nowadays. This is surely because selfies are not so much intended for the friends/followers of the poster, as the poster's own narcissism. Therefore the photo is not created the way the friends are most used to and find most attractive, but optimized for the poster itself. ",
"I've actually looked a lot in to this because it was bother me so much, the main reasons I found are lens distortion (e.g from the lens being. Close to your face w/ a wide angle), reduced dynamic range, noise and unnatural color reproduction (e.g not color balanced). Revrsing your face has little to do with it imo. Lighting also has a big part to play as well as angle.",
"Because front face camera makes people look like shit. Especially if it’s too close to your face. People say that pictures look more like you but I would say a mirror is more accurate even if the image is reversed. I see lots of pictures of people I know in real life and a lot of the time it doesn’t really look like them. Even from far away sometimes. \n\n",
"But, how do I look like then, who am I?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.danvojtech.cz/blog/2016/07/amazing-how-focal-length-affect-shape-of-the-face/"
],
[
"https://media.mcpactions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/focallengtharticle.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://m.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/07/average-woman-face-around-world_n_4058145.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ztdkv | why emotions from suppressed sources feel much stronger than regular emotions | When something pisses me off, I shake it off a few minutes later, but when my sister, whom I have built up a lot of resentment towards over the years, pisses me off, I want to choke the life out of her. I've never laid a hand on her but the urge is intense, I feel the anger down to my very core and it almost seems to resonate through my whole body. Even the very thought of her makes me mad and I can feel my heart rate rising just typing this. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ztdkv/eli5_why_emotions_from_suppressed_sources_feel/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyozvkr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your sister makes your life worse, by continuing to piss you off over a period of years. That has a much greater effect on you than some random annoyance in your life that is perhaps only going to happen once. It is oppressive to know that you will continue to be troubled by your sister for some indefinite time to come, possibly for your entire life. Your sister might still be annoying you when you are 90 years old. She might not, of course; lots of things could change. But meanwhile you do not know how long the problem will persist. You can be a gracious and choose to overlook something annoying, but a continual, repeating annoyance is much harder to overlook. It means that even though you have restrained yourself from choking your sister, over and over, she does not appreciate your self restraint and continues to be annoying. So while you are being considerate, she is being inconsiderate.\n\nI have assessed this situation from your point of view, and you may be 100% correct. But I do not know what your sister is doing that you find so annoying, and I do not know why she is doing it, or what complaints she might have about you. In cases of conflict between two people, there are usually two sides to the story. So do not take this as my confirmation that you are entirely right and your sister is entirely wrong. That may be the case, but I do not know enough about the situation to really know that. (But I will be dropping by to do an in-depth interview of you and your sister.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5q77cm | how do some teenagers/children show great maturity and adult like qualities even if their frontal lobes aren't fully developed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5q77cm/eli5_how_do_some_teenagerschildren_show_great/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcx0nrl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Well in this case, 'adult' is a bit of a misnomer, as I'm assuming you mean > 25 by the term (that's when your frontal lobe stops developing).\n\nI'll answer your question with a question. How do some adults show great immaturity if their frontal lobes are fully developed? The answer is, everybody's different. Some people learn to be more mature than others, and this is what we deem an 'adult-like quality'. You don't need a fully developed frontal lobe to be mature."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3v3c9j | why does australia choose to process illegal asylum seekers offshore instead of onshore? | I assume it has something to do with the fact that if its onshore processing, the asylum seeker has an easier legal path to residency or something. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v3c9j/eli5why_does_australia_choose_to_process_illegal/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxk1nob"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm sure it's more complicated than this, but afaik it is because a large number of people seeking asylum were arriving illegally via boats from South East Asia. The understanding was that if they reach Australian soil, they have 'made it' and will be processed through.\n\nThis led to a lot of dangerous situations as people attempted to cross the sea in overloaded and/or unsafe craft, and deaths were occurring. \n\nThe original idea was that any boat caught trying to cross over to Australia was to be turned back. But you can't just turn around an often overloaded, dangerous boat. More people could die.\n\nSo the government came up with the idea of offshore processing. This means that no matter how you reach Australia, if you do it illegally (outside of official refugee processes) you will still be sent offshore and remain in detention until you are processed. I believe the idea is it should act as a deterrent and convince people to apply for asylum through official channels, since either option now means you will not actually be in Australia until you are processed and accepted.\n\nWhether it's right or wrong, moral, ethical or effective is an ongoing debate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2t1fuz | how do we know a cats likes cat food, dogs like dog food? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t1fuz/eli5_how_do_we_know_a_cats_likes_cat_food_dogs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnuzswm",
"cnuzwme"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not a matter of what they like. Cats and dogs have different nutritional needs. So, you design a food with the nutritional value you are looking for, then make it appeal to the taste of that type of animal. \n\nAlso, cats are obligate carnivores, they *must* only eat meat. Dogs are kinda omnivores, or even scavengers.",
"I think the mistake here is assuming cats and dogs \"like\" things the same way we do (they may, I just don't assume they do).\n\nAs I understand it, the most fundamental part of a like or a want (when it comes to food) is a biological need for that thing. For example, if you normally eat fatty foods, and then stop eating fatty foods, your body wants fatty foods so it makes you crave them.\n\nBoth cats and dogs are carnivorous by nature, so they pack the foods with fats and proteins (and alas, tons of grain as a filler usually) and their body responds positively because it's getting what it requires.\n\nA *typical* cat or dog doesn't get pumped about leafy green vegetables because their bodies don't require as much of the nutritional value of that food item vs. meat (except for some reason my cat is nutty for leafy greens, hence the stress on \"typical\").\n\nThis is extremely simplified I'm sure.\n\nThat being said I know nothing of feline or canine olfactory systems and whether we can prove they have a more complex concept of \"like\" so this could all be BS."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2tid1v | why is obama visiting saudi arabia to give condolences when it is widely known saudi arabia is barbaric in its practices of torture, arbitrary judicial murders, street beheadings and flogging? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tid1v/eli5_why_is_obama_visiting_saudi_arabia_to_give/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnzary8",
"cnzarz3",
"cnzasxa",
"cnzavvc",
"cnzba6w",
"cnzbg1i",
"cnzbjzy",
"cnzbx5z",
"cnzc4xk",
"cnzce69",
"cnzckhr",
"cnzcxiq",
"cnzdvkq"
],
"score": [
2,
159,
2,
11,
22,
14,
3,
7,
2,
15,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's important to maintain good relations with the country that pumps blood through your country's veins.\n\nEven if they have several barbaric practices.",
"Because Saudi Arabia is an important ally, has a lot of oil and has a lot of influence in the region. Those are all very important reasons for the US to keep the political relationship with SA good and visiting at times like this keeps that political relationship good. \n\nSecondly, if you want to chance all of those things, the way to go about it is not to fly in there and force freedom on those people, it's to have politics there change from the inside. The previous king Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud was about as much of a progressive as you can get in a very conservative land like SA. No, women still can't drive. But they can vote now in municipal elections and be a part of the Shura. Is that enough? Of course not, but it is already a huge progressive step forward. The current king, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, is hoped to continue that sort of progress. He was hand-picked by his brother to be his successor, so that is a good indication. By supporting any steps towards becoming a more progressive nation with closer political ties etc, those changes are more likely to occur. ",
"Mainly because Saudi Arabia is the US' most important ally in the region. SA controls one of the - if not the most - important oil reserves in the world. The kingdom is also an enemy of Iran and Syria and has been historically a staunch supporter of US policies in the area.",
"Because its the proper thing to do.\nYou don't have to be a dick when the other party is.",
"As much as everyone is going to yell \"oil!\" in this post, it's really more about influence. Saudi Arabia is to the middle east as China is to east Asia. As Russia is to western Asia. Etc. While they do have a terrible human rights record (as does China and Russia), their neighbors still listen to them WAAAYYYYYY more than they listen to us. ",
"Eli5: Why dont people realize in order to run a country you have to be pragmatic?",
"1. Oil\n\n2. Stability in the region as they are our most powerful ally in the region. \n\n3. Oil. ",
"As if the US hasn't done any torture/killings lately? ",
"There are two sides to every coin. One way to think about it: why would Saudi Arabia want condolences from a country that has participated in mass genocide (native Americans), blatant torture in violation of the Geneva convention, and the unlawful assassination of freely elected world leaders (Salvadore Allende)",
"Same reason a country would do the same for us despite it being well known that we drone bomb, detain and torture indefinitely, imprison for profit, etc.",
"Ah what we have here is a perfect example of loading a question. You are asking why the US President would support barbarism, when you could ask why the President is visiting an ally that has laws that we disagree with. Basically, you are trying to get the answer you want by asking the question a certain way. ",
"Saudi Arabia is unique among all Middle Eastern nations. It is a kingdom, with European-inspired absolute monarchy instead of a sultanate or a caliphate. As such, the monarch and royal family of Saudi Arabia are not held on the same leadership standards expected of a Sultan or a Caliph. This roughly means Saudi Arabia's monarchy can do stuff a Sultan or a Caliph would be criticized for doing. This is particularly good for a non-Muslim country like United States to take advantage of. A \"heretical\" country like US would never get an alliance with a Sultan or a Caliph, but they could with a European-styled Muslim King.\n\nIt's more advantageous too than if Saudi Arabia is a republic or theocratic. US only needed to maintain good relations with basically just the royal family. If it were a republic, the US would have a hard time maintaining relations with all the political parties, most of which would probably maintain different levels of hostility towards Western ideals just like what we're seeing right now in other predominantly-Muslim republics. An Islamic theocracy would be worse as the theocratic body would uphold Islam's restrictions over relations with \"heretical\" countries.\n\nFrom the very beginning, it's only Saudi Arabia which the US could hope to maintain a long-term steady warm relations in the Gulf region, thanks to their unique government setup. This had been beneficial for the US during the Cold War. Just imagine what would have happened if the peninsula and all its oil fell to the Soviet sphere of influence during the Cold War.\n\nUS benefited from the oil and strategic partnership offered by Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia benefited from US money and protection. All these thanks to a royal family which the US has cared for for basically a generation now.\n\nThe US won't jeopardize its relations with the royal family just because it promotes a backward society. Actually, the US has a share of the blame. If it's not for the negativity the royal family earns from its people because of their warm relations with the US, the royal family won't have the reason to pamper the wishes of Saudi Arabia's clerics. Saudi Arabia's conservative social and criminal laws are a result of the royal family giving in to the wishes of the country's conservative clergy, partly for these clerics to look over the royal family's alliance with a Non-Islamic nation and partly to continually legitimize their claim to absolute leadership.",
"This thread brings a tear to my eyes!\n\nAs a Saudi, seeing Americans defend our mutually beneficial relationship in the face of a loaded question is great! such a different attitude than usual.\n\nWe do have a lot of problems. They're out burden to bear, and hopefully progress will continue towards gender equality and laws that respect human rights.\n\nI agree with Obama's diplomacy and also agree when our king visits the US to cement our relationship."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2nzweb | - why does a community need to secure the right to create its own broadband? why can't they just do it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nzweb/eli5_why_does_a_community_need_to_secure_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmiex5d",
"cmihn75",
"cmiib0r",
"cmiiw9a",
"cmijlli",
"cmijpig",
"cmijqhn",
"cmik8sc",
"cmikgrw",
"cmikm6d",
"cmikmwj",
"cmiln4h",
"cmilu7z",
"cmim25d",
"cmimrgm",
"cmimyk7",
"cmind5v",
"cminf5y",
"cmiocst",
"cmiovmg",
"cmip0us",
"cmip1w1",
"cmiq4w8",
"cmirf13",
"cmirygs",
"cmiskwj",
"cmitt31",
"cmiu22m",
"cmiuq2z",
"cmivqfi"
],
"score": [
140,
1037,
9,
4,
126,
2,
157,
9,
2,
2,
29,
24,
2,
6,
37,
2,
2,
66,
7,
7,
2,
5,
12,
2,
11,
3,
2,
2,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Many municipalities have contracts with one cable provider and one telephone provider, granting them legal monopolies. In some cases, establishing their own broadband service violates those contracts.",
"Also, the cities often don't own the poles, companies like AT & T do. Thus, the city needs permission from whoever owns them to run cables and stuff on the poles. (I'm not an expert, I just found this out from people that worked on getting google fiber to come to their city). ",
"In simple terms, that would be the town (publicly funded) building infrastructure for internet service, similarly to how the town builds roads, and the town puts in water pipes etc.\n\nWhy is this not \"okay\"? Because it's not \"right\" or \"fair\" for a publicly funded organization to compete in a private sector market. Imagine that a town's general store is the most popular place in a small town because it's the only store. They make profits, but nothing huge. Now consider that the town decided to build their own store across the street, using taxpayer money (including property taxes paid by the other store owner and their customers). Tax money pays for the stock and employee wages, and since it was easier to pay for, they make their store bigger and sell more things at lower prices. The mom and pop store gets driven out of business.\n\nIt's not ethically right that the town used the taxpayer money to exploit a local business (also another taxpayer). If the mayor decided to build a store on their own dime, it'd be different because it's their investment and their risk.\n\nNow apply this same thing to internet service. Even though comcast isn't a mom and pop convenience store that's fragile, you have to consider them with the same argument, which is very valid.\n\nInternet is sold as a service, not as a utility. Water is sold as a utility, electricity, natural gas are utilities. It was decided by government long ago that these were necessary for the public to maintain a comfortable lifestyle, and that it would be unfair leave the utility market unregulated. For municipal internet, you first need to take internet away from the private sector.",
"Except you have to imagine that you're starting from a scenario where all the current roads are toll roads owned by the private sector.\n\nThe government can build more roads, but then they're competing in a private market (not a capitalist market, which is one of the fundamental concepts USA is build on). Just because they're the government doesn't mean they can do whatever they want.\n",
"My state fought over this state-by-state issue not 2 years ago as we were vying for Google Fiber. First of 14 states to make a fuss over cable funded bipartisan congressmen randomly deciding municipal broadband was unfair competition to the systems in place that just \"couldn't afford to compete\" with an infrastructure funded venture.\n\nIf you are one of 23 states in the US, it's because your state intentionally banned it quietly in the past decade.\n\nIf you live in NC, you're at least aware that one county got by and a lotta counties raised a fuss over this shit.",
"well in nebraska \n\n\nNo Direct Sale\n\nStates affected: Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington\n\nAlmost as prevalent as administrative hurdles are states that explicitly restrict the direct sale of broadband (through communities or public power utilities) to end users.\n\nMost of the roadblocks to municipal broadband involve extra paperwork or economic disadvantages, but disallowing the direct sale to consumers effectively removes any ability for municipalities to bring faster speeds to their citizens… besides begging incumbent providers.\n\nIn effect, by banning municipal broadband these states are disagreeing with any advantage of community-run internet including local job growth, improved infrastructure, and self-reliability.\n\nThe sad thing is, unlike other barriers to entry, there isn’t even a way for cities and communities alike to get around the problem of direct sale, other than convincing the entire state of a complete overhaul of existing law code, which is difficult, time consuming, and at times, seemingly impossible.\nSpecific Laws:\n\n Arkansas: Ark. Code § 23-17-409\n Missouri: Missouri Revised Statutes § 392.410\n Nebraska: Nebraska Revised Statute 86-575, Nebraska Revised Statute 86-594\n Pennsylvania: 66 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 3014(h)\n Texas: Texas Utilities Code, § 54.201\n Washington: Washington Revised Code Annotated § 54.16.330\n\n\n",
"Because 22+ states have state laws banning or severely complicating municipal networks. The big ISPs have been busy lobbying (mostly through ALEC).\nSee _URL_2_ and _URL_1_\n\n\nThis is THE source for municipal network issues. _URL_0_\n\n",
"You're conflating the term \"community\" with \"local government\". Your question relates to problems of the political process, not problems of a market demand and insufficient supply. \n\nLocal governments across America answer to the big telecoms. Many people inappropriately then say that local government should take action to curtail the telecoms. So let me repeat. *Local governments across America answer to the big telecoms.*\n\nFocus on that. ",
"Its because the companies will sue the city for anticompetitive practices.",
"Imminent Domain. This is what local communities should implement and take it over to kill the monopolies. In Europe the governments own the physical network and companies compete for your business over that network. Prices are cheap and the speed is fast. To me that sounds more like capitalism and fosters real competition.",
"Because corporations like Comcast or Time Warner don't want you to do that. They prefer unchallengable monopolies over free market capitalism. And your government is owned by those corporations, so they won't do anything about it. ",
"In countries outside of the US companies can build infrastructure but the country/city forces the company to rent, lease or share infrastructure for a reasonable fee. This IMO is very sane. I personally dislike the company who owns the infrastructure on my internet connection however my actual ISP are bro's and I literally can resolve my issues talking to them for 5minutes. Fuckers actually know what a traceroute is and know how the network works",
"Generally speaking it's a bad idea to put business and government together. If I get to regulate the manufacture of, say, hotdogs, AND I go into the hotdog business, what's to stop me from passing a regulation that says only hotdogs made with my particular type of hotdog making machine can be sold to the public? Or to instruct inspectors and bureaucrats to deny my competitors crucial licenses on some made up grounds? And even if I pinky swear that I'm never going to do any of those things, not even if there's a recession and we really need our hotdog business to do well else we might have to raise taxes / cut spending / lose an election, maybe private companies won't believe in the promise. Maybe they'll just pull up stakes and run to somewhere where they won't have to compete with the same people who make the rules.\n\nAcross municipalities, as well as state and federal government, a variety of legal arrangements exist to try and prevent such abuses.",
"Dont *any* companies out there see the potential gold mine in the investment of building their own infrastructure and offering reasonable service and rates? I feel like people would flock to the new option with reasonable prices/service/products and force the others to play ball.\n\nOr is there legitimate concern that companies wouldnt see a return on their investments there? I see that it's an astronomical cost to implement, I just dont understand how something like that wouldnt pay off if the company did it right. Why is Google being so cautious about where it's rolling out it's fiber service? They could be destroying the market all over the country, no?",
"To understand that, you have to understand how governments work in the US. \n\nThe main issue here is that communities, e.g. cities and counties, unlike States and the Federal Government, do not have what is called sovereignty. The term Sovereignty simply means the authority to govern. Things like making laws, arresting people, making them pay taxes, providing electricity, that kind of stuff. \n\nIn the US system the people have sovereignty which is exercised through two levels of government. The state in which they live, and the country as a whole. So my State, Washington, has certain powers simply because it is a state. Those powers do not come from any other government, they are just a part of what a state is. Not even the Federal Government can take them away. Only the People can change their powers. \n\nThat is not true for cities and counties. Cities and counties, and other types of local governments, are created by states. Because states are big places with lots of different kinds of people and places, they create counties and cities to help out and to let local people control local issues. Your water will often come from a city or county for example. They also can do things like maintain and build streets, run parks, provide police and fire, all the local stuff we need. \n\nBut because they don't have sovereignty, they only have the power they are given and what they can do can be controlled by the State. \n\nIt's like a parent and an older child they leave in charge. They might give the older child the power to send their younger brother to their room, but they don't have the power to ground them. They can pick what's for dinner that night, but they can't choose what food is purchased. Or a CEO and a division head. The key thing is that their power comes from a higher government. They have no innate sovereignty. \n\nSo a city or county can only build a broadband network if the state lets them. Whether they can or not depends on the state in which they are in. Some states ban it outright, some just don't allow the powers needed, and in others it is allowed, or uncertain.\n \n ",
"Because your ISPs are taking advantage of your ignorance of what is, in fact, very simple technology.\n\nIt's called capitalism.",
"I live in a town of 50,000 in Canada (close to middle of the continent). The idea of only one company being allowed to run an ISP seems asinine in my opinion.\n\nThere's two main cable/DSL ISPs here - one is the regional phone company, which, until 1996 or so was owned by the government. And then there's a local co-operative that supplies high speed internet in larger towns in the region. I like getting dividend's every autumn but their prices have gone up a few dollars every year, while the speeds haven't really increased much.\n\nIn most cities in my part of Canada, it seems there's usually two ISPs available, the local regional phone company, and a local co-op or a national provider.. or else you'll have to go with one of the wireless providers.",
"I know I'm a little late, but a lot of it has to do with various state laws. Where I live in Colorado there is a law on the books known as SB152-05. It says it is illegal for public entities to build and sell broadband services if there is an incumbent provider that meets FCC broadband definitions. In order to bypass this law a vote must pass locally to override this law. That's where the right comes in. SOURCE: I work in IT in a community that just voted to override this law, and is building its own infrastructure.",
"Because local governments had sold out the people they supposedly represent, long ago, to give exclusive \"rights of way\" to specific companies and only those companies. These rights of way could be access to dig under city property (roads, sidewalks), put up poles to string cables, or whatever the case may be.\n\nThat's how you end up with \"Comcast towns\" and \"Time Warner towns\" but never the twain shall meet. One company got the right of way a long time in the past in that community which effectively granted them a monopoly in that geographic area. \n\nOnce one of these companies gets a local monopoly, [they make sure the politicians are well-incented to keep them in their monopoly positions](_URL_0_).",
"I am foreign student in Japan.And I enjoying 100 mbps by paying about 30 dollar per _URL_0_'s not super speed,but I can download the giga size bluray film while watching the movies,finishing watching current movies and proceed to new movies,heck I can spend all weekend just watching high quality movies one after another.\n\nAs much as I hate Japanese Culture,it was counter-balanced with their Internet speed.And porn.lol\n\nI don't know why I even want to mention this,but other part of the world internet sure is sucks.",
"Because \"government of the people by the people for the people\" is just a trendy saying now and means nothing",
"Why can't they just do it? \n\nBecause, in America today, we live in a Corporatist, Fascist, Crony Capitalistic society where government intervention has ruined pretty much any form of real innovation and entrepreneurial freedom. \n\nI look at some of these ridiculous comments from people saying things like, \"This is what happens when monopolies yada yada yada\" and \"No one can explain it\". \n\nBullshit. It's easy to explain. \n\nYou get monopolies when government tries to intervene, because government regulation ALWAYS inevitably ends up protecting, shielding, and bloating the largest company/companies, all while simultaneously strangling the little guys. Which, in the end, fucks over the consumer, because when the consumer wants to fight against the bad companies, they effectively have to fight against both the government AND the corporation, since they're both in bed with each other. It's a 1v2 fight as opposed to a 1v1 fight. And, they can't take their business and their money elsewhere because the absurd amount of government regulations have kept any legitimate competition from being able to enter the marketplace. \n\nThe internet is the perfect example. It's been essentially completely free all this time. Everyone's loved it. Now, the FCC (Government regulator) is considering killing that. Oh, and guess where the chairman of the FCC used to work? In the \"Comcast business\". Think he has YOUR best interests, or the free internet's interest at heart? Yeah fucking right. \n\nBut, in the end, all of this fuckery is actually a good thing. I'm hoping that it will just speed up the inevitable collapse.",
"Big business says its against government intervention yet behind closed doors they lobby furiously for legislation that will keep them way ahead of their competition. \n\nAfter Chattanooga's 1 gig per person publicly owned internet was completed successfully the cable giants quickly lobbied the legislatures of all 50 states to pass bills that would make it illegal for communities to own and operate their own cable internet infrastructure. Resulting in 20 states adopting laws that make it illegal for local communities to run their own cable infrastructure. Politicians are owned by big corporations so if Verizon does not want to compete with community owned broadband they will make it so they don't have to.\n",
"The state of \"broadband\" in the USA is laughable. \n\nThis is one thing the UK does way better.. (and to be honest we don't do it THAT well.)\n\nI don't understand how the most powerful nation in the world can have such shitty internet. You need to get some petitions together to make the government do something... I dunno. Everyone has to start somewhere right?",
"Because the private industry bought and paid to have laws passed which stifle competition from the public sector, because the American political system is woefully broken and no longer represents the will of the people but instead the will of the companies which fund the campaigns.",
"In the US, because Comcast, AT & T, Verizon, Cox, etc. pay lots of money to have politicians in their pockets to make it difficult to set up a competitor. Politican makes it hard to build out new infrastructure or operate in an area there is already an ISP in (even a monopoly), politician receives bacon. They also spend massive marketing budgets on FUD to oppose any other that does manage to get past the initial hurdle.\n\ntl;dr: Because murica.",
"Years ago, our town ran fiber throughout the city with the idea that in the future they would create city-wide free internet access. Spent tax-payer dollars for the infrastructure, were told they can't do it because the FCC won't allow it. It's not cable and it's not broadcast. Why can't we have what we paid for?",
"In a free country, you would not need permission to create anything. You would simply need a voluntary agreement. Unfortunately the US is not a free country.\n\nIn the US, local governments have granted monopoly privilege to service providers. This was sold to the public as well intended, so that the government could force the service providers to install infrastructure in low-income parts of town instead of only serving the rich parts of town. However, as with any other government program, the actual result is to enrich politicians and crony businesses that get the benefits of coercive restriction on competition.\n\nso now you have a situation where if you want to provide internet service to a particular geographic region, you have to ask for permission first, and it depends on what level of government happens to claim that turf (yes, like common street gangs.) Sometimes it is the state, county, or city government, it just depends. When one level of government wants to create an internet service offering (which isn't something I'd support, but I digress) and another level of government already has a pay to play kickback scheme going with a service provider that enjoys a coercive local monopoly, conflicts like this occur.",
"Things are seriously fucked up when a corporation decides to take on it's competition by lobbying lawmakers and politicians to make their competitors unable to compete in the marketplace (community fiber networks, Tesla direct sales, etc) instead of just offering the superior product. I don't know what we can do about it but I'm really tired of losing out on better products and competitive pricing because of this type of shit. It seems like whoever we vote in to office this behavior continues.",
"This thread is probably too old for a new comment to be seen but I will just leave this here anyway. \n\nwhat we call a community based broadband would be backed by the government. companies have been granted protection from competition with the government. this is quite reasonable since the government is not profit seeking and can lose lots of money competing with companies. it may seem unfair since the current companies are doing such a piss poor job of creating broadband but if government got in the habit of competing with private business it would have a chilling effect on investment in private business. would you invest money in a company if you thought there was a chance of the government coming in and taking over that industry? It is not really about broadband in particular but business in general. this is why people were so concerned about the government bailing out car companies. who would invest in Ford is GM is government owned and can compete without seeking profit? basically companies want assurance the government will stay out before they will invest in an industry. when the government wants to enter they need special permission. that's what is going on in these communities. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.muninetworks.org/",
"http://www.gwlr.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Stricker1.pdf",
"http://muninetworks.org/sites/www.muninetworks.org/files/2page-comty-bb.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://pando.com/2014/05/28/comcast-and-time-warner-have-made-huge-donations-to-the-politicians-who-could-block-their-merger/"
],
[
"month.It"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9ktvtl | why are small animals, even when bred in captivity, still afraid of human interaction? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ktvtl/eli5_why_are_small_animals_even_when_bred_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"e71qg1i",
"e71qylx",
"e71xw26"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"We are a large, apex predator (the \"eyes in front loves to hunt\" rule). When you're a prey animal, from mouse to deer, life expectancy is longer when you avoid predators like us. Living in one of our cage cities won't change that instinct for a long time, and prey animals are much more instinctive than our fellow predators like dogs and cats.",
"Animals tend to run from everything. Its safer than getting into a fight. Only when they've been around another species for a very long time do they know they don't have to flee.\n\nWhen you live in big cities for example, birds aren't typically afraid of people. They've come to learn we are not going to hurt them, and they don't just fly away. Especailly the bigger ones.\n\nAnd some animals like Penguins have no land predators so they simply can't imagine something else on land being a threat to them. They'll walk right up to you.",
"My rats fucking loved me. Even if I walked close to their cage, they’d run up and put their legs up on the cage in anticipation for me to open the door. When I would, if I was wearing a hoodie, they’d crawl straight up my arm and chill under my hoodie. I fucking miss them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1vtjcd | if my parents had sex to conceive me 3 hours earlier than they did, would i have then been born 3 hours earlier? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vtjcd/eli5_if_my_parents_had_sex_to_conceive_me_3_hours/ | {
"a_id": [
"cevnb9r",
"cevndvm"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"There's more of a chance of you not being you than anything else.",
"No pregnancy is exactly 41 weeks long down to the hours and minutes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4n0ovg | how is it possible that an open-source encryption program is safe? also why is it that 2048 bit encryption is currently unbreakable? | First question: If I make a secure, hard to break lock and everyone know how the lock is made then everyone can just fabricate a key for it based on how the lock functions and open it.
Second question: 2048 bit is just 2 Kilobits. That's not a long string of data considering we now use Gigabytes and Terabytes in our home PCs. Search engines search through much more than that too. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4n0ovg/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_an_opensource/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3ztkbz",
"d3ztpx6",
"d3ztrnw",
"d3ztrzr",
"d3ztxce",
"d3zuhx4",
"d3zws5s",
"d3zxqfv",
"d3zzgpv",
"d400yq3"
],
"score": [
4,
31,
3,
10,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > If I make a secure, hard to break lock and everyone know how the lock is made then everyone can just fabricate a key for it based on how the lock functions and open it.\n\nAn encryption system isn't a lock, it's a tool for making locks. Er... for making keys. Or- you know what, just don't rely too heavily on the lock-and-key metaphor. The point is that an open-source cryptography system like PGP encrypts data in a way that's simple to understand how it's done, but, unless you have the encryption key (which it's up to the user to keep secret), it's very time-consuming to reverse.",
"The nice thing about public key cryptography is that knowing how it's made doesn't make it less secure. The algorithm isn't secret, the keys are.\n\nNow, as for the bit length: imagine that I asked you for a password, and it was a number, and you decided to guess it. If you know it's a number between one and ten, then it will take you at most 10 guesses to get it right.\n\nWell, 2048 bit encryption means that there are 2^2048 possible keys. That might not look like a lot, until we look at what that number really is. I would write it out, but is is 617 digits long. So, just imagine the number three followed by 616 zeros. That's how many different keys there are.\n\n2048 is not a large number. 2^2048 is a huge number.\n",
"The person who writes the encryption code isn't making the lock - they're giving your computer the tools to make the lock.\n\nThink about it this way - I say to the world \"Here's my encryption scheme - you add a secret number to the number you want to send\"\n\nSo, if someone's eavesdropping on your communications, and they see the number 578, they know from my encryption scheme that the number they can see is your number, plus some other number only known to you and the recipient.\n\nThat's no use - it could be anything. I've got to take many guesses at what the secret number you've added is.\n\nNow, the 2048 bits... that's not 2048 different combinations. That's actually 2^2048 - two multiplied by 2 2048 times.\n\nThat's a big number. A huge number. My laptop won't even display it when I try and work it out in the calculator. It's a lot of combinations.",
"Imagine I take two prime numbers. \n\nI multiply them together. \n\nHow do you find out what they were? If you can tell me that, then you've just broken the lock. \n\nNow imagine if each of the two numbers were 500 digits long. You know how to calculate a prime number, but the way you do it would require you do to a lot of calculations. \n\nThe people with the lock are hoping that either that the thing it's protecting will be worth less than the cost of breaking the key, or it'll take long enough to break for you to create another lock, effectively making the whole effort of the hacker worthless. \n\nAnd it's not long which is the good part and is supposed to be that way. The \"complexity\" (the possible number of combinations) is 2^n where n is the digit length, so it gets complex really fast. (Think of decimal digits; 5 digits means you have 100000 combinations to check).",
"You can look up the patent drawings, or even just watch YouTube videos, to see how locks are constructed. They are, conceptually, fairly simple machines. But let's say you made a lock with a REALLY LONG key - one with 2048 pin positions. Even knowing perfectly well how the insides of the lock worked, you would not know what pattern of short and long pins were inside.\n\n*Just knowing how the encryption works is not the same as knowing the key.*",
"\n\n > If I make a secure, hard to break lock and everyone know how the lock is made then everyone can just fabricate a key for it based on how the lock functions and open it.\n\nEncryption algorithms aren't like locks. They're like directions on how to *make* locks. If we're using the lock-and-key analogy, then the encryption algorithm essentially says, \"Here's the part where you create a key, and a matching pin-and-tumbler mechanism inside the lock. The lock should have at least five pins for security, but you can make them any size you like.\"\n\nKnowing simply that the lock has pins in it doesn't tell you anything about the pin arrangement of any specific lock\n\n > 2048 bit is just 2 Kilobits.\n\nThere are 2^2048 possible 2048-bit numbers. That's more possible numbers than there are atoms in the observable universe. A **lot** more. If you wanted to try every single possible 2048-bit key to see if it works, then even if you tried a billion keys per second, it would still take you longer than the current age of the universe to get through less than a trillionth possible keys.\n",
"Modern security depends on factoring primes. If I give you two large primes (like 9001 and 10007), finding the product (90 073 007) is easy. However, going backwards is hard: if I give you the number 644 849 687, what are it's factors?\n\nGetting that number was easy for me. For you; it's going to take a long time to find the answer. And that's how cryptography is secure: if I have a huge list of primes, each one *could be* a key; which means you have to check *every single one* until you find a key. But if I know what key to use, it's easy.\n\n2048 bit cryptography means that I can use any number up to 2^2048 as my product: that's a 616-digit number. Basically, that means that you need need to look through about 10^300 keys to find the one that fits.",
"Encryption algorithms are (or should be) public knowledge. If the knowledge of the workings of the algorithm would allow it to be broken, *that algorithm is insecure*. Making it closed-source *cannot* prevent people from working out what the algorithm is, just make it slightly more difficult, because they can just read the machine code instead, and if that's a problem then your algorithm was broken anyway.\n\nNobody should be able to decrypt the ciphertext without knowing the key, with or without knowledge of the algorithm involved. An encryption system is not merely a means of obfuscating a message - there are strong mathematical guarantees on security. Usually, the problem of breaking the cipher is shown to be equivalent to some problem that is known to be very difficult - for example, to break RSA you would need to have an algorithm for efficient factorization of large integers, and the best-known algorithms for that are far too slow to be practical if the key size is sufficiently large.\n\nA closed source encryption application is actually *less* secure because it makes it harder for people to analyse and find the flaws in it. Cryptography is very difficult; even experts have a hard time making a secure cipher and most of the people developing programs that use cryptography are not cryptography experts, so it is better to use established cryptography libraries implementing standard algorithms that are constantly checked for weaknesses because they're so widely used. I wouldn't trust an application that claims to encrypt messages but doesn't say what algorithm is used to do so - because they are often [laughably bad](_URL_0_) (yes, this is basically a Vignere cipher, being used in an actual product).",
"I wouldn't say it 2048 is unbreakable. It's just unbreakable to anyone that doesn't have the means (ie. most individuals).\n\nModern encryption uses mathematical calculations that are very costly to reverse.\n\nAmong the costs are:\n\n* time\n\n* energy\n\n* water (or cooling in general)\n\n* bandwidth (in many cases)\n\n* machines to run the calculations\n\n* possible failure / waste of committed resources\n\n\n\n\n^edit: ^formatting",
" > Second question: 2048 bit is just 2 Kilobits. That's not a long string of data considering we now use Gigabytes and Terabytes in our home PCs. Search engines search through much more than that too.\n\nYour logic is like saying \"Keys are just relatively tiny bits of metal... its so simple to destroy a key simply using a hammer or some strong wirecutters... so how could their lock that they open possible be secure?\"\n\nEncryption/Decryption involves sophisticated, complex mathematical algorithms, has nothing to do with simply searching through 2048 bits of data.\n\nA 2058 bit key means 2^2048 possible keys. I plugged that into google calculator and it simply said \"infinity\". Only 2^100 is 1,267,650,600,228,229,401,496,703,205,376. 2^2048 is more than the number of atoms in the universe. There are typically more elegant ways of cracking encryption than trying out every possible combination... but still, my point is those are the kinds of numbers we are dealing with.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://cybergibbons.com/security-2/csl-dualcom-cs2300-signalling-unit-vulnerabilities/"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
3hb8k4 | - how does australian football work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hb8k4/eli5_how_does_australian_football_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu5ud3z",
"cu5zjxh"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Ok. \n\nEach team is trying to put the ball through the posts. The height at which the ball passes between the posts is not important.\n\nYou get 6 points for a 'goal' (between the two taller middle posts) and 1 point for a 'behind' (between one of the tall posts and one of the smaller posts on the right or left)\n\nThe ball is passed between players by either kicking it, or via a handpass (this is basically punching the ball). A player can only run 15 metres before he has to bounce the ball or touch it to the ground - this is actually harder than you'd think because the ball is not spherical.\n\nIf the ball has travelled 15 metres or more when a player receives it (via a catch) he can call a 'mark'; the game stops while he prepares to kick the ball on. He can of course, elect to just continue the game, at which point is able to be tackled by the opposition. \n\nYou usually see a 'mark' taken when the receiving player is within goal range because it allows him the chance to score without too much interference. \n\nWatched quite a bit of AFL when I was in England (I know this is weird, but Channel 4 used to show it on Sunday mornings) and it always looked quite a lot of fun, if bruising at times. ",
"Yarr, ye forgot yer searchin' duties, for ['twas asked by those what came before ye!](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all&q=Australian%20football"
]
] |
||
1oslo6 | what exactly would it mean for us if a particle, other than a photon, was able to travel at the speed of light or faster ? | Sorry if this was already asked but the entire thing about speed of light pretty much confuses me. Let's just say it would be possible, what would be the consequences ? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oslo6/eli5_what_exactly_would_it_mean_for_us_if_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccv5dtt",
"ccv6d8e"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I thought CERN had already accomplished obtaining particles that moved faster than light? No one talks about it much, so I'm guessing not a whole lot changed",
"The speed of light is the speed of massless particles. This is because mass is a property that causes object to resist change in momentum, also the faster a particles with mass is traveling, the more energy it takes to accelerate it (you would need infinite energy to get to the speed of light). So photons move at the speed of light because there is zero resistance and therefore must move at the maximum speed \"c\".\nIf a particle with mass moved faster than light it would change the fundamentals principles of physics as we know it. It would violate Einstein's special relativity for relativistic energy E=ymc^2 where y is the Lorentz factor is which is 1/sqrt(1-(velocity/speed of light)^2) so you would divide by zero if velocity = speed of light.\n\nas for what it would mean to the layman, well, hard to tell. probably very little but it might lead to new physics theory that could lead to new technologies. \nedit: word missing\n \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6go3bz | if someone is wrongfully imprisoned for a period of time and then released after proven innocent, how is their compensation calculated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6go3bz/eli5_if_someone_is_wrongfully_imprisoned_for_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dirs6ie"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Depends on the state. [Each state has different statutes governing this] (_URL_0_). Also, several states have no statutes at all, meaning that if you get wrongfully convinced there, you have no automatic right to recourse. I believe (but am not 100% on it) that you can take the state to civil court, but obviously, many people who were wrongfully imprisoned don't always have the means to do that. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.wrongfulconvictionlawyers.com/state-statutes/"
]
] |
||
zgs8b | why, when parked in a parking garage / building, does your car bounce up and down when another car drives by on the same floor? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zgs8b/eli5_why_when_parked_in_a_parking_garage_building/ | {
"a_id": [
"c64fvsf",
"c64fz57",
"c64jpvx"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of those garages are held together by gravity. They're big concrete 'plates' resting on top of one another. So when you put a lot of weight on one side of a plate, it tips just a little bit and lifts up the vehicles on the other side.",
"The structure flexes slightly.",
"The open secret of structural engineering is this: *everything* flexes. Put that same slab on the ground, drive a car over it, it will still flex--just not as noticeably. Run enough 18-wheelers over it, you'll need to re-pave it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1p7dlw | why are there no national grocery stores | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p7dlw/eli5why_are_there_no_national_grocery_stores/ | {
"a_id": [
"cczgxw9",
"cczgy5i"
],
"score": [
8,
7
],
"text": [
"There are.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nKroger bought several grocery store chains. Because people don't like change, and like to think they are sponsoring local brands/companies, Kroger kept the local names of each chain.",
"There are. Whole Foods is the first to come to mind. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kroger"
],
[]
] |
||
94rq2a | when metal rusts, does that mean we can never use it again? could we completely run out of metal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94rq2a/eli5_when_metal_rusts_does_that_mean_we_can_never/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3n84fz",
"e3n8m8h",
"e3n9evo",
"e3na482",
"e3nafij"
],
"score": [
5,
31,
5,
11,
6
],
"text": [
"No, you can melt it back into pure metal. And only the very surface of the metal rusts, the integrity of it stays intact.",
"You can reverse rusting through melting it down and introducing chemical catalysts to separate the oxygen. However only certain metals rust into a dirty pile of particulates.\n\nWhen iron rusts, it's oxidizing, and because of the size difference between unrusted and rusted molecules, that causes the metal to flake off and chip into dirt.\n\nOther metals, like aluminum famously, make an airtight protective layer of oxide over the fresh metal. So not all oxidized metal is useless, and in most cases involving aluminum, we actually encourage oxidization.",
"Most metals don't rust the way iron does. Aluminum, silver, and copper form an exterior coating. Gold and platinum don't oxidize at all.",
"Iron ore basically is rust. \nThere's a process in the furnace which turns the ore into raw iron",
"Iron we mine and turn in to metal is Iron oxide(rust). \n\nIt takes tons of energy to to remove to turn iron oxide to iron. \n\nThere is a ton of stored energy in the Iron and it wants to react with the oxygen in the air to turn back to rust. \n\nodd factoid- metal only rust or oxidizes on earth due to its oxygen in the air. The oxide layer keeps metal from sticking or welding its self back together. SO if you have really clean metal in space that doesn't have a layer of oxide then it will fuse back together. Kinda like 2 water drops touching then they form 1 water drop. They have special tools in space designed so they don't cold weld back into 1 peice"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6kiwt4 | why do people call for the ceo of a company to resign when something publicly bad happens to said company? | I've seen this multiple times throughout my life and never understood why. It can't always be the CEO's fault if something happens so why do they have to resign, or at least, why do people want them to? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kiwt4/eli5_why_do_people_call_for_the_ceo_of_a_company/ | {
"a_id": [
"djme0oq",
"djme371",
"djme4kp",
"djmf7tb",
"djmgkd4",
"djn3dfs",
"djp63y7"
],
"score": [
5,
18,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They also reap the benefits of the successes. If the company is raking in the profit, the CEO is getting paid. Basically, you (the stockholder) hire the CEO to make the stock grow, and if the stock falls, losing you money, there are plenty more people where they came from.",
"Have you ever seen a sign saying \"parents are responsible for their children\"? If the kids break a window, the parents are responsible for it.\n\nIt's the same with the CEO. It's the person responsible for the company. Good or bad. It's their fault if a racist commercial is approved and aired by the company, it's their fault if the company tricks the engines of the cars to emit less NOx while on test. With great power comes great responsibility.",
"The CEO is the leader of the company. They make the major strategic decisions for the firm, as well as hire all of the other \"C\" level executives at the firm. \n\nIf a company has a major scandal, it can often be traced back to a larger strategic decision that the CEO was responsible for (even if they didn't directly make it). If a company had a major hack, it is because the CEO didn't authorize enough money to ensure IT security; if there is a major environmental disaster, its because the CEO didn't put enough focus on safety as a part of their manufacturing strategy.",
"I would say the principle you're stating isn't absolute.\n\nIt tends to happen when something goes bad that the CEO had direct or indirect control over.\n\nMost bad news is driven by market forces and the economy, or strategies that were conveyed to the market but weren't successful. Then the board and shareholders tend to be more forgiving. And the story is only reported on the business pages.\n\nIf the story is so bad that it moves from the business section to the main news section then it often is for circumstances that the CEO could have / should have avoided. \n\nAs others have said, the CEO controls a lot, and has a duty to manage all the key risks of a corporation. An additional duty that I think it is important to highlight (and hasn't been mentioned): It is the duty of the board members (including the CEO) to set the tone of the company on issues such as integrity and legal compliance, and ensure that culture is understood and implemented.\n\nCommonly it is a failure in one of those that results in something so bad that it hits the mainstream news.\n\nAdditionally, if and when a crisis happens, the CEO is responsible for handling that crisis. That is a real \"tea bag test\" - only when you dip it in hot water can you tell it's strength. Sometimes the calls for firing the CEO arise because (s)he falls short on this score.",
"Because most people are essentially petulant children, and analyzing something in depth is less satisfying to their toddler nature than having someone to blame. The CEO job carries that risk, it's known well and I'm sure considered by most when the job is accepted.",
" > It can't always be the CEO's fault\n\nThat is what being a leader means. It *is* ultimately your fault. The buck stops at the top. Whatever happened, you could have done *something*, because you run the company and you have a lot of power to get things done. Get this person fired, or hire more people to do X, or don't invest quite as much money in technology Y, or implement better safety measures or get the FDA approval *before* trying to sell your medical device, or.... There was *something* you could have done, and you chose not to.\n\nIt is your job to make sure the company runs well and does well, and it is your job to take responsibility for the company.\n\n > It can't always be the CEO's fault if something happens\n\nBut it is the CEO's fault that it was allowed to happen, that it wasn't dealt with better, that the company didn't have processes in place to deal with when something like this happened, or that the person who fucked up was allowed to work there in the first place, or that the company didn't have a strategy to deal with these market trends or to outperform this competitor, or *whatever it was that happened*. You were supposed to have a plan to either prevent it or deal with it effectively. \n",
"Leaders TYPICALLY distribute praise and absorb blame. As they guide the company in certain directions and oversee the entire company, it is their responsibility to make sure everything is going well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ooz9u | why do we need credit cards, if debit cards can have overdrafts? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ooz9u/eli5_why_do_we_need_credit_cards_if_debit_cards/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmp6om5",
"cmp6os3",
"cmp6u2d",
"cmp8k8e",
"cmp9cg7"
],
"score": [
3,
15,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You don't need it. Here (France), credit cards are almost non-existent. If you need a credit (house, car, whatever shit is being peddled in your mouth), you go to your lovely banker, which review your file, and gives or refuse the credit. \n\nDebit card + overdraft is the way to go here.",
"i'd rather pay 22% on that pack of gum than $35 for an overdraft",
"Most debit cards have small overdraft protections of a couple hundred dollars, and charge an overdraft fee for using it that kicks in the moment it's used. So you have $99.50 in your account and buy something for $100 then you have to pay the, say, $20 fee for overdraft protection and interest on that money until your account is in the black again.\n\nCredit cards often allow for credit limits that are much larger, and can either be paid off over time or in full. Perhaps somebody just moved and needs a ton of furniture, or wants to go on a vacation, and doesn't have the $1000's they need right now. They can charge it and pay it off over time. With interest, of course...\n\nOn the flip side, one can pay off their credit card at the end of each billing cycle and not pay any interest. This is what I do, and I may actually make a purchase 6-7 weeks before I actually have to pay for it, interest free.\n\nEither way, demonstrating that one can manage access to credit by making payments and using it responsibly is a key factor in getting access to other loans like cars loans and mortgages.\n",
"Car rental agencies and hotels greatly punish debit cards that make it much better to use credit cards.\n\nBasically, if you rent a car, the rental agency will take out a bunch of money from your bank account as a deposit. Hotel will do the same. Last time I rented a car, they took out $250. They will refund the money when you're done. But that doesn't change the fact that you have no use of that $250 for the length of your rental period. \n\nLet's say you're on vacation and you rent a car and rent a hotel room. They'll both take out $250 (maybe even more, depending on how long your rental period is.) So instead of having a simple $250 vacation, you need to have at least $750 in your bank or else your debit car will no longer work. \n\nIn contrast, car rental and agencies don't do that for credit cards. So your $250 vacation will cost only $250 at the end of the month, without you losing the use of $500 during your vacation.",
"(Provided you have the right credit card)...pay your credit card off every month and it pays you to use it good luck trying out with a debit card"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9vwqgc | how do royalties work with cover songs? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9vwqgc/eli5_how_do_royalties_work_with_cover_songs/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9fq5cu",
"e9fv1zz",
"e9fvetv",
"e9geljd"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on your distribution service, but for example with DistroKid, if you publish a cover song, they get in contact with the rights holder (whether it's an individual, a record label, or both) and establish a contract to send them royalties.",
"When Tool covers No Quarter from Led Zeppelin, how is that handled? Dave Matthews Band covers a ton of songs live, what are they responsible for?",
"There are separate royalties for performance and for songwriting. Often they don't belong to the same people, e.g. all members of a band would share the performance royalties but one or two (possibly different for each song) would get the songwriting royalties.\n\nIf you play back a recording to a large public (e.g. on radio or in an ad), you pay both of them.\n\nIf you play a cover song to a large public, you don't pay the performance royalties but you pay the songwriting royalties.",
"I don’t know everywhere but I do know UK somewhat as a PRS member. \n\nThere are organisations called PRS (generally song writers), PPL (performers on recordings) and MCPS (physical copies) and they cover different specific things pertaining to royalties but they all work in a similar way. \n\nPeople/organisations/venues who want to play music in public, broadcast music or print commercial discs have to pay a license fee to any or all of those societies, which essentially work as collections agencies. The license money is then distributed to the rights holders based on how many times that particular song was performed/printed. Every commercially released song has a serial number and is kept track of, or in the case of live performance, self reported by the artist or representative for the artist and then verified by the society with the venue which will be the license holder. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2y9mw5 | why does it hurt so much when you bang the top of your kneecap? | I literally JUST banged my kneecap and it hurt like hell; to the point where I didn't want to move my leg it hurt so bad. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2y9mw5/eli5_why_does_it_hurt_so_much_when_you_bang_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp7hrco"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Our joints have loads of nerves to take messages back and forth between our spine and extremities. These nerves are vulnerable and relatively exposed because the flesh and bone that would otherwise protect them would restrict movement. The result is it hurts like a Motherf**ker when you bang them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9jygdc | oled displays: samsung vs apple | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9jygdc/eli5_oled_displays_samsung_vs_apple/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6v05qc",
"e6v6xv8"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"They can boast and claim whatever they want, its generally done with enough weasel words and qualifiers that its \"accurate\"\n\nReviewers can also call them out on their odd claims and they do, but its still the best display that's been in an iPhone yet\n\nSamsung doesn't particularly care, they're getting nearly $100/screen which they're likely quite happy about",
"Apple can toy with software and graphics a little but in the end they’re the same. Neither display really has any additional capability than the other. Apple also has 3D Touch Samsung doesn’t. But apple buys a Samsung screen and then calls it something retina and that makes it apple... and as the previous poster above stated, apples pays Samsung a lot for them. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6kegvg | why do doctors pop/drain cysts? | I’ve always wondered why for like the really huge ones, they don’t just cut it open, suck all the gunk out and stitch it back up.
Edit: Thanks for the responses guys! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6kegvg/eli5_why_do_doctors_popdrain_cysts/ | {
"a_id": [
"djlf9pw",
"djlffog"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They do that. That's actually the way you remove a cyst. You open, remove the cyst and it's envelope (the sac) so there is no recurrence. [Read this](_URL_0_). However, it is not always possible to take all of it out and therefore it might grow back.",
"That largely depends on what kind of cyst it is and what caused it. Was it a cyst that formed because of an ingrown hair or splinter? Or was it a cyst that formed because of blocked glands, is it a cyst that contains dead skin and hair in it? \n\nSome cysts can be treated by just popping and walking away (pimples and ingrown hairs are a good example) other cysts require medical attention because they may be causing tissue damage from pressure (this is a huge problem in cysts that form around the brain or spinal cord). \n\nThe cysts you're talking about are probably skin based cysts. Behind the knees, armpits or tailbone type areas. Depending on how bad these cysts are, the risk of reinfection and permanent tissue damage can be harmful. In those cases cysts are likely drained and the patient given some hard antibiotics and strict wound care instructions. Having an untreated cyst or having a reinfected cyst can kill glands and cause other problems. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebaceous_cyst#Surgical"
],
[]
] |
|
6ya70q | how can we detect the difference between a missile test launch vs one aimed at say washington d.c? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ya70q/eli5_how_can_we_detect_the_difference_between_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmlrjmq",
"dmlrw5d"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"By tracking the path. If the path is mostly straight up (as with recent North Korean ones) then it's not going to hit DC. Only a very specific ballistic path will go from the launchpad to DC, and if you launch on that path it's taken as an attack.",
"Ballistic missiles have that name because they follow a \"ballistic\" trajectory. They fly on a curved path that's fairly straightforward to calculate.\n\nA launch from North Korea aimed at a US city would have a very specific launch angle and velocity that should be apparent when the missile is initially detected on radar by the US Navy or Japanese/South Korean allies.\n\nModern ballistic missiles have some ability to alter their trajectory for greater accuracy, but they don't have aircraft-like controls that allow significant course changes in flight."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3b9b25 | why aren't dna samples taken at birth? would that not help future criminal cases by a grand margin? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b9b25/eli5_why_arent_dna_samples_taken_at_birth_would/ | {
"a_id": [
"csk25kn"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Because its your dna in your body. And you have the innate right to deny others access to your body."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1gqe6v | why is it that most measurements have been standardized but not others (ie. hands on horses, bushel of apples) | I mean, why can't everything just be like, heres a pound of apples or that horse is 5 feet tall? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gqe6v/eli5why_is_it_that_most_measurements_have_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"camqb3v",
"camtvan"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In general use, standardized measurements are already the norm. More specialized measurements (barrel of oil, bushel of apples) are mainly used in industry, and are mainly a legacy issue (people don't feel like changing how the industry operates, so they keep on using barrels of oil as a measure).",
"That's asking us to change tradition man. You can't do that the world will explode. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.