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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ckfcyr | how do all-female lion prides form? can male cubs grow to be leader? | Why do some prides only have all females? I assume the male died or is missing? Do they stay this way permanently and fight off hostile males? If the female is pregnant and has males, can they stay with the pride and become leaders? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ckfcyr/eli5_how_do_allfemale_lion_prides_form_can_male/ | {
"a_id": [
"evmsf5l",
"evph9w7"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There are lone males who are wandering around who challenge for leadership of prides and a vacant space will rapidly be taken by one of these.",
"\\ > can they stay with the pride and become leaders? \n\nNo. Male lions that are born in the pride, and that become sexually mature are expelled by the females to prevent inbreeding. Until a male from outside the pride comes along to assume leadership, the pride will be all females and juvenile males not yet capable of breeding."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
j9ams | could somebody explain the stan kubrick film the shining to me? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j9ams/could_somebody_explain_the_stan_kubrick_film_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2a7i19",
"c2a7i19"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The Shining was based on a horror story by Stephen King. In the story, a family are hired to live in a large, empty hotel to clean it and keep it fixed up during the off season. The hotel is haunted, and makes the father go insane and try to murder his family. The film was very different from other films that had come before, and the lead actor Jack Nicholson gave a very good performance, so the film is pretty well known and respected.",
"The Shining was based on a horror story by Stephen King. In the story, a family are hired to live in a large, empty hotel to clean it and keep it fixed up during the off season. The hotel is haunted, and makes the father go insane and try to murder his family. The film was very different from other films that had come before, and the lead actor Jack Nicholson gave a very good performance, so the film is pretty well known and respected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1h1h0p | the relationship between england and commonwealth nations like new zealand and canada | What is the Queen to the commonwealth nations? Does Parliament in England have any control on commonwealth policies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1h1h0p/eli5_the_relationship_between_england_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"capw03z",
"capwqk3"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Taking Canada as an example, our relationship with the UK is that of allies with long historic ties and which happen to have the same person as Queen. Her role as Queen of Canada is entirely separate from her role as Queen of the UK; legally speaking, they are entirely different kingdoms. Her powers here are incredibly limited, and arguably nonexistent - she \"appoints\" certain governmental positions, but only on the \"advice\" of the Prime Minister. She has no real power of any sort, and the parliament in London has no say at all in what happens here.\n\nWe are completely separate countries, both in law and in practice. Canadians can't even accept a British peerage or other honour without losing Canadian citizenship first, as Conrad Black famously found out some years ago.",
"She's basically a figurehead. London doesn't have any control really, over these countries. \n\n[This YouTube video by CPGrey explains the whole thing very well](_URL_0_), but to put it in a more basic ELI5 level --- places like the United States and the Republic of Ireland stopped being British colonies by having a war with England and winning. Places like Canada and Australia stopped being British colonies by asking nicely and signing treaties that said they could have their own parliaments and make their own laws, but that they would still have the same Queen. In practice this means little, except for making travel/work visas slightly easier to get, making trade between the countries easier. There's also a mini-Olympics between the countries called the Commonwealth Games. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10"
]
] |
|
1zctej | why prisoners generally have a better quality of life than poor and homeless people | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zctej/eli5_why_prisoners_generally_have_a_better/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfsitdr",
"cfskol2",
"cfso10d",
"cfspokt"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"I would guess it's because the poor are seen to have greater ability to control their conditions.\n\nAlso, your statement begs the question \"Do prisoners have a better quality of life?\" I would argue they do not based on the whole being stuck in prison bit.",
"I agree that this is begging the question \"Do they have a better quality of life?\"\nYes, they have guaranteed food and shelter, and probably some other nice amenities too. BUT prisons are violent places on the inside. Prisoners are often reminded that they're not \"real\" citizens. And if you're in max security, where you're barred from human contact most of the time? Not exactly a great way to live.\n\nPoor people often live in crime-ridden, violent neighborhoods as well. And the life of a homeless person is dangerous and uncomfortable.\n\nI'd say that it would take a lot of debate to determine who has it \"better\". And really, there's much overlap between the two populations you describe. ",
"If you're looking for a good reason, then there isn't one.\n\nIf you're looking for a reason it basically comes down to people don't want to give money to the poor but don't realize how much money is spent on prisons, most of which are contracted out to private companies anymore.",
"they don't have it better"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4idoq1 | why didn't the democrats pass gun control laws when they held majorities in congress in the 2009-10 session? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4idoq1/eli5_why_didnt_the_democrats_pass_gun_control/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2x7qpf",
"d2x8471",
"d2xegoc"
],
"score": [
13,
10,
4
],
"text": [
"1) The parties do not agree among themselves (either party) what proper gun restrictions should be. So just because they had a majority does not mean they can agree on a bill to pass. \n\n2) Some types of bill require a Super majority, not a simple majority. They may have not been able to get one. \n\n3) Gun laws end up messing with the Constitution and that can mean things get overturned by the Supreme court if they play too much. ",
"Because all 60 democratics in the senate would have had to agree, since all 40 Republicans would block any gun control.\n\nThat includes 2 independents as well.",
"Gun control rhetoric is pandering to the far left, similar to religious pandering to the far right. You'll see a lot of this leading up to a nomination, then the candidates will swing back to the middle and not focus on the extremes of their party for the election.\n\nA lot of Democrats are pro 2nd amendment and own guns. I work in a fairly liberal office, in a very liberal city and I go shooting with many of them. One of my coworkers who is a moderate lefty is also a conceal carry instructor. This is fairly odd to a lot of people who are shocked about his political views after learning about this. This is anecdotal, but I find it interesting in regards to these discussions.\n\nLooking at this Gallup poll you can see in 2010, maintaining current gun laws was at its highest in two decades, while increasing gun control was at its lowest. \n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx"
]
] |
||
5o27ww | why do only some people seem to be overly sexual whenever they are drunk? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o27ww/eli5why_do_only_some_people_seem_to_be_overly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcg44uk",
"dcg4580"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Are you sure they don't just seem overly sexual when *you're* drunk?",
"Alcohol lowers people's inhibitions/self control.\n\nWhile they might be thinking about it sober, they tend to keep it under control. Alcohol makes it harder to do that.\n\nThat doesn't necessarily mean they're secretly giant sex fiends- it can be one thing leads to another.\n\nFor the most part, almost everyone notices sexual cues. But between people there's a lot of things that can vary: how much they notice them sober, how much they drank, how well they convey themselves drunk, what situations they put themselves in drunk, etc.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2yujkl | what makes a country be a world power? | I'd appreciate a list of world powers and main reason of each one. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yujkl/eli5what_makes_a_country_be_a_world_power/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpd2lwu"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"There is only one 'Superpower' - that is, a country capable of acting as a Power in any part of the world - America.\n\nA 'Great Power' is a nation who's foreign policy shapes the policy of those around them. It's not an absolute quantity of power. China is a Great Power because what they do influences those around them - but Mexico is a Great Power in Central America, but if they were in Europe they would not be considered even be considered a minor power.\n\nA minor power is able to exert influence on other nations diplomatically, but their foreign policy does not actually alter the policy of others. Canada is an example of a minor power, able to negotiate between small nations and act as a peacekeeping force, but thoroughly unable to affect any of it's major allies in any meaningful way."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4aiej8 | when we are in a state of unconsciousness (fainting, blacked out drunk) how are we able to remember to breathe during those times? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4aiej8/eli5_when_we_are_in_a_state_of_unconsciousness/ | {
"a_id": [
"d10kdt2",
"d10kfa3",
"d10kgyy",
"d10knpr"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"You can also breathe when you're sleeping and 90% of the time you're awake you're also breathing involuntarily. You don't need to think about breathing to do, your brain does it for you. ",
"The part of the brain that controls breathing (the medulla oblongata) stays active while you are unconscious. This part controls involuntary breathing. This is why it's not possible without a ton of practice to take control over things like heart rate and breathing; there are safeguards in place so that people don't, for example, forget to breathe.",
"Part of your nervous system, the [autonomic nervous system](_URL_0_), is responsible for making sure the body keeps doing things like breathing, heart pumping, food digesting. It keeps things running, even if you are sleeping, passed out, or blackout drunk. It functions like a reflex, there is no thinking about it, it just happens.\n",
"When you go unconscious, it's kind of like turning off your monitor rather than your CPU. So all the background functions are still working properly, but there's a blank screen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomic_nervous_system"
],
[]
] |
||
fw4ogh | why are cell phone towers found in pairs? | My husband and I were driving around and keep noticing that cell phone towers are almost always in pairs. Particularly along highways and in open fields. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fw4ogh/eli5_why_are_cell_phone_towers_found_in_pairs/ | {
"a_id": [
"fmm7e6x",
"fmm8abh"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"* Most cell sites are privately owned and space on them is leased by carriers. \n* Most cell sites host antennas from multiple carriers.\n* Not all carriers can reach agreements with all site owners.\n* Despite your observations, many sites don't have another site close by.",
"The existing tower is strong enough for 2 sets of antennas, but 4 companies want their antennas in the area, so the tower owner built another tower."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2r0rtu | if apple and samsung have all of these patent disputes, then why does apple use samsung's products in their imacs. | In the media it seems that Samsung and Apple dislike each other a lot. But when I was a watching a video on Youtube, I saw several parts labeled with Samsung. If Apple and Samsung have a lot of patent lawsuits against each other, why does Apple use Samsung's product? Why doesn't Apple just make their own products to go into their computers?
[Link](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r0rtu/eli5if_apple_and_samsung_have_all_of_these_patent/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnbbc2w",
"cnbbnmb",
"cnbxcyu"
],
"score": [
15,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"It all comes down to money.\n\nBoth Samsung and Apple believe they are losing money when the other company is using their patents, so they sue.\n\nAt the same time though, when Apple uses certain Samsung components in their devices, they do that because using those components saves them more money than making them themselves. \n\nReally, if a big company is doing something the reason why is always going to be money. ",
"Because Apple's mobile division is completely separate from their personal computer division, which is different than their music division, etc.\n\nApple Mobile has issue with Samsungs mobile division in terms of patents. Apple Personal Computer division has nothing against Samsung as a whole, and uses their products. On top of that, it saves them money",
" > Why doesn't Apple just make their own products to go into their computers?\n\nApple makes almost nothing of its own hardware wise. Samsung actually makes stuff, (as does intel, TSMC and other companies).\n\nApple and Samsung are both very big companies. Samsung makes parts for smartphones (including the ones that used to power the iPhone and probably that will power the next gen iPhone), RAM, TV panels etc. etc. etc. Their various divisions are all somewhat separate, which is why a lot of the Galaxy series phones actually use Qualcomm processors. Qualcomm offers Samsung a better deal than samsung. Yes, that's bizarre. \n\nApple knows full well that it needs parts, and it needs the best parts it can get from a volume supplier, the list of options for them is fairly short. \n\nMost patent disputes are really theatrics. Car companies have this as well, though they're better at not letting it bubble over into the public. They all use patents from each other with massive cross licensing and direct licensing deals. For Apple they figure they can get press as being the 'real' inventor, and maybe get a couple of bucks per smartphone samsung sells without doing any work beyond lawyers bickering. If Samsung won't pay then Apple will escalate the fight. Ultimately that is what happens with patent licenses - you negotiate an agreement or you lawyer up and that forces one party to come back to the negotiating table. \n\nWhen you're talking millions of dollars in legal fees for billions of dollars in smartphone sales it's small fry in the grand scheme of things. \n\nYou can see that Apple moved its main chip manufacturing for iPhones to TSMC though. They are asking the same question you are - how much are we friends and how much enemies? They're happy to keep playing the game as long as everyone is making money but both parties need to be seen defending their patents, in the event that the business market goes badly and suddenly they find themselves needing money if they have a history of fighting for patents (and even better winning those fights) they have something they can take after whomever the next company to enter the market is. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://youtu.be/g7Ik36W5oDo?t=2m19s"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a593gx | what makes people believe so hard that wrong information is true? | I'm mostly thinking of the conspiracy theorists who think things that are actually good are bad. See anti-vaxxers, anti- gmo, and people who thing the earth is flat. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a593gx/eli5_what_makes_people_believe_so_hard_that_wrong/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebkrz5n",
"ebks4ym",
"ebksmd8"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"I'm not convinced that there are any real flat earthers, and that the whole thing isn't just a long term trolling/satire project. Still, anti-vax and anti-GMO are very real so the point stands.\n\nThe Oatmeal did a [long comic](_URL_0_) about this a while ago. He also includes a few sources. The tl;dr is that we react to attacks on our beliefs the same way we respond to physical attacks. Our beliefs form our worldview, which is a part of our identity. When someone says we're wrong about something and they have evidence to show it, obviously the logical response is to hear them out and look at the new evidence, but our instincts aren't always logical, so our actual reaction is to dig in and fight it.",
"People want there to be magic. People want there to be something more than what the world really is. They want there to be a big secret that no one else knows and they want to be a part of it. They want to be in the know. So someone comes along and tells them that the earth is flat and here’s 3 really convincing “facts” that make them believe because they already want to believe before they are even shown evidence. Once they believe, you can’t convince them otherwise because they continue to move the goal post. You show them hard evidence that premise one is false, they say “maybe, but what about premise two?” And so on forever. Once some people believe in something, they can’t disbelieve in it even if their belief directly contradicts other beliefs they hold. This is how cults, religions, pyramid schemes, etc. get people. They target people who are easily convinced that they are smarter than everyone and special for being able to see the “truth” even though they are shown evidence against their beliefs. They just ignore it because that would mean they aren’t special. ",
"Ideology. The average person has very little way to verify whether most of these things are true or not. So what they believe is entrenched in a matrix of their overall worldview. If you are convinced that the natural is good and the artificial is bad and that the government is trying to cover this up it is easy to clean to all sorts of ideas about science.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
dupzzr | why are light primary colours rgb different to pigment primary colours ryb. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dupzzr/eli5_why_are_light_primary_colours_rgb_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"f77nlj4"
],
"score": [
13
],
"text": [
"The primary colours of light - red, green and blue - each individually trigger a different type of receptor in our eyes. By mixing different amounts of each light, you trick our eyes into thinking we are seeing many different colors.\n\nPigments work the same way - but by soaking up colors of light instead of emitting them. The primary colors for pigments are actually Cyan ('sky blue'), Magenta (pink) and yellow. Cyan pigments absorb only the reds, magenta absorbs the green and yellow absorbs the blues. So by mixing these pigments, you absorb a controlled amounts of red, green and blue, reflecting the remainder - again tricking us into thinking we are seeing all the different colors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3fxudh | why do hotels have open wifi with a landing page to type the password, instead of a regular passworded wifi network? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fxudh/eli5_why_do_hotels_have_open_wifi_with_a_landing/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctsythf",
"ctsyyxf",
"ctt1ilb",
"ctt3b8q",
"cttaii6",
"cttakwn",
"cttg3xn"
],
"score": [
28,
24,
16,
8,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Many hotels have you log in with your room number and last name, so that only current guests can get access. For the ones with a single password, it's probably so they can make you agree to the terms of use.",
"Some hotels integrate their guest reservation system with the wifi, so that each guest gets their own login credentials that expire once their stay is complete.\n\nOther hotels don't do that, and just have a static username and password. But both of these hotels tend to get their equipment from the same vendors, so there's really no point in the vendors supporting two systems when they can support one.\n\nFinally, having an open network ensures the greatest amount of compatibility. That's not as big of an issue as it used to be, but it wasn't too long ago that there were lots of wireless devices out there that didn't support WPA, only WEP.",
"The rational for open wifi networks in hospitality is that other software (called a \"captive portal\") provides a layer where pay-for-use, and time/bandwidth limitations can be imposed. \n\nThis doesn't mean the hotel uses these features. It means the company which sells the service to the hotel (or chain) uses (and supports) that software, therefore it comes along with the service provided to the hotel/chain. \n\nAlso, open networks are more compatible than those with any kind of passkey encryption. In our home we already have a number of devices (iPod touch/Kindle) which cannot connect to wifi when high-performance settings are used with the latest encryption methods. \n\nLPT: Many hotel wifi passwords are their phone number. Drive around and see what you can connect to!",
"A landing page will more often than not have a terms of service!\n\nHotels love taking your money. They hate losing it. A terms of service ensures that if you do something silly on their network, they won't be held liable. They won't lose money in a suit.",
"Imagine having to come up with a new wifi password for your house, and then having to manually change your password, every single day. If you make a website to do it, it'll take care of it on its own with the right coding.",
"A captive portal allows you to require users to accept terms of service as well as to collect personally identifying information like a name, room number, or email address. Also, in most router firmware it is much easier to deploy bandwidth restrictions, data caps, penalty boxes, etc. on a per user basis. It also prevents media devices like Roku or XBox from getting online and potentially monopolizing often limited amounts of bandwidth.",
"Just to add to what's already said - with a regular passworded WiFi network you can generally only have a single password. There would then be no way to control individual guest accesses, other than registering each piece of connecting equipment's internal MAC identifier and allowing or blocking them individually, which would be supremely inconvenient."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2lwh8q | how is "tiered internet" different from paying more for higher download speeds? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lwh8q/eli5_how_is_tiered_internet_different_from_paying/ | {
"a_id": [
"clyszhr"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Eli 5 version. \n\nPaying for higher speed when you are the user means you expect that you are going to get that speed whether you fo to google, netflix, youtube or some pirate download site.\n\nNot having net neutrality means that if Netflix does not pay extra, you do not get netflix at the speed you paid for.\n\nSo the isp in the middle gets paid twice. Once by you and again by netflix. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dmodym | what makes someone an actual "adult"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dmodym/eli5_what_makes_someone_an_actual_adult/ | {
"a_id": [
"f53b10b"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Living with your parents is the same thing as having roommates, as long as you are self sufficient, work, etc. You're being a basic adult. Living with your parents, not working, and them taking care of you is not being a basic adult. \n\nWho cares who the roommates are if you cant afford to live alone you cant live alone. That simple."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
bu76ny | why do phones lose battery faster when it is hot/sunny? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bu76ny/eli5_why_do_phones_lose_battery_faster_when_it_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"ep7usz5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I would agree with the first poster and add my own \"yes and\"\n\nWhen phones are using power a byproduct is heat. So when the battery gets hot it speeds up the discharge process."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1s8tzi | why do fast food restaurants only bring back some of their best burgers for a 'limited time'? | I read that McDonald's brings back the McRib when pork prices are their lowest but I don't want to count it as it's not really a good burger.
More like Wendy's mushroom melt types. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s8tzi/eli5why_do_fast_food_restaurants_only_bring_back/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdv1o8m",
"cdvgyn9"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Perceived scarcity causes people to pay a higher price. By implying that something is around for \"a limited time\", even if they can reasonably make it all the time, they can charge a higher price and people will still go buy it.",
"On a related note, making an entirely new variation \"limited time only\" allows it to be withdrawn quietly if it doesn't sell. \nThat became standard practice throughout the processed-food industry in the '90s after the conspicuous failures of the New Coke, McDonalds' McDLT and Crystal Pepsi."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3i0noa | how come movies and music are sped up and the pitch is increased on tv and radio? | I've noticed this for a while, but always thought it was just me over thinking something. I live in Australia btw if that helps with anything
I recently watched Pitch Perfect 2 via Bigpond Telstra T-Box Rental and could immediately tell the whole movie was sped and pitched up. The musics tempo was faster than the trailers I watched for it. Not to the point where it was ridiculous to watch, but very slightly sped up to the point where you could easily tell. I downloaded the soundtrack of iTunes and sure enough, it sounded a lot different.
On TV, every theme song for any show that has one, will always sound slightly sped up and pitched. I've noticed this because when I once again buy an episode via iTunes it sounds pitched down.
Same thing with music, on the radio I can easily tell if a song's pitched has increased, I sorta like it actually but I'm still confused as to why this happens.
Is it for more airtime or something?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i0noa/eli5_how_come_movies_and_music_are_sped_up_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuc8hyr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I have also noticed that many times small scenes are cut out of movies (on network channels) to also widen the movie/commercial ratio. It's interesting too because the networks will put a one and a half hour movie into a two hour time slot and still cut scenes out. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3qpzsr | why are plants and insects more deadly in hotter, more tropical climates? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qpzsr/eli5_why_are_plants_and_insects_more_deadly_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwhaxd3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is much more density of animal and plant life in tropical areas, much more population and variety. Animals and plants both thrive but there is tremendous competition and many, many predators, so animals who have creative ways to defend themselves have more of an advantage, while desert or forest creatures are more reclusive, but that is only an effective defense when you live on a desert or forest or otherwise more spread out broke than the tropics. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1kiyom | how do mitochondria work? | From what i've learned in my high school Bio class, mitochondria take in food and oxygen, (O2), while turning them into ATP and carbon dioxide. is, essentially, the process just taking carbon from the food, sticking it to some oxygen, and using the rest of the food as a basis for energy? I've asked my teacher this question, but was only told it's complicated. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kiyom/eli5_how_do_mitochondria_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbpf4io",
"cbpfbb9"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"In a nutshell, food is digested and broken down into certain molecules termed electron carriers, like NADH, NADPH, and FADH. These molecules are used in mitochondria to drive the synthesis of ADP and a free phosphate group into ATP. So from the top, these electron carriers donate electrons to big proteins that sit in the inner membrane of the mitochondria. As they do this, a series of pumps in that inner membrane are energized to move protons (hydrogen ions) out into the space between the outer and inner membranes. This pumping action sets of a gradient of high proton concentration outside the inner membrane and low proton concentration inside. These protons naturally want to even themselves out and flow back into the space inside the inner membrane. There is another big protein stuck in this inner membrane that they flow through. When they do, they supply the energy needed to stick ADP and a free phosphate together to make ATP. Hope this helps.\n\nOH, EDIT: the oxygen in the end is there to pick up the spent electrons that were donated. This is why oxygen is essential to life (our life anyway). Without it, the machinery for ATP synthesis hits a block. Tell your high school professor to stop being lazy.\n\n2nd EDIT: the carbon dioxide we breath out is made primarily during the metabolic cycle that also generates the electron carriers (NADH, NADPH, and all that jazz) from sugars like glucose. ",
"[Mitochondria](_URL_0_) create an electrical and chemical gradient within themselves, and harness the flow of that gradient to produce ATP. \n\nThink of it like a water mill: just like falling water pushes the wheel and causes it to rotate and mill grain, positively charged hydrogen atoms flow down a gradient to produce ATP. This gradient is created and maintained by what is known as the [electron transfer chain (ETC)](_URL_1_).\n\nThe intermediates required for the electron transfer chain are made by the degradation of food (mostly sugar, in this case) which is achieved through the [citric acid cycle](_URL_2_) AKA the Krebs cycle AKA the TCA cycle. This cycle also occurs in the mitochondria.\n\nEdit: figgy_puddin's edits explain where CO2/O2 come in!"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrion#Function",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_transport_chain",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citric_acid_cycle"
]
] |
|
2ska01 | why can a cellular signal provide a wifi hotspot but a device plugged in with ethernet with wifi capabilities cannot? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ska01/eli5_why_can_a_cellular_signal_provide_a_wifi/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnq96k7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I know Windows and Linux can -- it is also an advertised feature on a number of USB wireless dongles.\n\nIt's called ad-hoc networking."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
a1nw9o | why do lawyers use legal size paper (8.5" x 14") instead of letter size paper (8.5" x 11") like everyone else? in countries that use a4 as their standard paper size, do lawyers there use some other obscure size too? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a1nw9o/eli5_why_do_lawyers_use_legal_size_paper_85_x_14/ | {
"a_id": [
"earcf7h",
"earclqe",
"earcnj9",
"eargs7j",
"eas1270",
"eas1ogl",
"eas3cq3",
"eas4qen",
"eas4ret",
"eas6srm",
"easc5tx",
"easfh3u",
"eat5l52"
],
"score": [
4403,
59,
310,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Accounts vary. Some would say simply because lawyers like to be different and like institutional memory. Same reason why latin phrases are so common. Others say it was so a lawyer could print a standard sized document on a sheet of legal paper and there would be several inches at the top and bottom for notes and revisions. Back in the day you couldn't simple shrink the size of a document to take up less paper. Documents were typeset and the size could not be changed, so if you wanted to take notes or make revisions to a document that filled up most of the page, you either used a second sheet of paper or you printed it on a larger sheet of paper for more room. Now days there is little to no practical necessity for it but lawyers are ones for tradition.",
"In countries that use metric and DIN standardized paper they only use as said start sized paper. A4 is normal letter sized, A3 is twice as A4 and A5 is of course half of A4, so they both wouldn't even work for that reason. \nSo only the USA as it seems does this weird stuff. ",
"No, in countries that use A4 as standard, lawyers do not use obscure sizes. For that matter, such A- or B- standards (under ISO 216) are developed for the purposes of defeating overall obscurity in the first place—say, consider imperial vs. metric system. So, this is the case not only for lawyers, but for any other profession as well.",
"Legal-size paper is still used (when resizing copiers and scanners are ubiquitous) in order to make very important documents stand out in a stack of regular documents or file folder. I've seen it most commonly used for lease/purchase agreements for major items (car, house, etc.). ",
"it gives the extra room to write annotations since legla documents are prone ot a lot of editing",
"I'm an italian lawyer, here A4 is standard and I use A4 paper, no need for extra big paper.",
"South African lawyer here. A4 is the standard across all industries, including law. I've never even heard of \"legal size\" paper before this post.",
"Follow up eli5...why Canary Yellow paper?",
"Australia (and the UK) used the terms foolscap (legal) and quarto (letter). At school and uni in the 70s, foolscap was the most common size for all exam papers and assignments. From memory, quarto was more common for everyday use. They were both replaced by A4 and A3 in the late 70s and 80s.\n",
"Here in the Philippines, since we were a US territory, we use both \"Short bond paper\" (8.5\" x 11\") the same thing as letter, but for \"Long bond paper\" (8.5\" x 13\") is for a more formal uses e.g. government, contracts, etc. We do have A4 for special uses. A3 is also very common for large paper uses. I wish our government would standardize everything. We use KM for distances, but inches/feet for height. We uses 1L for large sodas, but use 12oz. for small sodas.",
"TIL that A4 isn't standard sized paper worldwide, and there I was thinking that we at least all agreed on the size paper should be!",
"So now that we've discovered that North America is almost the only place on Earth that they use anything other than A4, will someone please tell Google to change their default cloudprint paper size to something most of us use?",
"Am lawyer. Do not use legal paper for anything. Only ever seen it used in old mortgage/estate docs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8xqozi | why do you get nauseous when you wake up super early? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8xqozi/eli5_why_do_you_get_nauseous_when_you_wake_up/ | {
"a_id": [
"e24xnw1",
"e24y8y2",
"e24yomn",
"e24yorq",
"e24yrgb",
"e24zprm",
"e24ztxu",
"e2505hc",
"e2505lp",
"e2507c9",
"e250h9u",
"e250iq4",
"e250msi",
"e250ri4",
"e251zi3",
"e26zdcm"
],
"score": [
53,
90,
8,
80,
2,
6,
4,
6,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I would get nauseous if I took a hot shower in the morning, found out that a cold shower would counteract it, so it might be because your core temperature is too high.",
"It may not be because you woke up super early, but because you woke up without completing a sleeping cycle.\n\nSee: _URL_0_\n\n*Edit* Added better link that is reputable.",
"Interestingly/weirdly, this used to happen to me if I got up too early throughout my childhood (to the point of vomiting on rare occasion), but I seem to have grown out of it. It is no longer an issue at all, no matter when I get up or how much sleep I get. Could it be age-related and/or hormone-linked?",
"I've never experienced this, but if I had to guess it would be related to your blood sugar. If this happens regularly to you, keep track of what you eat the night before and what time. I've noticed for example that if I eat something right before bed, I'll often wake up ravenously hungry. Whereas if I eat dinner and then sleep three or four hours later, I wake up feeling normal. ",
"When this happens to me, I think it's either anxiety or related to circadian rhythms. More likely if I wake up worried about something to come. Different for every person though. ",
"I used to get nauseous before school as a child, barely being able to eat breakfast, and it usually went away eventually. I do believe it was linked to anxiety and the same thing is happening now at 26, always in the morning and sometimes to the point of vomiting or dry heaving. It’s debilitating. I used to treat it with mint, lavender, and lemon tea or marijuana, but nothing seems to work anymore. Now as an adult i know my anxiety manifests itself in my stomach, and I’m not even sure who would be helpful. After eliminating a very stressful situation, it definitely has calmed down, further proving how much anxiety/stress can fuck with your body. ",
"I'm almost 50 and have never heard of this being a thing, let alone experienced it. I expected this thread to be full of armchair diagnoses of a rare symptom instead of other people who all suffer from it. My sympathies to everyone who has to deal with that- hope you find some solutions that work.",
"Google says low blood sugar.\nIf you are waking up at a different time than normal it could be a result of your circadian rhythms going on. ",
"I don't get nauseated when I wake up, but I can't eat for the first couple hours after waking up, regardless of how early or late I woke up or how much I slept. ",
"Oh my god are you me? I literally just gagged while brushing my teeth this morning. ",
"An explanation would be awesome. I started going to the gym before work and getting up at 5am. I eat this oat type cereal before I go, and usually drink a protein shake, but when I get up that early, if I drink that protein shake it's coming right back up so I have to drink it later in the day. If I drink it any other time, I'm fine, but early in the morning, I'll puke within 20 minutes.",
"There's a slew of reasons why this might be happening: \n\n1. Low blood sugar can cause nausea. If you haven't had this checked recently (within the last year or so) you probably should. \n2. Acid reflux, particularly if you sleep on your right side or ate a fat heavy meal the night before. \n3. Post-nasal drip can cause mucous to accumulate in the stomach and make you nauseous. \n4. Disruption of your [circadian rhythm has a slew of affects on your gastrointestinal tract](_URL_0_), many of which we still don't fully understand. \n5. You're pregnant. Probably not, but I might as well put this here because someone looking at this thread probably is. \n\nMy suggestion to you would be to go to your doctor if this is a recurring issue. It could be a symptom of another disease or condition, which if managed correctly might completely eliminate this issue. ",
"This is the main reason boot camp sucked for me. And chow was so early I had to eat something",
"because humans were not meant to start the day (wake up) before full day break :)\n\nand meant to retire for the day before the sun sets",
"Not eating for the 8 hours you're asleep can cause low blood sugar which can make some people feel nauseous ",
"This was the bane of my existence throughout my childhood (especially high school) but now as a young adult (I'll be 26 next week) it is mostly gone. I'll try to list some of the reasons I think caused it and I will also list what I think helped fixed it. I am not a health professional so this is all off the top of my head. \n\n# Causes: \n\n***Fluctuating Sleep Schedule***: Like most teenagers, I loved staying up late at night. I am still guilty of staying up way past my \"I'm definitely going to bed in 20 min\" time. On the weekdays I would get by on 5-7 hours of sleep while on the weekends I would sleep like 8-12 hours (sometimes longer) and I would go to bed at like 4-6 in the morning and wake up at like 2 in the afternoon. On the weekdays, every morning, I'd be nauseous - like clockwork - my alarm goes off, my stomach starts turning, my mouth gets acidic, I hate the world and anyone who claims to be a \"morning person\". On the weekends, however, no such sickness. Since then, I've gotten a full-time job which has dwindled this hugely skewed sleep schedule to the point where I wake up at around the same time regardless of weekday or weekend and I no longer feel sick in the morning. So a steady sleep schedule has helped. \n\n***Lack of Diet/Exercise***: I'm not the worlds fittest person. My work and my home-life consist of a LOT of sitting and sitting and sitting. I will try to get into an exercise regiment only to go back on it in 36 hours. Pair that with an \"eat what I want when I want\" diet and you get a formula for a generally unhealthy person. When I was younger (and had the nausea issue in question), I always ate fatty/greasy foods with plenty of sugar to go with it REALLY late at night. I did this both on weekdays when I had school and on weekends which I know wasn't good for me. I barely drank water so my hydration level was shot, too. I think this is one of the biggest contributes and the key to almost eliminating your problem solely if corrected. \n\n***Depression/Anxiety***: Throughout my teens and to this day, I've struggled with depression and anxiety. This is one of those things you can treat but can be nearly impossible to cure. I think my mental health is the reason I still struggle with nausea in the morning (and sometimes throughout the day) even though it isn't as bad as it used to be. Sometimes that unshakable sense of dread when you don't want to deal with people and work and just go back to sleep and start fresh but you can't really induces a physical response. This is what I think people who hate mornings are. Which I am guilty of being. My depression also keeps me from eating very much. I NEVER finish my plate. I get made fun of a lot as the person who \"never eats\" and my girlfriend pointed out to me that it might be because of my depression and I think she nailed it. This feeds the \"*Lack of Diet/Exercise*\" issue.\n\nIn my own life, just fixing one of the above with efforts at correcting the others has mostly gotten rid of my problem. Again, this is not a fix-all, but it HAS helped me. I also know this can all sound like a cliché, but lifestyle has a lot to do with it, I think. **\\*\\*ALSO\\*\\*** these symptoms COULD be a sign of an underlying health issue so seeing a doctor really is the best answer you'll get but it doesn't hurt to try some things first. \n\nIf anyone (preferably a health expert) can make a more accurate explanation than I have, please do so. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://time.com/4094734/interrupted-sleep-mood/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274276764_Circadian_rhythm_and_sleep_influences_on_digestive_physiology_and_disorders"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
a4whnc | why cant you grow certain fruits/vegetables from seed? | Avacado for example. I grew an avacado tree from a pit. It's just over two years old but I was told that this tree won't grow edible fruit, if any because of certain conditions and that the fruit it may grow would be of a different variety than the seed planted. the ones we buy at grocery store come from grafted trees.
What's the difference? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4whnc/eli5_why_cant_you_grow_certain_fruitsvegetables/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebhzreg",
"ebi82z9"
],
"score": [
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Not an expert but I'm pretty sure it's because plants/trees have female and male counterparts. Some plants require multiples to be planted around them so proper fertilization can occur producing a fruit. ",
"In this case, it has to do with the way the genetics of the tree works. \n\nI'll stick with apples, but avocados are similar.\n\nBasically, your standard wild apple is basically a crabapple. Small, not very tasty. Over time people have bred these and occasionally found an apple that is particularly good. It happens to get a gene for being big, a gene for tasting sweet, genes for good flavor undertones, a gene for growinig healthy, etc. Now, they take this tree and propagate it by basically cutting off a bit of the tree and growing it into a new tree. So all apples of that variety are fundamentally the same tree in some sense. Contrast this with dog breeds, where every dog of that breed is in the same \"family\" you might say, but not genetically identical like all apples of a variety.\n\nSo what happens when you plant a seed from an apple tree? Well, just like your kids aren't identical to you, the seed isn't identical to the apple tree. Maybe it's got sweet fruit but not big fruit, etc. In general, it won't be much like the parent tree.\n\nOr, to make a dog analogy, imagine if you had a bulldog, and you cloned it again and again to make more bulldogs. Each exactly the same as the one before. But what happens if you take one bulldog, let it breed with some random mutt off the street? The babies won't look like little bulldogs like their parents. This is similar to what happens when you plant the seed of an apple or avocado. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
535mek | a/c is on, but it's colder outside than it is inside. should i open the windows to make it cool faster? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/535mek/eli5_ac_is_on_but_its_colder_outside_than_it_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7q6wh8",
"d7q7ez2",
"d7q7oey"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You have a thermostat that controls when your A/C is on. If the temperature in your room is colder than the temperature set on the A/C, then the A/C will shut off. However, if the temperature in your room is hotter than what is set on the A/C, then the A/C will turn on until the temperature reaches what you set. If the outside environment is colder than your current room temperature, then opening the windows with the A/C running will make the room cool faster. Basically, by opening the windows the heat from your room will flow into the environment and will subsequently help in dropping the temperature.",
"depends. The a/c also dehumidifies. If it is cold and wet outside than no. Cold and dry yes.",
"To make it short. You are probably low on Freon. Go outside and look at your unit and see if there is ice on the lines inside the unit and possibly creeping out on low pressure line, the big one. Turn off your unit until it thaws and ice is gone. If the line is frost covered you are low. You need a recharge and a leak check. < - HVAC tech"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8glm5a | why does solid matter heat up under severe compression but gasses cool down under compression? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8glm5a/eli5_why_does_solid_matter_heat_up_under_severe/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyco02j"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Gasses don't cool down under compression, they heat up.\n\nWhen you cool gas it will compress, and when you expand gas it will cool. But compressing gas makes it hotter, and heating gas makes it want to expand.\n\nIf you ever touch a tank of compressed air that was recently filled you'll notice that it is quite hot to the touch."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5bhub5 | how do we know all these wiki leaks emails are real? | And not just totally made up. They look pretty generic, hell I could write one up saying she beats baby penguins with big black dildos for fun and sign it from Obama and make it look like all the other ones. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5bhub5/eli5_how_do_we_know_all_these_wiki_leaks_emails/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9ole1j",
"d9olj6t",
"d9olww1",
"d9oo27w",
"d9oo30o",
"d9p0wqc",
"d9p3b1f",
"d9p7c5g",
"d9r120r"
],
"score": [
74,
7,
15,
91,
57,
20,
16,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"You only question the authenticity of something like this when the people whose emails were leaked deny their authenticity. Thus far no one whose emails have been leaked has denied their authenticity, and in many cases they have confirmed the authenticity of the emails.\n\nTaking the Donna Brazile emails as an example - she lost her job at CNN over them and has a very high chance of losing her position in the Democratic Party when this is over. Given the consquences to her if the emails are true you would expect a denial as the absolute minimum she would do. Instead she has sent out tweets [like this one](_URL_0_) which indirectly confirm the leaked emails' authenticity.",
"So far the Clinton campaign has refused to verify any of the emails, but the fact that they haven't denied any of them speaks to their veracity I think.",
"Wikileaks has not once been wrong, even when it was sharing information on the Bush presidency.",
"Since I haven't seen someone make this comment I'll point out that many important emails have been verified cryptographically, using DKIM. I'm not really the best person to explain DKIM, so I'm hoping someone can piggyback on this comment.\n\nBasically it is an authentication method that allows the recipient of the email to verify that the email was unchanged in transit. Wikileaks can verify that (some of) these emails are presented in their unedited version including sender and recipient address. \n\n_URL_0_\n",
"Three reasons:\n\n1. Wikileaks prides itself on a 100% accuracy rating on its releases. Assange may be a blowhard and overmarkets what they find, but the actual findings have always (up to this point) been real.\n\n2. No one is denying that these emails are factual, but instead are deflecting the issue into who might have stolen them.\n\n3. Heads have rolled. Wasserman-Schultz lost her position. Brazile lost her position. Abedin and Wiener are in hot water. These people have a strong incentive to dispute the evidence, but have not done so. ",
"Full disclosure: I am very anti-Trump, but that doesn't actually color my concerns about WikiLeaks (which I've had for years) here.\n\nAt this point I would be less worried about the authenticity of the emails (given that no one seems to be denying that they're authentic) and more concerned that what we're seeing is carefully curated to present a specific scenario.\n\nThat's actually independent of the current situation, and more of a concern about how wikileaks does business, period.\n\nI don't think that they'd make something up out of whole cloth, but I also don't think that they're above withholding information that would be deleterious to their agenda. They've been known to (at the very least) editorialize, and their biases are pretty self evident.\n\nI would also be concerned that they themselves could be fooled by a third party to release information that they genuinely believed to be real either because they wanted it to be and as a result didn't do due diligence or because it objectively appeared to be authentic.\n\nWe're putting our trust in a group of individuals who've unilaterally decided to be the gatekeepers of this sort of information, who have no external oversight, and we're expecting them to keep 100% honest and objective (which I would argue that they've failed at in the past).\n\nI don't particularly care who or what they're campaigning against, my concerns are the same whether they're attacking Trump, Clinton, Exxon, the tooth fairy, whoever. They're an independent group functionally unanswerable to anyone with very clear biases and we should *not* be taking them at their word at anything.",
"Firstly, nobody has yet disputed their authenticity and some people involved in the emails have indirectly confirmed their legitimacy. \n\nHowever, to give a technical answer (as I presume your looking for) there are a multitude of ways to authenticate electronic messages. Generally however authenticity is verified via hashing (in some variation). Take for instance the hash algorithm MD5, you feed it the letter a and it outputs some long string (0cc175b9c0f1b6a831c399e269772661, for reference). That output will never appear if you hash anything else, a will always equal (see hash before) and nothing else. And that hash will never come up for anything else. \n\nSo what you can do, is assign an email account a private key. Let's say that the private key for our imaginary account is 'key'. You can then take the key, time, date and message details and hash them. Let's say you get an output from that of \"0ayfyfa\". If the message was tampered with in any way, even if only one character/symbol was to be changed, then the corresponding 'hash' would change. \n\nDKIM is an example of a far more complex authenticity system which runs on this concept. Essentially, the message is run through a complex mathematical algorithm to generate a 'hash', and if the message is ever modified then the message and the hash won't match up. Someone would only ever be able to 'fake' the hash contents if they knew the private key (i.e, your hash password). So you know that the only person who could have sent that message is the owner of the private key\n",
"if they were fake or altered in any way we would hear about it 24 X 7 X 365 from CNN and Wapo.",
"Not one document wikileaks has ever leaked has ever been proven false in it's decade long existance.\n\n\"If the leaks were false, everyone implicated in them would have immediately and aggressively denied their claims rather than simply change the subject in speculating if Russia did it.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://twitter.com/donnabrazile/status/793269639149154304"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.wikileaks.org/DKIM-Verification.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1t79ox | hockey fights. | As a person who's only experience with hockey is by watching fight compilations on Youtube I'm confused.
Are they allowed? Do they get a suspension or fine? What's the deal?
Why do the referees circle around them and then suddenly stop them?
Please ELI5. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t79ox/eli5_hockey_fights/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce5460n"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"There are many reasons for a hockey fight to break out, but only a small amount actually make any positive impact in the game. The majority of fights do little-to-nothing except excite fans for a few moments. \n\nHistorically, hockey fights were a way for players to rouse their team and motivate them. For example, if Toronto is losing (typical scenario) and playing lazily and emotionless, a player from Toronto may go out and fight someone on the other team, which would wake up the Toronto bench and hopefully spur on teammates to go out and play with more intensity and fire. \n\nAnother reason for fighting is if a skilled player like Gretzky was hit, or an attempt on his safety/well-being was taken, someone from Gretzky's team may go over to that player during the same shift, or shortly after it, and say \"hey, you do that again, I'll % & # & # your $^$#@!! head off!\" at which point it would be wise for that player not to skate in Gretzky's vicinity, for fear of never seeing his children grow up.\n\nAnother example of why a fight might break out is if the game is extremely intense, with both times fighting really hard and not giving an inch; typically micro-games form within games (e.g. Crosby vs. Ovechkin during a Pens-Caps game) and these micro-games can get heated, with both players at each other's throats. At some point, tensions might explode and both players just try to kill each other by fighting, which usually gets both team's benches fired up. These are my personal favourite forms of fighting. One of the best examples of this is during the 2004 Stanley Cup Final between Calgary and Tampa, when Calgary captain Jarome Iginla and Tampa captain Vincente LeCavalier exploded at each other and fought. (link: _URL_0_ ) You can even see in the video how the Tampa coach was trying to build off that moment.\n\nUnfortunately, those examples of fights are only a small percentage of all NHL fights these days. The vast majority of them are what we call \"staged fights\" where the players essentially know they will be fighting each other, before the game even begins in some cases. Most teams in the NHL have designated fighters, and it's their job to go fight so that players like Crosby or Ovechkin don't have to. Another idiotic reason players fight these days, which is not staged but might as well be, is when there is a really hard, solid body check (legal too) but players will all chase down the guy who threw the hit and try to fight him. If you're asking yourself \"but I thought hitting was allowed in hockey\" thats exactly the problem. The players always defend it by saying \"I had to go stand up for my teammate\" as if that body check wasn't allowed, thus their valiant effort to 'right the wrong' saved the day.\n\nPlayers will often mention during interviews how they followed \"the code\". Don't worry too much about this, there isn't a single hockey player on earth - or in Canada at least - that knows exactly what the code is and how to explain it. This is intentional. It is essentially an unwritten code that the fighters of the league \"follow\" when...well, fighting. The code supposedly outlines when, why, how, and who they can fight. But this code seems to change every season, with new fighters, new incidents involving fights, etc. \n\nThe referee circling (they're actually linesmen) is part of the officials' way of ending the fight; they wait for a good opportunity to jump in and separate the fighters, and take them to the penalty box. They won't jump in while 225lb players are throwing haymakers at each other, so they circle around similar to a boxing official, waiting for the safest time to jump in. \n\nThe answers to penalties seem to have been answered already, and my post has rambled on long enough, so I'll shut it. Hope this clears it up. I have family in the US and have spent many Christmas get-togethers explaining this to them! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Txhs_g5O7E8"
]
] |
|
1m8u4l | lymph nodes | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1m8u4l/eli5_lymph_nodes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc6w433",
"cc6yzg4",
"cc6z3bv"
],
"score": [
111,
12,
4
],
"text": [
"Lymph nodes are part of your immune system which can be thought of as a kind of military for your body, it is there to protect you from invaders (bacteria, viruses, parasites). If you think about it like this then the lymph nodes are like the bases or command centers. Military intelligence comes in through the lymph, a fluid drainage system. Most commonly this happens by a dendritic cell (a sentinel out on the battle field) that saw something it didn't like, say a drone. So this dendritic cell eats it, digests it, and then puts all the pieces on its surface to bring back and show to the higher ranking officers. These officers are T cells and B cells, if any of them recognizes a piece of the drone they get all excited and start cloning themselves to make more soldiers that can recognize the drone. So now all the soldiers get together and come up with a plan on how they are going to fight it. T cells come up with a strategy and then start telling B cells what kind of ammunition, missiles, or bombs need to be made according to what part of the drone they recognize. Once a sufficient army has been gathered up and properly equipped they get deployed back to the part of the body the dendritic cell came from to do battle with the evil-doers.",
"Basically, lymph nodes are a part of this system in your body that is parallel to your circulatory system, called the lymph system. \n\nThe cells in your body are not cemented together at the cell walls with no space between; there is space between each cell, filled with fluid, and bacteria likes to build up here. Lymph flushes through these crevices and washes out the bacteria, and then returns to the lymph system and eventually circulates through the nearest lymph node. The lymph nodes filter out all the foreign substances and pathogens from the lymph, which is eventually passed on to the blood and out through the kidneys along with other wastes.\n\nTL;DR your cells get bad stuff between them and this other stuff called lymph washes the bad stuff out and then goes back to the lymph nodes which send it all to your pee",
"The nodes in my underarms sometimes swell up and can be quite painful, and take a few days to go away. What would that be? I don't otherwise feel sick when this happens. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
796e88 | how do bowling alleys (lanes?) not dented/cracked? hundreds of weighted balls get dropped on them daily | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/796e88/eli5_how_do_bowling_alleys_lanes_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dozi9g5"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"[Maple is extremely hard, dense, and shock-absorbent. The lanes are also refinished frequently to protect them.](_URL_0_)\n\nApparently they're about 2 or 3 inches thick."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/answers/comments/ghn48/how_do_bowling_lanes_not_get_damaged_by_the/"
]
] |
||
dpdx2g | why is it good to visit the chiropractor? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dpdx2g/eli5_why_is_it_good_to_visit_the_chiropractor/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5uji0y"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's not, go see a physiotherapist if you have any muscular or joint issues.\n\nChiropractory is snake oil"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
21pufj | why do youtube channels partner with "networks"? | I.E Polaris and Maker Studios, Screenwave Media, Fullscreen...
I just don't understand why a channel doesn't just monetize and call it a day. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21pufj/eli5_why_do_youtube_channels_partner_with_networks/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfcxc8"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because of the possibility to get strikes, or copyright infringements, since some of them have direct access to YouTube workers, they can resolve problems way more quickly. Networks also help YouTubers to get higher paying advertisements."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4fe5hf | where euler's equation/identity derives from | I understand why the identity/equation is "beautiful", but I can't conceive how anybody could come up with this equation. ELI5 please! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fe5hf/eli5_where_eulers_equationidentity_derives_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"d282sta"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The classic proof is to use what's called a Taylor Series. \n\nYou can approximate any function as a polynomial. The fundamental theorem of algebra tells us that there are exactly N points that an Nth order polynomial crosses 0. (Meaning in the equation y = a1 + a2x + .... +aN x^N there are N points where Y equals 0). \n\nNow take the sine and cosine functions for example. They cross zero on intervals of pi, an infinite number of times. What we can do is represent sine and cosine as infinite order polynomials, or an infinite sum of polynomial terms in a series. It's called a Taylor Series Expansion. \n\nNow what about a different function, like e^x ? Well we can do that one too. An interesting thing happens when the exponent is complex, or e^ix where i is the square root of negative one. When you look at the Taylor series expansion, you will find it is alternating between terms of the cosine series and the sine series, multiplied by i. You can then rewrite \n\ne^ix = cos (x) + i sin (x)\n\nThen plug in x = pi, and you get e^ipi = -1. \n\nPeople have a problem with this method because Taylor series are kind of shitty to deal with, but that's what they teach in Calc II. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
16otlr | why is it that i can gain 1lbs a day by over eating and eating junk food, but can't lose 1lbs a day by restricting my diet and eating healthier foods? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16otlr/why_is_it_that_i_can_gain_1lbs_a_day_by_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7xxydz",
"c7xy0uu",
"c7xyl3x",
"c7y39xx",
"c7y6xf0"
],
"score": [
58,
4,
19,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"A pound of body fat equates to approximately 3500 calories.\n\nSince a \"recommended diet\" is 2000 calories. It's not incredibly difficult to eat 5500 calories although people rarely gain a pound a day. On the other hand, eating -1500 calories might prove more difficult.",
"The short answer is, you can. Just not for very long.\n\nOur bodies evolved for a long time in a situation when losing fat quickly could mean death. So we evolved to do the opposite.\n\nIf you exert a huge amount of energy in a day, and eat nothing, you might lose a pound of fat in a day. But the way you'll feel the next day will be incapacitating. Your body will realize what's going on so it will dramatically cut down how much energy it burns. You won't feel very good. \n\nThis is one of the reasons that extreme diets are recommended against. ",
"Your body weight changes as much as 4lb throughout the day, so your measurements may be off by that. If you want more accuracy, weight yourself once a day at a fixed time, put that data into spreadsheet and plot a graph with trend line. That way you'll be certain whether you lose or gain weight.",
"Your body wants to gain fat and keep fat. So it will send out a lot of signals to get you to eat more, but won't send out many signs to get you to eat less. If you eat to much then it will store the extra as fat. If you under eat, it will try and make you be tired or eat more so it does not have to use the fat.",
"You're thinking about it Completely wrong. There is absolutely no way a human body can make(any kind!) a pound of food go through catabolic[breaking down food] AND anabolic[building up tissue] metabolism in a single day. What is really happening is that when you over eat, your intestines work slower, which makes them \"hold\" food longer inside you. When you are restricting yourself, the junk food is *probably* still inside you and is still accounting for your weight. \n\nTL;DR : You \"gain\" weight quickly because you are adding more mass to you body. The rate at which your body is pushing out all the junks food is slower because you ate so much. \n "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3vylqf | do blind people/people with fake eyes, close their eyes when they sleep? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vylqf/eli5_do_blind_peoplepeople_with_fake_eyes_close/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxrsyl4"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Yes. Just because you're blind doesn't mean you don't have eyes and you can't feel them getting dried out by being exposed to the air. If you were in a pitch black room, you wouldn't be able to keep your eyes open forever without them starting to bother you. \n\nAs for people with glass eyes, more than likely they only have one, so it would take much more conscious effort to keep one eye open than close both of them, so they would close their eyes. As for people with two fake eyes? It's extremely unlikely that they were born without eyes at all and had fake ones implanted later, so force of habit would take over. Even in the extremely rare case of someone with two fake eyes that never had eyes in the first place, keeping your eye open for long periods of time will dry the surface of the eye and make it uncomfortable for a while, so assuming they sleep with them in at all, they'll keep them closed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5cjdlv | can someone explain the logic behind the roe v. wade supreme court decision to me? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5cjdlv/eli5_can_someone_explain_the_logic_behind_the_roe/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9wyro2",
"d9wztoe",
"d9x0i3i",
"d9x7h4p",
"d9x8lzu",
"d9xbhz4",
"d9xbxq9",
"d9xc0l1",
"d9xc9kr"
],
"score": [
13,
102,
646,
4,
15,
3,
9,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"I think you're using too narrow a definition of \"privacy\".\n\nAs was cited in the opinion, the 14th and 9th amendments define privacy *legally*. The legal definition is broader than the common understanding of privacy which merely means being away from prying eyes.",
"A quote from Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which is a later case from 1992 and is actually the current law on the topic of abortion, may clarify:\n\n\"Our law affords constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education. Our cases recognize the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child. Our precedents have respected the private realm of family life which the state cannot enter. These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under compulsion of the State.\"",
"Under the 9th amendment, you have rights that aren't actually in the constitution. After they added a few new rights to the constitution, they realized that they probably didn't have them all yet, so they basically added a line saying 'just because it's not in the constitution doesn't mean it's not a right'.\n\nSomeone wanted to get an abortion in Texas. At the time, abortions were only legal in the case of incest or rape. The person in question did not want to file rape charges, but still wanted an abortion. They argued that they had a 9th amendment right to privacy - to be able to get the procedure without having to prove that something terrible and private happened in her past.\n\nWhen this arrived to the supreme court, the court decided to take the issue one step further. They noted that few cases to do with abortion laws could reach them because of the length of trial compared to pregnancy, and that they wanted to act finally on the issue.\n\nThey agreed, with some dissenting votes, that the section in question that was relevant was not the 9th amendment but the 14th. The 14th amendment says a lot of things - it has five sections - but the thing it said that was in question was that the government can't pass laws without some kind of compelling reason, and that that reason had to be more important than the damage the law could cause.\n\nThey said that two compelling interests were at play - the value to the state of a potential human life, and the threat to the state from the potential death of woman in childbirth. They found that for early pregnancies, the danger of abortions was trivial and the danger of pregnancy non-trivial, and that an existing life is more important by a wide enough margin than a potential one to justify abortions before the third trimester. After the third trimester, miscarriage is rare enough and abortions dangerous enough that the value of future life outweighs the risk of pregnancy. The court held that to ban abortion outright placed an 'undue burden' on physicians, forcing them to give up a lot more than was gained by the law. They argued about it for a really long time, and all sorts of arguments were presented. In my opinion, the most compelling is that nothing bad happened from it in the states that allowed abortion - Texas wasn't gaining anything tangible over New York, so on the balance, the law restricted a freedom without providing a benefit.\n\nInterestingly, the court originally phrased this as protecting a physicians right to provide abortions as an economic/elective surgery that was not harmful to the state, and thus had no constitutional basis under the 14th amendment to be prevented. It was only in 1992 that the language was reviewed and it was presented as a woman's right to obtain the procedure.\n\nThe decisions has been criticized a lot. The interest that the state has in future life is very.. arbitrary. On the one hand, you'd never argue that the state could compel people to have sex to produce a child, especially if that sex had a non-trivial chance of killing one of the people involved. On the other hand, if you have religious cause to believe that a fetus is a human being from the moment of conception, then the state has sanctioned infanticide on the grounds that infants are useless. \n\nIn the end, the court agreed that 'the end of the first trimester' was an arbitrary point they picked to balance these conflicting and irreconcilable principles, though they freely admitted that scientific and medical information may well change this in the future (it has). Dissenting judges argued that the legislatures should ultimately decide whether future life was more important than risks to mothers, rather than the court, and that the writers of the 14th amendment never said they planned for it to apply to abortion laws, which were on the books at the time it was passed.",
"The right is \"based\" in the 4th Amendment. Basically, what the majority argued, is that each amendment casts a shadow. Sometimes these shadows interact. What is covered in this shadow is the right to privacy. This right to privacy is founded from a previous case where married couples could choose contraception. There are other rights in these shadows, ones that explicitly enumerated. \n\nSomething that was not mentioned in the other comments I scrolled through, is the importance that the Justice's did not call a fetus a person. This is so important. If a fetus was a person, a mother who delivered a still born baby could be charged with murder. If there is any kind of problem, the doctor delivering the baby and the mother could be charged with murder. Personhood is a term used in one of the sections of the 14th Amendment which allows the bill of rights to become applicable. I know this does not specifically answer your question, but it's worth bringing up. \n\nAdditionally, partial birth abortion is not a medical term. It was basically made up. There are three main types, and in this case the Justice Douglas only consulted a doctor for learning the timeline of a pregnancy. ",
"There is an excellent podcast called open arguments that explains these types of things. They have a three part series that explains the Roe v. Wade decision. _URL_0_ Episodes 9-11. I highly recommend it if you would like to understand more.",
"Oyez has a fabulous explainer that a five year old could understand -- there's a handful of precedents that elaborate on/clarify/amend the reasoning in *Roe v. Wade,* which is no longer actually the main governing precedent on abortion laws in the U.S. but has survived as a sort of pop culture reference to the same. \n\n[Body Politic from Oyez](_URL_0_)\n\n",
"Legal dictionary defines privacy as:\n\n\"In Constitutional Law, the right of people to make personal decisions regarding intimate matters\"\n\nMedical procedures involving your body (or whatever is inside it) would qualify as intimate matters. \n\nSometimes, to protect individual freedom, we have to accept some really bad things. We can try to make sure people don't choose a bad thing for themselves, but legally barring them is not the act of a free society. Frankly, drug use should be treated the same as abortion, but for some reason it isn't. We are either free to make choices for our own bodies, or we aren't. Currently drug laws say we are not, abortion laws say we are. It's a bit hypocritical if you ask me. ",
"So what you need to understand is that there is by that point a lot of case law which establishes your right to privacy. In fact the entire paragraph before that is so chock-full of previous legal cases that it's very hard to read. So I'm going to paste it but each legal case that's cited I'm just going to replace it with a † for ease of reading:\n\n > The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions, however, going back perhaps as far as Union Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford^† , the Court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution. In varying contexts, the Court or individual Justices have, indeed, found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment^† , in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments^†††† , in the penumbras of the Bill of Rights^† , in the Ninth Amendment^† , or in the concept of liberty guaranteed by the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment^† . These decisions make it clear that only personal rights that can be deemed \"fundamental\" or \"implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,\"^† are included in this guarantee of personal privacy. They also make it clear that the right has some extension to activities relating to marriage^† , procreation^† , contraception^†† , family relationships^† , and childrearing and education^†† .\n\nSo that's a lot of influential legal cases that have already stated that a right-to-privacy exists! Just to cover those bases, the first amendment gives you freedoms in religion, press, speech, assembly, and petition; the fourth amendment protects you and your property from unreasonable search and seizure without warrants and probable cause; the fifth protects you legally by demanding a grand jury before the case even begins, banning double jeopardy, requiring due process, and forbidding them from forcing you to testify against yourself; the ninth says 'hey all these freedoms we're citing here, that's not an exhaustive list!' and those were all a part of the bill of rights. Finally the \"penumbra\" is the part of a shadow that is fuzzy, and apparently some case law regards your right to personal liberty apart from the Bill of Rights as being this \"fuzzy part\" around all the stuff that was being outlawed in the Bill of Rights.\n\nThen, the Fourteenth Amendment came in when slavery was being outlawed after the civil war and the former-slaves were being granted citizenship: and it took a bold step of trying to make sure that Southern states didn't just re-institute basically-the-same-policies as a matter of state law. The big intellectual conflict in the Civil War was essentially whether states were the central autonomous agents in our union, or whether the people were. The South and their notion of states' rights said \"hey, we can restrict peoples' freedoms because we're not the federal government so all this 'Congress shall make no law...' crap doesn't apply to us!\" and the 14th wanted to say \"no, the laws are to protect the people and the states must also abide by those protections.\" So the 14th Amendment said,\n\n > No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.\n\nYou can view this in two ways. In one way it is an explicit amendment against only that notion of \"states' rights\", nothing else. That's a \"narrow\" interpretation. But the Supreme Court is saying that it takes a \"broad\" interpretation including the history of the thing, where we're saying that *individual people* are the autonomous agents of the Union, not the *states*. And thus these \"privileges and immunities\" are really important, they say that you have a private life which neither the federal nor the state governments can impinge upon, in the Supreme Court's view.\n\nAt this point you put two-and-two together to make four: *given that* this right-to-personal-liberty exists for your own decisions, and *given that* previous case law has affirmed this right in cases of marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and childrearing and education, *then* it makes sense that it's a broad enough grant of liberty that it extends into medically difficult territory such as abortion. But the Supreme Court is not happy with my way of putting it, \"hey, just put two and two together!\" is bad reasoning, so they spell it out explicitly the ways that these anti-abortion laws might infringe on the personal freedoms of the mother:\n\n > The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood may be involved. All these are factors the woman and her responsible physician necessarily will consider in consultation.\n\nIn other words, \"the mother and doctor can weigh these sorts of things against each other, but a blanket ban on abortions doesn't weigh any of these concerns -- but by the right-to-privacy the woman has a right to weight these concerns against each other!\" Or I guess you could also say, \"there are all of these ways that these laws could hurt the mother, and the mother has a right, under the right to privacy, to not be hurt by the government for this sort of decision.\" But the decision does not stop on this hardline-liberal side of the equation; it actually then takes a hard turn back to center:\n\n > On the basis of elements such as these, appellant [Roe's lawyers] and some *amici* [other people who have sent in documents for the Supreme Court to consider in their judgment] argue that the woman's right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. **With this we do not agree.** Appellant's arguments that Texas either has no valid interest at all in regulating the abortion decision, or no interest strong enough to support any limitation upon the woman's sole determination, are unpersuasive. The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential life. At some point in pregnancy, these respective interests become sufficiently compelling to sustain regulation of the factors that govern the abortion decision. The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute. In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some *amici* that one has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of this kind in the past. †(vaccination); †(sterilization).\n > \n > We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified, and must be considered against important state interests in regulation.\n\nSo their attitude is *your right to privacy includes a right to medical decisions and to do whatever you want with your body*, but also that this right is **probably limited**. (You have to wade through a little lawyer-speak above; they have not said that it is for-sure limited; they have deliberately chosen to say that \"right now these arguments for it are not persuasive, and it's *not clear to us* that these other people arguing for an unlimited right are correct, and if they were correct it would seem to be inconsistent with some of our previous decisions about how the laws should be interpreted.\" But they are deliberately leaving open the possibility of more-persuasive arguments for future Supreme Courts.)\n\nSo that's the full argument. Basically, there seems to be this general expectation that the federal government (and via the 14th, each state government) is going to butt out of personal decisions involving family and your own body; and as evidence that this matters here there's the fact that a lot of harm in the personal lives of women that can be inflicted by these anti-abortion laws if they don't respect those rights to self-determination. But on the other hand, even though you *do* have these rights, they aren't totally *inviolable* either; they're just reasonable expectations which the states must respect.",
"The tl'dr version?\n\nEssentially you have a right to privacy which would imply it is no ones business whether you are pregnant or what happens between you and your doctor. Very over simplified but that is the logical gist. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://openargs.com/"
],
[
"http://projects.oyez.org/body-politic/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3k5d0d | why do even the smallest shots in big movies take dozens if not hundreds of takes to make? | I was an extra in an upcoming Christian Bale and Oscar Isaac film today and the scene we did today involved only a small introduction. It was set in an old amphitheatre for medicine students in 1914. Isaacs character sits down and is immediately greeted with hostility by another student. A secondary character interjects, sends the bully away and the two make small talk. The professor walks in, everyone gets up and then sit down for beginning of the lecture. In total this scene takes less than 90 seconds and we started filming it at 7:45 am. By the time me and half the extras left at 8:30 pm they were still shooting this small sequence.
Now I know they have to cover all sorts of different angles which they did but even for each of those they took dozens of takes and it wasn't like something went wrong everytime as the director himself informed us pretty early on this was the only scene we would be doing today.
If anything it made me appreciate the enormous amount of work and manpower a movie like this requires. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k5d0d/eli5_why_do_even_the_smallest_shots_in_big_movies/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuux1pe",
"cuux6nm",
"cuuyou5"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Large part of the job of directors is directing the actors, and that generally requires that the director first has some initial take to improve on. Like they have a first take, then the director finds something to improve, to change in the performance of the actor and gives additional instructions. And sometimes directors can take several variations of the same shot so they have more freedom in the editing room to put together the scene. Also big scenes with tons of extras and a big set can require meticulous changes in lighting and sound recording when the camera moves just a little bit. And every time camera position is changed, they generally check and calibrate exposure values, the focus and stuff to capture the scene properly. So it's like a huge puzzle you have to sort of solve every time the camera position or the action in the scene changes.",
"There are hundreds of variables in each take, especially one with the amount of subjects you describe.\n\nA major one is the performance. The director wants to have several options on how the lines are delivered. \n\nBlocking. Movement, especially of multiple people, throws many wrenches into a camera shot.\n\nCamera angles. As you mentioned, they set up for wide shots, closeups, etc. ",
"This is by no means a \"small shot.\" Scenes with lots of extras are expensive and cumbersome, you want to get your money's worth out of them. From what you describe, the scene seems to set up that the main character is a controversial figure among his fellow students, so it's probably fairly significant within the framework of the drama. But even if scenes like this are light on content in terms of plot, they're important, especially for period pieces. They make a movie feel like a movie, immersive and rich. They are the moments that leave a general impression of opulence on the viewer, even if the rest of the movie mostly consists of \"2-3 people in a room, talking\" scenes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1dc1fo | why is winking so.. attractive? | Is it a cultural thing (winking = sexy), or is it something deeper? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dc1fo/eli5_why_is_winking_so_attractive/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9ovpux"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I can think of many reasons. First it is a sign of acknowledgment which is of course attractive. Another reason is that winking is usually accompanied by slightly opening the mouth, which is associated with kissing and other displays of affection. Plus it can display healthy dentistry which has strong primal bases for attraction."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
20f0a4 | can everyday exposure prepare your immune system just like a vaccine? | So I haven't gotten a flu shot in almost 8 years, not because I'm against them mostly just a needle fear. But I also haven't gotten the flu since that point, mind body aches and slight nausea but no intense sick days like when I did get the flu shot. Now I understand the Hep A and Hep B since we aren't constantly exposed to those but for more common sicknesses does daily exposure to whatever is in the outside world help your immune system with all the different strains of a flu or does the yearly flu shot work better? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20f0a4/eli5_can_everyday_exposure_prepare_your_immune/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg2kxz8",
"cg2kzs8",
"cg2lab3",
"cg2smb2"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I don't know if there is a scientific study behind it, but my understanding is that being *too* clean is also pretty bad for you.\n\nGeorge Carlin had a joke about how no one in his neighborhood ever got Polio - because they used to swim in the Hudson River. In his words, they were tempered in raw shit.\n\nI think there is a point to that - being exposed to things like the outdoors, public transit, etc., might make you sick at first - but your body will adapt over time and will become more resilient, I think. Genetics might play a strong part in this though.\n\nI have the basic vaccines, but i don't get flu shots. I will get sick for about 3-5 days in the winter, and then deal with an uncomfortable sinus pressure for a few days, and I'm good after that. And thats really the worst that has happened to me in that regard.\n\nI don't think I would skip on MMR or Hep vaccines, but I do know that despite living in NYC, not always washing my hands before eating, and generally not worrying about the quality/preparation of the food I eat, I haven't gotten sick more than twice in two years.\n\nedit; to actually answer your question, at best being outdoors and exposed to germs will just make you someone who has had exposure to germs. I personally think this is an advantage to someone who has never had exposure to germs. The flu will suck for both people, but I would wager that the person who has had exposure to bacteria/germs more regularly will handle it better.",
"Yes, BUT if you are exposing yourself to real viruses ad bacteria, and not the killed and weaken forms found in vaccines, there is a small but non-zero chance of the germs killing you.",
"Your immune system in effect produces a cure for any disease it manages to beat off.\r\rSo yes exposure to a given disease will act like a vaccine.\r\rThere are two problems though.\r\rFirst you will most likely have to contract the disease in the first place including all its symptoms.\r\rSecond of all diseases such as flu mutate rapidly to a point where your immune system no longer recognises it and cant fight it off with its existing antibodies.\r\rYou basically are encountering a new disease every time flu season comes around.",
"Well, kind of. The most effective way to prevent yourself from getting a disease is by developing active immunity to it, which basically means that your body is exposed to the germ, develops an immune response to it and remembers it so that if you're ever exposed to the germ again, you won't get sick. Both infection and immunization provide active immunity. The benefits of immunization over infection are that you get the resistance to the disease without getting sick.\n\nYou probably haven't gotten the flu in 8 years because [it's not actually that likely](_URL_0_), especially if you don't spend a lot of time in high-risk places, such as hospitals, clinics, or schools/universities. But the problem with that is you may end up losing that gamble one of these years. There are also many, many different strains of flu and it's a rapidly mutating virus, so more strains emerge pretty often. \n\nI also want to just point out here that vaccination isn't just for the individual. If enough people in a community or population are vaccinated, you can prevent disease from getting in there in the first place (called herd immunity, if anyone's interested in learning more). So even if you can't or don't get vaccinated, if you're surrounded by a lot of people who are, the disease won't make its way through the population because nobody can spread it. You may not become severely ill and die from the flu, but you could end up giving the flu to the 70 year old lady on the bus with you who could die of it. This is why so many healthcare people harp on flu vaccination, because even vaccinating a small part of the population majorly decreases cases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/flu-statistics"
]
] |
|
5vwu1t | why is the usa more conservative on attitudes about sex compared to other developed nations? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vwu1t/eli5_why_is_the_usa_more_conservative_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"de5iuc4",
"de5jpsd",
"de5oikr",
"de6heb5"
],
"score": [
19,
9,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"I think it's because the country was founded by Puritans who fled the United Kingdom because they were on the other side of religious persecution, being a minority religion in a majority Protestant country. In the New World, they were free to do the oppressing and forbid any fun activities.\n\nThey kicked Roger Williams out of Massachusetts Bay for \"spreading new and dangerous ideas\" like religious tolerance and separation of church and state. They also kicked out the Quakers and executed four by hanging when they stayed behind and kept practicing. Nice guys, these Puritans, don't you think?\n\nThe enforcers of religious dogma seem to be obsessed with people's sexuality. Controlling when and how you procreate and what you're allowed to teach your offspring creates a ready-made army of God. There's no higher purpose than that, really.",
"Americans have this thing called Bible Belt. \n\nAmerica only tolerates religious fundamentalism and extremism of the Jesus variant. ",
"It's because of the way the USA distributes power unevenly to the rural areas of the country. There are many areas of the country with relaxed attitudes about sex on par with Europe (Las Vegas, New Orleans, New York, San Francisco, etc). However, rural areas have a disproportionate voice in the Senate and Presidential elections so they still get to make the rules. ",
" > Why is the USA more conservative ~~on attitudes about sex compared to other developed nations?~~\n\nIt's more conservative on sex, because it's more conservative. Things that contribute to it being more conservative. \n\nLarge focus on individual liberty and freedom. Because of this...\na culture that regards population wide evidence-based policy with mistrust (e.g., affirmative action, universal healthcare et.c). This interrelates with..\n\na)Very religious relative to other nations. There is some relationship between education and religiousness (could be mistaken/mis-recalling, but I believe it is mainly the women's education)\n\nb) Shittier education on a population level (education is *one* of the axis that tends to separate people on the left-right spectrum). And before somebody harps on with the US having a world class education, it does. But not for everybody, and the inequality is the issue. It can't be fixed because of the mistrust in government policies like affirmative action. \n\nAnother part that comes into play is the US political system is built in such a way that makes progress slower. With the disproportionate voting power to rural areas, the complete segregation of branches, the number of checks and balances, the non compulsory voting, the (honestly quite fucked) voting boundaries... I'm sure there are more. \n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ahndhg | would two objects of the same density but different weights fall at the same rate underwater? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ahndhg/eli5_would_two_objects_of_the_same_density_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"eeg4re1"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Not necessarily. if you have two pieces of the same type of steel alloy and one is heavier and shaped like a sphere and the other is lighter but stretched out like a thin piece of sheet metal they will fall through the water in different ways and the heavier spear shaped one likely will fall faster. \n\nYou could also have a spear shaped piece of steel that is lighter then the sheet metal shaped piece of heavier steel. In this case I still think that the sphere shape one would fall faster simply because it would have less resistance slipping through the water.\n\nIn other words, shape and friction play into the equation as much as weight does regardless of equal density."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
648idi | why are some train tracks rusty and some shiny | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/648idi/eli5_why_are_some_train_tracks_rusty_and_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg07ip0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Trains regularly running over tracks wears out any rust on the load-bearing part. The rest of the rail is either structure or excess shape designed to protect the train from derailment.\n\nThe type of steel in the rail is resistant to rust, and it doesn't corrode very quickly. Lots of the rail actually has rust on it to protect it from letting more rust penetrate any deeper."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
f1q8ui | how do those prescription savings cards work? | They must be making someone money otherwise they wouldn't have commercials. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f1q8ui/eli5_how_do_those_prescription_savings_cards_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"fh7plr9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Basically: many of them charge the pharmacy a small amount of the sale so that the pharmacy can offer a lower price to the customer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
c3yq33 | how do show/ movie directors get shots and scenes of totally abandoned cities? | Take the walking dead for example, in season 1 Rick was walking through the ghost town Atlanta before walking into walkers. Take alien 2 on earth for example, at the end how was there no one in the city? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c3yq33/eli5_how_do_show_movie_directors_get_shots_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"eru35sm",
"eru39e0",
"eruamkk",
"erud44j",
"erukool",
"eruokzb",
"erv3553"
],
"score": [
63,
8,
20,
8,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They're not in real cities. They're on a movie set, and the rest of the city is faked with CGI.\n\nCheck out [this demo reel](_URL_0_) of how prevalent CGI is in TV shows.",
"Usually they can get permission to clear a couple blocks of a city for filming, and then will CGI the rest in.",
"For the deserted london scène in 28 days later they shot it @ 430 in the Morning. \n\n_URL_0_",
"In addition to what others have said, if you just need a static shot it’s possible to take multiple photos for an extended duration and then take the median. Basically you take the pixels which stay the same in most of the photos. Pixels which change are probably people or cars.",
"There are often a lot of 'abandoned' shots in productions like that where there are still perfectly cut lawns in the background. When you're able to shoot out of order, you can get a lot done in a weekend.",
"There was an article about this photographer that took a series of shots on a still day, then meticulously cropped out any signs of human activity (people, cars, etc). He then mounted the final images into a slow pan/ zoom montage and the city looked eeerily empty. Actual location shots, low budget, no cgi, loads of post, good results. Ymmv.",
"Depending on the size and budget of the film. I am legend for instance locked off multiple avenues in NYC and covered them with fake plants. You can do early morning right after sun rise or shoot in a certain direction and hide the huge crowd on the other side of the camera. You can also go cgi and green screen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clnozSXyF4k"
],
[],
[
"https://www.quora.com/How-did-they-shoot-the-Deserted-London-scene-from-28-Days-Later-2002"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3pzc11 | how exactly does the coriolis effect affect large-scale weather patterns? | After seeing news stories about Hurricane Patricia, I got to thinking about hurricanes and how they are formed. Unfortunately, any information I find online is only understandable to a physicist or a meteorologist. I understand how the Earth's rotation affects the movement of objects on a very small scale (i.e. A sniper's bullet), but how does it control weather patterns and the direction of currents and winds, so that they would rotate clockwise or counterclockwise? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pzc11/eli5_how_exactly_does_the_coriolis_effect_affect/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwar5y0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nI could try to explain it myself but nothing is ever going to beat a video for this topic. I think the merry-go-round example is the best possible example and the last part of the video ties it into how it affects air."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcPs_OdQOYU"
]
] |
|
2gejpq | why do i need to urinate more when concentrating? | When I'm concentrating really hard (e.g. programming or playing an fps game), I need to urinate 100x more frequently than usual.. why is this, do I output brain-fuel? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gejpq/eli5_why_do_i_need_to_urinate_more_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckicekw",
"ckiegvb"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"And what about when playing hide and seek?",
"(There is no science behind this answer, just observation) I find that if I'm active, running or working out, I have to go much less frequently than if I'm sitting down doing homework for hours at a time. My guess is that when you're active, your body is using more of it's available fluids because it needs them, whereas when you're sitting down for an extended period your body doesn't need those extra fluids so you just piss them right out. \n\nSource: At the library and I have to pee. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4nih8z | how does lashing kill someone? | One of the biggest mysteries ever according to google since I can't find a single article explaining this. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nih8z/eli5_how_does_lashing_kill_someone/ | {
"a_id": [
"d445kzu",
"d445lqq",
"d445m1a",
"d445md6"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It's not that mysterious. [It causes death either through loss of blood, damage to internal organs, or infection.](_URL_0_)",
"Most likely infection and/or blood loss. Lashes as a form of punishment arnt used to kill people though.",
"Severe lashing, especially with a knotted or barbed whip, can break the skin in many places and cause severe bleeding. If the wound gets infected, it can certainly be life-threatening to a weakened prisoner who gets poor or no medical care.",
"Lashing can be a bit more vigerous than you seem to imagine. Picture someone getting hit so hard that it tears their skin down to the muscle, so that strips of skin are hanging off their back. If they are lashed enough they lose enough blood and skin that they will die of shock or infection from the open wound.\n\nIt isn't just a few slaps with a belt that leaves a red welt or something."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.medievality.com/flagellation.html"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
agbzcd | what happens if you get shot in the stomach? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/agbzcd/eli5_what_happens_if_you_get_shot_in_the_stomach/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee522se"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"**Please read this entire message**\n\n---\n\nYour submission has been removed for the following reason(s):\n\n* Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts (Rule 2). \n\n\n\n\n---\nIf you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](_URL_0_) first. If you still feel the removal should be reviewed, please [message the moderators.](_URL_1_?)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules",
"http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Can%20you%20review%20my%20thread"
]
] |
||
3l82nm | what happened to the aristocracy? did the great wars/ great depression bleed the old money dry? | I'm trying to figure out why there isn't really a high society in America, nor a drive to be in high society. From extreme poor to crippling debt (higher education, low earned income high cost of living, gambling, drug addiction? etc) to the "wealthy 1%". Are the rich gaining wealth or just maintaining wealth while cost of living overshadows daily life for a majority of Americans? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l82nm/eli5_what_happened_to_the_aristocracy_did_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv413ur"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > why there isn't really a high society in America\n\nWhy would you think that? The US has plenty of billionaires and other extremely wealthy people in. There is a lot of \"old money\" that has been passed down since before the Robber Baron era of turn of the Century. Names like Rockefeller and Kennedy have been part of \"high society\" for a hundred years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
52oruw | how do successful celebrities attract so much bad press and remain successful? | There are, in my mind at least, two different gorups here. One group contains Putbull, Gwenith Paltrow, and Nicholas Cage that just get a lot of hate but still get a lot of work. The second groups of celebrities are the Justin Bieiber types that, although they are performers and celebrities that have a brand, get in a lot of trouble and yet still have a solid following despite all the ridiculous situations they end up in. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52oruw/eli5_how_do_successful_celebrities_attract_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7m0mix",
"d7m26lk",
"d7m2bzv"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, the saying goes \"there's no such thing as bad press\". If you didn't believe it before, take Donald Trump who has made an entire career out of it. The crazier he sounds the more people talk about him. \n\nAll of these things are more or less expected of celebrities. It doesn't affect their personal brand, because their personal brand isn't based on them being an altruistic, friendly, or kind individual.\n",
"Celebrities like Pitbull and Cage are just notorious for making repetitive/awful content, but it is important to note that they have achieved mainstream success beforehand in their respective professions. To my knowledge, they each haven't done anything particularly offensive or have been nasty people--it's just that they had bad gigs and we like to ridicule them for it. Nevertheless, there is a particular charm to celebrities like them, especially on the internet, where Cage is like the damn celebrity meme-god that people can like in other regards.\n\nOthers like Paltrow and Bieber are simply more troubled in their personal lives, but haven't done anything particularly damaging to the public other than cause some immature bullshit that did nobody any particular harm. They also have their respective fan-bases based off of their own talents, and they both seem to have \"matured\" as a result of their past missteps.\n\nA lot of this has to do with their managers as well--they would know exactly how to coordinate/redirect a celebrity's public image in a more positive light. That has been most successful with Bieber it seems. Haven't really heard much about Miley Cyrus/other celebrities however.\n\nThis isn't to say that they're immune to public criticism. People like Mel Gibson and Charlie Sheen were pretty much done for, though Mel Gibson tried to work hard to regain his image back in the industry and to the public eye. Part of the celebrity-ideal however, is the conviction that people have in them that they've proven themselves once before, so they're willing to give them a second chance more easily than the regular bloke. There are also celebrities like Lindsay Lohan and the such who had rougher times as well and don't appear to have good chances of recovery in the media.",
"More bad press = More people talking about them\n\nMore people talking about them = More people deciding to listen to their songs/watch their movies out of curiosity\n\nMore people deciding to listen to their songs/watch their movies out of curiosity = More people deciding they like their songs/movies and wanting to buy more"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2w50tc | how do they pick what camera angles to use in sport games? | Or who makes the decisions for the mid-game montages? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w50tc/eli5_how_do_they_pick_what_camera_angles_to_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"conmx1x"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"All of the cameras feed to screens in a room, where a producer will decide which camera's stream is sent to TV screens, it's their decision as to which shot is best.\n\nThere will also be editors available, who can grab important pieces of footage to assemble highlight reels and montages. In either case all of the footage captured during the game is recorded, so this can be easily done after the fact."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
79pouf | why are there so many different shapes of water towers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/79pouf/eli5_why_are_there_so_many_different_shapes_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp3vglb",
"dp3vks5",
"dp3w7kb"
],
"score": [
5,
25,
17
],
"text": [
"They have varying needs for height (pressure) and volume, must meet local zoning regulations for appearance and strength, and must be engineered to work with local soil strength. \nMunicipal water systems may emphasize beauty over cost as a matter of civic pride. If one is going to paint the town's or the high school football team's name, one might prefer sleek and swoopy lines to the basic tank-on-legs style that looks like a decaying relic from War of the Worlds.",
"Not exactly an answer but remember that water towers do not supply water: they supply water pressure to the whole system. The key design feature is that the water has high potential energy to drive it through the whole system.\n\n[Like this](_URL_0_)",
"Water towers can vary in size quite a bit. What is most cost effective for a 25,000 gal. tank is probably not the most cost effective for a 3,000,000 gal. tank.\n\nAlso the tank owners may have specific desires for the tank. Some tanks with larger towers can use that space for storage, etc. \n\nBy the way, the lollipop shaped towers are probably pedesphere tanks and the ones with lots of supports are generically known as multi leg tanks, I believe. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.putnamconnection.com/water_tower_diagram.jpg"
],
[]
] |
||
5j4jjl | what's the purpose of the orange lights on top of larger trucks and tractor trailers? | Above the windshield on most larger trucks and tractor trailers there is a row of orange lights. What's the pupose of that row of lights? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5j4jjl/eli5_whats_the_purpose_of_the_orange_lights_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbdd9jc",
"dbdf7l5"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe those are called \"clearance lights.\" They're apparently required by law in the US and Canada on larger vehicles. For **why** I'm not sure, here's a few possibilities randos threw out from googlin':\n\n* They indicate to other drivers that the vehicle they're looking at is taller, larger/heavier, and probably wider than other vehicles, and thus should be cautious.\n* Several truckers I've seen mention the clearance lights will illuminate trees and overhangs, not as bright as headlights but enough to see something before they whack it.",
"They are *clearance lights* designed to help you judge the height of your vehicle vs anything above it via reflection (like when you approach a tunnel of unknown height , you can slow down, park the front of the truck just inside the entrance and, if you see little orange circles above you that are roughly the size of your lights, you might be nearly too tall to safely drive through."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
25h67j | how come we don't have to pay for porn? | Is the money from adverts really sufficient for the entire cost of production and then profit? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25h67j/eli5_how_come_we_dont_have_to_pay_for_porn/ | {
"a_id": [
"chh3zn0",
"chh43tr",
"chh51ce",
"chh63g1"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Your dad pays for it, you just happen to find it for free.",
"Well, a lot of porn sites also generate a ton of revenue from live cam shows. Pretty much all the big ones have live models on hand, who rake in a surprising amount of cash.\n\n..Or so I heard.",
"Some people pay for porn. They subsidize free porn for the rest of us",
"It shouldn't be surprising that the ad money covers it.\n\nIt's how an enormous amount of free services and sites operate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bnczgu | why can your weight change so quickly (like gaining weight after going off of a diet or losing weight after not eating for a few days) but it takes so long to get back to your original weight? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bnczgu/eli5_why_can_your_weight_change_so_quickly_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"en4j11p",
"en4ls0a"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Short term weight changes are either due to water or colon content.\n\nIt you eat like a regular person, you have about 500g og glycol stored in your body as short term carbohydrate store. These sugar molecules bind about 2kg of water. If you ran on a diet, your body will first metabolize those stores, so you'll lose about 2.5kg rather quickly.\n\nThen there's your digestive tract which contents weigh several kilos. If you eat significantly less or food with different fiber content, the weight of the content changes rather quickly, since you colon keeps pushing things down, no matter what you eat.\n\nEdit: to clarify a bit: you need about 9000kcal excess to gain one kilo of pure fat tissue and you need about 7500kcal deficit to lose that kilo again. So an average person would have to stop eating anything for about three days to lose one kilo of pure fat (in theory).",
"Which one of the following two things are easier to do:\n\n & #x200B;\n\n1) After your usual breakfast you eat a granola bar, then after lunch someone brings donuts into the office and you have one, then after dinner you have a big piece of chocolate cake.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n2) You don't eat anything for a whole day.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n1 is obviously easier to do than 2. There are lots of days when you did 1 and very few days when you did 2. Doing one basically means eating 2 days worth of food in one day, and doing 2 is what you would need to do to make up for option 1. That's why you're fat. Its way easier to eat than it is to not eat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7ycarl | why does australia have 16/20 of the most venomous snakes in the world? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ycarl/eli5_why_does_australia_have_1620_of_the_most/ | {
"a_id": [
"duf8te6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yarr! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: Why is Australia choke-full of poisonous creatures, but New Zealand, despite the geographic proximity, has surprisingly few of them? ](_URL_4_) ^(_._)\n1. [ELI5: Why exactly is everything so deadly and dangerous in Australia? ](_URL_1_) ^(_6 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why does Australia have so many crazy animals and bugs? ](_URL_2_) ^(_14 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why are venomous animals in Australia typically more dangerous than venomous animals in other places? ](_URL_5_) ^(_3 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: How did Australia get some many nightmare enducing dangerous creatures in comparison to the rest of the world? ](_URL_0_) ^(_11 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Why Australia wildlife is so hostile? ](_URL_3_) ^(_9 comments_)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xypar/eli5_how_did_australia_get_some_many_nightmare/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3s2z7h/eli5_why_exactly_is_everything_so_deadly_and/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lk41u/eli5_why_does_australia_have_so_many_crazy/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cdix7/eli5_why_australia_wildlife_is_so_hostile/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gg3cx/eli5_why_is_australia_chokefull_of_poisonous/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5gywxm/eli5_why_are_venomous_animals_in_australia/"
]
] |
||
8qh3xl | why hasn’t the united nations decreed a denuclearization of all 9 countries with nuclear weapons? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8qh3xl/eli5_why_hasnt_the_united_nations_decreed_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0j4qvl",
"e0j5eul"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the UN does not have the power to do this. Such an order would have to come from the UN Security Council, where most of these countries have veto power.",
"To give some background the UN was created to make sure that something like WW2 wouldn't happen again, they tried to create one after WW1 to do the same but the countries that joined didn't trust each other and so it failed\n\nHowever because it did succeed the main countries that fought on the winning side of the war and founded the UN gave themselves the top seats or I kind of inner circle where they would get the most Power and deciding votes ( I believe the countries are great Britain, America, Russia and France I can't recall the 5th if there is one sorry ) these countries have the ability to veto all laws and UN votes\n\nA veto is where if even just one of these inner circle countries says no to a deal of law then it won't go threw ALL inner circle countries must agree before it is passed, this means that if let's just say only America had nukes then they could veto the law that would stop there nukes, but every inner circle country has nukes so none of them would ever agree to disarm for the simple reason of the fact that it's a status of power and it's a deterrent to other countries (hence the whole cold war or India and Pakistan using nukes to make sure the other doesn't try to attack or invade) \n\nTLDR: the countries that have the power in the UN also have nukes and don't want to get rid of them "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2aozc8 | why do climbers have to melt snow to drink it, why can't they just eat the snow? | I was watching [this](_URL_0_) documentary in which two climbers, whilst returning down from the top of a mountain, run out of gas meaning that they are unable to melt snow into water to drink, they end up becoming extremely dehydrated. But I was wondering, why couldn't they just eat the snow to re-hydrate? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aozc8/eli5_why_do_climbers_have_to_melt_snow_to_drink/ | {
"a_id": [
"cixbemr",
"cixbl2k"
],
"score": [
2,
13
],
"text": [
"It's extremely cold. It'll lower you body temperature and give you hypothermia.",
"\"Snow and ice are obvious sources of water but always melt them before consuming. Avoid the urge to eat snow or ice as it will lower your body core temperature, hastening the onset of hypothermia and can cause dehydration. Eating ice may also cause blistering and sores in and around your mouth and lips.\"\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379557/"
] | [
[],
[
"http://survivor-magazine.com/tag/dehydration/"
]
] |
|
2y5gz8 | why is asbestos looked at in such a bad light while other building materials like fiberglass and silica are seemingly similar and still currently used? | It seems that asbestos got a bad wrap and now that safe guards are in place against it and raw materials with similar properties products like fiber glass and silica that are seemingly as dangerous get to skate by. Could asbestos be reintroduced into markets with safe handling and use standards set in place? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2y5gz8/eli5why_is_asbestos_looked_at_in_such_a_bad_light/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp6eeg6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Asbestos is similar in chemical and physical structure (i.e., filaments), but it it *way* more friable. Friability means it breaks down into microfragments (tiny needles) that easily become airborne, hence the reason that asbestos causes mesothelioma and lung cancer. The tiny needles get lodged in lung tissue and repeatedly disrupt cellular structure causing inflammation and tumors."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1qdoml | how do companies such as twitter, which has yet to turn a profit since it's creation and has lost $165 million this year so far, continue to run and how can they pay employees? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qdoml/eli5_how_do_companies_such_as_twitter_which_has/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdbre2l",
"cdbs2p0",
"cdbs4bq",
"cdbs55c",
"cdbsgy2",
"cdbtfie",
"cdbu7nf",
"cdbu9tu",
"cdbue0h",
"cdbuj8t",
"cdbuuxx",
"cdbviee",
"cdbvyq6",
"cdbwb2p",
"cdbywyh",
"cdbzldr",
"cdc0tsf",
"cdc0vs5",
"cdc1rrb",
"cdc1zup",
"cdc2411",
"cdc54of",
"cdc57br",
"cdc5c21",
"cdca8tz",
"cdcatrv",
"cdcfeai",
"cdcfuf8"
],
"score": [
99,
4,
2,
23,
1680,
276,
16,
2,
5,
2,
13,
4,
2,
6,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
6,
2,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"They have convinced someone to give them money in exchange for ownership of the company, in Twitter's case stock. The Twitter business plan would call out potential routes for owners to get their money back which would document routes to profitability. These routes would probably include, selling the company to someone else for Twitter's technology, data, processes, people, or values. It also would include an IPO, which is what Twitter did.",
"They enter rounds of funding where they basically agree to sell a percentage of their company to one or several venture capitalists (VC) for a certain price. There may be several rounds, called series A, series B etc. \n\nThe money they raise from these rounds is used to pay their staff and to expand business. The bigger their business grows, the more they are worth, and the more they can get for the next series of funding. \n\nObviously the start up has to provide some benefit to the VCs, which means they have to convince them that if they grow big enough, they will be able to pay the VC their money back several times. \n\nIt is possible for a company to go from its first round to exit without earning any money. For example, Instagram managed to get itself bought by Facebook without having actually generated a profit. The VCs though, got paid out by whatever fb paid for Instagram, and fb gets the photography expertise and user base from Instagram which it presumably will either shut down to eliminate competition for its own photo product, or use to generate profit in the future. ",
"You can continue to pay employees while not making a profit. If you opened a store but didn't sell anything one month you would probably still be able to pay your employees with cash reserves. Usually businesses aren't run without enough money to pay expenses upcoming expenses. Especially start-ups, which often go years without making a profit. They are often funded with venture capital (or other types of loans or equity financing) or with the owner's start up capital. ",
"Venture funding. Venture funding is basically seed money provided to companies with a high potential for growth. The goal of venture funding is to help a company grow/finance them in exchange for equity or stock options. It's a gamble that eventually the company being funded will have an IPO or a sale. Twitter went public last week.\n\nAs for how Twitter was able to secure so much financing the answer is because we are in the middle of a gigantic social media bubble similar to the dotcom bubble. Twitter will likely one day make a profit but right now it is all hype and speculation. The value of the company has no grounds in reality. But all of this doesn't really matter because the purpose of venture funding is to make people rich through an IPO. In the case of Twitter this happened. Yay.\n",
"Source: I'm in-house counsel for a group of tech startups.\n\nTwitter has raised a tremendous amount of money: [1.82 billion, to be precise.](_URL_1_) This has been done by selling off bits of their company to investors. They also raised a shitload in this IPO.\n\n[They also have a tremendous amount of revenue - $317M last year.](_URL_0_)\n\nSo the main issue is that they are actually spending more than they take in, but given all the extra money they have from investors, that is more than enough to cover the gap.\n\nIn general, however, when a company is \"running in the red\" (i.e., spending more than they make, and numbers in the negative on income statements and balance sheets are typically put in red, hence the phrase), there are only a few possible situations that explain how they are sustainable:\n\n1. They have cash reserves which they are spending down. This is the case of twitter.\n2. They have a credit line which they are borrowing against. This is more typical for established companies with a substantial credit history - less so for internet startups. Just too volatile to properly assess from a credit-risk perspective. \n3. They are flirting with insolvency. \n\nAmazon, for instance, doesn't post good profits, if they post profits at all, because they spend all their revenue re-investing in the company. Twitter, however, is not really comparable - while Amazon is making major capital investments that are non-recurring and building out its infrastructure, Twitter's costs are likely almost all recurring, and consist of payroll and IT. This is why so many people are skeptical about Twitter - it has the stock performance of a much larger, more established company with an order of magnitude more revenue, but its underlying financials do not support this valuation from a traditional perspective. ",
"A bunch of rich guys have a lot of money and want to make more money using that money. They decide to get together and build a hotel so that they can get the money from people staying there. They pay for land, engineers, and construction workers to build this hotel. It takes some time to build it, and during this time they are not making money but paying people to build this hotel. Then, when the hotel is built they can get the income from people staying there. It is also possible that they decide that they are better at building a hotel than running one, so they sell it to someone who doesn't know how to build a hotel, but can run one efficiently. So they sell it for more than it cost to pay the construction workers to build it.\n\nThis is essentially what happens with Twitter and other companies. Some rich guys see the potential and instead of paying construction workers to build a hotel they pay engineers and programmers to build a website where you can send 140 character messages. They are not making any income right now because they are still building the hotel (company) and hope that in the future the company will bring them income, probably in the form of ad revenue or something like that. They could also sell it to someone in the future for more than it cost to build if they decide that they like to build growing companies instead of running already made hotels (companies.)",
"I just don't understand how these companies are worth billions of dollars...Are they THAT effective as advertising platforms? I certainly never clicked on a single facebook or twitter ad. It's crazy. ",
"Net income and cash flow are to different things. In accounting, income and expense does not equal cash coming in the door. \nEdit: example, my net income my be $0, but that typically includes non-cash accounting entries for depreciation and other deferred accounting treatment for taxes. It also doesn't factor in debt or equity investments from outside sources. So I could be setting on a pile of cash, but my company may not be turning a profit.",
"They were able to secure investors who gave them large amounts of money for preferred stock. Huge cash injections allow them to operate for many years to try and generate something of value. The investors received the equivalent of common stock at the price of $2 or less (depending on time of investment) per share. \n\nThere was risk (large or small) and now they are being rewarded. If you read the IPO, they were initially targeting a ~$24 price point which would have been a 1000% return. Based on market demand (read: suckers), they were able to raise the price to $45, a 2000% return. \n\nNow Tom and Sally who donated to Goldman Sachs have to come to terms that they have stock in a company that is essentially worth whatever they paid into it plus an annual net loss that averages about 90 million over 3 years. \n\nThe value that Twitter has to offer investors after all of this, is a large user base and the ability to provide targeted ads. Now if only there were already other companies that did this and did it better...",
"Microsoft turns huge profit, stocks go down. Amazon posts yet another loss, stocks go up. Who knows.",
"I'll compare it to having a kid. Let me explain. \n\nKids spend more than they earn until they are about 21 (assuming they go to college), but they get infusions of cash from parents/relatives/etc. \n\nAs a child grows older and begins to show promise, people are willing to make larger investments in this child's future. Think of a brilliant football player who gets a full scholarship at a $50,000 per year college. \n\nThe football player may not play the first year, costing the college $50k to sit on the bench (while improving of course). However in years to come that player might bring in large ticket sales and attract students to study at the school.\n\nFinally, the player gets drafted at 21 years old and stats making some money. He buys his parents a new house and allows them to retire early.\n\nWhile this child did not generate much income for 21 years, he eventually turned out to be a good investment for his parents and school by giving value to the investments they made over the long run by turning a profit for years to come.",
"So if I started a company that sells $100 bills for $95, I'm pretty sure I'd make billions of revenue very quickly. Market share would be tremendous and I'd have millions of unique users within weeks. (I'd have to start selling shares pretty quick obviously to keep the cash flow going)\n\n\nSure I'd be operating at a slight loss, but with that revenue and user base - a few red numbers don't seem to hold back people from investing in companies like Twitter? ",
"Twitter makes some revenue from advertising, but isn't currently profitable. They're paying the bills with money from investors. First they were using money from venture capitalists, and now they are operating with the money they made selling stock. People are willing to keep investing because there are 200 million world wide users, and the investors believe Twitter will eventually find a way to turn a profit.",
"“Once you have profits, it’s impossible to just make stuff up. That’s why we’re switching to a ‘freeconomics’ model. We’ll give away everything for free and let the market speculate about how much money we could make if we wanted to make money. That way, the sky’s the limit!”\n\nSource:\n_URL_0_",
"They buy in bulk, and pass the savings on to you. Edit: I have no idea.",
"Don't forget the things like depreciation and other accounting factors can show a 'loss' that doesn't require an expense. Case in point (not accurate but explains it) I make $100 1st quarter. I buy a TV for $100. The next month I make $100 but the TV is now worth $50. My net for that second month would read $50, not $100 since I loss $50 in value of the TV.\n\nIt's not how that actually works but explains (like you are 5) on how complex accounting can appear to have loss after loss but not really reflecting revenue versus debt.",
"Investments, raised capital, advertisements. I saw an analogy on here that made this clear to me. It is like you are investing in a gold excavation. You are basically putting money into this company because you think it might strike gold and make you rich. Twitter, Snapchat, Facebook, are all of these \"digging for gold\" companies. They have done something no other company has ever done. They have amassed millions to billions of users and they are faithful to the company and repeatedly use the product.\n\nThe problem is basically the end game. How does these companies make money off this widely used, widely accepted, and widely known product? Facebook has played with a phone, sponsorship pages, ads on the side and so on. No one has really figured it out. Like how did instagram pay its employees before facebook? \n\nHowever, Twitter has done something uniquely remarkable that (if it catches on) might be the end game to all of this. They now allow uses to \"send\" money via hashtags or links and sending it to another person. Like \"I just gave 100 dollars for Starbucks to so and so and you can to\". Its not entirely novel but its smart. Get the users to advertise for you and make money off that. Facebook toyed with this idea in the past where if you shopped online and it would post a status saying \"I just shopped here\" but it did not really catch on b/c we don't like to share that stuff. These companies are like trying to find the line in which we feel comfortable sharing.\n\nAnother thing I would like to ad that even if a company is losing money it does not necessarily mean it is not profitable or doing bad. For instance, _URL_0_ is in the red but their stock continues to rise because they are growing. It is all very confusing and you really need to do your research in order to fully grasp what the hell is going on",
"Profits do not equal cash flow. You can't pay employees or the light bill with Net Income, only cash. \nMany start-ups have net losses early on. Start-ups often raise gobs of money from venture capital firms or an IPO. They can use this money to develop and market products and pay their people until they get enough traction to make it on their own.\nSome do, some don't. \n\nSource: Commercial banker including a stint lending to early-stage technology companies. ",
"someone (venture capitalists) gave them a ton of money to spend and they're spending it. ",
"Now, here's my explanation for (NEARLY) a literal 5-year-old:\n\nCompanies such as Twitter get money from others in return for a part of the company. Simple example: Investor pays Twitter 50 million USD and gets 5% of the company. Why does he do that? He expects that Twitter will make a huge amount of money some time in the future. He believes in their business model. When all works out fine and Twitter really makes a lot of money in the future, the value of Twitter raises. The investor will then be able to sell his 5% at some point, for example for 200 million USD. Yet, as long as Twitter is not profitable, it will still have to sell parts of itself, to raise money.\n\n______________\nThere is one other option of course: Banks. The company, say Twitter, could have a credit line from a single bank or a bank consortium. However, such a credit line will mostly only be awarded if the company already has some success. An example would be a company just reached break-even (that is, they make more money than they lose) or that is already succesful in certain areas of its business. Now they want do some major technical infrastructure investment which would drive its profits right down in the negative again. Instead of fucking up their profit and loss section, just borrows from banks at this point (if banks are willing, that is).",
"They get money from outside sources who wanted a stake in the company. They also have sources of revenue from their business. They don't \"profit\" because they spend all their money on employees, rent, or even trying to grow the company (buying Instagram for example).",
"Twitter hasn't lost money,they just show a 0 profit. That happens because,in this case twitter,the company should have turned roughly 60 million in profit last year,however that profit was immediately re-invested into the acquisition of other companies and such,until the overall profit showed was 0.",
"How much money do they get from the NSA and other GOs and NGOs to provide all the links to other twits for tracking and other data mining? Just curious.",
"ALL businesses run exactly the same way just not usually for so long and not so \"publicly visible\"\n\nits called \"seed money\" you get this from loans and personal savings and investments or in the case of things like twitter Venture Capital, Angels, Investors etc..\n\nsomeone \"puts up\" seed money for something knowing it will not be profitable \"at first\"\n\nthe simply \"massive\" number of users on twitter is seen as \"potential revenue\" which encourages further support from VC's etc..\n\nThink of it this way. lets say you decide to \"make a painting\" for the purpose of selling it.\n\nyou do the same thing. you operate at a loss. you have to buy paint and supplies and canvas etc..\n\nyour spending money but your not making money. the plan is to sell that painting for more than it initially cost you to \"make\" it.\n\nif you do. you earn profit. same thing with say an iphone or a galaxy note. you make ten's of thousands of them without making a dime of profit. spending millions of dollars.\n\nbut once they start selling if you sell enough of them you make a profit.\n\ninvestment into things like facebook or twitter etc.. etc.. is just \"longer term\" than building something and selling it.\n\nyour in it for the long game. its partially a gamble of course. you could lose it all if its a flop or make it big if it takes off big.",
"Companies like Twitter raise money from venture capitalist investors. Investors provide the cash for salaries, equipment, and growth. In return the company gives the investors stock. Going public allows Twitter to raise money by issuing stock to the public. This will allow them to continue operating at a loss, as long as the investing public believes Twitter is a worthwhile investment. The key here is that people think Twitter is currently worth 23 billion.",
"why do i see so many multi-paragraph responses in this sub? :|",
"They sell the information that people put there in the form of data for companies so that companies can have a better idea of consumers.",
"Other than direct advertising, companies sell user data to third parties. This data can be consumer trends or statistics that the third am party will use. \n\nAn advertising friend once said something related to this: \"If you don't pay directly for a service, you are the product.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2013/11/07/twitter-ipo-set-for-26-despite-revenue-questions.html",
"http://www.crunchbase.com/company/twitter"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1941-press-release-37signals-valuation-tops-100-billion-after-bold-vc-investment"
],
[],
[],
[
"Amazon.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3lokpv | if we could see the entire spectrum of light, what colour would rainbows be? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lokpv/eli5_if_we_could_see_the_entire_spectrum_of_light/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv7xnkb",
"cv80j1w"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Everything out of the visible spectrum has no colour and is invisible to us. You cannot see it in colours.",
"This requires imagining what it would be like to have sense we don't have. Sorry, hypotheticals are not valid ELI5 topics."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2zeo8z | why my theeth are yellowish if i brush them everyday? | I don't drink a lot of coffe, neither I smoke or use drugs. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zeo8z/eli5_why_my_theeth_are_yellowish_if_i_brush_them/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpi7ii1",
"cpiauwi"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's your enamel, which you can't restore (though I believe researchers are working on that). The enamel is demineralized by sugars, like in candy and soda. Which is why if you have anything with a lot of sugar, you should drink some water to wash away the sugar.",
"But theriouthy,\n\nNatural teeth come in a wide range of colors and hues, from white white to yellow to tan to grey, and other than having them \"capped,\" there's not a whole lot you can do to change the color you're born with. \n\nAdditionally, people who took certain antibiotics in their youth may develop staining (I took acromycin and tetracycline, and my adult teeth were dark grey at the roots.) Fortunately (or not, depending upon how you look at it,) most of mine were forcibly yanked from my head (and subsequently replaced with ceramics,) after a run-in with the local wildlife left me essentially toothless. Now I have a lovely (and quite expensive) pearl white smile. ;-)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1eoxw8 | difference between gamma radiation and getting zapped with static electricity | So Gamma radiation is very penetrating, but it's just extra electrons - how is that different from just getting electrostaticly charged?
Edit: oops, definitely meant Beta radiation | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1eoxw8/eli5_difference_between_gamma_radiation_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca2bsre",
"ca2bt96"
],
"score": [
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Gamma radiation is high energy photons which are capable of liberating electrons from an atom, or even protons, neutrons, or an entire nucleus. Static is like a light cling of electrons, but gamma rays can blow chemical structures apart; it is like the difference between a light water mist and a pressure washer.",
"Gamma radiation is actually electromagnetic radiation and not electrons being shot at you. It's like light, except much more energetic.\n\nYou might be thinking of Beta radiation which is the emission of positrons and electrons.\n\nThe diffrence between Beta radiation and static electricity is the speed with which the particles move. The particles in beta radiation move a lot fast, so fas that they can collide with other nuclei, the cores of atoms causing those to become instable and decay as well.\n\nElectricity doesn't move as fast and as such won't cause a nuclear reaction.\n\nThis at ELI5: imagine that every atom is surrounded by a net, anything that wants to get to that atom would have to go through that net. Beta rays are like a fastball thrown so fast they can break through that net. \n\nElectrons are thrown in a more girly way so they bounce off the net."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8c9js0 | are gatorade-like sport drinks actually effective as it seems they are? if so, how do they contribute to the athlete? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8c9js0/eli5_are_gatoradelike_sport_drinks_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxd4ww0",
"dxd51vq",
"dxda3fr"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"To the best of my knowledge, sports drinks are really useful in the short term. They have lots of stuff like electrolytes that are good for short term exercise. And they're mostly just water, which is really good at hydration in general. However long term they're mostly just sugar water so drinking it without exercising is a bit of a waste.",
"Gatorade is basically salt water with a bunch of sugar and flavorants added to make it not taste terrible.\n\nWhen you sweat you lose water and salt. Sodium and potassium ions in the blood are necessary for nerve and muscle function. Gatorade and other sports drinks replenish them and rehydrate you.",
"In endurance sports, like triathlon, the race basically comes down to an eating contest. When you're really fit and have built the endurance, the upper limit for your endurance speed becomes how much energy the body can expend. It's very normal to see top level athletes expend 1000+ calories per hour. It's entirely possible to burn all the sugar in your bloodstream inside of 40 minutes. \n\nIn endurance sports, something like 75% of the expended energy come from the consumption of body fat. Pro triathletes can lose as much as 14 lbs during an Ironman distance race, roughly 7 lbs of water, and 7 lbs of body fat. The other 25% of the energy comes from consumed foods & drinks. \n\nThe consumption of fat is powered by sugar in your body. If you don't consume enough sugar during the race, your body runs out of \"ignition\" fuel and you are forced to used a slower method of burning fat in your body. In the real world, this is normally known as \"bonking\". SO, a racer must consume as much fuel as possible while moving as fast as possible. This is difficult to do, and is truly the difference between the amateurs and the pros. Most amatuers digestive system will almost completely stop during a race, while pros can digest several hundred calories per hour. \n\nGatorade is particularly favored because it's composition allows for fast absorption across the upper intestine and stomach, faster than water alone. Thus it not only improves hydration but also fueling. it is the preferred hydration drink for these racers. Powerade was used a few years back and it was despised by the racers for causing GI issues under race conditions. Some racers mix their own, and everyone has their own race fueling scheme. \n\nFYI, this concept gets really complex really quick, and I'm sure there are some super knowledgeable folks here who can better define the mechanisms I'm describing. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
ev9eh9 | how resilient are a man's testicles? | okay this may seem like a dumb question but can testicles be "damaged" without direct hits ? like when running or sitting with legs in strange positions. I'm paranoid and self conscious about this. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ev9eh9/eli5_how_resilient_are_a_mans_testicles/ | {
"a_id": [
"ffu90hm",
"ffuidg5"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"There would be no people if this were a problem. Testicular ruptures are a very serious problem, and surgery within a couple of days is needed to prevent serious complications that can include death. That said, 0.23% of the entries in the 2015 USA trauma databank have it. Most of these trauma cases involve car crashes, motorcycle crashes, and the like. The whole purpose of the \"pain feedback\" system in boys is to teach them not to cause blunt trauma in the area.",
"It depends on how you define \"damage\".\n\nThings like tight underwear and bicycle saddles can keep the testes too close to the body, especially on a warm day, affecting how they work and thus reducing your fertility. They are outside of your body because they need to be kept cooler than body temperature in order to with properly. This is why they hang lower on a hot day.\n\nLong term damage can occur over time, permanently affecting your fertility."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3c5bet | how does a company fire or let go of a ceo? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c5bet/eli5how_does_a_company_fire_or_let_go_of_a_ceo/ | {
"a_id": [
"cssd0a1",
"cssdfd9"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The Board of Directors. The CEO runs the company, but it is the Board of Directors that hold large stakes in the company (and decide its ultimate course of action). If they are unhappy with the CEO they can move to fire them. ",
"A Chief Executive Officer is not the owner of a company.\n\nThe owner of the company is the shareholders, who all own a part of the ownership through buying shares.\n\nIf there was one owner, he would be able to decide what the company does. Since there are many owners, each with a share of the ownership, each shareholder gets a share of the vote on what a company does based on how many shares they own.\n\nShareholders can vote out a CEO, who is tasked with running the company on behalf of the shareholders, since many shareholders can't run a company like one owner could.\n\nVoting on things is typically done at the Annual Shareholders Meeting.\n\nShareholders vote in the board of directors, or in other cases, the shareholders make up the board of directors. \n\nThe exact structure varies from country to country, so who exactly votes out the CEO may vary, but the ultimate source of executive power is the shareholders. \nShareholders either vote out the CEO, or vote for the people who vote out the CEO."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4fu6b0 | why was prince a big deal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fu6b0/eli5_why_was_prince_a_big_deal/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2bys14",
"d2bz1s3",
"d2bzvwm",
"d2c0iga",
"d2c0isl",
"d2c7x9y",
"d2cac9k"
],
"score": [
14,
39,
6,
6,
5,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Hit songs, weird personality, extravagant outfits, set design, \"performance art\" inspired concerts, and he absolutely shreds the guitar. These things tend to make people intrigued.",
"He was a talent like the world had never seen. He played many instruments, had an amazing voice, was a brilliant songwriter, and had one of the greatest stage presences ever seen. \n\nHe's one of the most successful recording artists in history.\n\nHe won 7 Grammys, a Golden Globe, and an Academy award for Purple Rain's song score. \n\nHe will always remain in the top 100 recording artists by Rolling Stone. \n\nA legend. That's what he is. That's why he's a big deal.",
"_URL_0_ \n\nHere you can find a live stream for Minnesota Public Radio who is playing Prince music the rest of the day mixed with news coverage and people talking about their Prince experiences. Also a huge blog post about his life and accomplishments. ",
"[This guitar solo](_URL_0_) (4:27) is all I need to hear to know why, but as far as the cultural influence that he represented in the 80's, only Madonna or Michael Jackson is even in the same league.",
"He had an amazing range, both vocally and in his song writing. His songs ranged from funky and sexy (Little Red Corvette), to sassy (Kiss) to despondent (Purple Rain) and wrote a generational anthem that is STILL played and celebrated every New Year everywhere; 1999. He combined genres that drew influence from many sectors of the industry and, despite being able to get to a normally unachievable falsetto, his music is supremely singable. It practically begs to be sung at the top of your lungs in your car with the windows down. ",
"He was very talented, had a unique and original style, and topped the charts for 15 years. And he wasn't a media invention, he wrote, composed, sang, and performed instruments on most of his songs. \n\nAnd while he may have had a big ego, he managed to avoid a lot of the scandals that brought other musicians of the day down, and is generally regarded as a decent person.\n\nThat's kind of a big deal.",
"for real, one of the greatest songwriters of all time, huge levels of musically excellent output, like Mozart-level talent. Plus charisma, presence, mystique, style, all that. But mainly for being an incredible musician."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.thecurrent.org/"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFXZNt4oLkE"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
631enf | why do men like strip clubs/strip teases? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/631enf/eli5why_do_men_like_strip_clubsstrip_teases/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfqk5ed"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Orgasm is not the only goal. 99% of all daily interactions aren't going to result in sex either.\n\nLooking at attractive females makes the straight male brain feel pleasure usually. That's why we are so bad about checking out girls that walk by, trying not to stare at cleveage, etc. It takes conscious physical exertion not to.\n\nStrip clubs provide an opportunity to stare without judgement and without having to wonder what will or won't come of it. It isn't the most entertaining of all things, which is why it is a pretty rare passtime for most guys. But when they do go, that is the appeal.\n\nPeople enjoy going to at museums even though they could see pictures online and know they won't get to take any of the art home."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9zql4j | why do calorie deficits work in burning fat on a non keto diet if the body can just use available glycogen storages instead of fat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9zql4j/eli5_why_do_calorie_deficits_work_in_burning_fat/ | {
"a_id": [
"eab9vqh",
"eabekzm"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Your body doesn’t have an infinite supply of glycogen. Eventually it will run out and burn fat. 100% of diets that involve a caloric deficit will burn fat. ",
"Because you don't have lots of glycogen, you have like at most, a full day worth of glycogen storage in your liver. \nAnd your muscular glycogen mostly goes to your muscles, so don't count on them to help you when fasting.\nGlycogen isn't really made to make you last in case you don't eat, it's more about keeping your body working in between meals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
7ofzn7 | why are nightmares so scary despite some of them being mild when we look back? | For instance, I have had nightmares which felt like a horror show dialed up to 10, but when I woke up I realized it was something so simple. It would be something like a lost shoe or eating slightly overcooked pasta, nothing really scary but in my sleep it was terrifying. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ofzn7/eli5_why_are_nightmares_so_scary_despite_some_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ds97lou",
"ds98hky",
"ds9azzk",
"ds9b6ws"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"Sometimes the emotion itself is part of the dream. For another example, \"in my dream there was a person who I knew loved me.\"",
"Aren't emotions muted by time in real life too? Why would it be different for dreams?",
"When you're asleep, the part of your brain that controls and puts limits on emotions is not active. Emotions may well seem intensified as a result. ",
"When you sleep, many parts of your brain operate at reduced capacity, including the part that evaluates reality. When faced with something nonsensical, instead of saying \"that can't be right, let's take a closer look\", your brain just kind of rolls with it. It is the reason when you can be an adult and in grade school at the same time, and why harmless things can have unwarranted emotional responses attached to them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2chr87 | what is happening when i accidentally crash an app or a program simply by clicking on the screen or clicking the mouse button when the software is loading? | This happens to some programs but not all. I would guess it has to do with some kind of stress to the application? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2chr87/eli5_what_is_happening_when_i_accidentally_crash/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjflelt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Not really 'stress', more likely you caused a sequence of events to occur which the programmer never thought of and never planned for.\n\nHere's a possible scenario (warning, simplifications coming here):\n\nSince the programmer knows how they expect the program to work, they might wait patiently for all the loading and setup to occur every time they test it. Clicking on the program or screen issues 'events' that the operating system sends to the current program. Suppose the normal behavior for a mouse click is for the program to make a certain window open up. But you have clicked before that window is created. The programmer has made a faulty assumption that the window will always be created (but hidden) and ready to go when a mouse click comes in. They end up accessing invalid memory and 'boom'.\n\nObviously thorough and proper testing should reveal flaws like this. But because events from the user are 'asynchronous', that is, they can occur at any time relative to the inner workings of the program, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to perfectly test for every possible case."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5hdhv3 | what is the purpose of hoarding enormous university endowments? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hdhv3/eli5_what_is_the_purpose_of_hoarding_enormous/ | {
"a_id": [
"dazcrt1"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > What is the purpose of hoarding such huge endowments that's tax free without making education cheaper or better\n\nYou're assuming they dont. 36% of their revenue ($1.7 billion) last year was from endowments. \n\nWhy not use it all? Endowments have restrictions set forth by the donor. They cant be accessed by Harvard unless certain conditions are met. I'd bet some of them are some smart ass Harvard accountants/financial people who understand future value equations... which brings me to... \n\nInvesting. Assuming they get 7% per year and spend none, in 10 years that 37 billion becomes 74 billion. In 10 more, 148 billion. In 10 more, 296 billion. In 10 more, 592 billion. Why did I use 7%? That's a commonly used \"expected return of stock market\" figure. Now ~40 years from now, if they earn 7% on 592 billion, that's 41.4 billion per year - more than the entire fund is currently worth. Unfortunately for Harvard, they're drained that endowment fund by 3.5% last year (but it still increased due to investments). \n\nSooo let's look at their operating expenses. [I did a quick check](_URL_0_) to see Harvards operating expenses (the page also has info on endowments). It's currently $4.7 billion per year. Meaning, if they paid all of their expenses with just endowments and nothing more, they could only sustain that for ~10-15 years\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://finance.harvard.edu/financial-overview"
]
] |
|
8ehqti | why does the consistency of food effect the taste? | For example why does a fluffy piece of bread taste better than a hard piece of bread, if they were cooked with the same ingredients and taste identical. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ehqti/eli5_why_does_the_consistency_of_food_effect_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxvb34t",
"dxw12ei"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In the case of bread, the hard piece may have been baked longer, and thus caramelized and had its chemical composition thus altered. In the case of other items, it may be a question of surface area: things chopped very fine may have a more intense flavor because there is a greater surface area And a greater area for air and other foods to mix and come in contact then if it were left whole. ",
"Taste is a lot more psychological than one would imagine, and it's in part because our sense of taste isn't as refined as other senses. Not just consistency - but temperature, shape, color, atmosphere all effect how we perceive something to taste. There are studies that find people perceive food as tastier based on a room's lighting and decoration. This is why people will swear up and down that \"the best pasta I had was in a hole-in-the-wall in Naples\" - when a blind taste test could show otherwise. And there's nothing wrong with that. Dining is an experience.\n\nA lot of this may relate to how we ate in prehistoric hunter/gatherer times. We would recognize certain fruits and berries as edible or toxic based on how soft it is - or it's color. And we may have found it tastier in 'safer' setting as a survival mechanism.\n\nAnd that may translate today to some people preferring penne over macaroni, swearing they taste different based on shape, even though they're chemically identical.\n\nRegarding your bread example - they're actually not identical. Hard piece of bread is drier, which affects chemical bonds. That affects flavor.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
60ahgf | despite both being highly totalitarian, how are nazi germany and soviet russia polar opposites in political ideology? | Nazi Germany was far-right and Soviet Russia was far-left. Despite this, both were highly oppressive, totalitarian dictatorships. What made their ideologies so unable to get along with? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60ahgf/eli5_despite_both_being_highly_totalitarian_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"df4t9c5",
"df4v88q",
"df4zzhs",
"df563rl",
"df59482"
],
"score": [
16,
23,
50,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Nazi ideology was not merely at odds with Soviet ideology; it was created in direct and hateful opposition to Marxism and all Slavic people (which includes most of the Soviet population.) Hitler spoke of Marxism and Judaism as the world's two evils, considered Slavs to be barely human and Soviet Communists to be puppets of powerful Jews, and spoke of a need for Germany to expand east and displace/destroy them. Promptly after taking power, he began to suppress Communism in Germany and issue anti-Soviet propaganda. He overtly hated the Soviets and wasn't subtle about it. \n\nAs for the Soviets, they had some interest in closer ties, but until 1939 their top-ranking diplomat was Jewish and therefore rejected by Nazi leadership.",
"In both ideologies, the problematic elements arise from the notion that the group is superior to the individual. In classic Enlightenment philosophy, the group exists only to serve the needs of the individual within that group. Thus the group's actions must be morally reflective of the individuals within that group. In contrast, Nazism and Communism claim the group itself is paramount and the individual must be subordinate to it - and the only morality is the needs of the group. As a result, both doctrines tend to reject all moral restraint so long as it can be argued that the group benefits.\n\nHowever, they differ in terms of how they define the group.\n\nWith Communism, your group is an ideology. Communism is based on the notion that Marxism is a scientific doctrine explaining all of history, economics and politics. Anyone who doesn't accept this doctrine is clearly wrong and must be educated/exploited/eliminated. However, as long as someone accepts your doctrine, they can be a member of the group. This is roughly similar to how Islam spread - you conquer people and make their lives miserable until they convert to Islam.\n\nIn contrast, Nazis viewed the group as ethnic/racial group. Their scientific basis was eugenics, where inferior races should either be subordinate to superior races or eliminated entirely. Since you can't educate away racial inferiority, that really means your only solution is to exploit them for labor until you can rid the world of them.\n\nThese different categorizations of the 'in-group' meant that Nazis and Communists couldn't really get along.",
"Nazism was a nationalist movement, meaning that they were all about the (mythic, idealized) German people and German state. They were all about taking care of the German people first (and, obviously, horrible anti-Semitism and racism and so on) because they believed that Germany in particular was better than everybody else. \n\nMeanwhile, the ultimate goal of Communism is a stateless society where the working class owns the factories and stuff and there's no need for top-down control. In this philosophy, the Soviet Union was actually an intermediate stage-- basically, \"we're going to control everything until you guys realize how great Communism is and rise up to overthrow all the other governments.\" (Obviously the USSR in practice would probably not have given up control at some future point, but that was the justification for its totalitarian governance.)\n\nSo Nazism says \"GERMANY IS THE BEST NATION AND THE GERMAN PEOPLE ARE THE BEST\" and Communism says \"NO MORE NATIONS, ALL PEOPLE ARE EQUAL.\" Boom, ideological clash. ",
"I feel like everyone isn't getting it. From a purely ideological standpoint, Naziism and communism are complete opposites. From a \"apply ideals to real life\" standpoint they are the same because the human element is the same literally everywhere you go.\n\n**Eli5 of difference:**\n\nCommunists view everyone as equal - socially as well as economically.\n\nNazis view one group as absolutely superior to others.\n\nIf those two ideas aren't opposites then I don't know what is.\n\nAlso do try to remember that communism sprang from Marxism. Karl Marx was a German Jew. Hitler hated Jews, remember?",
"Communism exerts state control to deconstruct the lines of public / private ownership. Leninism believed that a strong state needed to exist in order to deconstruct these lines and once this was completed, that centralized government would no longer be a necessity. \n\nNazism / facisism believes that private control of industry is central to the well being of society and what government will provide is a strong and consistent social society to reenforce the private / public collaboration. the Nationalist ideology of anti-Jewish sentiment can be found all throughout European history. \n\nthe manifestation of Jewish wealth and societal accumulation across Europe had its roots in since the Dark Ages within catholic thought. Usery, mercantile class, mobile communities, etc. were all things generally prohibited by the church as professions and mobility options of Christians. \n\nMany countries struggled with this duality and pogroms were the norms up until WW2 in many, especially eastern European lands. many many many people resented these insular communities, which were created because jews often had little choice, and the Nazis found little blowback and many willing partners to help them in eastern Europe to settle the Jewish question. \n\nNazis were not the only ones who saw the NKVD, for example, as it swept through the Ukraine in the 1920s as enemies of the people. Ukrainians in Galacia saw Jewish / NKVD help in eradicating Urkranian Nationalism after WW1 and the same in the Baltic states. Lithuanians were eager to help root out Jewish communities. \n\nunfortunately, many of the circumstances the Jewish people faced were long-rooted in historical facts that the Jewish people had little choice in creating. The Nazis and other European countries were long skeptical of transient Jewish communities who had easy ties and access across many national boundaries. \n\nThe Nazis, however, took pogroms to another, industrialized level. When, in fact, Jewish communities in Europe had experienced this behavior in pockets all over Europe for centuries. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8ag1mj | what happens when we choke on liquid substances such as water? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ag1mj/eli5_what_happens_when_we_choke_on_liquid/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwydzsn",
"dwye1tr",
"dwygcx8",
"dwyjd5j"
],
"score": [
25,
2,
5,
6
],
"text": [
"It goes down the air hole instead of the drinking hole. As a result the lungs work to eject the liquid that they have determined, rightly, should not be there. This comes in the form of coughing it back up, generally.",
"Your airways/lungs aren't supposed to have substantial amounts of liquid in them and your body knows that. So when a little bit of water goes down the wrong pipe, your body starts coughing up a lung to remove that excess liquid. Failure to due so can cause pneumonia or other respiratory complications which is less than ideal.",
"I believe it’s the epiglottis that helps navigate and direct which things are supposed to go down which tube. It’s like a flap that opens one of the tubes, so when you get water down the wrong tube it slipped past your epiglottis.",
"You have one throat, but 2 paths to follow going down it; the lungs or the stomach. When you choke on solid food, you are blocking the esophagus which prevents air from reaching the lungs. When someone 'chokes' on a liquid, it is usually because they inadvertently inhaled some of it, triggering a coughing fit. They aren't actually choking, as the airway is not obstructed. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7isoym | why did the 1892 populist party in the united states demand inflation through free and unlimited coinage of silver (what was its benefits)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7isoym/eli5_why_did_the_1892_populist_party_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dr14nt4",
"dr14osi",
"dr1cvoh"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It wasn't inflation.\n\nYou had uncoined silver that turned into coined silver.\n\nThe uncoined silver already had purchasing power before it was coined.\n\nIt is like the government purchased the silver, reducing the money supply and then increase the money supply by the same amount.",
"Because they were in debt. Inflation would lower the value of what they owe in real terms so it would be easier for them to pay off the debt (they'd still owe $100, but if $100 is worth baking 10 hours of labor, it's easier to pay off than if $100 was worth 100 hours of labor)",
"If you read their platform, it explains it all:\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIf big corporations have all the money and they don't spend it, then there is not enough in circulation. \n\nIf you go to the bank and try to borrow money so you can start a business of your own, and they say they have none to lend, what do you do then? \n\nThat was the issue, there was not enough money in circulation and so that stifles economic growth, as most businesses need borrowed money to start up or to grow."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/eamerica/media/ch22/resources/documents/populist.htm"
]
] |
||
1z8m95 | why are so many historic sculptures missing limbs and heads? | I know part of the reason could be structural decay over time, but I've heard other stories as well. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z8m95/eli5why_are_so_many_historic_sculptures_missing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfri3se",
"cfriela",
"cfrlb0j"
],
"score": [
5,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"For the most part, it's because limbs and heads were the first parts to break off after they fall, as sculptures tend to do once in a while during their milennia around the world.",
"Religion! At least for some... when christians took over ancient greece they were scared the sculptures of greek gods etc would come to life/curse them or something - so they cut off the hands so it couldn't get them, cut off the genitals so it can't reproduce/ cut out the mouth/eyes or just cut off the head so it couldn't see them/curse them, and then buried it in the bottom of a riverbed just to be extra safe. Some sculptures are not only missing limbs/heads but have been smoothed down from being washed over by a river for centuries. ",
"the missing head part is because full statues were expensive to commission. so instead they made statues with interchangeable heads. when one owner dies or decides to sell it, a new head can be put on the existing statue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4jkotj | what is all the fuss about facebook "censoring" news | I mean, the news on any website, be it eh BBC, The New York Times, the Times Of India - whatever, wherever - is all dependent on what the editors of that site decide to show you. There is no such thing as an unbiased, uncensored news site. So why does anyone think Facebook should be any different?
I have to admit to being a little ignorant of exactly how Facebook operates, not having an account with them, so I may have misunderstood the entire argument....
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jkotj/eli5_what_is_all_the_fuss_about_facebook/ | {
"a_id": [
"d37f8w0"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The trending news section implies just that - Trending. Based on popularity, what people are actively discussing. If a story hit a certain activity threshold, it would show up in this section. \n\nThe fuss is both about facebook censoring conservative stories even if they were genuinely trending, and likewise facebook injecting news that wasn't actually trending. \n\nIt undermines the authenticity of the trending section, as well as having a significant impact on information dissemination by presenting non-trending stories, or omitting trending topics based purely on their political slant. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7dda4w | how come one power strip with 12 plugs is okay, but linking two power strips that each have 6 plugs is dangerous? | Currently in class and there is a power strip that allows 12 things to be plugged in. How come it's safe for that power strip to have so many plugs in it; yet having two power strips (first one in the outlet, the second plugged to the first) is dangerous? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7dda4w/eli5_how_come_one_power_strip_with_12_plugs_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpwuk2r",
"dpwursp",
"dpwuxwq"
],
"score": [
4,
14,
2
],
"text": [
"Because plugging the second 6-plug into the first means the *entirety* of the second 6-plug's power is being fed through a single outlet of the first 6-plug strip. This can easily overload the output and cause a fire.",
"It's not inherently dangerous, but having too many things running off of one circult can overheat the wiring and either trip the circuit breaker or start a fire.\n\nA 20 amp circuit breaker can handle 2400 watts of power. You just need to use 12 gauge (or thicker) wiring to handle that much power. However, some power strips might have 14 or 16 gauge wiring in the cord, which is thinner. So as long as you are careful and don't overload anything, you could theoretically have twenty power strips all daisy chained together and not have a problem.\n\nMost people aren't that conscientious and so laws are written to protect everyone from that one stupid guy among us who just can't use any common sense. \n\nIf you want to know whether what you are doing with the power strip is safe, simply hold on to the cord, near the plug. If you are overloading the cord, it will be very hot, so hot you can't hold onto it for more than a few seconds. If it's warm, that's fine, but even a warm one you should keep a close eye on.",
"There's more to designing the strip than just the number of outlets. With twice the number of devices plugged in, the strip could be handling twice as much electric current, and the internal wires need to be thicker (and thus more expensive) to safely handle the extra. The six-outlet strip is only designed to handle the power consumption of six devices. If you feed too much current through it, you could heat up the wires to the point where the insulation catches fire, or melts and creates a short-circuit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a75ra8 | why are there frequently office buildings being constructed in close proximity to other office buildings that have oftentimes stood empty with "space for lease" in them for extended periods of time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a75ra8/eli5_why_are_there_frequently_office_buildings/ | {
"a_id": [
"ec0i35p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Often the empty one is no longer up to code; whoever buys/leases it will have to spend a ton on upgrades before they’ll be allowed to move in.\n\nNew construction is sometimes cheaper, depending on what needs to be done."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2hjt09 | why can you run for miles without your legs getting so tired that you can't keep going, but you can only do so many push-ups or curls before you can't do any more? | Was working out and was thinking about that. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hjt09/eli5_why_can_you_run_for_miles_without_your_legs/ | {
"a_id": [
"cktb2x3",
"cktbc28"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Probably because of 2 things\n\n1. Early humans needed to run long distances to run animals to the point exhaustion\n\n2. You use your legs way more than your arms/abs",
"What am I the T-1000? I can't run 200 yards without getting tired."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9xuvrh | why is it that when sometimes you wear sunglasses and look through a car mirror such as a rear view mirror, and see a visible teal and purple checkerboard on other cars' windshields? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9xuvrh/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_sometimes_you_wear/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9vb3sj",
"e9w37lp"
],
"score": [
22,
4
],
"text": [
"This is caused by the tempering process used on the glass. This is the process used to make the glass shatter into tiny little pieces instead of large ones. This makes it less likely to cause injury.",
"Chances are your glasses are polarized when you see the patterns. Polarized glass only transmits light that is in a certain \"alignment\". If you take two pieces of polarized glass and turn them so these alignments aren't lined up, then the it starts to look darker, eventually becoming black at 90 degrees. The patterns of dark and light are because the tempering process which makes glass tough, strong, and safe also introduces a slight polarization to it, but not evenly. So different parts have different polarizations, and you get the patterns depending on how they line up with the polarization in your own sunglasses."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
lt77h | if time 'stops' at the speed of light, how does anything happen to light itself? | As you get faster and faster time "slows down".
Photons have no mass and travel at this 'top speed', so how does anything happen (bounce off surfaces, being detected by your eye, travelling through space etc.) when it is not affected by time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lt77h/eli5_if_time_stops_at_the_speed_of_light_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2vemw7",
"c2vkaz0",
"c2vemw7",
"c2vkaz0"
],
"score": [
37,
3,
37,
3
],
"text": [
"Nothing does happen to light. The only \"things\" that can \"happen\" to light (and that's using the terms loosely) is that it can come into existence, and it can stop existing … and in the frame of reference of light, those two events happen at both the same instant and the same point in space.\n\nSay you have an atom. That atom has electrons. One of those electrons, we'll say, gets excited. We don't care how; it just does. Sooner or later, that electron is going to drop back to its lowest possible energy state. But the energy it has to shed to do this doesn't just disappear; it can't, because energy has to be conserved in this situation. So the energy radiates off as light. Like … kpew. Specifically, a *quantum* of light, which we call a photon.\n\nSometime later (in the frame of reference of an observer) that quantum of light interacts with some other charged particle, almost certainly another electron in some other atom. A variety of things can happen at this point, but they all involve that quantum of light ceasing to exist. For example, it can be absorbed by the electron, knocking it up into a higher energy state. At this point, the quantum of light stops existing; it just goes away. The momentum it carried becomes part of the electron.\n\nIf you imagine what that experience was like for the light quantum — which you really can't do, strictly speaking, because the math doesn't let you, but we can *imagine* it qualitatively just for fun — you find it went like this: At some time which we'll arbitrarily call t1 and point in space we'll arbitrarily label x1, the light quantum came into existence. At another time t2 and point x2, the light quantum stopped existing. In the imaginary, not-real frame of reference we've concocted for the light quantum, t1=t2 and x1=x2. That is, the photon is emitted and absorbed at the same instant and in the same place.\n\nTo a distant observer, however, t1 does not equal t2; some time elapses between the emission and absorption events. Also x1 does not equal x2; the events happen at different places. However — and this is really basically key to understanding all of modern physics — t2-t1 = x2-x1. Always. For every observer, no matter what. In other words the amount of time it takes for a quantum of light to cross between two points is always exactly equal to the distance between those two points. All observers everywhere will always agree on this. Even the photon itself would \"agree\" about this, in our imaginations, because if t1=t2 and x1=x2, then t2-t1 = 0 and x2-x1 = 0, which means t2-t1 = x2-x1.\n\nThat's what makes light special. It always propagates between two points in the time equal to the distance between the two points. This is universally true for all observers, no matter what, no exceptions ever.",
"This is all about frames of reference. Think about \"time\" as motion for the sake of this analogy:\n\nIf you were sitting on a seat in a small, windowless, boat, and you stayed seated for 1 hour, you would feel like you had 'moved' zero inches in reference to the boat, because you did. Outside the boat, however, you have been sitting in a strong current in an otherwise still ocean. In the span of that hour you have traveled a significant distance, and even run into other currents that moved you in other directions (refraction, bending of light due to gravity, etc.). From your frame of reference, zero motion has occured, but to an outside observer, you have traveled miles.\n\nThe same applies to time when you are talking about relativistic speeds. Ignoring all the things that would kill you, if you traveled in a boat at the speed of light, you would feel like you didn't travel at all, no time passed. To me standing on the shore, hours went by and you crashed into a mirror.\n\ntl;dr Nothing happens from the photon's perspective, things happen from an outside observer's perspective.",
"Nothing does happen to light. The only \"things\" that can \"happen\" to light (and that's using the terms loosely) is that it can come into existence, and it can stop existing … and in the frame of reference of light, those two events happen at both the same instant and the same point in space.\n\nSay you have an atom. That atom has electrons. One of those electrons, we'll say, gets excited. We don't care how; it just does. Sooner or later, that electron is going to drop back to its lowest possible energy state. But the energy it has to shed to do this doesn't just disappear; it can't, because energy has to be conserved in this situation. So the energy radiates off as light. Like … kpew. Specifically, a *quantum* of light, which we call a photon.\n\nSometime later (in the frame of reference of an observer) that quantum of light interacts with some other charged particle, almost certainly another electron in some other atom. A variety of things can happen at this point, but they all involve that quantum of light ceasing to exist. For example, it can be absorbed by the electron, knocking it up into a higher energy state. At this point, the quantum of light stops existing; it just goes away. The momentum it carried becomes part of the electron.\n\nIf you imagine what that experience was like for the light quantum — which you really can't do, strictly speaking, because the math doesn't let you, but we can *imagine* it qualitatively just for fun — you find it went like this: At some time which we'll arbitrarily call t1 and point in space we'll arbitrarily label x1, the light quantum came into existence. At another time t2 and point x2, the light quantum stopped existing. In the imaginary, not-real frame of reference we've concocted for the light quantum, t1=t2 and x1=x2. That is, the photon is emitted and absorbed at the same instant and in the same place.\n\nTo a distant observer, however, t1 does not equal t2; some time elapses between the emission and absorption events. Also x1 does not equal x2; the events happen at different places. However — and this is really basically key to understanding all of modern physics — t2-t1 = x2-x1. Always. For every observer, no matter what. In other words the amount of time it takes for a quantum of light to cross between two points is always exactly equal to the distance between those two points. All observers everywhere will always agree on this. Even the photon itself would \"agree\" about this, in our imaginations, because if t1=t2 and x1=x2, then t2-t1 = 0 and x2-x1 = 0, which means t2-t1 = x2-x1.\n\nThat's what makes light special. It always propagates between two points in the time equal to the distance between the two points. This is universally true for all observers, no matter what, no exceptions ever.",
"This is all about frames of reference. Think about \"time\" as motion for the sake of this analogy:\n\nIf you were sitting on a seat in a small, windowless, boat, and you stayed seated for 1 hour, you would feel like you had 'moved' zero inches in reference to the boat, because you did. Outside the boat, however, you have been sitting in a strong current in an otherwise still ocean. In the span of that hour you have traveled a significant distance, and even run into other currents that moved you in other directions (refraction, bending of light due to gravity, etc.). From your frame of reference, zero motion has occured, but to an outside observer, you have traveled miles.\n\nThe same applies to time when you are talking about relativistic speeds. Ignoring all the things that would kill you, if you traveled in a boat at the speed of light, you would feel like you didn't travel at all, no time passed. To me standing on the shore, hours went by and you crashed into a mirror.\n\ntl;dr Nothing happens from the photon's perspective, things happen from an outside observer's perspective."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4oqkpo | what is the difference between "high mileage" oil, versus "regular" oil, for cars? | Got my oil changed today at a quick lube type of shop, and was recommended the high mileage oil over regular oil, due to having 95,000 miles on my car.
Is there a chemical difference? Does it somehow effect the engine differently?
Aside from the price being almost double, what's the difference? Any?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4oqkpo/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_high_mileage/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4er1pn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Mostly the only difference is \"high mileage\" oils generally contain some products that are supposed to help recondition the seals inside the engine. If your car isn't leaking or burning oil though your engine seals are doing their job just fine and it probably isn't worth the extra money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6w16pe | why do some sports favour the very young and people are considered 'past it' in their 20s, while in other sports people can remain competitive into their 50s or even 60s? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6w16pe/eli5_why_do_some_sports_favour_the_very_young_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm4jl85"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It really depends on the sport. An equestrian that's 50 can probably ride a horse pretty well still, because most of the \"skill\" there is knowing how to handle the horse, not the physical strain of doing it.\n\nGymnastics, on the other hand, demand performance near the limits of human capability, and greatly favor young (smaller, lighter) participants. Thus, a person usually can't remain competitive very long into adulthood."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7bqrcz | how are abstract expression arts expressive? and what separates artworks like starry night from its contemporaries? | Like how is it that what seems to be a bunch of swiggly lines can sell hundreds of millions dollars? Why is starry night considered one of the most influential artwork? Why were Picasso's art so much better than others? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7bqrcz/eli5_how_are_abstract_expression_arts_expressive/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpk4x4f"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"So abstract means that the artist doesn’t have to stay within real world logic. Instead of showing a scene as it exists from a real perspective, they are free to change the shape or color or anything they want. Sometimes the change is small, but it can also be changed so much that it looks nothing like reality. \nAbstract expressionism came after Surrealism, where artists like Salvador Dali made illogical, dreamlike compositions of ordinary objects. Surrealist artists use their imagination and creativity to make images that express a strange or unnerving feeling. \nAbstract expressionism works in the same way. The painting is an expression of the artist’s imagination. \nAs to why one is more expensive than another, that is complicated and depends on the history or credibility usually."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1ockhz | how come you can buy almost every drink in bottles and cans except water which can only seem to be bought in bottles? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ockhz/eli5_how_come_you_can_buy_almost_every_drink_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccqr1kd",
"ccqr4eh"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Water isn't highly pressurised like sodas therefore there is no real need to put it in a can. With a bottle you can replace the lid and store the water in your bag. I think the biggest thing would be that people don't tend to see water as a treat like they do with sweet drinks, therefore you don't want to have to drink more than you need and having a can doesn't allow you to save any for later.",
"Well, you can totally buy [canned water](_URL_0_) it's just not that common. \n\nAs to why is not more common, well, I'm not really sure, but I would blame it on public perception. Simply put, we want to see how clear and \"pure\" our water is (nevermind that it probably comes from the local faucet and not from the Swiss Alps) so we tend to prefer packages that let us see that. Another factor, I think, would be that some people associate soda cans with carbonated drinks, and seeing water in a can makes you think it's carbonated, so people who don't like carbonated water would dismiss them (though there are canned juices out there, so I'm not so sure about this). \n\nOver all, canned water would be a better option, though. Since the can would protect the water from the sun and the aluminum is more resistant than the PET of most plastic bottles.\n\nOne last thing: Aluminum cans are coated on the inside with a special chemical that stops corrosion from occurring, otherwise the can would rust and become brittle (nevermind that you would probably get sick from it, something no company wants to deal with) so, no, canned water wouldn't rust the can faster than coke or lemonade."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.canmuseum.com/Staging/Images/Cans/33943L.jpg"
]
] |
||
3ytigt | how does smelting work? | Is it like distillation but for rocks? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ytigt/eli5_how_does_smelting_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyggpkj"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The metal atoms have a chemical bond with other atoms, usually oxygen. One type of iron ore for example has the chemical structure Fe2O3, two iron bond with three oxygen atoms. While you can heat up the metal so much that this bond can be broken, this is of no use, since you need to physically separate the atoms in order to prevent them from simply going back into the oxide form. So simply heating them, as in distillation, is not enough.\n\nConventional smelting uses the fact that the reaction of oxygen atoms with carbon monoxide atoms is more energetic than the reaction with the iron atoms. So you heat it up to make the bond unstable and introduce carbon monoxide so the oxygen atoms can react with it, forming CO2 - which can be vented. The carbon monoxide is an intermediate product of burning coal, so coal can be used to provide both the heat and the CO necessary for the reaction.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4547mf | what is the difference between the president and premier in china? | Which one would be equivalent to something like a prime minister, or the highest ranked person?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4547mf/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_the_president/ | {
"a_id": [
"czv1k07",
"czv23q3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Premier is their prime minister, the head of the Chinese legislature.\n\nHowever, since the legislature has very little power in China, the president is the one who really has control.",
"President is the top.\n\nPremier is more like a all the cabinet positions combined into one (except for the secretary of defense).\n\nHead of legislature is Chairman of the National People's Congress. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
bvx60p | why do scars sometimes hurt after they heal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bvx60p/eli5_why_do_scars_sometimes_hurt_after_they_heal/ | {
"a_id": [
"ept7pmk",
"ept7wp8",
"eptn302",
"eptxna1"
],
"score": [
222,
65,
17,
3
],
"text": [
"The skin has healed but the nerve endings don’t necessarily heal at the same rate as skin. Nerves can take up to years to heal.",
"A scar is made of organic fibers weaved by specialized fibroblast cells as part of wound healing. Because the wound was too large or too deep, the body could not regenerate the area back to its original state and decided to patch it up with a scar.\n\nScars don't have the original cells that function in the area. For example, skin scars won't sweat or tan. This also means the nerves that originally connected to the area are not properly wired. Free nerve endings could cause sensations of pain.\n\nSecondly, the fibers in scars will slowly over a matter of months to years pull together. This makes scars smaller with time but can be problematic for large scars such as those in burn victims. A large scar made of non-stretchy fiber could pull so tight that it reduces a person's range of motion. This pulling over time can also trigger pain. A similar pulling of fibers occurs under scabs that tigger our sense of itchiness.",
"Occasionally when the dark lord approaches, scars tend to hurt. This is the searing pain associated with the dual identity as both the chosen one, and a horcrux",
"Because scar are different from regular skin (e.g. they get sunburned more easily, don't sweat and often come with reduced senstivety) and they can take a long time to heal (upto 2 years) during that time it might be a good idea to massage the area."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ker63 | how would dropping thermonuclear bombs at mars' poles make the planet more habitable? | I watched the late show last night and was interested in Elon Musk's responses to Colbert's question about making Mars more habitable. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ker63/eli5_how_would_dropping_thermonuclear_bombs_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuwt1p6",
"cuwt6wo",
"cuwwenl",
"cux31hh"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It would release a bunch of trapped carbon dioxide and water, potentially making rivers run again and definitely thickening the atmosphere. Basically, things like global warming and nuclear winter which would be really bad for Earth are just what the doctor ordered on Mars.",
"Beneath the surface of the mars there is a lots of carbon dioxide. By heating and stirring the planet a bit you release the carbon dioxide from the soil, that creates a green house effect. Which heates the planet more, which releases more carbon dioxide, rince and repeat.\n\nIn a relatively short time you get a planet where you don't have to wear suit to be warm. ",
"Bombing the surface of Mars could open up several pockets of certain stored CO2, H2O and other organic compounds necessary for at least bacterial growth. The extreme heat could also trigger chemical reactions with the released gases and possibly create an atmosphere like the Miller/Urey bottle neck organic compound experiment. The atmosphere would thicken with different gases like carbon dioxide and methane because of the eventual flowering vegetation and eventually over many numbers of years, become a hospitable habitat. ",
"But isn't Mars' lack of an iron core still a problem? Without an iron core there's no way for Mars to have a magnetic field around it. Even if we manage to create an atmosphere won't it just get blown away eventually by solar radiation?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
643eki | the difference between a course offered at a university vs a course offered at a community college. | I have seen similar courses posted and offered in both 4-year universities and community colleges. What is the difference? For example, what is the difference between an 2nd year organic chemistry course at a prestigious university versus one at a community college? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/643eki/eli5_the_difference_between_a_course_offered_at_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfz3dok",
"dfz3p55",
"dfz4dsg",
"dfz5hq6",
"dfza140"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Generally community colleges offer undergrad classes and classes that are below the 300 level. Taking a chemistry 101 course at a community college and taking it at a university have little difference other than the price of the course and how nice the chemistry lab looks. When given the option to take Community College courses that transfer into the university towards degrees, it's less expensive and a better investment of time money and energy. \n\nThe 300 and 400 level classes will most likely have to be taken at a university",
"Honestly? Not much. It's just that once you hit classes above a \"sophomore\" level, you need to go to a university. The lower level classes are pretty much the same though, and by pretty much I mean the variation between a university and a CC is about the same variance that you would get from professor to professor anyway. Hell, some professors teach at a CC some days and the university the others.\n\nIt's also why you can transfer your credits from a CC to a four year university.\n\nSource: Went to a community college, learned the exact same things in basic classes as university friends, paid less.",
"One costs way more than the other. \n\nThe community college I went to was excellent, and I have failed to find a comparable education at any of the three universities that I have attended since. \n\nI am now attending a 4 year university only because my community college did not offer four year degrees. I am also outrageously drunk at a bar. ",
"The difference between a community college and a prestigious university? In both cases you are probably using the same text book. But at the prestigious university your professor might be the one who wrote that book, or someone who has known and worked with the author for years. ",
"* the professor will likely be more knowledgeable and have more experience teaching\n* you'll have access to better resources, like lab equipment\n* your classmates will be more advanced, so you will likely cover more material more thoroughly, rather than having to repeat the basics\n* if you are interested in postgraduate studies, you aren't likely to make the sort of connections that can help with that in community college\n\nFor lower level classes, these differences are unlikely to be very significant."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
612nwe | when is object oriented design called for? | I've done the searches, I've read the interwebz.
I've programmed in C for a long time. I program in Python quite a bit for quick stuff, but mostly treat it like C. (No explicit classes)
What I'm asking about is complexity. All of the OOP tutorials, books, and my C++ teacher (two decades ago) all come up with some contrived example where you end up with 100 lines of class definitions to define points in a triangle or some such.
Others say OOP is better for complex projects. To which I say... Linux and Windows are principally C. Not many things more complex than an OS...
Where is the line? Or do professional programmers have a paradigm hammer and all problems are a nail?
More simply: is there a point where you've spent so much time defining objects and classes and inheritance, that you probably could have done it in a bash script quicker? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/612nwe/eli5_when_is_object_oriented_design_called_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfb7wfd",
"dfb8weg"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"First I would point out that lots of things can be more complicated than an operating system kernel. \n\nObject oriented design is nice when you have lots of different things that you treat basically the same. \n\nSuppose you have a map from an integer to some sort of data and you want to be able to store these maps as files. You've got code to do all that. Now you want to write a utility that compares two files for their differences and only shows you the keys that are different along with the differences themselves. Now you've got to write code to diff each of these files semantically. \n\nNow, suppose they are all inherited from the same base class. Now you write the diff tool to act on the base class and maybe figure out from the file format which particular derived class you instantiate. Then you write the harness once and instantiate the class through some factory. It's even possible in some languages to get all the derived types to register themselves at static initialization time so you don't even have to write a factory that knows about all the types. They just show up automatically as long as you include/link all the derived types. \n\nThat's an example of when you want to think in objects. You want to think of lots of different concrete types in terms of a simpler base type and you don't need to know the difference between the types, the derived types can handle all that for you. \n\n",
"The thing that made it \"click\" for me was when I first started looking at the Java GUI API.\n\nI haven't used Java for many years now, but I regularly use C# with Windows Forms, which has many similar features in the way the GUI is implemented.\n\nI saw that Button, TextBox, ListBox and many others all inherit from something called \"Control\". And because of that, they can all be kept in a collection together. They all have a \"Draw\" method, although what that Draw method does is very different for each of them. And because of that, it's possible to go through each item in the \"Controls\" collection, and call the \"Draw\" method on each item, without having to know anything about what is actually being drawn. I figured that when a Form is told to Draw itself, this must be exactly what it does! And then I started thinking about how much easier that was with object orientation.\n\nCould it be done without object orientation? Sure! The Windows API was originally written in C, and managed perfectly well. But it was much, much more complicated to use, and involved passing pointers to functions all over the place.\n\nThe reason this particular example works so well is because of what /u/mc8675309 said: lots of different things that are treated basically the same. And because it's been designed by some of the most prominent companies in the world, specifically to be a public-facing API open to scrutiny by anyone and everyone, it's an extremely good example of how object orientation can be used and ought to be used."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9z56dg | how much raw data speed can we realistically transmit on a single optical fiber? | (Excluding different wavelengths) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9z56dg/eli5_how_much_raw_data_speed_can_we_realistically/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea6sve2"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For a single wavelength the limit is related to how fast you can switch the laser on/off OR how fast you can modulate a continuous laser with a shutter. The frequency of the light is around 200THz. The amount of data you can get through a fiber is also limited by the signal to noise ratio of the system. A cleaner, stronger signal can carry more data. \n\n > [channel capacity is proportional to the bandwidth of the channel and to the logarithm of SNR. This means channel capacity can be increased linearly either by increasing the channel's bandwidth given a fixed SNR requirement or, with fixed bandwidth, by using higher-order modulations that need a very high SNR to operate.]( _URL_0_)\n\nRealistic limits change all the time with improvements in technology. Currently it is around 25-40 Gbps. That's nowhere near the theoretical limit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon%E2%80%93Hartley_theorem"
]
] |
|
2g3e53 | why do sites like youtube run like crap on my laptop but run great on my tablets? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g3e53/eli5_why_do_sites_like_youtube_run_like_crap_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckf8qsm",
"ckf8rfx"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Perhaps your laptop needs a RAM or processor upgrade. Perhaps you are running too many processes/programs simultaneously. Perhaps your laptop, which I'm assuming is older than your tablet, has accumulated some malware/spyware. Perhaps you need to update your flash or shockwave player. Perhaps you need to update your browser to a more current release.\n\nJust a few options. Each case, and computer, is unique. ",
"This isn't thr most exciting answer, but it could be a bunch of reasons. If you're watching YouTube on an app specifically written for YouTube and only YouTube, you can do some optimizations you otherwise wouldn't be able to get away with on a general web browser. It could be the YouTube site sees you're coming from a tablet and sends you data differently than if you're ok a laptop/general computer because it knows the tablet needs help. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
54fjtc | can doctors diagnose themselves? if not then are they allowed to be diagnosed by doctors from the same clinic/hospital? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54fjtc/eli5can_doctors_diagnose_themselves_if_not_then/ | {
"a_id": [
"d81dcjf",
"d81dqq8",
"d81x7qu"
],
"score": [
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not recommended, especially the self-prescribing part, and some states do have rules against prescribing for somebody that isn't actually your patient, but generally they're free to do what they want. Most wouldn't self-diagnose anything serious due to the loss of objectivity. It can introduce a lot of bias and they won't necessarily perceive all the facts as they should.",
"They can self-diagnose to their heart's content. Prescription is another matter. Generally speaking they can't self-prescribe controlled drugs (like morphine or other opiates) but often can self-prescribe things like antibiotics. Other doctors in the same clinic or hospital can indeed write prescriptions for them.",
"Doctor. I've definitely diagnosed, accurately, myself in the past. I've also diagnosed myself inaccurately as well. Most physicians have a primary care doctor just like everyone else. However, our interactions with our doctors are different because we both share the same fundamental knowledge about medicine. \n\nMy doctor doesn't work in the same clinic as me, and generally doctors don't see a doctor they work with. It just creates an awkward situation of a colleague knowing your personal medical history, which we often don't want to share. \n\nPrescribing yourself medications is primarily pharmacist dependent. Narcotics are absolutely not okay to prescribe to yourself. However, most pharmacists understand that all doctors can diagnose an ear infection and prescribe an antibiotic for themselves or a family member. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3h2gxq | how do drug dealers make profit when they are buying drugs from another drug dealer who most likely bought drugs from another dealer? | I imagine it would be less lucrative to make money from selling drugs unless you are buying directly from the source where the price would be cheaper than buying from another dealer who most likely is selling at a higher price to make a profit for himself. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3h2gxq/eli5_how_do_drug_dealers_make_profit_when_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu3nlng"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The same is true of literally any product in the world. For example, when you buy groceries, you don't buy from farmers do you? You buy from a store, that buys from a distributor, that buys from farmers. The farmer sells in bulk to the distributor who sells in less bulk to the store who sells in single units to you. The price increases along the way. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
51mpm7 | in america, why do black and white people speak so differently despite being born and raised in the same city? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/51mpm7/eli5_in_america_why_do_black_and_white_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7d4doc",
"d7dhhrd"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Living in the same place doesn't always mean having the same social environment, and it's the latter where people get their speaking habits. In many American cities, black and white people tend to have different family backgrounds, live in different neighborhoods, go to different schools and have different jobs.",
"A persons accent is set fairly young, and is usually picked up from the kids they hang out with (their school mates), rather than family. Until the 50s/60s, the USA was legally segregated. Even though no longer legally segregated, their are still a lot of neighborhoods separated by race. \n\n\"more than half of Latino students are enrolled in schools that are 90% minority or more. In New York, Illinois, Maryland and Michigan, more than half of black students attend schools where 90% or more are minority\"\n\nBlack people still tend to hang out with people of their own race, so accents still tend to fall along race lines.\n\nIt's more common in England than USA, but often one city will have several accents based on region."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3mlb4o | if we used nuclear power for everything, how long until we run out? could we get more uranium by then? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mlb4o/eli5_if_we_used_nuclear_power_for_everything_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvfwnf4",
"cvg04x4"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"Fissionable materials are infinite for all practical purposes.\n\nUranium can be extracted from seawater in vast quantities because it comprises a significant portion of the Earth's crust.",
"David Goodstein (CalTech) has written extensively about energy issues, particularly about Peak Oil. Here is an excerpt I found from an interview at American Scientist:\n\n > ...we should remember that nuclear fission energy is not a magic bullet that will solve the problem. The largest practical nuclear plant is roughly 1 gigawatt. It would take an almost unimaginable 10,000 of those to replace the 10 terawatts of fossil fuel we consume worldwide today. And then the known reserves of uranium would only last a *decade or two* at that burn rate. [emphasis added].\n\nSo, the answer to your question appears to be a few decades. There are other options for nuclear power, each with its own downside, but it does not appear current nuke technology can save us."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
9wghmg | can a water bomb be used to extinguish the current california fires? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9wghmg/eli5_can_a_water_bomb_be_used_to_extinguish_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e9kfc8k",
"e9kgitf",
"e9kh0fw",
"e9kkeda"
],
"score": [
3,
11,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I’ve seen them doing this with helicopters but it’s doesn’t seem to affect the fire much, it’s a real monster of a fire. Entire mountain sides are going up so dropping a little water on it helps a small area but it’s not going to stop the fire, it’s just too big. ",
"Technically, yes. But it has to hit a critical mass of the fire all at once. \n\nRight now, multiple mountains are on fire. You'd need to hit it with a literal mountain sized bomb of water at about the same time. \n\nAssuming you pull that off, then you have to deal with the mountain of water that you dumped flooding whatever is downhill. ",
"That fire has covered an area of over 110,000 acres, last I read.\n\nThat is such an enormous amount of area I can't think of how to put that into scale; The best I can get is that 1 acre is roughly 1 American Football field, without the endzones; almost 100,000 football fields worth of land either are or have been on fire over the course of this weekend.\n\nI say this mostly to give a sense of the absolutely huge scale of the problem, and to give a hint as to why this wouldn't really do a whole lot: It's simply too much fire, and in reality the air force (or navy, or really any branch of the armed services) doesn't have any aircraft that are really designed to do this (carrying munitions and carrying water are two different engineering problems), let alone enough of them available to really make an impact on this fire. That one house had its' fire stopped with that tech, but you'd need entire bomber formations over California with that same sort of tech to even conceivably make any progress.",
"Even if you only had to dump a meter of water onto any given area, and could perfectly spread the water out with a single or multiple bombs, you're looking at around 450 cubic kilometers of water, which would weigh 450,000,000,000,000 kilograms. That would weigh roughly the same as 2 million Sears Towers.\n\nThis would require 450,000,000,000,000 liters of water, or almost 12% of the entire volume of water in Lake Michigan.\n\nEdit: Typo, fixed a decimal place I screwed up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.