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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1kcmgy | lavabit and whats going on with it | Maybe not 5, maybe like 13 and I kinda know how computers work | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kcmgy/eli5_lavabit_and_whats_going_on_with_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbnk3mc",
"cbnk9xw"
],
"score": [
2,
22
],
"text": [
"The government requested private data because Snowden was using it.. and the owner didn't even have access to his users data.. so he decided to close it down.",
"Its actually pretty straight forward.\n\nThey provide an email service which is totally private - they do not share any information about their users for any reason. That is the nature of their business. The NSA don't like this so sent them a letter which basically says that they legally have to give this information over to the authorities.\n\nThis put the owner in a tough spot. He could either comply with the government request, and in doing so go against the entire reason he set up the service and betray his subcribers. Or he could simply shut it down entirely.\n\nThe real unfortunate thing, is that becasue of the bs nature of the law, he cannot actually say that any of this happened. It is against the law to actually go public and say that you have recieved these letters... therefore he has had to word his statments very carefully, so its is obvious that reading between the lines that this has happend without directly saying it. The law is so strict, that it actually probihbits him from talking to his own legal team about the implications of the NSA's request.\n\nI know ELI5 is not a place for opinion, but in this case, I have to go ahead and say that this is a fucking disgrace and the US public should be going crazy to the Government about it. Sending letters asking for information is one thing, but banning the ability to discuss it, even with your own legal team, is what I would expect of eastern block Russia 30 years ago.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1z6scf | in baseball, why don't batters (particularly lefties) step all the way through on their hits, the same way pitchers step all the way through on their pitches? | I was just wondering this. Aren't they potentially losing a vast amount of hitting power by just pivoting with the hit instead of stepping all the way through? I suppose I understand why righties wouldn't, since their body would then be facing the opposite way of the direction they need to run, but lefties could swing, step through, get tons of power, and take off like a rocket. I'm not intimately familiar with baseball, so am I missing something obvious? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z6scf/eli5_in_baseball_why_dont_batters_particularly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfr090k"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You are missing the step almost all batters take towards the pitcher. \n\nThats the basic swing, after that, a batter may develope a unique stance or step. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
acz1o9 | how does lack of sleep slow down your metabolism? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/acz1o9/eli5_how_does_lack_of_sleep_slow_down_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"edc1sj8",
"edc3mbe"
],
"score": [
8,
18
],
"text": [
"Lack of sleep raises the \"stress hormone\" Cortisol which keeps your blood sugar levels high and stores more of your absorbed food as fat.",
"When we lack sleep, the body likely believes there is something wrong with our situation (sleep is such a basic necessity that its disruption surely signals some danger or inadequacy in the environment) and thus attempts to conserve energy by slowing our metabolism. \n\nInsufficient sleep additionally effects two key metabolism-related hormones in the body: one that controls the feeling of fullness (leptin), and one that controls the feeling of hunger (ghrelin). When you don't get enough sleep, the level of the hormone that controls the feeling of fullness decreases, while the level of the hormone that controls the feeling of hunger increases. Thus, you feel less full AND more hungry when you haven't slept enough. Since your metabolism is already slowed, this is the perfect recipe for overeating and potential weight gain if you sleep poorly for a long period of time.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSources: \"Why We Sleep\" by sleep scientist Matthew Walker, \n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_), \n[_URL_1_](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26538305",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22496545"
]
] |
|
bgb47a | why does tall buildings have a higher chance to collapse when its not swaying than when it is swaying during an earthquake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bgb47a/eli5_why_does_tall_buildings_have_a_higher_chance/ | {
"a_id": [
"eljobny",
"elrqr13"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Because when its swaying, it's absorbing energy.\n\nThink about it like this, if you clamp down a wooden skewer (the stick in a kebab), and you grab the top and and wiggle it violently, itll break. \n\nIf you did it with a straw, the straw is fine.\n\nAlthough the premise is very different, the idea is the same. \n\nIn buildings, they dont just snap in half, maybe one metal beam, or one load bearing joint or wall cracks, weakening it, then on the next shake, the building above it pushes it down and it buckles, then more walls will break.\n\nHave you played a bridge building game? It's always one weak point that breaks everything.",
"Because brittle materials don't absorb as much energy as ductile materials. When you're in a car crash, you want the car to crumple and deform because that means the energy from the crash is going into deforming the car and not into your body. If the car didn't deform, the energy would transfer to you and, because you are more ductile (mushy) than the car, you would absorb the energy.\n\nEnergy has to go somewhere. In this case, the energy goes into moving the building back and forth rather than crashing it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
38a3iy | how do pacemaker neurons work and what do they do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38a3iy/eli5_how_do_pacemaker_neurons_work_and_what_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"crtirnk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I'm going to assume you know how normal action potentials work (voltage-gated Na+ and K+ channels opening induced by Ach-gated Na+ channels) since this is a bit more specific a question than just about plain ol' action potentials.\n\nPacemaker neurons, rather than having the floodgates opened by another cell, have leaky Na+ channels that slowly let it into the cell until it it reaches threshold and fires an action potential. It gets reset and then does it again. It's a self-timer, essentially, that produces APs on a regular basis. These cells are utilized in the SA node, giving your heart and automated, regular beat. They're also present in the AV node and the bundle of His and Purkinje fibers can convert to pacemaker cells if you have node failure."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
569u2z | how does new money make old money worth less? | Can someone explain me first giving a simple example and then linking it to the question why US (or any other country) can't just create more money? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/569u2z/eli5_how_does_new_money_make_old_money_worth_less/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8hj7du",
"d8hjfjm",
"d8hjjkn"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"I'm going to have to quote South park here... \"more money from where?\"",
"Money is an abstract representation of the value of the economy. The total amount of money in existence represents the total value of the economy. However, printing more more does not make the economy contain more value (there's still the same amount of \"stuff\"), so now you have a larger amount of money that's worth the same overall value as the old, smaller amount of money. Thus money must now be worth less.",
"You may have heard your parents or grandparents talk about how different things were when they were your age. It only cost a nickel to see a movie. Gas was 30 cents per gallon. A brand new car might cost about $5,000. In the intervening years, prices have risen, sometimes drastically. Seeing a movie in the theater now costs about $8; gas can cost about $3 per gallon in some places; and few new cars cost less than $15,000. That's inflation.\n\nInflation is when a certain form of currency starts to have less value over time. It is caused mainly by two things: people's perception of value, and the economic principle of supply and demand.\nPrinting more dollar bills makes all the other dollar bills worth less. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
j7yx7 | why should i install anti-virus software and a firewall? | I don't really get the point of anti-virus software and firewalls-- they just seem like really big pains in the ass.
I hear about lots of people having problems with games or programs running because of firewalls/anti-virus software, and I also hear about those same people getting viruses and such despite the software.
I pretty much never get viruses despite torrenting lots of stuff, and in the rare event that it happens it seems like I can just Recover my computer back to the way it was the previous day.
And I don't really understand what the point of the firewall is at all.
Do I really need these things? Is it just "I've been lucky" so far that I haven't had big problems for not using them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j7yx7/eli5_why_should_i_install_antivirus_software_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c29vvs2",
"c29vz3d",
"c29wb7h",
"c29wdcc",
"c29vvs2",
"c29vz3d",
"c29wb7h",
"c29wdcc"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
3,
3,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Do yourself a favor and download this and scan your computer:\n\n[link](_URL_0_)\n\nIf it says you're free of viruses, then feel free to continue as you were.",
"First, your computer doesn't care from where an order comes, so if you can give orders from another computer then it will follow those orders. That is what hacking is, which viruses usually help with.\n\nA firewall only let certain things pass through the internet cable, which makes it much harder to send orders through it. But you can get problems with games as your computer just blocks everything, you have to tell it to let the games get through, which isn't always easy.\n\nAnti-virus software scan your computer for known viruses and removes them, so it's a second defense so to speak. It removes those that manage to get through the firewall.\n\n > in the rare event that it happens it seems like I can just Recover my computer back to the way it was the previous day.\n\nExcept that most viruses don't show themselves to the user, they just pass your information on to those who created them. Or take control of your computer whenever the creator feels like it.",
"Why you should install anti-virus and firewall? Honestly, this depends on which operating system you have and so on. But, why to try to defend from virus attacks in general as well as is smart? As this is LI5, I'm going to define all virus-like bad programs as virus here.\n\n > Intramar, the French Navy computer network, was infected with Conficker on 15 January 2009. The network was subsequently quarantined, forcing aircraft at several airbases to be grounded because their flight plans could not be downloaded.\n\n > The United Kingdom Ministry of Defence reported that some of its major systems and desktops were infected. The virus has spread across administrative offices, NavyStar/N* desktops aboard various Royal Navy warships and Royal Navy submarines, and hospitals across the city of Sheffield reported infection of over 800 computers.\n\n > An infection of Manchester City Council's IT system caused an estimated £1.5m worth of disruption in February 2009. USB flash drives have since been banned, as this was believed to be the vector for the initial infection.\n\nBecause _really_ bad things can happen. Always be as sure as possible to not have virus in you machine.\n\nAs to why you really should know, **beyond reasonable doubt** you have no virus on your personal computer at home?\n\nBecause if you have a virus on your computer, the guy who commands the virus, now possibly has access to everything you do on your computer.\n\n1. **Virus can, and some do, steal from your bank account in secret! (Zeus)**\n2. **Virus can, and some do, claim it has found your sick porn cache and that you have to pay to not get in touble**\n3. **Virus can, and some do, lock your computer, and want you to pay to get it opened**\n4. **Virus can, and some do, spy on what you type on your keyboard!**\n\nIf you have a virus on your computer, even when checking stuff for viruses with antivirus, REINSTALL your operating system! RECOVERING IS NOT ENOUGH. Reinstalling might also not be enough, so wipe your hard drive too! Also, hard drive is not the only place you can have a virus. You can't trust OS that has had virus in it. Just removing the virus with antivirus is not enough, or even possible.\n\nMyself, I don't have antivirus on this computer, but it's because I use operating system that doesn't get attacked so much. (Never had a single wide virus attack yet, in 20 years) Which in turn doesn't still mean that it will not get attacked, it just means that if I don't want to hassle with fighting against virusthingys, I should change the OS again to something that doesn't get attacked.\n\nAlso, having antivirus does not mean you cannot get a virus. It means, that you are actually able to defend against **those certain viruses** that the antivirus has been taught to fight against. It cannot find a virus that is not known. (simplification, I know) Not all viruses are immediately found and taught to antivirus.\n\nFirewall: Basically it defines rules, which stuff on your computer can access internet, and how your computer can be accessed from internet. It can block your access to WOW server for example, so yes, there is possible hassle. The thing why it's important, is to be more confident that you should not be able to get attacked. Again, here it also is true, that if you don't actually define good rules, it doesn't really matter. You have to know how to use it effectively.\n\nTL;DR If you don't care if you have virus on your computer or not, **there is no point to having passwords, hiding your porn, hiding your bank account passwords** as all that can be gained with virus. So if you don't care if you have a virus, don't do anything with your computer that you would not like to be seen by any other.\n\nHonest advice: Never have/do anything that could possibly ruin your life in your computer.\n\nEdit: added a word to advice\n\nEdit2: Firewall.\n\nEdit3: Have you been lucky to not have had big problems? Yes. Why I think that is \n\nIt has been [claimed](_URL_0_), that there has been a time, when unprotected Windows machine connected to Internet would make it be compromised in, like, minutes. I think Windows is currently however, not that badly protected. I'm not going to promise that though. \n\nThis all is part of the reason why I actually do think using a computer should legally need some kind of license. It is possible to ruin your life in many ways, but it's kinda stupid for it to happen just because you really didn't know better. If you had been saving money for years so you can afford some special medical treatment for your daughter for example, it would be really sad to lose that money because you didn't want to hassle with being safe. \n\nIf you handle your real wallet with care, why wouldn't you do the same to the computer you do your bank stuff with?",
"Lets take this question apart, do you need antivirus software? defintely yes. Do you need a firewall? probably not.\n\nA virus is a program that makes your computer sick, like a cold.\nThe problem is, some of these diseases do much more serious damage than the ordinary cold. They steal information from your computer that you do no twant other people to have, like credit card information.\n\nAn antivirus program tries to protect your computer from these programs. If you don't care if your computer gets sick, well you might not install an antivirus on your computer. \nThis is bad, if you dont care about getting sick, it usually means that theres something wrong with you, you do not take care of yourself and might ot love yourself very much either. \nThere is of course another reason, a virus spreads by infecting one computer then another, this means, that sometimes, when your computer gets infected, your computer will start infecting other computers or could be taken over by another person during that infection.\n\nSo by not protecting yourself, and allowing your computer to get sick from time to time, you are spreading the disease to other people.\n\nIf this does not bother you at all, then I'm afraid I cannot help you, ther is something wrong with you.\n\nFirewalls protect your computer in another way, they limit what information can enter or exit your computer.\n\nThis is useful when you want to keep someone out of your computer.\nIf you have info other people migh want to steal, then install a firewall, if not, then do whatever you want.",
"Do yourself a favor and download this and scan your computer:\n\n[link](_URL_0_)\n\nIf it says you're free of viruses, then feel free to continue as you were.",
"First, your computer doesn't care from where an order comes, so if you can give orders from another computer then it will follow those orders. That is what hacking is, which viruses usually help with.\n\nA firewall only let certain things pass through the internet cable, which makes it much harder to send orders through it. But you can get problems with games as your computer just blocks everything, you have to tell it to let the games get through, which isn't always easy.\n\nAnti-virus software scan your computer for known viruses and removes them, so it's a second defense so to speak. It removes those that manage to get through the firewall.\n\n > in the rare event that it happens it seems like I can just Recover my computer back to the way it was the previous day.\n\nExcept that most viruses don't show themselves to the user, they just pass your information on to those who created them. Or take control of your computer whenever the creator feels like it.",
"Why you should install anti-virus and firewall? Honestly, this depends on which operating system you have and so on. But, why to try to defend from virus attacks in general as well as is smart? As this is LI5, I'm going to define all virus-like bad programs as virus here.\n\n > Intramar, the French Navy computer network, was infected with Conficker on 15 January 2009. The network was subsequently quarantined, forcing aircraft at several airbases to be grounded because their flight plans could not be downloaded.\n\n > The United Kingdom Ministry of Defence reported that some of its major systems and desktops were infected. The virus has spread across administrative offices, NavyStar/N* desktops aboard various Royal Navy warships and Royal Navy submarines, and hospitals across the city of Sheffield reported infection of over 800 computers.\n\n > An infection of Manchester City Council's IT system caused an estimated £1.5m worth of disruption in February 2009. USB flash drives have since been banned, as this was believed to be the vector for the initial infection.\n\nBecause _really_ bad things can happen. Always be as sure as possible to not have virus in you machine.\n\nAs to why you really should know, **beyond reasonable doubt** you have no virus on your personal computer at home?\n\nBecause if you have a virus on your computer, the guy who commands the virus, now possibly has access to everything you do on your computer.\n\n1. **Virus can, and some do, steal from your bank account in secret! (Zeus)**\n2. **Virus can, and some do, claim it has found your sick porn cache and that you have to pay to not get in touble**\n3. **Virus can, and some do, lock your computer, and want you to pay to get it opened**\n4. **Virus can, and some do, spy on what you type on your keyboard!**\n\nIf you have a virus on your computer, even when checking stuff for viruses with antivirus, REINSTALL your operating system! RECOVERING IS NOT ENOUGH. Reinstalling might also not be enough, so wipe your hard drive too! Also, hard drive is not the only place you can have a virus. You can't trust OS that has had virus in it. Just removing the virus with antivirus is not enough, or even possible.\n\nMyself, I don't have antivirus on this computer, but it's because I use operating system that doesn't get attacked so much. (Never had a single wide virus attack yet, in 20 years) Which in turn doesn't still mean that it will not get attacked, it just means that if I don't want to hassle with fighting against virusthingys, I should change the OS again to something that doesn't get attacked.\n\nAlso, having antivirus does not mean you cannot get a virus. It means, that you are actually able to defend against **those certain viruses** that the antivirus has been taught to fight against. It cannot find a virus that is not known. (simplification, I know) Not all viruses are immediately found and taught to antivirus.\n\nFirewall: Basically it defines rules, which stuff on your computer can access internet, and how your computer can be accessed from internet. It can block your access to WOW server for example, so yes, there is possible hassle. The thing why it's important, is to be more confident that you should not be able to get attacked. Again, here it also is true, that if you don't actually define good rules, it doesn't really matter. You have to know how to use it effectively.\n\nTL;DR If you don't care if you have virus on your computer or not, **there is no point to having passwords, hiding your porn, hiding your bank account passwords** as all that can be gained with virus. So if you don't care if you have a virus, don't do anything with your computer that you would not like to be seen by any other.\n\nHonest advice: Never have/do anything that could possibly ruin your life in your computer.\n\nEdit: added a word to advice\n\nEdit2: Firewall.\n\nEdit3: Have you been lucky to not have had big problems? Yes. Why I think that is \n\nIt has been [claimed](_URL_0_), that there has been a time, when unprotected Windows machine connected to Internet would make it be compromised in, like, minutes. I think Windows is currently however, not that badly protected. I'm not going to promise that though. \n\nThis all is part of the reason why I actually do think using a computer should legally need some kind of license. It is possible to ruin your life in many ways, but it's kinda stupid for it to happen just because you really didn't know better. If you had been saving money for years so you can afford some special medical treatment for your daughter for example, it would be really sad to lose that money because you didn't want to hassle with being safe. \n\nIf you handle your real wallet with care, why wouldn't you do the same to the computer you do your bank stuff with?",
"Lets take this question apart, do you need antivirus software? defintely yes. Do you need a firewall? probably not.\n\nA virus is a program that makes your computer sick, like a cold.\nThe problem is, some of these diseases do much more serious damage than the ordinary cold. They steal information from your computer that you do no twant other people to have, like credit card information.\n\nAn antivirus program tries to protect your computer from these programs. If you don't care if your computer gets sick, well you might not install an antivirus on your computer. \nThis is bad, if you dont care about getting sick, it usually means that theres something wrong with you, you do not take care of yourself and might ot love yourself very much either. \nThere is of course another reason, a virus spreads by infecting one computer then another, this means, that sometimes, when your computer gets infected, your computer will start infecting other computers or could be taken over by another person during that infection.\n\nSo by not protecting yourself, and allowing your computer to get sick from time to time, you are spreading the disease to other people.\n\nIf this does not bother you at all, then I'm afraid I cannot help you, ther is something wrong with you.\n\nFirewalls protect your computer in another way, they limit what information can enter or exit your computer.\n\nThis is useful when you want to keep someone out of your computer.\nIf you have info other people migh want to steal, then install a firewall, if not, then do whatever you want."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam-download.php"
],
[],
[
"http://forums.pcworld.co.nz/showthread.php?t=59409"
],
[],
[
"http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam-download.php"
],
[],
[
"http://forums.pcworld.co.nz/showthread.php?t=59409"
],
[]
] |
|
2lvwcj | why do sites like reddit and youtube have shortened urls (_url_1_, _url_0_)? why not just have the shortened url be the default one? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lvwcj/eli5_why_do_sites_like_reddit_and_youtube_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"clyofz8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"*.com* has come to mean 'internet' in many peoples minds. Telling people to go to 'Youtube, _URL_1_' would just confuse them. They expect *_URL_0_*. Short URL's are convenient because they slice off all the guff at the end but for the main basic domain .com is convention and convention *is* convenience."
]
} | [
"youtu.be",
"redd.it"
] | [] | [
[
"BrandName.com",
"youtu.be"
]
] |
||
1rp62w | how do physical retail stores make a profit from selling cards for a digital currency? | Such as Steam cards or Zynga cards | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rp62w/eli5_how_do_physical_retail_stores_make_a_profit/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdpgxsg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They make deals with companies that sell the cards, lets say Valve. Valve gives the store (Lets call it Gamestop) the cards, asking for a certain amount of money for each card sold. So if a $20 Steam card is sold and Valve asks for 70% of the profit, Valve gets $14 and Gamestop gets $6. I hope that helped :D"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2nzx1d | why doesn't the pressure of a gas inside a bottle have any effect on the liquid it contains? | Like when you are drinking out of a glass bottle and you force as much air into it as you can, but the liquid still moves around freely. Why is that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2nzx1d/eli5_why_doesnt_the_pressure_of_a_gas_inside_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmiewfx",
"cmiezjn",
"cmihbob"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The liquid is still MUCH more dense than the gas. ",
"liquids are much denser than gases. no matter how much you pressurize the gas, as long as it's still a gas, the molecules of the gas are still much farther apart than the liquid molecules. so the heavy liquid with alot of molecules close together pushes its way wherever it wants, and the light air with only a few molecules per the same area gets pushed out of the way.",
"It does have some affect, since viscosity is partially dependant on pressure, but that effect is negligible. The viscosity at the interface between a gas and a liquid is very, very low. That means it's easy for gas to move along the surface of the liquid. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a3ebyc | how do we know there aren't more planets in the solar system with orbits that keep them on the opposite side of the sun from us at all times? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a3ebyc/eli5_how_do_we_know_there_arent_more_planets_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"eb5f8ln",
"eb5ff38",
"eb5gkf2",
"eb5lxe6"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"If something was there it would pull on other things and change how they move. Since we don't see anything like that, probably nothing there. ",
"Because of satellite telescopes, and they would affect the orbit of other planets that orbit faster than we do. And laslty, it's highly impobable that there's a planet orbiting at the exact same speed or a relatively exact same speed if they're closer or further from the sun. Interesting fact: there might be a 9th planet, way beyond pluto even, orbiting the sun, because they've noticed some irregularities in Pluto's orbit.",
"If there was some object opposite of us, obscured by the sun, we would see side effects of its gravity, because the other planets orbit at different speeds and are sometimes obscured by the sun. We've discovered several of our planets not by spotting them directly, but because celestial bodies we were aware of showed behavior not consistent with the known bodies of gravity in our solar system; planets don't just speed up, slow down, or diverge from their orbits if there isn't something acting upon it.\n\nIn fact, the hunt is on for a planet right now. We believe there is a planet 10x more massive than Earth, 20x further out than Neptune, that has to be out there. There are 6 planetoids, about the size of Pluto, way out in the Kuiper Belt that all have highly elliptic orbits, all pointing in the same direction, and there is no way their orbits could have been established by the known planets. It's also believed this guy caused a 6 degree tilt, relative to the sun's equator, of all the known planets.\n\nThey have a rough idea of where to look, but space is huge, and that far out, the planet will be dark, so the search is ongoing and tedious. Everything suggests it should be out there.",
"Fyi, there actually is a theory that there is another planet in our solar system, but it's very distant right now. I think the theory goes that it is in an elliptical orbit and actually gets closer to the solar system at times,while at other times being quite far away.\n\nWe think this because there are strange movements of some of our planets that we can't explain.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nI have not looked into this too much lately, so I'm not sure what the current theories are, I'm not sure if anyone still believes that there is a ghost planet or if it's been mostly debunked."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/closing-in-on-a-giant-ghost-planet/"
]
] |
||
2z21e9 | why do hurricanes lose significant power once they hit land, but you may have a snow/rain storm that travels across the entire u.s. and will hit the northeast the hardest? | I assume maybe it has to do with jetstreams? Or perhaps fronts moving down from Canada? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z21e9/eli5why_do_hurricanes_lose_significant_power_once/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpez9an",
"cpf1p6x"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"the hurricane thing - > iirc those are powerd by warm wet air which is generated over the ocean. once you hit land that power source is lost and the storm dissipates.\n\nsnow storms - > that has to do with north american geography - > no east/west mountain ranges do not block storms coming from the north. Eg. in Europe there is the alps which are a huge climate barrier and separate the mediterranian climate from ... however the climate north of the alps is called ;)",
"Snow and rain storms are basically the result of different bodies of air coming into contact that have differing levels of temperature and humidity. Think of warm air hitting mountains, rising, and hitting cold air above, or warm, wet southerly air hitting cold dry air from the north. This is why it doesn't matter to these systems whether they're over land or not.\n\nHurricanes and typhoons are created by heat in the oceans being transferred to the air and certain other atmospheric conditions which must be present. So when the hurricane or typhoon is cut off from this energy source by moving inland, it dissipates."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
avceiv | - why did i make $9k more in 2018 than i did 2017 but owe $900 more and am getting $600 less on my rax refund | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/avceiv/eli5_why_did_i_make_9k_more_in_2018_than_i_did/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehdzzan",
"ehe05ab"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The more money you make, the more taxes you owe. That’s the simple answer. \nThere isn’t enough information here to tell you exactly why. \n\nThere Were changes to the tax laws, you could have had different withholdings, you could have had different deductions, etc. ",
"Any chance your take home pay percentage went up check-to-check? I’m not talking about your raise, but the post-tax percentage of money in your check. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
379e19 | if i'm stuck on a puzzle in a video game or a math problem or something else challenging, why does it become easier after i put it down for a few hours? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/379e19/eli5_if_im_stuck_on_a_puzzle_in_a_video_game_or_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"crkr17w",
"crkrs0u"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Science has shown [your brain keeps learning during rest periods](_URL_0_). For related reasons, you should always get a good night's sleep or two between the time you finish studying for an exam and the time you take the exam (actual sleep is even better than mere \"rest\" in this respect). ",
"Ok, I learned about this at school but forget the exact theory, so bear with me. \n \nAfter a rest, you will have a fresher perspective, whereas if you keep working on a puzzle for too long, your brain gets in a rut and won't be able to keep it's original creativness, instead trying the same thing you've already thought of over and over again. Stepping away for a while allows your brain to \"reset\" and approach it in a different way. That is also why you will be better at correcting the mistakes in something you wrote if you give yourself a break before correcting. \n \n \nWhat meltingintoice has said is true, but doesn't apply to your question. The thing about putting it down for a few hours isn't that you've learned while you were resting, or that you're smarter now. It's just that it's easier for your brain to get a new perspective on things if you forget about the problem for a bit, which in turn helps you solve it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1957114,00.html"
],
[]
] |
||
1mextl | when an animal is swallowed whole and is still alive as it slides into the larger animals stomach, how exactly does it die? how long does it have to try to climb back up the throat? | saw a pic in r/WTF of a fish that was cut open and dozens of baby turtles spilled out of its stomach. prompted this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mextl/eli5_when_an_animal_is_swallowed_whole_and_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc8k959",
"cc8kaot",
"cc8l9u4",
"cc8lgm0",
"cc8o6a1",
"cc8ogwn",
"cc8p61w",
"cc8pm7u",
"cc8qi1d",
"cc8qlvp",
"cc8swql",
"cc8tuu3",
"cc8xv65",
"cc8zh34",
"cc959pe"
],
"score": [
78,
1801,
188,
36,
29,
7,
5,
10,
5,
102,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I assume most die of asphyxiation very quickly and long before they are near stomach acids if that's what you're getting at.",
"\"Most animals will die of suffocation within 1-3 minutes. Others are crushed to death by the muscles that push the food down\" \r\r-source: former herpetologist from the Buffalo Zoo is sitting on my couch.\r\rEdit: I guess I owe my buddy a beer.\r\rHot-Edits: part deux: my inbox exploded. If you guys want, I might convince him to do an AMA",
"On a related note. Say I'm running and accidentally a bug flies into my mouth and I start to feel it in my throat. I try to cough it up but don't see/feel anything fly out. Eventually the buggy feel goes away, do we involuntarily swallow the bug? Also I assume that the bug dies of suffocation in my throat? ",
"Depends on the animal.\n\nI saw someone swallow a goldfish, barf 2 hours later, and the fish was still alive. I'd imagine it was pretty drunk, based on the stomach content.",
"Turtles have shells that will keep them from being crushed and being aquatic animals they can hold their breath for a very long time. Most other things suffocate quickly. Except for pigeons who have been swallowed by a pelican....",
"The acid in the stomach will also kill the animal.",
"Believe it or not, it actually benefits the Epomis beetle larva to be eaten by frogs as they are later regurgitated and are then themselves eaten by the larva.",
"Hey OP can you give me the link to the pic on /r/WTF you're referring to? ",
"There was a scientific article trying to establish this at the turn of the 20th century. It may have been in physical review letters. Essentially they fed frogs to a snake and forced it to regurgitate them after varying times.\n\nIf I recall correctly the frog was fine minutes later, but appeared dazed and confused. Though wasn't at the end, because they fed it back again.",
"Ahh, I just finished \"Gulp\" by Mary Roach, and she addresses this sort of thing. There is an actual case mentioned wherein marine biologists opened a shark off the California coast to find three, fully-grown turtle shells in its stomach, all facing forwards. The shark simply swam up behind them, and the last thing they saw were some teeth. It was hypothesized that the turtles could have lasted for up to a day, living off of the shelter provided by their shells, but eventually succumbed, unable to find a way out.\n\nA scientist put a superworm into the stomach of a frog to see if it could or would try to eat its way out. One of the biggest barriers to the worm accomplishing this was the swaddling effect. That is, most animals (humans included), when totally surrounded by warm pressure will go into hibernation mode, which allows dinner to be properly digested without all that annoying moving about.\n\nAlso, it totally depends on the kind of animal! While the worm in a frog was unable to save itself from that sort of automatic shut down, if a human were eaten by, say, a sperm whale, we'd be bludgeoned to death by 500 pounds of pressure exerted by the whale's first stomach! But if we were swallowed whole by an Everglades python, we'd slowly be broken down by enzymes over the span of days. So excite!\n\nsource: [Gulp](_URL_0_), Mary Roach - a totally awesome read, highly recommend it.",
"What kind of apocalyptic terror has havocked this thread?",
"Why so many deleted comments, what happened here?",
"I swallowed a cricket alive once.\n\nIt fought my peristalsis all the way down; took about.. three or four minutes to clear my esophagus. Breathing was nightmarish, I could feel it clawing its way up a centimeter for every two centimeters it went down.\n\nI will never swallow another living thing alive again.",
"I would love to go to the everglades hunting pythons. Of course, I would not go any closer than my 12 gauge could reach. Before I get flaming replies, the pythons are ruining the ecosystem of the everglades.",
"[Reminds me of this](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulp:_Adventures_on_the_Alimentary_Canal"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://hexell.livejournal.com/87954.html?thread=1363346"
]
] |
|
7q01cg | how do electronics lose charge while not being used? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7q01cg/eli5_how_do_electronics_lose_charge_while_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dslbrqw",
"dslde72"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"The chemical reactions in batteries don't stop, even when not in use. As time goes on, this reduces the free charge and capacity of the battery.\n\nMost batteries nowadays are relatively efficient when not in use, but there will always be a small drainage of energy over time.",
"Some electronics never fully turn off, they're in low-power mode to keep internal clocks, infrared detector, etc. active.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
25agu4 | how the "red button" used by sky (for example) works | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/25agu4/eli5_how_the_red_button_used_by_sky_for_example/ | {
"a_id": [
"chfbx03"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"As well as being a device that decodes satellite TV signals, your Sky box has a number of other functions. In particular it is connected to the internet, so it can send data and signals back to Sky's servers, and it has a small dedicated computer inside which knows how to display overlaid text and video.\n\nSo when you press the Red Button it makes the inbuilt computer display a menu of options. As you navigate through those options, when you eventually choose one that makes something happen (e.g. play a video stream, show the weather, etc), the box sends a signal down the internet to Sky's servers saying \"user X has just requested function Y, what do I do now?\"\n\nSky's servers check that your subscription is valid for the service you've requested, and if so, they tell the box what to do, e.g. play the requested video stream, show the weather report, and so on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6d9jhk | how did people in the stone age deal with diseases (viruses, bacteria, parasites)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6d9jhk/eli5_how_did_people_in_the_stone_age_deal_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"di0vi04",
"di0via4",
"di0whef"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > How did people in the Stone Age deal with diseases and mental disorders?\n\nThey either got over it, lived with it, or died. People died a lot back then.\n\n > Wouldn't they have died out at a certain time?\n\nIndividuals did but overall they reproduced more.\n\n > Considering countries today are very developed and still thousands of people die out from a virus in developed countries how did people in the Stone Age cope? Wouldn't they all have died out?\n\nThey didn't live nearly as close together back then. Even if an isolated tribe or family group caught some terrible sickness they would just all die and maybe never be found by other humans. This tended to weed out illnesses that were incredibly fatal and left those which were highly contagious but didn't actually kill their victims. Being too deadly would limit the survival potential of the illness itself.",
"They didn't for the most part. They just died.\n\nThat being said, a lot of the viruses that really get to murdering these days were still evolving along side us and we were spread out enough that even a bad disease that wiped out a clan was unlikely to get more than them.",
"They died a lot obviously.\n\nThe idea that a child once born would have a better than even chance to live to adulthood is a very modern thing.\n\nPeople died a lot before we developed anything like modern medical science.\n\nHowever there is another aspect here.\n\nIn prehistoric times before we developed agriculture and settled down in larger and large communities we didn't really have to deal as much with communicable diseases as we have done in historic times. Things like large plagues and epidemics are mostly a thing that came with civilization.\n\nOn the other hands diseases like malaria have always been with us in places where the climate was right for it. There is a claim that the majority of humans who have ever died, died of malaria. There are a lot of arguments about that claim, but the fact that it apparently it was close enough to even be worth arguing about shows, just how much of a killer that disease was.\n\nSo people died a lot. They died in childbirth and from various diseases and injuries and from not having anything to eat and from being killed by other people and much of that happened at what we today would think of as a young age.\n\nLots of people died, but just enough lived to carry one. Sibling and cousins carried on for those who died or neighboring clans and tribes took over for those that had been wiped out.\n\nA few generations ago when we started to get medicine that not just worked, but worked really well we had to rethink out approach from having 11 children in hopes that just enough would survive to continue one to have more like 2.4 children because that was enough."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dt9m9r | why, when i’m making a purchase with my debit card, am i sometimes given the option of debit, with pin authorization, or credit, with a signature authorization? what’s the difference in how they’re processed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dt9m9r/eli5_why_when_im_making_a_purchase_with_my_debit/ | {
"a_id": [
"f6vfh9m",
"f6vja2o"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When you make a purchase your bank has a process that scores a transaction for fraud risk, when you use your PIN that score indicates it is less likely to be fraudulent, and a PINless transaction would have a more likely to be fraudulent score.\n\nSource: I work for a bank",
"Yes, always run as credit. The VISA or MC logo provides fraud help. If you key a pin, it's all on you. My friend's older mom got fooled by a scam. The scammers got her to go to Target, buy iTunes card specifically with her debit card and pin, and send the codes. By the time my friend noticed, the iTunes cards were empty, target wouldn't help since it was a debit transaction, and the bank wouldn't help since she personally did a PIN transaction. They got her for $500."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3yeeva | why does united overbook every flight on a small jet knowing it's overbooked? | Everytime I fly with United and its in a "regional" type jet, it is always overbooked and they ask for volunteers to move get off in exchange for a voucher. Why do they do this knowing they only have a certain amount of seats/weight allotted for the flight? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3yeeva/eli5_why_does_united_overbook_every_flight_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cycqe7u"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because cancelations happen all the time. Not to mention if they can sell you a ticket and have an open seat somewhere else, they still sold you a seat. \n\nA free upgrade costs them nothing, bumping someone who already paid cost them nothing. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a34b6f | why would i regurgitate recently swallowed water from a hiccup if it's a spasm of my diaphragm? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a34b6f/eli5_why_would_i_regurgitate_recently_swallowed/ | {
"a_id": [
"eb397ns"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Swallowing water takes time. We think it’s instantaneous, the same with food. The spasm probably formed a vacuum and sucked the water back up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5jyw7n | how did we end up with the pyramid style organizational hierarchy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jyw7n/eli5_how_did_we_end_up_with_the_pyramid_style/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbk2u84",
"dbk32v2",
"dbk3jze",
"dbk4ka9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Humans [can have around 150 relationships](_URL_0_). Organizations larger than that need to find a way to work that doesn't require every member to interact and coordinate with every other. \n\nPyramidal organizations allow people in each layer to limit their interaction to some superiors, some peers and multiple subordinates. In this way each person has exposure to just a subset of the organization which has a manageable number of people. \nThe main attraction of pyramidal is that you can put the executives of the company or the minister of the department or what have you at the top and have their decisions and desired organizational culture filter through middle management to all the people \"in the trenches\". \n\nIt's also possible to for instance split the organization into mostly independent cells. This makes it harder for stakeholders outside the organization\\* to direct what it should do, so it's more common for organizations where the members and stakeholders are the same people.\n\n\n\\*:Think investors in a corporation who don't work for it. ",
"Think about starting up a business, you make widgets, you also sell widgets, you market them, talk to customers, take orders, dispatch the items, deal with complaints etc.\nNow your company is doing well so you take on someone else to help keep up with the orders, they spend their working day just making widgets, you keep making widgets and do the rest and now keep an eye on them, making sure they do the right thing, but this is a new job for your business, its not something you have had to do before, so you make less widgets.\nYour business does well, it keeps growing, you have a fleet of people working for you, your so busy managing them you don't have time to make any widgets, or any of the other original activities, in fact there are now so many people you need people to manage them for you.\nYou now have a pyramid style organisational hierarchy.",
"These originated with military and governments -- two kinds of groups that had to manage very large numbers of people. Top leaders discovered that they could deal with the head of each region, without having to deal with every person in every region. But *within* each region, leaders had to know every person, until the region got too big, in which case they used the same trick with sub-regions.\n\nFamous users of this method included:\n\n- Imperial China\n- the Roman empire\n- the Mongolian Empire (under Genghis Khan).",
"Is there another way? \n\nHumans working together are more efficient if each one has a job they're really good at. It's called specialisation, which is why it's cheaper these days to buy a TV than it is to make one from scratch. \n\nSo if a team of humans is out hunting a deer with bows and arrows, you need people doing what they're good at - one guy flushing the deer out, one tracking, one actually shooting the deer, and so on. The most senior person here would probably be in charge, making sure that the flusher is scaring the deer in the right direction, and so on. \n\nThat allows a senior person to train more junior people while keeping them productive. \n\nIn a small team, you need one leader. But now these people get back to camp, along with 5 other teams. They compare notes, and the most senior of the leaders decides that hunting in the south seems to be better than in the north. So he tells everyone to head south the next day. A further point on the pyramid arrives - hunters, leaders, chief hunter. \n\nBut of course you also have the farmers, cooks, and others, who are organized the same way. Who coordinates between all of them? The chieftain/mayor/king, of course. \n\nSo you automatically end up with fewer people at the top leading larger numbers down the chain. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
27794g | why does eating spinach sometimes make my teeth feel weird? that gritty, chalky, dry feeling that doesn't go away for a few while. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27794g/eli5_why_does_eating_spinach_sometimes_make_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"chy1rg1",
"chy7qtg"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"The popular theory is that the oxalic acid crystals, which are found in abundance in spinach, are coating your teeth, leaving a gritty feeling. You can get the same feeling in other vegetables that are high in oxalic acid, like rhubarb.",
"Ok because I spent a little while working tech support i have to ask you: have you tried washing the spinach more thoroughly? If I'm not mistaken spinach grows in sandy soil."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
48p208 | how can babies be so loud? | Babies can scream at hearing-damaging levels -- upwards of 110db -- for an hour or more. They do this using tiny lungs, powered by a tiny diaphragm, channeling air through a tiny larynx, yet they can drown out all but the largest and loudest of adults. I understand *why* they can (survival); what I don't understand is *how* they do it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/48p208/eli5_how_can_babies_be_so_loud/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0ldnsh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Babies don't know how to control their bodies, when they grab you they do with all their strength, same when they cry. It's easy to see this as result of evolution. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2ngkk2 | why is it that when i fart in cold climate you cannot see the the fart, opposed to when i breathe out air, i can see my breath. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ngkk2/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_i_fart_in_cold_climate/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmdeyal",
"cmdf4qq",
"cmdfgd3",
"cmdhv4c",
"cmdimwo",
"cmdj2k4",
"cmdjo99"
],
"score": [
18,
100,
62,
3,
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This man.\n\nAsking the real questions.\n\n*Yer doin gods work, son*",
"Due to the difference between what you're breathing out and what you're farting (or at least I hope so...)\n\nThe primary constituent of your exhaled breath will be the Nitrogen you breathed in and your body ignored, some water vapour and Carbon Dioxide.\n\nYour fart, on the other hand, will be composed of primarily methane, Hydrogen Sulphide and Carbon Dioxide with a few other things thrown in depending on your own personal gut fauna.\n\nIf you look through those two lists, something interesting emerges: the only substance there with a freezing point high enough to be experienced outside in cold weather is water. \n\nAs you breathe out, some of the water vapour will freeze and you'll see that characteristic dragon smoke that kids know and love. Nothing in your fart will get cold enough to freeze so no way of pretending you're smoking a cigarette out of your butt, I'm afraid.\n\nTL;DR nothing in your fart is cold enough to freeze whilst water vapour in your breath can.\n\nIf you sharted though, that's a whole separate issue which needs some further investigation. Volunteers?",
"Now first I'd like to rule out that possibility that it's not just your pants diffusing and masking the fart vapour.\nHave you tried a sub-zero bare-assed fart to confirm? ",
"Because most of the time when it is cold outside you wear these things called underwear, along with pants over them. If you wanted to go outside in freezing temperatures with no pants on and blast a fart, then I'm sure you'd see vapor, or at least other people would, because it would be hard for you to twist you head around to see it yourself.",
"I distinctly recall one New Year's Eve when I was out with my brother and his wife--walking around Boston in near-zero degree (Fahrenheit) temperatures.\n\nHe was wearing fairly tight-seated blue jeans, walking ahead of us, and a visible \"vapor trail\" was emitting from his derrière at irregular frequencies.\n\nPromptly, upon noticing, his wife thrust her right boot into the offending region and exclaimed, \"STOP FARTING!!!\".\n\nIt was the finest New Year's Eve to date.",
"Is your ass in your pants when you fart? ",
"i just spoke to my friends about this a few weeks ago when it started getting colder [nyc]\n\ni told them my fear..\n\n_URL_0_\n\n^^ this made me think..overthink actually...this was the reason why i never farted in the cold ....around people atleast ..because if you can see your/others breaths then you can see the farts.......right? i was reassured by them that you couldnt [im a male & i was talking to females]\n\n\nyou may think im joking/trolling...but this is one of the most serious things ive ever talked about...and now my work history has thermal farts...(-___-\")"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=md-cv2hyc8w"
]
] |
||
5jmd7s | in america i see tons of land that is unpopulated. if nobody owned this land since america was founded how could someone obtain this property? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jmd7s/eli5_in_america_i_see_tons_of_land_that_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbh96sg",
"dbh9l7o"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Various governments took the land from the original native inhabitants, usually by force (basically they stole it). The land then became the property of these governments, or whoever they passed it to.",
"Just because it's unoccupied doesn't mean it's unowned. \n\nWhen the US was forming and expanding, it claimed a lot of land for itself. Most of that land it then sold or gave to various citizens (or other entities). A lot of these land claims were huge, so a family lived on the land and over generations sold it off to other people. Some of the land just never got sold, or wasn't developed by whoever owned it, so there is a lot of land with nothing on it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
r471h | how to blow smoke rings | For YEARS I thought that blowing smoke rings was an urban legend kinda thing, until I saw someone blow smoke rings (not just blow smoke rings, a big one followed by a smaller one right through it)
So I've been trying for some time now but I just can't do it :( | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/r471h/eli5_how_to_blow_smoke_rings/ | {
"a_id": [
"c42rtiw",
"c42slkh",
"c42stg1",
"c42t4dd",
"c42tjb3",
"c42ujn2"
],
"score": [
27,
2,
3,
3,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"For all the five year olds out there blowing smoke rings\n\n**The Inhale**\n\nTake a drag of smoke into your mouth like you normally would. Only this time, try to **take a fairly large drag**. The more smoke you have in your mouth, the more you have to work with. If you're using menthol cigarettes (Newports, especially) you will know when you have enough smoke if you start to feel the cold hitting your throat. Note: try not to burn your tongue.\n\n**Partially inhale the smoke**: \n\nKeep the smoke in your throat. This may take some getting used to. It may cause you to cough.\n\n**Move your tongue toward the back of your throat:**\n\nWith your mouth closed, draw your tongue back, keeping it pointing down toward the bottom of your mouth so that the smoke moves away from your lips.\n\n**Shape your mouth into an \"O\" shape:** \n\nShape your mouth into an \"O\" shape. But at the same time stick your lips out as if you were making an \"ooo\" sound (like in the word 'boot'). The circle should be as big as you can comfortably make it. Don't stress too much - leave room for movement. You will look rather ridiculous to everyone else, until they realize you're about to blow their minds.\n\n**Push small amounts of smoke out:**\n\nThe best way to describe how to do this is by the sound you make when you sigh, or the sound you make when someone tells you you have to do something you don't want to do. You will feel pressure and then a quick burst of smoke, but your vocal chords should not be used. The exhale should only be a guttural whisper, if anything.\n\n**The mouthing technique**\n\nAs you feel the smoke leaving your lips, push the tongue forward, still keeping it pointing down. At the same time, bring the lower jaw slightly but rapidly upward. Tuck your lips inward slightly, but rapidly. This will put a \"back-spin\" on the smoke, helping the ring stay tight. This should create a very beautiful, thick ring of smoke.\n\n(Source: _URL_0_)",
"Inhale some smoke, and stop breathing in as soon as you stop dragging. That's to say you don't want a section of clean air on top of the smoke in your lungs, you want to smoke almost escaping your mouth as you hold it there.\n\nOpen your jaw wide, until you find the point at which it locks a little and sort of snaps back as you close. Hover around this point. Now just sort of pump your jaw, while making a tight O shape with your lips. Keep your tongue out of the way.",
"This is best done with hookah smoke since it gives you SO MUCH smoke. It will be harder with a cig. Basically, inhale a fair amount of smoke. Make sure to inhale. Purse your lips together like you are whistling, but not as tight. Unfold your lips a little, like a fish would do. Now slowly exhale AND move your chin/lips like you are saying the word \"whoa\". After some practice, you should be proficient at performing Os ",
"You can blow mini smoke rings by tapping your cheek repeatedly while exhaling.",
"You gotta make a face like you're suckin a dick bro",
"To expand on this: \n\nYou can practice doing this by using apowl's technique without any smoke, and a sign you're on the right track is that your tongue's movement of air in and out of your mouth is making a slight whistling noise between your lips (if you push it out fast enough)\n\nYour mileage may vary but it's worked with the people I've taught. Good luck. \n\n\nAlso, if you're five, why are you smoking. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.wikihow.com/Blow-Smoke-Rings"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3nm09b | why can my phone record 4k video, but many 1000$ dslr's can't ? | edit: Wow, this went better than expected!! I guess I wont be waiting around for a 4K DSLR I can afford. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nm09b/eli5_why_can_my_phone_record_4k_video_but_many/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvp8ei9",
"cvp8g6r",
"cvp8uv4",
"cvpairi",
"cvplixl"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"Your phone can record shitty 4K. In reality to capture any resolution you need > CCD elements to get a clear picture. Simply having 4K CCD elements doesn't mean you're going to get a quality imagine.\n\nThere is a reason why your [say] 15 megapixel camera can take very quick and clear [say] 1080p images and get blurry and slow 4000x3000 images...",
"4k is amount of pixels. It does not necessary mean better picture quality. It isn't a bad thing, just not that important yet.",
"4K is more of a data measurement than something actually in the video. Your phone may use a full 4K's worth of data when saving the video, and may even have enough light sensors to actually put a value to each bit/pixel/thing, but it'll still be a shitty, shaky, blurry video through a cheap, likely smudged lens.\n\nAn expensive DSLR, on the other hand, uses a highly refined lens array and fine-tuned sensor(/sensor array, as the sensor is made up of itty bitty sensors for each pixel) to make sure the image taken is exactly as you see in person (\"DSLR\" actually refers to the way that the camera routes the viewfinder through the main lens to make sure you see exactly what you're going to get). On the other hand, the main sensor may have fewer megapixels or strip out detail from the saved image that the designers think you'll never be able to see to save storage \"space.\" Additionally, most cameras in that range are specifically for still images, and may be constructed or programmed in a way that makes video unfeasible or even impossible (for example, the \"DSLR\" part works by diverting light headed to the sensor through the viewfinder until you take the picture, which means you can't see through the viewfinder while the sensor is being used).",
"Competition, and physics. The smart phone market is far more profitable. Billions of people around the world want to buy one, and those that already have one still regularly upgrade them. As a result, the technologies inside mobile phones are innovated at a much faster rate.\n\nSmart phone cameras are absolutely tiny, yet fit roughly the same amount of light sensors as a large DSLR sensor. Now, traditionally that means less light hits each light sensor, as they are so much smaller. Try using most cell phones at night, and you're likely to just get a black image. However, recently phone cameras have lens elements that let in as much as 1.8f stops of light, which is brighter than many DSLR lenses. Also, it is far easier to have sensor stabilization on a small sensor than a large one. That means phones have a massive advantage when it comes to on sensor stabilization (see iPhone 6+ for example). \n\nOn sensor stabilization means that the shutter can stay open MUCH longer than a DSLR, letting in more light over time. The result is that for non-moving subjects, you can get a comparable, if not better photo out of a modern cell phone than you can a crop sensor DSLR with a kit lens (f3.5). \n\nMost DSLRs are feature poor because they run a custom OS, and major manufacturers have an established pricing model that new cameras need to fit into. Most people don't upgrade their camera every year, and it's common to buy old DSLRs. Big players know this, so they only offer tiny incremental updates across their comparative lines to avoid upsetting the market. Most of the money is made on the lenses, so there isn't a lot of incentive to offer features like 4k video anyway, especially entry or mid-range shooters. \n\nAlso, a lot of pro-togs who use DSLRs fight against what they see as unnecessary features, video being one of them. Recently a lot of film artists and bloggers have been using DSLRs to shoot video, so that may change. Just don't expect it to advance as fast as cell phones. \n\nThere is no inherent reason a larger sensor can not shoot 4k video. However, keep in mind most DSLRs have very limited processor and memory capacity compared to cell phones, which is probably the limiting factor in most DSLRs as far as 4k video goes. The larger sensor may also generate more heat. ",
"Phones today actually have very good video quality. Check out [this video](_URL_0_) as an example. It blows away most DSLRs. The only disadvantages are poor low-light performance and an inability to capture shots with shallow depth of field (the blurry background effect).\n\nThe real reason why this is the case is because the big players in the DSLR business, Canon and Nikon, don't really have an incentive to add many features to their cameras (Nikon isn't quite as bad as Canon with regards to this). When you buy a DSLR you aren't just buying the camera - you're buying into a system. In addition to the camera, you buy an assortment of lenses, flashes, and other accessories, which oftentimes are only compatible with one particular brand of camera. It's a massive hassle to switch systems and Canon and Nikon know very well that their customers won't ditch them to the competition just because the competition has a few extra features. \n\nCanon, in particular, has a line of pro video cameras (like the C100 and C300) that they want to protect and they are unwilling to self-cannibalize themselves. For example, even one of the more recent ones, the C100 Mark II, doesn't even have 4K, and it's over $5000. They don't want to offer cheaper cameras that have features their expensive professional cameras don't.\n\nThese companies are comfortable resting on their laurels, knowing that they will still sell hordes of cameras each year. When you go to the camera section at Costco or Best Buy, you'll see mostly Canon and Nikon cameras. When beginners ask for advice for their first camera, it's usually something along the lines of \"what DSLR should I get,\" not knowing that there are alternatives to DSLRs (more on that in a moment). People associate, for better or for worse, those big noisy cameras you see at weddings with picture quality and want more of them.\n\nThis seems like a big rant against Canon and Nikon but it shouldn't be viewed as such. There are very good reasons to buy Canon and Nikon DSLRs. Their support for professionals is very good - if something breaks, you'll get a replacement very soon. They include features that appeal to professionals such as dual memory card slots, in the case that one of the cards fail during a critical event like a wedding. Their autofocus tracking performance is still unrivaled. If your job depends on getting the right shots, then you'll buy Canon and Nikon, and I don't see this changing in the near future. However if you goal is getting the maximum amount of features they aren't the best choice.\n\nOther companies don't have all of this inertia and need to win as many new users as possible. Recent Sony and Panasonic cameras, for example, have 4K video. Not only that, but they have better video, free of the aliasing and moire artifacts typically found in DSLR video. Many of them have features that help you get properly focused pictures manually (some lenses don't focus automatically) in the viewfinder, and you can mount just about any lens from any manufacturer on them with an adapter. They aren't perfect, but they have the features you want, it's just that many haven't heard of them and Canon and Nikon don't seem them as too much of a threat. \n\nThe smartphone industry, in contrast, is very competitive. You have no obligation to stick to the same brand when you buy a new phone, unlike the case with DSLRs, and so the companies need to fight for your money. Flagship phones today have ridiculously high resolution screens, and even budget phones come with IPS displays. There's a new phone out with a 4K screen, and new features like this actually make headlines. \n\nTL;DR\nThe smartphone industry is very competitive and manufacturers are incentivized to add new features, unlike the DSLR industry."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://vimeo.com/140605808"
]
] |
|
5pm5zv | why does the difference between celsius and fahrenheit get smaller the lower it gets. | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pm5zv/eli5_why_does_the_difference_between_celsius_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcs7rk1",
"dcs7zjl",
"dcs80ke",
"dcscbkv"
],
"score": [
21,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A degree Celsius is exactly 80% bigger than a degree Fahrenheit. The freezing temp of water is 32 in Fahrenheit and 0 in Celsius. For every degree change in Celsius you there is a 1.8 degree change on the Fahrenheit scale.\n\nCounting down by 10s of degrees Celsius, then:\n\n0C = 32F\n\n-10C = 14F (32 - 18 = 14)\n\n-20C = -4F\n\n-30C = -22F\n\n-40C = -40F\n\nThey get closer and closer until they cross at -40.\n\nThe reason for this is just definition. Celsius is defined with the freezing temp of water at 0 and the boiling point of water at 100. Fahrenheit defines these temps as 32 and 212. The difference is 180. In other words, a 100 degree change in Celsius equals a 180 degree change in Fahrenheit.",
"Because the size of them is different.\n\nOn a graph, they would have different slopes and intersect at -40.\n\nOr put another way...\n\n\ndegrees_F = (degrees_C * 9/5) +32\n\nSo if C=-40 \nF = (-40 *9/5 ) +32 \nF= -72+32 \nF=-40\n\n",
"It doesn't get closer the smaller it gets. -100 degrees Celsius equals about -148 degrees Fahrenheit. Every 1 degree Celsius equals 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit. Just like 1 Yard equals 3 Feet.\n\nThey both have to be equal to each other at some point. Just like 0 Feet = 0 Yards, -40 degrees Celsius = -40 degrees Fahrenheit.",
"_URL_0_\n\nThis page has a graph of the two.\n\nThey are just ratios of each other. I wish I could find a better graph but that was all i could find."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mathfour.com/linear-algebra/fahrenheit-celsius-graphically"
]
] |
|
33r86c | who made all the money in the world? and who decided how much money was enough? | I know it went from trading milk for bread etc, but when they decided to use money, who decided how much money should be made? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33r86c/eli5_who_made_all_the_money_in_the_world_and_who/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqnmjig",
"cqnmnwc"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"The controlling agency for each currency decides. The Federal Reserve in the USA, the Bank of Canada for Canada, the Bank of England for the UK, etc. They decide based on their goals and estimations for the currency and the countries they issue currency for.",
"Money is not a finite quantity. Nobody \"made all of it\" and there is no limit at which there will be enough.\n\nMoney provides a solid, tangible exchange rate. Money is a measure of value, created so we can evenly establish relative value between two items. If you have a goat and I have two chickens, we have no real way of saying my two chickens are worth as much as your goat. This makes barter difficult on a large scale. If it is established that a chicken is worth $50 and a goat $100 then we can easily figure out how their relative value.\n\nMoney is also stored value. Money also allows someone with a surplus of goods to trade them for a commodity (the money) that will not spoil, expire, die or otherwise lose value. I have a hundred goats but do not need any other supplies right now. If I continue to hold onto my goats they will just cost me money to feed and house them, and some may grow old/sick and die. I don't want to trade them for chickens because I have enough cured chicken to last me through the summer. If I can sell them for a bunch of coins, then I can buy more chickens with those coins in the winter, when my current supply runs out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8he7vr | why does grease on my hands take so much more effect to take off compared to say getting some on my legs | Working on my bicycle, I got a little over zealous with some of the cleaning tools and brushes and splattered grease/dirt/gunk off my bike and onto me. It took 3 solid goes at washing my hands to get them clean, but to get the muck off my legs that also copped it in an equal amount, once and done.
Apart from gloves, is there something else I can do to make cleaning up my hands easier after i've washed my bike? Why is it so easy by comparison to get off other areas of skin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8he7vr/eli5_why_does_grease_on_my_hands_take_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyj3myw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Pure speculation, but I imagine it’s because the deep grooves and wrinkles in your palms trap and maintain grease more easily than your smoother, less tough skin in say your thigh or calf area. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ckfrwx | do we all see the same color or my red can be your blue? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ckfrwx/eli5_do_we_all_see_the_same_color_or_my_red_can/ | {
"a_id": [
"evmzhep"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Most likely that we all see colors the same since we all have similar structures in our eyes and brains to receive and process visual information. However, there's no definitive way to prove it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1lver4 | if my shirt is made of 60% cotton and 40% polyester, what part of the shirt is made up of cotton and which part for the polyester? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lver4/eli5_if_my_shirt_is_made_of_60_cotton_and_40/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc34b0e",
"cc34ttl"
],
"score": [
4,
10
],
"text": [
"It's a blend of the fibers. It's all made of a mixture containing about 60% cotton and 40% polyester.",
"That's like asking what part of a cake is flour, which is sugar & which is the eggs. They're all mixed up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8f9cyq | what are the advantages of gifting a gift card instead of cash? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8f9cyq/elif_what_are_the_advantages_of_gifting_a_gift/ | {
"a_id": [
"dy1ote1",
"dy1otid",
"dy1ozpm",
"dy1pbuc",
"dy1tin2",
"dy1v2jg",
"dy1z2be"
],
"score": [
25,
6,
4,
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Stores want you to have this feeling that it is more thoughtful than just giving cash. \n\nBut really it’s a scam. The amount of dollars lost in unused cards is staggering. \n\nDon’t be a sucker. Give cash. ",
"It can look more personal. Some people may see cash and prefer it. Some may think \"oh, they couldn't be annoyed thinking of what to buy\".\n\nBut with a gift card, while some of them can be generic for multiple choices of shops, some can be more personal. A gift card for spwcific shop u know they like or a particular restaurant.",
"Give visa gift cards so that way they can order things online from amazon or buy gas or groceries with it. I always use up every penny on my cards through multiple transactions.",
"You can give people something they want to have for themselves, for example when my son gets an iTunes gift card I'm pretty sure he is spending it on music he cannot convince me to buy for him.\n\nAnd you can give them a social thing, for example my nieces/nephews love it when I give them a bookshop gift card because they know it will be a day out with me and go to the shops and have lunch and get a book also!\n\nYou can give them a special moment thing, for example a \"here have a timeout of an hour where we will make you feel happy\" massage place gift card.\n\nBut then, a lot of them are waste of effort.",
"They are a compromise. Some believe believe that giving cash will send a message \"I put no thought into this gift.\" Choosing a gift card says \"I thought about what shop or restaurant you would probably enjoy, and chose a gift card from there.\"\n\nI imagine many recipients would prefer cash, but some probably do prefer knowing that additional thought went into the gift.",
"It forces them receiver to use the money for something \"splurgey\" for themselves that they might not have done otherwise. They can't use the money on bills or debt - they have to use it for a fancy coffee or a new shirt or something enjoyable they wouldn't have bought if they'd had the option to be more responsible with the money. ",
"They can be good for all sorts of people, but here is my first thought from when I was young: \n\nThey are thoughtful gifts for minors whose parents will make them save some portion of any straight up cash they receive. So if you give this kid forty dollars, twenty will be sent to their savings account because their parents say so. But their parents can't send any of the gift card to a savings account -- it is pure fun money.\n\nEven if you give a gift card to an adult, it makes it likely that they will buy themselves fun stuff they might not otherwise purchase. If you give them a check, it might go to their bills. Very convenient, but not fun. A gift card will let them feel no guilt buying something they don't need at all. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4gk6ik | why do headphones have lower frequency responses than speakers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gk6ik/eli5_why_do_headphones_have_lower_frequency/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2i9a5j",
"d2i9khq"
],
"score": [
8,
30
],
"text": [
"Headphones are smaller than speakers so they can't drive things like lower frequencies. Basically, your headphones are not big enough to push out large waves like a subwoofer could.\n\nAlso, any decent headphone should be able to push out 20-20khz which is the full range of human hearing, anything outside that would be felt but not heard",
"Small drivers, like those in your headphones can reproduce low frequencies but they can't do it with enough power to be heard at any real distance. \n\nTypical home speakers overcome this issue by using large drivers just for the low frequencies and using a cross-over circuit that routes more power to those drivers. \n\nThe lower the frequency the more power and larger driver you need. In a set of speakers this requires more materials and engineering to accomplish. While great sounding low frequency response can be achieved, most consumers choose a less expensive system.\n\nIt's much easier to engineer headphones that can accomplish the same thing because the drivers are so close to your ears. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2t0al5 | why do flash drives and sd cards only come with storage in roots of 2 (8 gb, 16 gb, 32 gb, 64 gb, etc.), but hard drives come in round numbers (like 500 gb, 600 gb, 700 gb, 750 gb, etc.). | Title | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2t0al5/eli5_why_do_flash_drives_and_sd_cards_only_come/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnuj4i2",
"cnuskte",
"cnut5yc",
"cnv00yb",
"cnv0mit"
],
"score": [
128,
10,
4,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"With a hard drive there is a platter that's made of a highly pure substance. The drive works by imprinting little bitty magnetic fields on that substance. The smaller the drive can make these magnetic fields and still tell them apart, the more data can be kept on the drive. It's very much like how if you have a sheet of paper you can fit more words on it if you write smaller. There's no reason to fully halve your writing size to double the amount of information.\n\nWith Flash memory each individual bit (or pair of bits, for MLC) is stored in a little structure that is constructed (a flash cell). The designers took that design, copy/pasted it, then added a bit of control circuitry to select between the two cells. Then you take *that* design, copy/paste it, and add a bit of control circuitry to select between the pairs of cells. Repeat, repeat, repeat, etc, etc, etc, until you have a single chip that can hold a large power of two bytes.\n\nEventually your technology gets better, so you take your old chip design (at least the memory portions of it), copy/paste it, and add one more layer of control circuitry to select between the two halves of the chip. Now you have a chip with twice the memory.\n\nIt's this fundamental difference between making each individual flash cell versus making a big blank slate and physically filling it up which causes the difference between storage size changes. ",
"First point to make is that hard drives for marketing reasons will use metric prefixes for their advertised capacities instead of binary ones (GB refers to 1000 MB, not 1024). There is a 'new' [IEC standard](_URL_0_) for referring to binary capacities by modified names including the the letters 'bi' for binary. Kilobyte becomes Kibibyte, Gigabyte becomes Gibibyte, and so on.\n\nOne additional point: often the space on a hard drive will be an approximation rather than an exact amount.\n\nFor example, I have a 1TB HDD here that is populated with a single NTFS volume. If I go into my device manager and look at the capacity, it tells me that I have 953869 MB with 9 MB of unallocated space. In this case, the computer is using binary prefixes.\n\nThat is, a binary Megabyte (Mebibyte, or MiB) is 2^20 or 1048576 bytes. The HDD thus has 1000213577728 bytes of storage space, which is approximately one 'metric' Terabyte, rather than 2^40 or 1099511627776 bytes. This space is typically divided into 512 byte sectors. By using the metric prefix, they provide 193941504 fewer sectors (about 92.5 GiB) than they would have to to be accurate to the binary prefix.",
"Basicly the HD always is fooling you\n\nwhen you buy a Harddrive of say 500Gb then mount it in your computer it will NOT be of 500Gb ... why because they count 1 Kb as 1000b instead of as it is 1024b\nthis iterates up to 1Mb is counted 1000*1000 instead of as the computer counts: 1024*1024 or 1 Gb as 1024*1024*1024 they companies count 1000x1000x1000 \nbasicly your 500Gb harddrive is actualy 465.6Gb\n\n\nEvery number when it comes down to computers have to be represented as a binary number. (1 or a 0). \nthis means that for every new bit you have to add your multiplying with 2 \n\n1bit = > 2 numbers\n\n2bit = > 4 numbers\n\n3bit = > 8numbers\n\n4bit = > 16 numbers \n\n5bits = 32 numbers \n\n6bits = 64 numbers \netc. \n\nTL;DR; the hardrive manufactors lies and do some big number rounding ... \nthe Flash manufactors do the same rounding but since the number is smaller you will not notice it so mutch. aka rounding 465.6Gb to 500Gb is more noticeable then rounding 7.438Gb up to 8Gb ",
"Instead of memory addresses, think of it as actual people addresses for mail. If you have a town and its covered by a post office, and all the delivery folk work full time jobs, it is pretty efficient. But if the town grows slightly, it can suddenly become very inefficient. Maybe you need just one part time worker, but that means a delivery truck and warehouse space just for that one part time job.. It would make more sense if you could just double the town at once, so that you can get a full post office and more full time delivery men, all working efficiently again. No trucks spending half their time in the parking lot, no half empty post office space, etc.\n\nThat's how the circuitry for memory, and flash, work. If you didn't double the size, and just increased it a little bit, you'd have the expensive part (the control circuits) only using a fraction of their capacity. Because memory addresses are binary, each bit you use in the address is a doubling of size. If you added a bit, and didnt double the size, you would have all the cheap parts of the memory (the actual storage space) all being used inefficiently.\n\nNow, hard drive space is different. It is more like christmas tree lights. Since different strings are different sizes (the circles on each platter), when you add more circles (by making the area of each platter smaller, so you can fit more), the controlling circuits have to do things differently than add a bit that doubles the number of addresses. It has to add a differently sized string to the list of strings it is keeping track of. So hard drive sizes tend to go up in a way that is very different than doubling.\n\nThis is all why, btw, hard drives have traditionally been sold with 1 kilobytes being an actual 1000 bytes, and memory has been sold as 1 kilobyte being 1024 bytes.",
"The space on a hard drive is allocated by powers of 2, as well -- but they are *advertised*/labeled with metric measurements (1000KB per MB instead of 1024KB, the actual amount) because it makes them seem larger."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3yq7d9 | what were gun laws in australia and the uk *before* 1990's mass shootings? | I know gun laws in Australia and the UK were significantly tightened after Port Arthur and Dunblane, respectively.
But even before that, were Aus or UK gun laws ever comparable to those in the US? Was the (pre 1990's) difference between Aus/UK and US attitudes to guns legal, cultural, or both? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3yq7d9/eli5_what_were_gun_laws_in_australia_and_the_uk/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyfo2sk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It was still a lot harder to get a gun in Australia compared to the states, even before Port Arthur and the buyback scheme.\n\nFor one thing, to get a firearm license in Australia you've always needed to have a demonstrated purpose for it, the most common being:\n\n- Agricultural need (you own a property and need a gun to control pests or put down livestock humanely).\n\n- Competitive shooter (member of a shooting club that participates in competitions).\n\n- Job-related (cops and a handful of security guards who need guns, like the guys that drive the cash trucks around and refill ATMs).\n\nIn answer to the question, Australia has never had \"comparable\" gun laws to the US because we don't have a guaranteed right to have them (as the second amendment gives).\n\nIs that a good thing or a bad thing? From one point of view, less rights is bad (I guess). On the other hand, we've had a hell of a lot less mass shootings, firearm homicides, suicides and accidents compared to the States."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
16digd | the relationship between unix, linux, and ubuntu | Very good responses, thanks. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16digd/eli5_the_relationship_between_unix_linux_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7v0f8v",
"c7v0j8q",
"c7v0xg6",
"c7v0y0j",
"c7v13ft",
"c7v18ti",
"c7v1h0f",
"c7v2g9d",
"c7v37iw",
"c7v3oi1",
"c7v3zvb",
"c7v5gag",
"c7v7zwp"
],
"score": [
41,
6,
440,
10,
5,
10,
2,
2,
4,
8,
44,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Unix is an operating system first released in 1969. It has given rise to many forks and branches which are collectively called \"Unix-likes\".\n\nLinux is a system initially released in 1991 that set out to behave like a Unix system, but without using any original Unix code i.e. Linus Torvalds wrote his own kernel which has since grown into a popular OS in its own right.\n\nUbuntu is a Linux distribution. This is a grouping of the Linux kernel and a set of software, usually together with some kind of repository system for installing and upgrading software. For example, Ubuntu comes with various useful applications pre-installed, and maintains an apt repository where you can download new packages.",
"[Unix](_URL_1_) is an operating system from 1969. It was one of the first popular multi user operating systems. More than one person could use the operating system at the same time.\n\nTo make the jump to Linux, I have to mention [MINUX](_URL_0_). It was made to be a Unix-like operating system. It was basically a research project from the mid 80s to teach people about how to make an operating system. Not wildly used.\n\nIn the early 90s some guy was learning about operating systems by working with MINIX and though \"Man, MINIX sucks. I'll make something better.\" Thus, Linux was born.\n\nThese are all operating systems. They don't actually do anything on their own.\n\nUbuntu is a distribution that uses Linux. It comes with programs that let you actually do work.",
"Unix is an operating system that was originally created at Bell Labs in the late 1960s/early '70s. In the '70s and '80s it became very popular, and various derivative versions were made - some by commercial companies.\n\nIn the early 1990s, Linus Torvalds created Linux while he was at university in Helsinki. Linux isn't based on Unix, but is more like a clone or remake. So to the user it mostly behaves the same as Unix, although technically it isn't derived from Unix. Linus wanted there to be a free version of Unix that could be used on PCs (at the time most versions of Unix cost money and required expensive computers). It became very popular, other people contributed code to it and it is now one of the most-used operating systems in the world.\n\nLinux itself is just a *kernel*. The kernel is the core of the operating system - it \"sets the stage\" on which everything else runs. The complete system is often referred to as \"Linux\", but it's actually Linux plus a whole load of different pieces of software from different projects.\n\nThere are many different Linux *distributions* (or *distros*). A distro takes all of these different components and assembles them into a complete system that you can install on your computer. Although the end result is usually largely the same, different distros do things in slightly different ways. Ubuntu is one example of a distro. Others would be Debian, Fedora, Gentoo, etc.",
"Unix is the ice cream, Linux is the whipped cream, and Ubuntu is the cherry.\n\nEdit: Unix is milk, Linux is ice cream, and Ubuntu is a banana split.",
"Secondary question: how does one pronounce Linux? ",
"So as a person who has used windows for all his life, is Linux worth trying? Apart from trying to be cool by rebelling against the man, why would it be good to try? Also can it run windows games and programs or are you limited in what software you can install? Also, what about ease of use? Thanks. ",
"Papa Unix has a son named Linux, They look a lot like eachother, speak mainly the same language. The son has a nice outfit - it is named ubuntu, and since it is his size, he can only wear it. He also has an outfit named Suse and RedHat and more outfits to be found [here!](_URL_0_)\n\nAll these outfits have buttons and zippers with a name like gnome or kde...\n\nHis father, Papa unix wears another outfit, but that's not to name here. ",
"UNIX is more of a standard these days (called POSIX), where as OS X, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc. Is UNIX-operatingsystems, and Linux is a UNIX-based operatingsystem.\n\nThe term UNIX is no longer a property of AT & T, but a property of the Open Group which governs the POSIX (or SUS) standard.\n\nI think they rest of the guys covered Linux and Ubuntu quite well.",
"_URL_0_ - with Ubuntu continuing on top of Debian.",
"Unix is Domino's pizza. Pretty good, but costs a bit of money. One day, Linus decided to share his pizza bread. He created his own pizza base and started giving it around for free. Whats more, anyone can contribute in the cooking process, and if he likes your dough, he uses it in his pizza base. Some families, like Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora add their own toppings and sauce on this base, and since they are good people give away their pizzas free. They charge a bit when companies take catering orders though, for their enterprise pizza offerings.",
"Think of it like Lego.\n\nUnix is the set of rules that define how the different bricks connect to one another.\n\nLinux is the bricks themselves.\n\nUbuntu is a Lego set that you'd buy that completes a certain project.\n\nOSX is Mega Bloks (follows the same rules outlined by Unix, but has different bricks)\n\nWindows is K'Nex (doesn't follow the Unix rules at all, has a totally different building set)",
"Things I still don't understand\n\n1) I use Linux Mint 14 KDE 64-bit. When someone asks me what operating system I use, what do I tell them?\n\n2) WTF is the difference between linux and GNU? I can't get that from the comments.\n\n3) When people say they need a NIX or *NIX expert, what EXACTLY does that mean?\n\nThanks in advance anyone who is able to tackle these questions!",
"So how are Linux, BSD, Unix, and other unix-like operating systems related to each other? From what I've read, it seems like they can run the same software. If they're different kernels, how can they all operate similarly? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINIX",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://distrowatch.com/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.freebsdnews.net/wp-content/uploads/unix_family_history_tree_1600x1200.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3qadtc | what makes a cake, or other baked good, 'fall' after it's taken out of the oven? | Does it affect taste, or is it just a presentation thing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qadtc/eli5_what_makes_a_cake_or_other_baked_good_fall/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwdexus",
"cwdfcj7"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"It is due to the yeast in a bread, when you bake bread yeast in the bread produces carbon dioxide which makes it rise. And as time goes on the gases leaks out of the bread and gasses shrinks at cold temperatures thus bread falls after a while.",
"Cakes and breads both have ingredients that produce gas (Carbon Dioxide) in them.\n\nIn cakes this is baking powder (or another rising agent like bicarbonate of soda), which is usually just part of the 'self raising flour' used in cakes. For breads this is usually yeast.\n\nThis gas forms bubbles in the mixture when in the oven, which is why breads and cakes rise.\n\nOnce out of the oven, this gas escapes pretty quickly, leaving simple air pockets.\n\nIf the bread or cake is baked properly, it is solid enough that the bread or cake stays the same shape, and the air pockets remain.\n\nIf the mixture hasn't been baked enough and is not 'set' into position, the cake or bread will 'fall' as the air pockets collapse under the weight of the mixture.\n\nSo this is a matter of taste, as bread and cakes that have 'fallen' have usually done so because they have not been baked enough."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6sq85j | why does being heavier helps a weightlifter to lift more? | When a weightlifter gets heavier body, his lifts increases. Why?
Ps. Sorry for my poor English. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6sq85j/eli5_why_does_being_heavier_helps_a_weightlifter/ | {
"a_id": [
"dleqdwf",
"dlf4umv"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Bodybuilders eat a lot and lift a lot. The more they lift, the more their muscles would consume and the more they can lift. Lifting a lot without eating a lot will lead to a plateau and you won't get larger at all.",
"Weight gets lifted by work performed by muscles.\n\nMore weight requires more work.\n\nTo do more work, you can use more muscle, or train existing muscle you have to perform work more efficiently.\n\nGiven similar physiology/training, a bigger dude will have more muscle, and will be capable of performing more work, lifting more weight."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1pm83q | when a picture is taken where the model is looking at the lens, how come the model is looking at you where ever you are looking at the picture from? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pm83q/eli5_when_a_picture_is_taken_where_the_model_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd3qir7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"She's not, it's your brain not quite understanding what a picture is, and so attempting to trick you into thinking she's interested and wants to copulate.\n\nBut seriously, it's your brain extrapolating the information it senses of a 2D object with static simulated depth, causing the depth to be calculated irrespective of the position of the observer. The depth information of looking at her from the side doesn't exist in the picture, therefor your brain decides you're looking straight at her."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3rnuvb | how has the russian empire managed to hold onto half of asia for a millennium? | How has the [Russian Empire|USSR|Russian Fed.] managed to hold-on to half of Asia for a millennium, when it was largely agrarian until the 1930s? Why haven't other Eurasian countries succeeded in taking significant territory from it?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rnuvb/eli5_how_has_the_russian_empire_managed_to_hold/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwpp9nl",
"cwpps5a"
],
"score": [
3,
9
],
"text": [
"Because Russia happened to be situated next to North Asia (which didn't have gunpowder weapons, large populations, or organized polities) and other European powers weren't. \n\nRussia's only major rivals in Asia were Qing Era China and, much later, Japan. Wars with China tended to end pretty inconclusively and didn't really result in much territory changing hands and the Russo-Japanese war kept Russia out of Korea and Southern Manchuria. \n\nBasically, Russia's Asian land has had no neighbors with commensurate power to Russia and an interest in taking that land.",
"err the russian empire ended in 1917. started in 1721 under peter. some half of a millennium eh?\n\nmost of that territory is fairly useless for people \n\n_URL_0_\n\nits got minerals and resources, but hard to access makes it not such a tasty target.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia"
]
] |
|
974t8h | how does modern surveying for construction projects work? | Is it fundamentally the same process as when George Washington did it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/974t8h/eli5_how_does_modern_surveying_for_construction/ | {
"a_id": [
"e45oixz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Surveying is fundamentally the same as it has been since Ancient Greece. Except now the instruments are electronic. The most commonly used instrument is called a total station, it looks like a big camera with a keyboard on it. The surveyor holds a rod with a reflecting prism on it on top of whatever he wants to shoot, and he can control the total station with a pocket PC.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6hizvf | with all the crap it goes through, how does corn stay intact in the end? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6hizvf/eli5_with_all_the_crap_it_goes_through_how_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"diyrwrs"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When you eat sweet corn, a few days later it appears that the kernels have gone through your digestive system intact. That's because you aren't doing close enough inspection. \n \nThe outer hull of the kernel is a very tough material that is hard for the human digestive tract to deal with. But the inside portion is not, and is typically digested. If you were to extract the remnants from your feces you'd find this out for yourself. But I really don't recommend this as a hobby. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
98ptlb | why do certain materials like glass feel cold to the touch when they’ve been sitting at room temperature? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/98ptlb/eli5_why_do_certain_materials_like_glass_feel/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4hvfsz",
"e4hvgez",
"e4hwajc"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They conduct heat well, and since your hand is warmer than room temperature, they conduct heat away from your hand. This reduction in temperature of your hand reaults in feeling cold. ",
"Because we don’t really feel temperature, but difference in temperature. And some materials like glass or metal conducts temperature better than others, like wood for example. So what happens is you’re feeling your body temperature escaping faster into some items ( remember your body temp is usually around 37C and room temperature is I guess around 20C )",
"Some materials are better conductors of heat. Materials that are better at conducting heat will often feel cold to the touch because they are good heat sinks. They will pull the heat away from your hands more efficiently than other materials "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6w321s | why do some men as they get older, their nose and ears get bigger? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6w321s/eli5_why_do_some_men_as_they_get_older_their_nose/ | {
"a_id": [
"dm51zem",
"dm53454",
"dm5bnuh"
],
"score": [
11,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Because while most other tissues and structures in your body stop growing sometime after puberty, cartilage continues to grow throughout your life. Since your nose and ears are largely formed by cartilage, they get bigger and bigger with respect to your head and face as you get old. Add to this the effect of long term gravity induced drooping of the earlobes, which makes them look even bigger.",
"It happens to all people as they age.\n\nCartilage continues to grow your whole life.\n\nThe effect is more pronounced when you have a bigger nose to begin with.",
"The hormones, that cause the pattern of thinning and hair loss in the scalp, also cause the mass of Vellus Hairs that are naturally present in the nose and ears to grow darker, longer and grow coarser. It is believed that the increased growth of hair in the nose and ears among aging men is tied to the same causes as male patterned baldness.\n\nThe different reactions within the different hair follicles relate to the way men develop secondary sexual characteristics (which is usually governed by the levels of hormones in the body). So while the testosterone can result in the loss of scalp hair, it can lengthen and coarsen the hair on other parts of the body.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9k09pr | how the simple concept of electron shells you learn in middle school relates to concepts about atomic orbitals | In middle school, we learned that the first electron shell has 2 electrons, and the subsequent shells have 8.
Later in high school, we learned about atomic orbitals, and how oxygen has 2 electrons in the 1s shell, 2 in the 2s shell, and 4 in the 2p shell.
This concept of electron shells is quite different from the simple version I learned in middle school, so how does the simple concept expand to the concept of orbitals? Or are these separate theories? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9k09pr/eli5_how_the_simple_concept_of_electron_shells/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6vfr83",
"e6vgcep"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The concepts are sort of linked, and it’s still somewhat useful to think of orbitals in terms of shells. \n\nThe shells are made up of atomic orbitals which I’m sure you know are essentially volumes of space where electrons are likely to be. \n\nEach new shell introduces a new type of orbital, that’s why each shell can hold more and more electrons. Despite it being taught, it isn’t 2,8,8,8,..., it’s actually 2,8,18,32,...\n\nThe first shell only has the 1s orbital, which is why the first shell can hold 2 electrons. \n\nThe second shell has the 2s and 2p orbitals (note there’s three p orbitals in a shell, from the second shell onwards), so the second shell can have 2 electrons in the 2s orbital, and 2 electrons in each of the three 2p orbitals for a total of 8 all together. \n\nDoes that help somewhat? As with most things in chemistry you have to start with an easy to understand model before complicating it with reality. ",
"Well, the \"little electron planets going around the nucleus star\" is great for middle school because it leverages other science students know - like planets.\n\nAlas, it's nothing like correct. Electrons are not hard little balls with a circular orbit. Electrons are better considered as a cloud of possible positions, science isn't thinking in terms of \"the width of an electron\".\n\nSince electrons are all charged alike, they repel each other. That means you can't have a bunch of them in an orbit, like train cars on a track. You can pack 2 into the 1S electron shell because because a \"sharp\" shell (where the S comes from) is a compact cloud but if the electrons have opposite spin they can \"share\".\n\nThe 2S shell is just like 1S, only farther out. There are 3 different 2P shells, which are long and thin, because the Universe has 3 spacial dimensions. The North-South P shell doesn't interfere with the East-West one or the Up-down one for a total of 3 with 2 electrons each. This gives 8 in the second orbital.\n\nAt the third orbital there is one 3S, three more 3P, plus 5 3D (for diffuse, not the normal 3D) and so on and so forth. See Wikipedia's article on [electron shells](_URL_0_) for more orbitals.\n\nThis clearly isn't the easiest way to explain things to an ELI13 middle schooler, so they use the Rutherford model (the science name for the \"little electron planets going around the nucleus star\" explanation)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_shell"
]
] |
|
3of13g | when shots are fired in the air why do more people not die from bullets returning to the ground? | You see people on news reports firing into the air in protests or celebration. Are people killed/injured by bullets returning to the ground and if they are, why aren't they killed/injured? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3of13g/eli5_when_shots_are_fired_in_the_air_why_do_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvwn987",
"cvwoqzx"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"When bullet reach its highest point it looses all energy it got from explosion of gun powder. Then the only force affecting it is gravity. Gravity it pretty weak. So wean bullet fall down it quickly reach terminal velocity restricted by air friction. Which isnt too high to seriously harm person. Its like throwing a penny from empire state building, it cant kill anyone.",
"The vast majority of land does not have a person standing on it. People are occasionally hit by bullets fired randomly into the air, but most of them just hit the ground where nobody is standing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5xf6er | how did we know right away that mammoths were wooly, but it took us a long time to figure out that dinosaurs were feathery? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xf6er/eli5_how_did_we_know_right_away_that_mammoths/ | {
"a_id": [
"dehlsrt",
"dehlwkr"
],
"score": [
4,
7
],
"text": [
"Because scientists have actually been able to find mammoth remains with the skin (and fur) still intact (intact enough anyway)\n\nBut with dinosaurs they didn't have that luxury and had to make deductions based on fossilised skeletal remains. ",
"Mammoth fossiles are around [30,000 years old](_URL_0_), and they largely lived during an ice age and many were preserved in ice enough that [their fur might be intact](_URL_1_).\n\nDinosaurs are, at the very least, [65 million years old](_URL_3_), give or take a few thousand, and their extinction was largely brought on by a cataclysmic event in Earth's history. Compare that to the Himalayan mountains, which might be as young as 55 million years old. That's not just an idle comparison, the Himalayans were probably formed (or mostly formed) when India and Asia collided. Could you imagine what happened to any dinosaur fossils buried in that area? 65 million years is a long, *long* time for fossils to survive.\n\nAlso, we've known for decades that many dinosaurs had feathers. The general public just never picked up on it, especially with movies like Jurassic Park depicting them as reptilian and without feathers. Recent discoveries are less that dinosaurs had feathers, and more *which* of them had feathers.\n\nEDIT: [Here's the timeline of Earth](_URL_2_). Mammoths lived during the Pliocene epoch. Dinosaurs went extinct in the Cretaceous period. It's been a long time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2212946/Almost-intact-carcass-30-000-year-old-woolly-mammoth-11-year-old-boy.html",
"http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/woolly-mammoth-found-frozen-siberia-2041039",
"http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/media/2011InfoG/Images/30.05.2011/20110528_WOC974_960.jpg",
"https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110712211016.htm"
]
] |
|
axyjqn | why do new phones cost more and more but don’t seem to be that „new“? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/axyjqn/eli5_why_do_new_phones_cost_more_and_more_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehwxt1d",
"ehwzubv",
"ehxknuv"
],
"score": [
4,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"when a technology gets older (mature) changes (innovations) becomes relatively smaller because the technology gets more developed.\n\nfor example 10 years ago the smartphone was a breakthrough and innovations were large and fast but now the smartphone is pretty much developed so there is less to add in a new phone untill there is another breakthrough",
"Very simple: because people are willing to pay for it. Top-level phones also have a very nice position right between life necessity and luxury status symbol. \n\nOn the one hand, for the amount of entertainment and business utility it provides, it's understandable for people to spend amounts that are similar to a laptop. \n\nOn the other hand, $1000 is cheap for a luxury product. The amount of interaction (be it through Instagram likes, or \"Is that the new iPhone?\" questions IRL) a new iPhone gets, is a lot higher than similarly priced watches, jewelry, etc. and it's definitely a lot cheaper than a nice car. ",
"Another big change that hasn't been brought up yet is the way that people purchase phones. The common practice used to be 2 year contracts, where cellular service providers would sell phones at a loss of a few hundred dollars and customers would sign a contract for 2 years of service, the provider would set service prices high enough to cover not only their operating expenses, but also the money they lost on the phone sale.\n\nThen T-Mobile started a no-contact marketing campaign where they portrayed contracts as a bad thing and got a lot of people to switch over to them. Because customers would typically use the same phone from their previous provider and because T-Mobile didn't have to build a hidden phone cost into the service cost, this resulted in lower customer bills and a lot of growth for T-Mobile. When T-Mobile customers did want a new phone, instead of paying, say $200 for a $600 phone, they instead paid the full $600, just spread out over a couple years. This worked really well for T-Mobile because they weren't losing hundreds of dollars each time they sold a phone.\n\nIt worked so well that other providers followed suit. This changed how people view phone prices. With a 2 year contract, the upfront cost of the phone increased along with the full price. If you paid $200 for a $600 phone, you would pay $400 for an $800 phone or $600 for a $1000 phone. Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars upfront. But if you spread the cost of the phone over a couple years, each $100 of price increase adds only about $4.16 to the monthly bill, making it easier for people to afford more expensive phones."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
w268q | libor | I get what it sorta means: The rate at which banks borrow money from each other. I'd like a better analytic approach and the ramifications of is scandal.
Vid:
_URL_0_
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/w268q/eli5_libor/ | {
"a_id": [
"c59kneb"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"[Searched](_URL_0_)\n\nRelevant [discussion](_URL_1_)\n\nOriginal question by [willowthewizard](_URL_3_)\n\n > I just learned of this recently and am a little unsure of how the whole apparatus worked as I don't have much of a background in Finance/Accounting/Econ. Just how big of a deal is this? If it is a big deal, how come it isn't getting very much coverage?\n\nTop comment courtesy [Klarok](_URL_2_)\n\n > LIBOR stands for London InterBank Offered Rate and it's a measure of the average amount of interest that banks have to pay if they borrowed from other banks.\n\n > **Let's use a simple analogy:**\n\n > You have 10 friends and each of you has Lego. Now, sometimes you like to borrow each others' Lego pieces so that you can have more to play with. Of course that means that your friend has less so you have to give your friend something in return. Let's say that you have to give your friend 8 lollies to borrow his Lego for 1 hour.\n\n > If I go around and ask all of your other friends the same question, they answer 9, 7, 10, 8, 8, 7, 10, 11 and 6. So we would say that, on average it costs you 8.4 lollies to borrow Lego for 1 hour.\n\n > Now, let's make up an imaginary person called Jack. Jack comes to you and wants to borrow Lego for an hour. If you lend him your Lego and charge less than 8.4 lollies then you could have gotten more lollies by just lending to one of your friends - so you have to charge Jack at least 8.4 lollies. You could also just borrow Lego from your friend with the same result. So what you do is charge Jack 8.4 lollies plus a bit extra for yourself. Let's call it 9.4 lollies.\n\n > Now, tomorrow, one of your friends decides to rent out Lego for 5 lollies per hour. This changes the average down to 8 lollies. You could keep charging Jack 9.4 lollies but he'd probably get upset at you so you change your rate to 9 lollies so you can still get to keep the same amount of lollies for yourself.\n\n > What you've done is set your borrowing rate equal to \"lolly average\" + 1.\n\n > **Right, back to the real explanation:**\n\n > In the real world, millions of contracts are written with rates at (LIBOR + x)%. If you knew what the LIBOR rate was going to be in the future, you could easily make an awful lot of money because lots of those deals are interest rate swaps to hedge against LIBOR changes.\n\n > During the financial crisis, Barclays (and presumably other banks under investigation) reported that the cost that they paid to borrow from other banks was lower than what it actually was. They did this because it made their own accounts look a lot better and made them look like a better deal for investors.\n\n > The effect it had though was to make LIBOR lower than what it should have been. It's interesting to note that Barclays has admitted to altering its reported rate but that the rate reported by Barclays was not the lowest reported rate for that period. That's a pretty good indication that \"everyone was doing it\".\n\n > It's a big deal for several reasons.\n\n > First, if you were an investor in the banks that under-reported, they had misrepresented material information which is fraud (or at least a Sarbanes-Oxley violation); you could sue and probably win.\n\n > Second, it opens up the avenue for insider trading on the agreed (lower) LIBOR rate which is itself criminal fraud. Someone who did an interest rate swap without knowing that LIBOR was fixed could have lost a lot of money.\n\n > There doesn't really need to be any more downsides than that. The potential is there for massive civil suits, criminal cases and unwinding of contracts based on LIBOR. It's a big deal.\n\n > As for your second question, it's actually getting a lot of coverage in Britain and Europe. I could work up a conspiracy theory as to why the USA mainstream media seems to be ignoring it if you like :)"
]
} | [] | [
"http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/the-mob-learned-from-wall-street-eliot-spitzer-on-the-cartel-style-corruption-behind-libor-scam/"
] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=libor&restrict_sr=on",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/vzg93/eli5_can_someone_explain_the_ongoing_libor/",
"http://www.reddit.com/user/Klarok",
"http://www.reddit.com/user/willowthewizard"
]
] |
|
1rpfj9 | for non-americans - why does black friday incite such excitement? what is going on in the typical 'riot' videos each year? what are they buying? | I'm familiar with the general idea of what Black Friday in America is - it's the day when the holiday season sales start. But what I don't understand is how it seems to inspire such excitement and (sometimes) riotous behaviour (as an example, see this video): _URL_0_
Here are some related questions:
* In such videos, people always seem to be grabbing items at random. Is this true? Or do they have specific items in mind?
* If they're grabbing items at random (just because they're 'cheap'), what is the rationale behind that? Do people grab and buy lots of things they don't even actually want?
* If people aren't grabbing items at random, do they decide before-hand? Do places like Walmart advertise, let's say, iPads as 20% off, and then the riots happen because everyone had a pre-meditated goal to grab that one particular item?
* Why are sales such a big deal to begin with? Sure, I like to save money as much as the next guy. But mostly I can't be bothered going out of my way for the sake of a sale. I don't mind paying a bit more money for the sake of convenience - even though I only work part-time and have a low income. I certainly wouldn't go into a crowded and panicked situation (like in that video) just because of a chance to save a little money. Maybe this is just me, but I would have thought most people would not risk a dangerous situation like that.
* Other countries have equivalent days to Black Friday as well. For example, most Commonwealth countries (including here) have major holiday sales that start on Boxing Day. But although a lot of people certainly go shopping on that day, they don't *run* through the front doors! They don't run around the store grabbing items, or battling each other. They just shop in a regular fashion. So I guess my question is - what makes Black Friday in the US so different to the equivalents in other countries? What inspires all the excitement?
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rpfj9/eli5_for_nonamericans_why_does_black_friday/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdpj4kd",
"cdpj66t",
"cdpjn88",
"cdpjukz",
"cdpk9n8",
"cdpkjj5",
"cdpkjs4",
"cdpltup",
"cdplz18",
"cdpma8t",
"cdpmikl",
"cdpoxnl",
"cdpptl8",
"cdprjmu",
"cdprw1r",
"cdpwffs"
],
"score": [
7,
243,
6,
10,
2,
3,
3,
3,
21,
2,
3,
11,
2,
4,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Honestly it's not as bad as the media makes it out to be. I personally don't get black Friday it's the one day out the year I never shop but for others it's so hyped up that we stand in line for a new cheap flat screen.\nNormally what stores would do is pass out tickets for the big items on sell so you're guaranteed to get one off whatever you're looking to buy.\nEach year there's the must have toy every one scrambles for. \nIt's a day based in consumption and feeling you got a great deal. Others actually see is family time. \n",
"First of all, before answering any of the questions, let me emphasize that the things that non-Americans see are highly atypical and not representative of what happens everywhere. There's 300 million or so of us, and if you see 300 people acting crazed, that's one person in a million. You aren't seeing the vast majority of the other calmer, bored, tired shoppers who wait patiently in long lines in stores where nothing happens. These things don't make the news. \n\n > In such videos, people always seem to be grabbing items at random. Is this true? Or do they have specific items in mind?\n\nIn the videos you see, they probably aren't grabbing things randomly, but there's so many people, that it's hard to calmly make your way through the crowd and tapping someone on the shoulder and saying, \"pardon me, can you pass me one of those?\" They most likely have items in mind, but the craziest people seeking out the best deals are usually after expensive, large items, like television sets and it's difficult to just grab one of the shelf, tuck it under your arm and get out of the way.\n\n > If they're grabbing items at random (just because they're 'cheap'), what is the rationale behind that? Do people grab and buy lots of things they don't even actually want?\n\nThis sometimes happens, but it's far from the norm.\n\n > If people aren't grabbing items at random, do they decide before-hand? Do places like Walmart advertise, let's say, iPads as 20% off, and then the riots happen because everyone had a pre-meditated goal to grab that one particular item?\n\nOh God, does Walmart advertise. I was over at my parent's place on Thanksgiving night and within one hour of watching a football game, I must have seen 6 Walmart ads, no exaggeration. We get ads in the mail, ads in the newspaper, and ads on radio and television nonstop for days. It's really impossible not to know that there are stores having deals on Friday. As you've noted, yes, often stores like Walmart will feature one big item that's normally $400, marked down to $200 and a few people every year get zealous about being the person to get it, because quantities are usually limited - just enough to get people excited and in the store, but not always enough for everyone to buy it who wants it.\n\n > Why are sales such a big deal to begin with? Sure, I like to save money as much as the next guy. But mostly I can't be bothered going out of my way for the sake of a sale. I don't mind paying a bit more money for the sake of convenience - even though I only work part-time and have a low income.\n\nI'm not justifying the kind of crazy behavior that makes the news in other parts of the world about us, but it's not just a little more, at least percentage. Some items are marked down 50%, so if you don't get it now, you will be paying literally double if you go a week later. In the case of the really expensive things, this can mean a few hundred dollars and for many who don't earn much, this may mean a lot of hours. If you earn $10/hr, $200 off a tv is half a week's pay.\n\n > what makes Black Friday in the US so different to the equivalents in other countries? What inspires all the excitement?\n\nHonestly, companies advertise for weeks, the media hypes it up to *create* a story, then *reports* a story, where it happens and makes it seem like it's a huge thing, and so what's normally less hectic than shopping on Christmas Eve has now become a major deal with huge crowds and chaos.\n\nDon't think the U.S. is unique, though. When H & M stores were opening in Europe and other parts of the world, there were crowds lined up to the stores. When big name movie stars show up at premieres in London and the like, fans line up for hours. Fanaticism isn't localized to the U.S.",
"I think it has mostly to do with herd behavior. There are truly good deals out there, and once weak minded people are in an amalgamous group, things can get volatile quickly. Sort of like how crowds after a soccer match can get nasty.\n\nI worked in retail from 2006 - 2010 and worked all four of those black Fridays. \n\nOnce I was working in a huge mall where the stores inside are individually gated off until it is their time to open. It was particularly frigid outside, so mall security allowed to hoards into the mall early, but they had to wait at their chosen store for the gate to open. When I went out onto the floor, the crowd was howling and shaking the gate. It was like something out of a gladiator movie!\n\nEDIT: Also, yes people do have plans ahead of time. A coworker of mine has been pouring iver sales ads since they started \"leaking\". He made a spreadsheet of all the items he's interested in, then went late on wednesday to map out the store so he would know exactly where the items would be. Then he developed a plan of attack and cane out with everything he intended to.",
"To quote the late great George Carlin:\n\"It's the new national pastime. Fuck baseball. It's consumption. The only true lasting American value that's left. Buying things. Buying things. People spending money they don't have on things they don't need.\"",
"It's kind of a case of the emperor's new clothes. Nobody wants to admit that they don't see the value in crowding into a circle of retail hell at some ungodly hour to maybe get their hands on something they could have purchased online for the same great \"sale\" price they're getting in stores. Since Black Friday is the closest thing to a religious retail holiday, stores push the issue with over the top ads about each year being insane and better than ever. It's all to contribute to ths mythology of the day.\n\nAs for the riots you see on TV, those are exaggerated, uncommon cases. Shoppers, while stupid and insensitive, aren't always as violent and beligerent as the media would suggest. Mostly, people come in with maybe one or two ad items in mind, but are really there just to browse the rumored fantastic deals. They seldom find anything worth getting up at 3 in the morning for, and hey, guess what, consumers hate crowded stuffy megastores as much as the minimum wage mules who work there and as a consequence, they act like bigger pricks than usual.",
"Honestly, Black Friday has always been a joy for me...\n\nWe have one of the biggest walmart in the area and it is always well stocked if you come early that is.\n\nAnyway, much of this has to do with timing and expectation. You are out with your family in the cold and just want a nice Christmas present for your loved ones, but when you get to the location, you see piles of people. This often results in a highly competitive instinct to get what you have came for.\n\nWhat shows are people's expectation that they come away with something to show for it.\n\nLast night, i did most of my shopping at boscov and jc Penney (had to get some dress clothes for myself and brother in law) and it was pretty hectic.\n\nWe then decided to head down to the walmart next to the mall, and we weren't able to get anything worth our trip. Thankfully we didn't have to travel a long way, but for families that want that special something, it is not unusual that they go crazy.\n\nFor your point about other countries, you haven't really been to Singapore during one of those computer expos or that great Singapore sale, have you? I have seen grandmas fighting over a silk blouse.. It is not an usual occurrence as you make it sound to be.\n\nGet the price of popular items extremely low, have very limited quantities and advertise the heck out of it so that everyone knows about that Ipad that comes with a $100 dollars gift card or that $98 tv... and have a sufficiently large population in a small area. You have the exact recipe for the same outcome.\n\nPosted from my ipad mini ",
"Part of it is Friday is a holiday for most people that don't work in the service industries. All the people in suits that normally make news are at home, so it's a slow news day anyway, and since it's a holiday people start to go shopping for Christmas. The media and the retailers have hyped it up in recent years, with say $1000 flat screen TVs marked down to $499.99, as \"doorbusters\" They lose money, but not a lot as they only have 10 of them per store, so people line up the night before and camp out, and maybe 1,000 people mob the store when it opens hoping to get one, and when they don't they still buy other things. There's also a trend among stores to one-up each other by opening earlier than the competition, (you can probably only get to the doorbuster at the first store of the day), so stores are opening earlier and ealier, first early morning Friday, then midnight Friday, and now even Thanksgiving evening, which is creating more news stories about how service workers are getting shortchanged as far as spending time with their families, (Thanksgiving in the US is when everyone comes home to grandma's house to eat dinner). ",
"It incites excitement because we have been turned into consumer zombies by Madison Avenue. The riot videos are people fighting over junk that they think they want, much like a pack of wolves fighting over a deer carcass. What they are buying is plastic shit made by slave labor in China.",
"Most Americans don't care about Black Friday. And most Black Friday sales are civil and non-crazy.\n\nOne thing to keep in mind is that 20% off is not a Black Friday sale. That's like a typical every day sale. \n\nBlack Friday sales can be as much as 75-80% off on big ticket items. Shoppers can literally save hundreds of dollars for their Christmas shopping on this one day.\nOh and that plasma TV that's 70% off that you would never be able to afford otherwise? There's only 12 of them. And there's 200 people waiting in line to start shopping. \nThat's why crazy shit happens. Big ticket items in limited supply discounted significantly. \nIts also why the real crazy stuff mainly only happens at Wal-Mart and Best Buy. ",
"For me, Black Friday is a family tradition with my dad. As the food is cooking on thanksgiving, we pull out the ads and browse the deals... mapping out the stores we want to go to at the specific times, and what we will be getting at each store. We wake up at 3 am, grab hot chocolate and wait in the freezing weather outside the store. As soon as the doors are open, we bolt inside, rushing for the deals that we planned for and many other random bargains. By 7 am, we've hit all our stores and we grab breakfast at the pancake corral. Then, we come home for a nap, and later we consolidate everything we bought and sort out what we're going to return the next day. It's a fun tradition, but it's been ruined since stores started opening on thanksgiving day\n\nFrom my experience, people are rarely violent... I've never seen anything bad. That being said, there is a definite rush for the good deals. I remember one morning they opened up one door and people were filling in, but we were so far back that we wouldn't be able to snag one of the thirty $50 bluray players (back when they were never cheaper than $100). But then! A miracle! The other door opens and my sister and I rush through, sprint across the store, hurdling over decorations and into the pile of electronics on sale. That day, we ended up with three bluray players. My dad was proud. \nOther deals inspire other people to come out. I mean, I normally wouldn't buy an Xbox because I can't justify the expense. But two years ago, Wal-Mart had an Xbox with Kinect and two games for $100! It would be my only chance to get an Xbox. I didn't get the deal though because that year Wal-Mart opened on thanksgiving. Really sad that our tradition is gone...",
"I'm American and much of what you see and hear about Black Friday is fabricated by corporations in an attempt to increase sales. \n\nFor me, Black Friday is Stay-Out-Of-Town Day. ",
"I participate because there is no better way to train for the inevitable zombie apocalypse.",
"I have never gone to stores on Black Friday and I have no plans to ever do so in the future. That said, I talked with a friend of mine who goes every year and she told me she goes for the rush and usually doesn't even buy anything. Apparently, it is exciting to camp out in front of a store overnight and be one of the first people in when the store opens. She goes straight for one of the big sale items and grabs one, takes it to a random part of the store where there aren't very many people and leaves it on a shelf, then goes back to watch \"the feeding frenzy\" going on where the big sale items are displayed. I think she likes the feeling of being in on the secret that there is one of those items a few aisles over and no one knows it. I personally don't understand the appeal of her \"urban camping and hunting\" trips as she calls them, but her family has been doing this for years. \n \nI agree with most of the other posts here that it's about the hype. I don't have cable and my work plays ad-free satallite radio, but I still have heard countless ads on the radio in my car and my mailbox has been stuffed full every day for the last week with doorbuster ads and crap like that. I think people like the competition and the feeling of \"winning\" the chance to buy one of the big sale, limited supply items.",
"I'm pretty sure that the second clip in your linked video isn't in America, I seem to remember it being in Brasil.\n\nedit: [i was right](_URL_0_)\n\nSo this isn't just an American phenomenon",
"Black Friday is what happens when you have a society so obsessed with consumerism that it can no longer think straight. ",
"Those are niggers in the video. That's why. They are always violent\n\nTL;DR Niggers"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xL8rE9DT4g#t=157"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HWY98Jspos"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
bz8j0j | how is it that mitch mcconnell can block any vote in the senate, even bipartisan ones | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bz8j0j/eli5_how_is_it_that_mitch_mcconnell_can_block_any/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqqtzhk",
"eqr14lj",
"eqr1x71"
],
"score": [
84,
6,
5
],
"text": [
"The Senate majority leader controls the Senate's schedule. If they don't schedule a bill to be considered, then it just languishes in Senate limbo.\n\nThe Senate minority leader can attempt to override this scheduling power by making a motion to have a bill considered. If that motion passes with a majority vote, then the minority leader gets to place the bill on the calendar.\n\nWhen a bill doesn't get scheduled that means one of three things:\n\n1) The bill's text is currently being negotiated.\n\n2) The majority leader is serving as a scapegoat of sorts for a bill that isn't popular enough to pass but which would consume a lot of the Senate's time being debated. \n\n3) The majority leader personally doesn't want the bill to pass and they are more popular than the bill is.",
"In addition to what /u/ughhhhh420 said, the Senate is unique in the US in that it effectively requires a 60-40 majority for regular legislation to pass.\n\nThis is because if there are fewer than 60 votes for something, one of the 40+ minority can filibuster the bill. To filibuster is to \"talk a bill to death\". Or when a senator goes up and refuses to yield the floor for hours upon hours and the vote fails. This can't happen with a 60 vote majority, because there's a rule that if 60+ senators agree, they can force the filibustering Senator to stop.\n\nFor instance, the Democrats have 47 Senators and the Republicans 53. It wouldn't be uncommon for a few moderate Republicans to join with Democrats but only have combined 59 votes. \n\nIf this happens, the Democrats might count the (bipartisan) votes ahead of time and choose not to push through with a vote if there's less than 60. McConnell might get the blame anyway.",
"simply put. The Senate Majority Leader chooses which bills everyone gets to vote on.\n\nIf he doesn't like it, he just won't let people vote on it.\n\nThere are ways to get around it, but they require everyone else to disagree with the Leader."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3i0cv9 | why do these companies want our info from all these apps "invading our privacy"? and what are they doing with it? | From Facebook to Spotify to some free time killer game in the app store, it seems like everyone is interested in our pictures, contacts, gps pings and what not. Who are these apps selling this info to and why do those guys want that info in the first place? Is this the first steps that will lead to the Corporate Congress? Or is it really to try and get me to buy Pepsi over Coke? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i0cv9/eli5_why_do_these_companies_want_our_info_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuc5nwn"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They are trying make ads that are more relevant towards you. If they find that you've been looking at cars on the internet then you might be in the market for a new car. If they know that you have a wife and two kids then they know you're probably not interested in a BMW Z4. If they know your commute to work brings you by two car dealerships then they know you have a good chance of going to that dealership.\n\nIf they know your wife just bought a pregnancy test kit and a larger purse to keep baby stuff in then they know she might be interested in baby clothes in 9 months (which is how the father of a teenage girl actually found out her daughter was pregnant because target started sending her ads for baby stuff)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2mhxmj | why does a human eye see noise in low-light conditions just like a camera lens does? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mhxmj/eli5_why_does_a_human_eye_see_noise_in_lowlight/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm4dhcy",
"cm4glxh"
],
"score": [
8,
5
],
"text": [
"The rod, the cell responsible for low-light vision in humans, is very sensitive to light, but also not very precise in terms of image quality. Without the sharp, color-seeing cones that need more light to function, we are left with cells that \"misfire\" often and our brain sometimes tries to make sense of the visual disturbances inaccurately.",
"Do you have an image of what you're talking about?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
u3hf3 | why do i feel tired and sluggish when its hot out, but active and energetic when its cold out? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/u3hf3/why_do_i_feel_tired_and_sluggish_when_its_hot_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4s281c"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Your body needs to dissipate heat to function properly (Unless your cold blood in which case, congrats on learning how to use a computer.)\n\nWhen it's hot out your body has to use alot of energy and nutrients to cool you down. Usually by sweating.\n\nAs the temperature is lowers your body loses more heat to the environment and uses less energy to maintain it's temperature. This makes you feel energetic. \n\nAs the temperature continues to go eventually you body will lose too much heat and require energy to keep you warm so your don't die :( At this point you will feel sluggish and tired."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8uvytw | what defines a substance as being a 'drug'? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8uvytw/eli5_what_defines_a_substance_as_being_a_drug/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1iq7ri",
"e1is1p1"
],
"score": [
11,
4
],
"text": [
"Drugs are specifically any compound other than a nutrient or essential dietary ingredient, which, when administered to a living organism, produces a biological effect.",
"A drug is a substance (other than food that gives us nutritional support) that when consumed causes temporary physiological or psychological changes in the body. It could be argued that Vitamin C supplements give us nutritional support, so would not fall under this category, or it could be said that they're just a different category of drug compared to psychoactive drugs like caffeine and alcohol. I guess what stops all chemicals being classified as drugs is that it would be super impractical, as the chemicals we do classify as drugs have important effects that we need to be distinct from other chemicals for our ease of reference. Every chemical does affect our body in some way, but some effect it in specific ways that are important for us to know, whether that's giving us more energy, curing illness, numbing pain, or causing negative and addictive reactions. Marketing probably also plays a part, as the word 'drug' carries negative connotations, and 'supplements' sound much friendlier. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4n6yeu | how do geysers work? | I am fascinated by geysers, but how do they work? Natural springs I understand: underground aquifers being squeezed by the crust forces the water out of tiny holes, but when it comes to geysers, what mechanics are involved? It seems like they shouldn't be as volatile or as unpredictable as they are. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4n6yeu/eli5_how_do_geysers_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"d41dq6c",
"d41es5i",
"d41gxtp"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm no expert or geologist for that matter, but I think it's just to do with an increase in pressure, caused by an increase in heat (from what I don't know), which then causes the geyser to erupt.",
"Inside geyser there is a chamber near a hot spot that slowly fills with water:\n\n1. chamber fills with water\n2. water is heated into steam\n3. steam pressure slowly builds\n4. steam pressure ejects the water above it, geyser erupts\n5. chamber is cleared\n\nThe timing can be unpredictable, because each cycle is a little different. In some cases, multiple chambers can be involved, the occurrence and degree of eruption depends on how synchronized the chambers are.",
"I went to one in NZ in January. As well as pressure reaching a point, geysers that go off on a pretty regular basis can be \"triggered\" to blow on a very regular basis for the tourists. \n\nThey use some sort of environmentally friendly agent to break the surface tension and begin the process. Used to be bi-carb I think. Wish I could remember how breaking surface tension induces the process but I do recall it is a stage. Perhaps someone can clarify."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3fru9o | do our radio signals degrade over distance? how does it exactly "travel" through space? | Browsing Reddit and I notice a post regarding how far our radio signals have traveled. ([This](_URL_0_) is what I'm talking about.)
I'm figuring that radio waves would cover larger and larger space in time (Not distance mind you, the overall area it expands from the origin point on Earth) and eventually start to degrade in quality (or that's what my brain tells me)
But the way my brain visualizes this could be horribly misconstrued. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fru9o/eli5_do_our_radio_signals_degrade_over_distance/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctrcjqm"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your intuition is good to a point. Radio waves are made of the exact same \"stuff\" as light, its all electromagnetism and therefore weirdly behaves as both a wave and a particle. It might be better to picture it as a particle for this explanation. The photons of a radio wave (remember its just like light) are particles carrying a tiny bit of energy, if you imagine the signal spreading out into space like shotgun pellets it might help. Each photon will carry on forever in a straight line until it hits something, but they further out you get the more those pellets are spread. Each photon will always carry the same amount of energy, that wont dissipate over time, but it may be nearly impossible to detect the signal based on a few spaced out photons and much easier to measure the signal with lots of densely packed photons. The difficult just depends on how good of an antenna or array of antennas you have. The reason radio waves dissipate so quickly here on earth is that there is tons of stuff for those photons to smash into and dissipate their energy, even just air is enough to knock down the signal strength lots given enough distance."
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/ZxEBHZI.jpg"
] | [
[]
] |
|
4zk54c | how come sharks and other predators only eat certain kinds of fish? | Whenever I see nature docs, there are always plenty of fish swimming around sharks and other predators and yet they don't eat them. I know that some types of fish clean predators or travel with them as a source of protection but this doesn't seem to be the case with the fish I see in these documentaries. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zk54c/eli5_how_come_sharks_and_other_predators_only_eat/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6wprtr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"A lot of those fish are so hard to catch for a large shark that it's not worth the energy it would take to make the attempt. Even if they'd succeed after many attempts, the nutritional value of the catch wouldn't make up for the energy lost on all the failed attempts.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
64w3ey | what is the fbi/cia's survelliance policy in terms of individual citizen's rights? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/64w3ey/eli5_what_is_the_fbicias_survelliance_policy_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dg5hwvb",
"dg5i6bo",
"dg5tu27"
],
"score": [
53,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a very old incident, it happened back in 2011. \n\nThe guy didn't sell the device and the FBI didn't sue him. Rather, the FBI asked for him to return the device and he did. He then sued the FBI alleging that his civil rights had been violated because the FBI did not have a warrant to place the device.\n\nAt the time there was no constitutional warrant requirement to attach a GPS device so your car so he lost. Since then the Supreme Court issued a ruling in United States v. Jones, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012) where it held that the 4th Amendment required law enforcement to get a warrant before installing a GPS device tracking device on your car.",
"In the U.S. it is your constitutional right to privacy (4th amendment). This right may be suspended, without your knowledge or consent, by the judicial branch on behalf of any number of government agencies, the FBI included (CIA is slightly different regarding the hurdles involved). \n\nNow once the judicial branch has suspended your right to privacy the agents that requested the warrant whether it be to electronically monitor your movements, tap your phone, even search your house without your knowledge, have decent latitude to employ whatever techniques they feel necessary to carry out the \"searches\" specified in the warrant. \n\nNow in the case you are referring to, anything used in accordance with the \"search\" is legally allowed to be there. Any intentional disruption of this \"search\" by an outside party could technically be considered obstruction and the action of selling property that is not yours can certainly be considered theft. \n\nNow, based on your description, it seems as if the FBI in this case chose not to pursue any criminal charges instead opting for civil proceedings where they were much more likely to win a 'destruction of property' type case. ",
"Sometimes powerful people realise hey can do what they want to less powerful people. In this case, the FBI and CIA do whatever they want to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
s5lpv | why many conservatives base their values around christianity, but jesus seemed so liberal. | This was inspired by a thread in /r/TIL.
I hear so much about how faith is such a strong part of the Republican mindset. I also hear about how Jesus had fairly progressive teachings, such as turning the other cheek/making peace, practicing your religion in private, and caring for the sick/poor/people in prison. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/s5lpv/eli5_why_many_conservatives_base_their_values/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4b9fxy",
"c4ba1xh",
"c4bgctx"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Because most of them listen to right-wing Christian preachers, instead of going out and reading the bible/Jesus' teachings. ",
"You can be conservative and liberal, however peope generally attach the names to the Republican party and the like.",
"what is liberal for one generation may be conservative a couple generations later for the people that grew up in it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
88ve3y | how exactly do athsma inhalers work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88ve3y/eli5_how_exactly_do_athsma_inhalers_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwniwx5",
"dwniyl3",
"dwnlgv2",
"dwnlq7i",
"dwnm8mj",
"dwnmgb3",
"dwnmriv",
"dwnpujv",
"dwnut0p",
"dwnwhtr",
"dwo1af4"
],
"score": [
594,
11,
23,
113,
12,
6,
6,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"During an asthma crisis, the airways in the lungs get tighter and almost closes completely, therefore air cannot pass and the person cannot breathe.\nAsthma inhalers contains molecules (such as salbutamol) that will force the airways to release the tightness and therefore open again so the person can breathe.",
"Asthma is an inflammation of the *bronchi* and *bronchioles* in the lungs (the smallest tubes where gas goes in and out), which means they swell up and let less air in and out. The medicines in inhalers work to decrease inflammation, so the gases in your lungs can get in and out effectively.",
"Most inhalers for asthmatics work because they are bronchodilators. This means that they work to relax the muscles in your airways (bronchi and bronchioles) in order to decrease the resistance and increase airflow into the lungs. They also can help to reduce inflammation, which has the same result of widening those airways.\nThe medicine mimics the signals that your body normally makes to carry out this action. \n(Pharmacy student who has kind of learned about this so far)",
"There are different types of medications in the inhalers, which are known as metered dose inhalers, or MDIs.\n\nFirst, you should understand what asthma is. Asthma is a reactive obstructive lung disease which causes air trapping, which means the patient can breath in, but has trouble getting rid of the air in their lungs due to narrowed pathways in the lungs caused by inflammation and tightening of the smooth muscles that makeup these pathways.\n\nThe most common medication used that most people are probably familiar with is Albuterol, and this is what is most commonly used in rescue inhalers. Albuterol is a bronchodilator, and specifically a beta agonist. A beta agonist is a medication that specifically targets beta receptors (receptors are sites on cells which cause specific reactions when triggered by specific matching molecules), which are found on smooth muscle, like those in the airways in the lungs. The reaction between the beta agonist and the beta receptor on the smooth muscle triggers the smooth muscle to relax, which expands the airways, allowing the patient to expell that trapped air.\n",
"Is the type of breathing difficulty in an asthma attack different from breathing difficulties in anxiety attacks or allergic reactions? ",
"Rescue inhalers have medications called bronchodilators that force the muscles wrapped around your airway to relax when they are inappropriately contracting (bronchospasm). \n\nThe drugs are sprayed at high pressure through a small nozzle to turn them into a mist that directly coats the airway because you inhale as you spray the inhaler. (Note: an inhaler does not work on an unconscious person or a person unable to inhale at all) A pill or even an injection would not get the drug to the airway muscles fast enough in an emergency.\n\nSince we are talking about inhalers, I'd like to also add that there are some slow-action inhalers that asthmatic people use. These are usually steroids and are usually taken on a schedule once or twice a day and help to *prevent* asthma attacks. They have a long but gentle action that is *not* suitable for saving a person who is having an asthma attack. If you ever find yourself helping someone and can't find a knowledgeable person to tell you which inhaler to use (sometimes young kids don't understand their inhalers) it's safe to do a couple puffs from each before you follow up by calling an ambulance.",
"For starters, asthma inhalers are broken down into two big general categories - rescue inhalers and chronic management therapy.\n\nRescue inhalers, typically albuterol (which is a short acting beta agonist) act as bronchodilators and allow more air to travel through the big passages in your lungs to the small ones, which contain the alveoli (which are where gas exchange takes place between your blood and the air. Rescue inhalers (examples include ProAir and Ventolin in the US, both albuterol) are intended to be used 'as needed' during an attack. They can also be used, under MD / pharmacist direction, to prevent exercise exacerbation. In general, rescue inhalers are to control symptoms during an asthma attack.\n\nChronic management involves the use of a once or twice daily asthma inhaler that is meant to reduce the likelihood of an attack. There are several varieties and escalations of therapy that are possible, and medications include the use of long acting beta agonists (LABAs), long acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), with ICS being the preferred first line agent according to most guidelines currently. These medications work differently and may be used in specific combinations, daily, to prevent asthma attacks or exacerbations. LABAs work the same as SABAs, but over a longer duration. ICS are primarily anti-inflammatory agents. The goal for all of these is to prevent airway inflammation and/or bronchoconstriction from occurring.\n\n\nIn the US, all of these medications require prescriptions and should only be used under the direction of a medical professional. Incorrect use can be extremely dangerous, so be sure to follow the instructions provided by your physician or pharmacist. Specifically, the types of inhalers used for chronic management should never be used for 'rescue' or acute events.\n\nThat is basically how they work. If you have further questions about the individual pharmacology I can try to simplify that a bit and provide it. Additionally, there are different methods of drug delivery - propellant based inhalers (like those labeled HFA) and dry powder inhalers (DPI). As you might imagine, propellant based inhalers used a propellant under pressure to deliver the drug as deeply as possible. Dry powder inhalers instead rely on the user to breathe the powder in. Both have benefits and drawbacks. Further, there are devices called 'spacers' which can assist in drug delivery quite a bit.",
"Ah damn it's 4am and I'm on Reddit specifically because I'm wheezing too hard to sleep laying down, and I realize I left my inhaler at my boyfriend's place, which is a > 4 hour round trip away by train!\n\nI'm drinking tea to make it better (the internet told me to), so I'm gonna hijack a popular thread to ask my own related question:\n\n*Why can caffeine also be used to relieve asthma symptoms?*",
"Ok so I've been an asthmatic since birth and I've used the albuterol rescue inhaler a lot in my life but recently as an adult I noticed if I take more than one puff consecutively I get very shaky like my blood sugar is crashing. Can anyone explain to me why this happens? ",
"ELI5: A rescue inhaler gives you a puff of special medicine straight to the back of your throat. You have to use this medicine because it can send a *very* important message that your brain can't:\"Hey, relax!\"\n\nThen your lungs realize you are right and that they need to loosen up so they relax and you can breathe better again!",
"Pediatric Resident Here, and I basically explain things to 5 year olds and their parents all day.\n\n- Asthma is a combination of two problems: Bronchoconstriction means when muscles are squeezing your air tubes to make them tight, and Inflammation, to where the walls of your air tubes become thick and irritated. When you have both tight air tubes and thickened walls, your air tubes are narrow and it is hard to take good breaths. \n- Albuterol works on bronchoconstriction and relaxes the muscles around the air tubes to open them up. These are used during an acute asthma episode to quickly improve air movement. \n- Inhaled steroids (Flovent, etc) are daily inhalers used to reduce inflammation and intended to prevent attacks. This requires daily usage to be fully effective and will not be useful in an acute attack right away."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9hjhxu | pleas explain how trading options workout and why isn't a betting of sorts? | I read some documentation on how to trade options, and it sounds more like betting against a sports team and not actual investing. Can someone explain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9hjhxu/eli5_pleas_explain_how_trading_options_workout/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6cgvh2",
"e6d3y4x"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Trading options is primarily done as a hedge against crazy losses. \n\nIf for example you are in a business buying oil. You think oil prices are going to skyrocket so you buy an option which gives you the ability to buy at a fixed rate lower than where you think it will end up. If the prices rises, you exercise the option and make out. If the price drops, you dont exercise the option and you're out whatever you spent on the option\n\nSo yes it is very intelligent gambling.",
"I've had various forms of investments my entire adult life. Even with the most thorough research using the best available information, ALL investing is, at its heart, a gamble.\n\n\nSometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Just don't be caught using Gray's Sports Almanac like Martha Stewart did."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8h6r3j | why were american teachers in arizona striking over their salaries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8h6r3j/eli5_why_were_american_teachers_in_arizona/ | {
"a_id": [
"dyhhmks",
"dyhlrla",
"dyhq36a"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You didn't take into account total cost of living\n\nIn the UK your healthcare is free or cheap (NHS), in the US it's freaking expensive.\n\nThat teacher probably has student loans to pay off too, in the UK the cost of education used to be much cheaper so it doesn't factor much into the effect on median wage. With the recent 9000 GBP per year change however, that might change in the upcoming years with people also asking for higher wages to compensate paying off these loans.\n\nArizona also isn't the cheapest state to live in, given the infrastructure cost of living in a desert.\n\nSo basically, that 47k USD doesnt get you as far in the USA as 27k USD gets you in the UK.",
"Anything under $50k is actually rather modest in America. It’s not poverty, not by a long shot, but it’s also nothing to write home about. Anyway, the problem is worse for teachers because they (A) have no real room for advancement or promotion, so wages are really the only retention tool the superintendents have. (B) Health care costs in the US are obscene. It is not unusual for a teacher to have $1400 deducted from their salary to pay for health insurance plans that amount to middling service. (C) Schools in America are chronically under-funded and almost all teachers have to purchase supplies for students out of their own pockets. \n\nAnd of course, most of this is rooted in reason (D)... Arizona is a deep ‘red’ state, meaning they tend to be rural, conservative, vote Republican, and listen only to Republican propaganda networks. For various socioeconomic and political reasons, these populations have a deep, almost visceral hatred of schoolteachers.\n\nI could write a book about why this happens, but to summarize: Schoolteachers already make more than many low-pay rural labor or agriculture jobs... Even if their pay is less than the national average. They do not work physically intense jobs. Rural workers tend to view schoolteachers as glorified daycare nannies rather than highly trained professionals. Schoolteachers also tend to have decent (if not spectacular) government retirement plans and they are often the only government employees these rural people routinely interact with. Many of these deep-red populations are hostile to education in general, as it doesn’t directly benefit their lives promotes critical thinking skills that undermine their conservative institutions. These factors and others conspire to promote a weirdly irrational hatred of schoolteachers that outsiders find incomprehensible. As a result, these states pay their teachers less than the national average and do not adequately fund their school systems. It’s a reflection of a uniquely American strain of anti-intellectualism and anti-government sentiment, because these people tend to view teachers as being useless government parasites that suck up their their tax dollars and provide little in return.",
"Remember too that for many it was not just about salaries, but in cuts to state and local funding for school districts at large.\n\nSo less money for new books, maintenance of the actual buildings, useful tools, and even basic supplies, more expensive classes or non core ones like Music what with those pricey instruments, let alone support staff like nurses, a few teachers assistants, groundskeepers, and crossing guards and all cost money and if it isnt there everyone just has to make do. And eventually there is a point where making do again and again begins to harm educational results and push back is warranted. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7kv0in | how can someone get falsely convicted of a crime if you’re innocent until proven guilty (how can they prove you’re guilty)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kv0in/elif_how_can_someone_get_falsely_convicted_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"drhcgym",
"drhcia8",
"drhcvkj",
"drhdu7j"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They could \"prove\" you are guilty using faked or incorrectly interpreted evidence. For example lie detectors are so inaccurate they are not considered admissible as evidence in most countries. You could also have an admission of guilt beaten out of you.",
"Because the measurement is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. A group of 12 people can look at a thing and still make a mistake about it. Heck a group of 12 million people can look at a thing and still make a mistake about it. You can't really PROVE someone is guilty but you can show that they are probably guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (generally).",
"Dozens of ways:\n\n- Evidence that could prove your innocence could be withheld.\n\n- Witness' could lie, or just mis-remember what they saw.\n\n- Physical evidence could be lost, or mis-analyzed, or contaminated.\n\n- The judge could give the jury faulty instructions about what reasonable doubt means.\n\n- The jury could have predispositions or be outright corrupt.\n\n- The accused could have an awful lawyer.\n\n- Someone could be framing the accused.\n\n- The accused could be willing to \"take a fall\" to save someone else.\n\nI'm sure there are dozens more, but those are the most common ones.",
"_URL_0_\n\nHere is a great example of a failure of the system and things stacked against a defendant.\n\nThe ELI5 answer is the police were directly involved in making them seem guilty and pleading innocent likely would have lead to a much harsher punishment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-burley-conviction-vacated-20171218-story.html#nws=true"
]
] |
||
9f4lrt | what do people learn as computer science majors? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9f4lrt/eli5_what_do_people_learn_as_computer_science/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5tsocp",
"e5tu4l9"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Mainly they learn about programming. It may include topics such as:\n\n* Use and comparisons between various programming languages\n* Use and comparisons between various computing platforms\n* Study of algorithms to make programs more efficient in terms of speed, memory, power usage, etc.\n* Study of theory relating to computers\n* Study of key computer components, including CPUs, operating systems, memory management, etc.\n\nAs a field, computer science tends to lean toward the theoretical end of things, studying current state of the art only to the extent that's necessary to understand the direction of future development.\n\nSimilar fields include:\n\n* Software engineering, which has the same basis as computer science, but tends to focus more on practical application of current software technology\n* Computer engineering, which tends to focus more on electrical engineering and the development of computer hardware, drivers, chips, and so on",
"A good comp-sci degree is going to cover some maths including algebra, calculus, and linear algebra - a lot of computation and machine learning is done in LA. You should learn a lot about computability, Church-Turing, the halting problem, graph theory, language parsing, and language theory. You'll learn about computer architecture, how CPUs actually physically work, and assembly programming. You aught to learn some practical things about programming, data structures, modeling, networking, and software tools.\n\nAs a professional, I don't care what language my juniors know when they leave college. We'll teach you what you need to know for that particular job. I want to know you are solid on your fundamentals."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
22p40k | in the united states, who/what determines if a minor gets charged as an adult? | Yesterday's stabbing suspect is a minor but will be charged as an adult. Not finding an official explanation. It seems the public just goes along with it in many cases.
Update: So I'm not really getting a concrete answer that makes sense. The time is 1:16 PM CST. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22p40k/eli5_in_the_united_states_whowhat_determines_if_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgozagu",
"cgp0no8",
"cgp0o71"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The law in that jurisdiction will lay out who can get charged as an adult, and who must be charged as a minor. Often, there will be overlap in the age ranges. In that case, it's going to be the discretion of the prosecutors whether to file charges as an adult or not.",
"In theory at least, it's supposed to be a judgement call based on whether or not the defendant was mature enough to understand the morality of his actions. A 4 year old, for example, might not really understand why stealing candy from a grocery store is wrong, but a 14 year old definitely would. ",
"The prosecutor decides how to charge someone.\n\nThe defense may object, and if the judge agrees, the charges may be dropped in favor of charging someone as a juvenile.\n\nThe juror ultimates determines guilt, and may be less likely to convict a juvenile facing an adult sentence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3x8qki | why drummers have a glass looking prison around them? | It seems other instruments benefit from it somehow. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3x8qki/eli5why_drummers_have_a_glass_looking_prison/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy2gi4d"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nCompared to all most instruments (including vocal cords), due to the nature of how drums work they are extremely loud. A drum screen helps to direct a lot of the sound from the drums away from the front of the stage (the audience/other performers) and towards the back (where there is sometimes material for dampening sound).\n\nOn small stages, the drums are often still loud enough to be heard even with the drum screen. On large stages and auditoriums, drum screens are less common."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drum_screen"
]
] |
|
75m1za | what differentiates great literature classics, from regular 'exciting' or 'interesting' fiction? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/75m1za/eli5_what_differentiates_great_literature/ | {
"a_id": [
"do77zdx",
"do7l7xt",
"do7xgx6"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Generally.... because popularity. Pretty much that's just it. It's kinda a shit show with regard to art and literature, being popular is the thing that makes things great-- especially when viewed over time, not necessarily the quality itself\n\nThere is plenty of incredible amazing, well written, impactful, awesome novels, literature, and philosophy written now and in history-- that got about zero traction or popularity. There could be thousands or more that are far better than any of our \"classic\" novels, that you and I have never heard of, no one cared much about, didn't get marketed right, were obscure, and so on.\n\nWe tend to think of these as classics because we actually know about them and people talk about them, not (just) because of their quality.\n\n**tl;dr**: Popularity rules all in the art world\n\n",
"I think u/wedrifteternal is half right. Popularity is definitely how certain types of literature makes it well known and there are plenty of things that could be great hiding in obscurity. However, he doesn't really address the question of say why is Infinite Jest considered great literature but Harry Potter more along the lines of exciting/interesting fiction. \n\nTo that end, I think it's important to note that there are a few major components to a good book. \n\nOne component is plot. This is effectively what the story beats are. When someone asks you to summarize a book, they are effectively asking you to summarize. \n\nAnother component is how well the book is written. This is a little harder to define but that can include things like word choice, ease of reading (or difficulty if that's the goal). Etc. etc. Personally (and I know this is controversial) I find Ayn Rand a very flat writer and so her books tend to fail substantially here. But going back to Harry Potter, JK Rowling has an incredible flow to her writing that makes it easy to just rip through those books. Ernest Hemingway has an intense precision that many people find beautiful. The Bronte's have a grandiose ornate prose that others find spectacular. In essence, this is the category of dissecting word choice. Generally, people tend to mark down \"ease\" in comparison to the other categories. \n\nAnother component is how the work interacts with it's form, this can overlap a little with the previous category but is mostly separate. For example, James Joyce's Ulysses has a different \"conceit\" for each chapter of the novel. Joyce uses each chapter to \"evolve\" the english language. He starts with a sort of earlier forms of english moving through various forms and methods of conveyance (including play) and ends with a made-up future slang and then truly concluding with a massive stream of conscious word vomit. It's great in the way it uses the form of the book. Harry Potter on the other hand is just a straight forward story, a concept that novels have been using for generations. This category definitely requires context as well. Something that was an interesting use of the form can make a piece of literature great historically but if it were published today, it may not be. \n\nGreat literature effectively needs to be great in all three (or solidly two) categories. A book like Harry Potter is great in plot, easy in reading (which some people don't consider great in the second category) and not at all great in the third. Something like Pride and Prejudice which is the archetype of the modern novel is great because it helped set the tone of this entire art form, even though the form is very similar to Harry Potter (it just beat it by a couple hundred years). ",
"To add on to what has been said so far, I think that if you combine all of the comments that have been written at this point, you'd get closer to the complete answer. The Mere Exposure Effect definitely plays a huge role in deciding to call things classics. To many people who aren't actually familiar with them, certain works are classics because they were told they're classics. As u/WeDriftEternal said, popularity definitely rules the art world. But there definitely more room for objectivity in written works than in visual art, especially since high end literature is more accessible to the common person. Most of the time classics are objectively well written, and deal with universal themes, the human condition, and all that good stuff as u/Jabberwooky2008 said. The majority of the American classics, also known as the Great American Novels, deal with the American dream and how characters struggle to obtain it, and often don't. And as u/spilgrim16 said, the use of plot, good writing, and how innovative the work is is often very important. But I'd add a little more to all of that. \n\nCalling something a \"classic\" \"classical\" or \"Classical\" is a retroactive process. We typically call art Classical when it comes from a part of ancient history with the most innovation, rules, prestige, and depth. Classical times were usually the height of culture and art. For the West (unless you mean musically), we use Ancient Greece and Rome. China and Japan use their respective Classical periods. And for music we typically use the Viennese Classical period. Classical with a lower case c is usually anything in a similar style, slightly below, or that came about during a resurgence of those values. For music, we extend the lowercase c to concert music from the Baroque period to the modern era. For art and literature, we go to the Renaissance, which was when Europe wanted to go back to the heights of culture that were Greek and Roman times. Many works we refer to as classics are from these times, Shakespeare was the Renaissance. The Greek and Roman Tragedies, etc. We became fascinated with The Greek and Roman plays during the Renaissance, and that is when people regarded them as timeless pieces of art that should be celebrated forever. Going forward the status as a classic was granted to many of Shakespeare's plays. As culture shifted and literature started focussing on common people, writers like Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, Victor Hugo and others wrote darker tales about the poor struggling against forces that were perpetuated by an upperclass grouping of people, and looking back educated people saw these works and started praising them for their insight into the need for social change. They were all popular during their times, but it's our fascination for the past that makes us want to celebrate them. When literature and theatre changed, the new waves of authors who lead the changed became the ones who history look favorably on. We saw the change with Naturalism, Realism, Epic Theatre, Expressionism, American Realism, Dystopian Fiction, etc. Harry Potter and other well known book series may be looked on as classics in the future, but for now, people interested in studying literature haven't turned their attention as much towards the present day."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
27nbs8 | how is heat index calculated? | And why did we first begin to make this calculation? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27nbs8/eli5_how_is_heat_index_calculated/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci2gsyu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The heat index is calculated from the temperature and relative humidity, or sometimes dew point. For instance 96 degrees F and 45% RH equals 104 degrees heat index. It was first used at the National Weather Service in 1979.\n\nEdit: To be more specific, the heat index is intended to show how hot it would feel to: \"A person who's 5 feet 7 inches and weighs 147 pounds, walks at about 3.1 miles per hour in a light breeze, wearing long pants and a short-sleeved shirt.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
36ck6w | i'm baffled, how is it even possible that this many unarmed people are being shot down by police? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36ck6w/eli5_im_baffled_how_is_it_even_possible_that_this/ | {
"a_id": [
"crcrpcf",
"crcsbo2",
"crcse7m",
"crcskl0",
"crcsqdj",
"crctlvq",
"crctmrf",
"crctz7p",
"crcwd5l"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6,
55,
7,
6,
4,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"It's also possible that, given the total number of confrontations between unarmed civilians and police, the number of shootings is actually very low, proportionately.",
"A lot of cops are bullies, or power hungry. Maybe a third to half the police force in my hometown. The son of one of the cops beat a kid up with a baseball bat, with his friends, and recorded it, and nothing happened to him when he was caught. \n\nCombine that with racism, give them a gun, and here we are. This has been happening for a while, but you've only just been hearing about it because everyone has a camera and access to the Internet. ",
"Also just because people are unarmed does not mean that they are not dangerous. People can and do disarm police officers. \n\n[A perfect example] (_URL_0_)",
"* As the internet becomes more deeply woven in everyone's everyday life and it reaches lower and lower into the socioeconomic latter, issues can disseminate from a class of people that never hadn't had their narratives matter before\n\n* This in turn means that more people can do something about these issues they previously hadn't had much experience with\n\n* This fuels the media creating a positive (if you would call it that) feedback loop in reporting of racial issues\n\nIts likely that unarmed deaths at the hands of police has not risen heavily in the past few months vs the last twenty years, however the level of communication has dramatically increased to people who couldn't potentially afford it before. As people organize and take a stand together that creates attention from the national media.\n\nTLDR we just know now how often it happens and the people are getting fed up",
"There isn't any researched data behind it, that I'm aware of, but there are probably a lot of factors contributing to the number of unjustified shootings you see/remember.\n\nTo get the first one out of the way, which /u/gargle_ground_glass already mentioned, it *might* be the result of plenty of biases. Firstly there's media bias: stories that evoke strong emotions in viewers tend to be more viewed or remembered, so that's why media has a preference to reporting bad incidents involving cops. Shooting of an unarmed person is on the top of that list, especially when it might be presented as racially motivated. So the number of media coverage of cops doing everything by the books and cops messing up badly is way to high in favour the latter. That's one bias, then we have another one and it's observer bias (how you interpret the data given). You are more likely to remember the bad stories about cops, especially shootings that are perceived as unnecessary, and even if the media was littered with stories of exemplary behaviour of police officers, you'd still probably say \"they are shooting too many people, they're doing it all the time\" because you more easily recall the bad news because they stuck more with you. People in general more easily see the mistakes of others than their good work, that's present everywhere, schools, workplaces,... you do your job right, no praises and thanks, one mistake and you wont hear the end of it for a while.\n\nThe second reason to so many shootings is that being a police officer is a very high stress level job, one mistake and you're dead, injured, or it's you that kills some one. Sure when we see the tapes/recordings it's blatantly obvious that the shooting was a mistake, but in the heat of the moment when you (possibly by mistake) think your life is in danger, you'll press the trigger sooner. Only the person who's been in a similar perceived life/death situation can assess it properly.\n\nThen there's an average profile of police officers involved in these shootings. This is the one reason, imho, that I will probably get some hate for, because it isn't true in all cases, but an average police officer simply was an action first, questions later type of person. They might even have had some power tripping issues, so at least a part of the force is in no way suited for their line of work and we see* the result of that as these unnecessary shootings, beatings and other mistakes.\n\nLastly, the most important reason, again imho, for this happening is the \"pack mentality\" and no adequate punishments for such conduct. These police officers are so heavily protected by their superiors, laws and courts that they are not deterred from this in the slightest. We see some police officers get away with a lot of things, tampering with evidence, beatings, killings, etc, things lay down after a while, media coverage is gone and they don't punish anyone, sweep it under the rug. That's the most dangerous thing, because if there is no expected punishment for your conduct, if your fellow officers will have your back no matter what, you'll simply continue doing the wrong things. Especially if you are not suited for the job and see it as a way to let off your steam.\n\nBut then again, if they weren't so protected they would be more afraid to do their jobs in some other cases. It's a very, very complicated matter, but it can be resolved with better and more frequent punishments for police officers who evidently abuse their powers and tamper with evidence. And on the other hand to more frequently praise all the good working police officers who do the right calls.\n\nEdit: added a word. And sorry for the wall of text, it's a very complicated issue and even this is barely scratching the surface.",
"From a British point of view, the fact that a Policeman can shoot someone for no other reason than they're running away seems rather incredible. Is running a crime?",
"Because America is batshit crazy about guns, and for officers it's entirely reasonable to assume that everyone they encounter is armed. The most certain way not to get shot is to shoot first.",
"There are a lot of people, like thousands of thousands of thousands.\n\nEven setting aside the fact that technology has reached the point where many situations are being recorded that otherwise wouldn't have been, those recordings are capable of being widely distributed to the public, people who distribute recordings have a bias towards promoting content that is provocative and holds the viewer's morbid fascination, that you actually have time to watch these recordings instead of laboring from sunup to sundown to survive, and that you've been able to do this enough that you have become desensitized and require the distributors to focus on even more provocative recordings to keep you from leaving them, there's still going to be a certain amount of variance in behavior across such a large population.\n\nThere's just more people and more possibility of any interaction between them happening. There are many people applying to be police right now who will shoot unarmed and possibly even unthreatening people simply because there are many many many people applying to be police officers. The more people become police officers the more likely it is that some police officer will do something they are not supposed to do because there are more of them and more chances for something to go wrong. More people are going to die unnatural deaths because there are significantly more people than any previous point of reference and it will happen to some of them as that some gets bigger every year.",
"It's entirely possible that in the last 10 years there have actually been **less** police shootings of unarmed people compared with 20 years ago. There isn't good data to know for sure, but I'd say it's actually likely.\n\nIt only seems like there is more because of our advanced communication technology, in addition to decreased apathy amongst the general population (which in turn will increase the media focus on this issue since that will drive ratings).\n\nIt's important to note that in the large majority of these shootings, the police officers didn't do anything proceduraly wrong. In essence, they assume every person they ever encounter is carrying a firearm and intends to kill police with it. This assumption remains in place until the officer has proven otherwise. Given that, any aggressive or sudden movement is often met with deadly force (there is a reason why resisting arrest is a crime)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23c7ovuSd2U"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
10lmno | why cigarettes have things like arsenic and tar in them | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10lmno/eli5_why_cigarettes_have_things_like_arsenic_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6eke7b",
"c6ekiiy",
"c6eklmv",
"c6ekz6z"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
93,
14
],
"text": [
"i believe a lot of the harmful chemicals can be linked to the pesticides used for tobacco growth.",
"You're talking, not just about arsenic and tar, but all the 'bad' chemicals in cigarettes. They are in there so that the cigarette continues to burn by itself in between draws. Rolled, or 'pouch' tobacco contains far less of these chemicals, and is therefore the safer (read: less toxic) alternative.",
"Some of these things are natural byproducts of smoke, and others are additives. \n\nTar is the solid leftovers from smoke. By definition. So any time you cool smoke down and it leaves behind some residue, that's tar. All smoke from all burning plants produces tar. So, it's not like they \"add tar\", it's just that with any smoke, the leftovers are called tar. \n\nNow, tar is made up of all sorts of things really. Thousands of different chemicals. That may sound scary, but it's a part of nature, that every organic thing is made up of hundreds or thousands of different organic molecules. Then, when you burn something, you combine it with oxygen, which likes to react with all sorts of different things, combining new chemicals.\n\nTar can be bad for you because some of the newly formed chemicals cause the cells of our bodies to mutate, and possibly cause cancer. These types of chemicals in tar are called Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. This is a problem with all smoke from burning plants. Plants, like all living things on earth are made up of carbon and hydrogen, which really like to combine with oxygen in all sorts of interesting ways. When you burn something, these molecules combine with oxygen very quickly, and in some cases incompletely, leaving behind a soup of all sorts of different partially reacted molecules, these PAH's, which our bodies don't like.\n\nNow, in addition to the stuff that's naturally bad about smoke, we also have additives. Things that aren't normally in tobacco, but we put in cigarettes for different reasons. The paper is bleached, so that it looks whiter. It's then treated with other chemicals to make it burn more evenly. The tobacco is treated, and they put in things like sodium nitrate, which oxidizes the burn, fueling the fire, allowing the cigarette to burn hotter and not go out as easily. It's treated with things like anti-fungal agents so the cigarettes don't mold. It's treated with pesticides, and so on. \n\nA lot of what you hear in anti-tobacco ads is over-the-top scaremongering. Saying \"TEN THOUSAND POTENTIALLY DEADLY CHEMICALS YOU WILL DIE\" isn't necessarily inaccurate, but I mean, you eat a steak and it contains a similar number of chemicals, and some of them are in fact deadly if consumed in great enough quantities, and it is also a fact you're going to die some day, so that's not inaccurate at all, it's just a bit manipulative.\n\nI'm not suggesting anyone start smoking though. It's highly addictive, and over the course of twenty years you can develop some severe health problems, and if you smoke your entire life there's about a fifty fifty chance you'll die of something tobacco related, but printing out a list of chemicals in cigarettes is at least a little bit misleading. Yes, cigarettes contain arsenic, but chances are an apple does too. It's a very common naturally occurring element you find in most soil. Arsenic is very deadly if you take enough of it, but there's very little in cigarettes, and the problems caused by cigarettes aren't caused by the tiny amount of arsenic in them.\n\nAnyways, I'm rambling at this point, and I don't have time to proofread, so I hope I've answered your question.",
"First I'll talk about the arsenic. Everything has tiny amounts of stuff in it that might scare you. A teeny tiny bit of something may be perfectly safe, even if a lot of it could hurt you. \n\nThe whole universe is made of atoms. There are about 100 different kinds of atom. \"Element\" is another word for \"one kind of atom\". Most of what is around you is made of just a few elements, but if you know a lot of science and know how to do it, you can look very very hard and find a few atoms of any element just about anywhere.\n\nLet's pretend purple sand could make you very sick. We'll pretend it takes a big pile of purple sand to make you sick. If I told you there's some purple sand on every beach in the world, would you be scared to go to the beach? Instead of getting scared right away, a good question to ask is, \"how much purple sand is there on that beach?\" If I said, \"the whole beach is purple\", you would say, \"I don't want to go there!\". But if I told you \"there's one tiny grain of purple sand on that whole beach\", you would know that purple sand isn't a problem there. You could probably look for days and days and never see that purple grain of sand. Even if you found it, it wouldn't make you sick. There's just not enough of it to make a difference to you. The beach might be dangerous in other ways, but the purple sand doesn't have anything to do with it. \n\nThat's what the arsenic in cigarettes is like. A teeny teeny tiny bit of arsenic is in just about everything, but most of the time there's so little we don't even have to think about it. We don't need to think about the arsenic in cigarettes because there isn't enough arsenic to make a bit of difference, and because there are so many things that are so much worse in the cigarette smoke.\n\nNow about tar. Some words can be confusing because they have more than one meaning. That's what the word \"tar\" is like. One kind of tar is the black gooey stuff we sometimes use to fix roads or seal up roofs. The tar in cigarettes is totally different stuff. If you had enough to look at, it might seem a little like road tar, but it's really its own thing. \n\nThere's no tar in the cigarettes before you burn them. Tar is just part of the smoke you get from burning the cigarette. The smoke is made from the stuff we call tar and from lots of other chemicals too, and almost all of them are bad for you. It's stupid to breathe in the smoke, but cigarettes are a kind of drug. When you're addicted to a drug its very hard to stop using it, no matter how stupid it is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1hkm2n | why i don't wet the bed after dreaming of peeing at an older age, but i used to when i was a child? | To explain a little further: When I was a kid, I would occasionally dream that I was peeing. I would then wake up with a wet bed. Now that I am much older, I still occasionally dream of peeing, but I wake up with a full bladder and can make it to the bathroom. Why is that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hkm2n/eli5why_i_dont_wet_the_bed_after_dreaming_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cav9oa7",
"cavd06b",
"cavdumv",
"cavi5fq",
"cavkque"
],
"score": [
14,
2,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Not an answer unfortunately but a couple of months ago I dreamt I opened my night stand drawer and peed in it. I woke up freaked out that I did that in my sleep. But just like you I didn't actually pee. I'm really curious about this answer too. ",
"No idea if this is true or not, but I wanna say it has something to do with the muscles and parts of the brain associated with holding one's bladder being underdeveloped as a child? Again, just a hunch without any backing evidence.",
"1. Your sleep self learned what real peeing feels like vs dream peeing feels like\n\n2. Your bladder is larger than it once was, and therefore doesn't really need to pee as often",
"A lot of things contribute to bed-wetting. There are genes associated with it (so your kids are more likely to wet the bed if you wet it as a kid), reduced functional size (basically the threshold where your bladder tells your body it's full), and a reduced level of communication between the bladder and the brain.\n\nThe genetic component never goes away, of course, but some of the other factors do, and mitigate it so you don't wet the bed as an adult (for the record, plenty of adults do wet the bed).\n\nOne of the big ones is simply that when you're young, your pituitary gland isn't fully developed yet. \n\nYour pituitary gland helps in the creation of something called an antidiuretic hormone (vasopressin). This hormone is responsible for regulating your retention of water. When you're asleep, your body creates more of the hormone, so you aren't constantly waking up having to pee (or wetting the bed in your sleep). If you're wetting the bed as a child, it's likely producing a more limited amount of antidiuretic hormone, so your bladder is filling up. When you hit puberty, and it fully develops, your body creates more antidiuretic, and you can make it through the night without a full bladder.\n\nYour brain-bladder communication also improves over time – just like your hand-eye coordination gets better. This helps your brain regulate your bladder, even in your sleep. Of course, you may notice if you get black-out drunk, that communication breaks down again...\n\ntl;dr Brain-bladder communication improves, and production of an antidiuretic hormone released as night increases as your pituitary gland develops.",
"I believe it has to do with the development of your detrusor muscle. This muscle is able to be somewhat controlled voluntarily, allowing you to chose when you will contract it or relax it (thus allowing you to have control over your bladder). As you get older, this muscle gets stronger, and you have a greater ability to automatically control your flow of urine, even while sleeping. In older people, who can often have trouble retaining their urine, they will do kegal exercises, which will in turn strengthen this muscle, and potentially allow them to gain control of their bladder. In your case, your detrusor muscle has matured, and is not stronger and able to hold off from allowing your bladder to release. (Nursing student)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6i2hu7 | how can some companies like lunar lands sell lands on other planets? how did they come to own them in the first place ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6i2hu7/eli5_how_can_some_companies_like_lunar_lands_sell/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj2z8si",
"dj2zbeg",
"dj2zpet"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They give you a worthless unenforceable contract to land on other planets. \n\nI can sell you a piece of paper declaring you supreme lord of Mercury if I feel like it and you want to pay for it. That piece of paper doesn't actually mean anything, but I'm welcome to sell it and you're welcome to buy it.",
"I believe it's all false. You buy a planet, but no actual scientific or governing body will ever recognise it as yours. You just get a certificate saying it's yours. It's completely worthless and meaningless, and wouldn't hold up in court if any aliens set up shop on your planet.",
"They don't. The Outer Space Treaty, ratified by the UN in 1967, states that all celestial bodies are the common property of all of mankind and forbids any one nation from staking claims on extraterrestrial property. Private ownership wasn't explicitly forbidden until the Moon Treaty of 1984, but virtually no major space fairing nation has signed it. Technically they can claim ownership of lunar property, but then again, so could you or me. Legally, our claims would be just as valid (or likely invalid) as Lunar Lands' claims. I suppose if they actually landed people there and began developing it they might have a slightly better claim (possession is 9/10 of the law) but the UN would have the authority to dismiss their claims and order them to leave. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2csr3s | why 10-minute youtube "ads"? | 30 second ads I understand, and how that is linked to ad revenue. But why is Youtube forcing me to watch 5 seconds of some random channel's video? I get suggested videos in other ways.
I find this really aggravating when I want to queue a playlist of videos and I have to actively close ads between videos. I'd stay to the end of 15 or 30 second ads, but with 2-10 minute ads in the mix, I'm actively closing all ads at the 5 second mark. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2csr3s/eli5_why_10minute_youtube_ads/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjilvh5"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"So YouTube has started advertising for channels (hopefully related to what you are watching). Its a great opportunity for creators! However, the ad they use is the channel's \"trailer\". Most channels will make a 30-60 second video introducing themselves... but some choose to make a 10min long trailer.\n\nSo its not YouTube, its people not understanding what an \"ad/trailer\" is."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
20ha66 | why is it sometimes economically rational to keep loss-making firms afloat? | I thought this may have been answered before so I searched this but, well, we all know what Reddit's search function is like.
It has occurred to me that the government intervenes in the market sometimes to keep particular firms afloat. I'm not talking about banks - I'm aware of the economics that surrounds that - but more so just general manufacturing firms or something of that nature.
For instance, two years or so ago I think, in the UK, the government heavily subsidised a shipbuilding firm that was making losses in the hundreds of millions. My question is: why? There could be a large amount of competition that come and take over from the loss-making firm and also the losses are just adding to the debts.
I can only think of two reasons why the government regularly keeps loss-making firms afloat:
- There is tremendous future expected growth of the firm that will eventually result in strong profits that will offset any current losses.
- Allowing the firm to fail will have too great of an effect on the unemployment rate.
Are they the only reasons the government keeps these firms afloat? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20ha66/eli5_why_is_it_sometimes_economically_rational_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg37dmz",
"cg37dxb",
"cg37g49",
"cg37hse"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The product may also be so socially or economically valuable that the government chooses to subsidize the industry.\n\nMany governments do this with basic services like electricity, water, and gas to control the price of those services.\n\nThe price stays so low that the company operates at a loss, the government makes up the difference. This is usually a good deal for most consumers, they get their services at less than the free market price.\n\nGovernments often also choose to subsidize farms to ensure a stable, secure food supply. You can't have a bad year put a bunch of farms out of business, food is important.",
"Jobs are an obvious reason.\n\nAnother reason might be military. If that shipyard is the only one left capable of making a particular class of warship, losing it would put the country in a position where they are no longer able to provide defense on their own. For a major world power like the UK, this would not only be a blow to their military strength but also national pride.",
"I think in that particular case it was because the government wanted to keep a military contractor afloat until the upcoming scheduled projects start. It's probably not easy to re-recruit the most skilled of the workforce once they gone.\n\n[BBC News](_URL_0_) on the BAE cuts and the upcoming project that's going to start in 2015 is [\"Global Combat Ship\"\n](_URL_1_).\n\nIs it worth it? I don't know.\n",
"Three reasons:\n\n1. Because the firm's existence provides more benefit than just its direct economic impact. In your example, it's possible that quick access to British made ships provides more good for more British firms and consumers than buying ships abroad. Banks are an unfortunate example of this, as we in the US have literally created firms which are \"too big to fail.\" No matter how unprofitable they are, they have become such an essential part of our economy that letting them tank would lead to disaster. (For those of you who are about to immediately mention Iceland, remember that they are a country of less than 1 million people, and the US is at the very least 300x bigger)\n\n2. For some firms, it is like an odd form of socialism. Taxes are taken from the successful and used to grow the revenue of the unsuccessful. You are correct in your previous assumption that letting the firm close will have too great of an effect on the unemployment rate. For example, the auto industry in the US supports one million jobs. If we had let GM fail, it would have sent our unemployment rate skyrocketing. For comparison, look at what happened to the northern UK when Thatcher fought the heavy industry located there. 30 years later and the region has yet to recover.\n\n2. Odd national pride is the other reason. There are some industries which are supported simply because they're seen as fundamental to the image of the nation - or because the owners of said industry are well connected to the government. I believe Australia's film industry is heavily subsidized by the government. This comes from a strong desire from both major parties in the Australian government for the Australian voice to be heard worldwide. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24831779",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Combat_Ship"
],
[]
] |
|
3ro7v5 | why do our minds sometimes feel "foggy" or "drowsy" throughout an entire day, even if we're not tired? | Sometimes it can be hard to focus, or you don't feel as "on point" that day. What causes the brain to not feel as sharp as usual? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ro7v5/eli5_why_do_our_minds_sometimes_feel_foggy_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwpsmom",
"cwpsnmh"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You may not feel tired, but commonly you are. Things like drinking coffee in the morning - it does give you a hit but then it drops off, causing a huge lack of energy. A lack off coffee when you're addicted can do this too. It can be all sorts of things though - dehydration is common, as you don't feel 'thirsty' until you are already quite dehydrated. You should drink even if you're not thirsty. Illness, hunger, restless sleeping are also causes too",
"Lack of sleep doesn't always make you feel tired, feeling foggy all day is a clear indicator you need to rest, or if its prolonged your body might not be getting enough of something you need nutrition wise. I notice over time when I change my diet I always feel a bit weird adjusting for about a week. Otherwise I would say your brain needs sleep"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2zfi5l | how do they get bagged popcorn to have a buttery taste,cheesy taste,etc. | Is it in the bag before it is popped? Or is there some sort of sciency explanation for it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zfi5l/eli5_how_do_they_get_bagged_popcorn_to_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpigtz1"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's in the bag pre pop. Open one up! Orange powdery stuff called \"flavocal\" at theaters"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
nb6jg | some questions related to the movement of the earth and gravity and other fun stuff like that. | The earth is moving hundreds of thousands of miles per hour through space right? (or at least I think it's around there when you calculate movement around the sun, movement of our galaxy, and drift within our galaxy)
I have a few things bothering me here.
* How in the world is the atmosphere not blown away? Is it because there is nothing in space for it to push up against and blow it away?
* How can we feel no movement? Is it just because we're used to the movement? Is it because we can't tell we're moving from our own perspective?
* How can something so big, while rotating and moving that fast be still enough to allow something like a house of cards to be built without toppling over? I can't fathom how the earth isn't shaking or bouncing or other little movements.
* At what point do astronauts become essentially "weightless"? Is it a gradual thing or is there a point where weightlessness comes on rapidly?
* It is my understanding that, in order to regain entry to the atmosphere, you need to be traveling very fast and enter at the right angle. Is this correct? What would happen if you left the space station and started propelling yourself slowly towards the earth? Would you eventually reach a point when you just start falling? This kinda ties into the last question, I think.
Sorry for all the questions, hopefully there is someone who can clear up my confusion a bit! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/nb6jg/eli5_some_questions_related_to_the_movement_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c37plcm",
"c37plcm"
],
"score": [
6,
6
],
"text": [
" * Yes. There is nothing in space to blow our atmosphere away. There *is* something called the \"solar wind\", which is a steady stream of particles coming from the sun. It is not strong enough to blow our atmosphere away.\n * The movement of the earth is very smooth, and it doesn't change. In a very smooth elevator, it is difficult to tell that you are moving once it gets going. You can feel it start and stop but you can't really feel it moving between floors. It is like that for us on Earth.\n * Like I said, the movement of the earth is very smooth. Picture the smoothest elevator known to man. You could definitely build a house of cards in there. However, when it starts and stops the change in acceleration might knock your house of cards over. If the earth is hit by something (like a large space rock), it might knock your cards over. Also, the earth does shake from time to time due to movements of the crust. These are known as earthquakes, and they will knock your house of cards over.\n * You could be \"weightless\" on the ground if you drove your car fast enough. Astronauts are not \"weightless\" because they are high above the ground. They are \"weightless\" because they are in free fall towards the earth. If you got into an elevator on the top floor of a tall building, and it accelerated down at 9.8 m/s, you would be weightless until you got to the bottom (where you would probably die). Astronauts are falling towards the earth, but they are doing it at an angle so that they always miss, so they keep going around, and always appear to be weightless.\n * Like I said above, normal space stations are going very quickly around the earth. To get down from a space station without using too much fuel, astronauts slow themselves down just a little bit. This changes the angle at which they are falling and so now they are on a path towards the ground. Because they are still going so fast, they enter the thicker part of the atmosphere going very fast.\n\nIf you were on a space station that could somehow stay in the same spot over the earth, then you could come straight down. In that case, you wouldn't be going as fast when you hit the atmosphere, and you might not even burn up. In fact, there was [a guy](_URL_0_) who took a balloon up into space, and then jumped out and skydived back to earth with a parachute.\n\nIf anything I said is confusing, please ask and I will try to make things easier to understand.",
" * Yes. There is nothing in space to blow our atmosphere away. There *is* something called the \"solar wind\", which is a steady stream of particles coming from the sun. It is not strong enough to blow our atmosphere away.\n * The movement of the earth is very smooth, and it doesn't change. In a very smooth elevator, it is difficult to tell that you are moving once it gets going. You can feel it start and stop but you can't really feel it moving between floors. It is like that for us on Earth.\n * Like I said, the movement of the earth is very smooth. Picture the smoothest elevator known to man. You could definitely build a house of cards in there. However, when it starts and stops the change in acceleration might knock your house of cards over. If the earth is hit by something (like a large space rock), it might knock your cards over. Also, the earth does shake from time to time due to movements of the crust. These are known as earthquakes, and they will knock your house of cards over.\n * You could be \"weightless\" on the ground if you drove your car fast enough. Astronauts are not \"weightless\" because they are high above the ground. They are \"weightless\" because they are in free fall towards the earth. If you got into an elevator on the top floor of a tall building, and it accelerated down at 9.8 m/s, you would be weightless until you got to the bottom (where you would probably die). Astronauts are falling towards the earth, but they are doing it at an angle so that they always miss, so they keep going around, and always appear to be weightless.\n * Like I said above, normal space stations are going very quickly around the earth. To get down from a space station without using too much fuel, astronauts slow themselves down just a little bit. This changes the angle at which they are falling and so now they are on a path towards the ground. Because they are still going so fast, they enter the thicker part of the atmosphere going very fast.\n\nIf you were on a space station that could somehow stay in the same spot over the earth, then you could come straight down. In that case, you wouldn't be going as fast when you hit the atmosphere, and you might not even burn up. In fact, there was [a guy](_URL_0_) who took a balloon up into space, and then jumped out and skydived back to earth with a parachute.\n\nIf anything I said is confusing, please ask and I will try to make things easier to understand."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kittinger#Project_Excelsior"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kittinger#Project_Excelsior"
]
] |
|
20qdhe | how did russia breach international laws? | Everyone keeps saying there was a breach but no one is giving details. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20qdhe/eli5how_did_russia_breach_international_laws/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg5r15z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter prohibits states from engaging in any threats or uses of force against other states, of which Russia and Ukraine have signed and are members of. _URL_0_\n\nThe problem with international law is that it is nearly impossible to enforce or pass judgement on. It is purely a basis for argument and peace. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/"
]
] |
|
bvma2n | how do smokers' lungs get used to smoke, and can they then handle inhaling all smoke (e.g. fire)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bvma2n/eli5_how_do_smokers_lungs_get_used_to_smoke_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"epqfz5g",
"epqkwr1"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The lungs don't get used to the smoke, it's just that there's not a very high concentration of smoke from the cigarette when you breathe in. The bigger thing is that your body recognizes the ash particles / the smoke when you try to breathe it in, and that can force you to cough the first few times, but eventually you get over that.\n\n > and can they then handle inhaling all smoke (e.g. fire)?\n\nAbsolutely not. Cigar smoke is very thick and can cause a person to choke hard, and smoke from regular fires is also very thick.",
"The lungs don't get used to smoke, they actually get damaged by it. Heavy smokers actually don't use their full lung capacity to breath due to damage."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
35z6q0 | why does only 1 piece of fruit in the bunch get moldy? is it still ok to eat the others? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35z6q0/eli5_why_does_only_1_piece_of_fruit_in_the_bunch/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr971l9"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"If it's black and/or shiny, don't risk it! But other than that, you can have the rest of the bunch of they're clean, and better yet, you can even have the moldy fruit if you cut off the contaminated part! (plus a few cm extra for a margin of safety, they can penetrate deeper than what you can see with your eyes)\n\nFor extra safety, rinse the fruit off. For even more safety wash with soap. Even more, very hot water and soap. One step further, soak in a concentrated heated salt bath then wash with soap and rinse.\n\nAbove all else, smell, then taste. If either make you feel 'off' DON'T EAT IT. We evolved without refrigeration and expiration dates, and there are automatic instinctual reactions to keep us alive. Trust them, and you'll be good.\n\nSource: I work in biotech and enjoy cooking (with non-moldy food)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3ps3fe | why does your body gain fat symmetrically? | e.g. Do your arms, legs, etc. actually gain fat symmetrically? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ps3fe/eli5_why_does_your_body_gain_fat_symmetrically/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw8vtyq",
"cw8xq8j"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your body doesn't gain fat symmetrically. Fat is stored in [adipose tissue](_URL_0_) that is not equally dispersed throughout the body.",
"It's not perfect symmetry, but nothing ever is. I think to answer the real question here, it's for moving. If you're (more or less) symmetrical it's a lot easier to balance and move in a predictable way."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adipose_tissue"
],
[]
] |
|
1y2clz | how do lifelong politicians, (for example dianne feinstein, john kerry, john mccain, etc) have net worths of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y2clz/eli5_how_do_lifelong_politicians_for_example/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfgpwnf",
"cfgpz0q",
"cfgpz88",
"cfgszuh",
"cfgtjrm",
"cfgubsc",
"cfgw7u1",
"cfh0x7p",
"cfh2rlu",
"cfh3a8d",
"cfh4cdd"
],
"score": [
86,
14,
33,
4,
2,
15,
6,
2,
13,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"In the specific cases you've mentioned, they all married very wealthy people. However, a lot of high ranking politicians were already very wealthy before they ever decided to run for office in the first place. ",
"I know Kerry married into the Heinz ketchup money. ",
"Well, for the three examples you gave--marriage.\n\nFrom Wikipedia: \n\nIn 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, an investment banker. In 2003, Feinstein was ranked the fifth-wealthiest senator, with an estimated net worth of $26 million.\n\nCindy McCain: Upon her father's death in 2000, she inherited majority control and became chair of Hensley & Co., one of the largest Anheuser-Busch beer distributors in the United States\n\nJohn Kerry married Theresa Heinz Kerry, who was married to Pennsylvania Senator John Heinz, a member of the Heinz corporation (who died in office). The Forbes 400 survey estimated in 2004 that Teresa Heinz Kerry had a net worth of $750 million. \n\nOtherwise, most other rich politicians made their fortunes as lawyers/investors/etc before they went into office (which, I guess, means they aren't \"career\" politicians.)",
"Sometimes it is because they marry wealthy people. That is where Kerry and McCain get their tens if not hundreds of millions. Most often, the people are independently wealthy - they achieve monetary success either through business or because their family has money. And on top of that, I don't believe insider trading laws apply to legislation, so a Congress-critter who knows about legislation that would help/harm an industry can call up his financial advisor and tell him to buy/sell/short stocks as appropriate to maximize returns. ",
"How much do lobbyists contribute directly to politician's wealth, or is it mainly donated to organizations/businesses that the politicians then profit from?",
"If you're a prominent politician, you can make millions doing speaking engagements and book deals. Clinton's made nearly $100 million just from speaking engagements. He probably got an enormous sum for My Life too. ",
"by proffiting from their power and influence. Duh. ",
"John Kerry was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and married a ketchup heiress.",
"Not being subject to insider trading laws helps.",
"And there are also politicians (Dick Cheney comes to mind) who drift in and out of office, while working at influential and high-paying jobs in the interim. But who would NEVER use their influence while in office to enhance the fortunes of their old company (which they might actually still have stock in). Oh MY, no.\n\n",
"Kerry and McCain both married very wealthy women."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3jhrk5 | how is tom brady able to challenge a punishment issued by roger goodell and the nfl in a federal court? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jhrk5/eli5_how_is_tom_brady_able_to_challenge_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cupa4os",
"cupb4q9",
"cupenrz"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Anytime I have a conflict about anything I can elect to use the civil court system to resolve it. Employment disputes are no different.\n\nWill it lead to more disputes? Maybe. It will also likely lead to stronger rules for arbitration included in contracts, tightening of contract language and so on. Its a cat-and-mouse game.",
"I'm under the impression that the punishment went outside the collective bargain with the players union. Also, it set a very bad precedent for players that the league can suspend players for minor infractions. And that past instances of this type of behaviour resulted in fines under $20,000.\n\nI think Brady successfully argued that Goodell's punishment went beyond what was reasonable, and that the NFL didn't have the authority to impose such a drastic penalty.",
"Nobody really answered the gist of the highlighted question. As a general rule, none of us can get our disputes into a federal court. There must be a \"federal question\", which means it must involve a federal law or constitutional issue, etc., or there must be \"diversity of citizenship\" and a large amount of money in question. I haven't read the player's association agreement, but my assumption is that there is a specific provision in there which allows for a direct appeal to federal court of arbitration decisions by the Commissioner. I don't know of a handful of industries which could command that type of special treatment by the courts, but the NFL already has all manner of anti-trust and other special considerations from Congress, so why not?\nAnd by the way, the NFL was the beneficiary of the some of the worst lawyering I have ever seen throughout this debacle. Wells was a disaster, and the guys on appeal must have been asleep in Court when Judge Berman waved the flag at them again and again to signal that they needed to settle this or they were going to get hammered. I guess a thousand bucks an hour won't buy as much as it used to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5g57n3 | why are exhaust pipes bent to the left or right for certain vehicles? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5g57n3/eli5_why_are_exhaust_pipes_bent_to_the_left_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"dapkin8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This is somewhat not specific. Some motor vehicles have exhaust on the side *before* the rear axle, such as NASCAR cars and some trucks (typically modified ones).\n\nThe choice may be due to manufacturer's design, simply enough. In most vehicles there is no object in the way of routing the exhaust out the back or to the side after the rear axle. The exhaust is below the gas tank (though it *does* have to route over the rear axle). \n\nI have never seen an object or interference that forced exhaust systems to go a specific way after the rear axle. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6p4ckc | why do the sell olives with pits at the grocery store? | At my grocery store today. Stopped to get olives at the olive bar. Half the choices were pitted, the other half contain pits. Got me thinking...why buy olives with the pits still in them? Does the pit serve some purpose or enhance the flavor?
For the record, yes I've heard of people eating an olive + pit as a last meal (presumably your decaying body nourishes the pit into an olive tree). I'm talking about generalized / grocery store consumption. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6p4ckc/eli5_why_do_the_sell_olives_with_pits_at_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkmgn8q"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The pits do not improve the olive as a food. But it is hard to get them out without damaging the olive."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
208aq6 | why do you get nightmares when you're feet are uncovered? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/208aq6/eli5_why_do_you_get_nightmares_when_youre_feet/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg0owpa"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"This sounds very much like confirmation bias. Unless you can provide some evidence that this phenomena exists, it would be hard to explain it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3sdu8c | quicksand | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sdu8c/eli5_quicksand/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwwc44j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Sand is made up of lots of little particles. In dry sand the spaces between them are filled with air. Air is a gas, which means it applies very little force to the particles; it has a low viscosity and it is compressible. The overwhelming control on how a pile of dry sand behaves is the surface contact between the grains. \n\nNow, if you saturate that sand in water the air has been replaced by an incompressible fluid. That enables grain weight to be supported by the fluid, not just the grain contacts. So if you vibrate a wet sand then it's possible for the grains to flow and move apart. This is why you sink in quicksand.\n\nThe real problem comes when you try and lift yourself out again. By trying to remove a foot, for example, you create a void which sucks the fluid into it. By removing fluid from surrounding sand, the grains get all close together again and lock up. You put the weight back on the fluid, you squeeze it into the surrounding sand making it mobile again and you sink deeper. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4npf3l | how are tv shows written? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4npf3l/eli5_how_are_tv_shows_written/ | {
"a_id": [
"d45xs9z",
"d45zc3f"
],
"score": [
36,
8
],
"text": [
"For dramas and serials:\n\nThe showrunners meet before the season and sketch out roughly how the season arc will run. Then they divide up the episodes among writing teams. The teams may not know all the specifics of the other teams episodes, but they have the gist from the show runner's notes. \nAs a team finishes an episode, it's given to a director to shoot with the actors and the team moves on to the next episode. \n\nFor comedies: \n\nSouth Park has a documentary about how they produce an episode in a week. Basically they get the writers in a room, think of a plot, and then pray the censors don't block their content when they submit the script. ",
"I recommend to get the Charlie Brookers \"screen Wipe\" series and watch. It is a documentary in comedy form about the whole TV industry. .\n\nIf you must watch one episode, is the one where the script writers explain how they made and pitched scripts. \n\nHere is the first episode to get you started. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3bNK97nIsKs"
]
] |
||
asmcfq | why are people in northern europe more distant from each other than people in southern europe? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/asmcfq/eli5_why_are_people_in_northern_europe_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"egvafo3",
"egvale2",
"egvbigj",
"egvfr6i",
"egvhqkj",
"egvhzfr",
"egvj3ms",
"egvj91e",
"egvjez7",
"egvjk5k",
"egvjmve",
"egvk4it",
"egvk5f2",
"egvkp2g",
"egvmjyf",
"egvmoo3",
"egvmuie",
"egvmzra",
"egvn1mi",
"egvn2rh",
"egvn471",
"egvngq0",
"egvni2h",
"egvnxv9",
"egvny96",
"egvoepl",
"egvqehk",
"egvqow9",
"egvqq3f",
"egvr1rw",
"egvru15",
"egvs5up",
"egvvr9i",
"egvxcqo",
"egvyxu5",
"egw2sgo",
"egw3gyc",
"egw7hm1",
"egymqmt"
],
"score": [
7,
40,
1288,
10,
71,
6,
33,
177,
9,
6,
4,
6,
3,
5,
2,
5,
10,
2,
6,
2,
2,
3,
2,
14,
3,
3,
9,
5,
6,
2,
2,
2,
14,
3,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"My history teacher talked about this once. The reason for this is climate. It has partly to do with the weather because colder weather leads peaope, to be less active, waste less time on things considered unnecessary. In the southern conutries because it is hot during the day people needed to keep themselves active for them not to get tired and stay productve. It is also reason the north was open for protestantism while southern europe was more catholic since the catholic church gives people more to do . \n\n & #x200B;\n\nWith todays technology though i think its mostly a cultural thing now since we are less influenced by outside conditions.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI am not sure if this is true though.",
"The further north you go, the more severe winter is. In the old days, there wasn't much you could do in winter. Windproof, waterproof, warm, and light clothing wasn't a thing back then. So you'd spend all your time indoors, in a tiny cramped cabin full of other people, hoping spring would come before the food ran out. \n\nAfter a few months of that, anyone who'd sit close to someone else and start talking about their day or their favourite kind of stone or the weather would be the first to get murdered and eaten when the food ran out. \n\nBeing taciturn is an adaptation, evolved over millennia of harsh winters.\n\n",
"If you live in very harsh climates, your immediate action has very direct impact on your community. Small families and tribes have to be very disciplined because nature is harsh - the need to store food, fuel and make adequate shelter requires very close knit and small communities. Since harsh weather typically means gathering food is also difficult - this makes distrust of outsiders almost a necessity for survival. All that and relative isolation too.\n\nWarmer climates make it easier to support higher population densities. Interaction with outsiders are more common. Food and shelter are not as scarce/difficult. \n\nThis is an interesting question. Is there a limit to this? What adaptation are we seeing when cities today are super dense? Are people in big cities \"colder\" than people who live in smaller communities?",
"That's funny, it's like that in the US also. People from the south are generally considered much more friendly than people from New England for example. ",
"Hmmm. Not sure all those facts hold true - Scots are regarded as much more welcoming and friendly than our english neighbours to the south - and our weather is pretty shit compared to theirs.",
"Personal space sphere is larger in northern countries (might be because of wast spaces who knows) so you tend to stand further from someone both when waiting for a bus or talking. \n\nPersonal space also include sound and smells. Most people are easy to talk to though but you shouldn't assume that someone wants to talk just because they are standing alone, they might have a reason for it. Don't intrude. \n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;",
"I'm interested in ancient Roman/Greek history and I made the observation that what we call \"north\" and \"south\" today corresponds vaguely to the separation between the Roman Empire (the south, roughly : the mediterranean world + France and Belgium) and the non-romanised or partly-romanised lands and populations in the north (northern Germany, the northern parts of the English islands etc). \nMaybe this has to do with a deep penetration of Latin/Germanic culture ? Or am I totally delusional ? \n",
"You're conflating the issues of personal space and sociability. I don't think they're necessarily related.\n\nIn Canada, for example most of us (ignoring Vancouver / Toronto for now, because I have no experience of that, I'm from a medium sized city) are just used to having more personal space because we're spread out. Our houses tend to be big and they all have yards. I feel a bit claustrophobic in places like England where everyone lives packed together - and much more so in other countries I have visited, where people will just get right up in your face so you can feel them breathing.\n\nThis is particularly noticeable when queuing in some countries. If I'm joining a queue, I'll stand just under a metre behind the last person. This has gotten me weird looks in other countries I've lived in, where people line up so they're basically touching the person's back. I get wildly uncomfortable in these situations.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI don't think we're less sociable. We're super friendly and happy to chat with strangers. We just expect you to stay at arm's length. I want to talk with you, not breathe your air.",
"I have been to a few places now in my travels and I think it really depends on the type of people and the culture within the area. I have been to many warm countries such and Sri Lanka and India where people are not as outgoing or open to speaking to strangers and this mostly due to the reserved nature of these cultures. Where as I've also been to norwary and Sweden where people are very friendly and approachable. So I don't know if climate and such factors affect a community as a whole. ",
"I live in northern England and I believe it is the other way round for England. The north is much more rural and everyone in the village/town will know each other so they will speak to each other a lot and be close but if you go to a big southern city such as London everyone will avoid each other as you say",
"Religion may be a factor. Catholics in Southern Europe v Lutherans in Northern Europe. In Catholicism there is more of an emphasis on the communal, whereas in Protestantism there is a larger emphasis on individualism. In Ireland, I reckon, people in, mainly Catholic, Donegal are seen as more outgoing than people in, mainly Protestant, Antrim, yet both counties are on the same latitude. In Scotland, they say something similar about Glasgow and Edinburgh, with the first of these two being the more Catholic and less stand-offish.",
"Northern Europe is cut by a dozen different rivers that flow south to north, none of which intersect. It's largely separated from Southern Europe by mountain ranges. In contrast, the south has the Mediterranean connecting pretty much everywhere. Strangers are *stranger* in a historical context up north.",
"I think it's not north and south but latitude. In Brazil, northerns are more expansive in relationships and the southern ones are more reserved and distant. Maybe because of colder weather or because its a rural and not a urban place ",
"You might be interested in Edward Hall and his work on [proxemics](_URL_0_) .",
"Just a random thought. This is definitely not a proven fact. \n\nMight be related to evolution as air is drier when colder (known fact), this enhance the volatility of viruses (that's why you are most often sick during winter). Hence in colder climates, where you are more likely to fall sick, being distant with people might be an evolutionary advantage. \n\nIt's more likely that it is just cultural (do south european children living in the north (and reciprocally) keep their land of birth behavior or their growing up country behavior ?",
"I wondered this about the difference between stereotypically \"loud\" cultures like Spanish and Italian and more stereotypically reserved ones like Scandinavian. My dad (who is Scandinavian) put it nicely: When you live in Spain and you get into an argument, you can go outside to cool off! (Not so much in the Scandinavian winter).",
"I think people might actually be barking up the wrong tree by thinking about this in terms of north and south, at least if you think of it in terms of social patterns rather than physical space.\n\nPeople in germanic countries tend to be emotionally reserved. People in romantic countries tend to be emotionally open. Take England v France for example, similar latitude but very different culture. The French have a more emotional way of expressing themselves compared with English and Germans, who are historically from the same 'stock'. Average relationship entanglement and enmeshnent is known to be higher in romantic countries than germanic ones. I don't know why this is but I would imagine it had something to do with germanic vs romantic cultures rather than modern ones. ",
"I believe this can be attributed to \"politeness theory\" and the ideas of \"negative vs positive face\". Negative face can be described as \"the desire of every person that his actions be unimpeded by others\" or \"the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction - the freedom of action and freedom from imposition\". Briefly compared, the difference between negative and positive face would be that positive face involves a desire for connection with others, whereas negative face involves a desire for autonomy and independence. In Northern Europe, at least in my experience, particularly Scandinavia, the idea of \"negative politeness\" is very strong. Basically, it is considered rude, or at least unexpected and very on-coming, to be overly imposing or familiar with someone without having established some sort of mutual relationship first.\n\nExactly why this is, I'm not entirely sure. I agree to a certain extent that the individualism incorporated in Norwegian culture by Protestantism could explain some of it. However, I also believe that geography and the general welfare resources (personal economy, education, occupational skills etc.) plays into it. Norway is a relatively small country which is easy to travel. Most people are also financially, of not strong, independent and in possession of desirable skill sets to the degree that it's easy to travel across the country or the rest of the world for that matter. As a result, it's not uncommon to move to the other side of the country to get a job or for similar reasons. We are, quite simply put, less socially bound by our close relations. This in turn strengthens the sense of personal independence and autonomy, which again builds up under the idea of \"negative politeness\" - I don't want you to bother me unnecessarily because I can handle myself, and in turn I won't bother you unnecessarily. ",
"As a Finn, can confirm. My personal space is 10 bigger than my colleagues from Brazil. \n\nDuring 30-40min of standing and talking at bar counter (empty) we had moved roughly 3.5-4m, lol. I noticed that as I shifted my weight from one leg to another I also move backwards and she would follow. ",
"Warmer weather brings people together.\n\nCold and gloomy people stay in the.... roomy?\n\nEssentially colder climates are typically less sociable. It's the psychological norm. In other climates people are socially engineered to accept living in closer proximity and more crowded places.",
"As an American living in southern Germany, I find it mildy annoying how close German's bunch up to eachother when standing in a line (queue) for instance. We like our personal space in the US, and that includes standing in line, however you do that in Europe and people just cut right in front of you like you aren't even there.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIn a seperate instance, i was at a water park in Dubai waiting in line for the rides, and the Arabs were constantly standing inside my personal space to the point of touching. Nothing quite as annoying as a half naked hairy dude touching you the entire way up the water slide stairs. (I'm a dude by the way)",
"This is kind of relevant... I’m taking a sociology course right now all about family dynamics in Europe. This is a researched topic that we’ve covered, briefly. In one paper, the phenomenon of how close we are to our families and how it influences life events is described using the terms “strong” and “weak” family ties, and they found a pretty strong distinction between northern, central, and Southern Europe. There are so many things that influence this... one theory is a rise in individualism in north/Central Europe due to leaving home earlier for apprenticeships and servant jobs, which historically were most common in central and Northern Europe. In the southern countries you typically relied on your family, who remained home until they at least were married, and sometimes after. The rise of the welfare state and policies that support the poor, homeless, and elderly created a reliance on the state rather than private sources for help; in southern countries, families protect younger generations and often rely on them for help in older age. There’s a reason there aren’t as many nursing homes in Southern Europe. Economically, wealth is passed successionally through generations in southern countries, and in north/central it’s more often individualistic and determined by contracts. Religion, culture, history, policy, government, and economics all have a role in this, so there is a LOT of variation throughout Europe. This is only one dimension of what you’re talking about, but it’s a super interesting topic and phenomenon!",
" > So why is that? Is is related to the climate? I know that at least German and English use terms like 'warmth/cold', 'distance/closeness' metaphorically to talk about social interactions so might there be a connection?\n\nSouthern Europeans use those too, just as a fact.",
"Got a degree in anthropology and climate is most def one of the reasons.\n\nThe best I can recollect is co creation of culture to climate. That the culture in colder climates, means fewer people can be at an event, in the sense that more people are welcome or can't be avoided if you go to a public space, of which there are also many more of in the south of Europe.\n\nYou can also see this on a minor scale between people who live in cities and people who live on the country side. People from cities will stand closer to each other. So even on a vertical plane around earth, you'll be able to see differences, between those from cities vs those from farms. And in general fewer people lives in the north and so the overall culture is prone to be understood on that premise.\n\nYour example from Germany, is actually a great example, because you have more in common relative to Scandinavians to Italiens.\n\nBut if we weren't to look at the climate, the culture of Jante(jantelov) is a great \"*symptom*\" for why it is as it is. If you don't believe you are the most important person, other people are equally as important and deserves as much space. Hence the distance. And most fascinating when we talk about the Finnish pictures - equal amount of space.\n\nIn other places, you might see an extraordinary amount of space around pregnant, old, men, or women. Which usually isn't the case in Scandinavia. Here the fundamental assumption is for equal amount of space. Though people do stand for old people in the bus.\n\n**TLDR**; Multiple reasons. Climate, amount of people pr km\\^2, cultural understanding of private space, among others.",
"This is something I have been often asking myself all my life. I lived in Canada, Italy and now in Denmark and damn it I miss Italy in this regard. I wish people here were more spontaneous and open to meet new people. It is so damn difficult to chat up people here and to make new friends.. I do believe climate is a factor for sure. I don't blame the culture of course. ",
"I‘m not sure if it’s only climate related. I lived in Ireland for a while and God it can be cold and rainy there (without a break). Irish people are still friendlier and much more social than Germans (I’m from Germany too). And in the recent years Germany had really hot endless summers. People were particularly pissed the hotter it got 😂",
"OP I hope you do realise, this is not a question with a \"correct' answer, just a thousand theories and speculations. On top of that, this is a broad generalisation too, it's not like a Scandinavian is genetically incapable of being as warm as an Italian, and vice versa. So I'm not sure what kind of answer you are expecting here.",
"I dont know really.. i think maybe, i just dont care about random people around me. I just dont. \n\nI live in denmark. Its not like i am raised to not talk to strangers and such. I just couldnt care less about people that i randomly come across. \n\nI talk to family, friends, people at social gatherings and of course co-workers. But random people? Why? I aint got time for that. Id rather spend my time with my family or something.\n\nMaybe we are more interested in how we spendnour time. \n\nI heard a lot of people in denmark for example, show up on the clock, at arranged time and so on. But this is less common in greece and whatever",
"How do you spot an aggressive Finn?\n\nHe looks at YOUR shoes when talking to you.\n",
"Any source that what the OP is claiming is true, or is it all stereotypes? ",
"Religion probably has a strong influence over northeners being more distant. Northern germany and scandinavia are some of the places where lutheranism took over earliest and was strongest, where as southern europe stayed mostly catholic.\n\nLutheranism placed a strong emphasis on the individual in relation to God. Faith and your relationship with God was your ticket to paradise. Catholicism emphasises the collective and giving back to the community as ways of achieving salvation.\n\nBecause Lutheranism emphasised the individual lutheran countries developed fewer informal safety nets, basically fewer charities. Fewer charities in turn meant the state needed to step in and help people in poverty or without education, essentially leading to a strong welfare state, where the citizens can trust in the system to do right by them. \n\nAnother factor may be population density, northern europe has a much lower population density than Spain for example.\n\nA third factor may be weather. Half of the year the weather in Sweden doesn’t allow people to hang out in parks or on the beach. Instead we are left with meeting friends at the bar/restaurant or in our own homes. When we invite guests to our homes it tends to be our closest friends and family. Swedes rarely talk to strangers (i remember reading a study here that ranked sweden as the worst country to make friends in). So swedes rarely get to practice their interaction with strangers.",
"We're not, but for us it's polite to give other people space and not bother eachother unless necessary.",
"I'm a foreigner who has lived in Finland for 17 years. \n\n\nFinns are quite warm and their personal space is not dissimilar to people in the UK when you see them at home or in the work place. In public you might see some differences. I've seen people stand 10 meters from a bus stop so they don't have to 'share it' with a stranger. \n\n\nAnother difference is what happens when they talk about their 'national identity', or where they have to deal with foreigners and speak, e.g. English. This is where Finns will tell you that they are quiet, without realising perhaps that they are not that quiet - how do you even know? When you see foreigners, it's easy to think they are more lively, when what is different is that it's happening in another language and so you are more focused on seeing the situation as an outsider. \n\n\nThey laugh and joke, tease, are clever with their language etc., get excited about topics or ideas, in ways that are identical to what I've seen in the UK. But around a large group of foreigners, they can lose their natural confidence and for that reason the idea of 'the silent Finn' can be a useful shield against too much scrutiny or expectation. \n\n\nAnother setting is in 'nature', where if you say hi to another walker, you can toss a coin as to whether they will just stare at you without reacting as you walk by or acknowledge your greeting in some way. But I know Finns who find this infuriating, so not all Finns are 'rude' like this. There is an ambiguity about whether it is necessary or not. \n\n\nThe exact same thing applies when it comes to crossing the road at a zebra crossing, where you just don't know if a driver is going to follow the highway rules and actually stop to let you cross. You take your life in your hands if you take it for granted that they will - sadly, this has cost the life of too many children too. It's like some people are polite and considerate and some aren't, but maybe it's just that there are two strong sets of expectations that live side by side here. ",
"Why do others want to get so close to strangers?\n\nI love to hug people I know, and try to be nice and not prejudice but I don't want to be in their face.",
"Suspect that it has to do with cultural roots tied back to the [Hajnal line](_URL_0_). Cultures from the Northwest of the Hajnal line had later marriages, lower birth rates, and atomic families. \n\nThat means the average household size is much smaller- a lot of single adults living alone, not many families with a 4+ kids, rare for extended families to be under one roof. \n\nIf you grow up in a crowded house, you get used to getting in people's face. You get comfortable being in close proximity and you don't get much alone time. Even today now that those differences have dissipated (Southern Europe now has some of the lowest birthrates in the world), over centuries that probably left a cultural impact.",
"I have no proof or anything of this, only my thoughts as a Swede.\n\nScandinavia is big on politeness. You do not inconvenience people unless you know them/know you can inconvenience them.\n\nWe aren't cold for the sake of being cold, but if someone needs anything from us it's on them to initiate.\n\nI don't know about the italian/swede speaking thing, I assume that is just cultural differences, I see people moving their arms alot in conversation as riled up/angry while that is just how people from other cultures speak.\n\nIf I had to choose one word to describe Scandinavian culture it would be \"Measured\"\n\nI assume less people around means you have to stay on good terms with the few thats around kn general. Or maybe it is religion, or the climate. I've no idea.",
"It has a great deal to do with cultural significance of individualistic mindset vs. collectivist cultures where a collectivist focuses more on relationships while an individualist is placing more importance on achievement:\n\n > (...) the theory of communication that was laid out by two social psychologists, Yuri Miyamoto and Norbert Schwarz. They define two main functions of communication: informational (to convey information to others) and relational (to build and maintain relationships with others). They found that individualistic cultures place a “greater value on the informational function of communication, whereas collectivistic cultures place a greater emphasis on the relational function.” It makes sense that individualistic cultures rely less on touch, a form of communication that cultivates relationships, simply because they value that less.\n\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)",
"Having grown up in the northwestern part of Norway (just outside Ålesund) I have reflected on this many times. In fact, this is not an uncommon conversation topic amongst us natives. \n\n I think your question in part asnwers itself, and I was half wondering that if I answer this in a serious tone, the joke would be on me. But anyway, we are physically more distant to each other then in a lot of countries, especially in the western cultural influence part of the world. If you look at especially western Norwegian geography and topography, you'll see that we do have a lot of space. Population is scattered in pockets along the coast, with typical rural centres will be found in the \"tip\" of the fjord. Before modern times, you had to sail around or scale mountains to get in touch with others, and tribalism and rivalry probably made us hostile and suspicious to each others groups.\n\n S0 maybe our attitudes to strangers are formed by our history and geography. You also have the fact that climate makes us stay indoors a lot in more than half the year, so we are more used to each others company, and less used to meeting and spending time with strangers.\n\n ",
"I wonder if comments are still posting here. Well, I suppose we will find out....\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI'm a bit disappointed that this was removed and viewed as some sort of nasty post.\n\nI do have a response but it's not really for a 5 year old. [Who We are and how we got here](_URL_0_) is a book by David Reich, head of the DNA lab at Harvard. He does a great job at explaining how people migrated though-out all the continents using new research available within the last 3-4 years (and MUCH has changed).\n\n & #x200B;\n\nAs a bit of a spoiler, he's not a believer in evolution (as you know it). There are many markers for when diseases start through the ages but there is still no proof that man kind has ever been anything but mankind. Anyhow, it's worth the read. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxemics"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajnal_line"
],
[],
[
"http://www.brownpoliticalreview.org/2018/10/personal-space-american-individualism/"
],
[],
[
"https://www.amazon.com/Who-Are-How-Got-Here/dp/110187032X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1550765565&sr=8-3&keywords=david++reich"
]
] |
||
5vgmjc | in medical terms, when they say someone has, "lost a lot of blood," what does "a lot" mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vgmjc/eli5_in_medical_terms_when_they_say_someone_has/ | {
"a_id": [
"de1ybfi",
"de1zn2m",
"de2abtz",
"de2hf8l"
],
"score": [
5,
43,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Enough comparable to their mass that it would be important to know that this amount of blood loss has been sustained.\n\n\"A lot\" is not a precise medical term. It just helps distinguish between someome who has lost a little bit of blood (such as from a shallow cut) compared to someone who has lost more.",
"Try to picture 5 litres of blood. That's about 13 or so regular cans of Pepsi, and also roughly (give or take depending on gender/size/etc) the amount of blood in a person. Your average blood donation takes about 8% of that, so pretty much just one can of Pepsis worth. \n\nHowever... should you find yourself unlucky enough to lose more than 20% (...About 3 cans of Pepsi) they go into what is known as Hypovolemic shock. Its pretty nasty. \n\nSo yeah, medically speaking, a fair representation of \"a lot\" would be near or greater than 20% of your blood, or roughly 2-3 cans of Pepsi's worth.",
"You can loose till 15% of 5l of blood without clinical repercussions. So after that you can say it's a lot. Even so you can lose till 50% without dieing in very critical situations. ",
"In medical terms, you enter a shock state after loosing 0.5l of blood. This is where medical personnel should start doing medical personnel things.\nA loss of about 2l of blood is usually fatal, the drastic drop in blood pressure leading to organ failure and death.\nWhile \"a lot\" is not a defined amount, I'd say it means anything from 0.5 to 2l of lost blood. \n\nOf course, these numbers are dependent on the patient's body mass. A child has less blood than a standard adult, and a standard adult has less blood than a massively obese person. \n\nAs u/MirrorShieldMart/ pointed out, if you donate blood you give about 0.5l. This is the threshold of OK/start worrying.\n\nSource: I am a medic."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
624y7p | how is the position on the earth's surface determined by a gps? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/624y7p/eli5how_is_the_position_on_the_earths_surface/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfjs7p6",
"dfjscgr"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"There is a cluster of satellites in orbit (the much cooler term is \"constellation of satellites\").\n\nEach one has a very accurate clock and they continuously broadcast their current time and which satellite they are. Your GPS device receives these time signals and since it knows (a) which satellite sent which signal, (b) where each satellite is supposed to be at that exact moment in time, and (c) that times three, it can use a technique called \"trilatteration\" to figure out where it is. \n\nYour GPS device never sends anything out, it only receives. The satellites never send out location information, just times and IDs. We just know where they are supposed to be at given times.\n\nIn the end, it's the same basic mechanism of star navigation sailors have used for centuries, except that this time we made the stars. ",
"GPS is a constellation of over 30 satellites that constantly orbit the Earth at about 20.000 km. With those satellites, the entire globe is covered. It's the equivalent of looking at the stars to know your position, but all day round.\n\nNow, what you need to know your position is to connect with at least three satellites (usually four). Your receiver constantly connects with them. It calculates the distance to all of them and from it, it can derive its latitude, longitude (and altitude). How does it calculate the distance? All satellites have the same time stamp that they send along with their name. The receiver gets all these time stamps but they are all different from one another, the ones very delayed have traveled a greater distance than the ones closer to the current time. It can calculate with the lag the distance to each satellite, and once it knows it, the exact position of the receiver follows.\n\n[Take a look at this](_URL_0_)\n\nAn easy 2-D example. You got the time stamps, calculated the distances: \n\nYou're 30 m away from your friend John (you can be anywhere in a circle centered in John)\n\nAND 30 m away from your friend Sally (you can be in either of the two intersections of the circle centered in John and the circle centered in Sally)\n\nAND 14 m away from your dog (you can only be in one exact point, where all three circles cross).\n\nGPS is the same but with spheres.\n\nAh, it doesn't send the time stamp in hh:mm:ss, it sends a signal from which you can very accurately derive the time stamp.\n\nNow, it would be very helpful if someone could shed light about how (step by step) does the little receiver guess the best route from all possible routes to go from A to B. Does it consider ALL routes exiting from A? Even the ones in the wrong direction?\n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.avionicswest.com/Articles/howGPSworks.html"
]
] |
||
1kao3h | what do the numbers and letters mean/represent on a camera lens? | For example: 24-105mm f/4L IS | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1kao3h/eli5_what_do_the_numbers_and_letters/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbn0lk4",
"cbn1rxu",
"cbn2moy"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The numbers before mm = focal length, the fact that there are two indicates that this is a zoom lens. A small number = wide field of view, a big number = small field of view. \n\nf/4L = maximum (biggest) aperture. This is the size of the opening in the lens to let light in. It is always a ratio to the focal length. A small number ie f/1.4 is a big hole which lets in lots of light. A big number ie f/22 is a small hole which lets in not that much light. \nAs indicated before, since this is the maximum aperture, the lens is actually capable of something like f/4-f/22. f/4 being the most light the lens can let in.\nAs a side note, aperture controls how much is in focus. at f/1.4 (big hole) there is only a small distance set which is in 'acceptable' focus. at f/22 (small hole) there is a large distance which is 'acceptable' focus.\n\nIS = Image Stabilizer, this means the engineers have put in something to detect movement and do some fancy magic to let the lens minimize this effect, letting you handhold at a slower shutter speed than you normally could and not get a blurred image.",
"And on the front of the lens will give you another #mm. That number is filter/lens cap size of the lens. For example, I have a Canon 50mm 1.2L lens with a 72mm filter size. ",
"Since others have answered in reference to the 24-105, I'll explain one of the most common lenses, the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. \n\n**18-55mm:** This is the lens focal length. 18mm is the widest (zoomed out) and 55mm is the longest (zoomed in).\n\n**f/:** \"f/\" denotes aperture value. The aperture is a ratio based on measurements of a lens. The lower the value, the wider the opening at the back of the lens. The higher the value, the smaller the opening. This affects many aspects of a shot.\n\n**3.5-5.6:** The numbers after the \"f/\" specify the widest aperture value of that lens. If two numbers are listed that means that widest available aperture changes when the lens is zoomed. In this case, at 18mm the widest available aperture is f/3.5. As the lens is zoomed, the aperture closes. Once the lens gets to 55mm, its widest available aperture is f/5.6."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2u33oh | effectiveness of multiple birth control methods | If a woman is on a pill that is, say, 99% effective when taken correctly, and then she additionally uses a second birth control method that is, say, 75% effective, is there some way to calculate the total percentage of how protected against pregnancy she should be? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u33oh/eli5_effectiveness_of_multiple_birth_control/ | {
"a_id": [
"co4o0oz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Those percentages are the percent of couples where the woman did not get pregnant after a year of using that birth control method. So if a birth control pill advertises 99% effectiveness, that means that 1 couple out of a hundred got pregnant after a year of using that method.\n\nTo figure out how effective two methods would be, you would use the following formula: (1-%x) * (1-%y), where %x is the % effectiveness of birth control method 1 and %y is for method 2. So, for example, if you're on a birth control method that's 60% effective and one that's 70% effective, you would do (1-.7) * (1-.6) = .3*.4 = .12. There's a 12% chance that you would get pregnant after one year of using both those methods. What you're calculating is the odds of getting pregnant and multiplying them together, since both methods would have to fail.\n\nThis of course assumes the methods are compatible. Some methods are, like combining condoms and the pill. Some aren't; for example, taking double the birth control pills or using two condoms may decrease the effectiveness of those methods.\n\nEdit: For your example, you would do (1-.99) * (1-.75), so there's a .25% she would get pregnant after a year."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
kog40 | why do people hoard gold when they think society is going to end? | Does gold really have any intrinsic value? Because if I thought society was going to regress to the dark ages, I'd hoard things like food, and tools, and protection. A shiny stone doesn't mean much if you're starving to death. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kog40/eli5_why_do_people_hoard_gold_when_they_think/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2lwtj8",
"c2lwvjg",
"c2m3ifv",
"c2lwtj8",
"c2lwvjg",
"c2m3ifv"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Gold is valued for the same reason paper money is: other people value it. If you needed to, you could buy something with it. Because the seller would assume *he* could buy something with it. Just like cash.\n\nIn addition, the supply of Gold is very limited. Its value cannot be deflated by increased supply. (That can happen to cash.) \n\nGold is also among the prettiest of the rare metals. It has been used by artisans for thousands of years.",
"They don't think society is going to necessarily regress to the dark ages, just that the economy is going to collapse.\n\nThis has actually happened in modern day countries, like Zimbabwe and Argentina. Economic turmoil lead to those countries' currency losing value to the point where a million dollars turned into pennies. Things were bad, real bad, but neither country was a post apocalyptic wasteland. \n\nIf people in those countries had gold instead of money, they could have sold it bad when the currency stabilized, and kept their fortune. Or they could have sold their gold in another country, and moved there. ",
" > if I thought society was going to regress to the dark ages, I'd hoard things like food, and tools, and protection.\n\nThe people hoarding gold don't think society's going to collapse. They just think that there's going to be massive inflation that makes our paper money worthless.\n\nThat's why they buy gold. Gold doesn't change it's value nearly as fast as paper money does. When paper money seems to be taking a huge nose-dive in value, gold is a much safer way to store your wealth.",
"Gold is valued for the same reason paper money is: other people value it. If you needed to, you could buy something with it. Because the seller would assume *he* could buy something with it. Just like cash.\n\nIn addition, the supply of Gold is very limited. Its value cannot be deflated by increased supply. (That can happen to cash.) \n\nGold is also among the prettiest of the rare metals. It has been used by artisans for thousands of years.",
"They don't think society is going to necessarily regress to the dark ages, just that the economy is going to collapse.\n\nThis has actually happened in modern day countries, like Zimbabwe and Argentina. Economic turmoil lead to those countries' currency losing value to the point where a million dollars turned into pennies. Things were bad, real bad, but neither country was a post apocalyptic wasteland. \n\nIf people in those countries had gold instead of money, they could have sold it bad when the currency stabilized, and kept their fortune. Or they could have sold their gold in another country, and moved there. ",
" > if I thought society was going to regress to the dark ages, I'd hoard things like food, and tools, and protection.\n\nThe people hoarding gold don't think society's going to collapse. They just think that there's going to be massive inflation that makes our paper money worthless.\n\nThat's why they buy gold. Gold doesn't change it's value nearly as fast as paper money does. When paper money seems to be taking a huge nose-dive in value, gold is a much safer way to store your wealth."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
lwmq2 | how do scram jets work? | I have decent understanding to how a regular jet engine creates thrust, but how does a Scram jet engine get so much compression so fast, and what fuel does it use?? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lwmq2/how_do_scram_jets_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2w5wp3",
"c2w5wp3"
],
"score": [
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Unlike a typical jet engine, such as a turbojet or turbofan engine, a scramjet does not use rotating, fan-like components to compress the air; rather, the achievable speed of the aircraft moving through the atmosphere causes the air to compress within the inlet. \n\nWhere a rocket engine carries liquid fuel and liquid oxygen, combining them together for the combustion that creates thrust, a scramjet takes the oxygen from the atmosphere passing through the vehicle and combusts it at supersonic speeds. \n\nThe craft becomes smaller, lighter and faster by not having to carry as much fuel, and creates a more powerful combustion reaction by keeping the airflow supersonic.\n\n ",
"Unlike a typical jet engine, such as a turbojet or turbofan engine, a scramjet does not use rotating, fan-like components to compress the air; rather, the achievable speed of the aircraft moving through the atmosphere causes the air to compress within the inlet. \n\nWhere a rocket engine carries liquid fuel and liquid oxygen, combining them together for the combustion that creates thrust, a scramjet takes the oxygen from the atmosphere passing through the vehicle and combusts it at supersonic speeds. \n\nThe craft becomes smaller, lighter and faster by not having to carry as much fuel, and creates a more powerful combustion reaction by keeping the airflow supersonic.\n\n "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2l6imt | why did it take so long to rebuild at the wtc compared to after the okc bombings? | I feel like the buildings around the OKC bombing were rebuilt and functional and the museum up and running within a couple of years yet we're just now opening WTC One again. Is it because the structure is obviously more complicated to build or are there other factors at work here? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2l6imt/eli5why_did_it_take_so_long_to_rebuild_at_the_wtc/ | {
"a_id": [
"clrwdrs",
"clrwldh",
"clrza90"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In addition to the structure, there's a lot more cramped space in downtown New York. The attention on the project also meant a much more complex process in choosing an architect and a design for 1 WTC.",
"Politics, for one. To put it simply: nobody can agree on anything.\n\nTwo: poor designing. One of the initial architects that was hired to design the new building designed it poorly. He had never designed anything larger than a 3-story building. There was initially supposed to be a very large garden on the top of Freedom Tower, but the way it was designed would've essentially had it get destroyed in heavy winds.\n\nWhile [I'm sure] there's more to it, these are what I know without having time to dive too deep.",
"While there are reasons already mentioned what took the WTC such a long time, what took OKC such a short time is because none of the buildings in Oklahoma were more than nine stories. The WTC was over 100 stories. It's just not a comparable situation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1tgqmc | why don't people living in 3rd world countries dig wells without aid? | After seeing many adverts on the tv about how donated money will be used to create wells for fresh drinking water I can't help but wonder what's so special about the wells that are created? Why can't the people in these countries just dig down to find fresh water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tgqmc/eli5_why_dont_people_living_in_3rd_world/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce7r9re"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"in many areas it is not uncommon to need to dig anywhere from 100 to 600 meters to reach water. This requires not only an expensive drilling rig but also well casing (pipe) and pump systems. \n\n _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://thewaterproject.org/digging-wells-in-africa-and-india-how-it-works.asp"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.