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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
7ha954 | what exactly is the advantage of smartphones having all glass bodies? is there a reason companies have been making the backs of their phones glass too? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ha954/eli5_what_exactly_is_the_advantage_of_smartphones/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqpd7wf",
"dqpdpdm",
"dqphjd9"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They look really pretty in product shots. Makes them look & feel \n\"luxurious\" even though glass is of course cheap as dirt, but plastic *feels* cheaper.",
"Glass is transparent to cellular signals. Metal bodies would interfere with wireless charging and with wireless signals. Plastic is cheap and scratches more easily than DLC coated glass. ",
"I suspect rear metal covers inhibit wireless charging?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3awh7z | how does a hostile take over work? | I am having trouble understanding the legality of a hostile takeover. How can you legally and forcefully take something that belongs to someone else? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3awh7z/eli5_how_does_a_hostile_take_over_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"csgllux",
"csglmcl",
"csgq8sh"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Usually this means publicly traded companies. You buy enough shares in a company to gain a majority, known as a controlling share. At this point it is *yours* and you can force current management out. ",
"Hostile takeovers can only happen to publicly traded companies, which means they are owned by the stockholders. If a rival buys enough stock to own most of the company, then at the next stockholders meeting his majority vote will say what happens with the company, if that happens to be it will be sold/merged/divested to a rival company, then so be it. ",
"What others haven't mentioned is what specifically makes it *hostile*. If I, in company A, were to try to buy out company B, what could happen is that:\n\nB could try to buy a majority share/make buying a majority share impossible.\n\nAnd/or the prices go up drastically as the demand skyrockets.\n\nWhat companies do in a hostile takeover is try to very suddenly buy up a huge amount of stock to get a majority before either of those things can happen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2i0lm4 | what is a fast fourier transform telescope and how does it work? | [Fast Fourier Transform Telescope](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i0lm4/eli5_what_is_a_fast_fourier_transform_telescope/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckxpm00"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Normally a telescope uses lenses and mirrors to focus the desired incoming light and filtering out the unwanted light so that the image that's trying to be seen is as clear and bright as possible.\n\nYou're probably familiar with a wave. It has a wavelength, amplitude, etc., and looks something like [this](_URL_0_). But when you actually receive waves via a sensor, it usually looks more like [this](_URL_1_). That's because you're never picking up just one isolated wave. It's always a mixture of a bunch of different waves with different frequencies and amplitudes.\n\nA fourier transform is a technique to take a mixture of waves like in the second picture and separate out the different waves that it's composed of. Fast fourier transform is just a computer algorithm that does a fourier transform. Light is a wave (or behaves like one), so if you look back at the first paragraph about what lenses and mirrors in a telescope do, it sounds kind of like a fourier transform. It's trying to isolate a few waves in a mixture of a bunch of them. Scientists have known since the 1800s that the lenses and mirrors in a telescope are essentially performing a fourier transform.\n\nNow that computers have become powerful enough, telescopes can actually be made where a computer replaces the lenses and mirrors. Instead of focusing the light coming into the telescope, the telescope just collects everything and sends it to a computer, which runs the Fast Fourier Transform algorithm to separate out the desired image. It's basically simulating exactly what the lenses and mirrors would do."
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Fourier_Transform_Telescope"
] | [
[
"http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/physics/images/waves1.gif",
"http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/hd-radio-4.jpg"
]
] |
|
4eunhc | what kind of injuries would actually cause you to bleed from the mouth like in movies? | We see it all the time in film and TV: you know someone is jacked up when blood drips (sometimes pours) from their mouths. But it seems like so many different types of injuries can cause this. Whether it's being shot, stabbed, falling from high up, getting a good enough ass kicking, being mauled or any other number of things. So what kind of injuries would realistically result in blood coming from your mouth? Aside from mouth injuries, of course. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4eunhc/eli5_what_kind_of_injuries_would_actually_cause/ | {
"a_id": [
"d23hx7h",
"d23lipf"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If you get bleeding in the GI system ( stabbed or ulcer) or the respiratory system you can get blood coming through the oral cavity\n\n",
"Movies use bleeding from the mouth as sort of a trope just to convey a serious injury. It's a good visual shorthand.\n\nGetting shot in the lung would cause some bleeding from the mouth but most likely not the drippy, oozing bleeding you see in the movies.\n\nI had a few buddies take rounds to the lungs in Afghanistan and never saw any of them bleed from the mouth."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6yuky9 | how are digital maps made? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6yuky9/eli5_how_are_digital_maps_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmq86ft",
"dmq8khe"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I know it sounds dumb and simplistic but they draw over top of aerial photos. It's obviously more complicated than that but that is the basics of what they do.\n\nHere's an article that digs more into it: _URL_0_",
"Can you explain what you're asking, OP? Because the straightforward answer is \"Digital mapping software\". "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/09/how-google-builds-its-maps-and-what-it-means-for-the-future-of-everything/261913/"
],
[]
] |
||
90824u | why does ethylene glycol lower water's freezing point, but pure ethylene glycol has a higher freezing temp than an aqueous solution? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/90824u/eli5_why_does_ethylene_glycol_lower_waters/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2of63y",
"e2ogdjm",
"e2pdtkq"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Increased opportunity for hydrogen bonding btwn OH glycol groups and water, rather than each other",
"This is true generally, whenever something dissolves in something else. Salt water freezes at a temperature less than either pure salt or pure water, lead-tin solder freezes at a temperature less than pure lead or pure tin, etc. Generally there's a specific concentration called the \"eutectic\" point where the freezing point is smallest.\n\nThis happens because the molecules in a liquid are always bouncing around at random different speeds, but they bounce around more slowly when the temperature is lower. To freeze, they need to be moving slowly enough to stick together in a solid clump, and not be be knocked free of the clump by other fast-moving molecules. Having a mix of molecule A and molecule B means it's less likely that two slow-moving A's will strike each other and stick together (the B's get in the way), and if they do stick it's more likely that a molecule B will come by and knock them apart. To compensate for that, you need to make the molecules move even more slowly -- which is to say, to freeze a mixture you need to make it colder.",
"Ethylene glycol and H2O interact via hydrogen bonds which occupies electrons and reduces the water-water or ethylene glycol-ethylene glycol interactions. Water freezes by forming hexagonal crystals, and cannot truly “freeze” while connected or obstructed by Ethylene Glycol, and vise versa. This leads to both of them having a lower freezing point than each of them individually. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ajsk00 | when the president travels, domestically or abroad, how can he ensure all his food is safe to eat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ajsk00/eli5_when_the_president_travels_domestically_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"eeyd31b",
"eeyd3rr",
"eeylijo"
],
"score": [
4,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"The Secret Service footprint surrounding the President is pretty large. They spend every waking moment checking things like this, whether it's at an official state banquet or just Tuesday night's dinner.",
"Everything he eats is tested. It will also either be brought with him on Air Force 1 or there will be observers placed in the kitchen to watch how it is prepared and to check it for safety. ",
"Nothing is ordered knowing it is intended for the President. Plain clothes agents order and pick up the food under a John Doe name.\n \nSecondly, as part of the safety net food is delivered to the White House by companies that have undergone background checks. .\n\nShopping is performed in plain clothes with an unmarked van etc.... A long time ago I knew a friend of a friend of a friend etc. that went to membership warehouses around D.C. to pick out and fill flat bed shopping carts with groceries.\n\nAlso, there is a \"presidential food taster.\" and it's the executive chef. \n\nIf you think about it, if the President went out for some ice-ream for a PR opportunity the store wouldn't know he was coming and would not have time to prepare. I'm sure the security detail is watching as well.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
fyw28l | if there are black jaguars and black leopards, why aren’t there any black lions or tigers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fyw28l/eli5_if_there_are_black_jaguars_and_black/ | {
"a_id": [
"fn262l3"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"This form of dark coloration is known as melanism. It occurs in many species, particularly in domestic animals where selection on coloration is less intense (you also see this with albino coloration). Melanistic jaguars and leopards seem to live mostly in thickly vegetated areas where dark coloration wouldn't severely hinder their camoflage, allowing the genes for dark coloration to persist in the population. There's no reason to think melanistic tigers or lions couldn't exist, but if selection tends to remove the mutation from the population because it interferes with camoflage (easy to see how this would happen with lions, but less obvious with tigers), then black lions and tigers would only happen when a fresh mutation occurs, and that would be very rare. There aren't huge numbers of lions and tigers out there so it's no surprise people haven't found them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7abvq2 | what is the point of the standard deduction in tax returns? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7abvq2/eli5_what_is_the_point_of_the_standard_deduction/ | {
"a_id": [
"dp8o1n2"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The Congress created the standard deduction in 1944 to make tax filing simpler for most Americans. Rather than keep receipts and fill out complex paperwork to file for dozens of specific deductions, the standard deduction allowed a taxpayer to just reduce his/her taxable income by 10%. The Congress in 1964 changed the deduction to a dollar amount, so as to permit the poorest Americans to avoid paying taxes altogether. The deduction still serves those dual purposes today -- making filing simpler for most Americans, and eliminating tax liability for the poorest Americans.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.marketplace.org/2017/05/09/economy/history-income-taxs-standard-deduction-more-interesting-than-you-think"
]
] |
||
1a637w | how do people dive into those tiny swimming pools unharmed? | it just seems impossible to me.. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1a637w/eli5_how_do_people_dive_into_those_tiny_swimming/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8uf8pf",
"c8uvchu"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You're talking about as part of a stage show? Where someone does a high dive into a shallow pool?\n\nThey just do a belly-flop. Hitting the water like that makes you stop much faster and not hit the bottom of the pool.",
"Water, when sitting there, as something called \"surface tension.\" The reason, scientifically, was pretty well explained [here](_URL_0_), by /u/MmmVomit in another thread. What this surface tension means is that the water has some ability to stop things that fall, though not to the same extent as a solid, like the ground. That is how some insects, like the [Water Strider](_URL_1_) are able to walk.\n\nNow, in terms of jumping into the water. Remember when you are on a diving board, and the different jumps have different results? These divers all do a belly flop into the water, so that they have a very high-surface area that hits the water, allowing more of the surface tension to stop their body. This is the opposite of when you do a \"pencil dive,\" when you go straight down, feet first. When you jumped off the diving board and belly-flopped, you may have gone only a few inches into the water, but a pencil dive gets you feet, right?\n\nIt's the same principle. Since you only need a little bit of water to stop, the performers can use just a little bit of water, not leaving themselves a buffer that we get in a pool."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1a6hcx/eli5_why_does_water_expand_when_frozen/c8uj3tq",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Strider"
]
] |
|
553f5v | how long until global warming makes a country uninhabitable or kills millions of people? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/553f5v/eli5_how_long_until_global_warming_makes_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d876v0q"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Ok this is gonna be sort of ranty at the start but it should come together so stay with me. First don't use the term global warming it's a term used by journalist and it doesn't properly explain what's happen the better term is climate change.\nSecond climate change isn't going to directly do anything ecosystems will start to die and make and life will be harder but we will be fine for a while.\nFinally to answer your question you only need the global average to rise 2° for the effect to be blatant, coastal areas to rise, rainforest dying, large quantities of marine species going extinct. That is projected to happen in the next 60 years give or take 20 depending on how bad things get in the coming years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
30b0e9 | last year was comcast & timewarner. now is heinz and kraft. how exactly do anti-monopoly laws work? do they work at all? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30b0e9/eli5_last_year_was_comcast_timewarner_now_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpqrj4c",
"cpqx7cj",
"cpqzyhp",
"cpr43a3"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The thing with Comcast and TimeWarner (which has not been approved yes, as far as I know) is that proponents of fusions like that argue that the companies never directly competed against each other in the first place, and they can therefore argue that customers will not be losing any options (as they never had them). \n\nBasically, most ISPs function in what are more or less regional monopolies. If you live in city A, you only choice is going to be Comcast. If you live in city B, you only choice is TimeWarner. These regional monopolies evolved not because these companies created a hostile market for newcomers (which would be illegal under anti-trust laws), but rather because there are naturally high barriers of entry that kept other people from wanting to compete there in the first place as they won't be certain they will be able to make a profit. The government can't force companies to enter geographical markets that would not be profitable for them. \n\nAnti-trust laws forbid things that would harm normal competition, but if this competition was not present anyway before, will it really harm the customer?\n\n(mind you, I am not saying this is necessarily my opinion. Just that this is the argumentation that two of the big ISPs that fused on my own country used and under that they were approved) ",
"A few years ago, Kraft split up into two separate companies. This new Heinz-Kraft combo won't even be as big as the original Kraft was, so there's not much of an antitrust argument to be made here. \n\nAlso, as already noted, there's very little overlap in the Heinz and Kraft brand lines, beyond \"they both make food\".",
"I think the problem at hand with the Comcast and TimeWarner merger is that internet services are what we'd consider a necessity and utility. If one giant group owns most of the means, they can force customers into bad situations, because, well, they can. When food companies merge, what's the worst that can happen? There is only one brand of mac 'n cheese? You don't need mac 'n cheese. You need internet in this day and age, though. The Craft and Heinz merger isn't nearly the same kind of threat for the consumer.",
"In addition to what others said, it is not about the size of the total company, it's about the percentage of the market. \n\nWhen SEC refused AT & T to but T-Mobile, they determined that in the cell phone business, you need T-Mobile, because without them, it would come down to just Verizon and at & t, and would stifle sprint. That result would be uncompetitive. That's why sprint considered buying T-Mobile afterwards, because they thought because the issue wasn't the amount of competing companies, but the ability for there to be sufficient competition in the market to keep prices consumer friendly. \n\nTherefore, the argument against comcast/twc isn't about the size of the company, but rather, the fact that would control so much of the total market, they would force unfair prices, not to the consumer, but to content providers. \n\nThat's why Kraft-Heinz is totally not an issue, because together they would make up only the fifth largest food company. (Unlike att & t+T-Mobile, which was the largest buying the fourth largest, and unlike comcast buying two, which was number 1 buying number 2).\n\nEven if kraft-heinz had directly competing products, the food market has more than enough competition, from Nestle to Mondelez (Nabisco), from general Mills and kellogs to pepsi-frito-lay, the food market had veryhealthy competition. \n\n\nLastly, in nearly any merger, the SEC will look at the more granular level to see if there are specific sectors within the total market which would be non-competitive, and the companies almost always agree to spin off parts that are in the way. \n\nFor example, if Kraft had owned, let's say, Hunts ketchup, kraft would offer to spin or sell the hunts brand, because within the ketchup market its pretty much Heinz and Hunts. If they joined, that would be a monopoly in ketchup, and its worth selling Hunts, a tiny piece of the overall company, so the rest of the corporations could merge. \n\n\nSee here t[his](_URL_0_) article, about the cimcast TwC merger, where comcast offered to sell subscribers (probably the subscribers that were in specific markets where two and comcast did in fact compete until now. ) in order to lessen the impact of the market resulting market domination. Obviously, the issues with comcast ate such that we all know, regardless of the merger, that the market is not competitive, and they should not be allowed to become less so. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/comcast-sells-subscribers-to-charter-to-help-clear-way-for-merger-with-time-warner-cable/2014/04/28/e59ffb60-cf0a-11e3-937f-d3026234b51c_story.html"
]
] |
||
3e33ub | why laws aren't retroactive. | In some cases, someone is put behind bars for 5 years and 2 years after he's been sentenced, the law was repealed. Why aren't people released if the government has decided the law shouldn't exist? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e33ub/eli5_why_laws_arent_retroactive/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctb0cfx",
"ctb0fz3"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Because people are subject to the laws in force at the time they commit the crime.\n\nAlthough it is often possible for people in such circumstances to get some degree of clemency. A pardon or clemency petition will have a lot more pull if the crime no longer exists.",
"Using the US as an example...\n\nIf the law is determined to be unconstitutional, then the Supreme Court (or whoever) is saying that the law never should have existed in the first place. Anyone who is imprisoned for *just* violating that law should be released immediately because they never committed a crime.\n\nIf a law is changed, the original law was still a valid & good law, and anyone who violated the law when it was in force will still be punished *unless* the new law makes provisions for releasing them. If the law doesn't provide forgiveness, it's up to each individual to plead before the court to have their sentence reduced.\n\nFor example, let's look at Prohibition. If you were caught with a truck full of whiskey, you're not *just* in there for the simple act of possessing the hooch - you're thumbing your nose at the entire idea of government authority and social order."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1eo6to | how do we know we're not living in a hologram? | The title says it. I heard about this theory and find it mind boggling. Seeing if anyone else is into this theory.
Thanks | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1eo6to/eli5_how_do_we_know_were_not_living_in_a_hologram/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca255cv",
"ca25r0e"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Strictly speaking, it's not a theory. Nor is it science: like the idea that we are living inside a simulation, there's probably no way to prove it false. If it isn't testable, it isn't science.",
"This is a philosophical question, and very much up for debate, although there is a group of scientists trying to test this hypothesis. I don't have article handy, sorry.\n\nHere's what I've learned to think about this: We don't know, and maybe never will, but we go about our lives as if we are not simulations because that's the easy way to make sense of everything (Occam's Razor and all that). Even if we were living in a simulation, what would it change? A lot of people would suddenly have existential crises, but what would actually be different? The physical world that we interact with would still be the same thing, and we would continue to interact with it in the same way.\n\nCheck out the concept of [Brain-in-a-vat](_URL_0_) for more ideas about this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_in_a_vat"
]
] |
|
1uzpkt | how come i can wake up at 11, play video games till 2, and not be hungry, but when i get up at 6:15 eat breakfast first, then go to school i'm hungry early in the day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uzpkt/how_come_i_can_wake_up_at_11_play_video_games/ | {
"a_id": [
"cenaiv9",
"cenam3a",
"cenase9",
"cenbjhv"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"I'd rephrase this and try again, I'd love to know the answer.",
"Sunday: wake up at 11am, skip breakfast, play some video games, not hungry till 2pm.\nMonday: wake up at 6:15am, eat breakfast, go out, hungry before noon.",
"It has to do with the idea of fasting. Breakfast is literally breaking the fast that you go through while you sleep. If you don't eat when you wake up, you are still fasting, so you body is not expects that it is not going to be fed, thus you aren't hungry. When you eat breakfast, it more or less starts your system, so you get hungry because your body is expecting food at closer intervals. ",
"To anyone here trying to reply, I think the gist of the question is, why can I lounge around the weekend without eating, but when I have an exam on Monday, I feel like I'm starving at 11 am? "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xp06q | why do my feet get cold and restless when trying to go to bed? | So why do I feel like I need to kick things when trying to go to bed, and why do they feel numb and static like? This only occurs at night, when I should be sleeping! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xp06q/eli5_why_do_my_feet_get_cold_and_restless_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfdbk8t"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You might need to consult with a doctor but your symptoms **mirror** restless leg syndrome (RLS). RLS is a neurological disorder that is characterized by unpleasant sensations in the legs and an uncontrollable urge to move them; especially at night and while in bed.\n\nThe cause of RLS is not well known but genetic links have been suggested. A specific brain region has also been implicated in RLS. The basal ganglia (a structure in the brain) produces a neurotransmitter (dopamine) that helps us have controlled movement and it has been suggested that abnormalities in this area lead to RLS.\n\nMore information: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/restless_legs/detail_restless_legs.htm"
]
] |
|
8twb3m | large scale debt | As I know it the basic form of debt goes like this: I borrow $100 from Joe, so he lends it to me, but before he gets paid back he ends up needing $1,000 which he borrows from Bill. Bill ends up needing $1,000 before Joe can pay it back to him and for some reason he can't get anyone to lend him money. And then Joe dies. So Bill's screwed and has to suffer in a way.
America is in trillions of dollars of debt, so when it's on such a huge scale, who is at the end of it? Who is getting screwed so bad and ripped off? Because surely you can't pay off 14.6 trillion dollars in a lifetime, even if it's over a ton of people, let alone trace it back to where it even started. So someone somewhere must be getting screwed over, right? And what about when debt is forgiven..? Doesn't that mean someone somewhere isn't getting paid for their work?
There's definitely a huge part of this I'm missing and I'm hoping someone could explain it to me. Sorry if it's a dumb question. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8twb3m/eli5_large_scale_debt/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1aqej5",
"e1aqwoe",
"e1asywu",
"e1axnwt",
"e1bk8r8"
],
"score": [
4,
5,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Giant figures like this are simply the *sum* of a large number of small debts. The US Government doesn't owe trillions of dollars to one party; it has borrowed a thousand here and a million there, and promised to pay a thousand here and a million there, and it adds up.\n\nNo one's getting screwed over. The US is so big and rich, it can actually pay these debts.",
"The debt is in the form of treasury bonds. They have set interest rates with set maturation dates that cannot be cashed out early. So as long as we can afford the \"bills\" when they come due it does not matter how high the debt gets. The closest analogy on the level of personal debt would be getting a mortgage on a house, you have no issue if you can meet the payments each month. Countries do have the added advantage of effectively be immortal, so there is no issue of them dying before paying the debt. ",
"Your perception of debt seems to be slightly confused. No offence. After all, that's what ELI5 is for.\n\nIt might be easier to explain debt from the other side: the lender. So, say a bank lends 100 people $100 each for one year. They charge 10% interest. This is obviously massively simplified, but it'll do.\n\nNow let's assume that 80 of those people pay back their debt, fine, no issues. The bank receives $8,800.\n\n15 people pay it back, but pay it back late. The bank has to get this money back, and so this costs them $2 per person. So, in total, the bank receives $1,620 from those people ($100 original loan + $10 interest - $2 for the cost of getting that money back x 15 people).\n\nFinally, 5 people never pay it back. For whatever reason, the bank simply can not get any of that money back. So, that's $0.\n\nIn total, the bank lent $10,000 and received $10,420 back after a year. Because banks lend money to borrowers from other people who save money with the bank, the bank has to pay some interest to those savers. Let's say they pay 3% interest. That's $300 to those savers. This leaves the bank with a profit of $120. This despite the fact that 5 people simply never repaid any money back to the bank.\n\nDoes this example answer your question? If not, let me know and I'll get more specific.",
"Remember that the US Dollar isn't backed by anything other than faith in the US Government, i.e. the belief that the US will exist tomorrow, next year, and for years to come. If the US Treasury wanted to create more dollars out of nothing, it could.\n\nBut it wouldn't do that, largely because creating more money willy-nilly would cause massive hyperinflation and cause the dollar to lose value rapidly.\n\nSo in order to keep the supply of dollars stable, so that something you bought today will cost you nearly the same tomorrow, the government plays a kind of shell game. It spends dollars to pay its employees and buy things, and it removes some money from general circulation through taxes. Since the US government always spends more money than it raises in taxes, it raises the rest by selling Treasury bonds and notes. This debt is sold to the general public, and debt holders can buy and sell them among themselves if they need cash.\n\nGovernment debt tends to have incredibly low interest rates, because governments are low risk borrowers. The majority of public debt is owed to Americans. So in effect, we the people are borrowing from ourselves, and promising to pay back our future selves.",
"Government debt is in the form of something called a bond. A bond is something that a company (or government) creates and sells on the stock market to anyone who wants to buy it. My grandparents used to give me a $100 government bond every year on my birthday. Basically anyone that owns any kind of investment account, or retirement account owns some government bonds of one kind or another. \n\nA government bond is an investment that you own. It pays an interest payment and at the end of the bond period you get that initial investment back. These bonds are considered VERY safe and secure because the government always pays it's debts and even if it can't it can just print money to pay the debt. \n\n > America is in trillions of dollars of debt, so when it's on such a huge scale, who is at the end of it? \n\nIt's basically everyone. Many world governments want or need US dollars and so they own some government bonds. Every single investment account and retirement account owns government bonds (or should, if they are properly balanced). Every mutual fund, every investment bank, and anyone that holds basically any kind of investment at all owns some government bonds. \n\nThe vast majority of US government debt is owned by American citizens. Some is owned by foreign citizens and some is owned by foreign governments. But to be clear, the vast majority of money that the US government has borrowed it has borrowed from normal, every day, Americans. \n\n > Who is getting screwed so bad and ripped off? \n\nNo one is bring ripped off. The US government is not a normal human, it never dies, so the scenario you listed can never happen because the \"person\" who borrowed the money, will live forever. While it's technically possible for the American Government to fall, if that were to happen there would be larger problems than people's stock accounts taking a hit. \n\n > Because surely you can't pay off 14.6 trillion dollars in a lifetime, even if it's over a ton of people, let alone trace it back to where it even started. \n\nWho owns a bond is fairly easy to track. Paying the bonds off is also easy because the government just issues another bond. They need to pay those interest payments but again,that's all tracked because we know who owns what bonds. \n\nPaying the debt off in a lifetime is not necessary because a country has no lifetime. \n\nTracking where a debt started is also not necessary you need only track who currently owns the bond. \n\n > And what about when debt is forgiven..?\n\nGenerally when debt is forgiven it's the person who lent the money (the bond holder) who does this. They are basically just saying \"you don't need to pay me back\". This basically never happens. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4cn4ky | why do older people seem to care more about the weather? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cn4ky/eli5_why_do_older_people_seem_to_care_more_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1jrj3w"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Could be they literally have little else to talk about since their days are not as filled with as many interactions as there were in their younger days. The world around them suddenly becomes more apparent as the rat race days fade away into distant memory. \n\nJust a thought. \n\nIf you have elderly relatives, spend time with them and ask them in sincerity to share with you the stories of their life. Sure, there will probably be some antiquated awkward racism or other socially unacceptable statements by today's standards. However, their wisdom gained through years of living is worth listening to and contemplating."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3i5orz | in music, how do you tell the difference between 2/4, 2/2, and 4/4 time, or 3/4 time and 6/8 time? | As someone who played piano for years, I've never had an answer to how composers decide that a piece is 3/4 time and not 6/8, or vice versa. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i5orz/eli5_in_music_how_do_you_tell_the_difference/ | {
"a_id": [
"cudk1dt",
"cudk3am",
"cudmyb7"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"It depends on the effect the composer is trying to achieve. It's hard to explain without being able to hum examples, but 3/4 feels like it never \"lands,\" that one measure is always flowing into the next -- think \"Blue Danube Waltz\" (used in \"2001\" for the trip to the space station) or a song like \"Daisy, Daisy\" (oddly enough, also used in \"2001\".) \n\nThe beat there is a constant 1-2-3, 1-2-3, and feels like it swings from measure to measure.\n\nWith 6/8, there's a much stronger feeling of a two-beat measure being played in triplets, and the count feels like **1**-2-3-**4**-5-6. 6/8 generally tends to be in a faster tempo than 3/4, as well. A lot of traditional dance music from Spain and Italy is written in 6/8, particularly the *Tarantella*, a famous dance from Italy, and the *Tapatío*, known to most Americans as the Mexican hat dance.\n",
"Well there's simple time and compound time. Simple time is divided between \"strong\" beats and \"weak\" beats. So 3/4 is Strong Weak weak. 2/4 is Strong Weak, 4/4 is strong weak medium weak. Compound time uses the same principle but subdivides into 3 not 2. So 6/8 is counted in 2.",
"Hi! Audio Engineer and drummer, here!\nIn classical music, it's used as described by /u/Teotwawki69, but you see less of that when it comes to pop and rock music. In a majority of cases, the time signature only affects how you actually read the sheet music more than how the music itself is accented. The first number is the most important, as it determines the overall sensation of the piece, and the bottom number only determines how you'll divide up the notes within the staff. You could write two identical-sounding pieces in 5/4 time signature and 5/8 signature. They would appear different on the written music, but sound the same. It all depends on where you prefer to accent the sub beats. \nEffectively, you can also reduce the time signature the same way that you would with fractions, and it would only appear different on paper. 3/4 and 6/8 are basically the same thing.\nTl;dr, Signature affects accents, and makes sheet music easier to read."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4uzcix | agile methodologies in software testing | In general terms, how does this methodology work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4uzcix/eli5_agile_methodologies_in_software_testing/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5uaa6o",
"d5uamb9",
"d5ucbv8",
"d5ufopp"
],
"score": [
16,
4,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The basic concept is that you decide on details regarding implementation and testing while developing. \n\nIn more classical methodologies you generally spend a lot of time in the beginning of a project to plan everything on a high detail before writing the first line of code.\n\nIn agile developement you make a very rough plan and decide the details as you go along. It is more of a \"Try and error\" method that is a lot more flexible but have some other drawbacks.",
"As a hardware engineer who does the occasional bit of firmware development: It's a fancy way of saying 'make it up as you go along'. \n\nI've never seen it explained in a way that doesn't make me think that's exactly what it is. The exception to that is 'our customers keep changing their minds about what they want so we have to just make it up as we go along'",
"Software Test Analyst here! I work for an outsourcing company, so have had the pleasure of seeing how dozens of different web and application developers apply the theory of Agile Testing.\n\n\nAs someone has mentioned - it is widely accepted as the process of test and development taking place together. Allowing for quick response and change to fix defects and change design where Testers can prove an issue with the current design.\n\n\nGood developers will do this in little sections called 'Sprints'. These are basically periods where a specific area is focused on for testing and development over a given period of time. You get everything as good as you can in that period and then move on to the next Sprint. This helps projects move forward and avoids getting bogged down trying to perfect overly specific areas.\n\n\n\nBad developers will use it an excuse for constantly moving the goalposts and covering up a lack of planning and design. Often the Solution Specification or Functional Specification I'm given is far from the final design, or just completely lacks any real detail. I've seen specifications range from hundreds of pages of beautiful quantifiable accurate information, down to 5 bullet points on a single page. You just never know!\n\n\nFinally, it's often the best method for client delivery. As it allows clients to tweak and adapt their requirements during development. If they suddenly want a new feature, it can be adapted into an upcoming Sprint and tested quickly for functionality.\n\n\nIn reality, Agile covers a broad range of styles. Often, as a Tester, you are coming into a project with numerous deadlines looming. So you end up quickly in a high pressured environment, with people expecting you to be able to finely comb through every aspect of their application looking for defects. This is where it pays off to have a comprehensive specification to refer to, and just as importantly to have developers who are happy to explain things in simple terms to you at a moments notice.\n",
"Say you are building a sandcastle for your friend. There's a few ways to do this.\n\nYou can ask him what he wants. Does he want a large wall? A canal so the water doesn't overrun the castle? Then sketch out a plan of what it looks like and build it. But then it goes far over budget and it's night time and you have to leave the beach.\n\n\nYou can ask briefly what your friend has in mind. First, a barrier wall so water doesn't get through. So you construct a part of it and then ask if that's what he wants, i.e. is it tall enough? Basically you go on like this until you have a construct that your friend wants.\n\nFirst scenario is older methodologies (waterfall), and agile is the second. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
efare5 | how do fast charges but slow exhaustions of a battery work? | The way a fast charging phone battery works. How can 10 minutes of charging equal a few hours of listening on wireless headphones? And if this is such a common practice do we also get more bang for our buck on things like gas ? Will it ever happen ?
Happy holidays and thanks in advance! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/efare5/eli5_how_do_fast_charges_but_slow_exhaustions_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"fbzbjya",
"fbzdxul"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Different volumes of electrical flow.\n\nThink of it like filling up a bucket with a hose, then drinking it with a straw.",
"There's a pool, how can you fill it in less time than it takes to drain?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
82dpua | how does exercise actually reduce the risk of diabetes? and how does too much sugar in a diet cause a person with no diabetes to get the disease? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/82dpua/eli5_how_does_exercise_actually_reduce_the_risk/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv9bwcy"
],
"score": [
18
],
"text": [
"Type two diabetes is effectively caused by having a higher than normal blood glucose level for a prolonged period of time. \n\nWhen you eat, most carbohydrates are transformed into glucose and absorbed into the bloodstream. Simple sugars are digested and absorbed into the blood very quickly, causing large spikes in blood sugar. \n\nInsulin is released by the body to control blood glucose levels, and to enable cells to absorb and use glucose. Higher than normal glucose levels needs more insulin to control it. This ends up causing insulin ineffectiveness/resistance, which means tat your insulin is less able to control blood glucose levels. In response, the pancreas creates and releases higher and higher levels of insulin. This effectively makes the cells that produce glucose run out. Simple sugar is one if the things that causes this.\n\nExersize does two beneficial things. Firstly, it reduces your blood glucose. It helps you control it without relying on insulin. This reduces the strain on your insulin and can prevent insulin resistance and diabetes. Secondly, exersize makes your insulin more effective. Combined, this reduces the chances of getting diabetes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5yfoze | why does opening just the back windows in car while driving create this annoying sound effect but opening just the front windows or both front and back windows cause no such effect? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5yfoze/eli5why_does_opening_just_the_back_windows_in_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"depncf7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The resonant frequency of a chamber changes when it's open at one end vs being open at both ends. FWIR it's different by a factor of two [1]. So if you're driving a certain speed, and that's able to drive a vibration frequency in your car, when you \"open the other end of the chamber\" the same wind speed will likely not be able to drive the resonation.\n\n[1] _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.studyphysics.ca/newnotes/20/unit03_mechanicalwaves/chp141516_waves/lesson51.htm"
]
] |
||
26rbt2 | why does the "pain" of pressing a fingernail in your hangnail feel so much better than the pain of just the hangnail? | I've always wondered this. Follow-up question: why is the pain of a hangnail seemingly so much higher than you think it'd be (compared to relative actual damage to your body)? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26rbt2/eli5_why_does_the_pain_of_pressing_a_fingernail/ | {
"a_id": [
"chtqlwv"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Fingers are for feeling, so they have way more nerves than other parts that aren't for feeling."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5d78g3 | why does packaged supermarket ground beef turn grey inside while remaining red on the outside when it's not fresh? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5d78g3/eli5_why_does_packaged_supermarket_ground_beef/ | {
"a_id": [
"da2d5up"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Oxygen from the air reacts with meat pigments to form a bright red color which is usually seen on the surface of meat purchased in the supermarket. The pigment responsible for the red color in meat is oxymyoglobin, a substance found in all warm-blooded animals. Fresh cut meat is purplish in color. The interior of the meat may be grayish brown due to lack of oxygen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3xqcin | tipping etiquette at mega-resorts (vegas) in america | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xqcin/eli5_tipping_etiquette_at_megaresorts_vegas_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy6uh8h"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"(I presume you're not familiar with American tipping customs, so this is from step 1.)\n\nGenerally, it's pocket change, $3-5, for anyone doing something for you. Bills only, not coins, not hard candy, not paperclips or buttons or advice. \n\nEveryone tips the valet (often free at resorts). A few bucks, $10 if you're generous, more if you have a special request or need.\n\nIt's typical to tip the maid a few bucks per day. $10-20 if you made a real mess.\n\nBellman should be tipped a few bucks, per bag. Show up with 10 heavy bags? Give the guy $20-30. \n\nSome people tip taxis and tour guides. Around 10-15% the cost. Some people don't. Base it on their performance. If they gave you a great experience, show your gratitude. \n\nBartenders and waiters, it's typically ~20% of the bill, and you're always expected to tip (10% is a stingy tip, 15% is usually a minimum). Direct cash is preferred, adding it to the bill is secondary. Tip whoever handed the drink/food to you. Drink prices often make it easy. Two $8.25 beers? Here's a $20, keep the change. (Sales tax is about 8%, just double it as a minimum tip for food/drink service).\n\nAnyone who serves you directly (trainer, masseuse, beautician) should also be getting 10-20%."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6zxv5s | what is leon festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance? | I read that it is "Phenomenon that in which an individual adjusts his/her beliefs to better fit or justify one's behavior"
I had trouble understanding that, so can someone plz explain it to me | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zxv5s/eli5_what_is_leon_festingers_theory_of_cognitive/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmz0hwn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In short, your brain likes for things to make sense. What's more, your brain obsessively needs to make sense of itself to itself. That is, every action you do and every thought you think must be rational and coherent to your brain.\n\nThat is what it wants, but that is not often what happens.\n\nFor instance, there was a study in which people were locked in a room, deprived of any sort of entertainment or stimulation (no books, no phones, no communication, no windows, no food, no water, nothing to look at, nothing to listen to, etc.) *except* there was a button on the table. If they pressed the button, they were shocked. \n\nThey weren't told *not* to press it. They weren't told to press it. They weren't told that it would shock them, though most people figured that out in a few minutes. No, the interesting thing was that people would *willingly shock themselves again* to alleviate the boredom.\n\nAnd then, when the psychologists asked them about repeatedly shocking themselves, **the people made up bullshit.**\n\nOr, take the case of split-brain people. The two halves of their brain can no longer talk to each other, and one side, the right side, cannot talk at all. However, the right side can still read, so if you show only its eye a sign that says \"pick up the ball\", then ask the person why they picked it up, you'll often get answers like, \"Because I wanted to\" or \"I like playing with balls\".\n\nPeople occasionally perform actions that are stupid, self-destructive, or inexplicable to themselves, and their minds can't handle that. Instead, it imagines a justification for the behavior that explains it in a way that is consistent with their sense of self."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1yfj8g | how do pilots communicate with air traffic control in foreign airports? | If a flight went from New York to Frankfurt, would they get a pilot that speaks German? What about the unit conversion from feet to meters? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yfj8g/eli5_how_do_pilots_communicate_with_air_traffic/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfk1hu2",
"cfk1ier",
"cfk1isn"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"No, language is English. You certify for a radio license for a given language, all ATC personel have to have an English one. There is a German one but I don't think many people have it.\n\nUnits is all feet and nautical miles in aviation.",
"English is officially the language of international aviation. There are exams in \"Aviation English\".",
"Usually in English.\n\nAt smaller airports, which are usually visited by hobbyist pilots rather than commercial pilots, it might be common to use the local language. But otherwise, English in the international language of aviation.\n\nThat doesn't mean everything is done exclusively in English. The French, in particular, are notorious for speaking in French between French pilots and French air traffic controllers. There has been at least one accident which was put down, in part, to this: the Air Traffic Controller incorrectly instructed a British aircraft to enter a runway, while another, French aircraft was taking off. The aircraft that was taking off was piloted by a French pilot, and the instruction to take off had been to him in French. The pilots of the British aircraft didn't understand French. If the instruction to take off had been given in a language which everyone understood, then there's a good chance that the British pilots would have spotted the controller's mistake. But the use of a non-standard language, combined with a hill on the runway which blocked the British pilots' view of the French aircraft, meant that there was no opportunity for anyone to spot the mistake."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6rrkem | why are eggs in so many foods that don't taste like eggs? | Basically every kind of Brownie, Cookie, Cake, or other baked good has eggs in the recipe, but few if any have any notable egg taste in the end result. What's the purpose of adding egg to these recipes, and why can't I taste the egg flavor in the finished goods? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rrkem/eli5_why_are_eggs_in_so_many_foods_that_dont/ | {
"a_id": [
"dl781qy"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Eggs are a great binding agent. Binding agents help all the other ingredients come together as a specific shape, or to just hold together. They can also add texture. So by adding eggs to your brownie recipe, you get that wonderful, moist, delicious, \"stuck together\" texture, while also making them keep their shape.\n\nOther common binding agents are soy, xanthum gum, corn starch, and gelatin. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
27ycht | when did game developers start to use motion capture and how does it work? | Before they started to use it, did they manually make the animations? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/27ycht/eli5_when_did_game_developers_start_to_use_motion/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci5kox4",
"ci5kyo0",
"ci5lwj2"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure when the game industry started using motion capture, it is definitely something that adds realism to animation.\n\nThe way it works is that actors have their bodies covered in small little balls. Each ball is a reference point for the location of part of the body (e.g. elbows, hands, shoulders, etc). These balls are tracked in a 3 dimensional space using multiple camera's.\n\nThe more balls on the actor, the more detail you can get. \n\nThe data (movement of the reference points) is than \"attached\" to certain parts of a model. By running the motion capture, the model starts to do the same movements.\n\nThis way they can make humans look natural in their movements, almost any game uses it these days if they need detail in animations.\n\nAnd yes, before motion capture this was all done by hand and is still done to this day if an object can't be represented by a motion capture actor. ",
"I'm not sure if it counts as motion capture, but the first [Prince of Persia game](_URL_0_) used a technique called [rotoscoping](_URL_1_) to animate the main character. Basically, the character was traced by hand from video footage of the programmer's brother jumping around. It was pretty revolutionary at the time and still looks fantastic to my nostalgic, rose-tinted eyes.",
"According to this [list](_URL_0_), Rise of Robots from 1994 was the first video game to use motion capture. I've found a few other articles that seem to corroborate the assertion."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Persia_(1989_video_game\\)",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotoscoping"
],
[
"http://listverse.com/2010/06/30/15-more-firsts-in-video-game-history/"
]
] |
|
c2z89k | how does alcohol dry things out? | Isopropyl alcohol is a liquid. How is it used to pull other liquids out of electronics? What properties make it happen? Won't it trigger liquid detection strips in, say, a cellphone? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c2z89k/eli5_how_does_alcohol_dry_things_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"ernjo51"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Alcohol and water are miscible (they can mix). If you place electronics in alcohol, it will reach all the tiny corners where water is hiding and mix with it, “diluting” the water.\n\nThen the alcohol evaporates, so the remaining water is now spread out over such a large volume that it evaporates quickly as well.\n\nThe detection strips rely on a hydration reaction with water. They probably won’t work with alcohol."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1ybw2q | why have people always craved gold, so intensely, for so long? starting from ancient civilisations up until the rich of modern day? | I was just wondering if I've missed something? Seems that all great civilisations seemed to highly regard gold, even now, a bar or gold is at an insane price, and ancient civilisations would crave it as a sign of power. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ybw2q/eli5_why_have_people_always_craved_gold_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfj3xon",
"cfj3yym",
"cfj4fxz"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If you had more gold would that indicate you had a better life...and does it?",
"Gold is a pretty unique element. It is one of the few metals that is found in a relatively pure form in nature (although not so much anymore--the easy-to-find stuff has pretty well been taken by now). It is one of the only metals that is not silvery-grey in color (the other being copper), and it is one of the least reactive substances you're likely to find--gold does not tarnish in commonly-found environments. Even gold that has been left in the ocean for decades has a nice shiny surface. These properties combine to make it one of the shiniest substances that you can find if you're a bronze-age civilization (the other being, of course, bronze). Gold is much rarer and is soft enough to be made into ornamental things, but it's too soft to be useful as a tool or weapon. These properties set it up to be ideal as a decorative item and a sign of wealth. ",
"Gold is a limited resource, and can be easily melted into any shape you want, including bars and coins. Gold is also stable, minimally or non-reactive with oxygen and other elements and does not (significantly) erode away. It is also an element that is visually attractive, enhancing its desirability.\n\nIt is therefore close to an ideal means of exchange/currency. \n\nGold fluctuates in value, but over the long term is quite stable in terms of its purchasing power. If you had a unit of gold in ancient times, you could buy yourself some good clothing, and about the same amount of gold today would buy you a good suit.\n\nOther elements used as currency are by no means as stable and are less valuable as they are harder to work, not available in pure form, less stable and too common. Silver and copper, for example both oxidise."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2n3uaz | help me understand the claims of jonathan gruber on the aca (obamacare)? | [Jonathan Gruber](_URL_0_)
What is the significance of state vs federal exchanges? How do tax credits work and how does it play into the bill being controversial.
What's a cadillac tax, and what does it mean even though it taxes insurance companies it's still taxing the people?
How were the "stupidity" of the American voters utilized to manipulate the bill, what were some obfuscations involved?
Really I realize it's another healthcare question, but maybe the specific grievances brought up can teach us something new.
EDIT: also the daily show Nov 18 has Jon Stewart commenting that the "... individual mandate was not a tax, but is actually a tax..." (paraphrased). What exactly does this mean and why is this important? What's individual mandate, and why does it matter whether or not it's a tax? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2n3uaz/eli5_help_me_understand_the_claims_of_jonathan/ | {
"a_id": [
"cma3k7z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The only difference between state and federal exchanges is who runs it. \n\nThe crafters of the ACA wanted every state to set up their own exchange, but recognized that some would not and provided a federal exchange for people. In order to force state governments hands in the matter, they wrote the law so that only people on state exchanges would be eligible for subsidies. Eventually, they hoped, the few states who didn't set up their own exchange would face pressure from citizens paying higher prices than everyone else for no good reason.\n\nUnfortunately for the Obama administration, the overwhelming majority of states chose not to set up an exchange and preferred instead to use the federal one. The administration, recognizing people would be livid once they saw the price without subsidies, quickly moved to extend subsidies to everyone on the federal exchange.\n\nGrubbers comments are notable because they confirmed the arguments of the plaintiffs currently challenging the authority of the President to provide subsidies to federal exchanges before the Supreme Court. \n\n--------------------------\n\nThe individual mandate, to pass constitutional muster, was designed from the very beginning to be a tax. However, the administration recognized a \"tax\" would be unpopular and publicly took the position during the debate over the law that it was anything but that. Gruber confirmed that the administrations sudden support of the tax argument once the individual mandate was challenged in court was not a sudden move of a convenience but rather a well thought out plan to obscure the true nature of the provision. Gruber essentially argues the administration relied on Americans ignorance of Constitutional Law to get them to support things they otherwise not support.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Gruber_%28economist%29#Controversies"
] | [
[]
] |
|
2ygdqh | why does it seem that toilet bowls are made to greatly amplify sound? | The thought comes up every time I sit on public toilet. Isn't there some better design? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ygdqh/eli5_why_does_it_seem_that_toilet_bowls_are_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp98qoq",
"cp9fogy"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Toilet bowls reflect sound for two reasons: Porcelain is a very non-porous surface, used purposely because water and other fluids can't penetrate into it and soak in. That same property causes it to reflect sound quite efficiently since the sound waves bounce off of it rather than soaking in like they do with carpet or acoustic foam or similar soft surfaces.\n\nSecond, they're bowl-shaped, so any sound produced in the middle bounces around inside the bowl and reflects out the top.\n\nFixing the acoustics would require either a softer more absorbant material which would be icky, or a design that is not shaped like a bowl which would be impractical.",
"There most certainly are \"better\" designs that don't amplify and reflect sound, but they aren't worth the cost when toilets already do the one thing they are supposed to do really really really well."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5z9beo | why is mussolini taken a lot less seriously in italy than hitler is in germany? | Just finished watching a documentary on Mussolini during WWII in class, and in the end it mentioned how Mussolini's tomb is on public display in Italy, and it has become a tourist attraction with a museum nearby. It also showed gift shops and street vendors nonchalantly selling Mussolini keychains, shirts, mugs, etc. He was treated as a kind of laughing matter, with people standing on rocks and exclaiming "Il Duce! Il Duce!"
This seems so different from Hitler, which I've heard is like mentioning Vold*mort in Germany.
Obviously Hitler was worse, but the contrast is stunning. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5z9beo/eli5_why_is_mussolini_taken_a_lot_less_seriously/ | {
"a_id": [
"dewaxbk",
"dewbhit",
"dewbxre",
"dewcs11"
],
"score": [
4,
11,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I mean, the Italian Fascist party was never anywhere close to as repressive and, well, insane, as the nazis. Additionally, the occupation of Italy was way less thorough than the process Germany endured after the war, when considerable effort went into rooting out and discrediting basically anyone with ties to the nazis. \n\nAdditionally, Italy was, well, never really that much of a threat in WWII and wasn't the primary aggressor or instigator of the conflict.",
"Mussolini didn't start a genocide that killed millions of people, and didn't start the worst war in history. Additionally, in the last few years of Mussolini's life he came to be seen by a large portion of his own country as a ridiculous failure and became widely mocked and disobeyed; he was removed from power against his will, driven to exile, and when he was killed by his own countrymen, his corpse was put on display so the locals could stone it for fun.\n\nAfter the war, there were millions of people who still felt a deep loyalty to Hitler and his ideals and felt he was killed unfairly by foreigners before he could finish making Germany a brilliant superpower and complete his mission. So there was a very serious attempt to educate people about the Holocaust and fanaticism and prevent a resurgence of neo-Nazism, and he's obviously a massive serious and dark mark on German politics and history. In comparison, Mussolini became a failure and a disgrace in his own lifetime and was widely mocked and despised at the time of his death, so there were far fewer people looking to immortalise him, revive his ideas, repeat the experience, etc.\n\nOf course, there were still some. Still many, still are, lots of fascists still around. But because he was pretty undeniably a failure to a majority of people and because he didn't do things as nightmarish as Hitler, it's just not treated the same way. Of course, he was still an absolute scumbag who created a police state, cult of personality, crushed the media, fostered racist and ultranationalist ideas, etc etc and should absolutely be reviled, we should all love to lob a few rocks at his body if it were still up. Just not as reviled as Hitler, which you could say about literally everyone else who ever lived, since Hitler's a good candidate for the worst human being in history in terms of what he directly did.",
"While there was anti-semitism in Second World War Italy, it remained essentially uninvolved in the Holocaust and indeed on several occasions outright refused to co-operate with Germany in 'rounding up' Jews. While Mussolini allied with Hitler he did not share all of Hitler's views.",
"Seems to me that post-war consequences were far worse for Germany. With massive destruction and loss of life - exp Russian army was punitive in their actions after what the Nazis did to them. Then the country was split in two for decades. Italy came out of it whole and united and with less damage.\n\nAlso, Hitler killed himself whereas the Italians hung off Mussellini themselves"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6bf0ug | is the finger a thumb and why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6bf0ug/eli5_is_the_finger_a_thumb_and_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhm3vjp",
"dhm48eu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"What? Are you sure you didn't mean \"Is the thumb a finger\"?\n\nIn which case, yes. But specifically it's a digit, because fingers tend to refer to your other non-thumb digits. ",
"Fingers have three knuckles. Your thumb only has 2. Your thumb is much more dexterous than your fingers. It's a digit, but not a finger."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
42z8ks | why do candidates like o'malley and kasich stay in the race when polls consistently show them at around 2%? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42z8ks/eli5_why_do_candidates_like_omalley_and_kasich/ | {
"a_id": [
"cze7ic8",
"cze8pza"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Before the Iowa Caucus and subsequently the New Hampshire primary, several candidates who went on to win those contests were in the single digits a short time before. I often hear it quoted that Santorum, for example, was in single digits before the 2012 Iowa Caucus before going on to ultimately win it with 25% IIRC (close to a tie with Romney who ultimately won the nomination). \n\nSo a lot of these candidates will usually stick around for at least those two contests and depending how they poll afterwards, will finally decide to drop out and throw their support behind another candidate instead. ",
"There are a few reasons candidates with \"no chance\" to win keep running. \n1) They enjoy campaigning (Pataki for example seems to really like just going around and talking to people about the issues). \n2) They're trying to push a specific issue onto the parties platform (i.e. there trying to get the party to take a specific position on an issue). \n3) They're angling for some other job. \n4) They're setting up for a run in the future. \n5) They're hoping something catastrophic will happen to the \"front runner\". "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2s7ps3 | why does the us divide its land into states instead of provinces? | Also, is there a difference between provinces, states, and territories? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2s7ps3/eli5_why_does_the_us_divide_its_land_into_states/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnmxknl",
"cnmxmzf"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"States in the US originally had a lot more autonomy, and we're considered to be almost their own country. This autonomy has largely disappeared due to several events, including the Civil War.\n\nThat said, even now, I'd venture a guess that a US state has more authority over its internal affairs than provinces in most countries. They have successfully sued on some occasions to get the federal government out of their business.\n\nProvinces do not exist in the US as far as I know.\n\nTerritories differ from states in that they have no inherent autonomy from the federal government. They may have some autonomy, but that is only at the consent of congress, and congress may throw out or impose any (constitutional) law they wish onto territories.",
"When the U.S. was originally formed, it was literally a confederation of independent states. They had their own armies and even issued their own currencies. This system had numerous problems so it was scrapped and replaced with the U.S.' current constitution, which gave more power to the federal government.\n\nSo technically the American states are literally independent countries, but practically they have autonomy to a degree comparable to provinces in other countries.\n\nIn the U.S, \"territories\" are different than states, since they don't have representation in Congress and can't vote for the President. That definition is different in other countries, like Canada."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2dfw8f | what are the dangers/benifits in protein shakes and supplements concerning muscle development. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dfw8f/eli5_what_are_the_dangersbenifits_in_protein/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjp33s2",
"cjp6vwp"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"Dangers of protein? Basically none. A lot of people say protein is bad for your kidneys, but that's only if you have a preexisting kidney condition and/or are consuming an obscene amount of it.\n\nBenefits, in addition to the fact that higher protein consumption helps rebuild muscle after working out, shakes in particular can help your muscles replenish their stores of glycogen, a sugar that they use for energy.\n\nThere are an immense amount of other supplements out there with their own sets of benefits and risks, I recommend _URL_0_ as a good resource to read up on them.",
"According to my physiology professor there's little no to need for a regular joe to consume any kind of protein shakes. His recommendation was to drink a glass of chocolate milk after a workout. \n\nAnd here's the magic of chocolate milk: The sugar from the chocolate will increase your bloodsugar. Which leads to your pancreas releasing insulin. And insulin is one of the strongest anti catabolic substances, which in turn promotes the protein uptake of your muscles. And the milk is for, well the protein, and it's generally healthy.\n\nDon't believe me? Well, ask all those bodybuilders what they inject, it's insulin. They often land in the ER with hypoglycemia. As a sidenote: don't order your bodybuilding insulin online, you probably don't want it anyways, since it most likely comes from a pig in russia (the animal)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"Examine.com"
],
[]
] |
||
lcc5v | what is rove vs. wade and what would it take for it to be overturned? | Hi guys. I know I could look up the first part of this question, but I want it real simple like. Also the second part is important too. I heard someone saying something called 'personhood' could lead to it geting overturned, but I'd like to know a little more. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/lcc5v/eli5_what_is_rove_vs_wade_and_what_would_it_take/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2rigpl",
"c2rimn4",
"c2rjqau",
"c2rk6dd",
"c2rigpl",
"c2rimn4",
"c2rjqau",
"c2rk6dd"
],
"score": [
2,
18,
3,
23,
2,
18,
3,
23
],
"text": [
"Roe v. Wade*\n\nBasically the court decided that the right to an abortion is protected under the 9th Amendment. I don't know enough about law to tell you what could overturn the decision, but the idea of \"personhood\" is a controversial attempt to define who is and is not legally a \"person.\" \"Personhood amendment\" activists try to claim that you are legally a \"person\" from the moment of conception, which would make abortion and miscarriage criminal acts because they would fall under the category of murder or manslaughter.",
"Roe V Wade was a landmark decision saying basically that privacy is an implied right, assumed in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and other amendments. It's based on precedent from the case [Griswold V CT](_URL_0_), which established the idea of an 'implied right to privacy'. In Griswold, the court decided that the relationship between a doctor and a married couple could not be intruded upon by the government - in that case it was related to contraception.\n\nFollowing in this vein of logic, Roe argues that the government similarly can't intrude on the doctor-patient relationship, nor legislate on what a woman can do with her body, as it is 'private'. In my opinion, and despite the fact that I'm pro-choice, I find the legal reasoning weak and unconvincing. Regardless, it is law.\n\nWhat would it take to overturn it? Simple, a case that says the exact opposite - that in fact there is such right and the government *can* tell a woman what to do with her body. Similarly, Constitutional Amendment could do it - I think that's what you are referring you by 'personhood'.\n\nMany conservatives favor an amendment specifically defining life as beginning at conception, whereas most liberals consider life starting at the point that the baby is 'viable', or able to survive without the mother - often in the third term of pregnancy.\n\nIt's these two separate assumptions about when life begins that forms the basis of the abortion debate and ensures to consensus will ever be reached.\n\nOf course, nobody wants abortions. Conservatives want it outlawed and often talk of abstinence, while liberals want to provide education and contraceptives to prevent unplanned pregnancies. I'm sure you can guess which side most of reddit is on.",
"Overturning Roe v Wade would involve also overturning Griswold v Connecticut, which would mean that birth control (condoms, diaphragms, IUDs, the pill) would be illegal again.",
"Karl Rove once challenged Dwayne Wade to a 1:1 basketball game. Wade was obviously the overwhelming favorite, but Rove convinced Wade that the best way for him to win was to let Rove's points \"trickle down\" into Wade's basket. Rove won 184-2. ",
"Roe v. Wade*\n\nBasically the court decided that the right to an abortion is protected under the 9th Amendment. I don't know enough about law to tell you what could overturn the decision, but the idea of \"personhood\" is a controversial attempt to define who is and is not legally a \"person.\" \"Personhood amendment\" activists try to claim that you are legally a \"person\" from the moment of conception, which would make abortion and miscarriage criminal acts because they would fall under the category of murder or manslaughter.",
"Roe V Wade was a landmark decision saying basically that privacy is an implied right, assumed in the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and other amendments. It's based on precedent from the case [Griswold V CT](_URL_0_), which established the idea of an 'implied right to privacy'. In Griswold, the court decided that the relationship between a doctor and a married couple could not be intruded upon by the government - in that case it was related to contraception.\n\nFollowing in this vein of logic, Roe argues that the government similarly can't intrude on the doctor-patient relationship, nor legislate on what a woman can do with her body, as it is 'private'. In my opinion, and despite the fact that I'm pro-choice, I find the legal reasoning weak and unconvincing. Regardless, it is law.\n\nWhat would it take to overturn it? Simple, a case that says the exact opposite - that in fact there is such right and the government *can* tell a woman what to do with her body. Similarly, Constitutional Amendment could do it - I think that's what you are referring you by 'personhood'.\n\nMany conservatives favor an amendment specifically defining life as beginning at conception, whereas most liberals consider life starting at the point that the baby is 'viable', or able to survive without the mother - often in the third term of pregnancy.\n\nIt's these two separate assumptions about when life begins that forms the basis of the abortion debate and ensures to consensus will ever be reached.\n\nOf course, nobody wants abortions. Conservatives want it outlawed and often talk of abstinence, while liberals want to provide education and contraceptives to prevent unplanned pregnancies. I'm sure you can guess which side most of reddit is on.",
"Overturning Roe v Wade would involve also overturning Griswold v Connecticut, which would mean that birth control (condoms, diaphragms, IUDs, the pill) would be illegal again.",
"Karl Rove once challenged Dwayne Wade to a 1:1 basketball game. Wade was obviously the overwhelming favorite, but Rove convinced Wade that the best way for him to win was to let Rove's points \"trickle down\" into Wade's basket. Rove won 184-2. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
fqx4x5 | is it necessary for electrons to always emit the energy back as photons after absorbing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fqx4x5/eli5_is_it_necessary_for_electrons_to_always_emit/ | {
"a_id": [
"flttfcs"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"No. When an electron in an atom or molecule is excited, one of several different things can happen.\n\nWe can think of our electron as being like a ball sitting in dip in the ground. Our photon gives the ball a little push. Let’s first imagine that the photon has lots of energy, and it gives the ball a really big push, enough that it escapes from the dip and rolls away. In this case, the electron goes flying completely out of your material, and the energy of the photon is converted to the kinetic energy (motion) of the electron. This is called the [photoelectric effect](_URL_1_) —it led to the development of quantum mechanics and is actually what Einstein won his Nobel Prize for, although it’s not even close to his most famous discovery.\n\nNow let’s imagine the other possibility, where the photon doesn’t have enough energy to push the electron completely out of its dip—instead it now just starts rolling back and forth inside the dip. This is called an excited state. The electron doesn’t experience friction, so how can it get rid of this energy? \n\nOne possibility is what you suggested: it could drop back down to its initial state, and re-emit the energy as a photon. However, usually at least some of the energy is converted into heat, by causing the atoms in the material to start vibrating. These vibrations are called phonons. The most common occurrence is that all of the energy is converted into phonons—this is called [internal conversion](_URL_0_). However, sometimes, for reasons that are complicated, only a little of the energy can be easily converted to photons. In that case, the leftover energy will eventually be re-emitted as photons, via processes called [fluorescence](_URL_2_) (if the re-emission happens quickly) or [phosphorescence](_URL_3_) (if the re-emission is slow). You’ve probably seen these before—fluorescent materials glow under UV lights, and glow in the dark paints are made of phosphorescent materials."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_conversion_(chemistry)",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence",
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorescence"
]
] |
||
9dknz3 | when you charge your phone or laptop where and how is this charge contained when your device is not plugged in? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9dknz3/eli5_when_you_charge_your_phone_or_laptop_where/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5i98d5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"* Batteries are made up of chemicals that react with each other. This reaction piles up electrons on one side, and spaces for electrons on the other side. \n\n* When connected to a device, the electrons flow out of the battery, through the device and back into the battery. The chemical reaction in the battery is the pump that keeps the electrons flowing.\n\n* Eventually the chemicals have been used up in the reaction and the pump stops.\n\n* Rechargeable batteries use chemical reactions that can be reversed. \n\n* So essentially you are just constantly re-arranging the chemical makeup of the battery back and forth. \n\n* The reactions also produce some junk particles and these eventually build up in the battery and get in the way of the electron pump. This is why your battery slowly holds less and less charge until its un-usable. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dqbi4j | can bugs see germs the same size as we see bugs? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dqbi4j/eli5_can_bugs_see_germs_the_same_size_as_we_see/ | {
"a_id": [
"f61v2jb",
"f61vjq3",
"f62m2xr",
"f62mh1d",
"f62rdcr",
"f62trys",
"f62x9qm"
],
"score": [
1804,
354,
180,
54,
21,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"No. Detail observed is inversely proportional to eye size. Essentially, larger eyes allow in more light and therefore can see smaller details. There are variations within the rule based on specific creatures' eye structures, i.e. amount of photoreceptors present, but it remains true on a macro scale.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n*Edit:* shoutout to u/aberneth for a good counterpoint.\n\n > The resolving power of a lens is roughly proportional to the diameter of the lens divided by its focal length (numerical aperture). If you miniaturize a lens, keeping this ratio constant, the resolving power is unchanged until the lens starts to become very small (a few micrometers or tens of micrometers). \n\nFor clarification, a larger eye would have better angular resolution, but not necessarily better overall resolution. In other words, a bigger eye can see smaller details from further away, like a telescope. A microscope can still observe small details when up very close, but a proportionally large lens would be able to see those details from further away. So, bringing it back to the original question: if we can't see germs, then bugs can't see germs.\n\n*Edit 2:* for everyone discussing the anatomical structure of different animal eyes, there are plenty of additional factors beyond just lens size. Eye spacing, eye angles, amount of photoreceptors, structure of photoreceptors, the brain's ability to interpret signals from the optical nerve, etc., are all important but don't seem like the proper answer to the question, which is about mathematical proportions, not biology.",
"Ants are like 2mm and humans are like 2m so the ratio is .002:2 or 1:1000. \n\nBacteria are like 2µm so the ant ratio is .000002:.002 or 1:1000.\n\nHowever, the wavelength of light seen by ants and humans is the same. Ant eyes don't have the same resolving power as human eyes, they are far too small.",
"No.\n\nBugs do not have eyes like we do. They often have compound eyes, which don't really see detail as much as motion. They largely use their other senses to navigate and find food.",
"While other comments focus on eye size and the amount of light it let's in.\n\nI will ELI5 that insects have vastly less evolved eyes than we do. They are simpler organisms for several reasons, my personal favourite is energy. We consume and use energy in much larger quantities than an insect, it helps drive more complex system such as our brain to process images from our eyes. We evolved to primarily rely on our eyes, unlike some other animals, so we can afford to spend the energy resources on big expensive ones.\n\nEdit: Try explaining to a 5yo that light is a wave..\n\n\"a wave like the sea?\"",
"A lot of people are talking about eye sizes, but the reality of the matter is that you need at least 1000x magnification to see individual bacterial cells. Bugs and people are much closer in size than bugs and bacteria are, so the answer is no. Bacteria are not 'bug sized' to bugs",
"I always wondered why humans die from a fall about 5 times our hight (30ft) but you can drop a bug from 10000 times its height and its just fine 😂 I'm sure it's to do with weight difference but it's still confuses me 🤣🤣",
"maybe they keep them as pets?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2wcl47 | how was vice news able to make a documentary in isis territory and get out without being held hostage? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wcl47/eli5_how_was_vice_news_able_to_make_a_documentary/ | {
"a_id": [
"copl2cr",
"copmbq9",
"copodcw",
"copt8r9",
"coq01a7",
"coq9c6f",
"coqrlec"
],
"score": [
98,
10,
22,
20,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They asked for permission and got a guarantee of safe passage.",
"Why would they not want to broadcast their message? ",
"They've got some really shady connections after supporting insurgent groups in Yemen, north Africa, etc. ",
"All terrorist cells need to spread their message and propaganda, which is best done in person and not by letting CNN tell your story. A reporter wrote a article fairly recently about his life reporting in war zones, with terrorists, and in areas Like parts of Africa where it's extremely dangerous and practically lawless. Basically what he said was that people cared more about getting the word out for recruiting and propaganda then they did about a hostage.\n\nGoogle reporting in a warzone or something along those lines, I don't remember the articles name but that might find it.",
"They had a guy detained in russia or the ukraine last year",
"cuz vice is pretty good when they're not posting shit articles on their site",
"This question gets asked all the time about how can reporters interview Cartel Leaders and the leaders of Violent Gangs. From a logistics standpoint, the first thing is these reporters like the guys from Vice have fucking balls of steel. Second, they get guarantees from the organization on their safety. If they don't hold up the guarantee then it will be hard for the organization to interface with the outside world because no one in the news will want to talk to them. \n \nThese organizations are egomaniacs. The cartels want to be movie stars and get their face on TV and show how bad ass they are so they let people film them. The other thing is, as others have said about ISIS, they believe in their cause and want others to see what a great job they're doing. Propoganda."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dfl0qi | i have a problem with mice. how come a colony won't fall for a trap twice or reject traps? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dfl0qi/eli5_i_have_a_problem_with_mice_how_come_a_colony/ | {
"a_id": [
"f33vyyt",
"f33wxfi",
"f33yyrc"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Are you wearing gloves when setting up? They may avoid if you leave a smell on the trap.",
"There is a guy on YouTube who tests mouse traps. Some are better than others. Some bait is more attractive to mice. And stay away from the gimmicky nonsense like irish spring is a mouse repellant.",
"Mice are smart as hell. They can also leave chemical scents that can warn other mice of danger.\n\n I had a problem with them once when they figured out how to get the food out of the livetraps without shutting the door. I begrudgingly moved to snap traps but the little bastards figured those out too. There's no way I'd ever use a glue trap, so in the end I had no choice but to call in a professional removal service.\n\nYou do want to deal with them fast and decisively though, they can have many litters a month and will breed exponentially if you move too slowly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e8hz6j | if the earth actually takes 23h56m to do a complete rotation aren't we incorrectly shifting the days 4 minutes every day? | Same for the years. If a year actually is 365.24219 days (tropical year) and we're adding 1 day every 4 years (.25 per year) there's a difference of 0.00781 days or \~11 minutes per year. After a few years, aren't we actually shifting hours? Is there a mechanism to adjust it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e8hz6j/eli5_if_the_earth_actually_takes_23h56m_to_do_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"fac73ug",
"fac7pfa",
"facbvq2",
"fae4yav",
"fam3abp"
],
"score": [
27,
6,
13,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"23 hours and 56 minutes is how long it takes the earth to revolve around itself relative to the stars. However, during that time earth also moved around the sun, approximately 1/365 of a revolution. Because of this, it takes the Earth approximately 4 more minutes to rotate to the same position relative to the sun.",
"You're right that adding a leap day every four years adds ever-so-slightly too much time. This is accounted for by skipping the leap day in years that are multiples of 100. That's a lot closer, but then we're actually adding slightly too little time, so if the year is multiple of 400, then we do have a leap year. At that point, we're close enough for it not to matter at all.",
"A sidereal day is 23 hours and 56 minutes. This is the time it take for the Earth to rotate 360°.\n\nHowever, we don't use sidereal days for our normal time keeping; we use solar day. A solar day is when the sun returns in the same place in the sky on the next day, which takes on average 24 hours. It takes a bit longer than a full rotation because of the Earth orbits around the sun as well. After the Earth rotates 360°, it is no longer is the same spot it its orbit. [It needs to rotate just a bit more in order to realign the sun](_URL_0_).\n\nSo, we don't lose those four minutes a day because don't use sidereal days.\n\nLeap years compensate for how long it takes to revolve around the sun. It has nothing to do with revolving on our own axis. For leap years, years divisible by 100 but not 400 are not leap years. For example, 2000 was a leap year because it is divisible by 100, and 400. 1900 was not leap year because it is not divisible by 400, neither will the year 2100 be. So, every 400 years, we skip 3 leap years.",
"The day with reference to the sun is 24 hours. This used to be used in the exact definition of hours, minutes, and seconds, but since the Earth's rotation is very gradually slowing over millions of years, more precise definitions have been created that rely on things like atomic vibtations. So it is no longer exactly 24 hours, just extremely close to it.\n\nSince the earth revolves around the sun, the relative position of the sun in the sky changes by about 0.998° per day. \n\nA *Sidereal Day* is 23 hours, 56 minutes, 4.0905 seconds. This is the amount of time it takes the earth to rotate exactly 360 degrees. This is the day with reference to the background of stars.\n\nIf you do the math and add this up, it works out to be 365.256 days, minus about 3 seconds. The former figure is accounted for by leap days. \n\nThe latter number of seconds requires an additional leap day every 26,000 years.",
"If you’re interested, read the “Time” chapter out of Bornsteins “The Discoverers.”\n\nThere’s a huge amount of interesting history about time and calendar keeping that most folks are unaware of."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cms/cpg15x/albums/userpics/solarday2.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
6nfwj2 | how can skateboarders jump from tall places and not get hurt? what's the highest you can jump from and not get hurt? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nfwj2/eli5_how_can_skateboarders_jump_from_tall_places/ | {
"a_id": [
"dk94uws",
"dk9dly9",
"dk9k7ej",
"dk9qjtr"
],
"score": [
17,
8,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"When a person takes a voluntary fall and can get their feet underneath them, they can flex their legs on impact to absorb and distribute the force, essentially using their muscles and tendons like a set of shocks. Skateboarders use this when they take their boards on a jump, and you can also see parkour atheletes doing it; the latter also can be seen integrating rolls and other acrobatic maneuvers as a way of further absorbing and redirecting the kinetic energy of the fall.\n\nAs far as maximum height, this old [ask science post](_URL_0_) has some parkour runners mentioning personal bests of around 15 feet with zero harm, a rule of thumb of 3x the falling person's overall height for a \"critical fall\", a mention of an LD50 fatality rate (on-average fatal, about 50% of reported cases resulting in death) at 48 feet and an LD90 (90% reported death rate) at 84 feet, as well as a reminder that people step off curbs and break/sprain their ankles every day.",
"The total force from the fall is consistent but using a skateboard you can transfer a portion of it into forward motion. ",
"They transfer the energy of the fall into forward momentum using their skateboard.\n\nIt's the same concept as rolling after a large fall. The idea is to give the energy from falling more time to safely disperse using friction instead of dumping it all at once due to the difference of inertia between you and the ground. ",
"When dropping from something high, they will also have to be very fast to distribute energy.\n\nFor highest drops, check out \"Aron 'Jaws' Homoki\" on YouTube. This guy is just crazy."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/l21py/what_is_the_maximum_height_an_adult_human_could/"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6xavrc | why do some insects undergo metamorphisis instead of the more conventional life cycle? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6xavrc/eli5why_do_some_insects_undergo_metamorphisis/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmeiuzw",
"dmej410",
"dmej748",
"dmeiuzw",
"dmej410",
"dmej748",
"dmeiuzw",
"dmej410",
"dmej748"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
5,
2,
3,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Almost all insects do, and we aren't entirely sure why, it takes more energy, it requires more care and you're more vulnerable. But how they do it is remarkable. The little caterpillar doesn't just break down his tail and make it into wings,his entire body pretty much becomes a soup where they're all rearranged to become a butterfly, which is pretty amazing, sort of like melting down a baby human (not really but kinda) and rebuilding it as a Wolf ",
"Perhaps there's an advantage to having two radically different physiologies during their life, and it's just too hard to make the huge changes without metamorphosing",
"Caterpillars are optimised for eating but are slow to spread around and find a mate. Butterflies are good at the latter. By changing half way through the life cycle they get the best of both worlds",
"Almost all insects do, and we aren't entirely sure why, it takes more energy, it requires more care and you're more vulnerable. But how they do it is remarkable. The little caterpillar doesn't just break down his tail and make it into wings,his entire body pretty much becomes a soup where they're all rearranged to become a butterfly, which is pretty amazing, sort of like melting down a baby human (not really but kinda) and rebuilding it as a Wolf ",
"Perhaps there's an advantage to having two radically different physiologies during their life, and it's just too hard to make the huge changes without metamorphosing",
"Caterpillars are optimised for eating but are slow to spread around and find a mate. Butterflies are good at the latter. By changing half way through the life cycle they get the best of both worlds",
"Almost all insects do, and we aren't entirely sure why, it takes more energy, it requires more care and you're more vulnerable. But how they do it is remarkable. The little caterpillar doesn't just break down his tail and make it into wings,his entire body pretty much becomes a soup where they're all rearranged to become a butterfly, which is pretty amazing, sort of like melting down a baby human (not really but kinda) and rebuilding it as a Wolf ",
"Perhaps there's an advantage to having two radically different physiologies during their life, and it's just too hard to make the huge changes without metamorphosing",
"Caterpillars are optimised for eating but are slow to spread around and find a mate. Butterflies are good at the latter. By changing half way through the life cycle they get the best of both worlds"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2qtl94 | why do progressive estates put their focus and resources on free healthcare and free education and not on free food, free clothing and free shelter? | According to the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (_URL_0_), Physiological needs are top priority and not Safety needs or Esteem needs. Why do the Estate focus on the latter rather than on the former? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qtl94/eli5_why_do_progressive_estates_put_their_focus/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn9d7aw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm a little confused by your use of the word Estate, but I assume you mean state. The reason is that most progressive states have already taken care of their citizens' need for food, clothing, and shelter. People in those countries are either able to buy their own food, clothing, and shelter easily or there are government programs that provide food, clothing and/or shelter. \n\nI would also say that the states aren't providing \"free\" healthcare and education, but rather they are socializing it. People still have to pay taxes to support those systems, but in return no individual person has to pay a lot of money out of pocket when they use those services.\n\nYou could also look at it more cynically and say that governments aren't concerned with their citizens' needs, but rather strengthening the state economically and militarily. Schools and healthcare for productive citizens do a better job of that than providing aid to less productive, poorer citizens. Realistically, though, I think governments try to help with all of the things you listed, but they can't do it all because they have limited resources."
]
} | [] | [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs"
] | [
[]
] |
|
7wlite | do cough suppressants actually help, or do they just suppress the germs coming out when you cough (which is bad, right?)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7wlite/eli5_do_cough_suppressants_actually_help_or_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"du18ukq",
"du1c0nn"
],
"score": [
12,
2
],
"text": [
"Cough suppressants have nothing to do with the germs coming out of your mouth when you do cough. \n\nCoughing is typically an involuntary reaction to your body recognizing an irritant somewhere in your respiratory or digestive tract. Germs aren’t the reason for this however, they’re too small to be recognized as irritants. They may be the root cause, by contributing the irritation (dry throat due to cold, etc)\n\nWhat cough suppressants attempt to do is replicate the body’s natural defense of these irritants by coating the throat with mucus. That’s why cough drops typically last not much longer than you have them in your mouth. The ones with menthol may last slightly longer because they have a numbing/cooling effect that helps kill the feeling of the irritant in the throat. ",
"Depends on the cough. With a dry cough or an irritated throat suppressants might give you some relief and time for your body to heal. But with a wet cough suppressants can be harmful if you are not careful. You body is trying to get the phlegm out of your lungs. If you don't do so it can lead to pneumonia. You should look to expectorants to make your cough more productive (more gunk coming up) and only add suppressants when sleeping, not all day long. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5655go | why is it "safe" to drink contaminated water that has been boiled, but "unsafe" to eat spoiled meat that has been cooked? the dead bacteria and viruses are still present in both cases. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5655go/eli5_why_is_it_safe_to_drink_contaminated_water/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8gcmdm",
"d8gdld6",
"d8genun",
"d8ggnv7",
"d8h3pj2"
],
"score": [
37,
2,
9,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"The bacteria actually aren't present after boiling.\n\n\"Boiling is sufficient to kill pathogenic bacteria, viruses and protozoa.\"\n\n\nMeat: \" started to go bad, then yes, cooking it will kill the germs. However, some bacteria (like Staphylococcus) that cause food poisoning do so by the fact that they excrete toxins, which are not necessarily destroyed by cooking.\"",
"One thing not mentioned by other commentors (but their points are still valid) is that when you boil water, you bring it all up to 100C (and it is generally recommended that if the water is contaminated you boil it for several minutes, just to make sure everyhing is dead).\n\nHowever, when you cook meat, the middle rarely gets this hot (typical temeratures for 'cooked' meat are 70-80C), and there is a greater chance of slightly cooler pockets where bacteria might survive.",
"When bacteria and myco cultures spoil meat they produce toxins as a wasteproduct of their digestion, like we produce well...no 1 and 2. In contaminated water (most of the time) there is not much food for bacteriae so they do not produce many toxins. \n\nWhile you kill off the bacteria most of the time, some of their toxins are surviving. But the main reason to not eat spoiled meat is that it would taste so bad (as a precaution from our body) that you would seldom get it down.\n",
"Some bacteria carry heat resistant spores inside themselves, which can grow into a new, live bacterium. Clostridium botulinum which causes botulism and C. difficile which causes dangerous diahorreal illness can form spores that would survive boiling. Spore formers are not normally found in water, they often live in soil and contaminate food\n\nSome toxic compounds made by, or contained in, bacteria are not destroyed by cooking or boiling, so they can poison you even if the organism that made that poison is dead. Bacillus cereus makes a toxin that is resistant to heat, and so do some Vibrio bacteria which would be found in food and water respectively... so I don't think its safe to drink contaminated water even if it has been boiled.",
"(1) different kinds of bacteria live in different kinds of media, so the bacteria most common in water are not the same as the bacteria that will penetrate the thickness of meat.\n\n(2) Boiling water is a terrific solvent, that destroys many complex chemicals.\n\n(3) The temperature at which water boils is _much_ higher than the temperature at which meat cooks.\n\n- Beef is \"cooked\" at about 145F. (actual minimum 130F, lower for \"en blu\", which is essentially raw)\n- Chicken is \"cooked\" at about 165F.\n- Water boils at 212F\n\nSo while you cook meat at a nominal 350F to 450F, and the outside reaches those sorts of temperatures (and undergoes the tasty, tasty Maillard Reaction), the full thickness has been nowhere near hot enough to kill bacteria.\n\nNote that this is why cooking a marginal cut of meat isn't as dangerous as cooking a marginal lump of ground beef. The grinding destroys the structural integrity of the meat and so may have introduced surface bacteria to the full thickness, where it could survive cooking.\n\nWe also don't eat white meat (chicken and pork) if it's still \"pink\" because it tends to not be as dense as red meat and so some bacteria (such as E. Coli in chicken) and some parasites (such as trichinosis in pork) get deeper into the meat and survive higher cooking temperatures than what shows up in beef and similar red meats. \n\nSo as meat is exposed to the world and starts to go bad, presuming it was healthy meat to start with, then cooking sanitizes/destroys the same thicknesses that the bacteria was invading. Which is why it's so useful as a primitive technique.\n\nThis is also why its \"Bad\" to eat \"sick\" animals. Their flesh may be interpenetrated with disease, especially muscular diseases like anthrax, so it can't be cleaned, cooked enough to be safe, or ingested safely.\n\nFinally, if the meat is bad enough it will be rejected by the body outright for being full of the waste products of the bacteria.\n\nIndeed, most \"food borne illnesses\" are not bad for you because of the damage the bacteria actually does first-hand, most such things are bad for you because bacteria shits poison. So the bacteria doesn't eat you you, it's excrement is complex and toxic.\n\nBoiling won't kill absolutely everything, nor will it destroy every possible toxin. But it will kill and destroy almost all of everything.\n\nAlso note that sometimes you'll be told to boil all water, and sometimes you'll be told to boil it for (e.g.) \"at least ten minutes\" or something like that. The latter case is reserved for a known threat that takes non-trivial time to be fully effected.\n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7gd8ce | how do we disable or disregard most sensory inputs when we’re asleep? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7gd8ce/eli5_how_do_we_disable_or_disregard_most_sensory/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqiqdm3",
"dqjd6pk"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The thalamus (part of your brain) does produce certain oscillations that can be seen on an EEG that are thought to dampen the body's response to sounds that can disturb sleep. If further interested, look up \"sleep spindles\".",
"Keeping it simple the brain cuts down on not needed processes. However it's on 'standby' this is why hearing your name called will wake you. The brain can hear your name and realise you are needed and wake you up.. \n\nEver been in a loud place and someone called your name? Same idea. You cut out unnecessary information and sift out what's needed.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
59vi9c | what is "hard" water, and how does adding salt to it make it "soft?" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59vi9c/eli5_what_is_hard_water_and_how_does_adding_salt/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9bpfrp",
"d9bqb7g",
"d9bsqrn",
"d9cmzcb"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
18,
2
],
"text": [
"Hard water is an expression you'll often come across when dealing with for instance dishwashers. Hard water, i.e water that contains a high amount of minerals - which tapwater often does - can leave mineral deposits on your dishware, and in some ways inhibit the effectiveness of the dishsoap as well. Thus, it is often desirable to 'soften' the water; remove some of its mineral content.\n\nSalt is commonly used in this process. The salt 'attracts' the minerals in the water, and binds them into a form that allows the dishwasher to work more effectively, and leaves your plates sparkly clean.",
"hard water is water that has a lot of minerals dissolved in it. in the short term this isn't a problem, but over time the minerals will attach themselves to parts any time the water is left undisturbed. think of a cave with water dripping off the ceiling... if it's hard water, the drips eventually form stalactites and stalagmites. one is formed when some of the minerals attach to the ceiling of the cave as the water is accumulating, yet not large enough to drip yet. the other is formed after the water drips and leaves the surface below wet, and some of the minerals attach to the cave floor. this is really cool after a long time in a cave, but you don't want that happening to your pipes in your house or your appliances. so you give it something it binds with more easily... like the salt... that way it binds with the salt and not your plumbing, and goes harmlessly down the drain with the rest of the water. ",
"Hard water is caused mostly by two common positively charged minerals, calcium and magnesium. These minerals can react with soap and detergents in such a as to precipitate (fancy word for remove it from solution) and make the soaps less effective. \n\nSalt water is used in water softeners. Water softeners contain a resin that can bind with the sodium in brine during charging. When in use, hard water is passed through the the resin. Calcium and magnesium bind more strongly with the resin then the sodium and as they bind with the resin, sodium is released into the water while the the calcium and magnesium are removed. \n\nUnlike the calcium and magnesium, sodium does not bind with nor precipitate soap or detergents so they remain just as effective and the water is considered softened. ",
"Okay just to be clear, you aren't talking about *ice*, are you?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7rv29e | external, internal, and cellular respiration | Any help appreciated, thanks!! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7rv29e/eli5_external_internal_and_cellular_respiration/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt0toss"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"My understanding is that these terms are used to separate 3 phases of gas exchange.\n\nExternal is the exchange of oxygen and CO2 in the lung.\n\nInternal is the exchange of oxygen and CO2 in the tissue/circulation\n\nCellular describes the reduction of O2 to CO2 (or other metabolite depending on the exact process) in the cell. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6k9cm0 | how do germs "work"? | I realized recently that at 25 years old and nearly 20 years of education under my belt I honestly have no idea how germs "work."
For example:
* What are germs anyway?
* Are they little microscopic critters that need to move?
* Is bacteria and germs the same thing?
* Are germs just a generic word for any kind of microscopic bacteria, viruses, parasites, etc?
* Are there germs covering everything?
* If you touch something with germs on it, do the germs INSTANTLY transfer? Or do "they" need time to move onto it?
* Is that where the five-second rule comes from?
* "Germaphobes" that don't like shaking hands, could they avoid germs by doing it ultra fast?
* if something is contagious, let say a wart, are the "germs" what make it contagious? Are they only on the wart itself or do they travel all around it?
I feel like this is some basic information about the world that I should have a better grasp on, but realized that my understanding is basically still limited to [Osmosis Jones](_URL_0_) the Movie. Seems like this would the subreddit I best belong in! lol | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6k9cm0/eli5_how_do_germs_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"djk9a7e",
"djk9fcr",
"djkak10"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"A \"germ\" is sort of a generic word that refers to bacteria, viruses, perhaps even other kinds of parasites. It is not a scientific term.\n\nBacteria and viruses are everywhere, and I mean everywhere. Covering your skin as well as any surface you touch. Your skin is covered in oil, so when you touch a surface, you leave behind some of the oil and your bacteria/viruses, and you pick up some of whatever was on the surface.\n\nThe 5 second rule is not very scientific, it's just folk wisdom.\n\n\n",
" > Are germs just a generic word for any kind of microscopic bacteria, viruses, parasites, etc?\n\nYes.\n\n > Are there germs covering everything?\n\nStill speaking in broad terms of \"germs\" in general, yeah, they're pretty much everywhere.\n\n > If you touch something with germs on it, do the germs INSTANTLY transfer? Or do \"they\" need time to move onto it?\n\nIt's better to think of bacteria and viruses at this point instead of \"germs\". Some bacteria/viruses survive nicely in the open and transfer easily to hands (the same way if you touch a pile of dirt some of it will stick to your hand, even if it's perfectly clean/dry). Some are airborne, and some others still need to remain in fluids.\n\nThe 5-second rule is urban legend, and an excuse to pick Skittles up of the floor ;-)",
"Bacteria are cells that exist independantly of the body's needs, but when they get in, they reproduce and use up resources like they would on, say, a rotting log, or anywhere else. Inflamation is when the body increases blood flow to an infected area to allow cells in the immune system to get there quicker. When immune cells get there, they engulph the bacteria (as well as any other stuff that might have gotten in) based on proteins and other materials found on the membranes of the bacteria. One this is done, most things return to normal. Every surface outside of (or in unfortunate cases including) hospital surfaces is covered in bacteria, given how simple they are, and how old. It is impossible to avoid contamination by shaking hands quickly for this reason: imagine one person had paint on their hand: would shaking hands with this person really fast reduce the chances of paint getting on you? The five-second rule is more a superstition than anything.\n\n & nbsp;\nAnother type of infection is a yeast-infection, yeasts being a single-celled fungus, which is like a bacteria, only it has cell walls of chitin, DNA is contained in a nucleus, and mitochondria. Mushrooms are another type of fungus.\n\n & nbsp;\nViruses are a lot like computer viruses: they can be divided into two main parts, the delivery-mechanism and the payload. Viruses result from random mutation, those mutated areas of DNA coding for identical DNA, and a protein covering. When a virus enters a cell, certain protein markers and receptors on the surface of the virus cause the cell membrane to open up and join to to the protein covering, injecting DNA or RNA, which goes to the cell's ribosomes to be coded into more viruses, which leave the cell in millions. Viruses aren't technically alive, in the way that a flash drive with a computer virus that hijacks factories to produce more flash drives with that code in it aren't computers. A virus is a static object that you could leave in a stable environment for the lifetime of the universe, and it could still infect a cell if it came across one. Another way to think about it is like if, in installing a program, some of the data glitched, creating a computer virus independant of human actions.\n\n & nbsp;\nParasites (such as intestinal worms and the botfly larva) are multicellular animals that, like bacteria, simply got here and found it a really good place to be, like an invasive species, and then evolved to exist in that environment.\n\n & nbsp;\n\"Germ\" is a really vague term, and is simply a microorganism that causes sickness. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181739/"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cr4tzx | why does your metabolism get worse as you grow older? when is your metabolism at its best and when does it usually slow down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cr4tzx/eli5_why_does_your_metabolism_get_worse_as_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"ex1v9d0",
"ex1wf6c",
"ex23qxt",
"ex2e1zp",
"ex2g0l4",
"ex2pfu0",
"ex2rox3",
"ex3e5uk",
"ex3w1xc",
"ex3yo6o",
"ex3zl27"
],
"score": [
404,
50,
13,
823,
17,
5,
7,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Edit: Not a doctor, shhhshhh...\n\nYour metabolism does not slow down with age, or at least not like you probably think. The main culprit is changing exercise and nutrition habits. Of course there are the additional costs of growing for kids, which is why a 16 year old will have a greater BMR (base metabolic rate) than a 30 year old of the same height and weight. BMR is the energy you burn by basically just existing, e.g. lying in bed all day.\n\nWhile most of us were probably more active when we were younger - think of playing outside, PE class and so on - adults are mostly sedentary. We drive to work, sit in an office the whole day and sit at home afterwards. This is why younger people seem to have a larger TDEE (total daily energy expenditure). TDEE is your BMR plus energy burned from moving about and exercise.\n\nHumans are really bad at noticing subtle changes over time, which is why most of us don't see that we are moving less and often eat more as we get older. Therefore the resulting weight gain is attributed to the mysterious slowing metabolism. While there are specific health problems or other factors that lead to weight gain, they mostly work by increasing appetite or making you lethargic and therefore use less energy. But these are often minor contributors compared to nutrition and exercise habits.",
"\"Metabolism\" is treated as this mysterious force that controls our weight gain. In reality, it's essentially just the sum total of all the energy (calories) that your body burns in a day in order to keep operating/living. \n\nThe reason your 'metabolism' slows down as you age is simple: You get lazier, slower and more immobile, so you burn less energy (calories). The reduced activity also tends to lead to less muscle mass (for men, a decrease in testosterone as you age will lead to a reduction in muscle mass), which again leads to less energy use.\n\nThat's it. There's some subtle nuance to it that's not discussed here (the reduction is not *all* explained by less activity, but that's the lion's share of it), but that's the the broad strokes of it. You do less as you get older, which means your body is using less energy - ergo, your 'metabolism' (or 'total energy/calories burned') is reduced. It's better to think of metabolism as simply a unit of measurement - that'll help dispel most of the false notions surrounding metabolism.",
"Short answer: it doesn’t. People tend to get less active as they grow older, but still eat the same amount of food and they get fatter.\n\nLonger answer: we eat stuff every day to fuel our bodies. The total amount of food we need to eat to exist (exluding moving/exercise) is called the Base Metabollic Rate or BMR. Muscle requires more energy to maintain than fat. A 70kg man with a lot of muscle will have a higher BMR than a 70kg man with mostly fat.\n\nYoung people tend to move more, play more sports and are more active in general. As a result, they tend to have more muscle mass than older people of a similar weight and height. Also, because they move more, they use more energy, so they need to eat more to gain weight.\n\nThe result is that older people with little muscle need less energy to exist, plus move less, so need less energy to do all their activities outside of just existing. Often they still eat the same amount of food or more as when they were young, so they get fat.\n\nNot so ELI5 addendum: the difference in BMR between two individuals that are equal in body composition (height, weight, bf%), but vary largely by age is indistinguishable from the statistical difference in BMR between equally aged individuals.",
"People already hit on the main reasons which are decreased activity and increased food consumption, but I have a feeling that's not really what you were asking for. \n\nThe main reason many teenagers are notorious for being able to eat a ton of food without gaining weight is that their body is rapidly growing. All the processes required to fuse growth plates, increase bone density, and develop the brain use a lot of energy. At around age 25-30, this development mostly stops and our body reverses to break-down processes rather than build-up processes. (Muscle is an exception to this if you do strength training)\n\nAnother thing to take into account is that as we do things, our bodies acclimate to it. For example, someone who begins running 1 mile a day will burn more calories the first time they run it than the 100th time they run it because their body will naturally find the path of greatest efficiency. Someone who's young will likely be doing many different tasks and exercises for the first time, so they tend to burn more calories until they reach that acclimation. \n\nEdit: This in no way is me saying that exercise is bad just because you acclimate to it. It's just an observation on a common issue that leads to a plateau, which almost every person who works out will experience at one point. The general solution to this, for anyone of any age, is to try to have a varied exercise routine. Instead of doing the same workouts every week change your pace, the day you're working different muscle groups, how much of your max weight you lift with, the type of cardio you do (running vs jump rope vs HIIT all make your body do different things). \n\n\nSource: Biochemistry degree and my own experiences with exercise",
"BMR will reduce linearly with age, but that’s almost solely due to a reduction in muscle mass. As for “metabolism” decrease with age, the contributing factors to an increased weight gain given the same nutritional patterns are:\n\n1. Less muscle mass\n2. Lowered activity levels\n\nFor older individuals that hold onto a decent amount of muscle mass and stay fit to a similar degree, the changes will not be nearly as noticeable. For an individual that undergoes TRT and is able to hold onto the same amount of muscle mass and activity levels, the changes would be insignificant at best.",
"The question has already been answered, but here's a helpful, related, perspective based thing to consider:\n\nYour metabolism isn't getting *worse.* If you're putting in the same amount as you did when you were young, spending the same amount as you did when you were young, and managing to gain more weight than you did when you were young, that's your metabolism doing *better,* not worse. It means that your body is wasting less of what it's bringing in, leaving more to save in reserve.",
"Your metabolism doesn't really slow down as you get older. It's just that people tend to gain weight year on year, so by middle age they are noticably fat. We also tend to get less active with age, adding to the effect.",
"I can’t prove it, but I sincerely believe that people answering this thread are incorrect. It seems objectively incorrect that a small 30 year old and a 60 year old would have the same caloric needs given the same activity levels.\n\nFurther, there is research that shows that having been fat and dieted down to a weight lowers your BMR compared with people that naturally maintain that weight (by about 10%). there is also work showing that feeding obese mice poop (and the natural gut bacteria therein) from skinny mice makes the obese mice skinnier. So the idea that your expenditures are only due to your size and activity is a faulty premise to begin with.\n\nI do not have data to back this up, but let me share a hypothesis: mitochondria are the main energy creators of the cell, they are the most efficient pathway to make energy from food. Mitochondria have their own DNA, but that DNA isn’t proofed as well as the main (nuclear) DNA in cells. So over time, mitochondria accumulate mistakes ([example source, there are probably many other better papers too](_URL_0_)).\n\nThis is thought to be a main driver of aging (chronic inflammation, stem cell senescence, etc), and I suspect it is also why metabolism lowers. Again note that this is only a hypothesis, but I think that mitochondrion with errors cause a decreased ability to generate energy and result in greater fat storage. As a counterpoint, logically, less efficient energy processing actually would mean a higher metabolic rate, if the “lost” energy were excreted rather than stored, it would take more food to make the needed amount of energy.\n\nAnyways, blood from old people is also different than that of young people, hormones (which direct fat storage) change, getting old is a process that changes a lot and I think the idea that it isn’t actually changing your energy processing abilities is asinine.\n\nTl;dr I don’t think this whole you’re just less active answer is correct, but I do think the real answer has too many unknowns for an ELI5.\n\nSource: PhD in biochemistry and molecular biology, granted I did not study mitochondria or aging especially, so there could be (and likely is) a body of work I’m unaware of",
"They did a study on mice. Fecal matter from fat diabetic mice transplant into a healthy mouse made him fat and diabetic regardless of diet. So what I'm saying is bacteria in your stomach of the bad kind is over running your stomach and intestines causing you to have a slow metabolism and get fat.\n\n1) fast more\n2) stay away from diarrhea Dave at work shit spores are bad news.",
"Metabolic heart rate also has quite a bit to do with it. Ever hear the heartbeat of an infant in the womb? It's extremely rapid. Also, hummibgbirds have a neat little situation that they have to feed on gnats and nectar every couple of minutes or they'd die. (during sleep they enter a state of torpor which is a kind of hibernation in which they slow their heart rate way down) It's one of the reasons why they only exist in the Americas. The distances are too great and there aren't enough flowers in between to make a complete migration east or west. Only north and south along blooming routes. So to answer your question, it would seem that your metabolic heart rate is fastest when you're young. The younger the better!",
"You also need to factor in that puberty and adulthood bring some challenges that can be alleviated with prescription drugs. People taking prescriptions may have a change in their metabolisms as well.\n\nI was on many different antidepressants when I was younger and searching for the perfect fit. I gained about 30-50 pounds from being on a prescription that I stopped 2 months ago. I have now lost over 20 pounds. \n\nMy appetite has decreased and I don't feel the need to eat as much. \n\nStress does crazy things to people."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/31407474/?i=5&from=age%20mitochondria"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
24cpze | how does comcast justify data caps? | My family have to actually try to stay under the cap. Between Netflix, _URL_0_, Youtube and just browsing the internet, the freaking data cap is reached in half of a month. I can't begin to voice the outrage I have for Comcast, and the fact that they think 300 GB is enough in a month for a family of 4 is ridiculous. If my dad and I separately watch every one of our baseball teams' games a month, it all but completely wipes out the data cap itself... forget about watching some Netflix or Youtube. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24cpze/eli5_how_does_comcast_justify_data_caps/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch5vdvg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"They justify it the same way that any place does. If you go to a restaurant and order a plate of pasta, they would only bring you one plate. If you want more, you have to pay for another plate. Comcast isn't some unlimited buffet. Maybe they used to be, but they aren't doing that anymore. There are a million reasons why their business is awful, but this is the justification. It's how internet service providers and cell phone carriers in most countries around the world operate. "
]
} | [] | [
"MLB.tv"
] | [
[]
] |
|
21rw8c | why do we criticize politicians for voting along party lines, then criticize them when they break from it? | This isn't geared towards any particular party or politician - more about society at large. I see a lot of complaining that party members tend to keep in line and don't analyze affairs critically, but at the same time, actually doing so and voting against party lines leads to people calling them a flip-flopper or not Republican/Democrat enough, like it's a betrayal. Is it just a function of different groups speaking up at different times, or is there something else involved?
EDIT: I guess I'm really asking why voting against party lines is automatically treated as a negative for individual politicians. Politicians who actually think critically about issues and vote depending on what they understand are marginalized for it - why is thinking critically automatically punished? This seems to extend beyond party lines, to some extent. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21rw8c/eli5_why_do_we_criticize_politicians_for_voting/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfwwdo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Personal belief and maybe some hypocrisy.\n\nIf I agree with you, then I don't care how you vote. If I disagree with you, I'll justify your actions as being wrong using whatever means I can."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1laomd | why dogs and cats (and other animals) have breeds and humans don't? | I always wondered why there's types of dogs, cats, birds etc, and humans only have 'one race' (color doesn't count). Often, same breed animals look almost identical. Is it some 'natural selection' trick to humans differ from others? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1laomd/eli5_why_dogs_and_cats_and_other_animals_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbxc2te",
"cbxd6jg",
"cby9zy0"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Why are you saying race (which is more than colour) doesn't count? Our races are quite similar to a breed of most animals. Dogs and such are a little exaggerated in breeds due to out artificial selection, but that is the same idea as a human race. \r\rAlso, you are biased to say identical breeds look the same. You are not that animal, you are not intended to notice small variations in them like you are with humans. ",
" > (color doesn't count)\n\nYes it does. \n\nA chinese person and a black person are two totally different \"types\" of human...They have distinct evolutionary differences that are not consistent between their bodies.",
"Humans are scientifically considered to be as similar as one breed of dog, and it's theorized that this was caused by some great extinction event in the past that has led almost all current humans in the world to have stemmed from one similar source.\n\nAlthough we have apparent physical difference, we have very little difference on the genetic level.\n\nFor example, go google image search some human skeletons, and then look at some dog skeletons. Things like the Bull Terrier's skull compared to a Boston Terrier's skull show a significant difference.\n\nIt should be noted that breeds of domesticated animals are different from breeds of wild animals. Wild animals obtain breed distinction by being isolated geographically from another group of the same animal, and through random natural selection, difference occur, and average out within their isolated groups. \n\nThis is what HAS happened to humans, and why blacks look different from Asians look different from Caucasians etc... However, as I said above, we have actually looked at our genetic structure and found ourselves to still be less diverse than that of a different breed \nof dog.\n\nWhy?\nBreed distinction in domesticated animals occurs because we make it happen, and committees of humans decide what is or what isn't an acceptable breed.\n\nWe are continuing to push dogs to the limit of their genetics, and most breeds would not and could not exist without our help.\nCheck out this [pitbull skull comparison.](_URL_0_)\n\nWe could do something similar with humans, taking all the tall humans and breeding them together to create extremely tall humans, taking all the fasted humans and breeding even faster ones, etc... But this is called Eugenics, and it's considered unethical, as it violates peoples rights to freedom and to reproduce as they see fit.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.americastruebulldogs.com/uploads/English_bulldog_skull_s.png"
]
] |
|
1rth9i | i've tried researching bitcoins, but i don't understand them at a fundamental level. what is the value of virtual money? | It's hard enough to understand the value of a piece of paper with no gold backing it, but this I really do not understand.
EDIT: Thanks for your replies, but they raise so many more questions for me. Do you purchase bitcoins with currency from your country of residence? Do you earn them somehow? How does one become a miner? Is investing in bitcoins similar to the risk one takes when investing in the Stock Market? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rth9i/eli5_ive_tried_researching_bitcoins_but_i_dont/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdqppur",
"cdqpuiw",
"cdqqql7"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It's really just how much value people give to it. Plus, there's a finite number of 'em so it has free market value. \n\nBasically supply and demand",
"The piece of paper is just a *token* that represents an abstract 'dollar' - it is not the dollar itself. There isn't actually physical bills for something like 90% of the dollars that exist - most of them are just bits in some bank's database. We can trust those bits because we trust the banks to keep their books straight & we know that the government will force them to 'play fair' with the dollars they have. We decide that a dollar has value because the government will back it up.\n\nWith BitCoin, rather than relying on laws & lawyers & cops & guns & prisons to keep the banks honest, we rely on some *really fucking hard* math problems. These problems are really hard to solve but really easy to check the answer to. Every transaction needs to tie into the solution to these math problems so *everyone* can see if the transaction is legit. As for value? It's completely arbitrary & based on how much interest people have in the Bitcoin system. This isn't really much different than basing it on how much trust people have in the government.",
"Bitcoins are \"mined\" through complex computer programs. For our purposes, just think of it as a way for people with lots of time or powerful computers to slowly find them. Once they are \"mined,\" however, you can accumulate them the same way that you would accumulate any foreign currency: through exchange. \n\nSo, imagine you are in England, and you want dollars. You can get them by \"trading\" with people who have dollars, either trading goods/services directly or offering them Pounds/Euros in exchange for dollars. For the currency exchange option, there are \"exchange rates,\" but these really just reflect prices that big brokers sell and buy at. There's nothing inherent about them. \n\nBitcoin is the same, the only difference is that, in addition to exchange and trade for goods/services, you can also mine, as described above. The parallel to mining for regular currency would be buying directly from the Central bank. \n\nAs you can tell from the above, the \"value\" of bitcoin, like any other currency, is really just based on how much people want it. Economic theory tells us there's a link between the amount of currency, virtual or not, in circulation and its \"price.\" \n\nIf lots of people want to buy things with dollars, and the central bank doesn't print more dollars, than the \"price\" of dollars will go up, and a dollar will buy more and cost more in foreign currency. Bitcoins are the same, if people who are willing to take bitcoins in exchange for something (goods, services, other money) have things people want, than the \"price\" of bitcoins goes up. \n\nOne wrinkle, though, is speculation. Speculation in currency is when you gather a certain type of money not to buy things, but in the hope the value will go up. Many people speculate in currency, but virtual currencies like bitcoin, where only a certain amount will be printed, are especially vulnerable to speculation. This means that a certain amount of the \"price\" of a bitcoin will reflect people who expect it to be worth more in the future, rather than people who want to use it to buy things now. This actually makes it harder to use as a currency, since people rarely want to spend something that will be worth more tomorrow. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
afkeck | if there are objects in space so far away that their light just hasn't reached us yet, do telescopes sometimes see new objects on the sky that just weren't there yesterday or 10 years ago? | I understand that we can only observe objects that are close enough for their light to reach us until now. But every day new light from parts of the universe that weren't observable yesterday should reach us, or not?? Do we find new Stars that way? Or is the light to weak to observe it even if it technically reaches us? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/afkeck/eli5_if_there_are_objects_in_space_so_far_away/ | {
"a_id": [
"edz9y35",
"edza1jd",
"edza53z",
"edzag1k",
"edzb4n4",
"ee0l2i8"
],
"score": [
2,
40,
4,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Since I'm not a physics buff I'll only answer the 1st question.\n\nYes, we see stars and the like as they existed however many years/months/days/hours/minutes it took for light to reach Earth.\n\nFor example, if the moon blew up we would see that in no time at all, but if a random supernova occurred millions of light years away (assuming our telescopes reached that far) we could see it after enough time had passed.\n\nFrom basic understanding, it should just be your classic speed, distance and time problem.",
"No. Sadly if the light hasn't reached us yet, it never will. This is because the universe is expanding faster than light can travel.",
"New stars don't just \"pop into existance\", they were created through a proccess. If the light of a given star hasn't reached us yet, we would see the light of *its creation* first. So, rather than a star just \"appearing\" we can see the birth of stars, its just a birth that happened many, many years ago.",
" > But every day new light from parts of the universe that weren't observable yesterday should reach us, or not??\n\nNo, but your thinking is somewhat correct in that as time passes you would expect more light to be arriving from more distant objects. However there is another factor at work which is the expansion of the universe. Space is becoming larger and so more distant objects are moving away from us faster due to this growth of the distance between us and them.\n\nIt turns out that at the very edge of our observable universe we can see back right to when it first became transparent to light, viewing the \"cosmic background radiation\" from the previously hot, opaque plasma. But at such a great distance the expansion adds up to being faster than light itself, meaning our view of this will eventually fade out as the expansion prevents the light from ever arriving.",
"If something new is created in the observable universe then yes, the telescope would see it long after it was created.\n\nHowever I think you're asking about does part of the universe become observable because the light from the entire region is just now reaching us. The answer there is no, because the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, so as a result the size of the observable universe is decreasing, not increasing.\n\n",
"Disclaimer: I'm not a astronomer and definitely not one of researchers of deep space, so if my understanding is incomplete, be sure to correct me\n\n-----\n\nLet's imagine something simple. Forget about everything about history of universe' beginning and what not. \nImagine that *right now* all universe loses all light and emits a light pulse towards us. What will happen?\n\nWell, since the universe expands proportional to distance (see Hubble constant), all light now \"changes distance between us\" at different rate. \nPhotons that were outside the Hubble distance (speed of light/constant) will be getting feather from us. \nThose at the edge will stay there.\nThose inside this sphere will be moving towards us.\n\nSo, in this example first we will see the pulse from closest objects, then from some on bigger distance and so on, up to the border, where it would take infinite amount of time.\n\nSo, as times goes on we still will be seeing new stuff, just slower and slower, as our vision gets closer and closer to what was happening at the border.\n\nThat's why we still see and will be seeing background radiation from all that time. And from behind it we see even more ancient stuff (just not light, I guess?)\n\n------\n\nNow, let me crank the difficulty up.\n\nHistorically, we didn't get the universe everywhere at the beginning. There wasn't anything there.\n\nThe *Hubble constant itself* was changing. Everything expanded at huge rate at first and then somewhat calmed down.\n\nNow what that changes in our abstraction? Well, for once the sphere that traps us from outside world was expanding. It means that some of photons that were on the edge/outside now move towards us. \n\nNow, it is possible that on the \"scale back\" we managed to overtake the universe and there's nothing on the borders and we'll be seeing the end of it. \nBut neither we can see the end right now, nor far rich data shows that the overtake has happened, so new stuff till the end of time still stands.\n\n------\n\nTime for last simplification to go.\n\nWe said that universe gave us a *pulse*. \nBut... That's not how it works. Everything emits light constantly. So to not confuse everyone about where the light was emitted from, when astronomers talk about distance to *really* far-away stuff, they use distance to *current position* of galaxies\n\nSince objects were/are moving at sub-solar speeds, there was/is stuff distancing away from us. Some of those will be crossing the border and emitting light there. \n\nThe photons on/near to the border will accumulate from all objects running away from us. \nThus, we will be/are getting tons of noise from there, that's for sure.\n\nAnd, here are where the line \"we won't see that stuff in x billion years\" comes from.\n\n-----\n\nTL/DR: we still get to see new stuff, but there's too much noise. \nAnd wikipedia pages on all that stuff is confusing af (and some are probably wrong)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
piw77 | what happens when you microwave food, and what would it feel like to be microwaved? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/piw77/eli5_what_happens_when_you_microwave_food_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3ppli3",
"c3ppmi2",
"c3pqh2a"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"The microwaves excite the water molecules making them move faster and faster heating up whatever you are cooking. As for how it feels, know people who work with radars who have gotten hit with high enough energy to melt a chocolate bar in their pocket and they said it felt just like getting hot but from the inside. They could have been Being me though.",
"The oven releases electromagnetic radiation at a frequency that causes molecules of water, fat, and similar substances to vibrate. Vibration = energy = heat.\n\nIt would probably feel like you were just getting warm, like you had a fever. Eventually you would pass out. Then you would cook.",
"Water is polar and the electromagnetic field from the \"microwave\" changes the orientation (dipole moment) of the water molecules based on polarity. This change in orientation causes heat and causes the surroundings to heat up, proteins to denature, etc. \n\nTl;dr: Water revolves around so fast it heats up surroundings. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
au16o1 | how are machines used for medical imaging calibrated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/au16o1/eli5_how_are_machines_used_for_medical_imaging/ | {
"a_id": [
"eh4tngb",
"eh55tpy"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably with some reference data. Here's a thing we send out with the machine its as exactly 1.0 as we can get if ur machine isnt measuring this at 1.0 its offcenter",
"Medical physicists run a gamut of testing and calibration on xray, CT, and MRI machines. It's really fascinating stuff. At least for xray and CT they measure the radiation dose levels (not for MRI as there is no radiation involved), accuracy of technical factors for the xray tubes (voltage and current that produce the xrays), and a whole bunch of other things. There are also biomedical technicians who have limited similar testing capabilities and then also repair/replace electrical components within the machines. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
67s9rs | why has there been such a marked increase in spam/scam phone calls in the past few years, and is there anything that can be done about it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67s9rs/eli5_why_has_there_been_such_a_marked_increase_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgszrs0",
"dgt0qw3",
"dgt1hdz",
"dgt1u17",
"dgt24s9",
"dgt34pq",
"dgt42qm",
"dgt44q0",
"dgt4ao2",
"dgt51tp",
"dgt5iz6",
"dgt6mnr",
"dgt6t0m",
"dgt7199",
"dgt726t",
"dgt7nio",
"dgt7now",
"dgt7s8a",
"dgt7zag",
"dgt7zy5",
"dgt80kn",
"dgt8dsv",
"dgt8hji",
"dgt8hlq",
"dgt9hc1",
"dgt9lj2",
"dgta805",
"dgtbqpc",
"dgtc2wl",
"dgtcq69",
"dgtd11c",
"dgtd4vt",
"dgtelca",
"dgtevvq",
"dgtfuw2"
],
"score": [
142,
104,
6,
36,
1286,
24,
10,
90,
4,
7,
9,
66,
5,
84,
6,
2,
5,
5,
2,
11,
3,
91,
65,
3,
20,
4,
3,
31,
6,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The level and detail of information about people is so accurate now that these companies can afford to ring you. Before they would need to randomly dial every number for a few hits. Now they can purchase data on things like, people who have had a car crash, people who have bought a PC etc.\n\nOur data is everywhere. What you buy, when you buy it etc are all easily collected. Things like a store loyalty card isnt there because they really really like you, its because they can tell if people in a particular area prefer Pepsi or Coke-Cola etc.\n\nThey also get mega bucks by passing these sorts of details over to marketing people who by these lists from all over the show, and then sell big lists to anyone who will buy them. This means that you can afford to only ring the 100,000 people on your list about that car crash they've had, rather than the entire country.",
"Don't forget reason number one: **Because it's profitable.** If it weren't so, people would stop doing it.\n\n > is there anything that can be done about it?\n\nWhen you find it, let us know!\n\nIn the meanwhile, here's my trick: \n\n* Phone rings. LET IT RING.\n* \"Answer it\" -- pick up handset, push green button -- after THIRD ring, but DON'T SAY ANYTHING.\n* Wait two seconds, listening. If you hear electronic beeps or clicking (call being switched) disconnect.\n* Finally, say Hello. If you don't get an IMMEDIATE response, disconnect.\n\nAnd Rachel from Cardholder services will start talking as soon as you pick up, so you don't have to say anything. Play a game: See if you can disconnect before she says \"Rachel\"!\n",
"Free cruise algorithms have gotten better but you have to reserve your spot with your CC immediately.",
"It's a couple of things, both related to VoIP.\n\nCalling has gotten ridiculously cheap. Long distance used to be 5-10c/min. Now it's less than a penny a minute.\n\nAlso, many carriers don't verify the caller ID for calls entering their network. The FCC should force them to. Also, there's no way for the carrier further in the chain to verify what the originating carrier sends.\n\nSource: big commercial VoIP industrial customer.",
"ELI5: When you mail a letter some place, you usually put a return address on it. However there is nobody that actually checks to verify the letter came from where you say it did. You could live in California and pretend to be from Washington, and if you use a re-mailer service the post marks will even show it's from Washington. \n\nIt is the same with telephone numbers in the digital age due to the ability of many voice over IP customers to change the phone number displayed when they call someone, much like setting a fake return address above. This allows scammers, robodialers, telemarketers, even bill collectors, to call a person without revealing their real phone number, or even pretending to be somebody else like the IRS, a neighbor, the police department, or a business.\n\n\nDetailed explanation: Telephone systems used to work using a protocol called SS7 or signalling system 7 which uses point codes instead of ip addresses. SS7 packets contain information about the source point code, the destination, and information on who placed the call, and where the call is destined. Because the telephone company had exclusive access to this network, it was not possible to fake a telephone number. \n\nThen came voice over IP which uses TCP/IP networking to send telephone calls over a data network using things like SIGTRAN or SIP (thanks for the correction Databeast) which helps establish calls over IP networks. \n\nSIP information can be sent by the telephone company, but if you have access to a SIP provider, then it is possible to change the displayed number and make a telephone call appear to come from any phone number you wish, the same way changing the return to address on a letter can. \n\nThis allows spammers and scammers to hide their real telephone number, and make the call appear to come from any phone number they wanted. For instance the IRS 800 number, your local police department phone number, friends or family, or even your own local area code and prefix so they could pretend to be a local call. \n\nThis makes it very easy to abuse the telephone system in a hard to trace manner while remaining anonymous so your victims have little information to find or incriminate you. \n\nThis is why telephone abuse is becoming more prevalent even on national call blocked numbers. Some people have asked why the phone companies don't block them and the answer is it was against the law and they could incur FCC fines for disrupting telephone calls. The FCC is working on new rules that would allow a user to give their phone provider permission to block these type of calls without incurring fines. \n\nIt is a good policy to set your phones default ring tone to silence or 24 hour \"do not disturb\", and specifically add phone numbers of friends and family to the exclusion list so the phone will still ring when they call. \n\nAnd if you see a phone call placed from the first 6 digits of your real phone number, it is guaranteed to be a scam. If your phone number is 210 855 4444 and you see a phone call from 210 855 1234 it's a scam. ",
"There are apps like [hiya](_URL_0_) that identify spam/scam calls and prevent the phone from ringing",
"I use an app Truecaller. It shows caller ID for most calls and shows if other users marked it as SPAM. It also allows blocking callers. Super useful.",
"It has EXPLODED. The \"do not call\" registry used to be slow to take effect, but worked well after a month or so. \n\nIt doesn't work at all anymore, it's telemarketing galore with no boundaries these days. All you can do is ignore and block! ",
"Nomorobo has decreased the number of robocalls we get on our land line. It says there that they've got something for iPhones now too. See _URL_0_",
"Can I sue these companies that keep calling me for TCPA violations?",
"If anyone knows how to stop them that would be nice. Just about every day I get a phone call with the same area code and first three digits as my own phone number. It's annoying, but at least I know which calls to ignore. \nOn another, somewhat related note, is it legal for a newspaper company to send me an advertisement catalog every week when I've asked them to stop? No matter how many times I call the number on the catalog and request a stop they keep sending it. ",
"My job at work is to caption phone calls for the deaf and hard of hearing. About 30-40% of calls that we connect to are either telemarketers, cardholder services, pre-recorded charity drives, warranty chasers, and PC scams. Occasionally we do get dangerous calls like the ones that call and pretend the person's grandson is in jail in Mexico or that they won something and they're demanding $250 bucks through Western Union before they can get their millions. \n\nThere is nothing we, the interpreters, can do about that. FCC regulations clearly defines that we have no business intentionally altering the conversation to alert the poor old biddy that gets drawn in to these kinds of things. We can only caption verbatim. I know a lot of colleagues who become distressed after certain calls because they have to just sit there and listen to someone get scammed out of their money.\n\nHowever, if you do have a relative that has a captioning phone, interpreters are allowed to collect the call IDs that we suspect as scams and patch it through to operations. This is a relatively recent addition and our marketing team sends out newsletters to customers just to at least warn them of such calls. Personally, I've told my parents and my grandparents to always come to us should they get any calls that demand money from them and stay clear away from those Microsoft scam fuckers because they are literally the worst. Top shit tier scum buckets along with the Western Union guys.",
"Since the why has been answered, here's something you can do to help. T-Mobile offers free spam blocking services if you change your benefits on mytmobile. Otherwise, just try blocking numbers. You can also forward spam texts to SPAM (7726, I believe?) and that is supposed to help them do... something. You can also try apps, such as Hiya, which will also block numbers. \n\nMy motto is basically \"if it's important, they'll leave a message.\" ",
"Yes, yes!! There is something you can do!!! \n\n_URL_0_\n\nThis guy, Roger, created a computer program that talks to your telemarketers for you. It's absolutely hilarious. My personal favorite is Kim the Kraken. She (the human voices robot) keeps this guy on the line for like 8 minutes. You can hear all of the different voices of robots on the site. \n\nIt used to be free, not sure anymore. I bought a subscription for $6 for a year and I three way call ALL my telemarketers and get links to my recordings emailed to me. \n\nI totally look forward to getting these calls now. At work, people gather around my speaker just to listen in. Very, very funny. \n\nThis is legit. Google it. The founder has given Ted talks, he's been interviewed in all kinds of magazines. You'll love it. ",
"The problem would disappear if each caller were required to pay you one dollar (or whatever you like) for every incoming call. \n\nFor those few calls that are not spam, you could maintain a trusted caller list. Or just return the call, which would refund the dollar.\n\nThis type of phone plan would be every popular if Verizon etc would offer it.",
"It's cheap and easy for fly by night companies to blast out thousands of calls and there's money to be made. If it wasn't profitable then it wouldn't happen. Check out [RoboKiller](_URL_0_) ",
"Are you telling me my business HASNT been approved for a $200,000 loan?",
"I answer them and waste their time. I think I am slowly getting blacklisted to not call me because I am a time waster.",
"How many people with cell phones get called? Generally curious, house line is always telemarketers or bs, but I've rarely had any on my cell numbers. \n\nI like to have fun on the house line",
"My go-to strategy is to engage them but never give them what they want. \"Oh yes, tell me more\", \"how's your day going, it's so nice to chat with you\", \"can you explain it to me like I'm five?\", \"how's the weather there, it sounds like rain\", \"yes, yes, yes, yes, yes\", \"I'm on a run, you'll have to speak up\", etc. \nit's wonderful how much quicker they stop calling you when you waste their time opposed to asking them not to call you.",
"I went from once a month or so over the last 2ish years to at least once a day in the last month. What the hell is going on?",
"I'll tell you what I do about it that seems to help tremendously. I do this for the Microsoft style scam calls and the ones asking things like if I had a bladder mesh surgery and want to join a class action suit. \n\n\nAs others have mentioned, the cost is so minimal nowadays that for all practical purposes, it costs them nothing. But, the one thing they don't have is unlimited time. Therefore, I drag it out so long that it makes it very inconvenient for them to call me. First, I play along and play dumb for as long as possible. They ask if I'm a homeowner, yes. They ask if I'm a renter, yes. They ask if I have been exposed to asbestos, yes. You get the picture. \n\n\nThen they finally catch on that I'm wasting their time. Many of the outright scam artists come from countries where family is very important. I start telling them how they embarrass their families by being dishonest people. If this doesn't bother them, I move on to how their parents must be so embarrassed that they are such failures that being a scam artist is the only type of job they are capable of because they are such pathetic people. I'll tell them they are dumb, pathetic losers who aren't capable of legit jobs. Their parents must be so embarrassed by what failures they are. While everyone else brags what their kids do, their parents have to stay silent to their friends because they are such losers that they shame their family. I'm not going to lie, I get downright vicious. \n\n\nThey will most likely become hostile at this point. Then I move on to insulting their penis. If they say anything back, I flat out taunt them. They work as scam artists in 3rd world countries, it's not like they have the means to get on a plane. I insult their dignity and their manhood. Eventually they get do pissed they hang up on me. I do this all over a good 10-30 minutes. I make it so hostile, uncomfortable, and time consuming that it no longer makes sense for them to contact me. Whatever scam outfit that person is from, they typically will not contact me again for a good 6 months to a year.\n\n\nSorry this isn't an official this works to report them to authorities who will care and do something about it. However, I've found this to be the most efficient way to get these people to stop bothering me.",
"Here's what you can do: \nWaste their time. \n\nThe scam only works because it's fast to sort the rubes from the non-rubes, even though the probability of finding a rube is very low. Change this balance even slightly, and the scam becomes unprofitable. \n\n\n You can't lower the percentage of rubes in the population, but you can increase the time it takes to find them: by keeping the scammer on the line even though you know it's a scam. \n\nThe scammers hate this. They're trying to make a fast buck, and you're slowing them down. As a result, they furiously scrub their lists for time-wasters. \nNothing else works. Hanging up doesn't work - that costs them nothing. Being rude doesn't work, that just means they hang up and cut their losses - they'll still call again. \n\nThe only thing that works is to be nice, string them along, keep them on the line as long as possible. \n\n**Waste. Their. Time.**",
"You still use your phone? Put it on silent except for your favorites. Everyone else. Send me a text. ",
"Waste their time.\n\nHere's my recent attempt. The guy wanted to know my PG & E password so I made up a random 48 character password. Spent 20 mins of the call trying to convey just the password.\n\nSmall recording towards the end where I was confirming to make sure he wrote it down correctly.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nRemember to have fun.. that's the most important part.",
"If you want to mess with these people and waste their time (which is really the only recourse we have against them) try _URL_0_ . They provide an automated responder to telemarketers that sounds like a confused old man, one of their favorite foods, who's game for their scams, but soooooo confused. Could you repeat that again? What did you say? Hello? \n\nI was getting daily calls from the \"Vehicle Warranty Department\" or whatever it called itself, trying to sell me a fake warranty. I put the Jolly Roger in my address book, ready to have fun at their expense next time they called... and then they never called again. Phooey.",
"protip: stop using phones; the whole idea is outdated; and i mean that, just never pick up unless it's from someone you know (you can do this in some phones i guess, ignore except for contacts), and let it go to voicemail\n\nproertip: give out only a google voice number in forms and such, and disable the voicemailbox \n\nbeen doing this forever and never had any issues; granted if you use the same phone for private and work use ymmv ",
"I don't know why, exactly, but it has to do with how gullible people, in general, are. Working in law enforcement, I encounter calls from citizens being scammed like this, about a dozen everyday. The most recent one I remember was a man in his 20s or 30s and transient; he got a call from the IRS on the day after Tax Day. The person on the other line said he owed money to the IRS and if he didn't pay, there will be a warrant out for his arrest and local PD will be out to get him (nevermind that he's transient and doesn't have a stable address for them to come get him, but I digress). He believes this and agrees to pay. They tell him to pay with $400 worth of iTunes cards and send the numbers or whatever to a particular account or number, and he does so. He realizes several hours later that he might have been scammed.\n\nHe asks me, with hope in his voice, \"ma'am, is this true? Does the IRS typically accept that form of payment?\" Because in spite of everything, he honestly believed them. It was kind of sad. \n\nInstead of saying what I really wanted to say, I just posed a question: \"what is the IRS going to do with an iTunes gift card?\"\n\nThen it struck home. \n\nRemember folks, if the IRS needs to get in touch with you, they will contact you through mail. And they will definitely find better ways to fuck you out of your hard-earned money than to demand iTunes cards!",
"My work involves a lot of driving around in a gated community. I love these calls. They break up the monotony. I like to see how long I can fuck with them before they hang up on me. I used to be able to keep them on for 15-20 minutes, but they have gotten better over the last couple of years. My greatest accomplishment was making this one Indian guy go absolutely berserk on me. I started really nice and concerned. Right as he was about to scam me I just drop so much shit on him. He said he was making more money than me and going to find me and kill me. I was just laughing my ass off, which just made him more angry. Good times. Now I can barely keep them on for a minute. I have tried different tactics, but I think if you sound intelligent and young they just hang up on you. They are really looking for the dumbest of the dumb and the most old and senile people. I can tell i've pissed them off because sometimes after I fuck with them I'll get calls from all over the country for a few days a lot, and when I try to connect with someone they instantly hang up. Good times. Give it a try if you got some spare time.",
"I started getting regular (twice a week) calls from the same company ( i forget the name now) trying to get me to claim for an accident I hadn't had. During one of our calls I let them give me the whole sale run down rather than hanging up until they mentioned the company name. Using the company name (and the london number) I found the address of their building they were calling from on google. The rep freaked out a bit when I told them I pass thru London a couple times a year and would be super interested in checking out their building at (address I found) and would be very interested in talking about accidents as they seem so eager. I stopped getting calls from them after that.",
"I receive a few calls a day from telemarketers. I guess they use a technique to change their number so it shows up in my caller ID appearing like a local number that is similar to mine (same area code, similar first 3 digits). The other day I finally got a call from myself. I have to be honest, when I first looked at the phone it scared the hell out of me. It felt like a horror movie scenario for a second. I was scared to pick up the phone and hear myself on the other end.",
"What is this \"Phone Call\" you speak of?",
"All calls placed on the Switched Public Network end up at a tandem switching office. A tandem office is to end offices what an end office is to the telephones themselves, a routing point. Calls incoming to the tandem office have ANI (Automatic Number Identification)digits the same stuff that shows up on your caller ID. The spoofers are able to change these outgoing digits to the tandem office. If AT & T ever put into place the required translations into the tandem offices, they could simply verify that every call coming in from the end offices was a legit number that was SUPPOSED to be originating from those end offices. Everything else, all the spoofed and fake numbers, could be routed to an intercept announcement, stating that the call cannot be completed \"as dialed\". If this happened, and 123-456-7890 called you, the only digits they could play with and still have the call complete would be the station code, or the 7890. If they tried to make it look like your call came from another area code, the call would fail. AT & T refuses to install this fix, because, even though the spammers are violating FCC law by manipulating call digits, it still makes AT & T a shitload of revenue.",
"Interesting, I've actually noticed a reduced amount of spam/scam phone call. I used to get the \"you won a cruise\" one all the time when I was in high school. It's been years since I've heard it.",
"As an IT guy for 20 years who now works for a large company my desk Cisco phone was getting called by Panda Antivirus in India. While I waited for the numbers to be blocked I had some fun with these greetings:\n\n\"Mort's Mortuary, you stab em', we slab em'\"\n\nFrank's Taxidermy, you snuff em', we stuff em'\n\n\"Bob's ambulance, you maul'em, we haul'em\"\n\nAbortion clicnic, you knock'em up, we knock' em down, no fetus can defeat us, we have a special on twins today, how may I help you?\"\n\n\"Pinky's porno place, what's your pleasure today\"\n\n..... I thought these would turn the India bastards away...\n\n\"Bob's cow butcher shop, how can I help you?\"\n\n\"RCMP, how may I direct your call?\"\n\nSometimes I had fun too.....\n\n\"Panda antivirus?, I'M WITH PANDA ANTIVIRUS TOO! (Pretends to stand up), where are you, are you sitting near me?\"\n\nThey only hung up on the RCMP and Panda ones. Eventually we blocked the numbers through our own call manager."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://hiya.com/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.nomorobo.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.jollyrogertelco.com/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.robokiller.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3WMNF_37zjKR0xDbjRjUS1GNWM"
],
[
"http://www.jollyrogertelco.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7qojcd | going to bed early is positive to a healthier lifestyle, but why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7qojcd/eli5_going_to_bed_early_is_positive_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsqpmos",
"dsqxfue"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It is mostly about the amount of sleep you get. Most people need to work 8-5, 9-6ish, so staying up late means you get less sleep, and are more rushed in the morning. If you didn't have to be at work until noon, a 2 am to 10 pm sleep schedule would be about the same.\n\nThere is some evidence to suggest you are better off if you sleep at night and are awake during the day, but this effect is small compared to the amount of sleep you get. Also, sleeping at the same times consistently is better for you, doing 2 am to 10 pm on the weekends, then 10 pm to 6 am on the weekdays can cause problems.",
"Bouncing off of u/kouhoutek, there's another piece of this having to do with 9-5 work schedules. If you think of yourself having two sections of free time, one before work and one after work, you're going to have a lot more energy in AM Free Time than PM Free Time, because PM Free Time happens when you've just expunged 8 hours' worth of mental and physical energy. \n\nIf you have anything outside of your job that requires considerable effort and attention, you're much better off working on that thing *before* you use up all your energy at your day job. However, most 9-5ers only leave enough AM Free Time to wake up and get ready for work. \n\nMost people that you think of as \"successful\" that also have a consistent work schedule had that same idea. They often have side projects that help them to excel financially, professionally, or personally, and doing them in AM Free Time allows them to be much more productive with it.\n\nTL;DR: It's nothing to do with circadian rhythms and everything to do with the work week. Do your hobbies and get your exercise BEFORE you go to work so you're not too tired from your work day to keep yourself on track."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4r59uo | why aren't cars geared to run at a lower rpms on the highway? | Wouldn't it make more sense to have a car run at under 2000 RPM when travelling around 65-70 mph, both from a fuel efficiency and wear standpoint? In a previous post asking a similar question someone suggested that cars might run more efficiently at specific (possibly higher) RPMs. I can't think of how that would be possible unless they were just talking about horsepower or something.
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4r59uo/eli5_why_arent_cars_geared_to_run_at_a_lower_rpms/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4yeiyu",
"d4yferx",
"d4yfm3v",
"d4yfqmo",
"d4yhlhy"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I mean, I'm not a car guy, I don't know much about RPMs in absolute terms, but don't they usually run at lower RPM in higher gear (i.e. highway speeds)?",
"It depends on the car - sometimes they need to be at higher RPMs to produce the power they need to run at highway speeds. But in general, yes, it is better to run at lower RPMs, which is why cars with automatic transmissions (and more gears) can run at under 2000 RPMs at those speeds.",
" > In a previous post asking a similar question someone suggested that cars might run more efficiently at specific (possibly higher) RPMs.\n\nThat is exactly true.\n\nAn engine is a mechanical device, and there will be some rpm value where it is going to be most efficient at turning exploding gasoline into motion.\n\n > I can't think of how that would be possible \n\nGood thing you don't build car engines then.\n\nThink of it this way. Clearly an engine can't run at 1 rpm...and if it did, it would be coming to a complete stop for most of that minute, wasting all the inertia it build up. There is always going to be a sweet spot, where the inertia from the last explosion places the pistons in just the right spot for the next explosion to happen at the most efficient point possible.",
"There is more to engine efficiency than just the RPM, efficiency changes with RPMs, and each engine will have a different point where it is most efficient. If the RPM is too low, the engine will struggle to make enough power (lugging). If the RPM is too high, you are just putting extra strain on the motor. In addition to that, fuel mappings, cam durations, ignition timings, octane, and so on all will affect power and efficiency, and also what RPM would be the best.\n\nCVT transmissions help with fuel economy as they try to keep the engine running at a fixed RPM, and then vary the gearing to adjust for speed.\n\n",
"Every engine has a range at which it produces the most horsepower. This is where you want your engine to run to get the most out of it fuel efficiency-wise. At low speeds you need to be at a lower gear to overcome your vehicle's inertia. As it gains momentum it is easier to keep moving but eventually rpm begins to exceed the engine's most efficient rpm range. This is when it's time to shift into a higher gear. You trade torque for higher speed. Because wind resistance increases with speed, eventually you reach a point where your relative gearing doesn't allow for enough torque to exceed to resisting forces on the vehicle. This is why you cannot keep accelerating a car ad infinitum. People do things to their cars like adding turbos and superchargers to widen their power band or lower their car to reduce wind resistance. (Though lowering a car is often done for other reasons than performance)"
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49cvr3/eli5_since_gas_mileage_is_generally_improved_by/"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eg4ua8 | how come canned fish have crumbly bones? | I opened a canned tuna and found bones that were crumbly. It wasn't like how fresh fish bones feel. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eg4ua8/eli5_how_come_canned_fish_have_crumbly_bones/ | {
"a_id": [
"fc4d42t",
"fc4k1qn"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"They usually add a bit of vinegar during the canning process that helps soften the bones with it's acidity.",
"The high heat of the pressure cooking that is used in the canning process breaks the bones down to be soft."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1gzgum | what id the difference between restricted and unrestricted free agents in sports? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gzgum/eli5_what_id_the_difference_between_restricted/ | {
"a_id": [
"capc1y1"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"For the NFL at least: \n\nAn unrestricted free agent is exactly that, someone who is completely free to sign with any team at any time. To become an unrestricted free agent you must have more than 4 years experience in the league when your contract expires. You can sign anywhere and your old team can do nothing about it and is owed nothing by your new team. (Although franchise tags do exist which I can explain if you like).\n\nA restricted free agent is a special type of free agent where the team holds some rights. In the NFL this happens if your contract expires while you have less than four years experience. What happens is the team can offer you a one year contract at a salary from a tiered payscale. You can either sign for this salary or explore free-agency. Any team is free to sign you to an offer sheet (basically a proposed contract) if you choose to explore free agency. \n\nIf you sign an offer sheet you must then take the offer sheet from team B back to your original team who has right of first refusal on the contract, meaning they can choose to sign you to the exact contract you accepted from team B. \n\nIf they refuse you now are under contract with team B, who must give up compensation to your original team. The compensation depends on what tier of the payscale they originally offered you, the higher the salary offered the more the compensation. \n\nSo say you're a restricted free agent for my team. I offer you $2M for next year which carries with it a 2nd round compensation. Instead of taking the $2M you decide to sign an offer sheet on a 5 year $20M contract with the Chicago Bears. \n\nYou take the offer sheet back to me I have two choices: sign the offer sheet and give you the same 5 year $20M contract, or not sign it making you a Bear and forcing the Bears to give me their 2nd round pick as compensation.\n\nThat's only how it works in the NFL, I'm really not sure about other leagues. Generally players signing to another team in the NFL is quite rare. Restricted free-agents stay with their original team a great majority of the time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6cxgrc | what actually happens when liquid such as your spit, water, and etcetera touch cotton candy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cxgrc/eli5_what_actually_happens_when_liquid_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhy4grg"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"cotton candy is merely colored flavored thin strands of sugar. These liquids dissolve these strands just as they would granulated sugar. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5ghdtn | what has changed in the past 5-10 years that "machine learning" is all the rage now? | Computers speeds, programming language, etc haven't changed all that much in the past ten years but it seems like machine learning / AI is being used everywhere now.
What advancement came along that made this technology suddenly viable?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ghdtn/eli5_what_has_changed_in_the_past_510_years_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"das8ij6",
"dasg63t"
],
"score": [
6,
20
],
"text": [
"It sort of went like this:\n\nCloud computing - > drove cheap storage - > allowed companies to store shit loads more data - > enabled data mining strategies that didn't previously exist - > opened up the realm of machine learning to sort through all that data.\n\nNow, nothing has fundamentally changed. Companies and governments have been doing this stuff since the 80s. In fact my father used to work on data mine algorithms for banks, in COBOL. But cloud computing has sort of brought this a bit more to the masses.",
"Machine learning has been slowly growing in popularity for decades. I think there are two main things that have changed.\n\nOne is that the theory has improved dramatically. Machine learning researchers have been comparing algorithms on the *same* benchmark data sets for years. For example, in 1998 the MNIST data set of handwritten digits was released, with 60,000 training images and 10,000 test images. The best accuracy at the time was 0.8% error (99.2% accuracy), and that was using the best algorithms known at the time, which were much better than other techniques that were getting error rates of 2 - 10%.\n\nToday the best algorithms can get as low as 0.23% error on the same data set.\n\nThe other difference is that the amount of computational power we have today is massively larger, and we also have the ability to exploit it more easily.\n\nEven 10 years ago, most researchers didn't have access to a supercomputer. If you were lucky, you could get a cluster of 500 computers to play with, and you'd spend a lot of time just on maintenance, repair, and electricity, and the computers would sit there idle a lot of the time.\n\nToday anyone can run massively large computing jobs \"in the cloud\" using services provided by Amazon, Microsoft, Google, or others. These services are an order of magnitude less expensive because you only need to pay for the resources you *actually use*, with no up-front cost. So someone who wants to use a massively large neural network to train a classifier only needs to pay for resources during training, and then it costs them nothing to use the result of that.\n\nThe huge amount of processing power has led to improvements in algorithms, of course. Things like deep learning were always suspected to be a good idea, but they were impossible to explore in the past because it was just too hard to get the resources. Today it's relatively easy to do deep learning and it turns out it's incredibly powerful.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2dkjl1 | how can a tv remote controller last for months, while game controllers (ie. the wiiu controller) can barely make it through the day? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dkjl1/eli5_how_can_a_tv_remote_controller_last_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjqcegn",
"cjqcgrc",
"cjqcn7t"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A TV remote is just a tiny infrared flashlight basically. It only sends signals and uses any power while you push down the buttons.\n\nA game controller is constantly talking to the game system via radio frequencies.",
"Most TV remotes get only a fraction of the amount of use that a Wii controller gets, so there's that. Also, you must really abuse your Wii controllers because I've had mine for ~3 years with no problems whatsoever. ",
"A TV remote control is only \"on\" when you are actively pushing a button. This usually only adds up to a minute or two a night unless you're really channel-surfing hard. Hitting a button powers a switch that sends a specific radio signal to the TV, and when you're tapping or holding down a button is the only time it's consuming battery power. So the battery lasts months.\n\nA Wii controller is \"on\" for the entire time you're playing it. It contains a series of motion sensors that all must be powered, plus the signalling mechanism that it uses to communicate with the Wii console, which is always firing whenever the wii is changing position in any of three directions. Some controllers also generate their own sounds, again requiring power, when you perform certain actions. So the battery is almost continually being drained from all of this stuff happening.\n\nAnd that's why batteries cringe in abject horror whenever anyone says the word \"we\". Watch for it. It happens. Really."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
baeuuo | why are some radio stations ' fm signals hard to pick up in the city they broadcast to, yet others from far away can be heard easily? | For example, here in England, 96.3 Radio Aire which broadcasts to Leeds, West Yorkshire is very difficult to pick up on FM, either on a car radio or on FM in general, and the signal is very fuzzy.
However, Pulse 1 West Yorkshire, which is on 97.5 and 102.5 FM, and covers nearby town Bradford, can be heard far clearer in Leeds, even though it does not *officially* cover Leeds.
Radio Aire broadcasts from Tingley, which is 8-10 miles away from Leeds.
In the South of England, BOB FM on 106.7 and 106.9 FM covers Stevenage, Hertfordshire, but it's difficult to pick up in Stevenage, so I've heard, and it's apparently easier to get Heart 96.9, which is on 96.9 FM, based 26-30 miles away in Bedford [or was until it moved studios to Milton Keynes, around 31-40 miles away].
Heart Bedford broadcasts from Sandy Heath, Bedfordshire which is around 20 miles away.
Why is it that a station whose FM frequency officially covers one city is hard to hear in its own city, yet one from a city around 10-14 miles away is easier to hear?
How does proximity of transmitter affect signal?
The examples above are general ones, this is *not* questions about any particular business.
I would appreciate any explanation. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/baeuuo/eli5_why_are_some_radio_stations_fm_signals_hard/ | {
"a_id": [
"ekbhbbj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Couple of things:\n\n- of course, the closer to the transmitter you are, the stronger the signal. \n- the transmitter may not actually be in the city it is “broadcasting to”\n- stations run different power levels. One station may be a 50,000 watt blowtorch and the other a 100 watt low power station\n- station transmitters don’t alway broadcast equally in every direction. You can have transmitter antennas with different patterns that have weaker signals in one direction. This is often the case if there a station on an adjacent channel in a nearby city to help minimize co-channel or adjacent channel interference. \n- and sometimes, depending on the output power and height of the transmitting antenna, if you get too close to the transmitter, the transmitted waves go “over you” and you’re in a dead zone. This really only happens with low power stations. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
f8tten | - how is gravity induced in spaceships traveling in space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f8tten/eli5_how_is_gravity_induced_in_spaceships/ | {
"a_id": [
"finf806",
"finf9u5",
"finfviv",
"finjnwn"
],
"score": [
7,
12,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"At the moment, we dont \"Generate\" a false gravity field in space, but if we did, we would use centripital forces, if I remember correctley if you can get a rotation rate of 3RPM where you're away from the cental rotation point by anything over 5 meteres (Distance probably wrong), it creates an artifical gravity because of the force. The easiest way to understand this effect on earth is, get yourself a bottle or bucket of water, make sure the top is open. Now spin your arm up and down (Head shoulder spin direction) at a fast enough rate, the water will not come out of the container because of the force. You can do this above people and you won't get a drop on them, unless you stop with the top facing down!\n\nThis video does a good job of experianing the process :)[_URL_2_](_URL_1_)\n\nThe only other way would be once we figure out how to control Gravions or the Higgs Field (But the higgs field is just a bad idea to mess with) \n\n\n\\*EDIT\\* \nAfter Someone spotted a few issues with my comment thought I'd make it more relevent. \nWith a 76m Diameter and about 3 RPM you can generate about 1/3 of earths gravity. The reason they go for 76m is because it's allows for a slower rotation period to the astonaught, providing less discomfort. \n\n\nThink about if you spin something on a string around, if's it's farther away it's travelling further but at the same speed as at the center, which is travelling maybe an inch compared? \n\n\nIf you look into this study it quanitifies their findings as to what is a comfortable rotation rate and size to generate 0.3-1G \n\n\n [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"What makes you think it is?\n\nIn general the only practical way this can be done is by having a rotating structure and using centripetal force to simulate gravity.\n\nTo date - mankind has not built such a structure in space.",
"Spaceships could be under thrust or spinning to 'simulate' gravity, as in occupants on board will experience a force towards the back or side of the spaceship respectively, which feels like gravity to them. Like how you're pressed into your seat when your car accelerates quickly or when you're pushed against the side on those spinning fairground rides. \n\nIn reality, no spinning spaceships have been made, and modern rockets undergo very brief periods of high thrust (much greater than the force of gravity), not long periods of sustained thrust equivalent to 1g.\n\nOccupants on-board real life spaceships, such as the Apollo spacecraft for example did not have any induced gravity for their journey.",
"In addition to the answers you've received, I don't think there are any plans - at least by NASA - to create a ship that mimics gravity with centripetal forces. The spin would cause the whole ship to shift and would require a precisely opposite spin to counteract - making the ship too complex and more prone to mechanical issues.\n\nThe current goal is to mitigate the deterioration of bone density that occurs in micro-gravity - which has been a very successful endeavor. Astronauts exercise with special equipment which puts pressure on specific bones so that their body doesn't decide they don't need them anymore (the saying \"if you don't use it, you lose it\" is very much true). AFAIK, the only bone they haven't been able to help is the pelvis."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4470275/",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im-JM0f_J7s",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im-JM0f\\_J7s"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3tmo9j | how is the british police force able to operate effectively when most of its officers don't carry guns? | I just learned about this today, and it just seems kind of unbelievable from my perspective (I live in the US fyi). | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tmo9j/eli5_how_is_the_british_police_force_able_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx7gewu",
"cx7gfuu",
"cx7gnbh",
"cx7ivx3",
"cx7j1mb",
"cx7k8uj",
"cx7vytn",
"cx7w228"
],
"score": [
2,
73,
7,
15,
5,
2,
18,
3
],
"text": [
"They don't carry lethal guns, their weapons can still stop people, it just typically doesn't kill them",
"The vast majority of police interactions in the U.S. are extraordinarily far from requiring a gun. When you call the cop because you've had a car accident, when you call the cop because you come home and you TV has been stolen, when someone has committed fraud, when someone has evaded taxes, when someone fails to pay all their traffic fines, when someone is speeding and so on and so forth. A gun is a silly thing to introduce into the vast majority of policing situations. We have a view of police work that it's all foot chases with armed criminals hell bent on killing everyone around them. Doesn't really work like that.",
"In the UK, almost nobody has a gun, including criminals. Because of this, the police will very rarely run into somebody with a gun, so they don't need one to defend themselves. \n \nIt's completely different in America. Everybody and their grandma has a gun here. Consequently, an officer is far more likely to come in contact with somebody who is armed. To defend themselves, they also carry guns.",
"According to Wikipedia, in England, since 2000 only 6 police officers have been shot out of 26 who died in the line of duty.\n\nOn the other hand, in the US the average from 1990-2010 was 164 per year, in 2010 there were 161. Even in 2014 the numbers are 127 for police and 95 for FBI (44 of which were \"accidents\").\n\nBasically the UK police don't need guns because the job isn't as dangerous (not to say it's not dangerous at all). They don't go into situations thinking \"will I get shot\" because it's not part of our society, guns just aren't a big thing for almost anyone. No one carries a gun and if they do they probably won't be able to conceal it. There are some areas of the UK where police are more well equipped such as Manchester but most places don't need an armory and an entire force of weapon trained officers.\n\nMaybe 0.001% of the population at most have a firearm that is not a shotgun or rifle whereas almost 20% of US households have at least one home defense piece.\n\nTo give some perspective, this is my interaction with guns. I own a shotgun and live about a mile away from a gunshop. The shop has around 300 guns of various types including airguns, shotguns (some silenced) and if I wanted a gun today I could get another one. Occasionally when I travel to London by train there will be pairs of armed police, they carry a glock and a carbine or maybe a shotgun (Remington 870 I think). It doesn't feel out of place or threatening and I appreciate the security. I just don't think every single office needs one.\n\nEdit: Sorry if this is a bit ranty, it's 1 am.",
"Because, 99.99% of the time, an engagement can be resolved non-violently since 99.99% of the populace have no reason to carry a weapon. This is because weapons of all descriptions are very heavily regulated.",
"There are officers with guns on patrol, they're usually in vehicles though, and typically respond to the report of weapons. The way to imagine the British situation might be to recall the Cold War function of Strategic Air Command: nuclear bombers were permanently flying, in order to strike the Soviet Union at immediate notice, if war were declared. It might help to think of the British situation vis-a-vis armed police as being similar, albeit not identical. Britain has armed police teams driving around, patrolling important sites (e.g.: airports), and at various police stations. Then, when they receive a call about the existence of dangerous weapons (e.g.: firearms), they snap into action. (Of course, they also perform premeditated operations, but this may help you understand why the British aren't fleeing London every time there's a disturbance).\n\nThose are my thoughts, I'm no expert. ",
"Source: I'm a British cop\n\nIt's really simple actually, we don't have a huge number of the population who own firearms. They're heavily licensed, handguns and automatic weapons are banned, as are most magazine fed weapons.\n\nWe're a relatively small place and have the benefit of being an island, so borders are easier to monitor and firearms are harder to smuggle in. We're just so far away from anywhere war torn, that even if someone does illegally source a weapon, good quality ammunition is very hard to come by.\n\nAdd in that Brits are a nosey bunch, someone walking around with an automatic weapon gets seen very quickly and it looks VERY out of place, so police get called. The prison sentences for firearms offences are quite steep.\n\nMost of the threats I face are from knives and blunt instruments; I carry Taser (albeit not everyone does), so I'm often used as the first unit to go to violent situations involving weapons. Taser is simply fantastic at focussing a suspects mind and in honesty I've only had to fire it once in about a dozen times I've drawn it, over the past 7 years.\n\nWe've got specialist Armed Response Teams, who operate a bit more like SWAT teams, with tactics and the like... They're pretty shit hot when they're needed. They'll still do what they have to do, when they have to do it, so it's not the case that British Police are weak, it's just that we escalate things gradually where we can... Talking is the most powerful tool 99% of the time; there's a way to win most people over. ",
"Number of firearm-related deaths in US in 2013, per 100,000 people = 10.5\n\nNumber of firearm-related deaths in UK in 2010, per 100,000 people = 0.26\n\nIn other words, the US has a firearm-related death rate over 40 times that of the UK"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1oc6tv | what is that sensation in your forehead when something like a finger or pencil is really close? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oc6tv/eli5_what_is_that_sensation_in_your_forehead_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccqnqsv",
"ccqny9o",
"ccqo25r",
"ccqo31l",
"ccqoas7",
"ccqoe5x",
"ccqpetb",
"ccqpq3s",
"ccqpuie",
"ccqq1hd",
"ccqq5lz",
"ccqq9rr",
"ccqqd4f",
"ccqqe42",
"ccqqskm",
"ccqqzvc",
"ccqr29n",
"ccqrvoa",
"ccqs25z",
"ccqtkv3",
"ccqtv0u",
"ccquf89",
"ccqulhh",
"ccqvbqz",
"ccqvetd",
"ccqvqik",
"ccqyl22"
],
"score": [
78,
31,
84,
8,
6,
3,
3,
9,
240,
3,
9,
2,
9,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
13,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"OP I have no idea what you mean.",
"I know EXACTLY what you're talking about, and I've always wondered about it. It's when something is getting close to your temple or basically anywhere on your head. You can feel this huge stress there. Maybe only certain people feel it? Can anyone elaborate? \n\n*yeah thanks expermierpage not illiterate ",
"It feels like a slight tickle/pressure right where your \"3rd eye\" should be. \nOh man, I can feel it just thinking about it. Glad I'm not alone. ",
"It feels similar to when you are crossing your eyes, so maybe it's your eyes trying to focus on whats in front of your face, even when you are not crossing them. ",
"I have this too but my boyfriend doesn't know what I'm talking about no matter how hard I try to explain. I like to say it's because he has no soul :)",
"I imagine that eyebrows, or any small hairs in that area could be picking up a pressure difference. Either that or the skin in that area is just sensitive to air pressure.",
"When you repeat something often, or when an event is particularly salient (meaningful, emotional, important, strong, pleasant, unpleasant, etc.), the brain physically changes on the neuronal level, and chemicals/electrical signals become apt at moving through certain patterns of neurons.\n\nIn the experience described, electrical signals in the brain essentially start to form a \"sentence\" which says \"A finger moves toward me and touches my face\". Brain chemicals are really really smart in that if you start to say one thing, it anticipates the outcome. \n\nThe touch sensation is triggered when the brain sees the sentence \"A finger moves toward me and _______ .\" \n\nYour brain is really really good at fill-in-the-blanks, and often does it automatically (i.e. optical illusions) which makes things seem to happen that aren't real, because the chemicals are so used to flowing from Neuron A to Neuron B to Neuron C.\n\n**tl;dr: it's an optical illusion, but with multiple senses. Your brain is filling in blanks in anticipation.**\n\n\nEdit: Also, heat and hair follicles play roles.",
"OMG I THOUGHT i WAS THE ONLY ONE!",
"Anxiety about objects being close to a very sensitive part of your head, coupled with the fact that it is picked up by 3 or even 4 of the 5 major senses. Yep, hearing too. Your hearing can detect not only left and right but the entire spatial ambience in a room, a kind of rudimentary sonar, which is why you can detect objects held close to your head or people standing behind you, or hands, fingers and pencils waved in front of your face. Smell only really applies if you have, for one reason or another, smelly fingers. Touch is more to do with the perception of radiated heat, and possibly changes in airflow, and sight is pretty straight forward, although the effect is still present with closed eyes (for me anyway) which suggests the other senses play an equal role in all this. It would be interesting to hear from people with impairments in one or more of these senses, whether they experience it less, or at all, or perhaps even stronger. Not sure what they could compare it too though. It's all subjective.",
"I've been wondering this since i was a kid. It does however not work when another person does it and you close your eyes at the same time. seems to only work if you know it coming. but yeah, thats a weird feeling.",
"For me it manifests as a very strong tingling sensation and I can actively control it even without the need for placing anything near it. I have no idea what it is or why it happens but I would like to know. ",
"I've often wondered this as well. I'm assuming OP means that if something is close to their forehead they can almost \"sense\" it's there (even though it's not touching skin or hair)?\n\n\n\nIf something is put by my face or ears, super quietly, it's almost like I can \"feel it\" in my head. Personally I think it's simply a disruption in the air pressure or sound waves: the air \"feels\" different some times.... whereas other times the \"sound of silence\" changes ever so slightly. Even though technically I can't hear said-item moving.",
"WTF is everyone talking about? Ive never felt this before and experimenting does nothing.",
"I've always wondered about this. Tested by having a friend put her finger close to my forehead while I had my eyes closed but didn't feel anything.\n\nMy guess is that you only feel it if you are aware that something is there.\n\nAlso, you are aware of where your finger or pen is, so your brain makes the connection that you should feel something soon.",
"According to Big Pete it's your brain going numb.",
"I thought I was the only one!\nHoly shit!\n\nFind the answer somebody!",
"what the fuck",
"top answer is about something near your eyes...OP was talking about forehead sensation which i also get, and dont understand, your answers are so far, shit. ",
"So everyone seems to think it's due to anticipation, but might the vestigial magnetite we have in our ethmoid bone have something to do with it? The sensation is generated in exactly in the right place.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nI, for one, have always found the sensation profoundly strong and non-replicable on other parts of my body or face, so it makes sense to me that there's more going on than a simple psychological trick.\n\nAlso, I haven't seen anyone post any proof for their factual assertions, so it'd be nice to see some references.",
"I get that feeling sometimes, especially when an animal's face is really close to mine.",
"My boyfriend knows what you're talking about and is trying to show me right now. I got nothing. Wth are you all talking about.",
"ELI5 IS NOT FOR LITERAL FIVE-YEAR-OLDS.",
"200 comments and no one has mentioned the answer.. \n\nIt's the tiny hairs that cover your body, you aren't touching the skin, but you *are* disrupting the hairs which give you the sensation of a light touch. We have more hair there than on other parts of our body because of our eyebrows. Seriously, take a close look at yourself in the mirror. ",
"It's my third eye tingling.... ",
"I literally have no idea what OP is talking about.\n\nCould it be because I have glasses?",
"Great. I'd never heard of this, and now I can't stop doing it. This is a going to be a rough week.",
"Seriously, I was thinking of asking this last week. I discovered this as a kid and it was freaky. Happens even with my eyes closed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethmoid_bone#Role_in_magnetoception"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
e0tu1n | why is connecting bluetooth in close proximity so unreliable when compared to connecting to random servers across the world via the internet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e0tu1n/eli5_why_is_connecting_bluetooth_in_close/ | {
"a_id": [
"f8h87wn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Bluetooth is designed to be a very low power communications link between two devices. The most common implementation is good for only about 10 meters under best case conditions. One class of BT is good for only about 1 meter. Bluetooth connections can degrade easily depending on what is between the two devices and the quality of the equipment within both. (Cheap bluetooth chips can give lousy results.)\n \nInternet communications are an entirely different thing. WiFi is much higher power and is designed to work over larger distances. And once you get to a router, most of the communications go over electrical cables and optical cables, which provide much more robust communications than any radio-based systems. \n \nEven though internet communications can go through many pieces of hardware and over miles and miles of cable, they are built to be incredibly reliable and have a variety of error detection and correction protocols. And if the data packets can't get to their destinations by one path, there are usually other paths available."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1gqodb | what are some of the implications of being a part of a free trade zone, like nafta and the new ttip? | What does being a part of the [TTIP](_URL_0_) mean for the economies of the world. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gqodb/eli5_what_are_some_of_the_implications_of_being_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"camu9yk"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The main idea of a free trade zone is that goods can move from one country to another without import taxes and limited customs handling.\n\nThis tends to make markets more efficient and lower prices for everyone, but it can hurt local businesses who have to compete against foreign trade for local sales. This can lead to failed businesses and unemployment, which can outweigh the benefits of lower prices."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/06/ttip_transatlantic_trade_and_investment_partnership_would_create_the_biggest.html"
] | [
[]
] |
|
6t25x3 | why does each car's turn signal blink at a different rate, even among similar models? is it due to the machinery that's under the hood, or something else entirely? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6t25x3/eli5_why_does_each_cars_turn_signal_blink_at_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlhah6e"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The device isn't manufactured to the strict tolerances needed to maintain the same rate, because there's no reason to do so. So anything from the charge in your battery, to the heat of the environment, can introduce some 'wiggle room' into the mechanism. Since it would take extra expense to eliminate this, and since, again, there's not actually a reason to do so, they don't. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1qw50l | the differences between, and respective merits of, different gaming consoles (ps3, xbox, wii, etc) | Explain as if to like an almost real five year old, please! Do they all have the same games? How much are the units and games? If my iPhone can play tealistic games, why doesn't everyone just use regular computers? Do they each use the same controls? Are they CDs or digital downloads? Do people mainly pirate games (like films)? Which is 'better', 'cooler', 'more fun', 'more respected', etc.? So much mystery! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qw50l/the_differences_between_and_respective_merits_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdh3xp4"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Game consoles come in 'generations', where each company releases a new platform at around the same time. These platforms come 4-8 years after their predecessors, and represent a technological leap over them, with more advanced graphics, new features like motion-controls, or support for larger games.\n\nSo in the fifth generation, you had the Nintendo 64, the Sony PlayStation, the Atari Jaguar, and the Sega Saturn. In the seventh generation, you had the Xbox 360, the Wii, and the PlayStation 3.\n\nYou can only play a game on its specific platform, not on any other platform -- a PS3 game will not work on a PS2. Sometimes platforms support the games of their immediate predecessor, though not so much lately.\n\nThe generation that we are just entering now is the eighth generation. Its consoles are the Wii U (Nintendo), the Xbox One (Microsoft), and the PlayStation 4 (Sony).\n\nGenerally, the Xbox and PlayStation lines have the same games. Each of them has a handful of titles exclusive to their platform, which can sway people to one, the other, or both, but a majority of games appear on both of those platforms.\n\nThe Wii is kind of the outsider of the group, with many games exclusive to it, not seeing many of the games available on the other platforms, and with a different emphasis on what does appear. The Wii has a larger number of party games, children's games, lighthearted games, and games from a number of popular franchises like Zelda and Mario that Nintendo make. The Wii is also the cheapest platform.\n\n > If my iPhone can play tealistic games, why doesn't everyone just use regular computers?\n\nYour iPhone may play nice-looking games, but they are nowhere near the quality or complexity of PC or console games. Their gameplay is usually far more limited out of necessity, and while they look nice on a small screen, they would look pretty bad scaled up to a 50\" TV. Games on a console can use a much much larger variety of assets, and over the last few years, many have approached filesizes of 50 GB, which would be impossible on a mobile device. Add to this the fact that with many games, 4+ people like to play together on the same device, and that many games require novel control schemes that watch your bodily movements or give you multiple screens to play with.\n\nGames can be played on gaming computers, though, which just means a desktop computer with a good graphics card and a good CPU. This is the 'highest-end' way to play games, with performance far ahead that of a console. Gaming computers tend to be more expensive than consoles to build/buy, but their games are significantly cheaper once you have one. You can use a computer as a console if you wish -- most games support plugging an Xbox control pad right in, all current graphics cards support being plugged into a TV, and the most popular game store/library software, Steam (think iTunes for games), has a mode called \"Big Picture Mode\" which lets you pick, start, and control games using a control pad from a couch.\n\n > Are they CDs or digital downloads? \n\nOn a PC, you can usually choose between DVDs and digital downloads. On current consoles, games are on blu-ray discs, although digital downloads are sometimes available too. (Maybe always available, with the PS4? I haven't used one yet.)\n\n > Do they each use the same controls?\n\nThe Xbox and PlayStation lines have very similar controls. The Wii line has an emphasis on motion controls (your movements control the game) and lately on a touchscreen built into the controller, used as a second display. \n\n > Which is 'better', 'cooler', 'more fun', 'more respected', etc.?\n\nPopular opinion favours the PlayStation 4 over the Xbox currently, although despite what you might think reading Reddit, the two platforms are 90% identical. Your choice would be based on whether you care about any of the games that are exclusive to one platform, and what your friends have (since you'll be able to play with them if you have the same console). \n\nNintendo's machine, the Wii U, is unpopular now, and will almost definitely remain so until the price gets a big drop and a bunch of new successful games come out for it (which will happen eventually, since Nintendo make a bunch of very popular game series themselves). You probably don't want one right now. \n\n > How much are the units and games? \n\nThis varies a lot by region, you'd be better off checking a local store. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
ft0d14 | what causes transverse waves to move up and down? | I understand how they move but not because of what. I'm assuming that it has to do with energy from the sun but is the energy not the thing traveling to the right so what then makes the wave move up and down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ft0d14/eli5_what_causes_transverse_waves_to_move_up_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"fm4cq65"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Not all transverse waves are the same. It sounds like you're talking about light, or electromagnetic waves. With an electromagnetic wave, the wave isn't actually moving up and down. Rather, the electric field is pointing up and down. If you were following a photon of light as it traveled from the sun to the Earth, the photon does NOT move up and down - it moves in a straight line. However if you were following this straight-line path with an electric-field meter, you would notice the field pointing up, then zero, then pointing down, then zero, then repeating."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4eal7s | - the uk joining or leaving the eu. | I've just had the leaflet in the post trying to get me to vote to stay but to be honest, I've no idea what choice is better or the reasons why. Can someone ELI5 to the reasons why we should/shouldn't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4eal7s/eli5_the_uk_joining_or_leaving_the_eu/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1yfroe",
"d1yg5yg"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Firstly, I think it's great that you are making an effort to understand this admittedly complex issue.\n\nHowever, I really think asking strangers on the internet to explain the pros and cons of UK leaving the EU is not the right way to approach this topic. You will never get an unbiased summary, as each poster will have their personal opinion. And this opinion will inevitably influence their post.\n\nA better way would be reading discussions and articles from a broad spectrum of (quality) newspapers. This issue is very present in the current media, so you shouldn't have trouble finding articles about it.\n\nIf you want suggestions on where to start, I would recommend [this](_URL_0_) article from The Guardian, as it gives a very good summary of the most important issues. ",
"Reasons to leave:\n\nThe best reasons to leave the EU center around bureaucracy and security. \n\nThe UK is required to comply with a lot of laws as a result of its membership in the EU, and some people believe that it doesn't allow the UK enough sovereignty. In addition, the UK pays a lot of money to be a member.\n\nAs for security, by leaving the EU, the UK could have greater control of its borders. As a real life example, if the UK stays in the EU, they would be required to take a certain number of refugees by EU law. If they leave, they could let in as many or as few as they like.\n\nReasons to stay:\n\nThe best reasons to stay in the EU center around trade and business.\n\nAs part of the EU, the UK has a host of beneficial trade agreements that were negotiated by the EU. If they UK were to leave, it would have to suddenly negotiate independent trade deals with upwards of 30 countries.\n\nLondon is currently one of the few financial capitals in the world, and that is in part a result of the UK's position in the EU. If the UK leaves the EU, then a significant benefit of having London as a base of operations to Europe is taken away.\n\nEach point above has a counter argument, of course. \n\nThe UK pays a lot of money and has to comply with EU law to be a member, but they get a great deal of benefits in return. Yes, the doors are open to immigration, but there's no proof that this policy has led directly to any attacks.\n\nThe UK might have to negotiate its own trade deal, but maybe that's better, as the UK would be able to set the terms it wants, and not worry about other countries. Business ties with Europe might be diminished, but London could then get out from under EU financial rules, and potentially allow even more banking to center there.\n\nThere is no evidence for any of these scenarios, since this has never happened. It's a philosophical argument about globalization versus isolationism.\n\nHere's what it comes down to:\n\nDo you believe that the UK is better off on its own, making its own way in the world? Or, do you believe that countries are more powerful when unified together?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/14/brexit-what-would-happen-if-britain-left-eu-european-union-referendum-uk"
],
[]
] |
|
45xfsd | why would a person get sick by eating their own feces? | I understand this seems gross, but why would eating your own feces make you sick (I don't mean throwing up from the taste and/or smell but your immune system response)? Assuming the feces came from eating something completely natural to the human diet, wouldn't all the bacteria have originated from your body anyway, or am I missing something about the digestive system? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45xfsd/eli5_why_would_a_person_get_sick_by_eating_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"d00t31q"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"[This thread](_URL_0_?) might help."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2miy8j/eli5_what_if_someone_went_on_an_allshit_diet/"
]
] |
|
1pih20 | what constitutes something as a fetish? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pih20/eli5_what_constitutes_something_as_a_fetish/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd2my7v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Being sexually attracted to something (Body part/Object) that isn't inherently sexual."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7ar2ay | why does carbonated water that has gone flat taste worse than regular water | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ar2ay/eli5_why_does_carbonated_water_that_has_gone_flat/ | {
"a_id": [
"dpc4pgu",
"dpc4umg",
"dpc7yvp",
"dpc9m6k",
"dpcas4f",
"dpcb7xm",
"dpcdop9",
"dpce1o5",
"dpcnety",
"dpcw7jn"
],
"score": [
6354,
31,
9,
634,
24,
31,
3237,
2,
12,
8
],
"text": [
"Because it is acidic. The CO2 reacts with the water creating carbonic acid, which is what gives carbonated drinks their bite. When it goes flat, you just have regular water with the acid but no bubbles.",
"The bubbles are made by adding pressurized CO2 to the water in the factory. After the water has gone flat, a little bit of the CO2 stays dissolved in the water, and it tastes a little bit acidic.\n\nIs the same thing that is happening in the oceans with climate change, acidification because more CO2 is being dissolved in the waters (~~I'm assuming a higher temperature and pressure means CO2 becomes more soluble in water~~ EDIT: so neither temperature nor pressure are key factors in ocean acidification, just CO2 concentration, thanks for the clarification).",
"The same reason that carbonated water that is still fizzy tastes worse than regular water - because the carbon dioxide in it makes carbonic acid.\n\n*Ducks the ire of angry Germans*",
"This is actually why Guinness made their stout partially infused with nitrogen. They wanted to make the beer less bitter, but keep the same recipe. By replacing some of the CO2 with nitrogen, the carbonic acid is reduced, thus lowering the amount of bitterness. They were the first to do this. It also makes for a more silky mouthfeel with the smaller bubbles. Yummy ",
"Dissolved CO2 in water will form carbonic acid, mostly HCO3- and a bit of H2CO3 in equilibrium. So, when there's a lot of carbonic acid or a catalyst (mentos and coke everyone?) the carbonic acid will form CO2 bubbles that scape the beverage. But when a significant amount of carbonic acid has been consumed by this reaction and we say that the water has gone flat, you still have some carbonic acid but not enough to form a bubble. The water is still acidic so it tastes weird.\n\nIf you know something about thermodynamics and/or surface science, you'll know about how nucleation requires oversaturation, overheating or a catalyst. In any case you can look up the reactions so you can see how there's equilibrium. ",
"A lot of folks are answering correctly here, but I think the thing that is difficult for me to understand is why bubbles/carbonation should hide/mask the acidic taste so dramatically. ",
"**Okay here is the ELI5, detailed below answer below. \n\nFlat water tastes different than regular water because even though the CO2 leaves the water it still leaves a large enough mass of bicarbonate that the water tastes bad (compared to regular water). The key point here is that the dissolved carbonate species (bicarbonate and carbonate) don't leave solution, just CO2. \n\n*Detailed* \nThe answers about increasing acidity are not correct. When the bottle is sealed it is supersaturated with CO2, which forms H2CO3 in water which then forms H+ and HCO3- which forms a miniscule about of H+ and CO32-. This is acidic. When the water goes \"flat\", the CO2 leaves causing a shift in the equilibrium to the left, ie causing HCO3- to react with an H+ to form H2CO3. This *reduces* acidicity and causes the water to be more basic. You are probably tasting bitterness of \"basic\" ions (bicarbonate), not sourness of acidic ions.\n\n*remember this is ELI5, I'm using terms like basic and acidic loosely. For knowledgeable, I mean increase hydroxide and decrease in hydronium. Yes, still acidic, but less so. (bicarbonate is not really a\" basic\" ion and I hate that term anyway. It has a pKa around 6.5 meaning it's a pretty good circumneutral buffer...it does taste bad though) \n\n**You can try this at home. Take some baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) and add it to water. It does not taste good. Like \"flat\" water. Or try baking powder if you have that. ",
"If carbonated water is so acidic, does that means it’s bad for you? Being alkaline seems to be all the rage these days. ",
"Another reason that I haven’t seen mentioned here is that a lot of times carbonated water will also contain a lot of minerals, TDS of 500 and higher. Manufacturers actually often carbonate mineral water to hide the taste of mineral water - once the fizziness ‘runs out’ you get to taste all the micronutrients that you otherwise wouldn’t. You can try ‘Medicinal water’ with TDS 1500 and higher and you’ll feel the taste immediately. \n\nSource: I work in a drinking water industry. ",
"I'm not an expert in chemistry but I'll give this a shot. \n\nTo carbonate water , carbon dioxide is added to the water. But carbon dioxide is slightly soluble in water(it can dissolve in water, but very slightly), that's why rainwater does not have a pH of 7. As acids taste sour, the carbon dioxide dissolved forms carbonic acid. This acid gives it the sour taste, which tastes worse than regular water. When the carbon dioxide escapes, carbonic acid is still left behind. Therefore, the sour taste still remains."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3l7umy | how we can sequence the human genome. but everyone's genomes are different. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l7umy/eli5_how_we_can_sequence_the_human_genome_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv3xniz"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"All humans share about 99.9% of their genes. You take any two people from anywhere and you'll find only 0.1% difference. That's a much smaller chunk to have to deal with. But its still hard, and we still havent fully done it. Lots of small issues, especially since each of us has variation. But we do have an idealized human genome mapped out.\n\nThat is, a genome where things are... averaged out. very close, but not what any individual would truly posses. The details on an individual level are much trickier.\n\nAs a related point, humans share 50% of their genome with Bananas."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2blnaf | why, if you were flat-footed would you not get conscripted for military service? | I know in Australia you could get conscripted but being flat footed meant you wouldn't have to serve. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2blnaf/eli5_why_if_you_were_flatfooted_would_you_not_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj6ikhf",
"cj6iw64"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Infantry with flat feet don't march very well or far.",
"Flat footed combat vet here. The conscription for flat footed soldiers used to be a thing but, not so much anymore. With more comfortable and supportive boots on the market, it's no longer much of an issue. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
ay7m3t | - why do seasons in the northern and southern hemisphere start on different days. for example in australia autumn starts on 1st march... why doesn’t spring start on the same date ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ay7m3t/eli5_why_do_seasons_in_the_northern_and_southern/ | {
"a_id": [
"ehz21zr",
"ehz35lu"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Autumn is not a single a thing that is well defined. There is traditions in different countries to define the start as a specific date but the date are in may ways arbitrarily choose so when it is so different countries use different days.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nFor example in the US is is the period between the autumnal equinox that is september 21-24 until the winter solstice december 21-22. That is astronomical definition. UK often uses a more meteorological with whole months and used the month of September, October, November to split the year in a way so the seasons match better in weather.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo there is not one definition of season for a hemisphere. Australia uses a similar to the UK but flipped because they are on the southern hemisphere and you a are likely in North America.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI personalty like the definition use in Sweden by the meteorological institute that define autumn as when the average daily temperature for 5 consecutive days is dropping and it is below 10 ° C but above 0 ° C. Spring is the same definition but rising temperature. Winter is below 0 ° C and summer is above 10 ° C. So the day depending on the location and will be change each year. The exact temperature is a bit arbitrarily but say a lot more about the weather. \n\n & #x200B;\n\n The difference in when autumn start by that definitions is approximate 2 months between the southern and northern part of the county. On average the start is august 16 in Kiruna in the north and October 12 on Malmö in the south.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThe temperature definition say a lot more about the weather. The difference is in may ways more extreme for when summer start because The spring usually in Kiruna may 1 and there is still snow in most places on the ground but the summer start in Malmö on average a week later on may 8.\n\n & #x200B;",
"There are two ways to track seasons — astronomical and meteorologic. One has to do with lengths of days, while the other is related to weather patterns. The astronomical seasons are the ones that start on about March 21, June 21, Sep 21, Dec 21. The meteorologic seasons start on the first of those months."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
15jdpb | accelerometers in small devices such as smartphones | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15jdpb/elif_accelerometers_in_small_devices_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7mys4v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"[Done and done] (_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZVgKu6v808&list=UU2bkHVIDjXS7sgrgjFtzOXQ&index=7"
]
] |
||
8uutsi | why does 35 degree air temperature feel so hot and not comfortable, considering our internal temperature is 36 degrees? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8uutsi/eli5_why_does_35_degree_air_temperature_feel_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1iay4z"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Specifically because it is close to the body temp. \n\nOur bodies constantly produce heat and have to dump that excess heat into the environment. They do this most effectively at around 70F (21C). Going colder than that and you start losing heat faster than you can generate it and so need things like jackets and coats to keep you warm. Going warmer than that and it starts to be harder to dump heat into the air around you and so you start to sweat. Once you get to body temp or slightly above it becomes extremely difficult if not impossible to dump excess heat and you run the risk of heat stroke. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
299ot0 | why are fast food companies like mcdonalds and burger king allowed to advertise pictures of burgers that look nothing like they do in real life? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/299ot0/eli5_why_are_fast_food_companies_like_mcdonalds/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciispw7",
"ciiwt1n",
"ciixa85",
"cij3y42"
],
"score": [
25,
5,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The food stylists get the exact same ingredients as the individual \"restaurants\" get. The only difference is in the expertise of those assembling them to look good for a camera. \n\nIt would be similar to showing a photograph of Jennifer Lawrence wearing a Versace dress, and then suing Versace because my sister looks like crap wearing it.",
"[Here's a good answer](_URL_0_).",
"The adverts care very deeply about making the food look as exquisite as possible.\n\nThe fry cook does not give a fuck. However, you are still eating the foods in the advert.",
"[Behind The Scenes Of A Domino's Commercial](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrZFM2nvLXA"
],
[],
[
"http://www.stupidvideos.com/video/commercials/Behind_The_Scenes_Of_A_Dominos_Commercial/#305962"
]
] |
||
bb1e4v | why are we worried about cost when talking about transitioning to green energy sources? wouldn’t it just pay itself off in the long run? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bb1e4v/eli5_why_are_we_worried_about_cost_when_talking/ | {
"a_id": [
"ekfn67r",
"ekfo8z7",
"ekfob3u",
"ekfpzm8",
"ekfvkdj"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Upfront costs are high. Oil companies and other ff companies have a lot of investment in the current state. To answer your question ... there is no doubt renewable energy would be more cost effective in the long run if you factor in the costs of climate change. Look at Germany for example",
"All sources of energy would pay themselves off. What increased percentage of your paycheck do you want to give to pay for it and what are you prepared to give up in order to go green. It’s more expensive, that’s the reality.\n\nGovernment could help things along by taxing traditional energy sources to the point where green energy is an equivalent cost in which case more people would go green \n\nEuropeans don’t drive small cars because anyone likes driving small cars. The Government s taxes gasoline so much it costs $9 / gallon (in some places) . If gas was that price in the US, everyone would be driving small cars.\n\nThe same would be true of electricity",
"It does not matter if it pays for itself in the long run if the upfront costs are so high that it breaks the economy to transition.",
"The thing people forget is that maintenance costs are a thing. Let's look at solar panels.\n\nSolar panels require yearly cleaning to continually operate correctly. For a household system this is around [$150-$300](_URL_0_). That's not a lot, but it is still something.\n\nThen we have understand that solar panels do not last forever. Solar panels actually only last 25-30 years. So after 30 or so years you have to replace them entirely.\n\nAs you can see, it's not that you install them once and you get power for the rest of your life. They are a piece of machinery that needs maintenance, and they will wear out with time and need to be replaced.",
"Yes, but if you don't have the money to pay the initial costs, you can't make that transition to pay it off."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.homeadvisor.com/cost/cleaning-services/solar-panel-maintenance/"
],
[]
] |
||
619fqj | walking off an injury | Anyone who has played a sport and have rolled their ankle has probably had their coach or trainer tell them to try and walk off the injury. Does "Walking off" and injury have any noteworthy effects, or is it just a placebo? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/619fqj/eli5_walking_off_an_injury/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfcr6us"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"My coaches always made sure to teach us the difference between being hurt and being injured. Of course it hurts to fall or get hit or whatever, and kids especially can get scared when they experience that type of pain. But pain can be fleeting, soreness is different than an injury, etc. Walking it off was just a way to encourage the kid to work through the pain and see if they were okay. And if they weren't okay, walking it off would demonstrate that too, in which case the kid would be pulled. But 9 times out of 10, it just showed the kid that the pain they felt was temporary and they were okay.\n\nThe expression has come to represent a lot of bad things (demanding coaches who don't care what happens to the bodies of his players, \"toxic masculinity\", etc.) but the practice is just a way to teach people that they can handle more than they may think if they just give themselves a chance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
j64gr | - the enron scandal and arthur andersen | Could someone explain to me the Enron scandal and what role Arthur Andersen played in it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j64gr/eli5_the_enron_scandal_and_arthur_andersen/ | {
"a_id": [
"c29h9f4",
"c29h9f4"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Enron was a company that made a lot of money trading in energy futures. An energy future is ownership in a certain amount of energy to be sold on the market at some point in the future.\nArthur Andersen was their accounting firm. To put these 'futures' on Enron's books, they used what's called 'mark to market' accounting. This means that they'd mark down the estimated future value (how much they planned to sell it for later) of an energy future instead of how much they paid for it. Problem was, they didn't end up selling their futures for as much as they claimed they would, and ended up taking losses.\nWhat happened was that, when using mark to market accounting, they overestimated the future value of their energy futures. They did this systematically to make Enron look more profitable than it really was. Arthur Andersen was essentially using clever bookeeping to hide loss and show profit. Eventually, the lack of real profit caught up to everybody and Enron collapsed, taking Arthur Andersen's credibility with it.",
"Enron was a company that made a lot of money trading in energy futures. An energy future is ownership in a certain amount of energy to be sold on the market at some point in the future.\nArthur Andersen was their accounting firm. To put these 'futures' on Enron's books, they used what's called 'mark to market' accounting. This means that they'd mark down the estimated future value (how much they planned to sell it for later) of an energy future instead of how much they paid for it. Problem was, they didn't end up selling their futures for as much as they claimed they would, and ended up taking losses.\nWhat happened was that, when using mark to market accounting, they overestimated the future value of their energy futures. They did this systematically to make Enron look more profitable than it really was. Arthur Andersen was essentially using clever bookeeping to hide loss and show profit. Eventually, the lack of real profit caught up to everybody and Enron collapsed, taking Arthur Andersen's credibility with it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1etr9z | google keeps a cached version of a large number of popular webpages. how do they do this without storing the whole internet on a hard drive the size of texas? | Or do they actually do this and I am vastly overestimating the size of the internet. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1etr9z/google_keeps_a_cached_version_of_a_large_number/ | {
"a_id": [
"ca3nr0p",
"ca3nrh4"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"They store it all on a hard drive the size of Texas!\n\nActually, it's split across thousands and thousands of hard drives, in probably hundreds of buildings. Here's a [picture](_URL_0_) of just one of them. This one is in Iowa.",
"You are vastly underestimating the size of Google, I think. The whole internet is about 5 million terabytes of data, and even Google can't store all of that. So they cheat. For one thing they only store the start of web-pages (the first 100 kb I think), so very long web pages aren't stored. And some sites doesn't want to be cached (or even indexed), so they don't care about them. And some sites isn't linked to, so Google never get's to index them (they index sites by following links, basically). So in the end Google stores only about 200 Tb, but that's almost all the popular sites you are likely to want. Most of the unindexed sites won't ever show up in a search, so it's simply not a problem. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ff_googleinfrastructure2_large.jpg"
],
[]
] |
|
94d9p5 | why does the foam from a fountain soda start to disappear when touched by your finger? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94d9p5/eli5why_does_the_foam_from_a_fountain_soda_start/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3k3z32",
"e3k7mne",
"e3kcc3x",
"e3kcfkk",
"e3khcal",
"e3l0bf0",
"e3l4623"
],
"score": [
6384,
226,
3,
3,
8,
109,
2
],
"text": [
"Oils on your finger get into the bubbles and destroy surface tension causing them to collapse. ",
"Oils of all types are a potent anti-foaming agent. Things generally like to stick to water, or to oil (polar vs nonpolar liquids), and if you can convince a tiny portion of the non-water content of a bubble to stick to oil, the bubble pops.\n\n",
"I will provide my best, most detailed (but still ELI5) type answer:\n\nBecause foam is just bubbles.",
"Take a bowl of water and sprinkle a bunch of black pepper on the surface of the water. After the pepper is floating and covering the surface, drop 1 drop of liquid soap in the center.\n\nYou will see the soap break the surface tension of the water. This will also work with oils and soap as well (black pepper is just a bit more visible).",
"the oils on your finger, so if you do it, its ok, like sticking your fingers in your mouth. if someone else does it to your drink, to \"help\" you- they are being jerks and \"tainting\" your soda, and don't even know it.",
"Everyone is stating that the oils reduce the surface tension. While it is true that the oils are responsible for the defoaming effect, it is not because the oils are reducing the surface tension. The bubble lamella have water in them. As you force the hydrophobic oils against those surfaces, you force the water to want to retract away from the oil. This essentially results in a disruption of the bubble wall which causes a collapse.\n\n[Here is a diagram](_URL_0_) that shows the mechanism by which defoaming can take place. In this scenario, small oil droplets are being shown. The blue part is the water filled bubble lamella. The yellow is the oil.\n",
"Surface bubbles generally have very thin walls known as lamellae. When you apply pressure on the surface of a bubble the thin walls and insufficient liquid between the bubble walls causes the bubble to instantly burst. If the bubble has enough liquid between the walls of subsequent bubbles the bubble wall will have a higher surface elasticity and basically stretch and change shape rather than burst. Generally in sodas the bottom layer of foam that is close to the liquid has thicker walls and the upper layer of foam is thinner and more likely to burst first. This answer is just another reason for bubbles bursting other than the fact that oils on the surface of our skin do cause bubbles to burst due to hydrophobicity. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://i.imgur.com/wSj99tp.png"
],
[]
] |
||
2bf912 | what is to stop me from taking out a loan to pay for college and then declaring bankruptcy after i graduate? | Lets say I go to school for 8 years pile up 150k in debt but I walk out with a PHD. So what if I have an awful credit score and no money, I will be making 80k+ a year with my PHD. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bf912/eli5_what_is_to_stop_me_from_taking_out_a_loan_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj4qkbf",
"cj4r0gx"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Student loans aren't erased when bankruptcy is declared. Student loans are practically immortal",
"Firstly, the following only applies if you got your loans through some means other than a govt backed student loan. These types of loans (govt backed) aren't erased by chapter 7. But...let's assume you got your loans in a different fashion:\n\n1. You won't be able to buy a house for 10 years from the point where you come out of bankruptcy.\n\n2. You can't be making 80K/year in most states and qualify for bankruptcy easily. The first test is that you have to have income below the median for the state. If yes, then....you can file, if not...the questions get harder. After that, you have to show that you don't have the means to meet your _debt_ obligations. This is not \"you don't have the means to eat at fancy resturaunts and meet your debt obligations\". The monthly expenses on your loans aren't going to be enough at 80K/year salary to demonstrate that you lack the disposable income to pay your debt.\n\n3. You can't avoid this by filing for bankruptcy while in school. Because...you'd have to stop spending money on school the second you filed - you can't accumulate new debt willfully while in the process.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3mraxw | why are there very specific needs for life to be on certain planets? | Even if we could only live a certain distance from the sun, couldn't other life forms be differently adapted than we are? What if they don't need what we need? What if they do need certain things that we don't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mraxw/eli5_why_are_there_very_specific_needs_for_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvhevbf"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The only reference we have for life is that of earth so that has become our standard until such time as we find a different form of life with different requirements"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
10acj4 | why does pepper make you sneeze? | Basic question, just was curious. Thanks in advance reddit :) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10acj4/eli5_why_does_pepper_make_you_sneeze/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6bqn9v"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Sneezing is your bodies way of trying to expel something irritating. Pepper and other hot and spicy powders will aggravate the membranes in your nose, throat, and lunges and trigger a sneeze response much easier than something like dust. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a0dmch | why aren't dried/canned soybeans more common? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0dmch/eli5_why_arent_driedcanned_soybeans_more_common/ | {
"a_id": [
"eagyjtw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because there's not a demand for them. If you did have access to canned or dried soybeans what recipes are there for them? You can find edamame in the frozen section in most stores and that's probably the closest you will get to what you could want. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3pw9iv | after paying for medical procedures, why do you get a second "adjusted" bill for the same procedure a month later? | Step 1: Pay $750 for your root canal
Step 2: One month later, get a bill for additional $40
Why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pw9iv/eli5_after_paying_for_medical_procedures_why_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwa269g"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The first amount you pay is their estimate of what your portion of the bill will be after your insurance pays their portion. The second bill you get is to pay the remainder that your insurance decided not to pay. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.