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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6lkcvu | why are professional sports players salaries made public while it's taboo for people to reveal their salary to their co-workers | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6lkcvu/eli5_why_are_professional_sports_players_salaries/ | {
"a_id": [
"djuh2d2",
"djui21k",
"djulrzm",
"djuohve",
"djutn51",
"djutpcp",
"djuu0h4"
],
"score": [
6,
38,
6,
12,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably because of the salary caps all teams are subject to. They are obligated to reveal all salaries to all other teams and they are checked to make sure they are within the limits. ",
"It's only taboo because companies don't want you to know how much you are worth.\n\nIf you knew someone gets paid more to do the same as you do, or less, you would ask for more money. ",
"The players use it to leverage better deals. Like everyone should really. It's only taboo because companies used to want people to keep it secret, because of the above. Also likely because poorer people don't want other people to know so much.",
"All major US sports leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, MLS, and NHL) all have player's unions which promote and require a certain amount of transparency. Due to these unions, most salary information is published and available for public consumption. This contrasts pretty starkly to most sports leagues in other countries who, while they may have similar financial requirements around a mechanism like a salary cap/luxury tax, these leagues not publish salary information. In these instances, organizations will get a confidential audit to show they are within the guidelines, but they will not publish salary information.\n\nAs far as why co-workers don't reveal their salary information, usually it is up to the individual to reveal their salary information as it won't be published by a third-party organization like a player's union. In these instance people usually don't want others to know how much they make because of the potential to create tension when you tell coworkers how much you make. Company's also discourage the revealing of salary information because it creates something called asymmetric information, This means the negotiating power is in the hands of the company because they know how much everyone at the organization makes, thus they know what they deem to be a fair rate, while you as the individual don't know how much your peers potentially make. This usually results in company's being able to negotiate rates that are more favorable for them. ",
"Bosses are dicks. They don't want employees discussing wages because when people do that then people start realizing that they are making less than others who do the same work, so they start complaining and asking for raises. Some bosses will even tell you that you are not allowed to discuss your wage, but I have seen posts saying that it is illegal for them to tell you that.",
"if all the plebs actively shared our salaries and had the thought to compare them, we would see that we are all being paid pittance for what amounts to the majority of our adult lives.\n\nby the rich people doing it in our faces we never lose the idea that we too could one day make ridiculous amounts of money, that and we wouldn't dig too deeply into their finances.\n\nimagine how curious you would be if you had literally no idea how much a top tier sportsman made but saw them constantly in fancy cars and hotels planes etc, you might just try and do some research to find out, then questions are asked, then hidden things are uncovered.\n\nbut if you ask the question, and 2 dozen people tell you because its public knowledge, then your curiosity is sated and you don't look any deeper.\n\njust my two cents.",
"Though rarely enforced, it is illegal in the United States for employers to punish employees for sharing wage info. See the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (United States).\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.nlrb.gov/resources/national-labor-relations-act"
]
] |
||
66y39s | how does a foreign government (non-us) values or devalues it's own currency against the us dollar? | For example: Some economists acuses China of maintain it's national currency at a value below it's "natural/equilibrium" point, in order to make foreign investments more profit rewarding. What a government and it's personal must do in order to achieve this effect? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66y39s/eli5_how_does_a_foreign_government_nonus_values/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgm6jiv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"China and France are different cases.\n\nChina uses a fixed exchange, Since its a major economic power and a controlled economy it can set by law \"my currency is worth this many dollars\" and enforce it. \n\nSome countries which are weaker economies like Argentina have set that, they set the price of their currency and peg it to the dollar, but it causes major economic turmoil since they dont have the market power or industrial capacity to mantain it so the product prices go crazy...\n\nAnyways. \n\nIn the case of france you have many tools, \n\n- Interest rates : money is debt, its that simple. its a piece of paper that says \"the goverment of X country owes you 5 dollars/euros/yuan whatever\", as any debt interest is paid on it. thats the interest rate on a currency, the more interest you pay, the more people want your currency, but a a high interest rate damages internal loans and finance. \n\n- Currency volume. The more currency out there, the less its worth, so by changing the volume of currency out there, destoying or printing more notes, you can manipulate the price of the currency. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1lu4sq | why non burn/destroy large quantaties of money in order to increase its value overall? | In order to increase value of the currency of a country overall, why not destroy some of the currency already made? Isn't less more? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lu4sq/eli5_why_non_burndestroy_large_quantaties_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc2rwsi",
"cc2t5nm"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You go first ",
"Why would you want to increase the value of the currency? \n\nThere are other ways to accomplish the same thing, most physical money goes out of circulation, the government could contract the supply of physical money over time easily enough, and it can contract the supply of electronic money essentially overnight by changing lending rates and a few other things. \n\nTrying to readjust the value of the currency up relative to itself would be bad, that's deflation, debt, and most people in the US through mortgages and through government have a lot of debt, actually becomes harder to pay off then. Japan has been struggling to get around this problem for a decade. \n\nIf you mean relative to other countries, then increasing the value of the currency would just mean everyone would adjust prices accordingly, you wouldn't get much out of it. You could decrease the cost of imports by appreciating the currency, and that does happen occasionally, but that's relative to one country that hasn't rebalanced yet basically. \n\nIronically, right now, everyone wants to devalue against everyone else. Which is not possible. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2ebxwa | when someone dies, what happens to their house if their mortgage has been paid off and they have no beneferices/children/will? who gets paid when it is sold to the next person? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ebxwa/eli5_when_someone_dies_what_happens_to_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjy073h"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"All the property defaults back to the government."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8dinrs | is there a reason we write $100 instead of 100$? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dinrs/eli5_is_there_a_reason_we_write_100_instead_of_100/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxnfqdx"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's to do with writing checks or invoices, if I recall correctly.\n\nBy placing the dollar sign right before the first number ($100.00) you prevent people from adding a number before the 1 (Example: $100.00, 2100.00$)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
45xowk | why is there always lame music playing during the act of sex in every softcore porn movie? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45xowk/eli5_why_is_there_always_lame_music_playing/ | {
"a_id": [
"d00uuat",
"d00vbmp"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Budget. Most of your budget goes on the actors and the film crew. Script and soundtrack take a back seat. ",
"1. there is at least partly a chicken and egg thing here. it's cheesy and lame because it's part of the aesthetic of something you think of as cheesy and lame - softcore porn.\n\n2. good production quality music is expensive. you're getting the equivalent of clip-art in your soft-core porn budget. the consumption of porn isn't typically based on it's use of the hottest single from beyonce.\n\n3. it's just not valued in this medium. not worth the expense, effort, etc."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2me5hc | why don't comets run out of stuff to leave behind in a trail after millions of years of flying around | It seems that they would run dry after a few years, never mind millions or billions. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2me5hc/eli5_why_dont_comets_run_out_of_stuff_to_leave/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm3civt",
"cm3ck2t",
"cm3cm2f"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
11
],
"text": [
"You are absolutely right in your thinking. Here's the deal: Outside of the solar system, FAR outside the solar system, is the Oort Cloud, which is basically an orbit populated with ice, dust, and rock bits and pieces. Out at that distance from the sun, the ice and dust can last indefinitely. It's simply too far away from the sun to be disturbed too much. But when a piece gets nudged out of the Oort cloud, and knocked in towards the sun, then it begins outgassing and basically dissolving during it's new orbit (or 2 or 3 or 4) around the sun, before it eventually just breaks apart.\n\nSo, comets that we see inside the solar system (from earth), orbiting closer to the sun, don't survive very long for reasons you mentioned.",
"The only leave stuff in a trail when they get close enough to the sun, which is infrequently and for a short time only. And eventually, they do run out, some quicker than others.",
"Many are really big, and have a lot of stuff. Enough to send out a few million kg every hundred years for a few million years (Halley's comet weighs 220,000,000,000,000 kg, and used to weigh much more). Some have run out. And others haven't been comets for very long, and haven't had time to run out of stuff; they can be knocked into elliptical orbits by collisions or gravitational attraction and become comets."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8pa4us | why is it seemingly impossible to get drunk again after after sobering up during the same day? for example, if i’ve been drinking during the day heavily, then sobers up before the evening and then starts drinking again. why is it so hard to feel the effects of the alcohol? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8pa4us/eli5_why_is_it_seemingly_impossible_to_get_drunk/ | {
"a_id": [
"e09n2m5",
"e09s9hd",
"e09xgne"
],
"score": [
49,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"It takes the body roughly 1 hour to metabolize 1 ounce of alcohol. That's about one drink. \n\nSo of you are \"drinking heavily\" in the morning. You aren't sober by the evening. \nAnd no, your tolerance doesn't mean your body gets better at dealing and processing the alcohol. It means you are just used to be buzzed. Your brain just goes \"ok cool, I guess I just feel good and get dizzy more easily now\" your reaction times and everything are still just as screwed. \n\nSo it's not that you can't get drunk again, it's that you still are. You just aren't noticing it, because it's now normal to your brain.",
"The best indicator of how drunk you feel isn’t your blood alcohol concentration but the rate at which that concentration is *changing.* If you drink an ounce of hard spirits every thirty minutes until you get to a BAC of 0.1 and note how much takes, then on a separate occasion down that much in five minutes, by the time you hit the same BAC you’d a feel *lot more* drunk.",
"If you wrote this during your second attempt at getting drunk for the day, you may be more successful at it than you think. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3d3qej | why tony abbott banned the cefc from investing in solar and wind energy? | I really can't see any possible good reason for him preventing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation from investing in solar energy, on top of the existing ban on wind energy. Is he just an idiot? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d3qej/eli5_why_tony_abbott_banned_the_cefc_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct1ifc9",
"ct1lj08"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"He has twice tried to get it shut down completely but the senate blocked the action.\n\nIn lieu of shutting it down- he now wants to de-power it by pretending that he wishes to make rooftop solar and wind stand on their own without government help.\n\nI believe this is because he is against anything that smacks of legitimising climate change.",
"His claim is that solar energy is established enough that is attracts private financing - so it doesn't need government investments. He says he wants to see the CEFC invest in new/emerging technologies instead.\n\nI'm an American, so I dont know much beyond that. Most articles I have read pretty much portray him as a bit of an asshole. My paraphrasing of his CEFC ideals comes from this:\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-13/pm-defends-decision-to-axe-wind-solar-from-cefc-spending/6615372"
]
] |
|
2gq7qp | how do "off-brand" products come into being? do the stores that sell them actually make them too? and does this require a license from the brand name company? are profits split? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gq7qp/eli5_how_do_offbrand_products_come_into_being_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckli3t5",
"cklnk4o"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Stores that sell them typically buy them from a third party. No licensing/profit sharing required as far as I know, unless the name brand product is still under patent protection.",
"O It's been a while since I took economics so I can't remember all the specific terms, but essentially the reason why there are generic brands, and why they're typically made by the same name brand companies is because there are consumers who will only pay for products at certain price points. For example, some people want name brands, and some people will only buy things on sale. \n\nIn order to capture as much profit as possible, companies will produce and sell their products in bulk to other companies to sell under another, generic brand. As someone mentioned, this may be the same recipe, it may be slightly changed. \n\n\nOne example of a company that does not do this is Listerine, on their bottles they specifically state this. Heinz makes tons of generic ketchup but they change the recipe. Not sure about the US but in Canada, a brand like presidents choice which is owned by lob laws, is almost certainly not making all these products themselves in a giant factory.. They are just buying in bulk from different manufacturers and those manufacturers just print PC labels to box them in\n\nSome name brands are at various levels of quality depending on where you buy them from. For example, Walmart will strong arm companies into making versions with cheaper parts, so they can undercut appliance stores selling the same brands"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
32a2it | why does the us require you to pay taxes even when you're working and paying taxes in another country? | I don't know of any other country which does this. Is the US the only one?
For a start, it would seem like a huge disincentive for Americans to work overseas.
And more to the point, it just doesn't seem fair. If you're in the other country, you're taking advantage of their government's services, and getting nothing from the US. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32a2it/eli5_why_does_the_us_require_you_to_pay_taxes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq99mje",
"cq99zpq",
"cq9aiv7",
"cq9as7a",
"cq9b4ka"
],
"score": [
43,
8,
3,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"It prevents rich Americans from shielding themselves from tax liability by simply moving overseas.",
"You still have the benefits of your US citizenship. At any time, you can present yourself at a US embassy and take advantage of the services and protection of the embassy. Additionally, getting back into the US is much simpler as a citizen than as a foreign national.",
"The US is, to my knowledge, the only country that taxes its citizens regardless of where they live and make income. The Phillipines taxes their citizens living abroad, but only on income derived from sources within the Phillipines. Eritrea is another one . . . but who really knows what happens there as it isn't exactly a transparent place. I am a US citizen living and working in Canada, so I have to file both US and Canadian taxes (and could potentially get returns/owe money back to either country). The thing with the US is that they generally only tax your foreign-earned income once you reach a certain cap. I have yet to make enough money abroad to have to pay any back taxes, and since I am filing and presumably paying Canadian taxes, that factors into my US tax deductions. Still, once I hit that cap I will have to start paying money back to the US government, even though I don't use any of the services. At which point I will hopefully have Canadian citizenship.",
"You don't always have to pay, depending on your overseas salary/residence and whether you have any assets in the US. But you should still file a US return.",
"The US allows many people working overseas to exclude a significant chuck of earned income from taxation. Alternatively, the US allows a credit against taxes paid to other countries. So while the issue of not getting many US services remains, the double taxation hinted at doesn't usually happen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
ccmjkh | why/how does ibuprofen et al make you constipated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ccmjkh/eli5_whyhow_does_ibuprofen_et_al_make_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"etnx9s9"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Ibuprofen doesn’t. Narcotics do. They act on opioid receptors in your body. The effect you want is on the receptors in your brain. One of the side effects is in receptors in your GI tract (constipation). Another is decreased breathing/respiration. That’s what can kill in an overdose."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1qqjh5 | how are video games programmed so that the gameplay is dynamic and interactive to your own unique movements? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qqjh5/eli5_how_are_video_games_programmed_so_that_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdfgoj7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The programmer writes the code to say \"if the user presses a button do XYZ, otherwise the character stands still\". The game is constantly checking to see if any buttons are being pressed and, if so, it responds appropriately. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3gio6b | how/why does a company like yamaha make everything from musical instruments and speakers to motorcycles, boats and generators under the same brand? | Do other companies do this as well? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gio6b/eli5_howwhy_does_a_company_like_yamaha_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctyi2pt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, other companies do it too. It is very common in Japan, with a fairly long and complicated history. You might want to read up on [keiretsu](_URL_0_) and/or [zaibatsu](_URL_1_). The varied products aren't really made by one company...there are a bunch of companies that are all associated with each other, invested in each other, and usually sharing the same central bank. They may or may not have a reporting structure and/or culture that is common. \n \nCompanies in other countries do something similar, but not quite the same. For example, in the USA, a company like GE might buy up various other smaller companies. Sometimes they will retain the original company's name/brand, sometimes they won't. The various smaller companies that are bought up are usually held as *subsidiary* companies, although not always. The purchasing company might fold them into their existing corporate structure entirely. \n \nOr you can have two companies that merge together, perhaps retaining their own names/brands, perhaps both taking on the name/brand of one of them, or perhaps forming a new company name/brand. There are a lot of options. \n \nAnd after two companies merge, the new company could later on buy another company, or merge with another company. The variations become almost endless, particularly when you have a very large company with lots of assets to gobble up smaller companies. \n \n**TL;DR** - There are a lot of ways for this to happen. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaibatsu"
]
] |
|
6gguji | how did people throughout history choose a city location. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gguji/eli5_how_did_people_throughout_history_choose_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"diq5o5y"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I don't think when they decided to start building there they thought \"wow, this place will be great for millions of people to live\".... Probably more along the lines of easy access to food, water, and other supplies needed to begin building, plus if they had ships voyaging from Europe and shit they would want to be close to the ocean."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2vlcp0 | if lightning wants to find the quickest path to the ground, why is it forked? | Title | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vlcp0/eli5_if_lightning_wants_to_find_the_quickest_path/ | {
"a_id": [
"coiocg9"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"It doesn't want to find the quickest path, it wants to find the path of least resistance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
37cfws | how can a space probe transmit information over 200,000 miles across space but i lose a radio station after 50 miles? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37cfws/eli5_how_can_a_space_probe_transmit_information/ | {
"a_id": [
"crlgxa5",
"crlgyvn",
"crlh0w0",
"crlh1hj",
"crlj3ne",
"crlnafx",
"crlnnph"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
22,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your car antennal is all directional. It tries to pick up stations in any direction. Both the space probe antenna and the receiver on Earth are highly directional. The Earth antenna is much larger and amplifies the signal fed into a specialized receiver designed to amplify very weak signals.\n\nYou are probably listening to an FM station. These are approximately line of sight. Buildings trees and most hills will not faze them. But eventually the curve of the Earth will shield the stations signal from you. It will also shield the signal from the space probe. They get around this by having receivers around the world.",
"I learned this from a very qualified individual: that broadcasts can be interrupted by natural features such as mountains, and atmospheric conditions like electrical storms. Space has practically no interferences. Consider that the curvature of the earth itself makes reception impossible beyond a certain distance, unless there is some reflector, such as a satellite, to direct the broadcast around a different route.",
"Use an antenna [this big]( _URL_1_) and you'll pick up that radio station (or space probe) just fine.\n\nNASA and others use arrays of really big antennas (34 and 70 metres across) to communicate to long range probes.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Take a look at [this dish](_URL_0_ ). These dishes are 34 or 70 meters across. They are part of the Deep Space Network, used to communicate with distant spacecraft. It's radio, but not on the same scale as the little rubber antenna sticking up from your car.",
"Four reasons, which have been listed already:\n\n1) /u/zoveighkuX pointed out that the atmosphere can disrupt signals, but there is no atmosphere in space. As such, NASA doesn't have to worry about trying to beat out atmospheric noise (the static you hear if you are tuned to a non-station frequency).\n\n2) /u/zoveighkuX and /u/friend1949 mention the fact that things get in the way too: trees, buildings, and the Earth itself can get in the way. In space, unless you are orbiting something (All the Apollo moon missions had times when the lunar orbiters were behind the moon, and completely out of communication), there isn't anything in the way.\n\n3) /u/friend1949 says that the car antenna is omnidirectional, while NASA uses directional broadcasts. This has the same effect of cupping your ears to hear better; and can effectively amplify a signal many times over.\n\n4) /u/Masark and /u/WRSaunders point out that NASA uses HUGE receivers to pick up the signal; which further amplifies the signal: the bigger the receiver (especially if the receiver is a paraboloid dish), the more signal you can focus; though with the dishes they use, you have to know where the signal is coming from).",
"The reason the radio antenna is so high is becouse of the curvature of the earth. From staying hight you can see approximately 4 km to the horizon. It you are on top of a very tall tower you can see further. No matter how powerful the transmission if you are to far away the earth will get in the way. Now there are fancy tricks with radio skip (bouncing off the clouds and back down but this requires proper conditions). ",
"Because FM radio tends to be line of sight (this has to do with the frequency, not the modulation), once there is something solid in the way, you will lose signal. My small handheld VHF radio I can talk to someone maybe a few miles out with a similar receiver (its a 5 watt transmitter). With the same receiver I can hear and talk to the International Space Station when its over the horizon (its about 220 miles above the surface of the earth when its directly above you). Just like others have said, how you focus the signal also makes a huge difference. I have different antennas that radiate the signal over a narrower beam and this make a huge difference on the range. NASA uses parabolic dishes which focus the signal like a flashlight to transmit and captures faint signals over a larger area on focuses to a smaller point (this has to do with antennae gain due to the design).\nI have a HAM technicians license."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Deep_Space_Network",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Goldstone_DSN_antenna.jpg"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Deep_Space_Network#/media/File:Madrid_Deep_Space_Network_Complex.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
289nji | why do birds tend to fly alongside ships and/or large boats? | It seems meaningless to me. But then again, I know nothing. Why do birds tend to fly alongside ships and/or large boats? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/289nji/eli5why_do_birds_tend_to_fly_alongside_ships/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci8s2v5",
"ci8s7wz"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Food - either directly from the ship itself or the sealife that get churned up in the ships wake",
",,When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea\"..legendary"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
82ijgu | [technology] why do electronics slow down over time, even though the processes which they run get better? | Take a phone or a laptop for example. 5 years ago, a new laptop could surf the web, use Microsoft programs, and other small games or applications (Solitaire). Over the next 5 years, the processes and applications don't change, but maybe the web (Chrome, Safari) gets more "advanced", more efficient. Why do computers slow down? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/82ijgu/eli5technology_why_do_electronics_slow_down_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvac6lg",
"dvacgh9",
"dvaclnz",
"dvaehpq",
"dvah5nn"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
13,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Because things do change. Every windows update, every temp file, every saved program changes the environment. You're computer doesn't reset back to factory fresh every time you shutdown. \n\nIn addition, components physically wear out. Hard drives wear out, memory wears out. Heat sinks get dust and fail to dissipate heat causing component reduced performance or physical damage.",
"Moore's law. Processing power doubles every 18 months. But, that means that programs can become twice as complex every 18 months and users won't notice... unless they try to run that software on older equipment. ",
"The processes they run don't get better, they get slower. The people writing that code make their \"is that too slow?\" Decisions using the latest hardware. Every update adds more code but you notice that more if you don't buy new hardware.",
"It's not the electronics slowing down. It's the computer systems. Windows is a good example, it has a registry which keeps track of important information about the system, like where certain important files are and what software has been installed in the past. \n\nOver time the registry gets filled and filled with information that Windows has to sort through. Also many modern programs are designed to be \"memory resident\". This means that instead of loading them from the hard drive into working memory every time you use them, they stay in working memory all the time. The problem with that is that there is far less working memory than hard drive space and eventually Windows has to start juggling things in working memory to make it all fit.\n\nThe longer you've had the computer, the more of these programs you've installed so the larger the registry data is and the more programs will be fighting for working memory.\n\nThe electrical components, however, are just as fast as when you first bought them, Windows is just asking them to do a whole lot more than they used to.",
"Format your hard drive and start over with a new OS installation. It will be just as fast as when you bought it. It will not have the decay and installations that have bogged it down over time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
f6cphi | why is it for some easier to cry for a fictional character than for a real life person? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f6cphi/eli5_why_is_it_for_some_easier_to_cry_for_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"fi3uxio"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"We are inherently wired to distrust people we do not know. We make assumptions that people who are strangers have different values, different goals, and different intentions from our own. These differences make a person less sympathetic towards another.\n\nIn TV and entertainment, the character is represented in the story, esp if they are the protagonist, in a way that makes them as sympathetic as possible, which makes them highly relatable, and makes the viewer prone to sharing and mirroring their emotions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1z1hy8 | why do i need to install drivers when using new computer parts. why can't they just understand each other to begin with? | If I take your hard drive out of your computer and put it in my computer it wouldn't work without installing tons of drivers. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z1hy8/eli5_why_do_i_need_to_install_drivers_when_using/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfpnzi5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When you buy a board game, you need instructions telling you how to play. The variety of board games out there is enormous and no one could be expected to \"just know\" how to play every game that might ever be invented. For this reason, every board game comes with instructions. The instructions tell you what the game is supposed to do and how you should interact with it.\n\nIn the same way, drivers are the instruction manuals explaining how the computer should interact with the hardware. It simply can't be expected to know without them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
13qsct | what were obama's changes to no child left behind? is it better than it was under the bush administration? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13qsct/what_were_obamas_changes_to_no_child_left_behind/ | {
"a_id": [
"c76d8tz",
"c76h8kn"
],
"score": [
11,
5
],
"text": [
"I think the other responses pretty much cover it. ",
"Both my parents are teachers, and education policy has a place in my heart.\n\nThe only significant change that I'm aware of is that he is allowing states to evaluate schools and create more customized methods of bringing low-performing schools up to speed.\n\nWhich means that any difference in quality of education policy would be up to the states.\n\nFrom personal knowledge, I can tell you that in Texas and Louisiana (parents in Texas, me in Louisiana), it hasn't gotten any better."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
5561g3 | what is happening when a cheap ring 'stains' my finger. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5561g3/eli5_what_is_happening_when_a_cheap_ring_stains/ | {
"a_id": [
"d87wb0r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on what sorts of metals are in the ring. A generic cheap ring might be silver or gold mixed with a baser metal, something like nickel, chromium, or even iron. While gold and high quality silver don't tarnish or oxidize easily, these other metals oxidize more quickly. The oxidation is the same process that happens when iron rusts. The metal combines with oxygen in the air to make a new compound that is not metallic, and it often dingy in color. That rubs off on your finger and can give your skin a dark \"stain.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
44k85f | how are we able to change the pitch of our voice consciously? and thus enable us to sing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44k85f/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_change_the_pitch_of_our/ | {
"a_id": [
"czqu150"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"You have a lot of muscles in your throat and neck that allow you to change the pitch of your voice. They do this by tightening or lengthening your focal folds (cords). It's somewhat similar to how a string instrument works actually. At that point, it's just a matter of coordinating between what you hear and adjusting the muscles to match the pitch that you want. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
br6rmf | aspirin lowers your nervous sensors that's why you feel less pain when you take one, but how does it actually work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/br6rmf/eli5_aspirin_lowers_your_nervous_sensors_thats/ | {
"a_id": [
"eoakp0y"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"Aspirin doesn't exactly \"lower your nervous sensors.\"\n\nPut simply, aspirin slows down the action of another chemical in your body (cyclooxygenase) by changing its shape, which ordinarily produces a particular *other* set of chemicals called *prostaglandins,* which attach to our nerves and cause us to feel pain.\n\nWith less prostaglandin to attach to our nerves, our perception of pain is reduced."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1vsbbe | how can i get a vitamin from sunlight? | I understand that vitamin D comes from sunlight -- but how? Aren't vitamins molecules? How does it attach itself to the lightwave, and do certain types of glass or other barriers prevent the vitamin D from coming through, or becoming trapped once past the barrier? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vsbbe/eli5_how_can_i_get_a_vitamin_from_sunlight/ | {
"a_id": [
"cevam8t",
"cevausc"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Your body produces Vitamin D, sunlight just stimulates it to do so. It's not \"riding\" on the light or anything like that.",
" > Aren't vitamins molecules? \n\nYes.\n\n > How does it attach itself to the lightwave\n\nIt doesn't.\n\nYour body produces vitamin D precursor molecules. When hit by ultraviolet light, those molecules change shape, which sets off the chain of molecular interactions that cause them to eventually become vitamin D.\n\n > and do certain types of glass or other barriers prevent the vitamin D from coming through, or becoming trapped once past the barrier?\n\nGlass that blocks UV light will prevent your body from being able to convert those precursor molecules into vitamin D.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
58pe9f | why do they show flashes of someone's skeleton when being electrocuted in cartoons? | This does not really happen in real life does it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58pe9f/eli5_why_do_they_show_flashes_of_someones/ | {
"a_id": [
"d929non",
"d92b6mo",
"d930lih",
"d93k8wg"
],
"score": [
13,
18,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Certain everyday items ***do*** glow when enough electricity flows through them. (Pickles, for one.) \n\nCombine that with the thought that electricity is like light from inside of you and you have skeletal flashes. ",
"Doesn't happen to people in real life, no.\n\nI always assumed that the cartoon version was a joke along the lines of turning the person into a light bulb and showing the bright bones like the filament of the light, glowing brightly.",
"No, it does not happen in real life. It's artistic representation to let you know that someone is being electrocuted.\n\nIf I'm not mistaken part of it comes from early connotations of electricity, power, and radiation that were relatively new to many people when cartoons were first created. Just because electricity was invented at a certain time didn't mean everyone had it or even knew what it was. If a cartoon cat had their tail put in an outlet and you didn't show the skeleton (or energy lines, or whatever), you'd have to assume that the people watching knew what was happening.\n\nSame reason why someone getting hit on the head doesn't actually see stars or have funny lines coming out of their body, nor do bumps immediately form in such a fashion when hit.",
"It may have to do with a fluoroscope type effect, although a fluoroscope doesn't shock or electrocute you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8tgkjb | how are pictures of emission nebulas (space clouds) taken? | I saw [this post](_URL_0_) and wondered how that picture was taken if the nebula was so incredibly large. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8tgkjb/eli5_how_are_pictures_of_emission_nebulas_space/ | {
"a_id": [
"e17b8sx",
"e17bl4d"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"They are also very far away. But they are generally taken in a series of exposures, in a variety of wavelengths, and then stitched together. ",
"The 'pillars of creation' (photo you linked to) is a tiny part of the much larger Eagle Nebula. The famous photos like these you normally see are composites of multiple exposures taking with numerous instruments onboard the Hubble space telescope and processed. They are what we call 'false color' images since the wavelengths that compose them aren't visible to the human eye. If we were close enough to see them with the naked eye the clouds would not look anything like this, but they would be beautiful in their own right. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/8tfo8i/the_amazing_scale_of_the_pillars_of_creation/?st=JISKYJ08&sh=123b852b"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
81uy14 | why cant oxygen have a solid form? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/81uy14/eli5_why_cant_oxygen_have_a_solid_form/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv5cpe5",
"dv5cw0c",
"dv5cwt5"
],
"score": [
10,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Oxygen does have a solid form. However, the temp to reach it is 54.36 K or -218.79 C or -361.82 F. ",
"Liquid oxygen is oxygen that’s cooled to -183° C (-297°F) at which point it becomes a pale blue liquid.\n\nSolid oxygen forms at normal atmospheric pressure at a temperature below 54.36 K (−218.79 °C, −361.82 °F). \n\nSo oxygen does have a solid form. [read more](_URL_0_) ",
"There is such a thing as solid oxygen. It has to be very cold, but it turns solid, just like almost all elements. Why would yo think there was no such thing?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_oxygen"
],
[]
] |
||
47wsht | why does the cold affect my manhood? why does cold equal shrinkage? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/47wsht/eli5_why_does_the_cold_affect_my_manhood_why_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0fyku2",
"d0fylbn"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Structure = function. The optimal temperature to produce sperm is slightly lower than the body temperature, which is why our testes are located more on the outside of our body, because it is warmer the closer you get to the body. So, when your manhood becomes cold, it needs to warm up to return to optimal sperm producing temperature. So the scrotum shrinks in order to bring the testes closer to the source of heat, the body.",
"Because your muscles in the area are sensitive to temperature to keep yer balls at the optimal temp for making sperm"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
40i6n1 | why can't companies fire workers on strike and hire people who want to work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40i6n1/eli5why_cant_companies_fire_workers_on_strike_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyub8vf",
"cyubgtk",
"cyuwnjm"
],
"score": [
11,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"The [National Labor Relations Act](_URL_0_) prevents employers from firing (or sometimes even replacing) employees if they are striking for economic or condition related reasons.",
"If they did, they would have no staff. Production and revenue would stop. They would have to hire an entirely new staff, and train them. There may not even be anyone who can train them properly if that guy was striking. The result is potentially weeks or months of lost revenue, and it may have been much more economic to just accept the strikers' demand for better wages.",
"They can't fire the striking workers because the law says they can't.\n\nThey can replace the workers \"temporarily\" with other people, provided those temporary workers don't have their skulls bashed in. \n\nBut while that happens, they still have to negotiate \"in good faith\" with the existing striking workers. What \"in good faith\" means depends on what 5 presidential appointees say it means."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Act"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
8mcqmy | why is the upper back so sensitive to human touch? | The most basic massage is a shoulder/upper back rub. Why is this part particular stress-relieving? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8mcqmy/eli5_why_is_the_upper_back_so_sensitive_to_human/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzmm4hv"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"A lot of it is due to the fact that it's not an area that receives a lot of stimulus on a regular basis. The same applies to places like the back of your knee, the back of your upper arm, etc. It's not a particularly tough area (in regards to skin) and doesn't frequently get a lot of pressure on it.\n\nThe other part of it is because there are a lot of muscles going a lot of different directions in your upper back and shoulder. If you're even remotely muscular, rubbing across the area will roll across several muscles."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
72hip8 | american school lunches. are they as unhealthy as portrayed by jamie oliver, do kids eat outside, is it free, are there healthy options, is commercial fast food actually available? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/72hip8/eli5_american_school_lunches_are_they_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnilcm3",
"dnillin",
"dnimg5i",
"dnines5",
"dnio19s",
"dniozi0"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Food offered at American schools insanely varies by each individual school. Even schools quite close to each other may or may not be in the same universe of food offers. Food is not free except in some exceptional and rare cases, generally for very low income students.\n\nPlaces that go look at these unhealthy school foods often go to places that specifically serve unhealthy food. That may or may not be the norm, but they are making a TV show and are going to find the perfect one they can to make their point, regardless of the truth of it, its an entertainment show.",
"It's not fine dining, but it probably won't kill you. Some schools do have the option to eat outside, some do not. Meals are not free for all students; if a student's family can prove financial hardship they can get their breakfast/lunches at a reduced rate, or free (for example, at my daughter's public elementary school the normal price of lunch is $2.25; at reduced it is $0.40) but there are usually quite a lot of forms that need to be filled out before the school year begins to qualify for reduced/free meals. Exceptions are, of course, made if the student's family experiences a crisis (parent dies/loses job/gets divorced, etc).\n\nAs for commercial fast food, there are some schools that will allow their students to leave campus for their lunch period and what they do with that time is up to the student - including purchasing food from nearby restaurants. But to my knowledge that option is usually only available to students who are older (14 and up).",
"It depends on the public school. In most elementary (primary) schools, kids won't be allowed to eat outside, but as kids get older, they might be allowed to. Public schools typically sell breakfast and lunch Monday-Friday for cheap. Free and reduced price meals are available for poor students, and in some school districts, school breakfasts and lunches are free for all students. (This is most common in urban districts as a significant number of kids will qualify.) Commercial fast food, candy bars, and soda is much less common in American public schools than it used to be- schools who sell these snacks often only sell them at school during non-school hours. So, while fast food in schools isn't a myth, it is largely a thing of the past. Some public schools use the same food vendors that supply college dining halls, so the food is good (though not as good or nearly as expensive as college dining hall meals). ",
"I assume it's for liability reasons, plus the fact that in most public schools, \"cafeteria staff\" are watching students in the lunch room, not teachers (meaning the school needs to keep it simple for a few staff members to keep track of a few hundred kids at once.) Of course we have extremely varied climates and weather here in North America, so maybe that plays a substantial role. Mostly though, I believe it's because of liability and the \"traditional way of doing things\" where we don't build Picknick tables outside for kids to eat lunch, and it's easier for staff to supervise kids sitting at tables in one room than on a playground/field outside. Furthermore, as weird as it seems, I encountered teachers in school who couldn't imagine kids buying a school lunch inside and then walking it outside to eat. But the concept of eating outside is not unheard of in the US, many private schools and high schools permit it. ",
"Cool, sounds like a pretty good system. And I like how you guys say \"Canteen,\" it's more fun than \"cafeteria.\" And to answer your other question, I doubt pizza is considered a vegetable anywhere in America, as it's an entree, not a side. Other unhealthy foods might count as fruits or veggies though, including sugary juices, tater tots (do those exist in Australia ?) and french fries. ",
"Potato gems?!! XD That's a new one for me. \n\nI don't have a strong opinion on cliques in American schools. Yes, different groups within schools are competitive with each other, but I think the categories vary more than what's mentioned in say, Mean Girls. I do think it's present in a lot of schools that the only \"cool\" activity to do is sports, so if you're into music, art, etc. you're automatically unpopular. Whereas at other high schools, they have journalism classes, top-ranked orchestras, and other niche, non-sports clubs/groups that hold their own against cheerleading and football in terms of camaraderie and (especially in the case of marching bands) competitiveness. Just my 2 cents. I hope someone else can weigh in on how \"stereotypical Hollywood\" their school was! Edit: Hollywood isn't lying in telling you we have exclusive lunch tables here- it's based on fact but varies by high school. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5c9k9m | is it possible for every country to be a developed, first-world country? | Kind of just goes with international wealth. Is it possible for every country to not be considered impoverished? Or just because of the sheer number of people on this Earth, there just aren't enough resources for everyone to live comfortably? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5c9k9m/eli5_is_it_possible_for_every_country_to_be_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9urkog",
"d9uu64z",
"d9vimbc"
],
"score": [
19,
4,
2
],
"text": [
" > Is it possible for every country to not be considered impoverished?\n\nYes. Depending on your definition of \"impoverished\". The definition has been raised over time. The world bank changed their definition of poverty from $1.25/day in 2008 to $1.90/day in 2015. Keeping up with inflation or something.\n\nIf you look back on history, even the kings and queens of nations lived pretty miserable lives by comparison to our own middle class. Things have gotten better and if they continue to do so, everyone will eventually rise above a certain threshold. \n\n > Is it possible for every country to be a developed, first-world country?\n\n\"First-world\" is actually a reference to the geopolitical divide between the NATO and the WARSAW pact. Use \"developed\" instead. I get what you're saying though.\n\nAnd I think the answer is \"no\". By the time that China industrialized, Europe was already moving on to the next big thing. Even when the worst parts of Africa quell their warlords and get a reliable infrastructure, they'll still have another hurdle in front of them to overcome to catch up to fully developed nations. \n\nI think the definition of \"developed\" will change with time and continue to march on. The countries of the world will have variance when it comes to how well they're doing, and someone will always be in front and someone will always be in the rear.\n\n > Or just because of the sheer number of people on this Earth, there just aren't enough resources for everyone to live comfortably?\n\nThat's a tough one. Define \"comfortably\". Because no, there's no way for everyone to have 3 maids, 2 drivers, and a butler. The maids and butlers don't can't have maids and butlers, that system falls apart pretty quickly. \n\nBut if you define \"comfortable\" as having food to eat, a place to sleep, and general safety, then I think the answer is yes. But that might be 1200 calories of soy-paste, a 30 sq-ft concrete cell, and the threat of death for anyone who threatens anyone else's safety. You know, like a really shitty prison. I myself would consider any situation where I didn't have at LEAST 3Mbps connection to be absolutely miserable. But everyone's definition of \"comfortable\" is different. \n\nBut yeah, if India and China develop a middle class and start consuming like America, then the world is fucked when it comes to global warming unless there's a MASSIVE change in our energy economy. \n\n\n\n",
"The answer is no one knows. You'll get a bunch of theories, including a well written one by /u/heckruler . But at the end of the day, he/she is just guessing. ",
"Yes and no. :)\n\nFor a fixed definition, yes, it would be possible. \n\nBut \"developed country\" is a moving target. We consider indoor plumbing to be a hallmark of development, but a lot of people in the US were still using outhouses in the 1950s. The same is true for things like telephones, air conditioning, and internet access. \n\nIf every country in the world met current development standards, we would come up with new ones, or come up with a new way to categorize countries."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
53gqvg | g-force | So it's a meassure of acceleration, I get that much. When you accelerate a lot in a car for example, you get pushed into your seat.
But when you reach your desired speed and keep at this speed, even if it's very fast you no longer feel like you are getting pushed into the seat. Why is this?
Does stopping/breaking also count as G-Force? It's the opposite of acceleration but I feel it's the same as you are now pushed forwards out of your seat. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/53gqvg/eli5_gforce/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7sxmwx",
"d7sxn1d"
],
"score": [
8,
8
],
"text": [
"Acceleration is any change in velocity. \n\nRemember, velocity is a vector. And a vector consists of two basic features: a length and a direction. If you change the length of the vector, which corresponds to speed, in any way, you are accelerating. \n\nBut even if you don't change your speed at all, but only your direction - for example when moving in a circle at constant speed - you are constantly accelerating towards the center of the circle. ",
"When you accelerate, the car is pushing you forward and increasing your speed. It feels like you're being pushed into your seats bur really your seat is pushing you forward.\n\nWhen you've reached a constant speed, the seat isn't pushing you anymore because you're already travelling at the same speed as the car. There's nothing inside the car resisting your forwards motion so there's no need to be pushed to maintain that speed.\n\nThe car itself needs to be pushed because its motion is being resisted by the friction from the road and the air.\n\nAnd yes you're right that braking is the same thing. It's just accelerating in the opposite direction. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
begxtu | why don’t we eat bacon from other animals such as cows or sheep? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/begxtu/eli5_why_dont_we_eat_bacon_from_other_animals/ | {
"a_id": [
"el5u56i",
"el5xda6"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"We do.\n\nI personally love bison bacon.\n\nThere's also turkey bacon. Beef bacon etc.\n\nPork just happens to be the main source but you can cure and thinly slice any meat.",
"You do, the part of belly bacon on a pig is a different cut of meat on a cow. On a cow it's the plate and flank primal cuts. Being a different kind of animals it has different muscles and hasn't been selectively bred to be as fatty as a lard hog.\n\nShort ribs are kind of sort of similar blend if meat and fat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
17r1k0 | stocks | How does stocks work? My dad never told me about stocks. I have five shares in my company's stock purchase plan and I don't even know how to use them. I don't know how to see what their worth.... I'm clueless. :/ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17r1k0/stocks/ | {
"a_id": [
"c88719z",
"c888cjb",
"c88amqp",
"c88c8hx",
"c88cngt"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"OK first of all, I'm not a financial advisor and nothing in this post should be taken as financial advice.\n\nCompanies on the stock-exchange are call publicly traded companies. They are known as joint stock companies. A company \"goes public\" by selling part of itself. If you own a company, you might decide to go public and sell 49% of it. For example, if you sold 100 shares each share would equate to 0.49% of the company.\n\nPeople buy and sell shares in companies based on what they think they are worth. In order to sell shares you own, you register a sell order on the stock exchange where the company is registered. If you want to buy into a company, you register a buy order in the same way. This results in *sell orders* at one price and *buy orders* at another. For example, some people might want to buy into your company at £1 a share. Some people who own stock want to cash out at £1.10 a share. This means that anyone who owns stock who also wants cash *right now* can \"liquidate\" their stock at £1 a share, whereas anyone who is prepared to wait a while to realise a profit - maybe they bought in at £1 a share - can hang around.\n\nSo, in your case, do you have stock or stock *options*? Most of the times employees get rewarded with options. An option is basically an insurance policy on the future price of a financial instrument. For example, you might decide that anyone who works for your company gets the option of buying 10 shares at £0.50 a share for each full year. That's great if the market price is £1 a share! It means your employees can exercise all their options and double their money. However, if you have a problem and the share price crashes - so the market thinks your company is a poor bet - then the share price could tank. If the share price is £0.25 a share while the option price is £0.50 a share, then it's a bad deal.",
"Can someone explain to me as a teenager how I can start investing in the stock market with real money? Do I just go to the stock exchange and ask for 10 of x or do I go through a company/person?",
"Something else to bear in mind. There are 2 different kind of shares. Most of what people are talking about here are \"Ordinary\" shares. These give you a percentge share of the business. If you own ordinary shares you have voting rights in the business.\nLarger companies sometimes sell \"preferential\" shares which have different rights, _URL_0_ . Be aware of which you might be buying as they are quite different. Major difference - they do not have voting rights but they have preferential treatment for dividends or if the company folds.",
"Your friend has a magic piggybank. This magic piggybank has 100 gold coins in it and magically produces 10 gold coins a year. You decide you want a piece of the golden coins that come from the piggybank so you offer your friend 70 gold coins for half ownership of the piggybank. He agrees, and you both own 50 of the coins In the piggy bank and get half of the 10 coins each year, since you own one share worth half the company and he owns another share worth half the company. \n\nThe piggybank is the stock, the golden coins in the piggybank is the equity, the golden coins made each year is profit, and each piece of ownership is a share. \n\nOther people may be willing to buy your share for 100 gold coins, whereas another person might think it is only worth 30 gold coins because he thinks the piggy bank will break. Ultimately, buyers and sellers agree on a value and that is the price of the stock. It can be completely different from what is actually in the piggybank. \n\nDoes this make sense?",
"On that note, are there any books or videos one can recommend?\n\nEdit: For an ultra beginner"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferred_stock"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1rkbtz | why don't they just piece by piece pick up the parts of titanic and then reconstruct it on the land for viewing? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rkbtz/eli5why_dont_they_just_piece_by_piece_pick_up_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdo3jf5",
"cdo3knk",
"cdo3uxm",
"cdo3xxs",
"cdo4bvt",
"cdo5biv",
"cdo5iql",
"cdo80b7"
],
"score": [
12,
46,
18,
23,
5,
5,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Who is they?",
"Ship-builders can re-create Titanic without picking up the submerged pieces.\n\n\nThey have the designs with them and there's nothing special about these designs.\n\n\nThe important question to ask is why would we want to reconstruct the Titanic. \n\n\nThe only reason Titanic is famous is because the ship sank and we got to see Kate Winslet naked.",
"It would be a hugely expensive operation with little real benefit. Sure, we could do it, but a salvage operation of that scale would take some funding. Then would be the question of where to put it. Do you take it to New York, where it was supposed to be going, or take it back to the UK? Once you've decided where in the world it's going to go, you need to secure a large space on land to actually house it. Add to that the problem that the company which operated it in 1912 no longer exists, and there is no international agreement over who now owns the wreck.\n\nBut let's suppose someone makes a reasonable claim to the wreck and manages to put together the funds to haul it to the surface and reconstruct it on dry land. Now, look at some pictures of the wreck as it currently is. It's basically a heap of beaten up, rusted metal. And that's exactly what it's going to look like when you get it above water too. It's not going to be nice to look at, you couldn't safely have tourists going inside it, and locals are going to complain that you put this heap of rusty metal next to their town/area of natural beauty. Of course, you could do a massive clean-up operation, maybe even try to beat everything back into shape and put it together just like new (although I'm not even sure this would still be physically possible), but by then, the amount of money and effort you've spent you might as well just have built a replica from scratch.",
"I would offer that one overriding reason is that's it's a graveyard. Same reason they don't move the USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor. ",
"Like all comments before me one big thing is that the titanic isn't just old it's being eaten. Bacteria eat the rust and poop out iron oxide which is what forms the stalactites and dripping of metal effect. The entire outside of the hull has been eaten and nearly reshaped so there is no way you could restore it and in a documentary I believe they reported that the whole ship may be gone in 20 years. We all love the titanic but it's place is at the bottom. It just isn't the romantic intact wreck we all imagine her as. It is also a gravesite too and there are laws about disturbing them. ",
"Haven't people already built exact replicas..? I swear that happened. Maybe it was a dream.",
"It's a gravesite.",
"Imagine the most frail thing you can think of. Now imagine that is it 100 years old, under tons and tons of pressure. Any move up would destroy it. Not to mention how expensive it would be and probably humanly impossible with todays technology"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
31bvsn | how did we learn that splitting an atom would lead to an atomic explosion without blowing up a city out of curiosity? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31bvsn/eli5_how_did_we_learn_that_splitting_an_atom/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq05q3d",
"cq06odb",
"cq0olx1",
"cq0ornx"
],
"score": [
2,
42,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"E=MC^2 (Energy = Mass x The speed of light^2)\n\nI'm not going to pretend I know at all the lengthy process Einstein went through to come up with this law, but it governs the principle of massive energy release when you split an atom. \n\nC is the speed of light, and is constant in a vacuum. It's fast. Additionally, in Earth's atmosphere, light is still extremely fast. \n\nSo C^2 is also huge! Gigantic. \n\nSo for the sake of simplicity and not to get crazy with numbers, we are left with:\n\nEnergy= Mass X (Really huge vector)^2\n\nSo, if we just plug mass into that equation. Let's say 1 kg (for simplicity), you have:\n\nEnergy = 1kg x (Really big vector)^2\n\n***\n\nNow that really big number is measured in meters per second, so since this is the unit, we'll add that to the equation. I'll also move some things around:\n\nEnergy = (1kgmm/ss)x really big constant^2. \n\nso We know that a Joule is mass x (velocity)^2. How convenient. We have this. Let's simplify.\n\nEnergy = 1J x Really big constant^2. \n\nThe speed of light in a vacuum is 299,792,458m/s. We already used up those units, so our equation is now:\n\nEnergy = 299,792,458^2 Joules, or 8.99X10^16 Joules\n\nThat's 89,900,000,000,000,000 Joules of energy. \n\n***\n\nNow - what does that mean? \n\n1g of TNT releases about 4500J of energy. So, a Ton of TNT is 4,500,000,000J.\n\n***\n\nGoing back to our equation, that's 19,977,778 tons, or about 20 MEGATONS if it was perfectly converted. That's a pretty big explosion if you harnessed it. \n\n***\n\nNow - we use radioactive materials because they're unstable and easy to harness. By deflecting their neutrons against a reflective material (like tungsten), we can exploit the instability and cause atoms to split. Through careful, precise engineering and conventional explosives, the first A-Bomb guys managed to get a good amount of energy from a small amount of mass using this principle.\n\nProcesses aren't perfect. Fission bombs aren't as efficient as fusion bombs, and this is why early bombs were huge and produced explosions measured in kilotons, not megatons for large amounts of enriched uranium. Even fusion bombs aren't perfect (it's an explosion set off by a smaller explosion. It's hard to get a method precise enough to convert ALL the radioactive material into energy).\n\n\n",
"Splitting a single atom does not lead to an atomic explosion. Splitting a lot of them does.\n\nIn other words, the trick is not the splitting reaction itself. The trick is making a _lot_ of them happen at once. There are lots of reactions that release energy but cannot be made to occur in great numbers at all. \n\nIn 1939 it was discovered that there was a reaction (nuclear fission) that was caused by neutrons but also released neutrons. This opened up the possibility of a _chain reaction_ — a reaction that made more reactions. Specifically it was an _exponential_ chain reaction: any single reaction would create at least 2 more new reactions, which would each create at least 2 more new reactions, and so on. \n\nSo a single fission reaction releases about 200 MeV of energy — a large amount from an atom's point of view, but a very small number from a human standpoint, about enough to visibly bump a speck of dust. But if that reaction then causes two more reactions, now you're up to 200+200+200 = 600 MeV. Still pretty small from a human point of view (three specks of dust bumped). But if each of those new reactions cause two more reactions, now you're up to 1+2+4 = 7 reactions total. And so on. Once you get up to 80 \"generations\" of fission, you are talking about having made 2^80 reactions — that's basically a 1 with 24 zeros after it. A big number. And 2^80 * 200 MeV = ~2.4 x 10^26 MeV. Which is a _lot_ of energy — about 10,000 tons of TNT equivalent. \n\nThey did a lot of experiments and calculations like this to figure out how many reactions could be made to occur before the entire thing blew itself into a state where no more reactions could occur. There were still significant margins of error possible. They did a test in July 1945 to see if it would work, and how big it would be, and found it worked pretty well. Then they dropped two bombs on Japan. ",
"For a thorough discussion of this, read the first few chapters of \"The Making of the Atomic Bomb\" by Richard Rhodes. Great book, won the Pulitzer.\n\nAs I recall he lays out the argument that every atomic physicist in the world at the time (1930's) [which was not a HUGE number of people] understood that a nuclear chain reaction could release a huge amount of energy, and could potentially be weaponized. A physicist named Leo Szilard was one of the key proponents of the idea, and wrote a letter to FDR for Einstein to sign that helped convince him to start the Manhattan Project.\n\nAll the work that happened at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project was essentially to figure out how to make that theoretical possibility a working, controllable weapon. \n\nThe first live test of a weapon was done in the middle of nowhere at White Sands New Mexico because they really didn't know for sure how powerful the bomb would be. Some of the physicists involved actually though it was possible that the detonation would ignite the atmosphere.",
"To answer OP they didn't. It was plausible to the scientists that the original hydrogen bomb would \"ignite the atmosphere\". They just thought it was fairly unlikely. \"The last words uttered by the human race will be one scientist turning to another saying 'What if we do it like this'\"-Kurt Vonnegut "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3kpucu | what is happening biologically when someone is injected with a sedative that knocks them out in a matter of seconds? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kpucu/eli5_what_is_happening_biologically_when_someone/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuzo9g2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That depends on what you mean by sedative and knocking them out. \n\nSedation generally leaves a person conscious, it inhibits communication in the brain cortex and limbic system which quiets a patient and causes memory loss along with muscle weakness, and lethargy. \n\nThen there is general anesthesia where you knock a patient out and that generally is done by interrupting nerve impulses. \n\nGeneral anesthesia has several classes of chemicals that work in different ways but the general idea is to interrupt nerve impulses while leaving the autonomous nervous system intact so the heart keeps beating, patient keeps breathing etc. \n\nIt can help to understand where they come from. \n\nSome of the first were very crude. Knocking somebody out with a blow to the head or allowing them to pass out from the pain. \n\nLater came the depresents like alcohol, ether, chloroform, etc. They work by depressing the central nervous system however they unfortunately depress the autonomous nervous system as well which can make a patient stop breathing. The difference between therapeutic levels where a patient is unconscious, and lethal levels where the patient could die, was not so great. \n\nOne of the first modern anesthetics was mixing inhalation anesthetics with injections of propofol or drugs like fenatyl. It was found to be safer than ether and inhalants alone. \n\nYou also have disassociatives like nitrous oxide which are absorbed in the fatty tissues and penetrate cell membranes and interrupt nerve conduction in the central nervous system. This results in a sedative effect and loss of memory. The person is not completely unconscious but they are not able to comprehend what is being done and they will have no memory of it so when the NOS is removed the person rapidly wakes back up with no memory of the procedure. \n\nI'm not a doctor, I just like to read a lot and history fascinates me. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
drp57d | why do floorboards creak? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/drp57d/elif_why_do_floorboards_creak/ | {
"a_id": [
"f6k65n0",
"f6k68y2"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Real, old and rather thick floorboards were made to fit very tightly. As they get used and older, the support from underneath wears down and the floorboards themselves can move a little. Now, when you put weight on them, they want to bend downwards but are held in place by their neighbors. That's what happens right before they creak. When they do creak, it's the tight fit floorboards rubbing against each other and bending a little themselves.\n\nAdditionally, floorboards are usually made of very hard wood and treated with oils. This makes them a little 'moist' and more likely to creak instead of just gliding past each other.",
"When temperature change or pressure makes the individual boards expand, contract and bend in different ways, they often rub up against each other and make noise."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
92w1e1 | why does stress cause ulcers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92w1e1/eli5_why_does_stress_cause_ulcers/ | {
"a_id": [
"e38shpt",
"e38sl32",
"e38w9lk"
],
"score": [
5,
40,
2
],
"text": [
"I’m pretty sure stomach ulcers are caused by bacteria. H. pylori\n\nI suppose if you’re a stress ball like me you can mess yourself up with cigarettes, alcohol and drugs (ibuprofen and such) but I’m not sure if that’s actually ulcers. More like GERD I guess. ",
"It doesn't. That was a commonly-held belief for many years but it has since been disproven. Peptic ulcers are caused primarily by certain strains of bacteria as well as other factors like disease, medications and heavy smoking.",
"Stress doesn’t cause ulcers but stress can cause you to secrete more stomach acid which can aggravate an already present ulcer "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
22leis | how come when we go somewhere new it has a distinct smell but after staying in that place for a certain amount of time, you can't smell it anymore? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22leis/eli5_how_come_when_we_go_somewhere_new_it_has_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgnya07"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's a form of habituation. It's the same way when you walk out somewhere bright it seems bright for a little while, then you get used to it and when you walk inside it seems dark for a bit. What's going on is your brain eventually adjusts and tells you that the smell is background noise and no longer reminds you that it smells a certain way."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7hxoua | how does a product get its price, in which way is it determined? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7hxoua/eli5_how_does_a_product_get_its_price_in_which/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqujrv0",
"dquk4hy",
"dqumy88"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For a product made in a big factory,\n\nThe price of the product is based on the following:\n\nLabour cost\nMaterial cost\nMachining cost\nLand cost\nElectricity cost\nAdvertising budget\nManagement and hiring budget\nOperating costs of the company\nDistribution and transport costs. \nInterest on total investment made into all this. \n\nSo, all of these costs are added per product and the resulting figure is multiplied by about a factor greater than 1.5x. This helps in accounting for hidden costs and not-so-apparent costs. The product cost can later be changed based on the financial output of the company(not always). But this factor helps in generating a revenue that covers the costs of the company that might have been missed. ",
"There isn't a formula but with past experience you can assign a product a certain price and then later on adjust it accordingly.\n\nYour goal is probably to make the most amount of profit so you have to find the sweet spot when it comes to the price.\nHigher price = fewer buyers but more profit/product.\nLower price = more buyers but less profit/product.\nIt's impossible to know what the exact price should be beforehand because there are so many small factors that can play in.\n\nThere isn't a correct answer when you come up with a new service/product but the money in a free market goes toward the companies that are good at this.\nThe inefficient companies may underestimate a demand so they miss out on profit or overestimate and invest too much in something that won't bear fruit. \n\nThen you have the competition between different companies and if you're good at assessing the demand you will have a leg up because you now have more money to spend on marketing, or you're able to offer more discounts and other things to attract customers from the other company to your own.\n\nSo in the long run the companies that are inefficient/bad simply go out of business. Because they don't attract customers as well.",
"There have been many books written about this topic.\n\nThe most important ones are:\n\n* **Cost-based pricing** - kinda like your formula, you charge how much it cost you in total to make and sell the product, plus some amount of profit. If nobody buys it at that point, you stop making it.\n* **Competition-based pricing** - You look at what others charge for similar products, use that as a baseline and charge more if your product is \"better\" in some way, or less if you want to build market share. If you're not making profit that way, you don't make the product.\n* **Market-based pricing** - You charge whatever you think people are willing to pay for the product. If you're wrong, you reduce the price (as long as it's still profitable) or invest in advertising/marketing.\n\nTypically, products that are *commodities* (i.e. the products from different companies are largely interchangeable), with strong competition, will have these methods lead to pretty much the same price, and you can only hope to improve profits by reducing your production costs somehow.\n\nYou're in a much better position if your product has so-called \"unique selling points\", features that customers cannot get from competing product (this includes abstract features like \"style\" and \"prestige\"). Then you can really concentrate on making them pay what it's worth to them.\n\nClosely related to that is the concept of **market segmentation** where you make a \"basic\" product and one or more \"premium\" ones in order to get more money from people who don't care about the price without losing the price-sensitive customers. The standard example is how an iPhone with more memory (which costs Apple maybe 5$ more) is sold for a $200 higher price."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6qnnrb | how is it that many parents choose what they think are unique names, only to find out the name is one of the most popular for the year? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qnnrb/eli5_how_is_it_that_many_parents_choose_what_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkyla1t"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because you don't know anyone with that name, you only know people whose names were trendy 25-30 years ago and over.\n\nNow you start hearing a name, you like it, and it's new so you think it's unique. You don't know anyone named like that, after all. \n\nBut everyone thinks the same.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8629ch | what privileges and advantages has a person when is entitled as "sir" by the england's queen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8629ch/eli5_what_privileges_and_advantages_has_a_person/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw1rogw",
"dw1sy52",
"dw1xpf8",
"dw20eq8",
"dw223ft",
"dw22gbk",
"dw22h37",
"dw232hn",
"dw23q29",
"dw24b1c",
"dw28owl",
"dw28xmj",
"dw2c5wj",
"dw2chtg",
"dw2k5go",
"dw2ky60",
"dw2lfqw",
"dw2lk6n",
"dw2m7zs",
"dw2mrz9",
"dw2nu6i",
"dw2pwth",
"dw2ti07",
"dw2tknh",
"dw2zi7v",
"dw311h5",
"dw36lzs",
"dw3ckxs"
],
"score": [
2152,
6178,
4180,
248,
29,
195,
1554,
790,
180,
16,
216,
21,
2,
1964,
67,
3,
7,
5,
1122,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You don't get to joust or wear armor, but you do pick up a few unusual garments. Knights and Dames Grand Cross get to wear special gear to formal events like coronations. This getup includes a pink-with-gray-edges satin mantle and a collar of six gold medallions.\n\nAll members of the Order are allowed to wear the group's badge. The badge is basically a cross hanging from a pink ribbon with gray edges, although various ranks wear their badges in unique ways. Members and Officers simply wear their badges like military medals pinned to their chests, while higher-ups wear theirs on sashes or around their necks.\n\nOther benefits include getting a spot in the British order of precedence, the arcane system that develops the hierarchy of ceremonial importance for things like state dinners. Furthermore, knights win their wives the right to be called \"Lady,\" and Knights and Dames Grand Cross can modify their coats of arms to reflect the honor.\n\nSource: _URL_0_\n\nEDIT: Holy cow guys, I've never had this many upvotes on a comment! I didn't even put my heart into it! You guys are awesome and I'd kiss all of you right on the mouth if I could... (Except you, Hudge)",
"For the practical part, the honour of recognition, mostly. You may find yourself being asked to be a director on the board of some companies for their status, etc. You won't get the KBE without already being known and respected though.",
"In the spirit of ELI5 you should also know that Queen Elizabeth is not the Queen of England. She is the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In the 1700's the kingdoms of England and Scotland combined to form the Kingdom of Great Britain (which was later renamed to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801,) and so there hasn't been a Queen of England since Queen Anne in the early 1700's.",
"John Lennon speculated that it gave him immunity from the police for most illegal activity that wasn't specifically harmful, i:e, drug use.\n\nHe returned his MBE in protest, got busted a few months later for drug possession, the police planted drugs in his home and everything. Probably just his paranoia, but it's an interesting thought. ",
"The awkwardness of everyone having to say \"Sir\" and then your name, when they are interviewing you or something. Sir Jeff. Sir Alan. Sir Michael.\n\nIt sounds cringeworthy.",
"Depends on the [type](_URL_0_) of knighthood received.\n\nRingo's knighthood is \"Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire\", or \"MBE\". Is the lowest of the orders, so has few privileges. Mostly, being called \"Sir Richard\" in Ringo's case.\n\nIf you remember the film, \"The King's Speech\", Australian Lionel Logue helped King George VI overcome his stammer, and Logue and the King became lifelong friends. Logue was made a \"Commander of the Royal Victorian Order\", CVO, for his service.",
"Terry Pratchett, on receiving his knighthood, had a sword made using meteorite ore and has it hidden somewhere prior to his death. He said \"It annoys me that knights aren't allowed to carry their swords,\". It should be noted that this is unusual even for knights. ",
"one is, British Airways grants all Knights and Dames free upgrades to First Class. But they have to be wearing the lapel pin to qualify. \n(know 'cuz an ex girlfriend has been Damed)\n",
"So hypothetically speaking, what's to stop a random British person from just going around and insisting he's a knight when he isn't? I live in America, where we are perpetually ensorcelled by all things even remotely English. I, for one, would be easily duped by a would-be Sir. Is there a penalty for impersonating a knight? Does the Queen show up at your doorstep and have her goons strap you to a chair while she thrashes her Royal Digit at thee? ",
"It used to be a big thing to be of Noble descent back in the day and you were not one of the peasants, you were a man or woman of Honor and were treated like royalty because you were an extension of the Kingdom's hand in power. Of course, the king of Zimbabwe was considered less a noble than the King of England because of territory or riches, but nevertheless, a noble.\n\nIn Freemasonry, \" Speculative \" knighthood is awarded to you at the 32nd degree of the Scottish Rite or the Knights Templar degree of York Rite. But real Knighthood that can be traced back through a legitimate lineage that has been maintained through centuries and is considered of higher importance than any other Knighthood. It's called, the Royal Order of Scotland, an invitation only body and the benefits are that you get to take the redpill and see how deep the rabbit hole gets ;)",
"I wanted to thank the people who have answered, even those who have pointed out that the title is not clear enough. I am not a native speaker, and I am not using a translator, you have my word. Thank you for your help. \n\nEdit: I'm becoming famous, you can find my post at r/titlegore lol",
"Most of these titles are honorary, as in they have been granted due to achievement or contribution to the British Empire.\nIt becomes news when a celebrity gets an honour, not because their contribution is more worthy than someone who has fought for Queen and country but because it promotes the brand. Both of the British Empire and of the celebrity. Consider the effect of having a MBE use your service or product. That is some fine ass promotion. Hence the benefits of having such an honour is for companies will want your custom and make their service attractive to you.",
"Has anyone actually been knighted without being insanely rich?\n\nNot judging just curious if it’s possible it seems to always be famous celebrities ",
"Not mentioned here but you get the right to get married in St Paul's Cathedral. Or at least in the Order's Chapel, which is part of St Paul's. ",
"* 20% discount in McDonalds restaurants throughout the UK\n* Free upgrades at Avis and Europcar rental\n* Access to VIP areas at a range of nightclubs in London's West End\n* Priority booking for pop concerts at the O2 arena and associated venues",
"I hear it's illegal to eat swan unless you're a member of the royal court, so there's that. ",
"As this is the place for neet little details I would just like to point out that there is no Queen of England. \n\nThere is however a Queen of Great Britain, a title created in [1707](_URL_0_) when the Queen of Scots (also Queen of England) merged her possesions together to restructure a ton of debt, upon the 'advice' of her ministers.\n ",
"Sir Ian McKellen actually did a Reddit AMA video explaining it: _URL_0_\n\n ",
"I had a colleague who received a knighthood “for services to disabled children.” The privileges and advantages were huge and wonderful - and directed entirely to the organisations that he worked and volunteered for. \n\nFirst, the occasion itself was in the national news, and this brought attention to so many good causes and charities. Then, afterwards, local news came and visited these organisations to take his photograph and report on his story. \n\nThen local donors and benefactors started to come forward and offer gifts; volunteers asked for opportunities to help; other organisations invited our client children to visit, enjoy experiences and opportunities they previously never had. \n\nThat knighthood opened doors, created goodwill and opportunities, and gave us resources we never had before. I’ve never experienced any other single event that has created so many positive results. ",
"Does the Sir get legal listing on all of your official government Identification?",
"In the event of capital punishment (a moot point these days, since it has been abolished in the U.K.) aren't knights entitled to be hanged with a velvet rope instead of a \"regular\" rope?\n\n\nAnd before anyone says that it isn't likely, there was a knight of the realm who was executed for treason. In the early 20th century, Roger Casement I think was his name. Something to do with the Irish Uprising. \n\n\n(This could've been an urban legend I picked up, to be honest)\n\n",
"Realistically? None compared to the achievements that got you there - usually people who get the title have done something to deserve it, and anything that comes of it is more to do with whatever they did to deserve the title in the first place. It's an honor, nothing more. A relative of mine received a knighthood and all it changed was the name on his (and his wife's) mail. He received it late in life and my had been a professor for years, so he became Prof. Sir., which is a bit of a mouthful. ",
"The process is called 'being knighted'.\n\nIt isn't always the Queen who does it. Charles has done it, and now the grandson too (Harry, William, who can remember which is which...)\n\nThere is no privilege and no advantage other than the prestige.\n\nWhen you start to get up to life peerages and so forth, that's where the kudos begins to mount.",
"HM Queen Elizabeth the Second is queen of England since England is a constituent country of the United Kingdom, but she does not hold the title \"Queen of England\".",
"One interesting thing, nothing after death. That may seem obvious, but there are no dead knights, only living ones. The title dies with you, so once you are dead, you are no longer a sir EXCEPT if you are a knight of the garter (an ordained knight). So, Sir Stephen Hawking is now Stephen Hawking, Sir Edmund Hillary is Edmund Hillary, Sir Jimmy Savile is now Jimmy Savile.",
"In Paul McCartney's case he gained the privilege of being able to only make awful music for the rest of his career and still be treated like a god",
"this would have been a whole different post if you’d ended after “Sir”\n\n“what privileges and advantages has a person when is entitled as “Sir””",
"All jokes aside, I think one is entitled unfettered passage across London bridge and Tower Bridge with livestock of some sort."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://mentalfloss.com/article/21056/how-does-one-become-knight"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders,_decorations,_and_medals_of_the_United_Kingdom"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGzLszWYHW4"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1t5hvx | when i leave food out in the open, it will rot and eventually larvae or maggots will form, but i don't have any flies in my room ever, so where do these larvae/eggs come from? | Are they eggs of other organisms? If it's from bacteria, how can they get so big? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t5hvx/eli5_when_i_leave_food_out_in_the_open_it_will/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce4j23m",
"ce4k3jc"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"It's from flies. I doubt you're watching it 24/7. ",
"Spontaneous generation. Just kidding. Really though, flies go and lay their eggs and shit. You put a camera on it, you're guaranteed to see something land on it. Of course if you put it in a jar and seal it, nothing's gonna come out of it. Even if you think you didn't see anything land on it, if there are maggots/bugs, something got to it when you weren't looking. \nI kinda repeated myself a little. Sorry. \nEdit- fixed a word"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3u96w3 | why do men seem to be more affected more from a cold/flu? | Hi guys,
It always seems like when a man has a cold, its the end of the world and they feel like dying, but I have never seen that in a woman. Are men actually more affected by the symptoms of a cold? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3u96w3/eli5_why_do_men_seem_to_be_more_affected_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxcxc5v",
"cxcxfia",
"cxd0783",
"cxd1vcl",
"cxd3b2w"
],
"score": [
4,
16,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Well a cold and the flu are very, **very** different things. A cold will have you sneezing and coughing a bit, and that's it. The flu will have you practically *bedridden* with a fever, chills, full-body aches, nausea, etc.\n\nSince you lumped the cold and flu together, I have to wonder if you're accidentally comparing women with a cold to men with the flu.",
"There hasn't been scientific consensus on the idea why or even if it exists yet, but it's generally known in pop culture that men take the hit harder than women. This could possibly be because:\n\n1. Women deal with a monthly period, so they are much more accustomed to feeling like crap and pushing through. \n\n2. Men are largely taught not to externalize their feelings, so when they're sick they use that opportunity to do so. An outlet for all the whinyness they've bottled up, if you will. \n\n3. That the immune systems of men and women are just slightly different, and that the way we feel is an extension of that. \n\n4. Women call in sick twice as much as men do, suggesting that most of the time men just ignore their sickness until it gets to the point they cannot anymore, making it seem that much more severe. ",
"This is a huge generalisation! I know lots of people of both genders who make a huge song and dance out of a tiny cold and just as many of each gender that power through it!",
"To give a stereotyped answer to a stereotyped question: When a man is sick, his SO will take care of him, his house, their kids, etc. When a woman is sick, everything will just fall apart, leaving a mess for her to deal with when she gets better, so it's just easier for a woman to suck it up and do what she has to do even if she feels like crap, while a man can take advantage of the situation and lie in bed for days.",
"maybe because men are more likely to try and just deal with instead of going to the doctor and getting it treated "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3w6atd | describe the process that makes you go wiggly wobbly when you're on a skateboard going fast down a hill. | I do believe that is the technical term: wiggly wobbly. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w6atd/eli5_describe_the_process_that_makes_you_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxtqxfw",
"cxtrua6",
"cxts5sf",
"cxtty4u"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"If you're talking about the wobbly kind of fishtailing that happens when you're going really fast then it's usually a technical issue with the board (loose trucks small wheel base) or with the rider (leaning too far back, not putting enough weight on the front trucks). What causes this is the same thing that causes fishtailing in fast cars when they accelerate too quickly. There isn't enough traction between the wheels and the road because you aren't applying enough downward force compared to the upward and sideways forces being applied by the ground on the board. As well, uneven distribution of force and your weight can cause the board to unevenly travel which will propagate and make you wobble more unless corrected ",
"Also known as \"speed wobbles\". Happens to cyclists too. Watch the cyclist at the 31 second mark: _URL_0_",
"It's called Speed Wobble and begins when some otherwise minor irregularity accelerates the wheel to one side. The restoring force is applied in phase with the progress of the irregularity, and the wheel turns to the other side where the process is repeated. If there is insufficient damping in the steering the oscillation will increase until system failure. \n\nELI5: The front wheels are like two kids pulling on either end of a rope. When one kid pulls to the left, the other kid doesn't like it and wants to pull back to the right. Like tug-o-war. The kids won't stop pulling back and forth until mom comes and gently pushes them apart equally.\n\nEdit: Grammer.",
"It's speed wobble. The fix is to lower your center of mass. On a skateboard, crouch down more."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfngbsIUSj8"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
5rq2zk | why is it that we are disgusted about our family members having sex? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5rq2zk/eli5_why_is_it_that_we_are_disgusted_about_our/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd98dku"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Natural aversion to sexual contact with our family for genetic reasons, taken one step further.\n\nPost audio or it didn't happen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9mccl8 | how come americans can be fired (or layed off) for little reason and on short notice? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9mccl8/eli5_how_come_americans_can_be_fired_or_layed_off/ | {
"a_id": [
"e7dnaov",
"e7dnbdy",
"e7dnm73",
"e7dno9i",
"e7dp9dd",
"e7dpxrt",
"e7dqce4",
"e7ds110",
"e7dsopr",
"e7duvwx",
"e7dv619",
"e7dv92c",
"e7dvdnl",
"e7dvi3n",
"e7dvmn2",
"e7dvons",
"e7dvwih",
"e7dvzy2",
"e7dw0h4",
"e7dw39b",
"e7dwb0u",
"e7dwdid",
"e7dwlsa",
"e7dwnnl",
"e7dwp6c",
"e7dx56a",
"e7dxiag",
"e7dxnu3",
"e7dxuyv",
"e7dxvlp",
"e7dy2zk",
"e7dyjwc",
"e7dytuv",
"e7dyve8",
"e7dz61e",
"e7dzi6h",
"e7dzjrg",
"e7dznra",
"e7dzzhi",
"e7e06bw",
"e7e0fk6",
"e7e0mjz",
"e7e0p09",
"e7e0z6g",
"e7e171g",
"e7e1nl9",
"e7e1r89",
"e7e1um4",
"e7e26ib",
"e7e2b7d",
"e7e2e2m",
"e7e2igp",
"e7e2lf7",
"e7e2nc9",
"e7e2onj",
"e7e2swf",
"e7e2zbh",
"e7f88zg"
],
"score": [
1006,
103,
13,
9,
9,
53,
3146,
8,
224,
486,
14,
2,
12,
14,
136,
49,
69,
3,
2,
5,
12,
2,
2,
141,
2,
9,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
2,
11,
2,
2,
3,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"For the large part, many states don't prohibit such actions, expressly stipulating that employment is a voluntary relationship that can be terminated by either party at will.",
"American laws heavily favor the employer rather than the employee. This is due to a lot of pressure by wealthy business owners over the years, and social pressure that holds that business owners are more important to the economy than the average worker and thus should get preferential treatment. ",
"Because it is the right any employer to fire you for any reason. It is also your right to quit for any reason. ",
"Anyone can start a company or a business. Not all businesses succeed. If a business runs out of money due to lack of sales they can and will \"lay off\" employees. Making that \"illegal\" will not give them the money to continue paying employees. Most states, however, require employers to contribute to an \"unemployment\" fund, administered by the state to help people who have lost their job until they find another. ",
"Why shouldn't they? If you own a company, you want the government to be able to force you to keep bad employees?",
"Like many ideas on the right, it endorses a view of liberty that only reflects the role of the Federal (and some time state) government.\nThis means that a job is a \"private contract\" with both sides theoretically equal in the same way a fist fight between Mike Tyson and a paraplegic would be. ",
"Compared to other countries, it's partly because labor unions have for a very long time had a bad reputation in the U.S. During the Cold War, they were portrayed as Communist sympathizers - consorting with the enemy. Even in modern times, most public examples of unions are things like bad teachers who can't be fired because they're in a union or bad cops who commit crimes but can't be punished because they're in a union. Even after the Cold War, the public narrative still portrays unions as evil.\n\nAs a result, relatively few people in the U.S. are (or have been) in a union, and that lack of collective bargaining has resulted in far fewer worker rights/protections/benefits than in other countries. It's the same reason that we have fewer holidays and vacations, no maternity/paternity leave and limited sick time, and health care is still tied to employers (even though they don't want to deal with it either), etc. \n\nIn addition, the U.S. has traditions of individualism and competitiveness. If you're a good person, then you should be able to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, succeed, and outcompete everyone else no matter the obstacles. And instead of thinking \"Hey, if they get those benefits, then it'll be more normal and so it'll be easier for me to get those benefits!\" you're supposed to think \"That's not fair! I don't want them getting benefits that I don't get! That would make it harder for me to outcompete them!\" and therefore you should block any social progress that doesn't directly affect you yet. (Although that also means that everyone else is blocking any social progress that would affect you.)\n\nIn short, propaganda and divisiveness have been used to convince the population against it for generations.\n\nTLDR: An average American has been convinced that such benefits as job protection would be misused by other (lesser) people at his/her expense, while he/she is better and will never need them, and therefore should vote against them.",
"The reason is that in the late 1800s, a legal writer intentionally misrepresented what several US court decisions had held to make it seem like the prevailing legal theory in America was at-will employment. This view became widespread and then the legal doctrine then followed.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nWhat people are saying about unions etc is not correct because unions have never held so much power to make for-cause the default rule in American employment law, and unions came later anyway.",
"In many cities (like Seattle) \"at Will employment\" is the norm which basically means they can fire you any time they feel like it for any reason (or no reason). \n\nIf every job you can get is offering the same terms what can you do? Nothing. People just go along with it.",
"Interestingly, in Denmark - often (wrongly) heralded as a \"socialist\" counterpart to the USA - it is very, very easy to fire your employees. No reason is needed at all (absent bilateral contractual agreement which isn't the norm). \n\nFor very different reasons, perhaps: Benefits are high, so it's not a big economic issue to experience unemployment spells, especially for low income and/or unskilled union workers. While unemployed, unions and municipalities will provide relevant tax financed education and coaching apart from monetary benefits.\n\nBusiness hire more freely as they won't get stuck with a surplus work force.\n\nThe biggest issue or difference here is that we don't have a working poor labour market, the lowest hourly wage is to high. This is not only a good thing - it is if you can get a \"normal\" job - but a minority, often with different issues like drug (ab)use or mental issues can't find a job at all as the easiest jobs with a low pay don't exist at all. ",
"Because in the USA employment is a voluntary action by both parties. Either can leave at any time with no notice. Now if you have a contract then that contract must be followed by both parties. So if the contract says that you can only be fired on a odd day then that is the only day you can be fired. ",
"It's called Liberty. Imagine if you want to start a company, thus you need to hire employees. Under what condition should you not be able to get rid of the thing you created? The more conditions you can think of, the less liberty you will have.",
"The easier it is to fire someone, the more likely you are to hire someone in the first place. Look at unemployment rates in America vs. France at the same point in the business cycle, for example. ",
"I think a lot of the \"business\" differences between USA, UK and Europe stem from the history and origins of the USA.\n\nThe UK tends to be inbetween the USA and EU when it comes to regulations, taxation and welfare provisions.\n\nThis is a very basic analysis from a Brit but I think it makes sense.\n\nThe USA decided they didn't want to be British because of taxes, therefore the USA being heavily pro-lower taxes makes sense.\n\nWhy is the USA more business friendly eg less regulations and more entrepeneurial and less inclined towards a welfare state - perhaps because it was settled by people that left everything behind (family, connections etc) to start again, from scratch on their own - hence the \"bootstraps mentality\"\n\n",
"Going through this thread is really sad, not a single reason is based on economics.\n\nThe real reason is that if it's easier to fire someone, that actually lowers the cost of hiring. If you hire someone and it doesn't work out, you can then find a replacement and fire them, with only the lost productivity while they were there lost. This isn't fun for the person getting fired, but we'll get back to why it's actually not that bad.\n\nIf it's hard to fire employees and you take a chance hiring someone, and then find out they just aren't a good fit, well you're kind of stuck with that person. It varies wildly by country on how hard it is to fire someone, but generally the more restrictions the more risky it is to hire someone, especially for example someone who is young and untested.\n\nThese restricted rules on firing lead inexplicably to higher unemployment and much higher youth unemployment. It's one of the main reasons that the US unemployment rate is generally half of what it is in Western Europe. If you're a US worker who gets fired because they didn't fit in well at a job, since the unemployment rate is so much lower you'll have an easier time finding a job somewhere else.\n\nEven if you don't get fired, the lower unemployment rate makes it easier to job hop, which will allow you to bounce around until you find a company you actually like and that values your skills and talents.\n\nThese more fluid labor markets work much more efficiently from an economics perspective, and is one of the reasons why US workers are far more productive on average and the US has had so much success growing corporations from medium size to massive international enterprises.",
"While Americans can be laid off with short notice, you have to consider that most companies will not fire anyone without just cause. This is especially true for large companies. \nMost companies will give a new employee a handbook that will list anything that will cause immediate termination- sexual harassment (I know all of the stories are in the news about harassment going unchecked, but in most companies if it is reported people are fired), gross misconduct (stealing, selling business secrets), and attendance issues. \nFor anything else, most companies require a pretty good history to be established to term someone. This is because a.) the company is actionable if someone is fired, and if there is even a whisper of the word “discrimination”, the company can be put into a litigious situation, and b.) they don’t want to have to pay out unemployment if it becomes he said/she said. \nThere are also several other factors to “just firing someone”, such as company reputation, local and state laws, and many others I am not mentioning.\nHere’s the thing though- when it all comes down to it, if somebody is “just fired for no reason”, they just don’t see the reason. In a decade that spans probably 750 hires for 2 multinational several billion dollar companies, I have never experienced any termination that didn’t come with a lot of writing on the wall. The termed employees are often just not very self aware. Layoffs happen, yes, but layoffs are the result of the company being unable to pay you. That’s shitty, but it happens. Better to lose a few people than have to shutter the doors. \nSo, in summation, I can fire all 50 something of my employees today if I want to. But will I end up in court both as an individual and as an agent of my company? Absolutely. If I have just cause, though, I am safe. ",
"In Denmark you can lay off anyone at very short notice as well and do not have to give any reason. This in turn means employers are less scared to hire. ",
"Is this not a thing in the rest of the world?",
"Because the US doesn't have a cradle to grave welfare state and people are expected to be able to look after themselves.",
"It seems foreign (no pun intended) to me that employees couldn't be laid off, since the employer owns the company and can decide what they want to do with it (or by proxy, the managers they have in place)\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThough that obviously won't fly as a pragmatic explanation for most people. For the employer and customers, its important that employees can be terminated to keep costs/prices controlled, as well as to ensure quality work and service. On the employee side, an employer who doesn't feel like he's entering into a one sided commitment for 10 years is more willing to hire new employees. After all, the employee can quit whenever they like, and few would see it as a good thing if the employer could force the employee to remain working there under penalty of law. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nBy intervening to prevent terminations like this, you now add a chilling factor to the hiring process, and limit employers ability to control costs and quality. ",
"I find the responses here fascinating. I'm an employer, and I can fire/hire whomever I choose whenever I like. I am under no obligation to pay severance, give a reason for termination and can give no notice.\n\nI'd have to deal with things like having a bad reputation as an employer, be short staffed and have to explain to clients why their previous contact isn't here anymore. I can also choose to give large severance packages and even offer an employment agency to help them find their next gig.\n\nI never thought of it as anything odd... What is it like where OP lives? (I'm assuming not america, because they referenced Americans in the title)\n\nI mean, you hire someone and for whatever reason, they just don't wanna work. Let's say you hire them and they just stand there looking at their phone the entire time. Are you supposed to pay them a severance? Give them 2 more weeks?\n\nThe responses here are... um, interesting. \"Because most Americans are still slaves.\"\n\nWow. I remember when I had to bust my ass at my first job for minimum wage and was treated horribly. I was so thankful and proud to have that job. (Washing dishes at Big Boy)",
"Most states have \"at will\" laws which allow businesses to terminate employees for any reason they choose, except for protected reasons under the civil rights act, the Americans with disabilities act (ADLA), and the Age discrimination in employment act (ADEA). Companies can and sometimes do terminate employees at will but this is rare due to the strong likelihood of legal recourse that will most likely occur, costing them several thousands of dollars. It's much more likely that the company will just build a file of unacceptable behavior or unsatisfactory job performance on the employee until they have enough evidence to show that the employee has not met the companies expectations or requirements. ",
"Because it's a business arrangement. My boss pays me to do a job until he doesn't want me to do that job anymore. I do not have to do that job any longer than I want, either. I do not have a right to do that job and they do not have a right to force me to keep doing that job. Things like my personal finances or ability to find other work are not relevant to that arrangement.\n\nIt's cold, but its part of being free.",
"Ultimately it's just about competing philosophies, and that one philosophy is a little stronger in the USA than it is in some other countries.\n\nThe huge generalization is to say that certain things that are seen as a balancing act between two competing ideas elsewhere, are instead seen as one fundamental principle to some Americans.\n\nFor example: If you have a business, it's yours. You own it. What you do with it should be up to you. Who you hire for it should be up to you as well. If you want to hire only young women with large breasts, you should be able to. If you want to fire those women tomorrow, you also should be able to. Private ownership means no one else has a 'right' to tell you what to do with it. If they could tell you, then it wouldn't really be yours, but instead belong to some combination of you, the government, and the public.\n\nStepping back from the idealism to the practical, it is certainly true that barriers to starting and operating a business can stagnate growth and entrepreneurship. It's also true that market forces influence who people hire and fire. After all, if a company kept firing it's most productive workers, how long would you expect that company to last? Thus, the idea that the market promotes meritocracy. If you're a Libertarian, then you tend to believe that nothing does this better than the market does, and setting rules and restrictions only serves to screw it up.\n\nSo, the way to sum it up quickly is to say there's a lot of that notion going around in the USA. If instead you see capitalism as simply a tool of oppression, then you're on the opposite side of the argument. If you see capitalism as effective in many places, but imperfect, then you strive to balance out different interests as beneficially as possible, then you're somewhere in between. I can't tell you who is right, but the answer to your question is that Americans have a more economically right-wing blend of thinking than other places.\n\n",
"Because many states are right-to-work meaning that there are no enforced unions. You can basically be fired for anything as long as it isn't a protected class. Things like, age, gender, race, ethnicity, and so on. \n\nAnd technically a lay off isn't the same as being fired. I work in a union shop and we have layoffs all the time, it just means that you aren't being called into work that week, but you still have a job. ",
"I work for an international company and I specialize in HR technology, so I need to know a little about European vacations compared American etc.\n\nWhat I've noticed in general is that the decisions came from the federal government.\n\nIn the United States, the government decided that *companies* should benefit the most. \n\nIn Europe, it's often the *contributor* that will have more work out in their favor.\n\nMaternal leave, vacation, public holidays, summer work hours...\n\nThe EU has American work culture beat by a mile.\n\nI can't remember which year it was, 2016 or 2017. My counterparts in the UK *lost* more public holidays that year than Americans got *all* year. \n\n(I say lost because if a holiday falls on a Sunday in EU, they do not typically get that Monday off as Americans do.) ",
"Ok so I am reading a very negative view of the american work force and I want to claridy it, as an american who has both worked in and out of unions in both Right to work states and not right to work states (also called \"at will employment\")..\n\nYes its true you can be fired for anything at all in a right to work state, or nothing at all at anytime. My interpretation of this has been as a rule against unions, which the other commenter summed up pretty nicely the union vs anti union sentiment.\n\n•I have never been fired at a moments notice. Usually you are atleast written up, 3x, unless you commit a massive offense like a crime, or cause a potential civil law suit. So if your going to get fired, your usually like \"o shit I been written up 2x for being late, if I show up late 1 more time, I am fired!\" In other words the writing is on the wall, all you need to do is read it.\n\n• being laid off happens when they can no longer afford you, and from my experience, everyone I know who uad been laid off in both right to work and not, had been given at minimum 2 week notice! The employers and bosses are humans too, and usually they understand, and will let you know. They dont always, but usually. This is from experience of seeing tons of lay offs in the dot com bust and the 2008 economic depression.\n\n• Giving a 2 week notice is pure consideration. You dont need to when you quit. That said, someone needs to cover your responsibilities. So you are likely forcing a coworker to work extra skipping his or her days off, and family time etc. Its just straight up rude, and a great way of pissing your \"work friends\" off. Now if you dont like them, nothing is stopping you from being a dick, but know, you are being a dick. Its not some corprate manipulation on the public... the public expects certain things from buisnesses, and if the services arent met, than they shop at the buisnesses competitor's. Competition is a major theme in america.\n\n•Unions arent all bad, and not all americans dont dispise them, but many do. The thing about unions is they often abuse there power, and it becomes more about politicing than actually getting the job done. Its a joke in the states but its kind of true, all work stops on a union lunch, and if youbdecide to work through the lunch (say your passionate or want to get ahead in the job) your looked down on, and potentially kicked out of the union. \n\n•There are people who try to get into Unions, but its hard, usually you need to know somone, and you need mert a bunch of requirments. Its not all bad, you get tons of benefits, but it certainly does go against more american beliefs such as competition.\n\n•Competition is a major major factor in American way of thought. Like another reditor said, your expected to get up and pull through obstacles and do your best to get what you want, your the only reason you havent done so. Its very true. Tho this sounds very bleak and dark, it follows the Nietzsche philosophy \"To live is to suffer, and to survive is to find meaning in the suffering\". Western culture (and religon since the beginning of religon) has this wired into our culture. The idea is that you are garunteed a life suffering, you are garunteed to die, everyone you know will die, nature will wreak havoc with harsh sun, strong storms, drauughts, tornados, people will disagree and thay will bring more suffering (even if both people have the best intentions). Surviving is finding happiness in all of that, buying a home, having responsibility, a sense of purpose, a family, etc etc. Basically obtaining the things in life that are not garunteed. It says everyone is oppressed, and the answer is to not attack the oppressors, but to better your self. So when dealt a hard life, you are expected to do yourself to better yourself.\n\n•Cutthroat of it all. The other commenters stated its common place to bring your fellow man down whule competeing for the top. This is kind of frowned upon... Cut throat backstabbing does happen, but usually at the upper levels of work and competition, where you have already devoted your life to work, instead of family, also retail lol. If you are a backstabber, your likely to be shunned as a scumbag. For the most part, no one is out to get you, people arent looking for ways to bring you down, they are looking for ways to climb to the top, and that means somtimes you get the job over somone else, your family gets the benefits of that promotion, your daughter eats better and goes to a better school, over somone elses. Some look at that as a evil thing, but its nothing personal. Its a competition, some people will win, others will lose. So nothing personal strictly buisness. The world isnt out to get you, there just out for themselves, and may we never meet on the ladder of success. \n\n• Lastly, the why of it all. We have established western civilization is based on competition, and pursuing happiness, as it is not a right. The idea is that the majority of people are competent, and if they are not we are humans and can show sympathy for those that need it. The idea is that if you take care of your body, which betters your household, if your house hold is better than your street is better, than your town, county, state, country, your society is better for it, as they dont need to take care of you. The idea is everyone does this, and while some people are cut throat, overall everyone is climbing the ladder and bettering society. This all assumes that there is a lot of harsh things in the world, that cannot be eliminated without eliminating free will and consciousness, hence america is \"the land of the free\" and fundamental enemy of communism as communism believes the world is good as having a good life is your right, and the only reason your life sucks is because an oppressor is oppressing you.",
"In India when you serve your notice period and quit your job they don't even pay you for your work during the notice period and just tell you to go fuck yourself. Not all companies of course, I was just unlucky enough to work for one such company.\n\nTrying to sue them doesn't help either. You'll just get fucked even harder.",
"As I get older, it becomes weirder to me how much of an illusion the concept of the American Free-spirit mentality is. Most Americans, maybe most people everywhere, desperately crave leadership—they long for authority figures to set rules for them to loyally (blindly) follow. They’ll complain, but they’ll do everything in their available power to make sure they surrender power to somebody else at pretty much every opportunity.\n\nIt’s not a political thing, it’s not a back ground thing, and it’s not a regional thing. It’s almost everyone, everywhere, in this country.\n\nPart of that gets portioned out to the companies and corporations that employ everybody. Starting unions is seen as disrespectful to these authority figures, to the point people start giving their coworkers a problem for even mentioning it, unless it had already been formed by other authority figures.\n\nIt’s weird.\n\n",
"even though you can be fired for any reason, if there’s no real justified reason then the worker may be entitled to unemployment benefits. \n\nit’s really about defining the difference between being laid off and being fired: the former being losing your job for reasons unrelated to your performance, while getting fired is usually because you screwed up some how. \n\nmy mom owned her own business and several times over the years had to go to court to prove a former employee was fired for performance reasons and not “just cuz”",
"Because the employee-employer relationship is a mutually agreed upon contract that can be broken at any point by either party. The employee agrees to sell his labor for an agreed-upon wage or salary. The employer agrees to give the employee compensation in the form of wages/salary (and maybe benefits) in exchange for their labor. \n\nJust as an employer cannot force an employee to work against their will and an employee can quit at any time, for any reason, an employer can terminate the agreement at any time, for any reason (with some restrictions, such as violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964).\n\n",
"Because a large fraction of them has successfully been convinced that *basic* worker's rights are for communists.\n\nThis sounds glib, but... really, that's a fairly valid summary of it.",
"At will employment is a two-way street. It's considered polite to give two weeks notice when you exit a job, but for most jobs nothing actually stops you from quitting immediately aside from social norms.\n\nMost companies refrain from bad behavior though, as their unemployment insurance is drastically increased based on the rate of claims. Note that in the US you still get unemployment when fired, even if the firing is justified. The only exceptions are for a handful of extreme reasons: e.g. you committed a crime at work (thieving, assault, DUI in a company car) or if you concuously tried to damage the business and/or destroyed company property.",
"In American values, freedom > everything else. It's my company and nobody can *make* me employ you. If I discover you are a Penguins fan, you are fuckin gone.",
"Research “right to work employment”. I’m no expert but have been in some strange positions at work. All the attorneys tell me I have no platform because I live in a “right to work” state. I live in CA. After researching it makes more sense. \n\nWhere we could use some change is working with unions. As commenters have said, unions have had a bad image in the US. In Germany it is different. Unions sit on the boards of companies and work with the execs to find mutual solutions to remain competitive yet protect worker’s right. Pretty interesting system compared to the US. ",
"Although you can fire people at will, you can still be sued for “wrongful termination” or discrimination. Generally large companies build a case to fire someone over a period of time including offical reprimands, one on one’s with management, documenting violations of company rules, etc. to protect themselves from those lawsuits. Small companies enploying low wage/low skill labor generally don’t bother because no lawyer would take on the case, just too little money in it without a class action but it happens. \n\nPlus you now have to take all the time recruiting a new person, training them and onboarding them. Which is time consuming and doesn’t produce anything.Most companies would rather hold onto a mediocre employee then go about replacing them. \n\nPlus in the U.S. when you want a promotion or you want to make more money, you find a new job. You don’t have to wait for the old guys to die or retire.",
"For the same reason you can cancel your Netflix membership on zero notice. Employment is a business relationship and firing someone isn't a punishment, it's just the end of a relationship. ",
"Not sure how much this comment adds.\n\nBut I have worked for 3 multinational firms in corporate finance.\n\n2 of them where I have had direct oversight of international hiring.\n\nIn one company we laid off around 100 US based employees, we could have let them all go in 2 weeks. (We gave them 3 month notice and severance instead). Honestly, we probably laid off too many people, but there was nothing to stop us in terms of labor laws. So... we just did it.\n\nOn the flip side I saw a company buy a business in Germany and after some analysis we realized it was vastly over staffed for the amount of production and volume we saw in Germany. But... we were unable to make a quick change there due to German labor laws and it ended up being a negative drain on the business for 2 years before we could fully adjust staffing to where we wanted.\n\nIn fin, I have loved having European style benefits at 2 of my companies (paid paternity, 25+ days of vacation with unlimited sick days, garunteed severance upon company termination, etc), and I've seen how my companies have been overly aggressive in US labor actions. At the same time I've seen how international labor laws in Europe have not allowed business to react and adapt to the market as well.",
"I'm not sure many of these comments directly address your question. Most US employees are hired as \"at will\" employees. That means the employer can terminate employment at any time.\n\n > At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish \"just cause\" for termination), and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's race or religion).\n\nSee also, [At-will employment](_URL_0_).",
"Because American politics is designed to mislead people to the extent that they support initiatives that will harm themselves. This is only possible because of the disgusting state of education in the United States. In short, America is a developed nation... for now... and just barely. ",
"Employment is at will. You can quit or get let go whenever.\n\nBut people don't just get let go or fired quickly or for no reason. Usually you can see it coming and get out in front of it. Employees still have right if you were to just get fired for no reason and not able to collect unemployment. ",
"It’s a “right to work” state. People are tricked into thinking that this means you have the right to work for whoever you want. This means you can quit at anytime because no contracts and it also means they can fire you for no reason. People are stupid and let themselves get used. ",
"The US employment relationship has consistently been \"at will,\" meaning that you can be fired for good, none or even a bad reason*. (I think Montana is the only US state that requires good reason for firing). So the classic example, your employer's nephew just graduated but can't find a job, so your employer fires you on the spot and gives him the job, totally okay in the US. ",
"I live in Canada and didn't know this was supposed to be an American thing. Why wouldn't they be able to fire you?",
"I like this about America, I have a small company here in the UK, I have the opportunity and financial resources to expand a lot, but I don’t, because finding the right employee is hard work, and if you don’t find the right employees it can be detrimental to a business, and they can’t be gotten rid of. \n\nI had one guy who was great at the interview, first couple of weeks went ok, then he started getting lazy, turning up for work late, throwing sickies and then eventually crashed a company vehicle playing with his phone while driving, causing £1000’s of damage, but I couldn’t sack him as there was no proof (he told another employee). Eventually he left, and over time the others left too as I wouldn’t take on the extra work because of said employee. I will never employ another person ever again. Never. The system in this country is just awful for employers. ",
"So we can get rid of unsuitable workers and not have to keep them around like in Europe, where the Dutch middle management is a joke, and Spanish retail workers are also like a joke, but less well paid.",
"Maybe dont be such toxic pieces of shit to people that arent in the union and people may actually support them more. All the union seems to be for these days is to keep unemployable people in high paying positions doing fuck all",
" For the most part if you're not working for a totally horriable company it's pretty customary for lay-off to include severance (probably more then two weeks worth in most cases). Lay offs also allow you to collect unemployment. Quitting does not. The company pays for the unemployment through insurance.\n\nIn the case of an out right firing it's usually with cause. If it's not they risk being sued at worst and at best their unemplyment insurance rate goes up and the employee collects unemployment.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo most of the time it's not as unfair as people make it out to be.",
"There are these things called “At-Will Employment” laws that dictate that not only can you quit for any reason, you can be fired at any time for any reason as well. If you believe your civil rights have been violated you can take your former employer to court.\n\n\nNow the opinion section: at-will employment and right to work laws are a prime example of corporate-written legislation that gets sold to ignorant, scared voters to convince them to vote against their own interests. Short of reversion these laws (good luck) the best thing you can do is form a union. Oh, and taking your employer to court? Good fudging luck.",
"Easy answer: Capitalism. More complicated answer is that that is not always true. Some states yes it is, and sometimes its limited by job and depends on your employment contract, but its a because they can. Only really awful jobs actually fire people for no reason and then only when the guy in charge is also really shitty. On top of that the civil rights act protects you from being fired on basis of race or ethnicity. Most jobs will wait for a reason, they'll fire you after a certain amount of times of being late, or failure to consistently meet arranged goals. Or for taking too many sick days. They're are no laws really regarding notice, but often times it will be written into a contract or agreed upon by a union. Most employment laws and the like are from union activism and often only applies to the union that promoted it.",
"There has been a concerted effort on the part of Republicans to destroy organized labor, which have been deemed \"liberal\". Part of this effort are the so-called \"right-to-work\" laws. These laws pretend to make it easier for workers to get jobs but in effect have been used by employers to fire workers for no cause and without any compensation. Sometimes these laws are used to mask forms of discrimination as well. Some employers are \"nice\" and will pay some form of severance but this is entirely voluntary. There is a government-backed program of unemployment benefits where workers are entitled to a small weekly sum, usually a tiny fraction of your previous pay, with a low maximum payout, which is payed from a tax that every worker pays into from their paycheck. This is a very small amount but, in my case, did allow me to keep my house and not starve during the great recession.",
"The purpose of \"at will employment\" is to keep workers desperate and cheap so corporations can more easily exploit them.",
"The American economy is truly based on the premise of \"money first, people second\" Unless the workers are part of a union, every worker is an \"at will\" employee and can be fired or laid off at any time for any reason. ",
"This is the default state if workers don't stay united and fight for protections. In the early 1900's and on through the 1940's unions got us many of the protections we take for granted today - no child labor, 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay, workplace safety, etc. There was a backlash against unions once some of the them became too powerful and corrupt, and as a result many of the protections people had were rolled back. One of them was the ability to negotiate employment contracts as a group, and employment contracts are what prevent employers from firing or laying people off. We still have some protections - unemployment insurance, for example, puts a financial burden on employers if they choose to lay people off for no reason. That's why you don't normally see short-notice layoffs, and when they happen they happen all at once. Instead, employers usually find _some_ cause to fire poor performers, and in skilled jobs, unless someone does something really outrageous, there will be a long paper trail in HR of formal complaints, attempted interventions, etc., before they are fired. For low-skilled jobs that doesn't matter as much, since hiring replacements is relatively easy and since unemployment insurance is cheap. That's why you mostly see people getting suddenly laid off in jobs where the barrier to entry is not very high.",
"Those with money write the rules.\n\nThe wealthy love wealth and will always seek more.\n\nThe wealthy want to send all labor overseas.\n\nThe wealthy want to automate everyone out of a job.\n\nThe wealthy want minimum wage lower than a living wage.\n\nThe wealthy will make the unethical legal and hire PR firms to tell you how divinely inspired it is.\n\n",
"Because money is what dictates and it’s become acceptable to screw over your fellow man/woman if it means saving a few bucks. ",
"Because people won’t use their rights and form a union. Unions have contracts which protect workers against at will firing. Wake up America!",
"Do you like to quit whenever you want with little to no warning? It's like that, only for the employer."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2i23qz | what caused swine flu to die out so abruptly? | with the rise of ebola, I was curious as to what it is that caused swine flu to end so abruptly | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i23qz/eli5_what_caused_swine_flu_to_die_out_so_abruptly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cky5tdt"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Swine flu is ultimately just a normal flu, and can crop up at any time in the seasonal mix. H1N1 flus have existed before and likely will exist again. Mostly, it did what most flus do and died down after flu season passed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3xy45m | how come when you fall over, you can scrap the skin beneath the pants, but not tear the pants themselves | A week ago, I fell over on hard concrete while wearing Nike leggings, and scraped my knee so it bled, but my pants were undamaged | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3xy45m/eli5_how_come_when_you_fall_over_you_can_scrap/ | {
"a_id": [
"cy8tb8d",
"cy8vhzp",
"cy8zmwd"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"With enough force/friction, most any material can tear your skin.\nIt just so happens the pants you were wearing were more durable.",
"Your skin will tear when it sees a certain amount of stress. Your leggings arent thick enough to shield your knees from 'feeling' the floor so your knees will can be hurt but the leggings themselves might be tough enough to not tear itself when it ecperiences the same amount of stress.\n\nIf say you wore gel pads within your leggings the pads might ve got a bit damaged but wohldve shielded your knees and the leggings would have also been fine.",
"Imagine I have an eraser, I put that eraser on my desk and rub, the eraser shreads. Now I put a sheet of paper on my desk and rub the eraser on the sheet of paper. If I rub hard enough the paper will start to disintegrate but long after the eraser starts to shread. \n\ni.e the desk is concrete, eraser is your leg, paper is your jeans.\n\nSide note if you want to think about rocks on the ground do the same thought experiment but with peices of lead both on the desk and paper. \n\nEdit: If you want really know what's going on look up something called shear stress."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2qfs7l | what laws apply if i murder someone on the moon (or in space)? | Let's say I'm an astronaut visiting the moon and I decide I don't really like my crew and decide to kill them. Assuming I get back to earth, which country's laws would apply, if any? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qfs7l/eli5_what_laws_apply_if_i_murder_someone_on_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn5ozkb",
"cn5p6k4"
],
"score": [
9,
6
],
"text": [
"Yes very much so. Most space craft are considers territory for what ever country they are from. Normal laws apply.\n\nStill should you be on the moon murdering someone Im not to sure there are regular check and you would have to fly your self back to get punishment...I don't really seeing anyone doing that. so Off to Mars you go OP, anything goes up there with the robots!",
"Some countries' criminal codes have clear definitions of where they apply. For example, the Austrian criminal code defines that it applies:\n\n- if the crime is committed in Austria\n- if the crime is committed on an Austrian aircraft or watercraft (presumably this includes spacecraft)\n- for certain crimes such as treason, false testimony, producing counterfeit money etc. if Austrian interests are violated\n- for a handful of crimes (mostly sexual crimes – murder isn't among them, but rape is) if either the perpetrator or the victim is an Austrian citizen or has their usual residence in Austria\n- crimes committed by an Austrian citizen against an Austrian citizen if both have their usual residence in Austria\n- a few other crimes such as air piracy, membership in a terrorist organization, financing a terrorist organization, under certain circumstances such as if the perpetrator is an Austrian citizen\n\nI would imagine that most other countries have similar clauses in their criminal codes. So check the laws of the country the spacecraft belongs to, whose citizen or resident you are, and whose citizen or resident each of your victims is. It will vary accordingly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
16ozw8 | why does more people clapping make more noise? | If each person is giving out around the same volume from their claps, why does it make more overall noise? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16ozw8/eli5_why_does_more_people_clapping_make_more_noise/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7xzpoz",
"c7y5z83"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Instead of clapping, imagine everyone's pushing on a stuck car. The more people that push, the more force on the car. Clapping is the same, except you're pushing on the air.",
"When you clap, you send out sound waves. When two sound waves meet each other, they 'interfere'. Imagine waves on water when you drop a stone into it. Peaks and troughs are formed. When a peak meets a peak, the amplitude (volume) of the wave doubles, and when a peak meets a trough, they cancel out, and the amplitude is 0. [Here is a useful picture](_URL_0_). Clapping causes this to happen many times, and it is this interference that means the overall sound is louder."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Interference_of_two_waves.svg"
]
] |
|
3atpcf | how can a digital clock be unplugged for years and still remember how long a minute is when it is plugged back in, yet forgets the time if the power flickers off? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3atpcf/eli5_how_can_a_digital_clock_be_unplugged_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"csfu1cj",
"csfu35r"
],
"score": [
3,
11
],
"text": [
"They use a tiny piece of quartz like a tuning fork. By vibrating it constantly with tiny electrical pulses, they keep it humming along at its resonant frequency. The clock counts the vibrations, and every x oscillations it increments the clock by one second or minute. Quartz is extremely stable in its vibration, though susceptible to extreme shock. They use quartz resonance in watches as well. \n\nThe clocks don't have an ability to retain the time without power because they need it to maintain the oscillations and, importantly, to count them. That takes power, but many clocks can use backup batteries so that they don't need to be reset when power is restored.",
"Digital clocks work off of a quartz crystal.\n\nQuartz resonates when electricity is pushed through it, at a very specific frequency. The clock has a computer chip that knows how many times per second it resonates. It counts each oscillation, and when that specific number is hit, it knows a second has passed. From there, it's just a matter of counting to a minute or hour.\n\nThis is why it will never forget how long a second/minute/hour is, it will always know that X number of oscillations=1 second.\n\nWhen it's unplugged, it loses the setting of \"which minute it's on\". You re-set the time to let it know where it should be, and it continues counting from that point."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
18b57p | why does digital data memory take so long to grow in size? | I don't really know how to ask the question, but here's what I'm trying to say:
The first SD cards were/are the same size as SD cards today, but they only held 2gb or less of data. Now you can get SD cards with 128gb of storage. Why does this happen like this?
If it's possible to cram 128gb worth of space into the same card that used to only be able to hold 2gb, then why couldn't they just do the 128gb on the first try? Along the same lines, since memory seems to be ever-expanding, is there a true limit to how much space you can put on an SD card? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18b57p/eli5_why_does_digital_data_memory_take_so_long_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8d7y4a",
"c8d7z7n",
"c8d98wh"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
3
],
"text": [
" > If it's possible to cram 128gb worth of space into the same card that used to only be able to hold 2gb, then why couldn't they just do the 128gb on the first try?\n\nThey learned how to make smaller circuits that use less power, so you can fit more of them in to the same space.",
" > If it's possible to cram 128gb worth of space into the same card that used to only be able to hold 2gb, then why couldn't they just do the 128gb on the first try?\n\nBecause it takes advances in technology and a lot of research to find out how to cram that much stuff in such a small space.\n\nThink of it like your closet. Sure you could throw things in there and fit a few things. But if you organized it, and bought proper shelving and took the time to do it right you could probably fit twice as much in there and have it even more accessible. The same idea applies here.\n\n > is there a true limit to how much space you can put on an SD card?\n\nIt's frequently said that there is an absolute memory limit once we start running up against individual bits being the size of a single atom. There aren't a lot of ways around that limitation but people who work on this are pretty creative so at the very least it won't be soon.",
"Moore's Law: About every 18 months, we can implement the same functions in a silicon integrated circuit \"chip\" as before but in 1/2 the silicon area. Since the circuit area is approximately related to the minimum feature size in both the X and Y directions, and Area = X times Y, this is similar to saying that every 18 months the feature sizes are reduced by a factor of 0.7x. (0.7 x 0.7 = 0.49 .) In other words, a 30% improvement nets a 50% reduction in size. \n \nHow is this 30% improvement every 18 months accomplished? By lots of research, experimentation and hard work by a lot of people in a lot of disciplines. Materials science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, chemistry, optics, etc. all have a role to play to overcome the obstacles that arise from trying to cram more and more transistors into smaller and smaller areas. If it was just a matter of making the transistors smaller without changing anything else, it would proceed a lot faster. But every time you make the transistors smaller, it creates a bunch of new problems that were never solved before, or weren't solved to the degree that is now necessary. \n \nHere's just one example out of hundreds: When you \"shrink\" the transistors on an integrated circuit, you also have to shrink everything else, including the \"wires\" that connect them and the insulators that separate them. But when you shrink a wire but not the amount of electrical current it has to carry, then the current density goes up. And if the current density gets too high, the metal line will wear out too soon (a process called \"electromigration\") and the devices will fail before they've achieved their normal useful field lifetime. Not just some of them; virtually ALL of them will. So at one point in the progression of Moore's Law, scientists and engineers had to make a major improvement - they had to find a material that could replace the one that they had been using (aluminium) with one that could survive higher current densitites, but also met a bunch of other requirements (melting temperature, cost, coefficient of expansion, etc.) . They found that they could use copper, but that using copper introduced a bunch of new problems. So they worked on finding solutions to those, some of which created problems of their own. Using Cu ultimately required that the chip fabriction process had to get a lot more complicated, but it met the requirements. \n \nAll of this kind of improvement has to happen at every process \"node\" or \"generation\", and usually a lot of experiments have to be run to find what will work and what won't. Fortunately, over the history of semiconductors a huge amount has been learned, and so we just continue to build upon that knowledge. And because the industry creates more and more powerful computers, it can USE more and more powerful computations to help in this work. \n \n\nWhy doesn't this work go even faster than it already does? Because doing all of that work takes time and money, and the industry already invests as much money in R & D as makes good business sense. With more resources it could go faster, but companies have to balance how much money they spend on R & D versus all the other things they have to spend money on. If they strike the wrong balance, they get beaten by the competition and go out of business. It's like playing SimCity....you can't put all of your money into building new sports stadiums. \n \nBut a company that has a LOT of resources can apply the same percentage to R & D and get a LOT more done. And in some cases, that happens. Intel is at least one process generation ahead of everyone else right now. \n \nAlso, some of the experiments that need to be run simply take time to do. You could do more if you ran more experiments in parallel, but that would obviously increase the resource requirement considerably. And some things need to be iterated, to take advantage of learning from your past experiments. After all, there's no point to experimentation if it doesn't have the chance to influence your future behavior. \n \n**TL;DR** - It takes work, and time, and money."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
20aqid | what are "debt consolidators" actually doing, and are they really saving you any money in making payments? | Always wondered, never researched the process behind it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20aqid/eli5_what_are_debt_consolidators_actually_doing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg1epxp",
"cg1fynq"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Only if what they are offering has a lower interest rate than what you are paying across the board. If you consolidate 4 retail cards at 24.99% APR into a fixed 5 year at say 7.99% then yes they can save you much money over the long run. I wouldn't pay for any type of service. Most banks offer a consolidation loan of sorts and they wont charge you, (other than interest)",
"Also, find one that is non-profit. They charge you like 20 bucks a month. but, they take all of your debt, find ways to stop your compounding interest, and work deals with the asshole collection companies. You work with only the consolidator. Seriously. Non profit"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
61zznm | why is it so hard to draw with a mouse? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61zznm/eli5_why_is_it_so_hard_to_draw_with_a_mouse/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfil4qg",
"dfil896",
"dfin8ta"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The mouse when it's stopped has some inertia that we need to push to make it move. The problem is that when that inertia is over we don't realize and end up making undesired moves.\n\nThere are mousepads that allow for less inertia, making the movements more accurate.\n\nPens and pencils have considerably less inertia than a mouse: Just compare the surface that touches the ground. A tiny dot in a pencil vs a large surface area like mice have.",
"It is hard to draw with a pen or a paintbrush too. You just spend a lot of time as a kid learning how to draw with a pen or a crayon or whatever. If you spent an equivalent amount of time learning with a mouse you could probably get close to the average person's drawing ability.\n\nBut once you get into more precise drawing the advantage of your dexterous fingers give a distinct advantage. Your arm and wrist just don't have the same precision and range of movement.",
"Fine motor control using pencil/pen/stylus with fingers while palm is resting on the table vs. drawing with your arm and wrist; fingers immobilized on the mouse."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cuvj9r | how do non-profit companies work? if you start one, how do you feed and house yourself? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cuvj9r/eli5how_do_nonprofit_companies_work_if_you_start/ | {
"a_id": [
"exzdda8",
"exzdge4",
"exzg4w4"
],
"score": [
13,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Non-profit companies still pay staff and provide benefits. They also have to pay rent on facilities, buy products and equipment etc.\n\nMuch of their income comes from grants or fund-raising as opposed to selling services.\n\nThe definition of a non-profit is that the company share holders don't get profits from the organizations success. Any excess funds in the budget must be saved or spent on furthering the cause.\n\nBeing registered as a non-profit with the Government gives the company benefits such as being tax-exempt from certain taxes. They also qualify for a variety of Government and non-Government programs which help with funding or provide discounts on products.\n\nJust because a company is listed as a non-profit doesn't mean that they don't waste exorbitant amounts of money or spent it on frivolous things.\n\nCEO's and executives of big non-profits often draw exorbitant salaries, retirement and benefits packages just like major companies.",
"Non-profit doesn't mean people work for free. There is still overhead which is personnel and resources. It just means they aren't selling some good or service to make extra money.",
"I've worked for many non-profits and am currently working for a start up. Our founder does a lot of fundraising and grant seeking to fund our program. While I and our other staff get paid o don't think our founder has yet to pay himself. He probably will someday, but like many people that start non-profits he was already financially stable enough to put his time into our company without needing to pay himself with it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3jaxc0 | how does a cabled tow launcher work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jaxc0/eli5_how_does_a_cabled_tow_launcher_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cunquty"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Basically TOW stands for Tube launched Optically Wire guided. There is the launcher unit which has a powerful optical magnifying unit built into it. When the gunner has a good line of sight on the target the missile is fired. The missile trails out 2 wires which allow steering information to be relayed to the steering fins. That data comes from the launcher. As the middle travels the gunner must keep the sight on the target. Then boom..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1wd3pl | what exactly is the optometrist doing when asking if the image is clearer first or second? | Is it as simple as progressively going up in stronger lens types or is there more to it than that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1wd3pl/eli5_what_exactly_is_the_optometrist_doing_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf0uiv5",
"cf0uvmj"
],
"score": [
7,
4
],
"text": [
"They're using trial and error to get to the optimum lens. Say your sight is -6.5, as mine is. They'd give me one that's -4 and one that's -6, and I'd say -6 was better. Then they'd give me -6 and -7 and I'd say they're bout about the same. And so on in that fashion until a good approximation has been made.",
"As stated it is done from an initial approximation, and then various strengths used above and below the expected result to dial in on the optimum prescription.\nWhen you have the rounder/darker question is when they are then rotating the cylindrical power to correct any astigmatism, this again is done in large steps originally and then dialled down to the optimum axis(angle) for your prescription. Once this is done the optometrist will once again then check with another lens to ensure this is the correct prescription and not just your eyes accommodating which can happen especially in younger patients.\n\nSource worked for an opticians as a Regional manager/ Trained Dispensing opticians."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
d61ntt | what exactly is horniness? | On one hand, I've always understood it as this intense desire to want to reach orgasm then and there. On the other hand, I've also heard that's it's just a desire to want to get out there and date other people. So, which is it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d61ntt/eli5_what_exactly_is_horniness/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0paj57",
"f0pconz"
],
"score": [
14,
10
],
"text": [
"More the first one; I've always heard the word used in reference to explicitly sexual desires, not more social desires.",
"If I was explaining this to a 5 year old I'd probably say something like wanting to date\n\nIn ELIAPCWNTKTBEICAINIIST (Explain like I'm a pubescent child who needs to know this but everything is confusing and I need it in simple terms) I'd say it's the sexual desire of a person, eg. A horny person wants sex like how a hungry person wants food."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3811xq | does flooding in a place like texas mean their drought isn't a problem anymore? | Texas, like California, has been pretty dry lately. I know the flooding is terrible, it's killed two dozen people last I checked, but will it refill reservoirs and cure Texas's drought? Or is that just not how it works? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3811xq/eli5_does_flooding_in_a_place_like_texas_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"crrf08w",
"crrg60l"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"It is, but the flooding is in a rather limited area, and most of the bit that's been getting media attention has been urban areas- Texas is a big state, and it's the agricultural areas to the north that really need it",
"I'm from country Victoria in Australia, the best I can describe drought is when the annual rainfall is below average, meaning that it is not at the recorded previous average levels, just because their is one big dump of rain does not mean that the annual rainfall average is being met.\n\nAnother good thing to consider is when the land is dry, it struggles to absorb the moisture as successfully as fertile land. Because farms etc, are dry, the water can overflow to unwanted areas and not be absorbed where a farmer would want the water. This also means water will evaporate more rather than being absorbed, making the rainfall less effective than it may seem."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
361a3n | why are the clean versions of albums more expensive than the explicit version? (more info inside) | For example, [this version (explicit)](_URL_1_) is priced lesser than the [clean](_URL_0_) although all the tracks are the same | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/361a3n/eli5_why_are_the_clean_versions_of_albums_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr9skrw",
"cr9t6gn"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably because there isn't as much demand for the clean one. And there is more labor involved in the clean version. They had to rerecord some tracks, or edit out the words.",
"Clean version will have extra processing as they have to edit out swear words (bleep, silence or replace with non-offensive variant), sometimes even re-recording whole songs."
]
} | [] | [
"https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/curtis/id269576594",
"https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/curtis/id269577160"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6je5va | certain foodstuffs are considered rich in specific elements, such as bananas containing chromium and potassium - but where do they get those from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6je5va/eli5_certain_foodstuffs_are_considered_rich_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"djdjyid"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"For the most part, they get the nutrients from the soil. Different plants, obviously, have different biochemical profiles, including the proteins that are present in there systems. Considering that proteins are basically the machinery that living beings have in order to exist, i.e. enzymes, structural proteins, and so forth, some systems also require different elements for their growth and function.\n\nThe capacity to digest and incorporate stuff into said anatomy also differs. In humans for example, some people can't handle gluten or lactose while others can. There is also the case of where in the soil, said roots reside. If a plant's root system generally resides in the shallow part of the soil, it won't necessarily have access to nutrients that are further down.\n\nThis is also ignoring the fact that there are things called [mycorrhizae](_URL_0_), which are fungi that form symbiotic relationships with plants. They are able to make nutrients available to plants that they normally wouldn't be able to process or rather would have to expend more resources to take in than the fungi do. The plants, give the fungi stuff like various saccharides that the plant is able to produce freely with a little sunlight. Generally, there are specific mycorrhizae for each species. So, at some level, it could also have to do with the environment and co-evolution of the two species.\n\nRegardless, those micronutrients are generally extracted from the soil."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycorrhiza"
]
] |
||
2osaed | what is stopping someone with insurmountable debt from immigrating to another country and starting over? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2osaed/eli5_what_is_stopping_someone_with_insurmountable/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmq0ow6",
"cmq0wf8",
"cmq12z7"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Mainly the impossibility of being accepted into another country with insurmountable debt.",
"Immigrating is hard. It takes a lot of time, money, and work to go move somewhere and live there.\n\nAll civilized countries honor the judgments of other countries. The country you move to would accept that you owe the debt, and the creditor could use their court system to enforce it. The only way to avoid this would be to move to a place where living there is way worse than a few annoying phone calls.\n\nStarting over means having nothing. Being in debt doesn't mean you have nothing. It just means you have debt in addition to all of your stuff. You would lose stuff by starting over.\n\nDebt isn't some awful thing. You should always avoid it, and it's bad, but having it doesn't actually hurt you in any way. You can't go to jail for it or anything. It just means you'll get a bunch of harassment through the phone and maybe a garnishment. Whoopdidoo.\n\nDebt is easy to fix. If you have insurmountable debt, we offer a wonderful, easy, and powerful bankruptcy system. You can wipe out any debt that's not taxes/education expenses/domestic support and still keep all of your stuff. That's way easier than losing all of your stuff and moving somewhere else.",
"Credit companies are transnational? Reminds me of The Town when Ben Afflecks character thinks moving to Florida will get him off the hook for bank robbery charges."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4r91mb | what the heck is an actuary and what do they actually do? | I've read all over the internet and it all just says "using maths and statistics to predict risk of uncertain events" which doesn't really make my any wiser. I need someone to ELI5. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4r91mb/eli5_what_the_heck_is_an_actuary_and_what_do_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4z7rjt",
"d4z84tm"
],
"score": [
3,
12
],
"text": [
"Actuaries are the people that help insurance companies set rates, by using statistical analysis to figure likelihood of an incident and likely payout. For example, in the case of car insurance, they would look at age, sex, driving records, address of drivers and type of vehicle to determine likelihood of an accident or theft claim. They'd also look at vehicle repair bills for particular models. Those would all be factored into settings a rate based on the combinations.",
"Actuary here. There are several different subfields of actuarial science which is why explanations of what we do might seem vague (it's kind of like explaining what an engineer does when there are so many different types of engineers). I'll explain what I do specifically, which hopefully give you an idea.\n\nActuaries create formulas to determine how much to charge for insurance. For example, when you go online and send all your personal information to an insurer to buy auto insurance, the formula that takes all your information and converts it to the price you pay for insurance (the premium), is created by actuaries.\n\nActuaries estimate liabilities (that is, how much the business owes to other parties). In the insurance world, these are called reserves, and due to the nature of the product, what you owe to other parties is subject to change over time. Therefore, this value must be estimated.\n\nYou don't want to get any of this wrong, determining the wrong price for a product or misestimating/misstating a liability can cause your company to go bankrupt, or to get into messy legal trouble. This is why actuaries exist. We use statistics to estimate what needs to be charged and how much we owe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
9pp41s | why aren't more buildings built into cliffs or subterranean holes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9pp41s/eli5_why_arent_more_buildings_built_into_cliffs/ | {
"a_id": [
"e83bdfr",
"e83bnv9",
"e83by7s",
"e83c2rn"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a couple of problems building into the ground or cliffs. One of the main factors is that earth/stone is heavy and difficult to remove. Building such a structure would require all the same parts and steps as above the ground, but first you would need to remove the material in that area which is a big project in itself. You also need to keep the hole in which the structure is built clear which means reinforcing from collapse and keeping water out of it such as with pumps. With a cliff perhaps it filling with water is less of an issue but rocks falling on it from above or the entire cliff face breaking off and falling away is a problem.\n\nNow supposing you have such a structure built there are further detriments. One of course is emergency exits in the event of a fire; if you are underground it greatly limits the possible routes of escape or rescue. Ventilation in general can be a challenge as lack of fresh air or even toxic atmospheres from spills (ammonia from refrigerators, etc) can lead to injury or death. We haven't even touched on the aesthetic penalty of storing people in a windowless box; people resent being sent away to the basement and covet corner offices with windows on two walls, how do you think they will feel having an entire building underground? Add therapy to the costs associated with such a building plan.\n\nWhen all of these factors are against such an idea it is a good sign that other solutions are superior.",
"The answer is not as difficult as if might seem. \n\nWhy remove the rock and then put the house in when you could just place the house on the ground? Why would you move several tons of rock, then build your skyscraper, rather than just building your skyscraper?\n\nPlaces with lots of cliffs are not really conductive to roads. Why make a road on a cliff when you can just make a road? \n\nIn general, how does going into a cliff reduce the growth of cities? Who would want to live in a cliff, rather than, say, a house or an apartment in the city. People who want to live away from the city and use a car to get to work will live in a house, people who want to live in the city will live in an apartment in the city, and moving an entire city to a large cliffside is not as feasible as it might seem. \n\nGoing deep underground is even harder. Aquifers, fault lines, cave-ins, and just the soil being unsuitable to the task are all major concerns, as well as the massive cost of the whole project. Then you have to make it livable for humans, as well as maneuvering the infrastructure to do so, and you have to supply air now. ",
"Building down costs way more than building above ground.\n\nIt can get up to 2 to 3 times as much depending on the structure and depth.\n\nI am talking about big constrctions, not basements for houses.\n\nBesides building costs there are upsides, and downsides. Upside is stable temp, downside is ground and water pressure, no (easy) natural light or ventilation.\n\nWhen space is tight and going underground is required, do it. If not, avoid it.",
"For existing cities, there is a lot of infrastructure under buildings. Sewer, power, and in some cases subways. You can't just dig through those. Plus once a building is already built, to extend down would require digging through the foundation of the building, which would compromise the stability of the building.\n\nAs for why cities weren't built into cliff faces from the beginning, there are a lot of reasons why that would be a bad idea. To start cities are rarely build with a lot of fore thought, usually people build a few homes, later some stores, and eventually it turns into a city. But for someone to start with building there home into a cliff would be a lot of work work. Digging into the cliff side to build a home is much more difficult than cutting trees and building a house. Also living in a cave would get very cold. From a modern viewpoint running power and data lines behind the walls would be nearly impossible if you build a house inside a cliff wall. Lastly people build homes near easily accessible sources of water, rivers and lakes. While there are a number of rivers that run through canyons that have cliffs you could build into, those locations aren't very convenient. Imagine living at the bottom of the Grand Canyon and having to travel all the way up the cliff to leave town, and all the way back down to get home."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8dunkh | how do people determine if x poison/venom is 10 million times more harmful than y poison/venom? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8dunkh/eli5_how_do_people_determine_if_x_poisonvenom_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxq571r",
"dxq5wrf",
"dxq69cw"
],
"score": [
25,
87,
4
],
"text": [
"It’s not really something you will feel better for knowing, but To test a toxin they dilute it down until they get to the point where it only kills half of the bunniesor mice or whatever the test subject animal is, and work it out from there.\n\nThere are huge ethical considerations and animal testing is only approved after any other options are exhausted, they are working on alternatives, like developing living cells they can put on microchips to run tests on, but certain results can only be achieved by testing on animals.",
"/u/Bigted1800 is indeed correct, but that's not really a complete definition. For toxicity, there's so many factors that come into play that it's really hard/unbelievably unethical to test for, so we use something called the LD50. That's the Lethal Dose 50% number, i.e. *this* amount will kill half of people exposed to it.\n\nWhy we use this number isn't immediately clear, so I'll provide an example. A BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) is considered \"fatal\" once it hits over .375. Well, that's all fine and good but people have survived .6 and people have died from .15, because due to genetics, habitual issues and blood chemistry, some people \"hold\" their liquor better than others. Take someone from SE Asia with characteristic \"Asian Flush\", alcohol allergy and it's going to take a lot less to kill them than a hard drinking slav.\n\nThe LD50 accounts for this over a population and gives us and idea of when \"acute toxicity\" (when harm is done) kicks in. The long and the short is the LD50, even for the 50 that don't die, it's still not a good idea to reach this point and gives us a number to use.\n\nSo when someones says, \"Oh, fentinol is X times as toxic/deadly as heroin\" it's based on a comparison of their LD50. Say 5mg is the LD50 of heroin (please don't use this as gospel truth, this is an example) and the LD50 of fentinol is .5 mg, you can say that feninol is 10x as toxic since it takes 10x less to reach the LD50.\n\nThis extrapolates out to all sorts of venoms, over the counter meds, ingested poisons, the works, they all got LD50s as it's really our best guess.",
"Earlier posts re LD50 have given you the answers. Of interest botulinum toxin “the most powerful toxin know to man” is measured in units. A single unit is the LD50 for mice. Cosmetic doses of Botox are usually a few units here, a few units there. Doses of Botox for muscular disorders can be up to 100 units in a single administration (80-100 units are used in the anal sphincter muscles for recalcitrant anal fissure)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
46xavl | why didn't the major european powers just annex germany after wwii? | If they were an aggressor nation in two major wars why didn't another country just annex them to stop the threat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46xavl/eli5_why_didnt_the_major_european_powers_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"d08hpof",
"d08i0se",
"d08ibd3",
"d08ircw"
],
"score": [
16,
3,
7,
4
],
"text": [
"The Soviet Union did annex half of Germany. The US/UK/France administered the other half for several years before turning it over to a new German government.",
"Prior to the German surrender, the Allies had already agreed (reluctantly) about how Germany should be divided up between them at the Potsdam conference. Russia got the occupation zone in the East and the British, Americans and French shared the West. Berlin was also split between the Allies though Stalin wasn't particularly happy about it.\n\nYou ask about stopping the Germans from being a threat but in fact, the Americans fought (figuratively) hard to help Germany get back on its feet. They lent a lot of money to Germany and other countries so they could rebuild after the war. Another rise from Germany wasn't the problem anymore, it was the massive Communist country a few hundred miles east.\n\nEDIT: I was talking about the USA sending money to Germany, I would like to point out this only went to West Germany and the US originally aimed to destroy what was left of Germany's industry, not to redevelop it.",
"France , Poland, Russia and Yugoslavia all got portions of Germany. Unlike WW 1, this time the cultural German were expelled into what is considered Germany today and new inhabitants took over the farms and factories. Add'ly German citizens were taken as slave labor by England, France and Russia. England and France released these slaves within 10 years but Russia never did account for the million German citizens that disappeared into Russian territory. \n_URL_0_",
"Because Germany is full of Germans. \n\n(Yes, the allies and the soviets really did take over for a long time) But the reason that West Germany isn't just another part of France now is because France didn't want it. They would have been **occupying** German lands and the Germans would have resented it. The Marshal plan, where we poor a lot of money into rebuilding all of Europe, including Germany, is a much better idea. Rather than try and punish them by levying taxes, or treating them all like conquered second class citizens, they were welcomed into the fold and told to not try that again. And to this day Germany is still touchy about their NAZI past and you can't fly the NAZI flag. \n\nThe same reason that while the USA invaded, conquered, and occupied Iraq... we REALLY don't actually want it. We just get shot a lot. It sucked."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_labor_of_Germans_after_World_War_II"
],
[]
] |
|
a078nj | which weapon was responsible for the most number of casualties in the wwii? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a078nj/eli5_which_weapon_was_responsible_for_the_most/ | {
"a_id": [
"eaf50xk",
"eaf52nx",
"eaf5346",
"eaf547w",
"eaf5ff2",
"eaf752h"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
4,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The atom bomb, named “Fat Man” & “Little Boy”.\nThe detonation of these bombs made USA the first and the only country to use atomic bombs against another country. Over 66,000 people were killed as the direct result of the blast in Hiroshima with over 69,000 casualties. Among the dead, 20,000 were from the Imperial Japanese Army. The total number of deaths reached over 192,000 including the after effects of the radiation and the aftermath. Over 70,000 people were killed instantly in Nagasaki. Five days after the second detonation, Japan surrendered ending the deadliest war in history.",
"If you had to choose one specific thing, probably Zyklon B. They estimate around 1 million people were killed with the stuff.",
"If chemicals don’t count I’d say shrapnel’s. Medicine wasn’t as good as now and the battlefields where dirty and often wet. There is a sub, askhistorians or similar. I think you question gets there better answers than here. ",
"Among combatants it would be artillery. That is for a type of weapon. US report have 65 percent of all casualties in Europe and 47% in the Pacific was because of artillery and mortar fire\n\n \nWhat single model of weapon might be hard or even impossible to answer.\n\nFor a single weapon it is Little Boy the nuclear bomb dropped over Hiroshima. You have ~20 000 solders and 70 000-80 000 civilian that died immediately and a lot more was injured\n",
"I thought the Machine Gun but apparently it's Artillery. I grabbed this from quora.\n\nArtillery.\n\nReference:Office of Medical History\n\nQuote:\n\nA report on the causative agents of battle casualties in World War II showed the comparative incidence of casualties from different types of weapons for several theaters. Compilers of the report believed that, while the more detailed subdivisions within their three major classes were open to question, their findings on the percent of total casualties due to small arms, artillery and mortars, and \"miscellaneous\" were reasonably accurate.\n\nFrom these they drew the following conclusions:\n\n1. Small arms fire accounted for between 14 and 31 percent of the total casualties, depending upon the theater of action:\n\nThe Mediterranean theater, 14.0 percent\n\nThe European theater, 23.4 percent\n\nThe Pacific theaters, 30.7 percent.\n\n2. Artillery and mortar fire together accounted for 65 percent of the total casualties in the European and Mediterranean theaters, 64.0 and 69.1, respectively. In the Pacific, they accounted for 47.0 percent.\n",
"In aggregate? Probably disease."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4z8p6w | why do squirrels stop seconds after running and continue running and repeat that same process over and over again? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4z8p6w/eli5_why_do_squirrels_stop_seconds_after_running/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ttdtc",
"d6u3wiz",
"d6ulqzp"
],
"score": [
250,
28,
4
],
"text": [
"It's a behavioral thing that allows them to evade one of the senses available to predators. They move in quick bursts and stop so that they can observe the world around them. In nature this means they are looking for all forms of threats as well as possible food sources. The reason for the quick bursts and stopping is because if they move quickly, they get a certain distance that would juuuuust trigger a predator's \"is there something\" visual response and then bam stop so that the predator's eyes and brain can't get past that to the \"what is it\" identification path. This is a purely visual evasion, but it can also sort of evade auditory detection in being that their movements can be considered arrhythmic. Things like owls aren't really confused by that stuff as they are also keenly adapted to spot even that change. \n\nIt not only serves as a visual evasion technique, but it also allows them to travel distances pretty efficiently while being on the lookout for both food and predators.",
"Just to add. Watch a Chameleon or a stick bug when they move. \n\n[Here's one vid](_URL_0_)\n\nPerhaps they don't zoom:stop:zoom:stop, like a squirrel but rather are:\n\nSway *forward* two steps\n\nSway *backward* one step\n\nSway *forward* two steps\n\nSway *backward* one step\n\nIt allows these animals to move in an irregular way that mimics the wind blowing leaves and branches. They also don't need to move quickly like a squirrel, as these two examples are more \"ambush\" predators.\n",
"Sometimes they will stop and turn to one side randomly to listen for predators. We call it, \"Crazy Ivan.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov2Yz_sZ2DI"
],
[]
] |
||
4xkpbw | computers' difference in performance between multiplication and division | As I see it, some "lighter" languages such as C eat both multiplication and division for breakfast with ease. However, when taking a look at Java I've been adviced to pre-compute divisions (and store in memory) for performance's sake. Why is that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xkpbw/eli5_computers_difference_in_performance_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6g8vvl",
"d6gcowk",
"d6gicsp"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Division is always more expensive because the hardware in the CPU requires multiple clock cycles to process the instruction, whereas most CPUs can do multiplication in a single cycle (although some don't, but it's still a lot faster than division). \n\nIt's also no different in C than in Java. If you can avoid a division, you should. Although most compilers are smart enough to catch the cases where you would be able to precompute, but I'm not sure if java works the same way because it's an interpreted language. ",
"[There is a small hand optimization](_URL_0_) that programmers have to do because the compiler will not.\n\n x = y / 2.5;\n\ninto \n\n x = y * (1 / 2.5); \n\nThe first form requires a division instruction that is about 3-5 times slower. The second one does not because the reciprocal can be computed at compile time and embedded into the instructions. Since the second form is ever so slightly less precise, most compilers (Java, C, etc.) will not make this optimization for you. \n\nLookup tables (using an array to store the values of a mathematical function) are useful for complex mathematical functions or functions that have been sampled from a physical source (simulations, music, graphics), but they're going to be a lot slower than simple division. 20-30 years ago tables were the way to go, but not now. ",
"The best algorithms we have for multiplying numbers are faster than those we have for dividing numbers. Informally, you might compare the time it takes to multiply two large numbers in the standard way and the time it takes to perform long division.\n\nFor this reason, *if you need to make calculations run faster*, then caching computed values that are re-used may speed up the program, and caching divisions may provide more of a speed-up than caching multiplications.\n\n**But remember Knuth's Law:**\n\n > The real problem is that programmers have spent far too much time worrying about efficiency in the wrong places and at the wrong times; premature optimization is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming.\n\n— Donald Knuth, 1974 Turing Award Lecture, *Communications of the ACM* 17 (12), (December 1974), p. 671. Via [Wikiquote](_URL_0_).\n\nFirst, there is no need to worry about efficiency where there is no performance problem. Writing clear and concise code trumps execution speed unless there is a clearly identifiable need for faster execution. Therefore, you should cache intermediate results if and only if doing so will make your program clearer to the next guy to read it (even if that's future-you).\n\nSecond, even when there is a need to improve performance, jumping to this sort of micro-optimization is not the first step. You have to identify exactly what section of your code is holding things up. Most of the time, the bulk of execution time is in a very small part of the program.\n\nThird, even when you've identified a certain piece of code as your bottleneck, before trying to shave a few instructions here and there you have to take a long look at the overall strategy the code embodies. If you're using the wrong algorithm for the situation, for example, then fixing that will do more than any amount of micro-optimization, and may fix the problem entirely.\n\nFourth, when you've gotten to the point of looking at individual line of code to see what's taking so long, the answer is not likely to be arithmetic. Operations like reading from a file or even reading from main memory will dwarf almost any amount of arithmetic. If your code is sending a message over the network, then probably no amount of arithmetic optimization will speed it up substantially because almost all the time is spent doing IO and waiting for the network.\n\nFifth, caching re-used intermediate results is precisely the kind of optimization that your compiler is probably doing for you anyway. Modern optimizing compilers are very good at this kind of thing, so even if a particular calculation involving division is holding up your program, caching results manually may not help if your compiler was already doing that behind the scenes. In fact, it may even make your program slower, because your optimization could interfere with the compiler's. There's no way to know but to carefully test it — and the outcome may vary from computer to computer, or depending on any number of other factors.\n\nSixth, I don't see any reason why this should be any different in C versus Java. I don't know why someone would tell you to do this optimization in Java but not C. If anything, I'd think it would be the other way around, because a need for maximum performance is a common reason to use C to begin with, and Java is more likely to be held up by much bigger concerns like automatic memory management or JVM startup next to which your arithmetic is insignificant."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://highperformanceinjava.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/division-vs-multiplication.html"
],
[
"https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Donald_Knuth"
]
] |
|
69vbza | what exactly are roms and how do emulators run them without the necessary hardware that they typically use? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69vbza/eli5_what_exactly_are_roms_and_how_do_emulators/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh9o0ib"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"ROM means Read-Only Memory. Think of it as hardware version of an optical disk; you can read but not change it. It's about storing the information in a permanent way. It goes one step further because a system can run the ROM in place, leveraging the memory aspect, without having to load the software it contains into RAM first. This makes them both permanent and fast.\n\nFor gaming systems, which is where it seems you're going with the emulator question, these ROMs provide the basic operation of the system. These tend to only be found in older or cheaper game systems any more, given advances in flash, network, and other storage options for game systems. An emulator emulates the other hardware of the system, like the CPU, video, and sound chips. The ROM is used to provide the execution instructions for the game system or the games the system runs. You configure an emulator with a ROM image and that's what it will do when you \"turn it on.\"\n\nOften a ROM image is needed separately for licensing reasons. When the games and systems were originally built, the hardware and software were one combined unit, and weren't meant to be copied. Industrious people have found ways to read the ROMs and turn them into binary files for use with the emulator. Many, if not most, of these are illegal as somewhere someone is trying to protect the marketability of those ROM running machines.\n\nThe ROM may be for the basic operation of the system, such as a Nintendo loader, or for games themselves, like those on cartridges. Or both may be needed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
38mdz4 | what would happen if someone swallowed concrete mix? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38mdz4/eli5_what_would_happen_if_someone_swallowed/ | {
"a_id": [
"crw4s0o",
"crw61m1",
"crwei6w"
],
"score": [
16,
34,
2
],
"text": [
"They would BURN THE INSIDE OF THEIR STOMACH. The drying of cement is exothermic and releases lots of heat. If that didn't kill them, the abrasion of cement on mucus membranes would cause abscesses most likely and sepsis would follow. ",
"Is this a time sensitive question? ",
"Just for interest: You get/can make rat killing pellets that contain uncured plaster of paris. It absorbs the moisture in the rats stomach and makes it die.\n\nThis is to prevent Owls from eating poisoned rats and being poisoned themselves. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6mfvof | how do new forms of digital currencies come out and what does it mean for the future? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6mfvof/eli5_how_do_new_forms_of_digital_currencies_come/ | {
"a_id": [
"dk1p1m5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most (all?) digital currencies, like Bitcoin and all the variants thereof, are based on a technology called blockchain: _URL_0_\n\nA blockchain is a technology that keeps records, like you might in an accountant's spreadsheet, but it does this in a way that is permanent. Changing a previous entry requires also changing everything that happened after it. That's less than desirably for a lot of purposes, but works well for a currency.\n\nNew forms of cryptocurrencies usually are a case of picking different parameters and rules about how they use their version of a blockchain, rather than some truly new technology. It's kind of like the multiple standards problem that plagues physical hardware. Why did we need Firewire when USB existed? It's because Firewire made different trade-offs in it's design and worked better for some uses and worse for others."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain"
]
] |
||
46ctcl | why do modern graphing calculators have such a terrible resolution? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/46ctcl/eli5_why_do_modern_graphing_calculators_have_such/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0441x7",
"d0444b5",
"d04504c",
"d0469h0",
"d049gne",
"d04j71u"
],
"score": [
85,
7,
23,
5,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Some of the graphing calculator models have basically remained unchanged for decades. This has two benefits: \n\n1) it's all standardized so regardless of how old the calculator is, all the calculators of that model number will have the same features and functions and same sort of style/interface which makes it a lot easier to share calculators and teach groups of students how to use a graphing calculator.\n\n2) Each calculator model is intentionally limited in its functionality. Even though the capability exists to make very powerful graphing calculators with amazing high-resolution 3D graphics and powerful mathematical functions without a significant increase in price, schools want students to be purposefully limited to certain functions found on specific calculator models. The primary reason for this is that it makes sure everyone is on the same page and that no student has an unfair advantage or the ability to use the calculator to 'cheat' and perform advanced functions/calculations that the school wants students to learn how to do manually.\n\nEdit: by the way, there are other more advanced graphing calculators out there that have color displays and higher resolution displays, it's just that the most popular models (the ones that schools usually require students to use) contain only the basic functionality and low-resolution monochrome display that has been around for ages.",
"A combination of lack of demand, practicality and \"if it ain't broke, don't fix it.\"\n\nThe TI 83 came out in 1983, hence the name. It was so good at what it did, it became the standard. So much so it had the right amount of functionality but at the same time the right limitations to the point where you didn't need anything more for standardized tests, and everything more recent made it easier to cheat. That kept the demand relatively the same, while at the same time there was no pressure to really make anything new. They're built like tanks, I've had the same calculator for like 8 years and it serves me fine. \n\nNext consider the practicality. You don't use a graphing calculator to make graphs for publication. You use it to get the gist of what's going on. That's really about it. \n\nAs time goes on, parts get cheaper. But TI can charge the same amount because demand stays the same. So their profit margin stays the same. Everyone uses them, and there's no pressure to innovate, and the parts get cheaper over time. Why would the make a calculator with better resolution? They're not going to sell any more of them. It would just cut their profits. \n\nFor making things pretty for publication, there's a whole host of tools to use that have better resolution. They just aren't allowed in tests, and long ago beat out calculators for that market. It's something TI won't try and break into. ",
"Aside from the reasons already stated, a big reason is battery life. Fewer pixels to power and control is a good thing for a device that doesn't need to get its batteries replaced for months. This compares to a smartphone with a better screen and better processor but needs to be charged every night.",
"Because there is exactly zero incentive to equip them with more modern specs and regulations would make it impossible anyway. A parabolic graph looks the same regardless of the resolution.",
"Price and battery life.\n\nIf you want a really powerful calculator, there are several apps for phones/tablets. I use Droid48 (which is free), which emulates a HP48, imho the best calculator ever made.\n\nThat said, I would very much like to see some new thinking in calculators. Somewhere in between a calculator, grapher, spreadsheet and programming.",
"Because Texas Instruments has a monopoly on calculators in US classrooms. And monopolies lead to higher prices and less technical advances, along with other negative ramifications. \n\nSource: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/09/02/the-unstoppable-ti-84-plus-how-an-outdated-calculator-still-holds-a-monopoly-on-classrooms/"
]
] |
||
9rgzcw | what is finite element analysis? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9rgzcw/eli5_what_is_finite_element_analysis/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8guxeo"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It’s a methodology for solving complex systems. \n\nFor example, if you want to analyze the stress across an entire structure that is put under load, the part is broken down into tiny pieces (elements), and then the forces/stresses can be calculated for each element which in turn provides the stress across the entire structure. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
528k9u | can someone explain to me how compression braking works? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/528k9u/eli5_can_someone_explain_to_me_how_compression/ | {
"a_id": [
"d7i6gmz"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"I assume you mean a jake brake. \n\nFirst, start with an engine. Suck, squeeze, bang, blow. \n\n* draw air and fuel into the engine\n* squeeze (compress) it\n* light it on fire which drives the piston down forcefully \n* push the remains out the exhaust\n\nNow imagine an engine with the fuel removed. \n\n* draw intake air, without fuel, in.\n* compress it\n* de-compress it (instead of blowing it up)\n* push it out the exhaust. \n\nSo without fuel, you get some air, the piston goes up, then it gets pushed back down. This is essentially an air spring. The harder you squeeze the air, the harder it pushes back. However, just like a spring, you can't use this as a brake because all the energy you add to the air by compressing it comes right back when it pushes the piston back down. \n\nA jake brake is a device that opens the exhaust valve prematurely, releasing the compressed air before the piston starts going back down again. Now you've converted the engine into an air compressor, which requires energy to operate (unlike the spring, whose net energy consumption is 0). The energy comes from the kinetic energy of the truck, and therefore the truck slows down.\n\nJake brakes work better on diesel engines because they don't have a throttle. Gas engines have a throttle which is closed and won't allow air to enter the engine. Newer electronic throttles and engine computers could allow a jake brake, but it would be a bit pointless."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9bk48f | how do computers display graphics? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9bk48f/eli5how_do_computers_display_graphics/ | {
"a_id": [
"e53lf5i",
"e53n2z3"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine 9 people sitting in a 3x3 square. They each have a black or white sign that they can hold up depending on what I tell them to do. I would be the graphics card in this example and they would be individual pixels. In a grid like this\n\n1-2-3\n\n4-5-6\n\n7-8-9\n\nSo I tell certain people to hold up black and and certain one to hold up white and we can create a very basic picture this way. Is I told 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 to hold up black and 2,4,6,8 to hold up white, they would form what looks like an X.\n\nThen a minute passes by and I tell 1,2,3,5 and 8 to hold up black and 4,6,7,and 9 to hold up white and we have now made a letter T.\n\nA graphics card does the same thing, but it tells a lot more \"people\" what to do. It doesn't just tell them to hold up black or white, it can choose from a massive selection of colors to create images. And it does this X number of times per second.\n\nAny questions?",
"An LCD panel is rows of colored windows, which have a window shade turned on and off by those bits of electricity. The red green and blue windows are opened slightly shaded for less bright, all the way for full bright. The red green blue colors are additive, which means they combine to make other colors. All three at the same brightness make white, red and green at the same brightness make yellow, etc. Look up rgb additive color wheel on Google for more of that.\nThe old crt displays are easier to demonstrate than eli5. Look up a demo on YouTube.\nThe image in the computer memory is also stored in \"rows\", commonly as 8 bits of red, 8 of blue, 8 of green. The 8 bits represent 256 levels of brightness for each colors. The bits are mapped to the graphics card pretty much one-to-one in sequence where they are sent in ordered sequence to the monitor. There is a place in computer memory which in the most basic form, has rows and columns for the red green and blue spots on the screen. The brightness in a spot is turned on in proportion to the amount of the red green blue numbers.\n\nAdditive color is for glowing lights, or emission. Subtractive color is for reflected light. Just an extra FYI."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
21rt29 | why do we susidize big banks? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21rt29/eli5_why_do_we_susidize_big_banks/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgfw11k"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"They provide services that the public requires and their failure might mean bad things for society as a whole.\n\nThat's the argument at least. Not sure if I agree with it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3opexg | why is it that though exercise burns very little calories in proportion to what we eat, it still helps significantly in weight loss? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3opexg/eli5_why_is_it_that_though_exercise_burns_very/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvz9a5k",
"cvz9e64",
"cvz9f3v",
"cvzhz0t"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Exercise keeps your metabolism high which burns calories even when you're not actively exercising. It also helps build muscle mass which burns calories just by existing.",
"There are a few factors at play.\n\nFirst, you're going to burn a substantial amount of calories simply by being alive and maintaining your current weight. This number is known as your Basal Metabolic Rate, or BMR. (The \"at rest\" state defined by BMR makes it a little more complicated than that, but for our purposes, it'll do.)\n\nSecond is the actual calories expended by the exercise itself. This will be the figure people think of when they say \"just did my cardio, and burned 300 calories!\" \n\nWe're just going to focus on these factors here, most specifically, the BMR.\n\nSo, your BMR is determined by, among other things, your body fat and muscle mass. A morbidly obese person may have a very high BMR to maintain their excess weight, while a person who only needs to shed a few pounds will have a much lower BMR. This is why someone who needs to lose a large amount of weight often sees better results from dieting alone than a person who just needs to drop those last few pounds.\n\nWhen we talk about exercise, we're also talking about building some degree of muscle, be it weightlifting, or just cycling. The addition of this muscle serves to raise or maintain the BMR while still losing fat. \n\nThis way, you continue to expend a larger number of calories at rest, thanks to the muscle gain of the exercise that also gave you a single calorie burn when you did it. This is the lasting weight loss effect of a regular exercise regimen.",
"This goes back to the adage 'Eat less and move more'. \n\nIf you read a lot of 'Get in shape' articles, a large amount of them will mention the 'Weight loss starts in the kitchen' - Which is true. You can do little exercise, but eat well and you will lose weight. \n\nIf you base it all on Calories (Or kilocalories - seems to be a hotbutton on Reddit at the moment) and we say that a regular adult male needs 2500 Calories to live a normal day, with regular activity.\n\nSo he wants to lose weight - we need to put in a calorific deficit. So we adjust his diet so that he only eats 2000 Calories a day.\n\nThats good, but we want better results. So he runs 2 miles a day, that will burn 200 Calories. Lets say 150, as he walked halfway.\n\nNow we are down to 1850 Calories. Remember, that the body will be burning calories all the time aswell, so a chunk of what you take in will be spent on breathing, heart beating, moving etc. \nIt can be significant, but is more so when coupled with an eating plan.\n\nAll the above figures were gotten googling 'Average calories...'",
"Exercise not only burns calories and builds muscle, it also [changes the levels of a large number of hormones](_URL_0_).\n\nThese influence things like appetite, basal metabolic rate, and lipolysis (fat burning)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15896089"
]
] |
||
195kzb | why the us needs a marine corps when the other three services could potentially fulfill its role. | Other than the National Security Act of 1947, what is the legitimate reasoning behind maintaining what some would deem to be a second standing army? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/195kzb/eli5_why_the_us_needs_a_marine_corps_when_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8l09hf",
"c8l0m8c",
"c8l45ro",
"c8l53t8",
"c8lgkao"
],
"score": [
6,
35,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Back in the day, each branch had a specific function. The Army conducted ground operations and held the land. The Navy would blockade a port and conduct sea battles. The Air Force would transport and re-supply ground troops. The Marines would move from the Navy vessels to secure the land following a blockade. \n\nNow, there are joint service operations. That means the Branch is not as important as the assets the Branch has. If a medical person is needed for a particular operation, she may be taken from the Navy to support an Army mission. If a radio operator is needed for a mission, he may be taken from the Army and used to support the Marines. \n\nFor those that are going to nit-pick this response, this does not hold true for small unit teams. The squads and company, troop and battery are all composed of members of the same branch, but at higher levels, you may have a Naval medical team running the clinic or a Coast Guard team running your communications. \n\nHaving said that, you still have the question of why we have different Branches. The answer would be that Congress and the President have control over the allocation and funding for the specific Branches and it works out better on the budget sheet to keep them separate. ",
"flexibility. no one is pretending that in terms of land combat the Marine Corps is anywhere as close as capable as the Army is, to illustrate this, it's composed of three active infantry divisions with supporting arms (and of course the air wing), the Army has (multiple?) divisions *completely composed of armor*. the Marine Corps has several (like, 3) *battalions* of tanks. suffice to say, Marines weren't guarding the fulda gap in the cold war, nor were they ever intended to.\n\nthat being said, the Marine Corps possesses every warfighting capability of the United States armed forces, at some level, organically. A Marine commander, possibly as junior as a LtCol (and they are certainly trained as such) could have under his direct command everything from an infantry regiment with supporting arms, including arty and tanks, with requisite logistic support, to limited heavy airlift capability (C130s), air superiority (F/A-18s), and even electronic warfare (prowlers).\n\nso this brings us to its point in national defense strategy. if something happens \"flash in the pan\" a Marine commander can have enough assets at his fingertips, instantly, to bring a lot of pain for about two weeks to maybe a month with almost zero outside assistance. obviously this isn't being applied in protracted occupations/COIN like Afghanistan (or to be honest even OIF-1), so this capability, *literally* the primary purpose of the Marine Corps, isn't really seen.\n\nbut this cohesiveness and integration at such a comparatively low level is exactly the purpose of the Marine Corps. every asset in the Corps (except of course the grunts themselves) is reminded that they exist solely and utterly to support the rifleman on the ground. training, for every MOS, is centered around an expeditionary capability to allow this. MEUs are a regular deployment that are a specific embodiment of this philosophy: a purpose-built small deck carrier with an infantry battalion, some supporting arms, a logistics arm, and a composite aviation element of helos, ospreys, and harriers, with 130s on call. the CO (a colonel) has all this at his command as it sails around its assigned hemisphere, waiting for something bad to happen.\n\ntl;dr while much smaller, the Marine Corps is structured to allow to be *entirely self sufficient* (barring Naval assets like LHDs, who themselves exist solely to support the Marine Corps) for a **short period of time**\n\nedit: OP you're clearly a Marine, don't you know all this shit?\n\ngold for this? sweet, thanks!",
"Imagine if you were brick maker all your life. Since the day you were born your entire life revolved around making bricks. This makes you very good at making bricks, but very terrible at just about everything else. This is why we have so many branches of the military: specialization.\n\nThe army operates, almost exclusively in land warfare. So all of their training is geared towards tanks, artillery, infantry and the supporting of these areas.\n\nLikewise, the Navy operates almost exclusively in the water. Just like the army doesn't have (m)any ships, the Navy doesn't have tanks and the Airforce has lots of airplanes.\n\nThe odd-one-out is the Marines since they are trained and equipped to operated on Land, Sea and Air. This is why their training takes so much longer (lots of areas to train in) and also why they are almost always the first ones into a fight; they have many varied rolls and abilities.\n\nThe Coast Guard is (mostly) a Naval function as well, but they are limited to patrolling and providing security for coastal areas and ports as well as ice-breaking shipping channels and providing support to scientific missions. ",
"If the above is TL.\n\nThe Marine Corps is the nation's quick reaction force, and able to be deployed without congressional approval. When a force larger than a special operations team is needed, and when occupying forces are not necessary, Marines are perfect for the job. And we (Marines) are damn good at it. ",
"Each branch of the military has a different focus, a different job. In extremely broad strokes, the Marines may be good at taking land, but they are not equipped to hold and keep that land. Part of the reason they are good at taking land is specifically because they are not trained for it, nor are they maintaining or transporting all that equipment that would be intended for defending land.\n\nSo, why not give some units of the marines that defensive gear to hold it after the offensive units take the land? \n\nThink of it like a business. A single company that produces everything. Cars, medicine, food, power plants, office supplies, water, computers, etc. Not only do they produce these things, they sell and maintain as well. They will inherently be less good at any one thing. No specialization. 'Jack of all trade, master of none' would be very appropriate here.\n\nThis is the exact problem large corporations have. It's why they have different branches that are close to independent. Just like our single military has different branches.\n\nIn something like war, where failure means death, you want the best. So we have a few different branches of our military that specialize in different types of warfare.\n\nThe distinction between branches is blurry at best when you look at specifics though. Like how Navy and Marines have F/A-18's on the same aircraft carrier. Specifics like that are a different discussion though and this post is already too long."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2527la | why do the credits in old 80's movies seem to wiggle? | I was watching some old 80's movies today and noticed that the credits seem to wiggle ever so slightly. Were they not created via computer? They almost seem to be filmed on a black background or something. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2527la/eli5why_do_the_credits_in_old_80s_movies_seem_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"chcx41f"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"They were often not created on a computer.\n\nThey were printed on long sheets of plastic which was then pulled through the camera's frame on rollers. The image was then inverted to make a negative (white letters on black background). Sometimes this negative was further processed to allow another image to be projected behind the credits or beside the credits. It was all analog."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6x5p9b | why is it harder to hold the more you are closer to toilet seat, or toilet generally | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6x5p9b/eli5why_is_it_harder_to_hold_the_more_you_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmd9y4m"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Most animals have an instinct to urinate and defecate in the same area every time. And often in areas of running water. This helps prevent food poisoning as they only pollute one area and not everywhere. So when you get close to a toilet the sense of urgency increases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ag3kyw | how do those images where a 3d image appears when you cross your eyes work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ag3kyw/eli5_how_do_those_images_where_a_3d_image_appears/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee3hnd5",
"ee3o7dn",
"ee3rpee"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"All the random dots repeat in fixed-width columns. Crossing your eyes allows you to view the columns overlapping as if they were one, though they will still look flat.\n\nTo get the 3D effect, for any individual dot, you can make that dot appear farther or nearer by shortening or increasing the distance between them (thinner or wider columns for just those dots). The eye can pick out those offset dots quite easily, and the brain will make them appear 3D.",
"Each eye sees the same thing, but from different perspectives. Our brain combines these two viewpoints to give us the ability to percieve depth. That's why it's harder to measure distances, etc when you cover one of your eyes. ",
".\n\nyour eyes tell how far away things are by comparing the two images from each eye and looking for subtle differences. those magic eye books have patterns that are almost the same but with subtle differences, so when you cross your eyes so they overlap, your brain uses that data as if it was information about how far away things are, and gives you a 3-d picture."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
12wm8j | what are particles that cannot be broken down anymore made of? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/12wm8j/eli5_what_are_particles_that_cannot_be_broken/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6yqanz",
"c6yrbsx"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"this is not going to be a ELI5 explanation. the particles that you probably refer to are called quarks. and there is only one viable explanation. they are mede of nothing. that right, nothing. just like a bit in a computer game . it does´nt really exist in the game itself but it alter the games physics. just like this. if these quarks are made of anything at least we cannot observe it.",
"I will do my best but might be able to give more of a background to the question than actually answer it with the current theories. This really isn't going to be all that ELI5 friendly but ask if you would like anything expanded on or clarified.\n\nThe phrase you are looking for is [\"fundamental\" or \"elementary particles\"](_URL_5_) where to the best of our current knowledge they have no inner structure.\n\nAs it stands the elementary particles are those which make up [\"the standard model\"](_URL_4_) and there are actually 61 known elementary particles ([listed here if you are interested](_URL_3_), though it is best not to worry about what all the rest of them are for the moment). These include quarks, electrons, neutrinos and bosons (such as the photon which we know as being light).\n\nDepending on how much physics you know you may notice that these represent a very wide range of properties such as very high to 0 particle mass, and from here on things only get more blurred and confusing really.\n\nAs it stands we do not know what they are made up of (bit of a cop out answer isn't it sorry). Various theories have been put forward such as [string theory](_URL_0_) which suggests that the universe is made of tiny \"strings\" and that the note they play determines what particle they are (to put it very crudely), however these very quickly get very confusing and bogged down in heavy mathematical terms.\n\nIt is worth noting that this can also be a fast changing area, once atoms were thought to be elementary particles and then protons and neutons. Now we have people suggesting particles such as the [electron](_URL_2_) and [quark](_URL_1_) also have sub particles, though these are still only postulated or not yet fully proven and accepted.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://seedmagazine.com/images/uploads/cribsheet9.gif",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preon",
"http://cosmologyscience.com/cosblog/electron-is-not-a-fundamental-particle/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model#Particle_content",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_particle"
]
] |
||
86spsv | why did typhus disease seem to be most rampant and severe in german concentration camps in ww2 and not reportedly as bad elsewhere? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/86spsv/eli5_why_did_typhus_disease_seem_to_be_most/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw7p518"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Because the crowding and poor sanitary conditions in concentration camps were an ideal breeding ground for the lice that cause typhus. It wasn't as bad elsewhere because no one else was packing people together like the German concentration camps.\n\nYou see the same discrepancy today. Typhus is effectively non-existent in most of the world, but it does crop up in places like refugee camps where the crowding and sanitary conditions are poor."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3vvgvw | the difference between narcisistic, selfish and selfcentered | I dont fully understand the difference between these definitions, does anybody have a more detailed explanation? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vvgvw/eli5_the_difference_between_narcisistic_selfish/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxr3ahh"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Narcissism appears to be more of a psychological trait.\n\nSelf-centered means you're preoccupied with your own interests. \n\nSelfish is just a synonym for self-centered.\n\nCorrect me if I'm wrong\n\nSource: _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"dictionary.com"
]
] |
|
8006n3 | where did the tradition of having bedrooms on the second floor come from? | I know that any small room can be a bedroom but i want to know why their always upstairs in a house with more then 1 floor.
Did it come from the idea of "Staterooms" in old mansions?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8006n3/eli5_where_did_the_tradition_of_having_bedrooms/ | {
"a_id": [
"durzhee",
"dus0h8k",
"dus0ruv",
"dusb8ze",
"dusc37v",
"dusm6kh"
],
"score": [
9,
32,
38,
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"When you have guests it's more comfortable to have them in just the ground floor.\n\nThe guests will possibly need to use your living room, bathroom and maybe kitchen.\n\nSo you put the bedroom out of sight, it's not a room you'd use regulary or expect others to use. So you kinda hide it away. ",
"Heat rises. Be it cattle, fires or central heating.\n\nAlso, in the days of cattle in the same building, it was quite hard to get the cattle to go upstairs.\n\n* ~~their (belongs to them)~~ they're (they are)",
"Bedrooms have been upstairs since houses had two stories, because it puts them away from the public spaces, away from the livestock, and away from some of the creatures that crawl around on the ground. Also it's warmer in the winter, and catches more breezes in the summer.",
"I think it comes from various sources and traditions. In big castles, mansions, and similar buildings the more public areas are on the main floor close to the entrance. Living quarters were up.\n\nIn pioneer days log cabins would often be built with a loft...a partial upper level that was mainly used for sleeping. Again the more public and mainly used parts of the home (cooking,eating,working, living) was the main floor. The 'beds' were out of the way up in the loft.\n\nSame thing with your classic middle class 2 story home, bedrooms upstairs and out of the way. ",
"In addition to the comments about heat rising, there are other practical issues of bedrooms being private spaces rather than public where you might entertain guests, ones where you’d want to keep out dirty, wet, etc. outerwear that can be left on the lower level.",
"Ground floor bedrooms are helpful if the sleeper is disabled. If you are interested in learning more about the history of bedrooms and how houses are arranged, you might like a book called *If Walls Could Talk: An Intimate History of the Home* by Lucy Worsley, published in 2011. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9u00ri | where do snakes go in the winter time when it gets cold? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9u00ri/eli5_where_do_snakes_go_in_the_winter_time_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"e90fzv3",
"e90jtxh"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Snakes are ectotherms, so they have to maintain their body temperature with external sources. In the winter they probably sunbathe, huddle together, or burrow. \n\nThey also stay sedentary or hibernate. Ectotherms lower their metabolism in low temperatures, which allows them to use less energy and thus have to eat less. By staying inactive and trying to stay as warm as possible, they'll live long enough until the temperature rises and they can eat once again. ",
"Imagine a basketball player (snek). He was just in the playoffs but lost to a superior team (beautiful weather turning to fall) , he decides that instead of working hard and building his own team (snakes can't build a house), he decides to join the aforementioned superior team and coast to multiple consecutive championships (snake just relaxes and lets the weather pass on by).."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
33m87n | how are we able to know the distances/size of objects in space? | How can we know how big the Milky Way is, or how far away stars are? I know we measure distance in light years, but how is this possible? How can we know that Star A is 5 light years away from Star B? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33m87n/eli5_how_are_we_able_to_know_the_distancessize_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqm8d0o"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"One way to get the distance is to observe it 6 months apart. As the Earth orbits the Sun, the two observation points will differ by 2 [AU](_URL_2_). The object being observed will appear to wiggle through an effect called [parallax](_URL_0_). The greater the wiggle, the closer the object is. You can try this yourself by looking at your thumb with one eye open, then closing that eye and opening the other. Your thumb will appear to jump back and forth considerably if you hold it close to your face; less so if you hold it at arm's length. Try the same thing on something distant like a tree, and the apparent jump will be quite small, perhaps even unnoticeable. \n\nSince the parallax effect is too tiny for very distant objects, other [more complicated methods](_URL_1_) are employed. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_distance_ladder#Galactic_distance_indicators",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit"
]
] |
|
7t9y38 | how do people deep fry ice cream? wouldn't it melt? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7t9y38/eli5_how_do_people_deep_fry_ice_cream_wouldnt_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtb0b1v",
"dtb0f4h",
"dtb0k95"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"First of all the ice cream for this is frozen at extremely cold temps, then it is quickly battered and fried, so while the ice cream softens up a little....it is still plenty cold.",
"The ice cream is frozen hard into scoops/ balls. Then it's dipped in the batter and taken out fairly quickly as soon as the batter is cooked. \n\nThe part that keeps the ice cream from melting are the bubbles in the batter. This causes the batter to become insulation for the ice cream from the heat. \n\nI've made deep fried ice cream many times. ",
"It's not the ice cream that's fried. It's coated in batter, basically a thin layer of donut around the whole thing. The dough is fried and insulates the ice cream."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
23lvnp | html & html5 | I have no previous knowledge on html and now that html5 has become a talking point to some of my peers. What exactly is it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23lvnp/eli5_html_html5/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgyahzt"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"HTML is not a programming language, like C++ or Java. It is a markup language. A markup language is a set of instructions on how to create a document, like a Web page. HTML is also very good at incorporating other types of document into itself, like a Flash file for instance. The web browser, if it has the correct addons/plugins, can show that content easily.\n\nHTML5 is different in 3 main ways.\n\n1. It is trying to make error handling centralized. Most browsers can take very badly written code, with errors, and make it into something usable, but many browsers use different methods to find out how the webpage should be. The problem with this, though, is that there is no consistent way to figure out what the webpage should look like, and as a result of that, a badly written webpage can look vastly different across browsers. HTML5 tries to change that by making a central set of standards for displaying broken webpages.\n2. It is trying to make it easier to create web applications. HTML5 is incorporating tags (HTML elements) such as < video > , < audio > , and < canvas > . These, like their name implies, are used to create video elements, audio elements, and a canvas on which javascript can be run. Also, Local Storage was added. It is a local SQL database which can be written to by Javascript. In addition to all that, the browser can now validate a form locally, before sending it to the server, which reduces server load and speeds up load times for the user.\n3. it tries to make the raw HTML easier to understand. It includes tags such as < article > , < header > , < nav > , and others, so that the developer does not have to sift through endless piles of < div > s (divisions in a page). This makes the code MUCH easier to read, and much easier to understand.\n\nCSS (the update to the \"theming\" tech of the web, which places things, colors them, rotates them, etc) has also been updated to CSS3, which allows for more stuff like 3d rotation of objects."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
730agg | how do action potential occure in the brain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/730agg/eli5_how_do_action_potential_occure_in_the_brain/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnmu7b9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The membrane of a neuron basically separates two compartments - the intracellular (everything in the neuron) from the extracellular (everything outside). There are charged ions on both sides - the difference between the two is what gives the neuron's resting membrane potential, usually around -70mV but constantly fluxes up and down. \n\nAs the positive ions flow into the neuron or negative ions flow out, this membrane potential will increase. If it increases to about -50mV, or the threshold, this causes voltage gated ion channels to open causing a massive rush of sodium ions into the cell boosting the electric activity up to about +20mV.\n\nWith respect to an EEG, any baseline noise you see is just random ions flowing in and out, and spikes are any time a neuron reaches its threshold and spikes up. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
egeufz | when a white blood cell is killing a bacteria cell or virus what is actually happening? and what remains of the bacteria/virus? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/egeufz/eli5_when_a_white_blood_cell_is_killing_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"fc66tns"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"Well, there are a bunch of different kinds of white blood cells, and each kind will kill invaders in a different way. Examples of the types of white blood cells include neutrophils, bands, eosinophils, basophils, monocytes and lymphocytes, and each kind has it's own way of doing things. \n\n\nSometimes, killing an invading bacteria or virus involves the white blood cells detecting a chemical signature that tells them an invader is there, then they rush to the location (helped along by increased blood flow to the area), surround the invaders, and digest them using special enzymes. So they're really eating them. \n\n\nOther types of white blood cells have special chemicals in them, and when they ooze those chemicals onto an invader, it basically poisons and kills that invader. Then there are other types that don't kill the invaders themselves, they just send out chemicals that tell other types of white cells that there's invaders here, and then stick special chemicals to the invaders themselves, kind of like a flashing locator beacon, and that helps other white cells find them and eat them or poison them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1o6l9m | why do they leave the lights on at night when there is no one at school? | It was 2:00 AM. I was coming home one night and I passed by my school. Half of the lights were still on. I was wondering why. And then I came to the conclusion the janitor maybe forgot to close the lights before locking the school. And then another night I came home late again. I passed by my school, again. I noticed again, the lights were on. I'm pretty sure this time it was done on purpose. Summer came, mid July. I was taking a walk near my school; it was about 8:00 PM. I haden't seen my school in over a month. And BOOM the lights were on. And now I am here wondering, what is the purpose of leaving the lights on at school at night? Is this for security purpose or something, because I sure as hell know, they're wasting a whole lot of electricty.
**TL;DR**: Why do they leave the lights on at school during the night time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o6l9m/eli5_why_do_they_leave_the_lights_on_at_night/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccp85d4",
"ccpa65w",
"ccpazrz",
"ccpbbkc",
"ccpcwsn",
"ccpef5y"
],
"score": [
49,
11,
5,
16,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"People are less likely to break into areas that are well-lit.",
"Asides from stuff like the janitorial staff moving about the school, teaching staff staying late, lights being on as a burglary deterrant, needing hallways to escape doors well lit at all hours in case of emergency, perhaps? Fire regulations in schools are pretty strict.\nAlso my high school would often rent out the gymnasium to local groups for sports or whatever they'd like, so lights were left on then and I assume the groups wouldn't have access to turning off the lights.\n\nedit: also generally institutions that use large amounts of power get a flat rate, don't they? I mean, they're buying large quantities over sustained periods and usually under district budgets, there oughta be a discount...",
"In some places, like where I live, it's city by-law to make things easier for emergency responders such as firefighters.",
"All of these things, as well as if the school has security cameras. If someone breaks in, the lights on make it easier to see them on the cameras.",
"I was told that while it is partly for security reasons but that having fewer cycles of the ballasts control box of florescent lighting fixtures means that they need to be replaced less often which is a pain in the arse and they contain PCBs. Anyone know if there is any truth to that??",
"Many places have a school house lighting law that mandates primary lights in school buildings (and other public buildings) be left on. \n\nWhy, I'm not really sure. \n\nClaims cover burglary deterrent, safe zones, old ballast lights aren't easy to start up, etc. \n\nI've always thought that it had to do with making a public building a safe place to go, day or night. If you're in danger you have a well lit place to seek shelter, even if you can't get inside, and wait for police who routinely patrol the building. \n\nBut some places have internal lights, which can't be seen from the outside, that never shut off. I'm a teacher and in my classroom, with no external windows, I have one light that can't be shut down. When I turn my main lights on it goes off, when I turn my lights off it comes on. \n\nI suppose another reason is fire safety, if the lights are off and people need to get out quickly, they don't have time to get the hall lights up. \n\nWe also leave extra lights on in particular problem areas to deter people from trying to get in and to give non-night vision cameras adequate light. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
68pbxl | could the internet ever "go down" like it does in so many science fiction movies or shows. why couldn't it, or could it happen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68pbxl/eli5_could_the_internet_ever_go_down_like_it_does/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh07y69"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Internet is not a single \"thing\". It is just a big network of different service providers and big companies. The best comparison I can find is the postal service. There are a lot of different postal services. Some are local and some are global. Some delivers door to door letters and packets while others only handle container shipments between certain hubs. If you send a letter between two countries the letter may be handled by three or four different postal services and go through a lot of hubs for sorting. It is hard to know beforehand the exact route the letter will take as this depends on how much post there is to deliver and a lot of other events. For example if there is bad weather so planes are stuck the letter will get packed on a truck and shipped by land.\n\nThe Internet works in a similar manner. There are a lot of different Internet Service Providers that work together to deliver all the Internet Packets. As postal services have hubs ISPs have routers. If a link between two routers are down the traffic will be redirected though another link. Traffic may be routed though third party providers as the thousands of end providers are unlikely to have direct links to each other.\n\nSo taking down the Internet is pretty hard. There is no single company with the power to shut down the entire Internet. And the technology that the Internet is based on was developed by the US Army to deal with nuclear bombs taking out central hubs. So any disruption in one place will cause the traffic to be rerouted around the area until it is fine again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
37y750 | why do all people i've seen do extensive cosmetic surgery end up looking like cat-people? | Is it a demand thing or what? Is that the only way you can end up? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37y750/eli5_why_do_all_people_ive_seen_do_extensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"crqtrme"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Cosmetic surgery is easy to do wrong, in the sense that tiny mistakes can make it look horrific. \n\nMany people who go for one end up going again and again, and end up exaggerating their features until they don't look human.\n\nThey often focus on small details like \"lips should be puffier\" or \"nose should be slender\", and forget that the details have to fit together to be attractive.\n\nLastly, cosmetic surgery often doesn't last long, as whatever they inject degrades, shortened tendons weaken and sag, etc."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.