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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3m1v8v | is there any real danger of muslims implementing sharia law in western societies? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3m1v8v/eli5is_there_any_real_danger_of_muslims/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvb7org",
"cvb7ppt",
"cvb8ijn",
"cvb8jnu",
"cvb8yhe",
"cvb9ukt",
"cvbbwc8",
"cvbbxnc",
"cvbchll",
"cvbde56",
"cvbduj0",
"cvbej5p",
"cvbelpr",
"cvbemh0",
"cvbenwf",
"cvbeuod"
],
"score": [
35,
57,
62,
3,
14,
2,
2,
2,
5,
6,
5,
2,
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No, there isn't. \n\n* The vast, vast, vast majority of Muslims living in the West have no intention or reason for implementing the Sharia in any Western country. \n\n* The few extremists who do have no chance of doing so. How would they?\n\n* Do not forget that Muslims are a very heterogeneous group. The cultural differences between Muslims of different denominations and origins is a major source for the tension in the Middle East. \nAny generalizations about 'Muslims' are usually entirely meaningless. ",
"Not really. Most countries have laws regarding how you change laws, and what constitutes a misdemeanor vs felony.\n\nThey'd need a majority in their senate or whatever to push any such change through without veto.\n\nUnofficially? Yeah, vigilante sharia enforcers could be a thing.",
"There are already Sharia courts in the UK. These are for religious matters and for arbitration - when both parties agree to be bound by the decision of the Sharia court. They are not for criminal matters - needless to say it is a contentious subject.\n\n_URL_0_ \nEdit for clarity: legal matters to criminal matters ",
"It's like saying \"Hebrew\" law, just because a certain religion has rules for their own religion, doesn't mean we will suddenly have to up and follow it if that religion \"enacts\" the law in an area. You have as much choice over it as you do worshipping or believing anything. ",
"The issue is that it will be implemented *de facto* rather than *de jure.* There's little chance (barring extreme demographic shifts) of Islamic law being codified in a Western country any time soon. But what is far, far more likely is that enough people who do want Sharia will start to enforce it outside the law though harassment and intimidation. And it doesn't even have to be as egregious as what happened to 'Charlie Hebdo.' How many times are you going to put up with men angrily shouting at you to wear a hijab before you do just to get them off your back? Everyone has to eat halal when it's too much of a hassle for restaurants and grocery stores to sell pork.\n\nEdit: [So there's this.](_URL_0_) \n\nIs this common? Is this indicative of every single Muslim? Is this the case in every Islamic country? Will angry, gun-toting, turban-wearing, suicide-bombing racist caricatures 'take over' your community and institute draconian laws, stoning Tindr users on every street corner?\n\nNo. Nobody is saying that's the case.\n\nAnd yet that woman still gets harassed. It's something that woman deals with in the morning when she gets dressed. And so long as we refuse to accept that it's happening and continue to tolerate the intolerance of others, it'll still be a thing. And it will grow. And after the fifth or seventeenth time one angry asshole ruins the store's pork products in protest, they'll stop carrying it.",
"Depending on who wins next year, America might even get the Christian equivalent to Sharia Law most Republicans seem so eager to implement. Of course this \"new\" version of Jesus hates the poor, gives more money to the rich, and only really crusades about eradicating abortions, homosexuality, Muslims, as well as rolling back centuries of scientific knowledge because the topics of evolution and the history of the universe weren't officially endorsed by The Book. Believe me it's not only many Muslims that want to shit all over secular law and establish a state religion, any country with a single religious majority is at risk of establishing itself as a theocracy unless everyone manages to agree that's a terrible idea and the laws put in place to prevent that are actually upheld and not sabotaged at every opportunity.",
"Don't forget that a lot of muslims leaves their countries to escape the politics and laws there.\n\nLike with most issues, the ones that we hear a lot are the loudest few.\n\nThere could not be a legal sharia law without a majority of people wanting it and I can't see that happening. But there could be unofficial implementation inside communities. They would be bound by law like everybody else so I dont know to what extent that could go.",
"Assuming you're asking about Sharia law applying to you, also assuming you're not a Muslim.\n\nShort answer: No.\n\nLong answer: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.",
"No more likely than Christians implementing biblical law. Except unlike Christians, Muslims in most communities are still a minority which makes it even harder.",
"No.\n\nBut unfortunately we cannot remove the idiotic inflammatory tabloids that people readily buy into which spread this sort of rubbish.",
"They could probably be established, even in the U.S., for the resolution of religious/cultural disputes, much in the same way the Jewish Beth Din courts have for years.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Fuck no. There's no real danger of Sharia law in America. But there is real danger from idiots who claim \"god's laws\" supercede actual y'know, LAWS.",
"Only by doing so illegally. David Koresh was a Christian extremist who created his own laws in the US, but the government didn't accept that. The thing was this was just a small group of whackos where Muslim whacko populations are growing larger in Europe. Trying to get a few thousand people to follow the law could end up deadly.",
"I know it is the cool and hip thing atm to be seen hands down supporting religion but:\n\n1) Out of 500 UK Muslims questioned not one supported gay rights.\n\n2) 97% of those questioned believed that sex between unmarried men and women was immoral.\n\n3) British Muslims identified more with their home nation.\n\n4) Four major inquiries are taking place over a group of conservative Muslims are taking over a number of schools in Birmingham.\n\n5) Quarter (27% of those asked) British Muslims sympathize with Charlie Hebdo terrorists\n\n6) Personally i have seen men on London streets (where there are mosques) enforcing shiria law, no alcohol, no skirts, no kissing etc (they have been arrested since). \n\nSo yes there is a danger its the same with any 2 massively different cultures only preventative measure is for **both** sides to educate themselves.\n\n*I know this will be down voted anything that goes against religion is... oh well truth hurts...*",
"In France, it's impossible.\n\nWell, let's suppose that, for some reasons, the minority of 6% get enough friendly deputies (mostly white christian males) to vote a law and same at the Senate (average senator: 75yo white christian male). You also have to suppose that those 6% all speak together and think the secular Republic don't suit them, which is false.\n\n3 possibilities for the law:\n\n- it mentions religion as a condition to apply the law, which would be unconstitutational (since the state officially doesn't know what is a religion)\n\n- it hands judicial power to a religious court, which would be unconstitutional too (complete separation between the State and the Church since 1905)\n\n- it's a law applied to all French citizens, and it would be complete fiction to say it's possible a deputy would defend such a law",
"Through legitimate means? Not unless the following happens (using Canada as an example):\n\n* Firstly, an Islamist political party needs to be formed or an existing party needs to become an Islamist party.\n* The Islamist Party of Canada (IPC) now needs to be elected to a majority mandate (compromises with non-Islamists would mean no Sharia law) in every province and territory, because they're probably going to have to change the constitution, which requires provincial cooperation. This will prove very difficult in Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, as they do not have political parties represented in their legislature.\n* The IPC must retain a majority government across the board long enough to appoint a majority of senators and court judges, which can take a very, very long time.\n* Now, the IPC can begin changing the existing laws in Canada to Sharia law.\n\nTL;DR: **No.**"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://fullfact.org/factcheck/law/80_sharia_courts_britain-38319"
],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/offmychest/comments/3i5k1l/looking_forward_to_coming_back_to_my_home_country/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nylslawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2012/11/NYLS_Law_Review_Volume-57-2.Broyde.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
43n6tg | why does sleep paralysis usually only occur when sleeping on one's back? does it have to do with blood flow or the inner ear? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43n6tg/eli5_why_does_sleep_paralysis_usually_only_occur/ | {
"a_id": [
"czjgofg",
"czjgtog",
"czjhyux",
"czjlcz4"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"I've definitely gotten it before in different positions, but I can tell for sure my position has a lot to do with it.",
"I don't know if there is enough data to say. All I know is that when I do get sleep paralysis it is usually when I'm laying on my back. Even when I sleep on my side I usually role over at some point. When i was a teen it got so bad I had to sleep on my tummy. Even then I had the occasional bout of sleep paralysis.",
"I get it when I lay on my stomach most of the time. Only once on my back. Laying on your belly during sleep paralysis is worse IMO. More terrifying. ",
"I remember reading that it was to do with the pressure on your lungs while your sleeping on your back that can trigger an episode of sleep paralysis. Over tiredness can trigger it too so when combined your more likely to have an attack. \n\nDon't take my word as gospel though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2krxcg | why was /r/creepshots not ok (perv pics taken in public places), while it is ok to have entire subs dedicated to pictures of freshly murdered woman, or bloody babies recently aborted? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2krxcg/eli5_why_was_rcreepshots_not_ok_perv_pics_taken/ | {
"a_id": [
"clo3yi5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This post is not asking for a layman-friendly explanation to something complicated or technical, so it doesn't belong here and it's been removed. Entirely subjective questions generally belong in /r/askreddit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
334jur | was there any efficacy to leaches or bleeding as a medical treatment? if not why was the practice so well accepted? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/334jur/eli5was_there_any_efficacy_to_leaches_or_bleeding/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqhvfad"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The practice of blood-letting was based on the idea that all medical problems are due to an imbalance in the four humors, blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phelgm. If you were sick, doctors would try to fix you by bringing the humors in balance, and blood-letting was a way of doing this.\n\nNow that we know more about medicine, we don't do this very much anymore. There are some conditions that benefit from blood-letting, but not so many that we should blood-let to the extent that doctors in the past did."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9bqf4h | how does the supreme court's decision affect laws nation wide? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9bqf4h/eli5_how_does_the_supreme_courts_decision_affect/ | {
"a_id": [
"e54zgpm",
"e54zihn",
"e54zk1c",
"e54zm4m"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It sets a legal precedent.\n\nThe Supreme Court is the final court in the US. When they make a decision, that decision is essentially final, and the only people who can overturn that decision is the Supreme Court, or Congress could change the laws the decision was based on.\n\nAfter they make a decision, if someone in the future has a similar case, they can basically say \"look this went all the way to the Supreme Court, and this is what they said then. If you don't find things this way now, we'll just keep appealing until we get to the Supreme Court too, so they can say the same thing again\".",
"The USA is a constitutional democratic republic. That means that any laws passed by your elected officials are limited by the rights guaranteed in the constitution. This is known as majority rule restrained by minority rights. If a federal constitutional right is found to overrule a law than all such laws are void. All courts will follow SCOTUS and void the laws. ",
"In Law there is a concept of precedence which means that if judges make a decision in one form or another this is how decisions on similar cases should be made in future.\nLiterally a lawyer will stand up and say that in this previous case,this happened and I'd like it to happen again and the judges will most likely agree if the situation is indeed similar.\n\nAdditionally the supreme court is the court with the highest authority, so if they rule one way on something they are likely to again if someone brought their case there again. Even if other lower courts initially disagree, they can be overruled.",
"Federal law trumps state and local law. That means that a decision by the Supreme Court is officially the supreme law of the land. So for example, if the Supreme Court says that it's unconstitutional to discriminate against trans people by restricting which restroom they can use, then that's it, no state or local municipality could have a policy that allowed such discrimination. \n\nNow lets put it in actual 5 year old terms. Growing up, I could ask dad (the state government) for permission to do certain things. If dad said it was cool, then I could do it, so long as mom (the federal government) didn't disagree. If mom laid down the law though for instance by saying that X activity was too dangerous, that was it, dad would never overrule her. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6zi0ph | how is it that we can take our pulse and not completely block out veins/arteries when we do so? | Like whenever runners check their pulse on their neck, they'll press two or three fingers against the underside of the jaw, sometimes pretty firmly, and it appears not to have any effect. Does it have an effect on blood flow, and if so, why is it so negligible? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6zi0ph/eli5_how_is_it_that_we_can_take_our_pulse_and_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"dmvdfto",
"dmve0m8"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"You may temporarily reduce blood flow when you do this, but the body isn't *so* delicate that this would hurt you.",
"Nurse here. It does reduce blood flow but the blood pressure does push it to stretch on the side of the artery without pressure. But you can fully stop flow with enough pressure. There are arteries and veins on both sides of the neck. That's why you only see a runner check one side at a time. You could make someone pass out if you depressed both firmly enough to cut off major blood vessels. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1hqeev | sun tzu - why exactly was he so great? | I understand he was a good war general, but what was so great about him? His strategy? Why does his philosophy influence so many lives? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hqeev/eli5_sun_tzu_why_exactly_was_he_so_great/ | {
"a_id": [
"cawxl7n",
"cawxown"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Sun Tzu's philosophy is a widely applicable approach to any sort of battle, from war to competing business to schoolyard cliques. It forms a very good foundation of techniques to prepare and instigate a \"battle\" to ensure that all your weaknesses are covered and the target's are exploited. As well as great risk assessment to determine whether a battle is even worth fighting.\n\nHe basically wrote \"conflicts for dummies\".",
"He carefully put into words many strategic principles and philosophies that hold true in all aspects of life. The art of war isn't simply his view or opinion on war, they are principles that have been proven time and time again to be correct. \n\nAnd he didn't write one or two well aimed statements, he wrote a comprehensive work on the subject. As a thought experiment, switch the word \"war\" with \"conflict\" and his writings hold just as true.\n\n\n > “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” \n\nAt face value a noble statement. It's also an efficient one. Defeating an enemy without fighting means you suffered no losses, expended little and have caused a minimum of animosity in your opponent. This sentiment is as true in war as it is in an office meeting.\n\n > “Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win” \n\nPreparation is everything. Like GI Joe said, knowing is half the battle. Going into a task unprepared, half assed and hoping to wing it, will leave you helpless at the hands of an opponent who knows what he's doing.\n\n > “When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.” \n\nIf you put someone with his back against the wall, he'll have no alternative but to fight you tooth and nail. If you want compromise, leave him room to compromise.\n\nSun Tzu's art of war is the truth of life. And part of what made it so long lasting is that while it is absolutely the art of *war*, all of life is conflict. His lessons can be as easily applied in the workplace, school or even simply the way you live your life as on the battlefield. Everyone can learn from his work."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5pfld0 | what does chemo do to your body? | Someone I know recently finished his first round of chemo. From what I understand it was extremely rough on his body. What exactly does it do to you? What are all the possible side effects from chemo? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pfld0/eli5_what_does_chemo_do_to_your_body/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcqtlv3",
"dcqv1yf"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Chemo basically kills all fast growing cells. It normally causes some kind of DNA damage that will kill cells. This is more harmful to cells that are quickly dividing because they don't have time to repair the damage. The cancer cells are growing fast so it can hopefully kill all the cancer cells, but there are a lot of fast growing normal cells in the body which is why it is very rough to go through.",
"There are many different categories of chemotherapeutic anti-cancer drugs, all of which have varied effects, but most of them are involved in disrupting the cell division and DNA / RNA synthesis of cells in the body. \n\nA cancer tumor is really just a large mass of cells that have stopped responding to the rest of the body. Normally your body regulates how many times a cell can divide, and can induce a cell to kill itself. Cancer cells have stopped responding to this, and are just reproducing uncontrollably \n\nCancer tumors require a certain threshold size to be \"cancer\", and to withstand the body's immune system. A general rule of thumb is that the larger a cancerous mass is, the more powerful it is. That is why a large part of treating cancer is reducing its size.\n\nEnter chemotherapy drugs - drugs that hurt the ability for cells to divide. Now, it is important for *many* cells in your body to divide, but because your body regulates the process, most cells divide much slower than cancer cells. So chemotherapy harms cancer tumors *more* than most other cells in your body. \n\nIt is an extremely delicate balance, and that is why oncologists have a very difficult job. They need to ensure that the drugs are strong enough to hinder the tumors ability to replicate, but *not* so powerful that they make it impossible for your own immune system to fight the tumor. \n\nChemotherapy is often used with spot-radiation therapy, which is where doctors bombard cancer tumors with powerful radiation, which shreds the cells DNA and kills them. This is an extra attack on the tumor to ensure that your immune system is stronger than the tumor. \n\nIn the end, it is the body's immune system that ultimately needs to destroy the cancer. Chemotherapy is a double-edged sword, but doctors try to make the side that's stabbing the cancer cells *longer and sharper* than the one stabbing your immune system. Since cancer cells divide more rapidly, they're more vulnerable to chemotherapy, so the goal is to give your body the edge. \n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
elwbal | can ocean water be used to extinguish large scale forest fires? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/elwbal/eli5_can_ocean_water_be_used_to_extinguish_large/ | {
"a_id": [
"fdkmqv1",
"fdkmsfm",
"fdkmxaw",
"fdknvk1"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Ocean water is full of salt.\n\nSalt interferes with plant growth.\n\nScooping up a bunch of ocean water and dumping it on vegetation might help put out a fire, if you ignore the logistics needed to transport ocean water like that, but you'd be screwing up the long-term health of the place.",
"Yes. But it would poison the land with salt making it such that few to no plants can grow there and it could take centuries for the salt levels to wash away to the point that the soil can grow plants again. Salt was used by armies to permanently (relatively) destroy farm land as they invaded. It is not something you want to do in general if you actually want to save the forests.",
"Yes, but there are issues. Transporting that much water is difficult. There are some helicopters that can actually use big buckets to do just that, but it's not a lot of water compared to the scale of most forrest fires. \n\nI imagine another issue over the long term is the salinity of ocean water.",
"Salt is like poison to plants. Once salt gets in soil, it is very difficult for anything to grow there for a very long time. It is much worse for the local ecology than a fire, infact"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cw5huq | why does it feel like hitting concrete when you jump into a body of water from 50 feet or higher? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cw5huq/eli5_why_does_it_feel_like_hitting_concrete_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey8dlzg",
"ey8ffh2",
"ey8wv4i"
],
"score": [
21,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Liquids have viscosity that differ. The thicker a viscosity the more it can mimic (for lack of a better word) the properties of a solid. Water has a relatively low viscosity compared to oil, but when you get to a certain velocity, that viscosity is enough to injure.",
"if you think about being squirted by a hose or gun full of water then think about this when your going like 30+ mph and it is all your weight in your body hitting something , it doesnt matter if it is water it still hurts . imagine pressure washing your self , it would hurt even though its water",
"Just as an added note to the other good explanations here. Water \"feeling\" like concrete when hit from a great height is just a saying, it does not have any scientific truth.\n\nWater results in far less G-forces (what actually kills a person) as compared to concrete if you were to fall on both from the same height. Mythbusters did a very good episode on this.\n\nIn short, water can absolutely kill you if you fall from high enough. But concrete will kill you from a much lower fall because concrete is significantly harder than water."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
egxdl6 | the science behind having naturally really dry skin | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/egxdl6/eli5_the_science_behind_having_naturally_really/ | {
"a_id": [
"fcfkwe7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Many people wash their skin too much. Soaps strip the skin of the naturally occurring oils that protect skin and keep moisture in."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2i0qfg | when i have a tube filled with marbles and push in on one end, another pops out instantly. what if the tube was a mile? would it still be as quick? | Would the problem be the weight of the marbles? And if so what if we could ignore the weight? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i0qfg/eli5_when_i_have_a_tube_filled_with_marbles_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckxqa6p",
"ckxqkxj"
],
"score": [
4,
12
],
"text": [
"The pressure wave will be transmitted from marble to marble at the speed of sound in marble.",
" > What if the tube was a mile? Would it still be as quick?\n\nNope. There is the limit to the speed that a physical force can propagate through a medium. In fact, we have a name for this speed, based on one of the most common examples of a physical force propagating though a medium. It's an example that you're very familiar with: Sound.\n\nThe speed of sound is nothing more than the speed at which physical forces move through a material. Assuming that the marbles were all touching each other, the amount of time it would take for the marble at the end to pop out would be the length of the tube divided by the speed of sound in the material that the marbles were made of.\n\nAssuming glass marbles, we can take the speed of sound in glass as 13,000 ft/s, and get a time of ~0.41 s. So just under half a second for the marble at the other end to move.\n\nAnd, interestingly enough, this will work for a solid rod, as well. If you had a mile-long rod of solid glass, and you pushed on one end, it would take ~0.41s for the other end to move."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1rc5ir | why are canadian and american accents almost indistinguishable, even to residents of either country? why are the two countries so similar? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rc5ir/eli5_why_are_canadian_and_american_accents_almost/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdlplky",
"cdlpo4h",
"cdlq1k0",
"cdlqnch"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. I would say a lot of accents are distinguishable, especially in the east. ",
"Canadian and American accents both vary wildly. It's pretty easy to distinguish.",
"Canadian accents are very distinguishable by most. ",
"Guessing you are from the British Isles, where accents vary over very short distances.When you become more familiar with the North American nuances you will find a similar, but more subtle variation amongst us."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
thhu7 | pink lemonade. if it's not strawberry or raspberry, then what is the pink? | I mean, there are no pink lemons.
Are there? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/thhu7/eli5_pink_lemonade_if_its_not_strawberry_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4mnr5g",
"c4mobs3"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"There is a pink lemon, but it's not used.\n\nPink lemonade is just normal lemonade colored pink. It's dyed using artificial dye, raspberries, cherries, red grapefruit, grapes, cranberries, strawberries, grenadine, or, as in the origin story, cinnamon candy. The flavor may or may not be different.",
"The taste is the same. The color is fake.\n\nIts a color marker that indicates the beverage. Pink has become associated with lemonade (especially artificially flavored very sweet version) and pink is a pleasing and distinct color. \n\nRegular lemonade has a dull, mostly clear, slight yellow tint color that isn't all that distinctive. [but I still like it]\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3b9o3q | why doesn't wifi quality correlate with wifi range? | * When I use wifi in the same room as my router, my internet speed is nice and fast, and the wifi strength indicator on my laptop/phone etc is at maximum.
* When I move two rooms away, the internet on my device all but stops. Pages load slowly or not at all, and I receive error messages saying that there is not internet. However, the wifi is still connected at full strength.
* I understand that the distance from the router and the material of the walls impact on the wifi, but how is it that the data transfers slow down/stop, yet the signal strength is perfect? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b9o3q/eli5_why_doesnt_wifi_quality_correlate_with_wifi/ | {
"a_id": [
"csk6gbi"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"Excellent question, I used to work on corporate and hospitality systems (think like the Marriott or Sheraton wifi) and this I had to learn fast.\n\nSo a wireless signal transmits also called broadcasts a lot of information in the signal. Some of your signal is the data (we call it throughout), some of it is the wifi name (also called the SSID), and then there's some technical information transmitted that we won't get into (depending on the system).\n\nYou computer clumps data together in small bursts called a packet, think of it like a snowball. So when you ask for _URL_0_ you computer begins sending packets, or throwing snowballs to servers on the Internet, and as the servers process they throw snowballs back. The ideal is you have to collect all the snowballs (packets) before you can build a fort (web page, image, etc.).\n\nYour wifi has a radius (circle which is your wifi name like mine is District13) in which it broadcast, think of this like a large frozen water disk above you making sure the sun can't melt your snowballs (packets). So as you move away from the center of your protective circle, the circle melts and the sun comes through. You can still see the frozen water (your network name) but now the sun (interference) is melting your snowball (we call it packet fragmentation). So now you see the circle (name) but instead of getting back 10 whole snowballs you got 1 and a half, which isn't enough. \n\nI am sorry if that sounds ridiculous, it's the analogy I once used to explain it to a middle schooler. There are a lot of other things to consider too. Ever hear the term 802.11a or 802.11n, also called wireless N? 802.11 tells techs what the protocol or language is, the letter specifies a version and sometimes frequency range. A/B/G were some of the first, followed by N and AC (5G). If you are on say A or B then max speed at the wifi point is 11mbps, walk 50 feet away it's now 8mbps. Compare that to Standing next to an AC home wifi point, 7GBps, that more than 700 times faster (approximately 875 or so). Walk 50 feet away the AC wifi point, speeds are now 3GBps."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"Google.com"
]
] |
|
7yg3ar | synthetic meat | Does anyone know what has happened to the synthetic meat we were all promised many years ago that would be just as good as the real thing (One step closer to Blade Runner ). It's now 2018 I haven't seen one synthetic burger.
and is it really that good for you... or not ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7yg3ar/eli5_synthetic_meat/ | {
"a_id": [
"dugamxa",
"duggv2s",
"dugh4wm",
"dugtyty",
"dugu8u0",
"dugxufs"
],
"score": [
404,
8,
67,
16,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"No one has figured out how to make it cheap enough yet. Consider the price of ground beef, if you have a multimillion dollar lab making lab-grown beef then you're going to need to make millions of pounds to have it pay for itself.\n\nThere are a bunch of companies work on it, but none of their products are commercially viable yet.",
"They've started selling them in some supermarket chains in Denmark already! It's a bit more expensive and has a bit higher calorie count than normal beef, but it's there! Haven't tried it yet, but will soon. ",
"ELI5 for synthetic meat. First you want to start by clearing up the terminology a bit which might be leading to some confusion. The meat itself is being called 'synthetic' because it's not coming directly from the standard source IE. a living creature. \nEssentially at its most basic level how synthetic meat is produced is as follows. Proprietor cells are taken from the type of organism whose meat you wish to replicate. In my example I'll use some beef. So some cow muscle cells are extracted from an animal and then they are placed on a template in a specific arrangement so that as they grow and replicate they will form muscle spindles and fibres. For the sake of a simple explanation think of this template as a 3D printed petri dish with special shelves for the cells. Once the scaffolding has been completed and the cow muscle cells are ready to start growing the template is bathed in a lab developed solution which contains all the vitamins, minerals and other nutrients required for the muscle cells to develop into full articulated structures. In normal meat production this is done by feeding the cow as it grows and allowing the cows body to replicate the cells and form all the structures. The muscle cells absorb the nutrients from the \"lab broth\" and grow into a product which has similar nutritional properties to actual meat. \nAfter the meat has fully developed into its final cellular structures it is then harvested and undergoes a variety of chemical and mechanical processing treatments to make it food ready. Think of this stage as being similar to grinding up regular meat to make ground beef for patties. \nAnd voila! You've got your synthetic meat. \n\nTLDR; Synthetic meat is real meat but it's called synthetic because its grown in a dish instead of on a cow. The original cells taken to grown the meat are taken from the animal and the meat is \"fed\" through a nutrient broth allowing it to grow in much the same way the animal would being fed its normal diet. ",
"Two questions - doing my best to ELI5 them both.\n\n1st Question:\n\nImagine you have decided to sell jelly beans - but you have a friend who sells them too. He is your competition. Jimmy grows his jellybeans on plants, but when he picks the jelly beans the plants die. It takes a long time for Jimmy's jelly bean plant to grow and it requires a lot of water and fertilizer to keep them growing.\n\nYou found a way to grow your jelly beans inside of a metal container. However, you're still trying to make sure that the jelly beans taste as good as Jimmy's. You're close but you need a bit more time. Once you have this figured out you can scale up your efforts and quite possible outsell and outproduce Jimmy. \n\n2nd Question: \n\nYou and Jimmy both grow jelly beans. They are made of the exact same material whether they are grown on the plant or grown in your metal vat. One will be as healthy as the other. \n\nNon-ELI5: Companies working on this have almost gotten the taste correct and are working on bringing down the price and improving the flavor. Once they do this they can ramp up production and potentially shave off the costs competing directly with beef farming practices. \n\nSince at the cellular level synthetic or lab grown beef is the same biological material as actual dead cow, the cells are as beneficial/harmful as the ones you eat today.\n",
"The best overview I've found is at:\n_URL_1_\n\nRight now, it looks like the biggest hurdle is not macro-nutrients, vitamins or minerals. It's hormones and other serum proteins that can't be easily synthesized. Basically, it's the things in serum that make it different than, say, a protein-enhanced sports drink.\n\nSome of these animal proteins can be obtained via genetic engineering, but that is expensive as well - consider that recombinant human albumin (from GM rice) runs about $60 dollars a gram (_URL_0_). I couldn't find a price for recombinant (non-animal) bovine serum albumin.\n\nAn egg has about 2 grams of ovalbumin.\n\nETA: Only about 60% of cow is sold as beef; the rest has various uses. One is as a source for bovine serum albumin. You can buy this in bulk, at purity suitable for cell culture, for roughly 11$ per gram (_URL_2_). \n\nThe current price point for cultured meat might include this relatively cheap animal-based albumin source. The price may well go up using recombinant sources.",
"I have only really been following the progress of one company, Memphis Meats, because I believe they are the front runner for \"synthetic\" meats since they have had some big name investors in their company like Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Kimbal Musk, and more; thus some of my information might not be accurate for the progress of \"synthetic\" meat as a whole.\n\nAs many other users have pointed out the technology to create \"synthetic\" meat is there and has been for awhile now. This technology allows for creation of meat that is better tasting and healthier since you can manipulate the parts of the meat that effect the healthiness/taste to become optimal. I put \"synthetic\" in quotes because it misleads people into thinking that it is unhealthy but in reality on a structural level it is the same other than the optimizations done as regular meat the real difference is the source is a lab rather than an animal.\n\nMemphis Meats from understanding has pushed back their commercial release of their products, it is now set to 2021; this is due to the cost of production. They have been making progress in lowering the cost it has just been slower than many have expected. They are also not making the product on industrial scale yet or receiving subsidies from the government like regular meat production so that adds to the price. \n\nAnother major challenge for Memphis Meats has been avoiding Bovine serum which is usually acquired from the blood of unborn baby cows. The meat they have produced so far has used this so it has technically not been Vegan/Vegetarian according to some people's definitions."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/sigma/a9731?lang=en&region=US",
"http://elliot-swartz.squarespace.com/science-related/invitromeat",
"https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/life-science/biochemicals/biochemical-products.html?TablePage=103994915"
],
[]
] |
|
b99m98 | what is a white dwarf star made out of? | I get the process more or less, star contracts and gets super dense after all the energy gets used up. What's it actually made of though, molecular structure/atomic structure/particle wise, that makes it so much denser than say Earth while possibly being the same size? By what composition and structure does a white dwarf have such a great mass and density while confined to such a relatively small space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b99m98/eli5_what_is_a_white_dwarf_star_made_out_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ek3edti"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"To an extent it depends on the star that died. A White dwarf is essentially the exposed inerds of a sunlike star once the outer atmosphere has been cast off and nuclear fusion has ceased. What it's made of depends on it's mass and what it was last fusing before the reaction ceased.\n\nStars begin and spend most of their life fusing hydrogen into helium, then either stop or move on to Fusing Helium into elements like Carbon and Oxygen and Silicon (plus a few others)\n\nReally heavy stars can go on to start fusing them into other things, but I think your average white dwarf is probably going to be a ball of mostly carbon, oxygen and silicon "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
13za0r | what is redshirting in ncaa sports? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13za0r/what_is_redshirting_in_ncaa_sports/ | {
"a_id": [
"c78gbzr",
"c78gghe"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"NCAA rules say that a player can only play for 4 years. They don't want students essentially becoming professional college sports players. The primary reason they're in college is supposed to be to get a degree.\n\nBut, the team might not want a player to play in their first year. They may want a particularly good player to practice with the team for a year, develop their skills and generally become a better player. So, they don't let the player play in any games for his first (or even second) year. They aren't allowed to put on a normal uniform. They can still be on the sidelines during a game, but they have to wear a red shirt to make it clear that they're not eligible to play.\n\nThis way they still get the full 4 years of eligibility but the player gets to develop a little bit more.",
"It allows 4 years of a student athlete's NCAA eligibility to be spread out over 5 years. It's a way for an athlete who is likely not going to get any playing time in their freshmen year to still gain the experience of being on the team but not have that time count against their four years of eligibility. When redshirted, a player will still attend classes and practices, but not be able to play in any games that year.\n\nPlayers are typically redshirted because there is another older player on the team already who plays the same position. For instance, an incoming freshman quarterback may be redshirted if the team already has a senior quarterback and a junior backup quartback. The next season, the senior will have graduated and the redshirted player now can be on the active squad."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
7qqt3f | how is phobias treated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7qqt3f/eli5_how_is_phobias_treated/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsr7hzf",
"dsr8de3",
"dsrhbe1"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Education and Exposure mostly, depending on severity, you can generally treat phobias first by educating yourself on the actual risk and facts of the phobia, then exposing yourself to it. This doesn't mean if you're afraid of spiders you need to go handle a live spider, but it does mean approaching the situation in a way where you can adapt to being able to cope rationally in the same environment with them.\n\nIn most cases people won't get rid of phobias but they will learn to manage them. You can get to a point where it's not a crippling fear that sends you screaming and running but manage it down to a point where it just makes you uncomfortable.",
"Different treatments based on person. They can do anything from hypnosis to conditioning. for example i heard of a case where a person was scared of an animal (i forget what kind of animal specifically so i'll just say spider) so they eased them into it. They said \"somewhere in the building we have a spider\". And they would do that for awhile or few sessions. Next they would say \"there's a spider in the next room\". Do that for awhile then \"the spider is outside the door' then they would move it in the room and closer. Til eventually the person with the phobia was holding the spider in their hands",
"From personal experience, I had crippling arachnophobia until I was about 10yrs old. My parents got me help, which took about 3 years. Nowadays I can move spiders outside instead of freezing in place panicking for up to an hour straight. (One night I got zero sleep, frozen and panicking because a spider was in the corner above my bunk bed.)\n\nFirst it began with education. They made me read about spiders, then they introduced pictures of them about the therapist office and home where I had to do my best to simply touch the pictures, (maybe above a door knob or above the wash)\n\nThen it moved to exposure. We went to the arachnid exhibit twice a month for a fucking year. The first time I panicked so bad they called the EMTs. By the end of that year I could walk through and begrudgingly was a bit curious to see what was new. Even if it made me antsy.\n\nFinally it came to contact. This wasn't part of the therapy but my dad did it. I'd been fine on several camping trips and I'd even managed to contain spiders in a glass instead of panicking. Seeing one would give me a start but I wouldn't shut down. \n\nSo my dad took me to my uncle's place and had him teach me how to care for his redknee. (A type of tarantula) and I did that for a few months, weekly.\n\nAt this point, I'm almost 30, it's been over a decade and a half since spiders have given me a real start, much less a panic attack. Yeah it took fucking forever to get over and I don't know how normal that is, but I actually love the little creepy shits. Believe me, they're petrified of you. And they should be.\n\nAnyways I still freak out when watching masses of spiders, like funnel web babies or farms. Just no fucking escape. Id never watch 8 legged freaks, the posters make my skin crawl, but I'm not going to go into distress over a lomglegs or even a wolf simply marching up the couch. I'm functional.\n\nAn aside, my brother had/has monophobia. It's much more difficult to treat and he's only in his late 20s and gotten barely over it. Still coping. It's harder to address phobias that aren't strictly object oriented as far as I've been told. For example he couldn't handle driving alone in a car for a few years, and he only in the last 5 managed to get an apartment alone. On the upside he's got a stellar dating record because he jumps to cohabitation like instantly XD. He's learned to be incredibly likeable as a coping mechanism. I swear he could get a date from someone who doesn't even speak the language.\n\nOther ways of treating it involves hypnosis, drugs of course SSRI's like Zoloft, and submersion/exposure therapy. (Mine was obviously submersion. Hypnosis has never worked on me and drugs tend to need a really high dose to have any effect.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2yaoci | microfiber cloths. they seem to be recommended to clean everything? what are they and why are they so amazing? | So no matter what I look up, the solution is to almost always to wipe with a microfiber cloth. Whether to clean cars, glasses, computer screens, laptops, windows, etc.
One day they were just everywhere and I kind of took it for granted. But...some questions
1) What are they?
2) Why are they so amazing?
3) Are they all the same? Any brands to avoid? Any brands preferable?
4) How to clean microfiber cloths?
5) Do they have a lifespan? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yaoci/eli5_microfiber_cloths_they_seem_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"cp7retl",
"cp7rvro",
"cp7tyk6"
],
"score": [
2,
19,
4
],
"text": [
"Better question: why do we even have OTHER options?",
"1 they are cloths with a far higher surface area than more common ones\n\n2 the surface area means holding more water and particles, so you can clean more easily. All are synthetic, and high quality ones can be squeezed almost completely dry as well.\n\n3 no they are not the same. oh I don't know about brands\n\n4 for most, the safest/only way is to rinse in water. Some are more tolerant of soaps, but all will loose their qualities more quickly this way.\n\n5 Yes they do. It varies widly by the model. You should learn the purpose for the particular cloth, and follow the manufacturers care and use instructions. Also, if you were shopping for microfiber cloths for a particular purpose, you can safely bet that price and quality will line up lineirly. So the 2$ cloth for cleaning glasses will be inferior to the $10 one, but may serve you well.",
"I use microfiber mitts when washing my car to apply soap and a waffle weave microfiber to dry it.\n\n\nLike others have said they have a higher surface area and can trap water easier and pick up dust easier without creating \"swirls\" or micro scratches on a cars paint.\n\n\nSome brands are definitely better made. Cheap ones I just use to clean the inside of the car or dust around the house. You can tell they're cheap when they're really thin or have loose fibers coming out.\n\n\nThe more expensive ones with more intricate weaves I use to dry the car since it holds so much water. I can do my entire car without having to wring it.\n\n\n\nTo clean them I use a special microfiber soap that gets all the wax and compounds I use on my car out. It's also supposed to help keep the microfiber in better shape but I'm sure any detergent would work if you're not using them with detailing products. I bought a pack of about ten towels from a reputable detailing shop online and they've lasted me 4 years so far and still look new so maybe there is something to the microfiber soap."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1juqs4 | why do tv shows and movies sometimes have to change the names/logos on items for copyright reasons? wouldn't it just be free advertisement for the company/product? | I've always wondered this.. Please, explain this to me! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1juqs4/why_do_tv_shows_and_movies_sometimes_have_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbihjyg",
"cbihkn7"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a number of reasons for this.\n\nFirstly, it limits liability for trademark violations. If, for whatever reason, the company who has their products featured on a given show doesn't like the way in which the products are presented (or doesn't want to be associated with that particular show for some reason), that company may then try to take legal action against the show's producers for trademark violations (unauthorized use of the company's brand name/logo).\n\nSecondly, advertisers generally don't like it when shows feature products from other companies (especially competing products) at no cost because the advertisers feel it's not fair that they should have pay for the privilege to have their product shown in the program when other products are featured freely. So basically, products which are not official sponsors of the show are often blurred out or modified to be generic in order to attract advertisers and sponsors to the show and make it look like the show provides more value (and advertising exclusivity) to them.",
"You're asking this question backwards. Of course it would be free advertising, which would lessen the amount they could charge for paid product placement. By blocking your product, they are raising the value of your paying to have that blockage removed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3m1lnu | how did disney delay mickey mouse from being in public domain? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3m1lnu/eli5_how_did_disney_delay_mickey_mouse_from_being/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvb634r",
"cvb68aa",
"cvb6of1"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Money. They gave so much money to the law makers that they actually made a Mickey mouse law. ",
"Every time the copyright for Mickey Mouse is about to expire a bill goes into law stating that the length of time a copyright lasts is longer than the last one.\n\nFirst it was creators death, then +25 years, +50 years, ect. Honestly I wish it would end so we could listen to \"I Have A Dream\" and \"Happy Birthday\"...",
"By paying politicians to extend copyright for them. Extending copyright lengths after the fact is so clearly against the public interest that it is hard to put any other interpretation on it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3qyrw5 | union between countries (denmark-norway, austria-hungary etc) | I don't fully understand unions between countries. Is it a type of alliance? Same rulers or do the rulers work togheter?
?? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qyrw5/eli5_union_between_countries_denmarknorway/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwjhj5b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In the case of Denmark-Norway the king of Norway (Håkon Magnusson) married one of the daughters of the Danish king (Margrethe). They had a son, Olav, who was hair to the Norwegian throne. All of Margrethe's siblings died, and her son, Olav, now was chosen as hair to Denmark to. Olavs grandfather, Valdemar king of Denmark died when Olav was five years old. When Olav was ten, his father Håkon of Norway died. Olav was now king of both countries. His mother ruled trough her son. Unfortunately Olav died when he was only 16 years old. The nobles choose Margrethe's nephew, Erik of Pommern as hair to both Denmark and Norway. He choose Copenhagen as his seat, but ruled both kingdoms as separate countries. Later on more and more power was moved to Denmark, with the dissolving of the Norwegian Riksråd (council of realm) as the final blow to Norwegian self government. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
cv8ziu | what's the"resolution" of film photography? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cv8ziu/eli5_whats_theresolution_of_film_photography/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey2ndcr",
"ey38mte",
"ey3groz"
],
"score": [
31,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There isn’t a specific “resolution.” It depends on two main physical characteristics of the film itself - the size of the film and the speed of the film - as well as the way that film is exposed.\n\nThe first physical aspect is what format of film you’re using - there’s small, like a standard 35mm film that your average point-and-shoot camera would take; medium, which takes a range of film sizes (popularly 120mm); and large, which takes film sheets with dimensions of several inches.\n\nThe second physical aspect is the speed of the film, or how long it takes for light to affect the film; the higher the speed, the lower the quality of the image. This speed references the density of the film’s grain- a higher speed has a larger grain, and thus the image is a lower quality, because a finer grain has the ability to capture more detail. This is probably the most direct similarity to digital photography and resolution, because the grains are essentially like pixels; more pixels = more details.\n\nThe combination of film size and film speed essentially boils down to how many grains of film the image is being captured on - a large format film with a low speed will capture the most detail, because it has the most crystal to capture the details with.\n\nThese physical factors are then combined with the way the film is shot - specifically, the length of exposure - because again, the longer the film is exposed to light, the more time that light has to affect the film in greater detail.",
"Film can have a higher 'resolution' or sharpness than you can effectively use.\n\nNow this isn't exactly for five-year-olds but [this](_URL_0_) document has everything you need to know, and this part sort of answers your question:\n\n > Film Resolution defines the potential resolving power of a film; Kodak calls this sharpness. Resolution is determined using the MTF Curve, which is found in the film data sheets supplied by manufacturers. However, the MFT curve is measured using a sine wave bar chart printed directly on the film. The actual resolution of film is made on the film through a lens in a camera. \n\n > Based on the Resolving Power Equation(s) used by both Kodak and Fuji, the actual resolution of a “film-and-camera system” must be decreased by 30-80%, from native resolution. The greater the resolution of the film in a system, the greater the loss of the system resolution, for a specific lens with a given resolving power. This loss of system resolution is due to degradation of the image (1) exposed through a lens and (2) due to variables in film transport and film processing. \n\n > The MTF Curve of Kodachrome 200 (PKL) transparency film shows a native resolution of 50-lp/mm, (2540 ppi digital equivalent). Using the Fuji Resolving Power Equation, PKL shot through an excellent 35mm format lens (100 lp/mm lens) will have a final resolution of 33-lp/mm, with a digital equivalent resolution of 1962 ppi. This is a loss of 34% from the native MTF data, due to lens and film related issues.",
"It seems infinite at first, since film looks seamlessly smooth and lacks a familiar grid of pixels, but there are in fact tiny individual particles of chemicals. Exact numbers vary, but there should be *at least* 100,000 x 100,000 individual particles on 35mm film.\n\nHowever, the particles are so small that they can't really count as a pixel of resolution. They only work reliably in groups or clumps, because the waves of light often occupy a space larger than the individual particles, and other physical limitations depending on the film.\n\nSo what is the effective resolution? Just depends who you ask, what film they used, and how they measured it. Most people would agree it's very high, at least that of a 4k tv."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.tmax100.com/photo/pdf/film.pdf"
],
[]
] |
||
2putaa | how computer languages work in different (spoken) languages. if i wanted a computer to communicate with a computer in russia, would i have to speak russian, or is there some international standard? | Just curious | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2putaa/eli5_how_computer_languages_work_in_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn085yf",
"cn08sju",
"cn08xed"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Pretty much every programming language is in English, if that's what you're asking. People who can't speak English well have a very hard time learning to code, since it's harder to remember what (for example) an \"if/else\" command's name is if you don't know what if and else mean.",
"Computers use standardized protocols to communicate, regardless of language or location of the user. The protocols use a predetermined order and positioning of bits that are universally predetermined, so every computer that knows the protocols are on the same page. \n\nThink of this as the 'To' and 'From' areas on a letter. The actual contents of the letter don't matter to the post office.\n\nIts up to the programmer to code the client (user software) and server to ensure that the letter contents are understood by both parties. \n\n",
"There are two levels of computer language here.\n\nThe *programming* languages are almost always based on English, although there are a few based on other languages, and some that are completely abstract.\n\nThe *machine* language the computer run no longer has the human language part, and is basically just numbers. And when two computers talk, they use numbers that conform to an known standard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
15dvle | what was going on in libya when gaddafi was in power and why was he killed. | I'm seeing a lot of contradictory articles on great things he did for his people and how they loved him but then articles talking about how his people hated him and how evil he was. What's the deal? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15dvle/eli5_what_was_going_on_in_libya_when_gaddafi_was/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7lvwlz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Gaddafi was about to introduce a new currency, the gold Dinar, made from real gold for the african countries. He would have then sold the petrol from libya for gold only, wich the usa cannot afford. So the usa went in to abolish the gold dinar"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2whflw | why are recorders still taught in music classes in school if they all sound so terrible? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2whflw/eli5_why_are_recorders_still_taught_in_music/ | {
"a_id": [
"coqv5ju",
"coqv88v",
"coqvwqq"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Because they are really cheap instruments you can't make everyone buy a $1000 violin. ",
"They are cheap and easier to play with tiny hands.",
"They're cheap, small, simple, don't require any real maintenance and don't require any skill to get a somewhat-acceptable tone out of or get correct pitch.\n\nThey also don't have to sound terrible - breath control for proper tone production isn't typically taught to the kind of students who are playing recorder to begin with (little kids), that's all."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
aagyft | what exactly does "airplane mode" do and how does it keep my phone from disrupting airplane functions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aagyft/eli5_what_exactly_does_airplane_mode_do_and_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecrxzd9",
"ecrya80",
"ecs05o2",
"ecsatga",
"ecsj486"
],
"score": [
50,
3,
7,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It disables the cellular transceiver in your phone. It just turns off the part of your phone that sends and receives data from cell towers. The idea is that you will not be creating electromagnetic interference that could potentially interact with the aircraft's instrumentation. The reality is that everything is so well shielded now, it probably wouldn't matter.",
"\"Airplane Mode\" turns off all the radios in your phone, for example your cellular and wifi radios. This is why your connection goes dead whenever you use Airplane Mode.\n\nIn theory airlines make you do this (or shut off your phone entirely) because they don't want transmissions from your device interfering with the plane's instruments. It's a very very old regulation and its applicability to modern aircraft is dubious at best but the airlines still take a \"better safe than sorry\" approach.",
"Wasn't it proven that phones don't disrupt aircraft functions at all?\n\nAnyways, airplane mode just turns off Wifi/Mobile Data/Cellular Service/possibly radio",
"Airplane mode disables the radios on your phone that talk to Cell Towers. Phones periodically ping phone towers basically saying \"Hey, are you there? How many of you are there?\" the further away a phone gets from a Cell Tower, the louder it yells \"HEY!!!!\". That's why older phones, when they are out of service range, drain battery really fast. Its because they are pumping as much power as they can into that little antenna trying to yell \"HEY! Is anyone there?\". Modern phones give up after a while and check a lot less frequently after enough attempts have failed. Which is why if you are in an area with low reception and your modern phone loses bars, it helps to flip it into airplane mode and flip it back so the phone can try checking for cell towers one more time! \n\n\nCellphones don't really disrupt aircraft systems as much as they cause an annoyance in the captains ears. When 100 devices are going off yelling \"HEY\" at 50,000 feet, each \"HEY\" sounds like a high pitched chirp in the ear of the radio the captain, who is listening to Air Traffic Controller instructions. If the chirps are really loud (on unshielded equipment) it can prevent the captain from hearing important information, or delay how long it takes for information to be conveyed! (that's how turning Airplane mode on helps!)",
"As others have said, Airplane mode mostly just turns off the radios on your phone.\n\nThese features by themselves will not disrupt airplane functions. You can think of it this way incidentally, if having dozens of devices with radios would cause problems with the avionics, why would they equip planes with wifi for you to use?\n\nIt was a theorized fear years ago but not a practical one.\n\nThe big reason they make you put your phones and such away during takeoff and landing is that those are the points most likely for something to go wrong during the flight. They want you focused on the plane and what's going on outside both for safeties sake (you may have a bit of information that makes you slightly faster at responding in the emergency) and so that after the incident, you might be able to provide some critical piece of information (I saw a duck hit the wing!) that would help the accident investigation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
68bkmw | what causes those static-like patches of white pixels when watching films on a disc that's been scratched? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68bkmw/eli5_what_causes_those_staticlike_patches_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgxrw4t"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine it like this,\n\nYoi stretched out the dvd into one line, here you can see all the code for the laser which is etched into the dvd, if it gets scratched off the laser will see nothing an percieve it as zero and leave the screen white in places.\n\nHowever sometines when scratched the laser can also percieve the scratches as random colors so you also see an array of colors"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
9t1sh9 | when someone’s metabolism speeds up where does the extra energy go? | So if two people eat 2000 cals a day. If the person with the slow metabolism puts the energy on as fat. What happens to the person with the quick metabolism? Where does it go? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9t1sh9/eli5_when_someones_metabolism_speeds_up_where/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8t2988",
"e8tfrid"
],
"score": [
10,
11
],
"text": [
"The extra energy is used, primarily for movement. People with a fast metabolism tend to be a lot more active.",
"Your body is in a constant state of two processes: \n[Gluconeogenesis](_URL_0_)- the building up of sugar chains in order to store and transfer energy \n[Glycolysis](_URL_1_)- the breaking down of sugar chains to use energy to do work\n\nWhat is important to know about these two processes is: \n1) They are almost exactly the same, just reversed \n2) Some energy is lost in each reaction as heat\n\nFor your example where the metabolism is higher in one person over another (but no additional work has been done); essentially the person with higher metabolism is performing the buildup and breakdown reactions more. As the reactions are performed more and more, more energy is lost as heat.\n\nTL;DR- The body is artificially generating heat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolysis"
]
] |
|
ez8dab | where does our bodily energy go when we don't use it? | For example if you get really riled up to the point where you look berserk or you're high on some kind of crazy drug that's making you feel like exploding out of your skin then you just stop and sit there or go to sleep, was there ever more potential energy inside your body before you calmed down? If not how does that work? And if so, where does the energy go? Or is the energy simply used to power the involuntary functions of the body?
If energy can't be created or destroyed, where does the energy from someone on cocaine come from? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ez8dab/eli5_where_does_our_bodily_energy_go_when_we_dont/ | {
"a_id": [
"fgllqur"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"You're conflating the physical concept of energy with the abstract human feeling of being energetic. They are not the same at all. Being riled up doesn't mean your body contains more energy, it's just how you feel. Your body isn't a vessel that stores energy until it reaches some peak and explodes. That's not what potential energy is, that's a completely unrelated concept. Drugs don't contain calories so they don't give you any energy, only food does. In fact, stimulant drugs tend to speed up your metabolism which makes you burn energy even faster. You're always using energy from metabolizing food, and if you're consuming more energy from calories than you use, your body turns it into fat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2x1e6b | why do cables that plug into phones such as the iphone cable have multiple pins going out but ultimately its a 4 pin usb connection on the others end? | I know androids have standard micro USB connections but the iPhone cables and older devices have a 32 pin connection or the new lightning cable for iPhone have 8 pins. The other end of the cable has 4 pins. Why don't all phones just have 4 pins? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2x1e6b/eli5_why_do_cables_that_plug_into_phones_such_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cow0iz2",
"cow0leo"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The iPhone dock connector was designed to provide multiple types of control & power. If you plug the phone into certain types of docks, it carries audio data & lets you control the device (play/pause, stop, next/previous track), along with providing power.\n\nWhen you connect it to USB, you're only connecting power & data, ignoring all the other pins.",
"In the case of the lightening connector, the 8 pins aren't used to communicate with the USB port, they communicate with a chip inside the cable. That chip in turn communicates with the USB port.\n\nThat doesn't answer your question, though, of why there are so many pins. The answer is because it allows the phone to work out which way up the cable has been inserted. The phone only looks at the bottom set of pins, not the top set. [This diagram](_URL_0_) shows how the top and bottom set are connected together in such a way that the phone can work out what's going on and communicate with the chip.\n\nIn the case of older Apple connectors, the extra pins were simply to deal with non-USB accessories (as amoeba has described in another post). The lightening connector uses its on-board chip to deal with non-USB accessories as required."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.chipworks.com/en/technical-competitive-analysis/resources/blog/technologyblog/files/2012/12/2pin-config-4.jpg?file=2012/12/2pin-config-4.jpg"
]
] |
|
1e79j9 | why do people want obama impeached over the benghazi attack? | I'm 14 and I don't have a clear understanding over the situation in Benghazi. All I know is there was an attack that killed some people. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1e79j9/eli5_why_do_people_want_obama_impeached_over_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9xhrr9",
"c9xhvlq",
"c9xis1w",
"c9xlup1",
"c9xoh0d",
"c9xou52",
"c9xp1tq",
"c9xpdyu",
"c9xrl7e"
],
"score": [
2,
73,
86,
9,
5,
2,
16,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Actually just covered this in a different thread. It's not necessairly ELI5-ready, but I think I did a good job.\n\n[Link](_URL_0_)",
"The accusation is that Obama used Susan Rice to cover up that there was a terrorist involvement in the Benghazi attack. After the attack Susan Rice's position was that the attack was due to the movie The Innocence of Muslims.\n\nBecause Susan Rice was stating this and she works for President Obama, Republicans are saying that it was ultimately his fault and because Petraeus later said that he had told the President that it was a terrorist attack. They are also angry because those under attack at the embassy asked for military help and were denied that help. Because President Obama is the Commander in Chief they are also laying the blame of that upon his shoulders. \n\nAlso a lot of people think that this is just a huge dog and pony show to destabilize Hillary Clinton's bid for President in 2016, which it most likely is. Regardless, it's pretty hard to impeach a United States President especially one with a significantly higher approval rating than his congressional counterparts. ",
"The scandal originally was about when the attacks occurred the Administration, including Hillary Clinton, blamed it on reaction to some terribly made [anti-Muslim movie trailer](_URL_0_). In actuality it was coordinated effort by Al Qaeda.\n\nThis got the Republicans very upset. And they accused Obama of playing politics by covering up a security failure and Al Qaeda attack and pointing fingers at the movie and implying that Republican extremists were the cause.\n\nInstead of the White House being grown ups and admitting they messed up they have parsed statements and shown that technically they did make some statements blaming terrorists rather than movie critics.\n\nAnd instead of the Republicans being grown ups and getting over the whole thing they have conducted Congressional hearings to look into the thing.\n\nThe congressional hearings today are about how much warning there was before the attack. The Republicans are trying to find something but have no actual evidence the White House did anything drastically wrong.\n",
"There have been arguments in favor of impeaching Obama since shortly after he took office. The reason changes over and over again, and sometimes there is no reason given. A portion of these excuses - claims that he is a socialist, communist, fascist, Arab, Muslim, and/or Kenyan - not only have no proof behind them, but some of them are contradictory to one another or contradictory to facts we know for certain about Obama. These particular excuses are merely euphemisms for claiming he should be impeached for being black, as a portion of his opposition is racist but is trying (and failing) to conceal their racism. While this portion of his opposition might not make up the majority of those who want him impeached for Benghazi, they are most definitely part of that crowd.\n\n(I should note, if it wasn't clear enough, that not all opposition to Obama is from racists. However, some of it is certainly from racists.)",
"Cause they lack an understanding of reality. Any impeachment would be tried in the senate, needing 2/3rds majority to succeed. So an actual impeachment is only possible if the Republicans can convince a significant number of Democratic Senators to go against their own president, or if the Democrats lose every single seat that is contested in the 2014 election.\n\nNeither of those events are very likely to happen. So any call for impeachment is just political grandstanding that will pretty much be a waste of everyone's time.",
"I'm not sure there is seriously anyone calling for impeachment at this moment. There is more information that needs to be gathered before anything like that is possible or appropriate. \n\nPeople here have failed to mention Gregory Hicks, former deputy U.S. Chief of Mission in Libya, who has been referred to by most as a whistle-blower in this case. Hicks, a registered democrat, testified that they were denied reinforcements when requested for an unknown reason. These extra soldiers may have saved people's lives! Hicks said that Lt. Col. Gibson, who we know little information about, was furious when he was told that they were not allowed to help without an explanation being given! \n\nYou see, this isn't necessarily an issue that is just being politicized by the Republicans to bring down Obama. The whistle-blower in the case actually voted for Obama for president. The fact is that the executive branch lied to the people intentionally. The fact that they lied makes people feel like there needs to be more transparency. ",
"I see that the conservatives (if you can call them that) are out in full force. Anything that paints any sort of objective picture here is down voted to hell.\n\nThey're as ridiculous as the congressmen they support. This whole thing is massively overblown and there is no scandal. Fox News hates Obama and wants to impeach him for any reason. This is today's reason. Next month they'll invent another pretend scandal.",
" > Why do people want Obama impeached over the Benghazi attack?\n\nThey watch too much Fox News.",
"Another republican blow up, similar to Whitewater."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1e6rt0/john_mccain_refuses_to_back_impeaching_obama_over/c9xfaa0"
],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjoa3QazVy8&bpctr=1368400752"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
69uosl | why is planter's trail mix allowed to use real m & ms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69uosl/eli5_why_is_planters_trail_mix_allowed_to_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh9hzz7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because they have a deal with Mars. It's mutually beneficial for the two companies since they don't directly compete. If you pay attention you can find this sort of thing all over the snack aisle."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6p11v8 | why is planting trees so important when farmers plant millions of plants every year? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6p11v8/eli5_why_is_planting_trees_so_important_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"dklwkd2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Many reasons.\n\nTrees are much larger than what a farmer plants. When they grow they provide homes for many animals and one tree is better for the environment than an acre of a crop.\n\nTrees provide shade, they can live for many years, cleaning the air..\n\nTrees have deep roots which are good for the soil. They reach deep and pull up nutrients and when established the trees don't need watering. To compare most crops have very shallow roots which means the farmer needs to add nutrients to the soil and they may need watering (irrigation).\n\nFarmers crops are mono-culture (one type of plant). Mono-culture environments are sterile and don't support much other life, a tree will soon have a forest around it, including trees of other types, shrubs, moss, and so forth, all creating a nicer environment.\n\nAlso remember farmers crops are short lived - harvested after a few months and often the field is left bare after that and some top soil will even blow away (or get washed off in the rain). So you only have the benefit of the plants for a few months and the plants are pretty small in comparison to a tree and don't do much for reducing carbon from the air like a tree does. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
zz66g | why does my voice sounds weird on video/audio? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zz66g/why_does_my_voice_sounds_weird_on_videoaudio/ | {
"a_id": [
"c68zae5",
"c68zafo"
],
"score": [
15,
4
],
"text": [
"When you speak, you hear two things. You hear the sound of your own voice carried through the air back to your ears (having bounced off the walls or something), and you also hear the sound of your voice resonating inside your own body, in your chest cavity and your sinuses and all that. Both of these contribute to what you hear when you listen to yourself speaking.\n\nMicrophones can generally only record the part that comes through the air. Which, incidentally, is the only thing other people can hear too.\n\nSo microphones hear what other people hear, which is less than what you yourself hear from inside your own body.\n\nPut another way, your voice sounds *normal* when recorded; it sounds weird when you hear it from inside yourself.",
"The voice you hear when you speak also includes sound made by the vibrations in the bones in your head and face, which only you can hear. This makes it sound different to that heard by others, and therefore that heard on recorded audio."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3vyd4x | the difference between hate crime and terrorism | Thanks for the responses. Pretty much what I thought | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vyd4x/eli5_the_difference_between_hate_crime_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxrqhrt",
"cxrqzmm",
"cxrsk7x",
"cxrtr3d",
"cxrvqzn"
],
"score": [
4,
55,
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The difference is in the intended audience. Terrorism is done in a very public way, in order to terrorize as many people as possible. A hate crime is simply a crime where the victim was chosen because of their race / religion / etc.\n\nSo, for example, here in Pittsburgh a cab driver was shot in the middle of the night because he is Muslim. That is a hate crime. If the shooter had gone to a mosque in the middle of the day and started shooting people, trying to get maximum press coverage, that would be terrorism.",
"edit:formatting\n\n**Hate crime** is targeted at a specific individual(s) and causing harm to those individual(s) solely because they are a member of a legally [protected class.](_URL_0_)\n\n**Terrorism** is an act that targets a group of people broader than those harmed in the action taken. The intent is to cause fear that is felt across a large group of people that were not necessarily directly affected by the violent action.",
"Hate crime: harming an individual(s) because they like apples.\n\nTerrorism: destroying apple orchards or tainting apples because people like them.",
"Hate crime is usually defined in the US by a state's law. It generally requires an investigator to prove that the only reason, or the main reason, a crime was committed was due to the victim's race, gender, sexual orientation etc. Terrorism, however, is usually done to change policy, government, or laws. Whereas hate crimes want none of those and the crime is done because you dislike the targeted aspect of the victim.",
"Terrorism is a tactic used in ~~asynchronous~~ *asymmetric* power situations, by the weaker power, to create fear and incite the more powerful faction to self destruction. \n\nHate crime is a crime whose motivation is hate of a group."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
50mviu | if you throw a die you have a 1-in-6 (16.7%) chance of landing the desired number, but if you throw it six times you don't have a 100% chance of landing it. | I know it's theoretical, but what does this look like/what is this called mathematically? This is fucking me up.
I know there are dice with more than six sides, this is just an example. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50mviu/eli5_if_you_throw_a_die_you_have_a_1in6_167/ | {
"a_id": [
"d75a3ie"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"For independent events like die rolls, probabilities don't add, they multiply. So the chance of getting a 2nd roll the same as the first is 1/6. And the chance of getting a 2nd roll the same as the first AND a 3rd roll the same as the second is 1/6 * 1/6, or 1/36."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
20xblf | how instant hot water showers work | I'm from a country where they're not hugely common and I have to turn on the water heater for like an hour when I want to have a shower, how do other showers just always have hot water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20xblf/eli5_how_instant_hot_water_showers_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg7lcgg",
"cg7lriz",
"cg7mw5l"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"In the US, at least, we have a Water Heater Tank.\n\nThink of a big tank of water that is kept at a relatively constant temperature. When you turn on the hot water pipe, hot water is pumped out of the hot water tank.\n\nIt's usually electric or gas heated. \n\nIn other countries I've been to, there is sometimes a tankless system where the water is warmed up as it passes through the hose, at the shower area.\n\nI've also been places where you would boil the water in a big fucking pot and pour it over your head. It's almost more fun tbh.",
"There are several different configurations of shower but the main two are as follows.\r\rElectric showers:\rAn electric unit on the wall of the shower heats up cold water as it passes into the shower unit. These are usually cheap as all you need is the shower unit on the wall. They are normally often don't give a particularly powerful water jet as they have to heat the water as it goes and electric heating can be inefficient. \r\rMixer shower:\rThese showers mix hot water from your water heater (in uk these are generally gas powered) with cold water to get a desired temperature. \rThey need a decent head of water (the water needs to fall from above to give enough pressure) so can require water pumps to give a powerful blast.\rMixer showers can simply mix the water and you have to fiddle with them to get the right temp or can be thermostatic which allow you to set a temperature that it tries to maintain.\r\rSource: i worked for a bathroom retailer for a long time",
"In Iceland, were i live, there is no need for in-house water heater, we use geothermal heat and then it is mixed in the bathroom."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
zfukn | how do government agencies/big companies track internet usage of users, especially if there are hundreds of people using it at the same time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zfukn/eli5_how_do_government_agenciesbig_companies/ | {
"a_id": [
"c648vrl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The places sending you the information have to track you anyway in order to send it. All the government/companies have to do is copy and organize this data; when you have lots of very big servers, that's not particularly hard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4mlfuj | if everyone stopped dying altogether, right this moment, how long do we have before the earth is completely overpopulated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mlfuj/eli5if_everyone_stopped_dying_altogether_right/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3wdyoz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I believe 14B is an accepted maximum capacity. For every 8 worldwide deaths, there are 19 births (2.375x). Around 55.3M people die every year. Since the population is currently ~7.4B, that means we need 6.6B more, so just under 116 years."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2rpab2 | why is it that as we get older, we find it harder to enjoy new things (ie. music) and instead focus on things that remind us of the past? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rpab2/eli5why_is_it_that_as_we_get_older_we_find_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnhzlaw",
"cni0028"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm not really sure that this is the case. \n\nIf it is, though, I would think the answer is in the question: since the very young have comparatively less of *anything* to remind them of good things in the past, they cling to whatever's current just by default, whereas anyone who's even 20 or older will have (increasingly with age) more and more things that remind them of good things in the past.",
"It doesn't really work that way at all. I'm in my early 40's and LOVE music. I do find it harder and harder to find new bands/artists I really like, but that isn't because I live in the past. I have al;ways liked music from all eras. It's mainly because my standards are pretty high now and the bar for someone new to enter the pantheon is pretty high.\n\n Think of it this way. The first 100 musical artists you listen to are the 100 best artists you have ever heard. Beccause they are all you know. This is why teenagers have the annoying habit of thinking the latest and greatest is also the greatest of all time. It's called lack of context. Now, with a little more time, say you are exposed to 100 more new artists. Now you have heard 200 artists, and to pick a top 100 of all time you have to start dumping the weaker links from the original 100 to make new for the best of the new stuff. \n\n Once you run through that cycle enough times you will have accomplished a few things. For one, you will have acquired a real depth of knowledge about both music in general, and your tastes in particular. For another, when you have heard 1000-1500 artists your top 100 is fairly exclusive, and also of a fairly high quality. \n\n On the negative your tastes do get a little static, and it takes more to knock you out of your comfortable groove. It's also harder to like a lot of new stuff because it starts sounding so derivative, and you will tend to fall back to enjoying the original instead of the new people copying them (in spite of the fact that what was \"original\" to you copied something even earlier). Also, since you have narrowed down your list of stuff you like so many times (and 100 is just an arbitrary number to give an example, of course) something has to really jump out at you to make the cut. It gets harder and harder to find something of that high quality because truly great musicians are fairly rare, and only a handful come along each new decade."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8qjbqp | why are viruses so difficult to get rid of? if they mutate too quickly, how do they retain their orignal side effect? (common cold, hiv, herpes) | As per title, (resubmitted due to lack of flair), how come it's nigh impossible to get rid of viruses? If they mutate so fast, how do they retain their original effect on the human body?
If they keep on mutating, there should be a chance that some viruses will mutate into something our immune system is good at killing, right? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8qjbqp/eli5_why_are_viruses_so_difficult_to_get_rid_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"e0jkxv1",
"e0jldqj",
"e0jucrp"
],
"score": [
4,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"Two different questions, two different responses:\n\nDifficulty of removal could fall into two camps, eradication of a given virus, or clearing of all viruses from a given area. Both are difficult due to different reasons.\n\nViruses aren't alive per se, they need a cell to reproduce (of which they don't have). So with cleansers and what not that are meant to degrade or kill living organisms, viruses persist. You need to degrade the very structures of viruses to remove them.\n\nEradication of a virus is the crux of your second question, regarding mutation.\n\nMutations are *not* \"decided\" by a virus. Evolution works by random mutations showing up. The advantageous mutations (hardiness, virulence, transmission rate and method) are kept, as it allows the virus to flourish. Negative mutations simply die off due to the inability to compete. So over time, the virus gets more capable as its less-capable brethren are weeded out due to competition.\n\nThis applies to all evolution, from viruses to animals, plants and fungi. Humans are constantly evolving their immune systems (innately and in a reactive way, the term \"evolving\" here is literal and metaphorical) to defend from bacteria, viruses and everything else.\n\nThe real reason viruses are dangerous, is that they can \"reproduce\" very quickly and are prone to mutation (for various reasons). This means they can outpace humans in the great arms race of life (immune system features vs. infiltration features of invaders) and always seem a step ahead.\n\nFinally, most viruses that mutate will gain a negative trait (to their fitness and replication) and immediately die off, or the mutation will change absolutely nothing in how they function.\n\n",
"First of all, you have to distinguish between RNA and DNA viruses. Mutations rarely occurs in DNA viruses but are frequent in RNA viruses (just think about the common flu virus). The problem with viruses is that they use the transcriptional/traslational apparatus of the cell for their replication so their life circle would be linked to the one of the cell too. Due to that, any kind of treatment will inevitably affect also the cell. That's why bacteria infections are commonly more eradicable than viruses' and for the latter we prefer prevention (for example vaccines -- exception: some viruses don't have any antigen linked to the disease, like HCV). \n[The most frequent drugs used for viruses have such targets: virus genome, virus proteases or virus polymerases.]",
"So 2 things with your question:\n\nfirst you need to know our immune system fights viruses by having white blood cells that have many different 'hooks' and those hooks catch the surface of those viruses. If a white blood cell catches a virus it hooks get reproduced. Viruses like the Common Cold change their surface fast. So our immune system is not really good against those.\n\nSecond mutation and viruses and evolution. If a virus mutates so we can kill it, that virus doesn't reproduce anymore. And all the other viruses without that mutation (basically the siblings) are still around and reproduce. So evolution screws us over here. But it also makes diseases less deadly for its host species over time, since a dead host doesn't spread the disease around.\n\nTo the original side effects: some symptoms of the common cold are reactions of your body to help fight the virus. Others are effects from the virus (like HIV attacks your immune system) that are caused by parts that don't change as fast as the surface of the virus. \n\nAlso I would guess if the symptoms change too much, we give the disease a different name."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ib2ks | if one country gets fined by another, how is the fine enforced? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ib2ks/eli5_if_one_country_gets_fined_by_another_how_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"cueuvu5"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"I don't understand. It is impossible to fine other countries. If you are referring to reparations for war, that is different. It if you are referring to fines imposed by a treaty organization (I.e. UN, NATO, etc) that is also different. Can you please clarify."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
e73v6p | how do stops in a pipe organ work? | Context: I work in a museum with a Baroque-era European pipe organ from between 1670-1770. Every week, some students from a local university’s music program come by and play it. Thing sounds awesome.
On it, there are 10-12 knobs that, when pulled, totally change the sound of the organ, which I now know are called stops. What I don’t know, and have not learnt through Google, is how these stops so dramatically change the timbre of the organ. It goes from sounding like Phantom of the Opera, to a giant flute, to a Beethoven-esque sound... it just does not compute.
Can someone ELI5? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e73v6p/eli5_how_do_stops_in_a_pipe_organ_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"f9v67oz",
"f9vdw43",
"f9vivb2"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"Those are literally valves that direct air to different sets of pipes. Depending on the material, shape, length, etc., of the pipes, you can get different sounds. If you pull a stop, it opens a valve, and when you push it back in, it closes it.",
"Organs are very complicated instruments. Larger ones have hundreds of different sets of pipes. Each set is keyed to one of the keyboards (there's probably a technical term, but I don't know it) so when you pull out the stop that opens the valve, you can trigger the pipes associated with a particular note across several different sets of pipes. Some organs have semi-programmable buttons where you can engage a group of stops mid-song. This is how you can get such complicated sounds from a single performer. [This](_URL_0_) video gives a nice tour of a large organ. It's really spectacular the effort that goes into such a massive instrument.",
"The reason why you can get such a variable sound by changing the stops is that an organ is quite literally a physical synthesizer.\n\nThe sound that an instrument makes (its timbre) can be decomposed into multiple tones: a fundamental frequency that determines the note that is being played, and a bunch of harmonics at multiples of it (e.g. 2×, 3×, etc). The volume of these parts relative to each other is what makes an instrument sound one way or another. For example, you might have a 500Hz tone, a 1000Hz tone, a 1500Hz tone, etc, at different volumes. Computer synthesizers often work by mixing together tones like this to produce a given sound. Changing which note you play changes the base note and all the harmonics along with it, but the pattern remains roughly the same for a given sound/instrument.\n\nThe stops of an organ literally correspond to these harmonics (or combinations of them). So by configuring them differently you can make it sound closer to a flute, to a violin, etc."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeB3JnKp8To"
],
[]
] |
|
qydch | why are there print and television advertisements for things like cotton, plastic, clean coal or eggs. | I don't understand why there are ads for things like this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qydch/why_are_there_print_and_television_advertisements/ | {
"a_id": [
"c41fsn2"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Those campaigns are put on usually by lobbies for the entire industry. Their purpose is to influence and raise people opinion of the item in question so that people both buy it more/vote for proposal that they feel are in their interest. That's partially why you'll fine that those ads seem to be more about inspiring people then pushing any particular product.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
459jfj | the implications of the detection of gravitational waves by the ligo team | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/459jfj/eli5_the_implications_of_the_detection_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"czw5acc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\"Well, gravitational waves give us another way to observe space. For example, waves from the Big Bang would tell us a little more about how the universe formed. Waves also form when black holes collide, supernovae explode, and massive neutron stars wobble. So detecting these waves would give us a new new insight into the cosmic events that produced them.\nFinally, gravitational waves could also help physicists understand the fundamental laws of the universe. They are, in fact, a crucial part of Einstein's general theory of relativity. Finding them would prove that theory—and could also help us figure out where it goes astray. Which could lead to a more accurate, more all-encompassing model, and perhaps point the way toward a theory of everything.\" So. Einstein nailed it. -And not only do we have the data to prove it, but we've also got what we need to take our understanding to the next level, potentially resulting in a working Grand Unified Theory. Aka The secrets of the universe are now within short reach."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8ny8aj | do other animals actually have “human” facial expressions (smiles, frowns, furrowed brows) or is it just our minds wanting to see facial expressions in animals? | I have seen pictures of frowning bunnies, smiling elephants, sad giraffes, laughing monkeys. It seems like facial expressions are not just human traits but I want to know if there’s any sort of scientific studies to prove/disprove this theory | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8ny8aj/eli5_do_other_animals_actually_have_human_facial/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzzajet",
"dzzb5ty",
"dzzbd9m",
"dzzrdjv"
],
"score": [
8,
4,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe it somewhat has to do with a cognitive phenomena called Pareidolia - in which our brains responds to certain visual stimuli that evokes the recognition of some pattern (like a anthropomorphic expression) where none exists. Please take a look at this article in Wikipedia. \n\n_URL_0_",
"Other apes use facial expressions to communicate emotions and messages. But im not sure if its specific to primates.",
"Sure. A dog will squint different way with either pain or pleasure. We humans pick up on it. ",
"Ok so let me give it a go again. You know how sometimes you look at some objects and you think \"oh, that kinda looks like a smiling face\" or something like that? That is your brain creating an image of something familiar out of some clues you are looking at. This is an ability that our brains have that makes us understand when someone is happy, sad and so on by looking at their faces. \n\n\nWhen you look at an object or an animal, your brain looks for the same clues. So if you see the corners of a mouth (or something that is where the mouth is supposed to be) curled up, your brain says \"smile\". If it is curled down, it says. \"sad\".\n\n We try to give the same meaning specially to animals that have the same face characteristics - mouth, nose, eyes - because it is part of our instinct as well. You don't mess with a dog that is showing its teeth in a certain way because the it clearly says \"pissed off\". And you don't have to be an adult to know that. \n\nHope this one is better?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
558zl3 | why was the native american code during ww2 so hard to break? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/558zl3/eli5_why_was_the_native_american_code_during_ww2/ | {
"a_id": [
"d88jcvm",
"d88jfb2",
"d88jmt8",
"d88k9mc",
"d88l4hr",
"d88owgy",
"d88wu9s"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
4,
5,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Languages are organized in families. English is part of the Indo-European family, so almost all European languages are from that family. There are lots of loanwords too.\n\nThe Native American languages were from their own family, so the linguists in Germany and Japan didn't have experience with them. Also, since pretty much everyone who spoke the language lived in a small geographic area inside the US, that made it even harder for other countries to study it.\n\nWithout the ability to study these languages in context, it's almost impossible to decipher the words, and then what the codes mean.",
"Nobody other than Native Americans spoke the language and it was so different from languages elsewhere as to be nearly impenetrable; you might be able to understand Portuguese a bit if you know Spanish for example, but Navajo didn't have any counterparts.\n\nAdd on that they used different words for units (a bomber might be a vulture, and a fighter a hawk) and it was a very effective and fast form of secure communication.",
"Because the code they talked in was based on their own native languages.\n\nIf you have a simple cipher written or spoken in a well known language that can be broken with a sufficient application of math.\n\nBreaking a code based on Navajo or Basque would involve figuring out and translating the language.\n\nTranslating an unknown language especially one that wasn't very much related to any other language that was known by others is way harder than deciphering a code.\n\nRight now many of the codes used in WWII could be cracked and brute forced by modern computers, Google translate still has real problems with translating from one human language to another though and that is despite actually having access to all sorts of information about the languages.\n",
"Not only are they speaking in a language you dont know, they're speaking in codewords.\n\nThey're not saying \"enemy tank spotted at grid X\". They're saying \"charlie brown hopped fence and fell on X\"",
"The Germans and Japanese had zero experience with Native American languages. They barely new they existed, and didn't even have a related language at home they could study to try and figure it out. It would be like us trying to figure out a Martian language.",
"It's mostly because they are languages that Native Europeans would have never been exposed to. Whereas most European languages share one of a few root languages, Native American languages such as Navajo are based off root languages that never existed in Europe.",
"1. Navajo is a very difficult language to learn because it is a tonal language, different from most western languages. \n2. There are very few speakers of Navajo, native speakers are isolated to certain parts of the USA.\n3. There were few academics who might know Navajo, and it would only be of interest to American academics, not German or Japanese academics, so there was little chance the enemy could find a native speaker in their own ranks. \n4. Beyond the use of a hard to learn language which wasn't known to the enemy, the Navajo code talkers spoke in code (i.e. they didn't say \"Enemy spotted in location X\", they used agreed upon code words and phrases which would have sounded like nonsense to any Navajo speakers who were listening but not in on the code. \n\nThe code was weak from the perspective that there was a 1:1 correspondence between input and output, so encrypting the same message twice would result in the same \"encrypted\" version, which the enemy could theoretically figure out and be on the lookout for in the future. In that sense it was much weaker than strategic codes like Enigma. However it was only used as a tactical battlefield code where messages needed to stay secret for only a short time. There was no way for the enemy to QUICKLY decipher the code. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
42nv43 | why does windows sometimes estimate copying time super incorrectly? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42nv43/eli5_why_does_windows_sometimes_estimate_copying/ | {
"a_id": [
"czbpy5b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It takes longer to copy many smaller files than one large file. Sometimes you may be copying a combination of the two so windows thinks all the files are small and since the average copying speed has dropped copying the smaller files it increases the expected time to complete the rest of the files thinking that the remaining files will copy at the same rate."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
butafk | how does air move across a room? | I'm sitting in my house and just closed a window - 3 metres away on the other side of the room, the door rattled and then opened as a result of me closing the window. Can someone explain how shutting the window shook and opened the door on the other side?
Thanks | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/butafk/eli5_how_does_air_move_across_a_room/ | {
"a_id": [
"eph8xb6",
"ephe8ec"
],
"score": [
2,
9
],
"text": [
" > just closed a window (...) the door rattled\n\nThat shouldn't happen, unless you're leaving something out or missed the sequence of events.\n\nUsually, shutting a door can rattle a window, but not the other way around, because doors swing and windows merely close.\n\nIt's air pressure. When a door swings closed, it's pushing air in front of it, which can increase or decrease pressure in a room. That, in turn, affects the ratio of internal and external air pressure on a window, causing it to rattle.",
"Air pressure. My house has really weird pressure. I can close a door on one end of the house, and if the garage door isn't latched right, it'll open and then SLAM shut."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4humyc | how is dubai able to build so much infrastructure so quickly without much political opposition? | And in other places it takes years to get infrastructure in place. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4humyc/eli5_how_is_dubai_able_to_build_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2sflih",
"d2sfy5v"
],
"score": [
14,
4
],
"text": [
"Dubai is an absolute monarchy: there *is* no political opposition. That doesn't mean that the ruling family does whatever they feel like doing without consultation, but they could. The largest property developers have state connections e.g. the founder of Emaar Properties, Mohamed Alabbar, was also a chief economic adviser to the Dubai regime. \n\nIt's also worth noting that outside the city centre, Dubai was pretty much empty desert. All those skyscrapers such as the Burj Khalifa, weren't built over existing infrastructure. ",
"Absolute monarchy. Dubai is ruled by Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. There are no elections. All government bodies are run by members of the Maktoum family. There's no debates, no politicking, no pesky journalists, and only minimal voice given to the public (and with in very proscribed bounds). A lot can be accomplished (for good or bad) in such an environment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1zggyo | how do open source projects compete with for profit alternatives? | I'll admit that I'm a huge Linux fan. It does everything I need and I can make it look and behave exactly like I want. As much as I would like to convince you guys to use it, that isn't the point of this post. A lot of the programs that I use are free as in freedom. As in not only do you not pay for it, but the code is completely open and anyone can submit a change. And most of these programs are extremely complicated and take a lot of work to keep the project going. And I'm talking about code that would normally be hard work for a corporation that would be able to put a lot of money into the project. And yet some of these projects are even better than the closed source for-profit alternatives.
So my question is can someone explain how these giant, free programs manage to be maintained and improved when there is often times no compensation for the work beyond a big thank you and maybe a handful of donations? (especially Linux itself which is competing with the flagship product that built Microsoft, one of the largest tech companies in the world). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zggyo/eli5_how_do_open_source_projects_compete_with_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cftrc8j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Poorly. They really cannot advertise, for the consumer market which is mostly free, nor compete much with Microsoft for being included on sold PCs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1rl7tw | if suicide by subway train is prevalent, why don't the subway trains slow down enough to make a quick stop before they get to the platform? | It always seems that the trains are at such a speed that they will stop just at the platform rather than being able to stop any time before then. Maybe I'm just used to seeing a lot of train suicides on reddit, but if this was an issue, I would think the subway trains would be designed to slow down enough to be able to stop when the operator sees someone attempting suicide. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rl7tw/eli5_if_suicide_by_subway_train_is_prevalent_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdoc9ax",
"cdocaqo",
"cdocb7p",
"cdoccaz",
"cdoccyh",
"cdoe66n",
"cdoomwb",
"cdopt5n",
"cdopv15",
"cdovgxc",
"cdox1tw"
],
"score": [
26,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Trains have poor stopping distances. The value of a subway system is rapid mass transit. Slow travel times undermine its use as competition with driving/walking. \n\nSuicide by train is not that common in fact it's so rare that its often international news when it happens. Even if it were a problem, a much more effective and efficient solution is [platform screen doors](_URL_0_).",
"In the past couple years, there have been 70 some odd subway related suicides. You want to change an entire system to save 70 people? You want to spend billions to reinvent the subways when gun related suicides number close to 20,000? Billions use a subway every year without incident, invest money where it would make a real difference. Because people who want to kill themselves always have options I don't think a subway is the one that we should consider removing. ",
"Its not all that many:\n\n_URL_1_\n\nThey put the number in \"scores\" (dozens). So you figure with all the trains and subways in service, you have _maybe_ 50-100 people a year using them for suicide. In 2012, there are 35,000 suicides in the US.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nSo we are talking less than .3%. And thats assuming that all of those people wouldn't use another method.\n\nHaving those stops would really hinder transit, as all the express trains would have to slow down/stop at every station. ",
"They do - the problem is that the only way to go slow enough where someone jumping in front of the train doesn't do anything, is to go *so slow* that it takes several minutes for the train to get into station.\n\nIf they tried that in NYC there would be riots. And there aren't nearly enough suicides where it makes sense to slow down all trains and add significant time to the average train ride just for the occasional jumper.",
"In truth, suicide by train is not super common. If it was, then trains probably would slow down. At this point though, slowing all the trains down would tremendously decrease the efficiency of the railroad, and as of now it's not worth it.",
"There are so many ways for a person to kill themselves, should we get rid of them all? Cars only drive 10 mph so people can't jump in front of them? Bridge height limit of 15 feet so people won't jump off of them? Get rid of one method and they will find another. I don't mean to sound insensitive, I just think it would be an inconvenience with little benefit in the end.",
"they are not THAT prevalent.",
"In Japan they put mirrors up on subway platforms\n\nThe suicidal person was less likely to commit suicide if they could see themselves in the act.",
"1. Trains are very massive and platforms are very long.\n\n2. People jump at the last moment in front of the train, from the platform leaving no time for the driving to react. ",
"I've heard, but I have no source for this, that putting a mirror opposite the platform at the beginning (where the train will be fastest, and most people jump) is a big disincentive to jumping. Apparently something about seeing your reflection makes you rethink your plan, or hesitate long enough to regret it.",
"When someone commits suicide by train, the last thing they'd want is for the potential of it being botched or being stopped, so they give the optimum chance of dying by jumping right in front of the train so it has no time to break at the last second.\n\nTrains can get pretty damn fast too."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Paris_Metro_St_Lazare.jpg"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States",
"http://www.ble-t.org/pr/news/headline.asp?id=12603"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6b6th8 | why does the tail rotor on a helicopter spin on an axis perpendicular to the main rotor on top of the helicopter? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6b6th8/eli5_why_does_the_tail_rotor_on_a_helicopter_spin/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhk8dky",
"dhk8kpp",
"dhk8xvs",
"dhkt0v1"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the main rotor's spinning generates a net torque that twists the helicopter around. The tail rotor cancels the torque. ",
"The purpose of the tail rotor is not to create lift but to counter the torque produced by the main rotor, which would otherwise cause the helicopter to spin around uncontrollably. The thrust from the tail rotor is angled at 90 degrees to the main rotor in order to counter this tendency to rotate.\n\n\nSome very large helicopters have two main rotors that spin in opposite directions so that there is no net torque. These designs do not need a tail rotor.",
"It pushes against the spin caused by the main rotor. \n\nIt can slow down or speed up / change pitch to allow the helicopter to turn.\n\nChinooks fro example don't have them because their rotors spin in opposing directions to counter each other.\n\nAlso on a side not some helicopters use rotating jets.\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's as other here already said: The tail rotor is there to counter the torque of the main rotor.\n\nTo get rid of the tail rotor you can build a second rotor in which rotates in the opposite direction.\nThis has two effects: It's counters the torque so the helicopter doesn't spin around and it has more power to lift.\n\nThe russians perfectioned this technique: \n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.mdhelicopters.com/notar.html"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_rotors",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamov"
]
] |
||
3720rd | what is preventing us to make more of the drug quaaludes since it doesn't exist anymore? (depicted in wolf of wallstreet) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3720rd/eli5_what_is_preventing_us_to_make_more_of_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"crj1017",
"crj14fa",
"crj26qb"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Quaaludes must be manufactured in a lab. The DEA was able to find the labs making it and shut them down. Simple answer it's hard to make Quaaludes.",
"It's mostly been replaced by better, safer, modern drugs. Benzodiazepines (eg - Xanax & Valium) have less problems with addiction, drug interactions & are harder to overdose on. Additionally, there's a wide variety to choose from, with different strengths, onset times & durations.\n\nIn parts of the world, clandestine drug chemists continue to make Ludes for the black market. Apparently, it's quite the thing in South Africa.",
"A lot of people are giving answers that contributed. But there's still one answer that's the real answer.\n\nWhen the US government decided to actively work to stop the production of illicit quaaludes, they did so by restricting the supply of one of the key precursors. Doing so caused the international market to collapse.\n\nSauce\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/faqs/quaaludes.html"
]
] |
||
60k6eh | how did "aww" become a standard reply upon seeing/hearing something cute? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60k6eh/eli5_how_did_aww_become_a_standard_reply_upon/ | {
"a_id": [
"df7psdw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Perhaps it's because it sounds like what one says when they see or hear something cute. Basically a moan."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5jxoke | why is it that the stock market generally continues to go up forever? | Why is it that the stock market seem to go up forever? I understand that there is inflation, but doesn't someone else(an other countries company or government) need to be losing money for other stocks to gain money? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jxoke/eli5_why_is_it_that_the_stock_market_generally/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbk9fyl"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I run a company. I made some profits. I use those profits to build new factory. I didn't have to go steal that factory from some other country or company, I just **made** it. (Or hired people to.) The stock value of the company I run has gone up, because now I have another factory which is a source of profits.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
26y69f | why are certain things interesting? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26y69f/eli5why_are_certain_things_interesting/ | {
"a_id": [
"chvlk0j"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"My source for this is the book 'A Theory Of Fun' by Raph Koster in which he asks this question to neuroscientists but...\n\nThe human brain is constantly trying to identify patterns in everything, and it rewards us with dopamine for doing so. When we manage to discern a new pattern and get that dopamine hit we refer to it as 'interesting'.\n\nHowever it's not as simple as 'all patterns are interesting', there's a sweet spot in the middle of a trade-off between patterns that are in line with our brain's processing power and patterns that we haven't yet experienced.\n\nFor example, take a game of naughts & crosses. As a child this is interesting because the patterns that you have to discern to win are at your intelligence level and they're all new to you. But as you get older and you've acknowledged all the ins and outs of the game it stops being fun.\n\nLikewise take an action video game. To win you have to discern a pattern of strikes and blocks over a period of time. If the pattern matches your brain's power it's stimulating but if it's too easy the game gets boring. On the other hand if it's too difficult the game also gets boring because the pattern just looks like noise.\n\n\nIf you're 'interested' in this stuff I recommend that you read the same book I did. Also, have a look into the theory of storytelling with this in mind because a lot of the same neuroscience is behind it.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
b9ac1k | if an atom is mostly empty space, how are we able to touch anything, and how do atoms combine to make something solid? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b9ac1k/eli5_if_an_atom_is_mostly_empty_space_how_are_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"ek3834b",
"ek38f7i",
"ek39nsw",
"ek3adrq"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Everything is mostly empty space because it is made of atoms. The nature of protons, neutrons and electrons is that they can't be pushed together more than a certain amount. The reason why is \"quantum stuff\", a bit beyond ELI5, but roughly because they can't be confined into a smaller space.\n\nWhen the atoms of your finger come close to something else, or even the other atoms in your finger, the force stopping them getting closer than the distances allowed by their quantum nature translates to what we call \"solid\".",
"This comes down to a very particular rule called Pauli's Exclusion Principle.\n\nIt sounds complex, and it actually slightly is, but in layman's terms: you can't shove two fermions (protons, neutrons, electrons, quarks, neutrinos etc) to occupy the same space. They just don't like it; And no amount of the universe telling them to sit down will make them. Just don't.\n\nThis creates a repulsion field as every fermion pushes against every other. That's what we feel.\n\nWhat you CAN do, is make them take a structured order. The two main methods of doing this is to either make them cold, or squeeze them together. Imagine a bunch of energetic puppies that fly everywhere at whatever they want. You can make a relatively solid mass of puppies by pushing them together in a box or making them cold so they have less energy to run around and huddle together.\n\nAtoms work the same way, the less energy they have, the harder it is for them to push each other away. And pressure can overcome most (but not all) of the repulsive force.\n\nImportant note: Unlike Atoms, squeezing or freezing puppies together will have a preeeeetty high chance of getting an angry animal rights officer at your door.",
"Have you ever held two really strong magnets near each other (same pole)? That's basically what is happening on the micro level. Nothing ever really touches anything else, it's all electromagnetic forces at the human scales.",
"You got some good answers here but those pop science channels on youtube have made videos on this exact question. Search for them if you're interested"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3b9xjc | how does putting a lawyer on retainer work? what are the advantages of doing this versus just hiring/consulting a lawyer when you need one? | Thought about this while watching Silicon Valley. "So..I paid $80,000 just so I could pay them more later?"
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b9xjc/eli5_how_does_putting_a_lawyer_on_retainer_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"csk8gzq",
"csk9ce2",
"csk9fql"
],
"score": [
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"TV shows do not represent real life. The reason some gets a Lawyer on retainer is because it is *cheaper*. It is essentially buying in bulk. Someone pays the lawyer to be on retainer so that they can consult with them whenever they want/often. This is cheaper than paying the lawyer each time the person needs legal advice.\n\nNormally this is only done for companies or people with a lot of wealth. ",
"* like any other service, you get a better detail buying in bulk and buying in advance\n* the law firm has an opportunity to familiarize itself with your legal needs\n* the law firm is more obligated to represent you...if you wait, they might not be taking new clients",
"How popular retainers are or how they operate will depend a lot on where you are, since the costs structures for lawyers will be different.\n\nThe general idea of a retainer is that you engage a lawyer for say, a year, and during that time the lawyer will provide a set of services which usually are quite simple or routine in nature.\n\nFor example, a business selling car parts may have a law firm in retainer, and the retainer will include basic services like issuing demand letter for outstanding payments, or other things like looking over simple contracts. More complex things like moving forward with disputes may be outside the retainer and will incur maybe another set or structure of fees."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8zsbk7 | how do batteries (aa, aaa, b, c, d, etc.) get their names? what do they mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8zsbk7/eli5_how_do_batteries_aa_aaa_b_c_d_etc_get_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2l4am0",
"e2l4iqh",
"e2l7i1k",
"e2lglhq",
"e2lip3e",
"e2ljbom"
],
"score": [
7490,
1401,
185,
25,
7,
17
],
"text": [
"Every time you step up a letter, the batteries get bigger. Because we don’t have a letter smaller than A, we repeat the letter.\n\nAAAA < AAA < AA < A < B < C < D\n\nEdit:\nYes, there’s an A battery. Yes, there’s a B battery. No, they didn’t name them after bra sizes. No, that joke you stole from another post about “the louder they scream” isn’t hilarious.",
"To put it simply, Cell voltages are not compatible \n\nThe long answer is A and B exist, or rather existed. These are the battery sizes you're likely most familiar with: D C AA AAA P3(most people call them 9 volt batteries)\n\nThe naming conventions were sort of standardised by two organisations, ANSI (American National Standards Institute) and IEC (International Electrochemical Commission) who tried to herd together the different national and company-specific naming conventions for batteries and try to produce standardised batteries that could be used across various consumer devices and for different purposes.\n\nThe batteries you see above go by many different names (still!), though they are often marketed under a fairly uniform identifier these days. For example, AAA batteries can also be identified as [1]:\n\nBy IEC:\nLR03 (alkaline)\nR03 (carbon–zinc)\nFR03 (Li–FeS2)\nHR03 (NiMH)\nKR03 (NiCd)\nZR03 (NiOOH)\n\nBy ANSI:\n24A (alkaline)\n24D (carbon–zinc)\n24LF (Li–FeS2)\n\nOther marketed names:\nU16 (In Britain until the 1980s)\nMicro\nMicrolight\nMN2400\nMX2400\nMinistilo (Italy)\nPalito (Brazil)\n\nThat's just for AAA batteries. As you can imagine, there are a great many different types of batteries floating around various markets with different dimensions, constituent chemicals, capacities and names. Many were standardised in name only and fell out of favour due to poor up-take or availability. \n\nThis is precisely what happened to A and B (and a host of other) batteries. AAAA batteries exist, though are used only with very, very thin devices like penlights. As one user commented above. \n\nPs. A size batteries are hard to find as well. In fact, I can't even find a picture of one, because they were primarily used in really old laptop batteries. \n",
"[Why are there no B Batteries?](_URL_0_).\n\nSpoiler, there are B batteries, just not very common.",
"I'm not going to answer your question since others have, but I thought you might want to know that in some European countries, some of the cell sizes have funny names.\n\nD = Mono\n\nC = Baby\n\nAA = Mignon\n\nAAA = Micro\n\nAAAA = Mini\n\nN = Lady",
"why are AA/C/D batteries very common but I’ve never even heard of an A or B battery?",
"In Brazil, we usually give them nicknames:\n\n-AAA - Palito (Stick)\n\n-AA - Pequena (Small)\n\n-C - Média (Medium)\n\n-D - Grande (Large)\n\n-9V - Bateria (Battery)\n\n-3V - Botão (Button)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiBrXPe0d-E"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9z948y | glass that is more scratch resistant is more brittle and prone to shattering. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9z948y/eli5_glass_that_is_more_scratch_resistant_is_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"ea7e1ct"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is more scratch resistant because it is harder, and in some materials more hardness means more brittleness. You see the same thing in machine tooling, tungsten carbide is well-regarded because it is hard and can cut through many materials, but one bad move and it shatters much more easily than say HSS steel."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1p2t01 | why do cops use fatal guns instead of tranquilizer guns just like used in animals? | I can't understand why not, since these guns would prevent any human error, emotional distress, accidents to end up with peoples lives... Why use real guns to imobilize dangerous criminals (or not) if tranquilizers do the trick by putting them asleep?
The same would apply to any gun sold to civilians, no lethal guns, just tranquilizers, to avoid any *accidents*...
Why not? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p2t01/why_do_cops_use_fatal_guns_instead_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccy5fr1",
"ccy5iey",
"ccy5jem",
"ccy5k4u",
"ccy5mog",
"ccy616v",
"ccy65gv",
"ccy6b54",
"ccy7nkd"
],
"score": [
12,
16,
23,
5,
2,
4,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"They carry non-lethal tazers for tranquilizing purposes.\nGuns are for extreme cases, from self-defense to saving others' lives.",
"I would not want to shot a tranquilizer dart into someone and wait 10-30 sec for them to stop shooting a gun at me...",
"Tranquilizing someone is an exact science, which is why anesthesiologists get paid the big bucks. You'd have to know the person's exact height and weight (plus a few other important factors, like if they're a natural ginger) to safely knock them out. If you give them too big a dose they die and if you don't give them enough it's not effective. \n\nTheoretically you could shoot a bunch of darts with a low dose until they pass out, but that would not work in a situation with any sort of time limitation. \n\nTazers are a much better non-lethal option, but they have a limited range. Rubber bullets have a better range, but not much stopping power. \n\nOther non-lethal options (like a sound cannon) are in the works, but thus far we haven't found a viable replacement for firearms. Not to mention that many criminals have their own weapons so arming the police force is, in part, self defense. ",
"Depending ones sex, height, and weight the correct dosage to incapacitate someone and not kill them may be entirely different. Unless you know these things ahead of time you have a very high probability of seriously injuring or killing someone. ",
"Tranquilizers have to be measured out on a case by case basis or your going to still end up with deaths, brain damage, and worse. Tranqs are also not instant, and take time to work giving people the chance to kill the officer or anyone around them. ",
"Tranquilizer darts don't work like they do in movies. If you have ever been under anesthesia for surgery, you can remember that you did not fall asleep as soon as the anesthetic started flowing - and that is with ideal conditions, since it was being directly injected, you weren't full of adrenaline, you weren't trying to resist. A darted animal has ~30sec of consciousness left after getting darted and can injure or kill any handlers that try to approach before it is all the way out.\n\nIn addition, police are supposed to follow a strict continuum of force. Don't quote me, but I think officers are only allowed to use lethal force if it is required to prevent imminent harm to them or another. There aren't many situations where you could use a tranq instead of a gun.",
"Tranquilizer guns do not behave like they do in movies. The drugs used in tranquilizers are adminitered based on weight. Too much, you risk an overdose. Too little, you risk the drug not having the desired effect. The drugs also do not act instantly, so whatever you end up hitting with a tranquilizer may still end up coming after you.\n\nTasers have been successful, but they have a limited range. They are also not 100% guaranteed to do the job, especially if you are up against someone hopped up on PCP. Tasers also tend to be less effective if your target is wearing heavier clothing, especially leather. And they do still have the potential to cause a lot of harm.\n\nFirearms offer a little bit more standoff in extreme cases. And in the case where it is life and death, a firearm will do a much better job at neutralizing a threat than a taser or tranquilizer. Police are also restricted to when they are allowed to use deadly force, and it is usually restricted to an absolute last resort when all other options have been exhausted. The reason why you see police going into houses with their guns up is because 1) they have no idea what's going on in there and 2) people are more likely to not do anything stupid when they have a gun pointed at them. In pretty much any case, a police officer has to be able to justify removing their weapon from their holster.",
"Thank you guys :)",
"In terms of self defense, the purpose of a gun is to *stop* someone from seriously harming you or someone else. Killing is secondary.\n\nTranquilizer darts are bad at this:\n\n* they take time to act\n* they have a very limited ammunition capacity\n* they are not terribly accurate\n* they don't penetrate well\n* they are full of drugs that might be misused\n* they could kill someone, or just not have any effect\n\nFor less lethal weapons, you are better off with tasers and bean bags."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1dgbth | how cannabinoid receptors are affected when we consume marijuana | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dgbth/eli5_how_cannabinoid_receptors_are_affected_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9qia1u"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Do you remember the toys you played with as a kid where you would try to put the square peg in the round hole? This is vaguely kind of how neurotransmitters work. The cannabinoids from pot will travel to your brain through your blood from your lungs or stomach and look for places where they fit. Once they reach their destination, they order a chicken quesadilla meal and go to town."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
65soun | when we say a list of names, how come some sound better in a specific order? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/65soun/eli5_when_we_say_a_list_of_names_how_come_some/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgcwxmh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Like 60% of the time, when someone asks why a certain phrase sounds better in a certain order, the answer is rhythm. Phrases with repetition seem to make people happy.\n\n\"Evan and Emily\" sounds good because it repeats the same pattern twice: a stressed syllable with an \"e\" sound follow by two unstressed syllables. Note that it has the exact same rhythm as \"Guinness is good for you,\" which obviously sounded so good that a giant corporation took it and made it their slogan.\n\n\"Emily and Evan\" sounds pretty good, because it almost sets up three pairs of stressed and unstressed syllables, but the \"ly\" in \"Emily\" is not stressed as strongly, so it's not as optimal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5w9vkz | why does copper powder not give a high conductivity when in water? | Had a lab session the other day and we had to use a conductivity probe to measure the conductivity (μS/cm) of various substances in water.
I got 3870 μS/cm for Calcium Chloride, no surprise there since it's an Ionic bond. I got 5 μS/cm for Hexane, also no surprise since it's a Covalent bond. But when I put pure Copper powder into the water and probed it, I only got 12 μS/cm. Is this unusual? Isn't copper supposed to be highly conductive? If this is unusual, could this be caused by there being something in the powder? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5w9vkz/eli5_why_does_copper_powder_not_give_a_high/ | {
"a_id": [
"de8i09c"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The path of current does not go THRU it to convey current. The water by itself is the pathway for current. If the pure elemental copper was combined as a salt, it would then be conductive in the water and aid in passing the electrical current.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1mhjcc | is it actually bad for your brain to fall asleep to tv/music? | I fall asleep to netflix every night and literally cycle through all family guy/american dad/futurama episodes. Is this harming my sleep cycle and potentially anything else? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mhjcc/eli5is_it_actually_bad_for_your_brain_to_fall/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc9cc9f",
"cc9eh9j",
"cc9fpd7"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"My personal story about sleeping with the TV on. I used to fall asleep with PBS on (Public TV for you non-Yanks). I would then have some really bizarre dreams about the subject of whatever was being shown. A couple of the more odd dreams I had were one about math (the PBS channel in my city used to show telecourses from the local University) and one about Sesame Street.\n\nI had to stop leaving the TV on after about a month.",
"Music and tv is disruptive to sleep because your brain is still processing information, it doesn't just shut down when you fall asleep. You will have difficulty moving adequately through the stages of sleep because every change in tempo, sound level or light will cause an arousal or disturbance from the current sleep phase. Think of it like someone poking your arm every few minutes while your trying to sleep, its not very restful or refreshing. Lack of adequate sleep can lead to fatigue, memory problems and difficulty concentrating. Lack of sleep has also been linked to altering your body's insulin production and leading to onset diabetes type 2. \n\nSource: sleep tech and current RN student; watched a few patients through the years insist music didn't affect their sleep as I watched their brain waves on my monitor continually be disrupted by the music they were playing. ",
"My personal experience:\n\nI often fall asleep to tv. I do make sure to dim the screen's light, because light regulates sleep. Less light, better sleep.\n\nI enjoy the 'company' of the voices of tv & music. I think because, as a human, I am a social creature. Therefore, I'm biologically programmed to be around humans, and to be able to fall asleep around them. Even as they are still talking to one another. I'm talking thousands of years ago around a fire or something. At least this is my intuition. We are biologically and mentally very similar if not identical.\n\nThe best advice I could give is to just do what feels natural and good. Listen to your body. Maybe try soothing tv or music. I know that when I fall asleep to the Daily Show, I often get jerked out of sleep by the loud sound effects and audience's applause. Futurama usually gets me to sleep way more easily as I find it very mellow. I already know the plot to most episodes, so I don't mind not paying attention. It's sort of like friends nearby I suppose."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2djfif | why don't politicians ever take contributions then act counter to the contributors wishes? | Say Comcast and Time Warner give someone $50,000 in political contributions and that person soon becomes a Senator. Then the Senator decides to act counter to what the big cable companies want by pushing the FCC to prevent their merging and removing restrictions that were keeping start-up cable companies out of cities.
The Senator already has the money. Obviously the big cable companies wouldn't donate money to that person ever again, but wouldn't being a Senator for the people and getting donations from the smaller start-ups balance this?
I apologize if this question is naive and overly optimistic, but it seems that with lobbying making so many people angry that someone acting counter to corporate lobbyists would reap large rewards. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2djfif/eli5_why_dont_politicians_ever_take_contributions/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjq0ylx",
"cjq1edl"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Most likely because whoever gave the contribution will go to their rival and make sure that person does not get re-elected. You typically don't bite the hand that feeds you. ",
"There is also the fact that most people don't contribute to campaigns of people who don't align with their position. You contribute to people you expect to act in your interest, whether you're a company, or a person. Sure they could be completely lying about their stance about things in order to get contributions, but why lie and say you support A when you actually support B if B can give you a similar amount of money? Just say you support B, that way you can get in office and stay, instead of getting in office and pissing everyone off, A and B alike.\n\nSo instead of thinking of it as:\n\n* Company finds blank slate candidate with no opinions of their own and gives them money for their campaign.\n* candidate gets elected.\n* Candidate goes against company and supports organization. \n* Organization is unlikely to support them (they aren't trustworthy), and company is unlikely (they lied).\n* Candidate doesn't get relected.\n\nIt's probably more reasonable to think of it as:\n\n* Candidate supports policy which helps company.\n* Company gives money so that candidate can get into office, and enact stated policy.\n* Candidate gets elected, and acts as expected. \n* Company likes them, and gives again, organization doesn't, and doesn't give\n* Candidate gets re-elected.\n\nIn the second situation it wouldn't really make sense to abandon the company who supported you because of the policies you already expressed right? If you supported different policies it would have made way more sense in the short and long run to run on those (unless no one agrees with those policies)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
19wzx4 | how do jpeg/jpg images get so pixelated and messed up? | What makes it different from other types like png. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19wzx4/eli5_how_do_jpegjpg_images_get_so_pixelated_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8s1ypr",
"c8sdrhn"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"In an effort to reduce the size of the image, JPEGs will reduce the quality (kind of like how MP3s work). Sometimes it's noticeable, sometimes it's not, depending on the image and the level of compression.\n\nPNG files don't reduce the quality, but they are also larger than JPEGs.",
"JPG is old. The codec came out in 1992. You barely see cars on the road that old these days. That JPG corruption is the sacrifice the codec makes to achieve a file size, giving up parts of the image because they require more file size.\n\nPNG as mentioned is lossless, meaning there is no difference between the original image and the PNG unless you reduce the number of colors.\n\nOther formats, like JPEG 2000 (JP2) for instance, are a lot better for images than JPG is. They produce lower file sizes and better quality, as 8 years of R & D between JPG and JP2 should. But just like your old car the JPG codec's bought and paid for, insurance is a joke, and most importantly - it just works."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1ojuqj | why is it that car insurance companies are telling me i am responsible for my children until they are 21, even though they are adults at 18? | so the insurance companies (geico, allstate, etc) are telling me that even after my children are out of the house and 18 years old (adults in every legal sense of the word) that i can still be sued if they get into a car accident, etc....have i completely lost my mind or is this a real thing? if this is true, can someone please explain to me how i could be held responsible for what my children do after they reach adulthood? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ojuqj/eli5_why_is_it_that_car_insurance_companies_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccsnosc",
"ccspei2"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Are they driving vehicles insured by you, or are you guarantor under the policy?",
"It's because of psychology and human development. This is under the topic of \"emerging adulthood\". Basically most 18‑20 year olds in the United States don't see themselves as adults and are still in the process of obtaining an education, are unmarried, and are childless. Generally emerging adulthood last until 25. Insurance companies know this and use it to keep kids under their parents responsibilites. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
70qojw | why does the cia sometimes refer to osama bin laden as "usama bin laden"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70qojw/eli5_why_does_the_cia_sometimes_refer_to_osama/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn5729s",
"dn572x4",
"dn577wp",
"dn58gcz"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because his first name is spelled \"أسامة\", which doesn't have an exact representation in the Latin alphabet. Both \"Osama\" and \"Usama\" are correct. As are \"Oussama\" and \"Usamah\".",
"Transliterating Arabic words or names into English (converting the spelling from Arabic letters to English letters) is not perfect. The name we transliterate as \"Osama\" or \"Usama\" is \" أسامة \" in Arabic. The first sound in the name is one we don't really use in English and depending on the person speaking sounds like \"Oo\" or \"Uh\".",
"Osama bin Laden's name is Arabic; this language is not natively written with the Latin alphabet, but has its own writing system. Scholars have devised different systems for transliterating Arabic writing to the Latin alphabet, and there isn't a single one that's universally accepted. So it's normal to see Arabic words and names spelled in different ways.",
"There is no single standard for transliterating Arabic words into English. Depending on your pronunciation, both \"Osama\" and \"Usama\" can get you close to the native pronunciation of the name. Regardless of the spelling, they refer to the same person.\n\nFor what it's worth, I think the spelling \"Usama\" is closer to the correct Arabic pronunciation, but \"Osama\" is far and away the most common spelling in the West especially post-9/11."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2u0fgz | why a billion dollar gaming industry hasn't produced a "gaming" operating system? | How is there not yet a dynamic operating system for a PC that allows developers direct hooks or as low-level as possible to the hardware without all the other software "middle-persons" found in typical operating systems, to make games run?
edit- added "Dynamic" in front of operating system to curb the console fever crowd
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u0fgz/eli5_why_a_billion_dollar_gaming_industry_hasnt/ | {
"a_id": [
"co3z400",
"co3z4vx",
"co3z9p9",
"co3zf6j",
"co3zj69",
"co46hw6",
"co4cmfh"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
19,
2,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Unless you count steam's os. Which shouldn't count because it can only run steam games (As far as I know).",
"So, what would happen if someone wanted to use PC hardware and write an optimized OS for it?\n\nWell, they'd want to standardize on some certain hardware. Because they don't want to be constantly writing for different video cards and sound and everything else.\n\nSo, know what you have then? A console.",
"They have...it is called the XBox and the Playstation.\n\nOne of the advantages of PC gaming is you can still use your box for other stuff, and that usually means Windows or Linux. Setting up a dual boot partition and rebooting whenever you want to play a game is not something most consumers want to deal with.\n\nAlso, DirectX works well enough, and graphics cards manufacturers tune directly to it. It is unlikely a fledgeling OS would get the same support, and for a long time, it might actually be slower.",
"that's what consoles do basically. they run operating systems optimized for the games they run, with lower specs and price tags for the actual machines.",
"If you take a PC and put a dedicated gaming OS on it it would become a console and would no longer be useful as a PC (unless you are going to dual boot but that's quite uncommon). PC's run games fine as it is, there's no need to put unnecessary limitations on them.",
"Because there's no point. Nobody wants a \"gaming OS\", nobody wants to support such a thing, nobody would gain anything real from using such a thing.\n\nWhy invest all that effort/money/time for negligible gains?",
"You ARE talking about console OSes. Throwing dynamic in front of it is meaningless because even console OSes are \"dynamic\". Just look at how much the 360 OS has changed over the years.\n\nTo understand the answer to your question, you need to understand why things like the OS and DirectX/OpenGL exist. You also need to understand why there are inherent drawbacks to vendor-specific technologies like Mantle and PhysX.\n\nAbstraction layers exist for a reason. The OS abstracts the hardware from the software. Direct3D and OpenGL abstract the gfx card from the software. These abstraction layers exist because software needs a standard way to interact with the hardware. Without it, your game is bound to specific hardware and will likely not work very well (if at all) on other hardware. Think about the case of Mantle. A game written to target Mantle will only ever run on gfx cards that support Mantle. Just like games that are written to target DirectX will only ever run hardware combinations that support DirectX. Same story with PhysX. If you have an NVidia card you get fancy physics simulations. If you're on AMD, tough luck, you get the bare minimum that can be simulated on your CPU.\n\nI'm guessing your question came about due to Mantle. Well, Mantle came about because AMD believes that DirectX added too much overhead by abstracting too much. Guess what? Microsoft agrees. That's why there are changes coming in DX12. And that's why there is much less attention being paid to Mantle now. Noone wants to expend the extra resources to write the game to work specifically on AMD cards because that cuts out the NVidia market. And if Microsoft is already addressing the problems in the technology that supports both, why waste the time?\n\nThis leads to the problem of more direct access to hardware. The closer you interact with hardware, the more you are bound to the specifics of how the hardware works. This is an inherent problem for PC platforms that consoles do not have to deal with. On a PC the gfx card and its specific behavior will change based on what gfx card you're using. Forget AMD or Nvidia here, each gfx card family will vary significantly from others from the same manufacturer. For consoles the gfx card they use is fixed and doesn't change. Any changes are almost non-existent even with hardware revisions, they spend a lot of development to ensure there is minimal change between hardware revisions. So once again, devs target the standard. On PC it's DirectX/OpenGL. On the consoles it's the officially published details of the target gfx card.\n\nWhat about the rest of the system, CPU, chipsets, memory, etc. It's the same problem. Consoles guarantee a specific CPU, chipset, and memory layout. It's a fixed rule that certain regions of memory are more quickly accessed by certain CPUs or the GPU. It's a fixed rule that data that goes from storage to the GPU needs to be moved onto specific memory chips. What your CPU supports is fixed. This guarantee does not exist in the PC world. The combinations of CPUs, CPU capabilities, chipset, amount/speed of RAM, gfx card interfaces, and so on are infinite. Once again developers target the standard. In the console world it's a combination of the OS and component layout. In the PC world it's the OS and the existence of various components. \n\nSo what would a PC \"gaming\" OS look like? Well, it would be Windows/DirectX. Or Linux/OpenGL. Why would the billion dollar gaming industry not produce their own OS? Because what's there does the job really well already and an OS is larger than a billion dollar industry. Seriously, an OS is a very complex beast and takes a lot of resources to make and maintain. Linux is free, but there's a reason there's industries larger than games built on just supporting it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1puxg7 | how can judges dismiss evidence that isn't "submitted correctly" such as videos that incriminate the accused? | For example, a judge throws out a piece of evidence that shows the accused person in video because it wasn't submitted by a certain deadline. Isn't the video enough to prove someone guilty no matter how it was legally submitted to court? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1puxg7/eli5_how_can_judges_dismiss_evidence_that_isnt/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd6bbg5",
"cd6bdcs"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"[Here](_URL_0_) is part of the Illustrated Guide to Law that explains this with comics.\n\nBasically, it's to protect citizens from police investigators overstepping their boundaries. The Constitution, which states the fundamental rights belonging to Americans, makes it clear that the government is to protect people from \"unreasonable searches and seizures\". In theory, this would mean stopping investigators from collecting evidence illegally. In practice, there are times when investigators (intentionally or unknowingly) go too far. Dismissing illegally collected evidence protects the accused from being negatively impacted by an illegal act by police and provides an incentive for them to make sure they perform searches properly. ",
"The rules are there to protect the *system*. No exceptions are made, even when it seems like an exception should be made because law is built upon precedents and citing previous cases. If one judge allowed evidence that shouldn't have been allowed, then either other cases should allow it, or the original judge's decision should be overturned. \n\nAlso, think about the case where someone *is* guilty, but we allow evidence no matter how it was obtained. It creates sketchy law, where police officers are allowed to skirt the law, ignore personal liberties, and usurp the need for search warrants because they *know* someone is guilty. It's there to protect you, me, the innocent, and even the guilty from illegal searches and seizures without a warrant. The ends do NOT justify the means - we can't just say that the evidence would convict if it means that unlawful means were taken to get it. \n\nIn the case of evidence, there are statutes to ensure that many crimes are done within a reasonable amount of time, within a time frame that the evidence is relevant, witnesses can still testify, and the parties involved are still there."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1585"
],
[]
] |
|
4ycmrk | why are some people well written but not well spoken? (myself included) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ycmrk/eli5why_are_some_people_well_written_but_not_well/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6mn2y1",
"d6mn3cj"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"To be well spoken you need to construct well phrased sentences in a fraction of the time you have when you are writing something. This requires a lot more practice as you can't do it if you have to use a lot of your brains capacity for it. ",
"Speaking is hard. You have to think of what to say, translate that into words that make sense and in the right order, then translate those into sounds and speak them correctly all while doing it fast enough and right on the first try so the other person doesn't think you're an awkward mess. \n\n\nWritting, you have all the time in the world to find the right words and put them in the right order and can even change your mind half way if you need to correct something. All before the other person can even see what thoughts you have to offer.\n\n\nSo all things being equal, you could have an amazing vocabulary, but if you're not quick witted or practiced, it's often hard to vocalize what you want to say on the spot. But given time to write it, you can make best use of your mental talents. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
328q8g | what is the medical condition s.t. depression? | My mom was told by her doctor after wearing a heart monitor that she has this condition. She asked him to elaborate and all he did was give her the technical medical terms that went over her head. She seems concerned and so am I! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/328q8g/eli5_what_is_the_medical_condition_st_depression/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq8x8ls"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"There are about 11 different serious medical conditions that can cause a cardiac ST depression. \n\n***I highly suggest you or your mom call her cardiologist and tell them you don't understand his/her explanation and would like to meet to talk about it again. If they aren't willing to do that, then you need to find a new doctor. \n\nI can explain the basics of an ECG, if that will help? I cannot allude to what your mom has been diagnosed with, because I don't know the specifics of the situation. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1r7kc7 | what would we experience on earth if another earth-like planet were to collide with us? | I watched Lars von Trier's "Melancholia" last night. It's not meant to be a scientifically accurate portrayal of the end of the world, and so it made me wonder what would actually happen in the circumstances depicted in the film. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1r7kc7/eli5_what_would_we_experience_on_earth_if_another/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdkdts5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"We would all die in a matter of seconds. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3va3es | why are bathroom hot air hand dryers better for the environment when they are using a non-renewable resource (fossil fuels) to save a renewable one (trees)? | Edit: Thanks, Reddit! Not sure why I didn't think about all the other stuff that needs to happen before and after the actual drying of hands. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3va3es/eli5why_are_bathroom_hot_air_hand_dryers_better/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxln0ky",
"cxln2oy",
"cxlngxp",
"cxlntwj"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"To answer that question we need to know how much energy that particular dryer uses to dry your hands, what percentage of that energy is coming from burning fossil fuels, how much energy was used to produce the paper towel, and what resources were used to produce the paper towel. I have often pondered this as well, but I predict that the electric dryer ends up being much better after accounting for all the processes used to produce the paper.",
"The energy that goes into the production, transport, etc. of the towel is greater than that of the energy in the dryer and - over time - the dryer itself. \n",
"There's an energy accounting to be done, as others have pointed out, but there's also the impact of the waste of the paper towel. At minimum, the towel waste can be recycled, which would use fewer trees, but requires energy in the recycling process. Plus, recycling is notorious for using a lot of water. \n\nIf paper hand towels cannot be recycled, then the situation is even more grim - they have to be disposed of, either by composting, incineration or landfill. ",
"aside from saving trees from being used in manufacturing process, you're also keeping more trees up and keeping the air clean.\n\nTrees are like the bristles in your broom; by cutting down your bristles, you are effectively weakening the broom's ability to clean."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1qsmvm | how do top chess players look so many moves ahead? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qsmvm/eli5_how_do_top_chess_players_look_so_many_moves/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdg1bez",
"cdg1gko"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"When the top chess players began playing chess, they only looked 1 or 2 moves ahead. It was all they knew how to do, because they were new to the game.\nAfter beating some other players, having some close games, and becoming familiar with different combinations of moves, the top chess player was able to think 3, 4, 5 moves ahead. The player got better, and could read his or her opponent's next 4 moves, too.\nThe player progresses to thinking up four moves in response to each of the opponent's next four moves. Eventually, they're thinking 20 moves ahead for the end of the pawn skirmish and prioritizing 10 different execution styles in case the first 9 don't work out. It's about familiarity, focus, repetition, and a lot of time.",
"Most of them don't look at all possible combinations. They only look for moves that they think are likely for an opponent (in a given position, this may be only one good move to as many as twenty). Also, they are familiar with particular positions. They know which positions to try to get to and which positions to avoid at all costs. So they aren't actually looking at every single possible combination of moves for the next twenty moves."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1511rd | what's the difference between "assault" and "battery"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1511rd/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_assault_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7ia7fe",
"c7icu1q"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Assault is the threat of the violence, Battery is the actual violence.\n\nFrom Wikipedia:\n\nAssault and battery is the combination of two violent crimes: assault (the threat of violence) and battery (physical violence). This legal distinction exists only in jurisdictions that distinguish assault as threatened violence rather than actual violence.",
"Echoing what most of these posts say: assault is the threat, but battery is actual violence. \n\nBut keep in mind that these are specialized legal terms--\"assault\" in everyday use is more like the definitions of \"battery\" given here. An \"assault\" rifle is not named for its use in merely *threatening* violence."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2i5snr | has the olympics always (since 1896) been a major expense and drain to the host city/country? | Oslo, Norway recently pulled its bid for the 2022 Olympics. In a reddit thread regarding that, most of the comments say how terribly expensive and burdensome the Olympics is on a city, and that it's no wonder Oslo would pull out.
Has it always been like this? Is the IOC actually more corrupt now than it used to be? Was it less expensive or more beneficial in the past for the host city? When and why did this change? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i5snr/eli5_has_the_olympics_always_since_1896_been_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckz4u64"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The Olympic events themselves are, economically speaking, beneficial for a country. They attract a lot of visitors who will spend money at local establishments.\n\nThe burden comes from the infrastructure. Unless a city has hosted the Olympics before, they're very unlikely to have all of the facilities they needed for athletics, gymnastics, swimming, rowing, equestrian, shooting, and so on.\n\nEven once they build the facilities the city needs to have a plan for what to use the infrastructure for once the Olympics has passed. Every now and again photos show up on the front page of reddit showing that Olympic facilities in both Athens and Beijing are largely unused and run down; in comparison parts of Sydney's Olympic park are still in use for sports and general entertainment events.\n\nThe [1976 Olympics in Montreal](_URL_0_) is generally considered to be the first Olympics which resulted in an overall burden to the city (as opposed to a benefit). Due to the large costs of building new facilities outstripping the income generated by the games.\n\nThe issue is worse for the winter Olympics. It is vary unlikely that any city needs, or can even use, an Olympic bobsled course outside of the Olympics; but if they don't already have one then it must be built for the games, there is no alternative. Historically the winter games have also attracted less international attention and attract smaller crowds. So they make less money than the summer games while still being expensive to host."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Summer_Olympics#Legacy"
]
] |
|
8civgw | why does earth's armosphere glow blue in pictures taken from space? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8civgw/eli5_why_does_earths_armosphere_glow_blue_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxfa9rc"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is the same reson that the sky is blue from the ground. The atmosphere scatter the blue light more then the other colors so it looks blue. The amount of scattering depend on the wavelength of light. Blue scatter most and red on the others side of the spectrum scatter the least.\n\nIs is the same reason that a sun set looks looks red/orange. The light passes trough more atmosphere when it is low so more light is scattered. The result is that the light that reaches you is primary red/orange.."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1x0v2j | why is red hair so much more rare than other hair colors? | My friend was telling me how something like 2% of the earth's population has red hair and that people with red hair are actually going "extinct". So why is red hair more uncommon than other hair colors? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x0v2j/why_is_red_hair_so_much_more_rare_than_other_hair/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf763eg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because red hair is the most recessive of the hair colors. So if you look at a punnet square it'll be easy to see that unless both parents have red hair then there is only a 25% chance of the child having red hair at best and since there are multiple hair colors when red heads mate with non red heads it's easy to see how the recessive gene will slowly disappear "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7nb2mh | what is mk ultra? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7nb2mh/eli5_what_is_mk_ultra/ | {
"a_id": [
"ds0ff52",
"ds0lxj1"
],
"score": [
8,
3
],
"text": [
"It was a CIA project that started in the 50s and lasted the the 70s. It's goal was to identify drugs and techniques used for interrogation and counter intelligence. It included a lot of messed up experiments like daily LSD dosage on unknowing patients. It was illegal and didn't yield any real results. It did however drive a ton of U.S citizens bat shit crazy. The uni bomber was one of the more famous test subjects. ",
"Ahoy, matey! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: Project MKUltra ](_URL_3_) ^(_31 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: What exactly was Project MKUltra, and was it deemed a success or failure? ](_URL_7_) ^(_13 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: Project MKULTRA ](_URL_2_) ^(_6 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: What is this MK Ultra I keep hearing about? ](_URL_1_) ^(_4 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: The conspiracy theory surrounding celebrities and MKUltra. ](_URL_4_) ^(_42 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: What is MK Ultra? ](_URL_5_) ^(_10 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: MK Ultra. ](_URL_0_) ^(_2 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: What is MK Ultra? ](_URL_6_) ^(_._)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q07eq/eli5_mk_ultra/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t1zgl/eli5_what_is_this_mk_ultra_i_keep_hearing_about/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jn3gv/eli5_project_mkultra/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1doa8r/eli5_project_mkultra/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xfaob/eli5_the_conspiracy_theory_surrounding/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3g1gre/eli5_what_is_mk_ultra/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiro/comments/3g1joe/eli5_what_is_mk_ultra/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lszwy/eli5_what_exactly_was_project_mkultra_and_was_it/"
]
] |
||
3527m9 | why do most americans seem to be suspicious of the federal government? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3527m9/eli5_why_do_most_americans_seem_to_be_suspicious/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr080p2",
"cr082mg",
"cr08bvx",
"cr08pfo",
"cr0973n",
"cr0a876",
"cr0aiit",
"cr0b7n4",
"cr0c4k2",
"cr0cjfw",
"cr0dc98",
"cr0e2la",
"cr0ecjf",
"cr0fhdh",
"cr0fxfs",
"cr0id51",
"cr0l8pv",
"cr0lnpc",
"cr0m3e4",
"cr0maja",
"cr0na35",
"cr0om0i",
"cr0on0g",
"cr0opgj",
"cr0paoc",
"cr0r1bt",
"cr0r9c0",
"cr0sp11",
"cr15t6t"
],
"score": [
173,
29,
9,
11,
6,
18,
3,
2,
6,
11,
304,
4,
2,
6,
2,
2,
5,
3,
50,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sadly, most Americans really aren't, and I wish that they were. It's not really suspicious, because that implies some level of mystery. I'm completely soured on them. They're power-hungry dicks who will use any and every tool at their disposal to control everyone's lives as much as they can. ",
"Because their interests arent the american people. Its keeping the machine going at all costs.. Oh yeah and their personal interests too",
"Because the federal government behaves in fashions that are clearly self-serving, rather than entirely 'for the people.' This is the nature of any power structure, to a greater or lesser degree. Absolute trust would cede absolute power and likely be disadvantageous to you, the individual. ",
"Because they are suspicious of us. They have been caught spying on basically everyone around the world, not just Americans, then they lied about it to protect themselves. And they sacrifice both freedom and liberty for the illusion of security.",
"I'm not going to speak to the paranoia that drives survivalists, gun nuts and xenophobes and antiglobalists, but what I personally am most suspicious of is the simple fact that the side effects of government policies always tend to be worse than the problems they are created to solve. Bureaucracies never wither or shrink, they always grow. When they are given the power to develop policies to implement their stated mission, it is as if we are getting legislation without representation.\n\nLaws passed with good intent end up being threats to free society and an affront to common sense. I don't really need to list areas in which federal \"solutions\" have had perverse side effects. The drug war, the sex offender registry, copyright law, and anti-hacking laws to name a few have all had numerous well-documented misapplications that defy common sense.\n\nSo yes, when someone proposes that the government is here to help us, be very afraid. It is true more often than not that the government that governs best is the one that governs least.",
"Everyone should always be suspicious of anyone who wants power enough to go through what you have to go through to get it, and doubly suspicious of anyone already in power and what they will do to keep it.",
"We have a long history in America of equating politicians with used car salesmen and snake oil peddlers. It fuels entire genres of humor and the people and pundits and talking heads employed by it aren't about to let it go. Add that to the number of times the government has either created a truly terrible unintended consequence or someone has been caught with their hand in the cookie jar, it's no wonder the nut job black helicopter types start to look like they may be onto something. ",
"Think about it like a school lunch at the cafeteria. Most students are fine to just eat the meal and go on with their day but there exists a small subset that, over time, feels they have been wronged in some way. \n\n* Timmy doesn't like cheese and, on Wednesday, the only lunch options are cheese pizza and grilled cheese.\n* Susy is lactose intolerant and the cafeteria often runs out of non-milk drink options\n* Jimmy only eats spaghetti and the cafeteria never serves spaghetti\n\nAfter multiple years of putting up with this, each of Timmy, Susy, and Jimmy begins to feel like the cafeteria is specifically targeting him/her when what might actually be happening is that the cafeteria has to serve 500 kids and it's nearly impossible to cater to every single preference or situation.\n\nOf course, maybe the cafeteria does actually have it out for Timmy or Susy or Jimmy! But it's probably just the misfortune of being caught up in a system that, out of necessity, prefers broad appeal over catering to specific individuals.\n\nAll this is to say that I suspect you are seeing a small but vocal minority of folks that are suspicious. My guess is that the average American lives his/her daily life and never once thinks about the government or, if the thought does pop up, it's completely benign. Among those that are suspicious, it likely stems from a perceived injustice of some sort. That injustice may be totally legit or it may be a complete fabrication but just the perception that an injustice occurred that is sufficient to set some folks on this course.\n\nTo further clarify, I'm not advocating her that the government is not worthy of suspicion. My personal take is that almost any pure authority figure deserves a healthy dose of skepticism. I'm only pointing out that a lot of suspicion that exists is likely the result of being a single party (or very small group) that exists within a huge system.",
"Why would any citizen NOT be suspicious of their government?",
"Watergate.\n\nAs an American, I remember learning in one of my high school history classes that trust in the federal government fell during the late 1970s, mainly due to Watergate. After the Watergate scandal, popularity polls decreased for a lot of high ranking elected officials, along with reduced voter turnout. Not only is Watergate still taught and remembered today (think of how many journalists use \"-gate\" to denote scandal), people who lived through have unknowingly passed this behavior to their children and it's become somewhat culturally ingrained.\n\nOn a side note it's not \"most\" Americans, but polls have showed USA has much less faith in their government that most other Western nations.\n\nEDIT: [Here's](_URL_0_) a good graph which shows Watergate's effect on trust in government.\n\nEDIT2: [Here](_URL_1_) is the results of a survey conducted by the Center for International Governance Innovation comparing U.S. to other countries.",
"It's part of our culture. Our nation was founded by people with a fear and resentment of governments and kings. We were once a brave and rebellious assortment of people.\n\nAlso our government always gives us good reason not to trust. Sneaky bunch of motherfuckers.",
"We have a President who believes he has the authority to assassinate American citizens without a trial or due process. When the government has that much power it is only natural for people to be suspicious.",
"Actually if you think about the founding principle in the Declaration of Independence \"\"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness\" it's that last one that the government has habitually tried to infringe upon, in many people's eyes. So, when people apply that to themselves individually, government -- usually the law authorities -- come after them pretty hard. It makes Americans .. suspicious.",
"I do not have a good explanation as to why.\n\nHowever, they should be. Now declassified documents indicate a long history of our own government doing horrible things. Like poisoning entire towns with radiation or chemicals, without the their knowledge, to see what the affects are. Also we have been tricked into every major war we have even gotten involved in. Sadly this is not the reason since, I believe, most Americans are ill informed regarding these incidents. \n\n\n",
"I don't think most Americans are, they are simply the ones making a noise. The reason (I think) is the importance of staying in power rather than making a change. \n\nFrom the politicians point of view it makes sense (and happens in every country, mind you); you have the best solutions, and the only way to make the country better is to make sure it is your policies winning. To do that you need to stay in power, and that will trump any other incentive. To make it worse, in the case of the US, the checks and balances system combined with a de facto two-party system makes for a very gridlocked political environment in which staying in power is alpha omega. Imagine two people fighting in water; 99% of your efforts are going to be just holding your breath and getting above the surface in order to do anything at all. Every little help that will get you an advantage will be crucial which is why campaigns are fuelled by billions of dollars. You are forced to take it in order to do anything, even if you will be handicapped by your promises to corporations. Better some than nothing. \n\nFrom the civilian's point of view, nothing gets done and the politicians are in the pockets of their donors; so much money is being spent and so little is being done. I would be tired and suspicious too, wishing that my vote would count for more than the power-stryggle between politicians. Even if I understand the reasons why, I would still find myself struggling to care.\n\nTL;DR: Most are not suspicious, but those who are blame the lack of action on corrupt politicians. ",
"Americans are afraid the government is trying to trick them (which it does sometimes) and/or take advantage of them. Politicians will go back on there promises or use misleading facts and that makes the American public feel cheated. If you have something that is not always trust worthy, you are going to start to be suspicious of them. I'm not saying there aren't good politicians that are trust worthy, but the bad examples leave a stain that makes people fear or not trust the people that run our states and country.\n\nTl;DR: The government's tract record is not close to perfect which makes some people scared and others not trusting of the government.",
"Because they give us reason to be very, very regularly. The NSA. Campaign financing. Lobbying. Gerrymandering. The list just goes on forever, basically. ",
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. - Eisenhower speech, 1961",
"I recently realized your question, which is really common in Europe, is highly unfair. It's not *wrong* as such, it's just unfair. I'm making a big assumption here, that you're European like me, so if you're not I apologize, but if you are, just think for a second: How many times have you read a headline along the lines of \"bureaucrats in Brussels screwing us over again\", or \"EU decides bananas cannot be bent more than XX degrees\" or \"EU means we'll be overrun by gypsies\"... Yeah, you get the point. Even pro-EU people in Europe are very firm on the whole sovereignty thing - as a Swede, I feel my country is mostly pro-EU, but there would be a fuckin' *revolution* if the EU outlawed our snus (they're trying to, we're resisting). \n\nSo here's the kicker: For a large part of the US, that's *exactly* how they feel about the federal government. Their union was based on states' sovereignty, and while some don't care, for others it is a *crime* when the federal government tries to decide things that they think should be up to states, *regardless* of whether it would be more *effective* to do it at a federal level.\n\nI feel I could make this argument more good if I wasn't so drunk, but the jist is there...\n\ntl;dr: Instead of \"I am Texan/whatever, distrust Washington\", read \"I am Dutch/German/Swedish/British/etc, distrust Brussels\" (then imagine it in 100 years, when EU federalism is a fait accompli). \n\nEDIT: Thank you for the gold, kind stranger!",
"First, I think I'd call it skepticism at its best, and suspicion at its worst. But this skepticism about federalism and the balance between states' rights and central government is something that has always been part of the fabric of American society. \n\nThis started with the founding of the country, when Americans kicked out the centralized government of England, which they believed was out of touch and taxing them unfairly while not providing services and representation in government. This feeling is carried on in many US states even today, but instead of being skeptical of the king of England, this skepticism is directed toward the President and Congress. \n\nAnother factor here is the vastness of the US. Someone in Hawaii, Montana, and Connecticut are going to have very different priorities. They might want a different direction for the federal government than one another. A cattle rancher in Wyoming and a graphic artist in New York city are living different lives. So the cattle rancher bristles when he has to swallow something that the graphic artist might enjoy, and vice versa. That makes it hard to reach consensus, so many Americans, perhaps rightly, see the federal government as a place of contention and not consensus, and don't believe the central government is capable of making a real positive impact on people's lives.",
"The true start was the twin scandals of Watergate and Vietnam. It was the first time Americans saw the extent to which their government lies to them. \n\nAnd if you want a more recent example, just turn on the news.",
"The larger, more populated, and more diverse a country is the harder it is for a single monolithic government entity to represent it. Some Americans like the federal government, some *depend on it* as a mommy figure, but a lot see it as a sort of foreign power. If you are community-oriented and self-sufficient, the federal government is seen as an external force imposing its will on you. I personally tend to have a lot more in common with people in my state, Washington, and similar states like Oregon than I do with people from say... Arkansas. There are statistical outliers of course, but when I've traveled to other parts of the country, although there are a lot of unifying traits that Americans have, there are also a lot of things that make us different. Marijuana legalization is one issue that serves as an example. My state legalized Marijuana and I almost never meet anyone here who disagrees with that measure, but I have family in other states and they think that my state, and myself, are crazy for allowing what they think is a harmful drug to be legal. Currently Marijuana is still illegal at the federal level. That is one good example of the disconnect between different groups in the US, between states and and the federal government. How do you govern a country where there are such wide and varying opinions? The US is not a homogeneous in almost all areas and on almost all issues. \n\nThere is also the opinion that a lot of people have that the federal government mismanages everything it touches. There is a lot of waste and bureaucracy in basically every government program that exists. States often do things a lot better when left on their own (like marijuana legalization). \n\nAlso, the US government has just straight up done some sketchy shit. I don't think 9/11 was an inside job but I don't think that people in charge of the most powerful country in the world, trying to play the geopolitical long game to protect their interests, are above doing something like that. ",
"The real question is why are so many people uncritical of their government? You have to keep a close eye on your government, or else it will be doing bad things on your behalf (afterall they should be representing you).\n\nBut to answer your question: The US government has done some awful things in the past (MK Ultra for example), and there are other things the government does that looks extremely suspicious of what many conspiracy theorists say they are doing. The government just does a lot of things that appear sketchy and unethical when you view their actions with a critical eye.",
"People naturally fear things they don't fully understand. Secret societies, the worlds most powerful government ect. ",
"They listen to our phone calls, transcribing every word we say to keep forever. Then they lie to us about it.",
"There's been quite a lovely rise in things like \"civil forfeiture\" in the past couple decades. When the government gives itself the \"right\" to steal from you at will without recourse, they kinda aren't so much trustworthy anymore, ya know?",
"Honestly, it derives from Watergate, statistics show a much higher rate of trusting the federal government than afterwards. Our confidence in their ability to legislate and not act as tyrants has never recovered. ",
"Most Americans aren't suspicious of the federal government. Not in general, anyway.\n\nMost Americans *are* suspicious of *aspects* of the federal government, and okay with others, and few people in US politics speak with any nuance so it sounds like Everyone Hates The Fed.\n\nThe the FDA and the NSA, two different federal agencies. One evaluates nutrition labels and sets standards for drug testing. The other is a security agency.\n\nThere is a large number of people who mistrust the NSA because evidence has come out that they've been unconstitutionally/unethically spying on people they have no right or reason to spy on. But not everyone who believes this thinks that there shouldn't be an FDA or has any particularly big criticism of that bureau.\n\nMeanwhile, some people think the FDA has no business in regulating food and drugs and that state governments, or the market, should perform this function. But not everyone in that group disapproves of the NSA's spying operations, perhaps because they think that if you aren't doing anything wrong then you have nothing to hide.\n\nComparatively few people dislike the federal government *as a whole*, for any reason. This makes sense. It's a big organization made up of a lot of parts and it really doesn't have much of a uniting factor other than the kind of taxes that pay for it.\n\nSo your short answer is, \"Because American politics is oversimplified in media.\"",
"Because we always catch them doing stupid shit. Like overthrowing countries in South America, or listening in on all our phone calls, and working with corporations to screw the general population.\n\nI mean, we aren't \"suspicious\" without reason. The reasons are clear as day, they are literally the worst at hiding this shit. It's like coming home from work and your 4 year old has their hands behind their backs, a shit-eating-grin on their face, and everything is covered in blood. *WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID JUST YET BUT WE'RE LITERALLY ABOUT TO FIND OUT AND WE KNOW IT MUST BE FUCKING AWFUL.*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.people-press.org/2014/11/13/public-trust-in-government/",
"https://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/q30.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7mfn3y | market capitalization when it comes to purchasing a company. | Here is my understanding of market capitalization: outstanding shares x stock price = market cap. The market cap is in essence the value of the company.
Recently Humana announced they would be buying Kindred Healthcare for $4.1B. Kindred's market cap is $822M at the time of this writing. Wouldn't that mean that Humana is paying more than 4x what Kindred is actually worth?
I'm so confused. Please ELI5. Thank you in advance! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7mfn3y/eli5_market_capitalization_when_it_comes_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"drtjf2k",
"drtw7us"
],
"score": [
50,
7
],
"text": [
"Often the buying company must pay a premium to the traded price, to acquire the company, but usually this premium is 20-50% of the pre-offer share price. \n\nOne thing that isn't in the market cap but is usually part of the purchase price is the assumption of debt. If Kindred owed roughly $3.3 billion to its creditors, the purchase price could be $4.1 billion with only $800 million going to shareholders. The idea being the purchase of two otherwise identical businesses, one financed by mostly equity while another financed by mostly debt should probably have the same purchase price. \n\nI didn't see the deal press release, but did find an article with this:\n\n > Kindred, which had $7 billion in revenues last year, has been weighed down with *$3.2 billion in long-term debt.*\n\nSo Humana is paying $800ish million for the equity in Kindred Healthcare, but also will have to repay Kindred's creditors $3.2 billion. It's fairly common to include both of these when reporting the amount spent on a merger. \n\nWhoa, thanks for the gold!",
"There are many different ways to value an asset, be that a house, a single square of toilet paper, or a company. At any given moment, the different ways to value an asset can be equal or vastly different. However, the actual price of something at any given time is the intersection of supply and demand.\n\nIn terms of valuation there are many ways to value something.\n\n* There's **replacement cost**: how much money would I need to spend to replace this exact asset at this particular moment in time with another of the same quality. Car insurance companies use this when valuing your car in case it gets 'totaled'. A car is totaled when the cost to repair it is greater than the cost to buy a similar car (before the damage) on the open market. This is why a 15 year old car with 250k miles on it can be totaled after a fender-bender. A insurance company would prefer to pay the $900 to buy a comparable copy of your car versus what it would cost to repair it.\n\nLet's look at a bottle of water as an example. I can buy a bottle of water at a gas station for $1.19. If I walk out of a gas station after purchasing a bottle of water and it gets stolen, the replacement cost of that bottle will be another $1.19 plus the effort it takes to go back inside and retrieve another one.\n\n* **Market Capitalization** is exactly what you described. The number of outstanding shares times the price per share. For public companies, this price is the aggregate of all publicly available knowledge about a company's value. In layman's terms, this means that across however millions of shareholders a company has, their collective average valuation of that company at any given picosecond is the market capitalization at that moment.\n\nSince a Market Cap is the crowdsourced valuation of a company, it will include things that don't affect other types of valuations. Wall Street's perception about who's running a corporation, where the company is incorporated, how many (and how serious) pending lawsuits it may be exposed to all affect how people perceive a company's current value (or, more importantly, how they think it will be valued in the future). \n\nThis is why companies like Tesla have a huge market capitalization relative to the value of their physical assets. People *think* Tesla will be more valuable in the future than it is today, so its market capitalization is nearly equal to a physically much larger car manufacturer like General Motors. \n\nUsing our water bottle example, Market Capitalization would be like getting a million people into a room and asking everyone how much each would pay for one water bottle ($1.19). Then taking their average price to determine the value of 100,000 water bottles ($119,000).\n\n* There's also **intrinsic value** which takes into account how a company generates cash. Value investors calculate a company's intrinsic value and compare it to the market cap to see if a company is over or undervalued at any given time.\n\nIf I own a 100 water bottles, using the market capitalization method I have $119 worth of assets. But, if in real life I am selling those bottles for $2 each, my assets are worth much more than what my market cap is suggesting. My intrinsic value, in this example would be much higher than $119 because the cash I generate from my assets is higher than what the market gives me credit for.\n\nFinally, we come to price in the real world. Buyers of public companies almost always need to pay more than the market cap for a number of reasons.\n\nOne, you need to convince the target's shareholders to actually sell their stock. Remember, a company's current price is the aggregate of the collective knowledge of its shareholders. This means that a company's shareholder are, at any given time, happy with their expectation of prices. No one would continue to own a share of a company if they *think* the price was going to get worse, they all continue to own shares because they think the price will increase. So, to purchase all of the shares of another company, you have to buy them for more than what the average shareholder thinks they're going to be worth.\n\nSecond, a market cap is the valuation of a company given all publicly available information. Publicly available is a key distinction. All companies have trade secrets, secret product development pipelines, and their own secret sauce that only they know about and control. The secret sides of a company are sometimes called 'goodwill' on a balance sheet because its made up of things that aren't able to be easily valued. \n\nIn pharmaceuticals, the difference between physical value and goodwill can be extreme and nearly impossible to valuate. The cure to the common cold could make a small lab of five researchers worth billions of dollars. But, if they fail to get their promising drug past FDA regulations, they're literally worthless.\n\nFinally, there are a host of other reasons to pay more for a company. Maybe you're paying gobs of money for a company because you don't want your competitor to purchase them. Maybe they have a key patent to a widget that you want to include in your next gadget and without the rights to that widget, your gadget is worthless. Or maybe you're under intense pressure from your own shareholders to grow your company and Company Z is up for sale.\n\nThis gets us to supply and demand and real price. Humana is spending $4.1 billion on Kindred because Kindred is worth $4.1 billion to Humana. All of Humana's internal valuations of Kindred's product line, services, people, patents, and more sum up to $4.1 billion (or more). Kindred's selling to Humana because their internal valuation of all of those things is $4.1 billion (or less).\n\n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6ivo3l | the difference between interpreted and compiled computer languages? | I'm teaching myself code right now and this subject has come up here and there. I feel like I understand general qualities of the two languages but don't have a fundamental understanding of what they truly are. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ivo3l/eli5_the_difference_between_interpreted_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dj9f8wj"
],
"score": [
22
],
"text": [
"Compiled languages are translated directly into the machine code that the processor can execute. It would be like taking a cookbook written in Greek, and getting it translated to a cookbook written in English. Once you have the translated cookbook, you can then follow the recipes (as can everyone else that reads English).\n\nInterpreted languages are translated on the fly. It would be like having a professional Greek interpreter sitting next to you, and you'd go \"ok, what next?\" and the Greek guy would be \"Add half a cup of broth\" and so on. The upside is that you didn't have to wait for him to translate the whole damn book, and if the original author makes changes to the book in Greek, you don't have to go retranslate it. The downside is that now whoever wants to use the recipe book has to have the Greek guy sitting next to them.\n\nCompiled languages are usually faster to run, but they require a \"build\" step which can be time consuming, and is effectively when the translation to machine code is done.\n\nInterpreted languages don't usually require a 'build' step, but they usually don't run quite as fast, because they need to have the interpreter there, translating everything as the program runs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3sxehv | why do manufacturers print "best before: see bottom" instead of the actual date? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sxehv/eli5_why_do_manufacturers_print_best_before_see/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx17u8h"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It could be a case where the label is printed well before the product actually gets canned/boxed, so you cant put a date on the label as you don't know when it will actually be put on a product. So it directs you to where the date will be put during the final canning/boxing process."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2ho1ys | why in most us universities do they make you share a room with a roomate? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ho1ys/eli5_why_in_most_us_universities_do_they_make_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckuf3wz",
"ckuf7se",
"ckufte0",
"ckufxxn",
"ckufyen"
],
"score": [
13,
8,
2,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It's cheaper, and uses less space. I'm getting shafted enough already on rent in this two-person dorm room, I can't imagine what it would cost for everyone to have their own room. ",
"They get twice the amount of money for one room. Economics is down the hall. ",
"more people in the same living space equals greater profits per unit\n",
"Because not having a roommate would be a tremendous waste of a bunkbed.",
"Because then the dorms would all be 75 stories high.\n\nYou have a refrigerator, right?\n\nIt has 5 shelves, give or take a few.\n\nDo you just put one thing on each shelf? Fuck no, you fill that fucker up.\n\nSame thing with college. You get a roommate for 2 reasons. First, they want you to socialize, and with a random person, you will socialize.\n\nSecond, they want to be able to house everyone.\n\nIF you want a private room, you can get one, tell your parents to fork over more money so you can fap on your own time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6d355p | why is devil's food cake not just called devil's cake? | I understand the name refers to the texture and decadence of the type of cake but why does the name include the word "food" if it's cake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6d355p/eli5_why_is_devils_food_cake_not_just_called/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhzhknx"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"there's two kinds of cake. \n\nthe first one along was called \"[angel food cake](_URL_0_)\". \n\n\nthen someone added chocolate to it, and made it into \"[devils food cake](_URL_1_)\". \n\n\nbecause the second one was \"devilishly good\"\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://allrecipes.com/recipe/7324/angel-food-cake-i/",
"http://allrecipes.com/recipe/25570/devils-food-cake-ii/"
]
] |
|
2iovsy | why does alaska have so many lakes? | I was looking at a map of alaska, near Alpine Alaska, and I noticed tons and tons of small lakes. Why are there so many up there? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2iovsy/eli5_why_does_alaska_have_so_many_lakes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cl42dlr"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Glaciers receded during the ice age and tore up the land. Check out what most of the Canadian landscape looks like vs the lower 48 for a clearer example. Tons of tiny (and not so tiny) lakes everywhere. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1gs16v | what are farm subsidies and how do they work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1gs16v/eli5_what_are_farm_subsidies_and_how_do_they_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"can8zsd",
"can94g6",
"can94id",
"canbbxf",
"cancb4u",
"cand43p",
"canf9ki",
"canfjyb",
"canfz6o"
],
"score": [
7,
9,
193,
2,
2,
4,
2,
4,
4
],
"text": [
"Farmers get government payments for planting a crop, or for not planting any crops. People who own farm land and say they are \"actively engaged\" in farming the land they've never even seen get government payments, too. Some of them live in Manhattan and Beverly Hills.\n\nIt used to be that you got the payments no matter how much money you made or how much of that money came from actual farming. Now the rules are different and if you're a farmer who makes more than $750,000 a year, you don't get any payments. And if you have another job and 2/3 of your money comes from *that* job instead of your part-time farming job, your payments get cut, too.\n\nFarmers can sell their crops to the government and get a guarantee of a certain price even if that price is more than what they could get if they just sold it to anybody else.\n\nFarmers get to buy cheap insurance for their crops in case all the crops DIAF because the government pays for part of the insurance premiums. Let's call it Farmercare.\n\nThe subsidies make it so the farmers don't go broke every year there's a flood or a drought or plague of locusts, and you don't have to pay $3.50 for your $1 cheeseburger.\n",
"Farmers can be their own worst enemy.\n\nThey want to grow as many crops as they possible can. The problem is when they all have a good year, there is an oversupply, prices plummet, and they all lose out.\n\nThe gov't tries to fix this with subsidies. They either pay farmer not to grow when it looks like there will be an oversupply, or they guarantee a minimum price for the crops, and make up any difference with tax money.\n\nThis might be a good idea to help out Farmer Bob and his family, but many farms are owned by corporations, who don't need the help, and are better able to manipulate the system. There are people who get paid millions in gov't money to not grow crops.",
"Okay, so for years the United States produced more cotton than any other country. So anyone in other countries who wanted cotton would end importing it from the United States.\n\nAll was well, and the cotton farmers had a great time, since everyone was paying top dollar for their cotton.\n\nNow, for a number of reasons that I'll explain when you're older, other countries suddenly were able to grow and sell cotton for cheaper than the United States. This was very bad news for American cotton farmers, who couldn't compete with the cheap cotton coming from other countries.\n\nSo, the cotton farmers said Help! Please, government, can you do something? Our business is in danger, and as you can see, the United States relies on all the business the cotton trade brings in! Please do something! \n\nSo, the government says \"Well, you're right, this cotton industry is too big to fail. What we'll do is we'll pay you some money each year so that you can lower the prices of your cotton.\" This way, people don't start buying Brazilian or Egyptian cotton, the US cotton is cheaper for them.\n\nThis is sorta short-sighted though. The government is propping up a business that can't keep itself afloat, and everyone who pays taxes ends up paying a bit of their money each paycheck so that US cotton is cheaper than imported cotton. \n\nNow this has happened in other industries as well. Wheat, corn, oil, and a bunch of other things are all heavily subsidized, so that your bread and gasoline are cheaper and so that you don't have to buy imported goods, keeping the money inside the country, and creating jobs for Americans. This is of course silly and unsustainable.\n\nThis causes other weird stuff like for instance if one year everyone grows too many pigs, the price of pork will drop too low, so sometimes the government will come in and pay the farmers to kill their pigs and bury them, so that they don't suddenly flood the market with cheap pork, putting some people out of business.\n\nNow, it gets even weirder. Since sugar is so hard to produce in America, and it's so easy to grow in the tropics, instead of subsidizing American sugar, we put tariffs on imported sugar. That means, there's an extra tax on sugar that you get from other countries. That combined with the fact that corn is subsidized by the government means that people who make sweet foods have switched away from using real sugar, and instead use high fructose corn syrup. All kinds of weird things like that happen when the government artificially interferes with the prices of goods.\n\nNow, to make things *even* weirder, back to the example of cotton.. All of the sudden Brazil, who we trade with a lot, says \"Hey, you guys are subsidizing your cotton so it's too cheap, so we are unable to sell our Brazilian cotton. Do something about that or we won't trade coffee (for example) with you!\"\n\nThe sane thing to do might be to lower the subsidies given to US farmers, but those are written into contracts that couldn't be broken at the time, so what they did instead is subsidize Brazilian farmers! That's right, the some of the tax dollars that US citizens pay off of every check goes to Brazilian cotton farmers so that they can lower the prices of their cotton, so they can compete with the unfairly low prices of US cotton! Imagine that!\n\n",
"_URL_0_ chapter 13. might have to read 1 and 2 and maybe 3 to get a premise though. great read",
"Okay. So everyone needs to eat, and we need to do it almost every day. So we have farmers who grow us food. In the last little while it's become clear that it would be sorta cheaper to just buy food from some poor places and spend our time doing other things, or use factory farms to produce meat instead of crops because meat is delicious. The problem with this is if there's a huge crisis, or a war, or whatever, the people selling us food might not want to sell us any at all, no matter what the price. They have to eat too. So it's a pretty good idea to always grow food in your own country. But the farmers can't live off the food they grow because foods so cheap, so the government pays them to grow food so they can compete with other farmers and still buy things in their country at their country's prices. This ends up with the US having like retarded amounts of corn, so they started using corn for everything, animal feed, chips, and eventually sugar. This is why there's so much HFCS in foods. It's not because it's better than sugar, it's because there's tons of food laying around and you can't just add corn to ice cream, but you can just add sugar to ice cream. This causes health problems not because its HFCS but because it's stupid amounts of sugar to put into bread/drinks/everything you ever eat.\n\n\nIt's all for national defence.",
"Here it is for five year olds:\n\nIf you have too much of something, like corn or any other farmed thing, the price of corn will go down because there's so much corn and not enough people to buy it all!\n\nSo the government says to the farmer, \"Hey farmer! I think you've done your job too well, can you please stop farming corn?\"\n\nBut the farmer says, \"If I stop farming corn, I'll make no money!\"\n\nSo the government says, \"Okay, we will give you money to live off of so that you won't make corn, or as we like to call it in fancy government words, a *subsidy*.\"\n\nThis keeps corn at a normal price. Now everybody is happy!",
"Most of the current laws are reauthorizations of laws written in the 40s. Why were they written then? The problem at the time was a bunch of hungry rural americans. The solution we came up with was cheap calories. To make cheap calories come about, the government encouraged farmers to \"plant to the fences\" meaning grow a lot of food. To do this, the government offered to pick up the tab if prices dropped below a certain point, insuring farmers of their income, and encouraging them to crank out lots of cheap food. Every 5 years the Farm Bill generally renews this policy. Except now, the problem is not a bunch of skinny starving Americans, it's obesity. Yet, our Farm Bill makes sure the cheap calories keep flowing. So subsidies keep the food cheap and abundant which boosts profit margins for companies like Kraft and offers unhealthy choices to Americans. ",
"A farm subsidy is money paid by the government to farmers in order to supplement the high risk they take in producing something that is critical to national security: our food supply. \n\nFarming is one of the most risky jobs you can have. You put everything you have into the field in the spring, you work from dawn til dusk every day cultivating the crop, then in the fall you harvest and hope to recoup your cost plus enough to live on until next spring. Now consider the number of things that can go wrong along the way: pests, drought, floods, hurricanes, tornados, etc. In addition to that, if everything goes well, you can still have a problem in the event of a bumper crop (everyone produces too much) because the market is flooded and prices drop. Now if it were just the production of Sham-Wows or something trivial, we might just say let them fail. However, food is a national security issue. A nation cannot survive without it. Therefore, the government subsidizes the farmer to make sure that, even in the event disaster strikes, he will still be ok. ",
"There are many kinds of subsidies. One of the biggest and most important is crop insurance. \n\nIf your vegetables are thirsty, it is easy to grab a hose and spray them with water. Farmers have giant areas of land too big for hoses and have to rely on rain and big sprinkler systems to water their crops. If it doesn't rain for a while, they can run out of water and their crops might die. If it rains too much, the land becomes very soft and the crops can fail over or get sick. If it rains a lot during harvest, the farmers may not be able to get to the food they worked so hard to grow before it rots. If it is too windy or a major storm occurs the crops can be killed. If there is a fire, the crops may burn. Farming is very risky, but we need farms to grow the food we eat, so the government has programs to help the farmers out when their crops have trouble. Farming is very expensive. A single corn combine can cost more than a nice house. Without help a farmer might not be able to plant his crops again the next year.\n\nAnother program pays farmers to not grow crops.\n\nIt sounds strange, but land needs to rest. Growing food is hard and wears land out. But farmers need all their land to grow enough food to pay their bills. So sometimes the government pays the farmers so the land can rest and grow food better in later years. Sometimes the government pays farmers so the land can rest for a long time and provide homes for native plants and animals.\n\nA third program pays farmers so they can compete with farmers in other countries who can grow crops easier.\n\nSome crops like to grow in different areas. Corn likes to grow in the United States, but coffee likes to grow in parts of South America. Sometimes when farmers have been growing a crop for many years, another area will start growing the same crop, and sell it for less money. When that happens the older group of farmers lose money and can't afford to keep growing the same crop. But changing crops is expensive. The farmer needs to buy seed and equipment, and then sell his old equipment. This equipment can cost more than a house, and if everyone is changing, then no one will want to buy the old stuff. A farmer could find himself stuck with expensive tractors he can't use and unable to afford what he needs for the new crop. The farm could go out of business. To keep that from happening sometimes the government will step in and pay the farmer so he can afford to keep growing the old crop and not lose business.\n\nWhen this happens the new farmers complain and the different governments start to fight and argue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6aqv5h | why do media organizations ask for user permission before sharing submitted content from twitter but not reddit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6aqv5h/eli5_why_do_media_organizations_ask_for_user/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhgrem0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If you submit a link to Reddit, it's from an external source/site. Just because you shared it doesn't mean it's yours so there is no reason to ask permission from anyone on Reddit. You'd ask the owner of the original source of the link.\n\nText posts and comments are easier to use under fair use - especially since you can paraphrase the original post. You can't paraphrase a video or photo of an important event, so they explicitly ask permission for things like that.\n\nEither way, I commonly see Reddit and Reddit usernames referenced in online news/articles as sources."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
q0sgr | the difference between gaelic, welsh, breton, and manx | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q0sgr/eli5_the_difference_between_gaelic_welsh_breton/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3truwz",
"c3twg11"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Since you are five, let's pretend that English, [Gibberish the language game](_URL_1_), and Pig Latin were all languages you knew. They are all pretty closely related, but you can pretty much immediately understand Pig Latin and English since there really isn't much difference. Gibberish on the otherhand is still based on English but there are many more syllables so it's much harder to understand. Now you speak Pig Latin. Your neighbors on the other hand speak Gibberish but never learned English. You can probably listen and catch onto some of the words but if you don't know the bits of grammar it probably won't make sense to you. The same would be true of all the languages you listed. In that they all came from a common source, however, they are different based on the area where the developed. In this case, it was your house and your neighbors house.\n\n[Here's an example of someone speaking Gibberish if you are interested.](_URL_0_)\n\nMore like you are fifteen: there are two branches of Gaelic, Brythonic and Goidelic Gaelic. They would have all come from a Proto-Celtic language. I'm assuming when you say plain old Gaelic that you are referring to Irish Gaelic which is of the Goidelic branch. Breton and Welsh are the only two languages of the Brythonic branch of Gaelic. There were other Gaelic family languages that are no longer spoken. \n\nThe big difference between the two is that Brythonic languages generally were spoken in Southern Great Britain as well as small enclaves on mainland Europe, whereas, Goidelic languages tended to be spoken in northern Great Britain and Ireland. That is other than the obvious bit about the vocabulary being different. Since you are five, Goidelic languages will share more common words and vocabulary with each other. Whereas Brythonic languages will have the same. However, Goidelic and Brythonic langauges will have much less in common with each other.\n\nBack to the geography based differences. Those that speak the Brythonic languages are Celts but they are not Gaels. Those that speak Goidelic languages are both Gaels and Celts. ",
"Bretons are people that hail from the north-western region of High Rock and are the most gifted humans in the field of magic, due to their past close relations with elven kind."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT_HROSuI90",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibberish_%28language_game%29"
],
[]
] |
||
28c5sj | how come native americans never built empires like cultures on other continents? | South America had Incas and Mayans. Asia had Mongols and the Chinese Dynasties but, North America never had great cities or monuments. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28c5sj/eli5_how_come_native_americans_never_built/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci9i195",
"ci9i2b2",
"ci9i923",
"ci9j9bn",
"ci9kjqm",
"ci9mdos"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
5,
5,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"See also, [The mound builders](_URL_0_)",
"Near St Louis is Cahokia. There are Mounds several stories high that were built by a large civilization. Several thousand Indians thrived there. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nMore information : apparently it was one of the largest civilizations between 600-1400AD",
"It's been awhile, so please be patient, but I do recall that one of the biggest reasons was a lack of sufficient surface iron. North America was every bit as competitive as Europe and the Mediterranean, but while that region had plenty of rich surface deposits of iron that could be worked at low temperatures (see Norway as an example, I believe), the metal deposits in North America were buried deeper, and those that were above ground were not as rich, which meant that they were beyond the reach of refining with stone-age technologies, and therefore not worth the effort of anyone even bothering to look at the ore to see if it was at all useful.\n\nGold was there and plentiful, but too soft to be useful for tools or weapons. Lack of easy iron meant no technological advances requiring metal. Native Americans had progressed quite far in nearly any technology that didn't have metal as a prerequisite.",
"There were several large cities in pre-Columbian North America, and there were also several widely-distributed cultures. By some definitons these would qualify as \"empires\". Wood and mud were the primary building materials however so very little of them currently remains.\n\nCheck out each of the cultures here: _URL_0_\n\nHaving said that, large cities aren't intrinsically \"better\" than smaller or nomadic societies. There are certainly advantages, depending on the situation, to any one of those lifestyles.",
"There is a large element of false information in your statement. True, the North American natives were not as advanced as the Incas, but they were not as backwards as they are in holywood movies. The reason is this: when columbus showed up, he spread desease. . A dark ages caused by the plagues followed, then, 200 years later, Europeans started settling in the eastern US, by which time the cleared farmland was overgrown and the villages were gone. When Lasalle went through the Confederate areas in the 1500s, he reported finding empty villages and unplanted but cleared farmlands. Ask yourself why primitive savages could teach the pilgrims what crops to plant or how to cure scurvy. The Americas were a little behind eurasia because of a lack of pack animals and less heterogeneous trade opportunities, but they were coming along.",
"The Mayans aren't in South America, they are in central and North America. They are also preceded by the Olmecs. The Aztecs are in North America too, and were an empire.\n\nAnother problem is that you cannot evaluate cultures as evolving along a single line that leads to empires. The Northwest coast people had very sophisticated cultures and large populations, but they never developed agriculture because they didnt need it. Farming from the central Mexican region spread all the way up the Mississippi and led to the Moundbuilders mentioned else where. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mound_Builders"
],
[
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pre-Columbian_cultures#Northern_America"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
1lf2aq | why is it illegal to use milk crates for other things aside milk? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lf2aq/eli5_why_is_it_illegal_to_use_milk_crates_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbyksht"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I didnt know that. At my job we go into the dairy cooler and grab milk crates for other purposes every day."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6fpibt | why do companies pay ceo's so much money? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fpibt/eli5_why_do_companies_pay_ceos_so_much_money/ | {
"a_id": [
"dik26bt"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"1) CEOs spend a lot of time working, so they need to be compensated. They are held responsible for the company, so 24/7 they are on the hook and often answer calls in the middle of the night, skip weddings and kid's soccer games, and don't have meaningful time off. \n\n2) There are only so many experienced CEOs. There are millions you could hire to fry chicken at KFC, but only a handful of individuals who have experience running multinational corporations that employee tens of thousands of people. A small pool means more negotiating power for those in it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ccfg05 | so what exactly is the connection between nazism and the composer richard wagner? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ccfg05/eli5_so_what_exactly_is_the_connection_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"etmhm30",
"etmi00w"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Wagner wasn’t a Nazi, because he died in 1883, before Hitler was even born. But in his time, Wagner was a virulent anti-Semite. \n\nHitler and the Nazi Party loved Wagner, however, and the composer and his beliefs conflated with Nazism and anti-Semitism. \n\n[BBC source ](_URL_0_)",
"I've asked this question to some people and most assume that it's because he was a nazi that apparently turned over several jewish members in his orchestra group a some point. Problem is he died a a half dozen decades too early to do.\n\nNo the main reason is because at one point Hitler went to a concert that was playing his music and he wrote about it in his mein kampf book. After gaining office he liked to suggest and request that a lot of people play Wagners music and stuff as a symbol of german pride and because Hitler liked wagners music.\n\nFrom there a lot of nazis just kinda played records of wagners music and that's a bad thing because nazis are bad."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20130509-is-wagners-nazi-stigma-fair"
],
[]
] |
||
no123 | why does certain bacteria cause food poisoning that makes you expel basically everything in your digestive system? | How does bacteria cause that to happen? I just can't seem to grasp the concept. I have had food poisoning a couple times, but I can't seem to understand how just bacteria can cause that powerful of a reaction.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/no123/eli5_why_does_certain_bacteria_cause_food/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3al4x1",
"c3al4x1"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Some bacteria, as a byproduct of their metabolism, produce a toxin. This toxin and its source, when detected by our bodies is *gotten rid of* as quickly as possible via explosive bowel movements. ",
"Some bacteria, as a byproduct of their metabolism, produce a toxin. This toxin and its source, when detected by our bodies is *gotten rid of* as quickly as possible via explosive bowel movements. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
39o6fq | why is identifying as another gender ok but identifying as another race crazy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39o6fq/eli5_why_is_identifying_as_another_gender_ok_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs502md",
"cs5087d"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n",
"Duplicate of other posts\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_2_\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21pfov/eli5_if_people_can_determine_their_own_gender/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39nsxd/eli5_why_is_rachel_dolezal_identifying_as_black/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38g7kf/eli5_how_come_transgender_exists_but_not/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39lx5k/eli5_why_dont_we_recognize_a_person_who_wants_to/"
],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21pfov/eli5_if_people_can_determine_their_own_gender/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39nsxd/eli5_why_is_rachel_dolezal_identifying_as_black/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38g7kf/eli5_how_come_transgender_exists_but_not/",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39lx5k/eli5_why_dont_we_recognize_a_person_who_wants_to/"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.