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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3rp2go | why can't the government take back alcatraz from the park service and rehab it into a modern prison for gitmo detainees? | I mean, if SF didn't have a problem with the country's most dangerous criminals for decades... Why would they have such a hard time about now? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rp2go/eli5_why_cant_the_government_take_back_alcatraz/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwq1a9i",
"cwq1vuw",
"cwq9a78"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Gitmo is located in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. so that it exists outside the juristiction of the American Constitution. \n\nThis allows long term incarceration without trial and conviction and interrogation techniques that would be considered \"Cruel and unusual\" in the USA.\n\nAlcatraz is very much within the USA.",
"The reason that the Gitmo was chosen as a prison is that it is in Cuba and is not US soil. The US constitution does not grant any of the prisoners there protections unless they hold US citizenship. Alcatraz in in the US, the Constitution would apply there even to non-citizens. ",
"So basically a poor loophole to do exactly what your most precious founding document expressly forbids. No wonder people outside the US hate us "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9h2sks | whats worst that can happen if i don't get enough sleep? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9h2sks/eli5whats_worst_that_can_happen_if_i_dont_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"e68qpg5"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The worst? Death. Chronic sleep deprivation can kill you.\n\nMost likely you aren't anywhere close to that point but it can also lead to a host of negative health effects to the point of taking years off your life. Quantifying exactly what the consequences of an individual getting too little sleep will result in is impossible though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1dgx3n | why do carriers care if you tether? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dgx3n/eli5_why_do_carriers_care_if_you_tether/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9q6xrc",
"c9q73jn",
"c9qatg8",
"c9qg9pq"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"the same reason why Hollywood cared about VCRs or the music industry cared about cassette tapes.\n\nwith tethering, you'll only need to subscribe to their service once instead of multiple times (ie one subscription per device).",
"1. It ties up bandwith on their network\n\n2. They can make money off it. Most carriers sells mobile broadband devices. By tethering you're circumventing their mobile broadband service, so they charge you for that in lieu of you signing up for mobile broadband. \n\n",
"Money. It's a \"service\" they can otherwise charge more for. Why would they give something away when they can charge you for the privilege? ",
"They want to be able to sell you a tethering service for an additional fee.\n\nCell companies are not in the business of providing you a service, they're in the business of taking as much of your money as possible while doing the least amount of work.\n\n**TL;DR** Because fuck you."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3rlj45 | black holes suck in light, so why are they black? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rlj45/eli5_black_holes_suck_in_light_so_why_are_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwp522z",
"cwp53tb"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Black is the label we apply to an absence of light. You can't make a flashlight that projects black. Since the BH absorbs light, it you could look at it you would see no light. That condition is labeled \"black\".",
"We call them black because we believe that they suck in light and don't let it out.\n\nIt's outgoing light we can see, you can't see light that's being absorbed only light that is being sent out or reflected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6pjk6f | why is being bare foot seen as taboo? why is it different between being barefoot or in flip flops. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pjk6f/eli5_why_is_being_bare_foot_seen_as_taboo_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkptftx",
"dkq228p"
],
"score": [
18,
3
],
"text": [
"Where i work its an insurance thing, yes we clean our floors but there is no guarantee there is not an odd shard of glass somewhere, if you cut your foot the company could be held liable so we would just rather you wear your fucking shoes please, hippy.",
"I don't think you understand what taboo means. Also, being bare foot is quite very simply disgusting in modern cities."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1s8wvm | what does this patent troll bill say and do? | The passing of this patent troll bill is all over the news. Does it have any impact on my company's existing patents? Will it affect plans we have in place for future patents?
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s8wvm/eli5_what_does_this_patent_troll_bill_say_and_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdv3taf",
"cdv3tg3",
"cdv45wg",
"cdv5red",
"cdv7t01"
],
"score": [
3,
9,
9,
36,
4
],
"text": [
"I would honestly like to know that as well.",
"\"You must pay the Troll toll, to get to this boys hole.\"",
"Nice try patent troll.\n\nActually, I heard on NPR that the law is for companies who own patents, but do not do anything else, offer no services or do not do manufacturing. It will allow the companies they sue to recoup court costs if they win.\n\nThe patent trolls sue the bejesus out of every and anyone using their patents as the basis of the suit. Most companies who are sued just settles, as it is cheaper than fighting. For example, patent trolls are not just suing tech company using their wifi patents, but also coffee shops who offer free wifi.",
"Let's say you own the patent on brass plated, triangle shaped bottle openers. Here are some of the basics.\n\nRight now you could file a lawsuit on someone making gold plated square shaped bottle openers saying, \"Hey, we have a patent for bottle openers!\" The people making gold plated square shaped bottle openers don't have the time or money to fight you in court because it costs a lot of money to find out what patent you own, figure out if it's a legally binding patent, figure out if they're violating it etc...etc..., so they settle out of court for a couple thousand dollars to get you to go away.\n\nWhat the bill does is not only forces you to state the specifics of the patent they are violating (in this case your brass plated, triangle shaped bottle opener patent), but when you lose the lawsuit because it's pretty obvious there is no patent violation, you would have to pay their lawyer fees.\n\nAnother thing the bill adds is the right for the patent office to re-review your patent after the case if it was deemed frivolous. \"Wait a second, why are we allowing someone to patent brass plated, triangle shaped bottle openers? That's silly.\"",
"From my understand of patent law and the USPTO I've tried to summarize what I know. Not sure if it's 100% correct so please correct me if I'm wrong.\nBasically under the patent system before the bill mostly larger companies would buy patents from inventors, creating a large portfolio of patent for inventions that they never put out on the market. These companies would then file lawsuits with upwards of 20-30 defendants, if not more, claiming that the defendant's products infringed a single patent they held. Typically it would be ok to go after infringers, but in this case where the plaintiff isn't actually putting a product out on the market and in turn preventing others from putting it out on the market only because doing so was a source if revenue became problematic. If I'm correct, what this bill does (in the context of patent trolls) is require that the plaintiff state exactly how a defendant is infringing on their patent (this gets rid if the lawsuits with 20-30 defendants) and require that the plaintiff (aka patent troll) state their principal business. Presumably this is so the court can evaluate if the patent infringement is actually affecting plaintiffs business or it's just a patent troll case where it is not. Also it would provide relief for defendants who are found not guilty because it orders the plaintiff to pay their court costs and fees incurred in litigation."
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.infoworld.com/t/government/patent-troll-bill-clears-house-huge-majority-232218"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1njl9g | how can a microwave heat up food but have no affect on plastic food wrap? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1njl9g/eli5_how_can_a_microwave_heat_up_food_but_have_no/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccj5x7c",
"ccj5y7a"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Microwaves are radio waves that are roughly around 2,500 megahertz\n\nThese radio waves are absorbed by water, fats, and sugars. \n\nThese waves are also not absorbed by most plastics, ceramics, or glass.\n\nIf you were to change the frequency then you could design a microwave that only melted plastic but didn't heat up the food. But this would be less marketable.",
"When an object is \"hot\" it just means it's molecules are vibrating faster than normal. A microwave heats up food by vibrating the water molecules in it. Plastic food wrap has very few water molecules in it, so it take much more time to heat up. Still not a good idea to leave it on your food in the microwave though..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6sl5mr | nuclear preparedness | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6sl5mr/eli5_nuclear_preparedness/ | {
"a_id": [
"dldjopw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Everybody's going to die, slowly. That's arguably an improvement over people inside the loop, who are going to die quickly.\n\nThe sort of war that would include attacks on major American cities is likely to be the sort of thing that ends humanity as we know it. Perhaps a single nuclear missile attack by crazy North Korea wouldn't end up killing everybody, but a full scale NK vs US vs China vs US nuclear war is the end of days.\n\nSome folks might survive the nuclear effects by being in KY, but all the millions of city folks who don't get killed are going to come for your food. Fields of corn in Iowa aren't any good without the food distribution networks. 95% of the population has to die off before a simple agricultural society can be established. They will never see the glory days we currently have, because the raw materials they would need to industrialize are beyond their reach because we've used up all the easy to get to stuff. \n\nIt's Mad Max science fiction times. Not fun. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
trp5k | why do people protest the nato summits? | As a resident of Chicago, we are being forced to deal with a lot of security preparation and road closures due to the NATO summit. Not only is his in terms of closing down roads for foreign dignitaries, but also preparation if protests get out of control. I've looked around online but it seems to be a pretty charged debate. So I ask you ELI5: Why do people protest the NATO summits? What do they want? Why protest this event specifically? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/trp5k/eli5_why_do_people_protest_the_nato_summits/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4p6zw5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If you use the search bar, you'll find [this was already asked](_URL_0_). Unfortunately there was only one answer so it's not incredibly helpful. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tla5t/eil5_why_are_people_protesting_the_nato_summit_in/"
]
] |
|
2bumsk | why if i approach any wild animal in the countryside on foot it sprints away, but when you're in a car they just sit in the middle of the road until you nearly, or do, run them over. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bumsk/elif_why_if_i_approach_any_wild_animal_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj9234c"
],
"score": [
15
],
"text": [
"A survival skill is the ability to recognize and react to movements of animals (such as people) differently than movements of objects (such as trees blowing in the wind) - you run when it's the former but the latter is just background noise to be ignored. But cars are something relatively new, something that looks like an object and not an animal. \n\nIt's further complicated because that object can move in ways that no other object they've encountered can move. It goes much MUCH faster, for one, and does it without using legs. \n\nDeer do things like run in front of cars because it doesn't look or behave like their instincts tell them a carnivore does, and because they don't really understand and can't rationalize how fast it's moving. They start crossing the weird wide open black smooth field when that shiny rock is still hundreds of feet away and suddenly it's right at their location. \"What the fu-\"BAM."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
70s28a | why do we see multi-colored dots in the dark? | In the dark, especially when you're eyes aren't adjusted, you see multi-colored dots, why is that? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/70s28a/eli5_why_do_we_see_multicolored_dots_in_the_dark/ | {
"a_id": [
"dn5jt32"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'm in a sensation and perception class right now. Even when your eyes are closed, the inner anatomy of your eye is still picking up what minimal sensations are present. Your neurons are still firing from this input, just not much so your perception will almost never be pitch black."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5m20v7 | why does a website with a recipe often include a long preface before you get to the actual recipe? | Each time you find a recipe online, there will likely be a very very long preface to the recipe that is by the author-- which makes no difference to the dish (for example, "I first made this dish on a Saturday morning, when the leaves were falling on my porch...."). If it were ads, that would make some sense as part of the deal of getting the recipe. But, it is usually just a long story and far too many pictures of the completed dish. What's the deal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5m20v7/eli5_why_does_a_website_with_a_recipe_often/ | {
"a_id": [
"dc0659s",
"dc068ww",
"dc06xx0"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
4
],
"text": [
"I would guess it's because these websites aren't cookbooks, they're blogs, which implies some degree of the author writing for themself. ",
"Imma answer your question, but first let me tell you about this time I watered the lawn on a warm july afternoon, there were clouds in the sky and childrens laughter....\n\nok seriously, who knows, maybe they just like to hear themselves type, or create an emotional connection to the recipe, perhaps they are just killing white space so the ad banner on the side fits the page.\n\ncould be worse, you could be asking about youtube videos. *11minutes to review a potato peeler? how???*",
"If the author is a decent writer, it can help set the mood for the food but even the best authors can sometime seem like they're waving their wonderfulness about like a 3 year old boy enjoys waving around his penis (I've got one - wheee!)\n\nI would rather see the recipe at the top of the post so I can immediately see if I want to read further instead of slogging through 42 glamor shots to discover I don't have a certain ingredient and won't dream of buying it anyway (fungus!) or am lacking XYZ gadget and wouldn't bother buying one or working around it.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2jnelo | what is the connection between greenland and denmark? | Although Greenland is Danish territory, Greenland appears to consider itself a largely-independent territory. So, what is the official status of Greenland and Denmark, and how much control does Denmark have over Greenland? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jnelo/eli5_what_is_the_connection_between_greenland_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cldc5o0"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Greenland is a country within the Kingdom of Denmark, similar to how Scotland is a country within the UK.\n\nGreenland has been aspiring to greater autonomy, and Denmark has completely, putting them on a track to assume increasingly more control of their domestic affair. Despite this, Greenland remains economically dependant on Denmark."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
76kx5q | why does licking the wrapper of a cinnamon gum and placing it into your skin start to burn your skin? | EDIT: onto your skin
When I was a kid, it was a thing to take the Big Red gum wrapper, lick it, and place it on your forehead until it started burning. Why did/does this happen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/76kx5q/eli5_why_does_licking_the_wrapper_of_a_cinnamon/ | {
"a_id": [
"dof6un6"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The cinnamon oil that flavors the gum feels hot in your mouth when you chew it. This is because it's an \"irritant\", or a molecule that activates pain receptors. The gum wrapper has some of the cinnamon oil on it, and when you moisten it by licking you make it easy to transfer the oil from the wrapper to the skin. In the skin, it finds your nerve cells and tells them that they hurt."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2i8j62 | was scurvy actually particular to sailors? it seems like citrus wouldn't have been available to most of the lower classes | I work at a museum and talk a lot about ships and people often ask about scurvy. I understand that grog helped curtail it in sailors (rum+water was the sailors usual diet, but "Admiral Grog"'s water source was so foul he added citrus to make it taste better and his sailors didn't catch scurvy). But it seems like most lower class wouldn't get citrus: I mean- lemons and limes were a delicacy! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2i8j62/eli5_was_scurvy_actually_particular_to_sailors_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckzu9q5",
"ckzuaex",
"ckzv53a",
"ckzv5dg"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Citrus isn't the only source of vitamin C, it just happened to be a good one for ship-goers since most things that were cheap and vitamin C rich were perishable.",
"Scurvy is caused by a lack of vitamin C. \nVitamin C can be found in peppers, turnip greens, cabbage, broccoli, tomatoes, peas, and other foods. \nA lot of those would be available to the lower classes at least some of the time.",
"Scurvy isn't particular to sailors, anyone can get it, but it was very very common due to the poor rations that sailors had. I have two main examples, the British Navy in the [Mid 18th Century](_URL_1_), and the Japanese Navy in the [late 19th Century](_URL_0_)\n\nCitrus was difficult to come by, store and keep fresh, and it wasn't introduced as a way to improve peoples' lives, it was introduced because it increased the effectiveness of the ships. \n\nBeriberi, in the Japanese Navy was a deficiency in diet (there's a trend) caused by too much rice. A 'higher class' diet included rice, and a 'lower class' diet included barley. Barley had more nutritional value, but there was a social stigma attached to eating barley that prevented widespread adoption.\n\nWhen you say, 'But it seems like most lower class wouldn't get citrus: I mean- lemons and limes were a delicacy!', do you mean on ships, or on land? Shipboard, people ate what they were given. Once the various militaries figured out how to prevent scurvy, they implemented a plan. Non Navy people didn't get scurvy on land, despite not having citrus as a regular part of their diet, because food on land was healthy enough to not need the extra supplements. British navy food was rather sparse: salt pork, rum, bread, etc. On land, even a poor person could eat well enough to avoid scurvy.\n\nThe British Navy did so much research into Scurvy (and Lind solved it in 1747) because scurvy was far more widespread due to (*speculation*) the longer cruises the British Navy did. I don't know if other navies avoided extended times at sea, or if their cuisine naturally included enough nutrients.",
"And, incidentally, the issuing of limes to British sailors was the reason they were called Limeys."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriberi",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scurvy#18th_century"
],
[]
] |
|
39ah49 | why can massive video games like the witcher or elder scrolls come on a single disc, but most tv shows always come on around 5 discs? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/39ah49/eli5_why_can_massive_video_games_like_the_witcher/ | {
"a_id": [
"cs1p7nr",
"cs1sz5z"
],
"score": [
87,
14
],
"text": [
"Because video isn't generally a small thing to carry, whereas 3D data can be. \n\nVideo is just being read and played back, all the data you're seeing has to be there on the disk, otherwise, well, there's nothing to play. \n\nWith something like Elder Scrolls games however what the disk is storing is 3D asset data, which for want of a better word are just instructions on what shapes things are, where certain lights are, what the colour or texture of this particular surface is, and so on. \n\nThe actual 'video' you're seeing is being generated on the fly by your graphic card. It's not like every view you see is being pulled off the disk, it's being generated. \n\n*edit* To address a criticism of this answer - it's true texture data can be enormous in modern games, but if you scale both sides of the argument, for a modern game compare to a Blu Ray box set, rather than an older game and a DVD box set, the same differences still apply, for the same reasons. ",
"Disc's that store TV shows/movies have to come with a fully built dining room set. Disc's that store video games comes with IKEA furniture and your computer puts it together."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4br7cl | native reserves in the usa and canada. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4br7cl/eli5_native_reserves_in_the_usa_and_canada/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1bmx3l",
"d1bou5j",
"d1bp9vg",
"d1bshwf",
"d1bty4r",
"d1btz86"
],
"score": [
3,
40,
5,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"What, specifically, do you want to learn about them?",
"Basically Native Americans didn't see land ownership in the same way the Europeans did.\n\nAs the Europeans came to North America they began claiming land that they saw as \"unclaimed\". This lead to conflicts between the two groups as Natives lost access to land they previously saw as for everyones use.\n\nEventually these conflicts came to a head with a treaty being signed and agreed to between the colonists and the natives. In the treaty the colonists agreed to designate a certain amount of land as being \"owned\" by the Native communities.\n\nIt differs a bit between US and Canada so I can mostly only speak to the Canadian perspective but on a Native reserve there are no federal or provincial taxes collected and the reserves themselves have their own system of government and regulation. Anything that happens on that land in terms of building or development must be approved by the council and the chiefs of that land.\n\nAs for whether they're good or not, there are pros and cons.\n\nThe reserves allow the native communities to have a space to help preserve their culture and to exercise a measure of self determination that they would not have access to otherwise. Some have been able to maximize their ability to control regulations and taxation in order to draw businesses to the reserve land and generate a healthy economy for their people to take advantage of.\n\nOn the con side, it isolates these communities from the rest of the culture and helps foster an \"us vs. them\" attitude between Canadians and what are typically refereed to as First Nations (Natives). It also makes them extremely vulnerable to the common problems that occur in small clusters of people in a relatively small geographic area: corruption, economic instability, localized natural/man made disasters. These events can have a magnified impact on these communities because their Independence means they have fewer ties to outside communities and their fixed geographic locations means they can't simply re-locate without effectively losing their reserve land. They can't settle a new reserve somewhere else without re-negotiating the entire treaty.\n\nIn Canada issues of corruption among local leaders has been a pretty common story and because of their Independence it's difficult to enforce any kind of government oversite without being seen as meddling in the affairs of First Nations people so it's always a balancing act when one of these communities finds themselves in desperate need of assistance. ",
"I'll give it a shot. However this will be a purely Canadian perspective coming from a white guy in university. \n\nI can't remember the specifics of the origins but trickery was involved when settlers first arrived in North America through the signing away of land. I believe the aboriginals thought they were allowing settlers to use the land while the actual document said they were giving it up. \n\nAnother thing to note is how the aboriginals were hit with massive plagues when settlers arrived from Europe. Without getting too much into it, essentially since Europe had domesticatable animals (cows, pigs, sheep etc) they were able to build cities and feed large amounts of people in one area, however, since they lived in such close proximity to the animals (literally roamed the streets) then diseases from animals were able to cross over to humans through mutations. They brought all these new diseases over with them and I believe I've heard reports as high as 90% of the population was wiped out in North America. This thinned the population considerably and made them much easier to manipulate. \n\nUltimately they were placed on reserves on undesirable land. But then residential schools came along which uprooted the aboriginal youth and attempted to strip them of their culture. Many troublemakers were simply killed and a large portion were abused in all the ways you'd expect by an olden day church related institution. The last school closed in 1996 and all the children had been slowly sent back to their reserves. But the effects have been devastating. These children weren't raised within their culture so they feel alienated at home since they didn't even speak the same language any more, they didn't learn how to be parents since they were raised in the school, and many received no counselling support for all the abuse suffered which has had an effect on the drug and alcohol levels. That being said, the stereotype that they are all drunks is wrong. Studies have shown that while those who are alcoholics on reserves will drink more than Canadian alcoholics, the actual percentage of alcoholics is lower on reserves than the rest of Canada.\n\nThings are changing slowly, but no. Life on reserves can be very hard. Many are on boiled water advisories and some require helicopters/airplanes to get to. Many feel no connection to the land they are on due to hostile land takeovers during WWI and II and many aren't even allowed to dig more than 6 inches into the ground for construction. It was illegal up until the late 1900s for them to even make a legal claim for land. \n\nAll the children who were in schools are now at a parental age with the grandparents being the parents of those in residential schools. Remember the last school closed only 20 years ago, this is still a fresh wound. There is a big push in the aboriginal communities to try and rebuild their culture and revitalize languages before they are lost but they face a lot of challenges, stereotypes being one of them, and the other is just pure ignorance on our part of the issues they face. It's shocking to me how little the average Canadian knows about them. \n\nSorry if I didn't answer your main question I just wasn't entirely sure what you were looking for but feel free to ask any supplementary ones! \n\n\n",
"North America was fairly heavily settled by natives before 1492. However, after European diseases arrived the population was greatly reduced. When the Pilgrims arrived, for example, the local natives had died of disease and the Pilgrims found basically an empty territory to settle in.\n\nThe settlers wanted to establish which land was theirs and which was the natives. Given that the early settlements were tiny and the loss of natives due to disease, there was enough land for everyone. Jamestown was settled with 214 people. The number of early colonists was just not significant.\n\nBut as more colonists arrived, they wanted more land. They would make treaties with the natives to get the land they wanted. With no clear ownership, they would make whatever claims or treaties they could. \n\nThe early reservations were really just divisions of the land. The Cherokee lived on their land, although it was much reduced from what they had before whites arrived. But then the colonists wanted all of the good land. They started forcing the natives to move to land that the settlers did not want - basically deserts and other wasteland.\n\nThen when whites found gold or oil in the deserts and wasteland they forced the natives off of that land to someplace with nothing of value.\n\nFrom a strictly numerical standpoint, the reservation sizes \"make sense\". The native population has been virtually wiped out. It is not a question of millions of people forced onto tiny pieces of land, but of the millions dying off and the remainder having only a fraction of the land left (there are only about 5 million natives in the U.S. out of 300+ million people).\n\nBut now (in America at least) reservations are basically worthless areas of land that the natives were forced onto so that the whites could have all of the good land. There are also some tiny reservations scattered around where tribes have a few square miles of land (often with casinos now) that they were not driven off of, or were given back.\n",
"**US-centric and not touching on the weirder legal bits at all.**\n\nWhen settlers from Europe first came to the United States, many natives had already gotten sick and died. The natives that remained were often relatively friendly to newcomers because they'd been adopting people who'd lost their families for years. They also had extra land because so many had died and really hoped they could add the settlers, who they often saw as white \"orphans\", to their family. So the natives would give some spare land to the settlers.\n\nThe settlers really didn't see it this way but kinda went along because they needed help and couldn't really fight. It was sometimes rough, but settlers and natives mostly got along okay. But more settlers showed up and soon the settlers didn't see themselves as orphans at all and didn't think they needed any help anyway. So they just started taking things because they had guns while the natives did not. The settlers just took things for almost 300 years.\n\nAfter almost 300 years, some settlers had big cities like New York and Boston. Some of these city settlers felt sorry for the natives and about what they'd done, not too sorry, but a little. But other settlers didn't have cities. They had farms and they weren't sorry at all. They wanted to keep taking things. So a compromise was made between the farmer settlers and city settlers: the natives would get to keep land as long as no settlers wanted it. This worked out well for the settlers but not so great for the natives. After all, who wants land no one wants? Nobody, that's who.\n\nSo the settlers took everything but a little bit of land nobody wanted, called it a \"reservation\", and made the natives move to the land nobody wanted. That land was far away from towns and cities. It couldn't grow food very well, either. This made the natives very poor while the settlers lived it up on land the natives used to own.\n\nBut then the settlers wanted the reservations, too. So they told the natives that they'd \"help\" them with it by setting up mines or logging or whatever else the settlers had in mind. Since they didn't have any respect for the natives, the settlers would keep the money, too. But the natives could trust the settlers, the settlers said, and they'd keep the money in storage for the natives. They did, sometimes, but never let the natives take any out! The settlers thought they were pretty clever and the natives weren't.\n\nNow, I should say that the natives weren't what the settlers thought at all. Way back they'd actually beaten the settlers at one of their own games; the hardest game the settlers had, really, and beat them on their own turf. The settlers' best court told the settlers to cut it out with all the stealing. The settlers didn't listen because the court didn't have guns either.\n\nBut now, almost right now, the court had guns and most of the settlers were city settlers. The city settlers and their best court felt sorry about all the stealing, not a little sorry, not totally sorry, but way more sorry than they'd ever felt. And bit-by-bit, the natives started getting back things that had been taken from them. Not all of it, not even close, but a little of it. Some of that money the settlers had been keeping was turned over, too.\n\nBut the land the natives had left is still land nobody wanted and it's still far away from everything else. So it's still mostly poor. And not all the settlers are sorry, either, so the natives often still don't have any of the things people should always have, like good food, clean water, schools, or hospitals. When the natives complain about this, they're often told they're just lazy or worse.",
"I actually grew up and am currently living on an Indian reservation! I don't know the specifics/politics of the whole thing, but I could answer any questions from the perspective a 20 year old dude who calls one home "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4eamjt | is a poisonous reaction just a effective form of allergy? | Hello, something that's been plaguing the back of my mind of a while.
What's the difference between a poisonous or a venomous reaction and an allergic reaction? Is a poison or venom just a chemical that we are extremely allergic to as a collective species. If so, why do we call them poions and venoms instead of allergens like peanuts? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4eamjt/eli5is_a_poisonous_reaction_just_a_effective_form/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1yeaxe",
"d1yo9lr"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A poison is something that attacks your system and causes it damage.\n\nAn allergy is when your body overreacts to a substance and *thinks* it's under attack. The key point of an allergy is that it's something that is actually benign (or at least not terribly threatening) but your body goes apeshit anyway.",
"Another way of seeing it is:\nAn immunodepressed person (such as a person with AIDS) cannot have an allergy because allergies are immune reactions. However they can be poisoned because posiones aren't related to the immune system.\n\nNote: this isn't 100% true, especially for AIDS, but it is another way of seeing it"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3zsmky | why are "red" cameras so expensive? (upwards of $77,500 per camera) | Like this one:
_URL_0_
What makes it so expensive? I would understand a couple of thousand dollars but close to 6 figures!? Why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zsmky/eli5_why_are_red_cameras_so_expensive_upwards_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyopdf2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They're not. They're cheap. Like WAY cheap.\n\n\"Red\" cameras are not consumer products. They are essentially the digital equal/evolution of 35mm film cameras, such as the Panavision Milennium XL, which many Hollywood movies are filmed on. These cost MUCH more (well into 6 figures), plus you gotta buy the film, and the entire process is more expensive. These are marketed toward Hollywood production companies, not regular joes. \n\nAlso keep in mind you're going to need to be buying attachments, lenses, etc. There is a reason that most companies in the industry rent this equipment vs. purchase it.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.red.com/store/products/limited-edition-weapon-forged-cf-package"
] | [
[]
] |
|
2qi98v | packing a cigarette before smoking. | I'm a smoker but I often wonder what happens when I pack a cigarette. Sure, the tobacco become more compact. But why does packing make throat hits and the 'taste' better? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qi98v/eli5_packing_a_cigarette_before_smoking/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn6cbeh",
"cn6cfjv",
"cn6e2x6",
"cn6ea2q"
],
"score": [
3,
9,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"In my opinion it makes for a thicker more satisfying smoke. Also it is about personal habits usually learned and copied from someone else.",
"As far as I know it prevents the end of the cigarette from burning weakly or unevenly, and also helps it to 'draw' better.",
"If you don't pack it, when you smoke little ash will fall most of the time. After you pack it, the cherry burn evenly and when you go to ash it, they fall down in nice little clunk. Also the drag is better like demoror say.",
"I think it is because since the leaves are closer together, it burns a little slower, and there is less air in the smoke. Since it burns a little slower, there are less unburned hydrocarbons, and since there is less air in the smoke, the taste is stronger. Both add up to \"better taste.\"\n \nI could be wrong, but that's what I think it is.\n \nSource: former smoker"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
eoexqf | how did telephones work in the early 1900s? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eoexqf/eli5_how_did_telephones_work_in_the_early_1900s/ | {
"a_id": [
"fecb5ys",
"fecbdnf"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"There was a wire connection from each house which directly linked up via an exchange which plugged in specific lines to specific locations in a board _URL_0_",
"Do you mean the decade the 1900s or the century the 1900s? \n\nIf you're talking about the old timey box on the wall with a crank telephones, The crank is a generator that rings a bell for the operator, you tell the operator who you want to talk to, and the operator then plugs your line into either the line you want to call, or a line to another telephone exchange, closer to the person you want to call. \n\nIf you're talking about the rotary dial telephones, there were automatic relays triggered by the number of pulses generated by the dial as it rotates."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVDGuCjog_0"
],
[]
] |
||
218683 | how/why do boogers form and why can't i feel them forming? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/218683/eli5_howwhy_do_boogers_form_and_why_cant_i_feel/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgam9o3",
"cgb7c5v"
],
"score": [
46,
2
],
"text": [
"Mucus is excreted into the nose by a few types of cells on the inner surface of it. It's purpose is to trap pathogens, dust, or other particles in order to prevent them from entering your respiratory system. You can't feel it form because it happens so slowly and gradually that it never causes any nerve cells to fire, much like your hair growing",
"When one is sick, why are they able to blow tons of boogers every 5 minutes?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4fozko | how do electric fences cause discomfort if the person or animal touching the fence is essentially a load resistor in parallel with a short? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fozko/eli5_how_do_electric_fences_cause_discomfort_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2arzo0"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The fence isn't a short. The entire fence is energized to very very high voltage. The fence completes a circuit through you to the ground because you offer less resistance than the air does. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2bkj1p | why don't some other company produce sodium thiopental if others refuse to provide it for executions? | It seems that any chemical company would be able to make sodium thiopental. What is stopping it being made from somewhere else in the US? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bkj1p/eli5_why_dont_some_other_company_produce_sodium/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj68h1o",
"cj68iz7",
"cj6950a"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Why can't they just fire up ol sparky. ",
"Best guess: Poor ROI.\n\nTo make any chemical substance, you need to set up a lot of equipment. This means buying new equipment, renting a place to put it, and staffing a team.\n\nMy best guess is that investors are wary of investing in a chemical project that only produces one very controversial drug. The last company that made it stopped for brand image reasons, and there is constant political pressure for primary consumers to stop purchasing. Likely, they have found safer investments with higher returns instead.",
"As to why it can't be make elsewhere: The EU (where the death is universally outlawed) banned exports or drugs to be used for lethal injections. Since most drug companies are in either the US or the EU, that doesn't leave a lot of other options."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3cb54m | how do we know we aren't seeding life on mars when sending probes there? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3cb54m/eli5_how_do_we_know_we_arent_seeding_life_on_mars/ | {
"a_id": [
"cstv1es",
"cstv1h7",
"cstv49e",
"cstvhgd",
"cstxe34",
"csu0nl6",
"csu6l2s"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
90,
14,
36,
3,
7
],
"text": [
"It is extremely important to the people building these probes that we don't \"seed\" the planets, because part of the mission is to try to find life. The probes are built in a perfectly sterile environment. The air is carefully filtered, and the people building the parts need to be completely covered. They go to great lengths to make sure that there isn't a single microorganism on that probe. ",
"Space agencies do have policies to sterilize equipment and prevent the introduction of foreign life to new environments. \n\n[Here](_URL_0_) is the relevant page for NASA.",
"Simple answer, we don't, we actually assume at this point in time that this is exactly what we have done. \n\nNASA has already stated numerous times that some of the equipment that was sent was not completely sterile, due to mistakes and errors and that they believe that they could have contaminated the soil.\n\nThey believe that the life that they found, was in fact from earth.",
"Yes, we *might* have already contaminated Mars. In the early days--like the Viking missions--NASA did a decent job of sterilizing the probes, but that was before we knew about extremophiles, organisms that thrive in conditions we previously thought were 100% fatal to life. So these days, we take a bit more care in scrubbing our grubby fingerprints off the things before we launch them.\n\nBut this is why it would be a crime against science of *staggering* proportions to send people to Mars before we've thoroughly investigated the planet with carefully-sterilized rovers. The moment the first human plants the first muddy bootprint on Mars, it's game over for the science of investigating Martian life. Any results we turn up (or FAIL to turn up) will be forever colored by the possibility of contamination.\n",
"NASA actually goes to considerable lengths to ensure their spacecraft are sterile. They even have one of the most badass sounding jobs around - the [Planetary Protection Officer](_URL_0_)",
"It wouldn't matter if we were; the Mars probes are not the first visitors from Earth.\n\nWhen as asteroid hits the Earth, or Mars, you get a big blast and a whole lot of material gets thrown out. This stuff is really moving remember we're talking about a hell of a lot of energy here, so its travelling at hundreds of metres per second. Some of it is even moving at thousands of metres per second, and that's where it gets interesting because that's escape velocity. Material from a meteorite impact can be thrown up with such force, it can completely escape the Earth's gravity. Or Mars' gravity.\n\nThe rock floats around in space for a while but then the gravity of another planet pulls it in, and it crash lands on the new planet having crossed the void between them. We know this happens we find Mars meteorites here on Earth, and we know Earth rocks have gone to Mars. Earth and Mars have been swapping rocks for *billions* of years.\n\nNow for the really cool bit; bacteria can survive the trip. The force of being thrown into space, the vacuum of space, re-entry and impact, they can survive it all if they are inside the rock. Its really incredible but we know they can do it. So a meteorite from Earth that eventually made its way to Mars, would have had stowaways.\n\nSo there's really no reason to worry about Mars being contaminated by Earth microbes. If Earth microbes can survive at all on Mars, then they have been there for a very, *very* long time.",
"Lots of people have covered the construction of the probes (done in sterile environments), but no one has commented on the \"[extremophile](_URL_0_)\" microbes you outlined in the question.\n\nSo, let's break down the essentials for life:\n\n**Food:** Everything needs food to live, even if that food happens to be noble gasses or metals. Our probes aren't made out of biological material, so you can immediately rule out any of the microbes we're intimately familiar with (flu, cold, bacteria/virus based diseases). But there are a handful of microbes that could possibly be eating the probe itself. However, the likelihood of a scientist successfully transporting a metal eating microbe into the sterile build area is somewhat slim as metal eating microbes are not common in human habitats. Microbes that require any of our atmospheric gasses would die during the trip through space. It's also important to keep in mind that the materials that make up our probe aren't just.. laying around Mars. So if we did end up bringing hitchhikers, they might have nothing to eat except for the probe itself.\n\n**Time:** Microbes reproduce awfully quickly if they have food around, but they'll typically die in a few hours to a few weeks without a food source. The journey to Mars is 6 months to 1 year, so live microbes would *have* to be able to consume some part of the probe itself to survive. Spores, on the other hand, can last thousands of years. Could a microbe spore survive the rigors of space?\n\n**Climate:** Extremophiles are super neat, but they also prefer to stay where it's extreme. The same microbe that loves a 200c water vent probably isn't going to be happy with freezing temperatures. Now, you have to remember that the probes we're sending into space are *not* equipped with any biological habitation modules. They're being exposed to the extreme G forces and pressures of launch, the vacuum of space, the cold of space, the intense radiation of space, and the intense heat of re-entry; before finally coming to land on the Mars surface which is not a pleasant place to be.\n\nSo, what could survive the trip? It would have to be a microbe that could eat the probe (or a spore that doesn't have to eat), survive a vacuum, endure extreme cold, extreme heat, extreme pressures, extreme radiation.. and then be able to find something suitable to eat on Mars.\n\nEven if all of that happened, it would still be several million/billion years before our super space-faring microbe evolved enough to become a plant or animal we could see with the naked eye.\n\n**TL;DR:** It is *extremely* unlikely that something could survive earth, survive space, *and* survive Mars enough to 'seed life' by accident. Anything that hearty was probably already there due to meteorites and comets. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/methods"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/about"
],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile"
]
] |
||
253mmu | why is it when we get angry or upset about something we can "sleep it off" and feel much better about the situation later? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/253mmu/eli5_why_is_it_when_we_get_angry_or_upset_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"chddofw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Emotional responses are \"faster\" and \"stronger\" than logical responses.\nGoing to sleep, or any delaying action such as deep breaths, counting to ten etc. is kinda like the tortoise (logic) and the hare(emotion)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1sqhqq | why do degrees break down into minutes and seconds? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sqhqq/eli5why_do_degrees_break_down_into_minutes_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ce06at4",
"ce09tee"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"I know about the words, but not about the number 60.\n\nMinutes and seconds are both abbreviations.\n\nMinute used to be Prima Minute \"The first small part\", second was Seconda Minute \"the second small part\". (Spellings probably wrong).\n\nHours and degrees both needed subdividing, and then subdividing again, so the existing terminology was used.\n\nI hope you'll forgive the speculation on the significance of the number 60 in both cases, but I think it's because it has a lot of factors. You can divide 60 by 1,2,3,4,5,6,10,12,15, 20 and 30, and still get an integer, which is handy for designing dials and stuff. By comparison, 100 only divides by 1,2,4,5,10,20,25 and 50.",
"If you're talking about the mathematical tool, it's because we say there's \"360 degrees around a circle\", but on our watches we could as easily say \"there's 24 hours around the clock\". Then it's easy to say that \"1 hour around my clock corresponds to 15 (360/24) degrees around the circle\" or \"for every 360 degrees, there's 24 hours around the circle\" (note: 24 hours is not supposed to mean an actual amount of time here, but just the fraction of the circle that 1 hour encloses). This provides an easy subdividing system of when we have to look at smaller and smaller angles because it enables us to use the notation of \"minutes per hour\" and \"seconds per minute\". On 360 degrees there're 24 hours and so there's 1440 minutes to 360 degrees and 86400 seconds to 360 degrees. So if I tell you, \"go 3 arc seconds anticlockwise in a circle\", you know to a very high precision you have to turn 0.0125 (360/24/60/60*3) degrees to the left. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
jb3ln | the political situation in wisconsin | I'm constantly being bombarded by political adds that do nothing more than sling mud at their opponents. I didn't know where else to post this but I would really appreciate somebody explaining what the candidates stand for to a first time voter. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jb3ln/eli5_the_political_situation_in_wisconsin/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2ao0h3",
"c2ao0h3"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"This is a hard one to explain to a five year old and I'm not good at coming up with analogies, but I kept it as simple as possible.\n\nEssentially, Scott Walker's \"budget repair bill\" does the following:\n\n1. Eliminate collective bargaining rights for most public workers. So while unions still could represent those workers, they would not be able to seek pay increases above those pegged to the Consumer Price Index unless approved by a public referendum.\n\n2. Unions also could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized.\n\n3. Local police, firefighters and state troopers would retain their collective bargaining rights.\n\n4. Public workers would have to pay half the costs of their pensions and at least 12.6 percent of their health care coverage. That represents an average of 8 percent increase in state employees’ share of pension and health care \n\nThis legislation, according to Walker, is necessary to close Wisconsin's $137 million budget gap. There are a number of problems with that argument, though. The unions are not to blame for the deficit, and stripping unionized workers of their collective bargaining rights won't in and of itself save any money. Walker says he needs to strip the unions of their rights to close the gap. But public safety officers' unions, which have members who are more likely to support Republicans and who also tend to have the highest salaries and benefits, are exempt from the new rules. Meanwhile, a series of tax breaks that Walker and the Republican legislature passed just after his inauguration dramatically increased the deficit that Walker now says he's trying to close. And Wisconsin has closed a much larger budget gap in the past without scrapping worker organizing rights.\n\nI'm a student at the University of Wisconsin, and what so many of us students are upset about (in addition to union busting) is the detrimental effect on our education caused by the passage of the bill. In addition to the list above, the bill also cuts $900 million in education, including $250 million to the UW system (-11%) and $125 million to UW Madison alone (-13%). At the moment, we are a research one university that rates highly on academic achievement scales. This is due mostly in part to our excellent staff and professors. The minute you cut wages, benefits and funding, those faculty members have no incentive to stay at UW. The future success of our university is in jeopardy, because it will no longer be able to hold on to high quality staff members.\n\n",
"This is a hard one to explain to a five year old and I'm not good at coming up with analogies, but I kept it as simple as possible.\n\nEssentially, Scott Walker's \"budget repair bill\" does the following:\n\n1. Eliminate collective bargaining rights for most public workers. So while unions still could represent those workers, they would not be able to seek pay increases above those pegged to the Consumer Price Index unless approved by a public referendum.\n\n2. Unions also could not force employees to pay dues and would have to hold annual votes to stay organized.\n\n3. Local police, firefighters and state troopers would retain their collective bargaining rights.\n\n4. Public workers would have to pay half the costs of their pensions and at least 12.6 percent of their health care coverage. That represents an average of 8 percent increase in state employees’ share of pension and health care \n\nThis legislation, according to Walker, is necessary to close Wisconsin's $137 million budget gap. There are a number of problems with that argument, though. The unions are not to blame for the deficit, and stripping unionized workers of their collective bargaining rights won't in and of itself save any money. Walker says he needs to strip the unions of their rights to close the gap. But public safety officers' unions, which have members who are more likely to support Republicans and who also tend to have the highest salaries and benefits, are exempt from the new rules. Meanwhile, a series of tax breaks that Walker and the Republican legislature passed just after his inauguration dramatically increased the deficit that Walker now says he's trying to close. And Wisconsin has closed a much larger budget gap in the past without scrapping worker organizing rights.\n\nI'm a student at the University of Wisconsin, and what so many of us students are upset about (in addition to union busting) is the detrimental effect on our education caused by the passage of the bill. In addition to the list above, the bill also cuts $900 million in education, including $250 million to the UW system (-11%) and $125 million to UW Madison alone (-13%). At the moment, we are a research one university that rates highly on academic achievement scales. This is due mostly in part to our excellent staff and professors. The minute you cut wages, benefits and funding, those faculty members have no incentive to stay at UW. The future success of our university is in jeopardy, because it will no longer be able to hold on to high quality staff members.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
69ni9v | at what point does counterfeit money legally fit the definition of being counterfeit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/69ni9v/eli5_at_what_point_does_counterfeit_money_legally/ | {
"a_id": [
"dh7xyyy",
"dh7y7im",
"dh7zjp1"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Fun fact. If you shine a laser cat toy or pointer through a Canadian banknote at the clear Canada flag, the denomination will be projected on the wall as three numbers in a circle.",
"America has regulations for this:\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > * Illustration must be less that .75 or more than 1.5, in linear dimension, of the currency \n > * Illustration must be one-sided. \n > * Destroy or erase anything used in the making of the illustration that contains an image or part of the illustration. ",
"Depends on the laws for your jurisdiction. R/asklegal"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.treasury.gov/services/Pages/Regulations-for-Reproducing-US-Currency-Images.aspx"
],
[]
] |
||
2g20j1 | why does the us government keep publicly stating that they will be air-striking is? doesn't this give is a heads up and chance for counter plans? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g20j1/eli5_why_does_the_us_government_keep_publicly/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckeviaw",
"ckew2kv"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There's not much a group like ISIS can do about air strikes. Their knowledge of them doesn't harm US forces. If it forces them to stay in hiding more, that's a plus.",
"What counterplans? The USAF is pretty much unassailable to most real countries. There's very little ISIS can do other than hide if jets show up on the horizon. \n\nBesides, the government *wants* ISIS to know they're coming. Publicly declaring that we're going to ruin their whole fucking day, and there's nothing they can do about it is an intentional plan to show people that the organization can't win (if that will work or not is a different manner)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
8223q5 | what is aging? | At a cellular level, what really causes us to age? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8223q5/eli5what_is_aging/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv6wsov"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Aging is thought to happen when the ends of DNA (telomeres) become damaged enough to let the important generic information get messed up. These telomeres act like a shield made of garbage, they help protect the more important parts of the strand of DNA by taking the brunt of the damage during cell division. Once the telomeres are gone, the ends of the important bits start to get damaged by mutations and division, eventually causing the cell to stop replicating, and die."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5nt25o | why do we sometimes experience tremendous mood shifts based upon music? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nt25o/eli5_why_do_we_sometimes_experience_tremendous/ | {
"a_id": [
"dce4bvg"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's based on you experiences you have had with these genres. For example, I used to listen to the most annoying alarm clock every morning because it was the only thing loud enough to wake me. One day I was walking through a store and heard a sound with the same frequency going over the PA and immediately felt angry about the question my mom was asking me. When you hear sounds your brain uses your memory to consider what this sound means to you i.e. hearing gunshot would frighten you if you were at the gym."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
16mpkt | what causes sad (seasonal affective disorder) and what helps? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16mpkt/eli5_what_causes_sad_seasonal_affective_disorder/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7xhu4e"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Though not definite, some think SAD is a caused by a lack of sunlight during the winter months. People have come to this conclusion since countries that are further North are more likely to report higher rates of depression during the darker months.\n\nMelatonin is a hormone that our bodies produce. It is important in our wake-sleep cycle, making us drowsy. Light inhibits the production of Melatonin. So, during the winter months and especially the further North (or South in the Southern Hemisphere), we are exposed to less light and thus increasing the production of Melatonin.\n\nBlue light (wavelengths between 460-480 nm) has the effect of halting production of the hormone. To help mitigate SAD, one can use light therapy. This is pretty much a box with a bulb that produces the necessary wavelengths that one stares at for a period of time with the goal of impeding the production of Melatonin. One can also force themselves outside more often, especially on sunny days, in an effort to get as much light as possible (this is probably very difficult for extreme northern and/or cloudy areas). Exercise is also an option.\n\n_URL_0_\n_URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seasonal_affective_disorder#Physiology",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melatonin"
]
] |
||
1qtz1i | how can people in tough financial situations can be living in hotels? | Hotels per night are much more expensive than getting an apartment for a month, so what am I missing? Why would someone choose to do that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qtz1i/eli5_how_can_people_in_tough_financial_situations/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdgfv9z",
"cdgja74",
"cdgjf5h",
"cdgk2or",
"cdgse3u"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It could be that their finances are in bad shape because they make poor decisions like that.",
"There was itinerant housing near my place in Chicago (no longer, they were bought out). It cost $30/night for a bed, and you got $5 back when you returned your key in the morning and if you follow all of their rules. I found this out by talking to one of the residents. Other than that, no info. \n\nSo...it's 900 up front per month, 750 if you get all of your deposits back. The first number was more expensive than my 1bdrm, but the second number was not. In that neighborhood (a good one), the cheapest studios will run you about $750/mo. \n\nFrom what I *saw*, a number of the people who stayed there had..issues. Alcoholics. Chronic joblessness. People who weren't all mentally \"with it\". They had enough money to get by (sometimes through panhandling), but they obviously didn't have enough steady income to save up for a deposit. Also keep in mind this was a very good neighborhood, people who get section 8 housing in this neighborhood hold onto it like its gold. So it may have been an issue of not wanting to go to places where affordable housing was more available, but you sacrifice in other ways. ",
"Getting an apartment has some initial and upfront payments (deposit, credit check, one months rent in advance, etc). Someone might not have the money or credit rating necessary so chose to live in a hotel instead",
"Well, you need references and first and last months rent, as well as a dd. A motel or hotel you can just walk into. From my experience you never know how long you will be in a city, so why drop 2 grand with a week or two waiting period if you only need a place for a couple weeks and you have the cash so you don't have to sleep outside?",
"Some hotels and hostels will offer discounts to long term tenants as opposed to charging the regular nightly rate. Also poor credit history and lack of savings for a security deposit prevent people from getting an apartment."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ni4b7 | why do computer programs sometimes slow down when they're open for long periods of time? | For example the UFC fight pass app on xbox one gets extremely slow and laggy after its been open for a while without anything else changing. It happens with computers programs too. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ni4b7/eli5_why_do_computer_programs_sometimes_slow_down/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvoanet",
"cvoaqyh",
"cvoarcz"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"The simplest way to explain it is by thinking of a bucket you put water into. As long as the program is open, water is in the bucket. Whenevr you visit new information, you add water. Eventually you can't add more, and the bucket is very hard to carry. The only way to make it lighter is to close the program, or empty the bucket. ",
"Usually this is because of a memory leak, but there could be other factors. \n\nA memory leak is when the programmer allocates memory to use some sort of data, i.e. they open a file, load an \"[object](_URL_0_)\", or do anything else where the request memory from the machine.\n\nHowever it doesn't become a leak unless the programmer fails to close and deallocate that memory after using it. Over time this builds up, and the program has less and less memory to work with. \n\nIt becomes like slowly clamping a water hose, the more you bend the hose the more slowly water comes out of it.",
"It might be a memory leak. The program requests RAM to run, borrows a little more, then forgets about it without giving it back. Borrows a bit more...bit more... hours later, you're out of RAM..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_\\(computer_science\\)"
],
[]
] |
|
1ummap | why do people say 'film' instead of 'movie'? | I know that 'film' stems from the film that motion pictures used to be recorded on. But it seems to me that 'movie' is just a more accurate term to describe said motion picture as it is literally the shortened version of 'moving picture show'. I find it snobbish when I hear people say film. Help me understand why people say film so I can get over it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ummap/eli5_why_do_people_say_film_instead_of_movie/ | {
"a_id": [
"cejl92t",
"cejlyhx",
"cejp25w"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Why do some people (I do this) refer to 'taping' something when it would be more accurate to say 'recording' these days? Old habits die hard, especially when they've been embedded in our daily vocabularies. The word 'film' has now been around for longer than anyone has been alive, so it's not likely to just disappear. And it's not inherently snobbish in any way, either.",
"For the same reason people call a soft drink pop or soda, or shopping carts carriages or trolleys. You just get used to using certain words for things. \n\nThe terms \"film\" and \"movie\" aren't any more descriptive or accurate than the other so people use both interchangeably.",
"Snobbery has a lot to do with it.\n\nIf you are trying to do a serious study of film as an art form, \"movie\" is kind of a juvenile sounding term that implies people go to see the gimmick of motion rather than the stories it tells. It is kind of like calling painting \"coloring\".\n\nAnd so it serves as sort of a gateway...if you call it a movie, you are part of the unwashed massed, but if you call it film or cinema, you are one of the discerning aficionados who truly appreciates the art form. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2g3sbm | how do democrats and republicans rationalize billions of dollars in tax breaks every year to oil companies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g3sbm/eli5_how_do_democrats_and_republicans_rationalize/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckfc489",
"ckfc5b3",
"ckfcjg0",
"ckfd0qe",
"ckfdeft",
"ckfdf2g",
"ckfdph8",
"ckfe67e",
"ckfei02",
"ckfenm3",
"ckfev1u",
"ckfevc1",
"ckfewpz",
"ckffmf0",
"ckfg4a7",
"ckfgj0w",
"ckfgztr",
"ckfhlqg",
"ckfhm8c",
"ckfhvap",
"ckfhymq",
"ckfimj1",
"ckfiocf",
"ckfjvkl",
"ckfl19h",
"ckfl75g",
"ckflkfd",
"ckfm2cg",
"ckfml6h",
"ckfmstz",
"ckfn9fh",
"ckfnncw",
"ckfo500",
"ckfoofb",
"ckfoopt",
"ckfoxq4",
"ckfqc8k",
"ckfrvqk",
"ckfsbeh",
"ckft05v",
"ckfuf06",
"ckfutxr",
"ckfvlv4",
"ckfwdex",
"ckfwv6l",
"ckfx0bu",
"ckfyvs0",
"ckg0ien",
"ckg0z8c",
"ckg24eu",
"ckg276b",
"ckg4p0t",
"ckg5thp",
"ckg6kzw",
"ckg7c1p",
"ckg7jjh",
"ckg7uqh",
"ckg8faw"
],
"score": [
8,
14,
8,
6,
2706,
5,
3,
21,
429,
3,
14,
49,
2,
56,
2,
3,
78,
50,
2,
3,
5,
13,
2,
12,
2,
2,
9,
7,
2,
133,
2,
2,
2,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Look, you don't know about capitalism like our politicians. Do you want our oil to be \"Made in China\"??? [Let our Congressman Barton explain free market capitalism to you.](_URL_0_)",
"[Barton: Govt Subsidies Necessary To Keep Exxon From Going Out Of Business](_URL_0_)",
"it doesn't matter if they get them or not ....you will still pay the same for a gallon of gas. The only person that \"pays\" for anything is the consumer. Everyone else just passes the cost along.",
"If they didn't support corporate welfare, the corporations would stop handing them campaign contributions, and they'd be out of a job. Sounds pretty clear-cut to me.\n",
"Without commenting on the merits of the argument or where I personally stand on this, the argument goes roughly like this:\n\n- Cheap energy is the cornerstone of a healthy economy.\n- Provide access to national lands and/or tax reduction for exploration and drilling in the US.\n- The more oil we get domestically, the less we have to import from dictatorial sewers like most of the Middle East and Venezuela.\n- The less we are dependent upon foreign oil, the more secure our nation will be.\n\nEDIT: Well I'll be hornswoggled. Gilded yet again. Thank ye kind stranger(s).\n\n",
"It is not the government's money. It is the oil companies money. They got the oil out of the ground, they refined the oil, and they distributed the oil. Yes, the company pay some taxes but as long as they stay within the laws they are ok.\n\nBy the way, the govt should take less from people and companies who made it, govt should get the heck out of the way and quit stealing money.",
"Their rational is that it keeps the prices from becoming inflated and/or helps keep these companies from laying off employees.\n\nBut both of those outcomes happen anyways.",
"Oil subsidies are one of the main reasons that fuel is so cheap in the United States, relative to everywhere else. There are arguments for and against keeping the cost of fuel artificially cheap, but the simple fact is that unless you personally are willing to pay European gas prices at the pump, fuel subsidies are here to stay.",
"Because the overwhelming majority of tax breaks that they take advantage of are not specific to their industries. For example: \n\n\"Section 199 is part of the domestic production activities deduction that was included in the American Job Creation Act of 2004, which passed with strong bipartisan support, especially in the Senate. It currently provides a 9% tax deduction from net income for businesses engaged in \"qualified production activities\" in the U.S. Those activities include manufacturing a product, selling, leasing or licensing it, and engineering and software activities related to that production. The deduction was intended to encourage domestic manufacturing, and in the hope that the tax break could provide a slight competitive advantage against foreign competition.\n\nThe oil and gas industry, especially in its extracting and refining, is heavily involved in U.S. manufacturing. Congress already penalizes the industry by only giving it a 6% deduction, rather than the 9% that other industries receive.\"\n\nSource: _URL_0_\n\nThere's more at the article, but a big thing to remember is that when you vote for new corporate tax loopholes to go towards things like industrial productivity, you're opening yourself up to people complaining about how you \"Gave millions in tax breaks to the oil industry\", though they won't mention that those same breaks go to their own favored industry, like auto manufacturers. \n\n**5-year-old version**: Just because your best friend brought in cupcakes for everyone in class, and even gave one to the kid that you really hate, doesn't mean that he really likes that one kid and hates you. ",
"Very silly, charged replies on this one...\n\nLet's consider economics instead of partisan politics and campaign contributions, you goofballs. This is about maintaining status quo. As demand continues to rise, oil companies need to keep up, meaning they need to spend more in order to meet that demand. Naturally, this would lead to HIGHER GAS PRICES. If this was allowed, then the markets would push into new energy alternatives since eventually it would become cheaper to invest in new things than continue searching for more oil. That is how markets naturally evolve away from scarce resources.\n\nAnyway, the tax breaks are there to, again, maintain the status quo which allows gas prices to remain pretty low. Compared to an average American's purchasing power, gasoline is pretty darn cheap. Without the tax breaks, prices would go up and there would be serious public upheaval. Debate the correctness of this policy all you want - but it's bad politics to allow gas prices to go up because people somehow assume it's the government's responsibility to keep them low. This directly conflicts with the market's willingingness investment in alternative energy. Anyway, that debate is for another day, but hopefully this answers your question.",
"Here is the Wall Street Journal's take on it, at least with regard to a couple of the tax breaks energy companies get. In relevant part it states:\n\n*Section 199 is part of the domestic production activities deduction that was included in the American Job Creation Act of 2004, which passed with strong bipartisan support, especially in the Senate. It currently provides a 9% tax deduction from net income for businesses engaged in \"qualified production activities\" in the U.S. Those activities include manufacturing a product, selling, leasing or licensing it, and engineering and software activities related to that production. The deduction was intended to encourage domestic manufacturing, and in the hope that the tax break could provide a slight competitive advantage against foreign competition.*\n\n*The oil and gas industry, especially in its extracting and refining, is heavily involved in U.S. manufacturing. Congress already penalizes the industry by only giving it a 6% deduction, rather than the 9% that other industries receive.*\n\n*But whatever the percentage allowed, this isn't a special deduction for oil and gas. Many other manufacturing industries—including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals—take the deduction. Mr. Van Hollen's bill refers to the disqualification of two industries from these benefits as a \"Special Rule for Certain Oil and Gas Companies.\" In terms of fairness, it's like telling oil company workers that they can't take the home-mortgage deduction anymore because they work for politically targeted companies.*\n\n*Mr. Van Hollen also draws a bead on the last-in, first-out accounting method known as Lifo. Those who had accounting classes will recall that there are several widely accepted ways to value a company's inventory. Lifo is one of them. It assumes that the last inventory in is the first used, sold or distributed—an accounting method often used by commodity-type industries. Mr. Van Hollen proposes to reduce those inventory options available to the oil and gas industry, even though they are, and will remain, widely available to most U.S. companies.*\n\n*Critics of the industry claim that there are other ways of appraising oil and gas inventory that would result in a higher value, and thus companies would have to pay more taxes. But that's like offering individuals the choice of taking the standard deduction or itemizing on their returns, and then demonizing a subset of people who choose the approach that minimizes their income tax obligation.*\n\nFull article here: _URL_1_\n\nEdit: here's another article briefly summarizing the types of deductions available and why they exist. Again, not saying they are good or bad, just answering the question OP asked. _URL_0_",
"There are no tax breaks for oil and gas in the US.\n\nCorporate tax code is incredibly convoluted. Oil and Gas are very large companies, and therefore able to spend big money finding all the nooks and crannies in the tax law in order to meet the obligations required for lots and lots of various tax incentives.\n\nALL of these incentives are available for every business in the country or in certain categories. These areas are extremely broad, such as agriculture or manufacturing. There is not a single specific oil/gas tax break, in fact, they are often prohibited from taking full advantage of some breaks.\n\nEssentially what people say when they want the 'tax breaks' taken from the oil companies, means they want a separate tax code written just for them to force them to pay the full 35% corporate tax rate as a flat tax without deductions. This doesn't fly in America for obvious reasons, we really don't like some people getting special treatment and others getting targeted. Even when you don't like them.,",
"Selective industry subsidies are used to enable politicians to control certain industries. Companies over time rely on them and if they do something not to the liking of congress, they can simply threaten to take them away to motivate them. Oil subsidies are not as much as you think. The Environmental Law Institute in 2009 determined that $72 Billion was spent between 2002 and 2008 on fossil fuel subsidies and $29 Billion on alternative fuel subsidies over that time. That is $10B and $4B per year respectively. [SOURCE](_URL_0_). For scale the budget in 2008 was $2.9 Trillion. The reason fossil fuels are cheaper in the US if we don't tack on enormous taxes like they do in Europe, there are plenty of countries that spend very little on fuel subsidies are get it cheaper than the US.",
"The fact is that, as much as Americans like to complain about oil companies, we oftentimes overlook the fact that they are supplying us with an essential commodity for a far cheaper price than almost anywhere else in the world. \n\nIf tax breaks and subsidies to oil companies ended, they would just end up charging more for the oil, thereby raising gas prices to a level that would significantly hurt our economy and put even more financial stress on your average American worker. Before you complain about oil companies and the treatment they receive, realize that the alternative is a massive increase in gas prices.",
"Well, its quite simple: Cheap energy is necessary for a good industrial economy, for a happy population, and for communication. Oil companies provide it, but in order to keep the prices down they need to keep their profits up in order to keep expanding to find more oil. Its the easiest way to keep our economy afloat and for us to continue being a international superpower, but is by no means the best way.\n\nHonestly, the better question here is \"How does Congress rationalize spending money on tax breaks for oil companies that could be spent on creating more solar, wind, and hydro plants?\"",
"By voters asking them to \"create jobs\" and manage economic downturns.",
"Most of the tax breaks for oil companies have to deal with exploration and drilling (finding the oil and getting to it) and not with the actual selling of the oil. The oil industry is, by its very nature, a very risky place. Let's say it cost 5 billion dollars to drill and start pumping a new well in the Gulf of Mexico that is PROJECTED to produce 10 billion dollars of oil (in our world, oil company production and selling is taxed at a 20% rate so our oil company will get 8 billion dollars back while the government gets 2 billion dollars). Now say the licensing fees and other taxes associated with physical drilling (not the selling) are a total of 1 billion dollars. Now this hikes the total price up to 6 billion dollars that our oil has to shell out before it sees a lick of profit. Our company might think that spending 6 billion to MAYBE make 8 billion isn't a risk worth taking, so they scrap the whole project. Now, instead of the government making 3 billion dollars in taxes it makes 0 dollars. So, what the government decides to do is give a tax break on the initial 1 billion dollar tax. Since the project now only cost 5 billion dollars, our company sees I'd as an acceptable risk and OKs the project. As a result, the government now makes 2 billion dollars more than it would have previously (or if the project fails, the government doesn't gain or lose anything). Not only do these tax breaks end up generating more money for the governemnt over all, they create job, lower energy prices, and decrease our dependence on foreign oil. All parties involved benefit, though since the oil companies usually benefit more directly alot people see it as unjustifiable. \n\nFYI: Real life tax codes and oil projections are much more complicated but this example has the general gist. \n",
"This is what ELI5 has become? Thinly veiled political commentary?",
"◾The more oil we get domestically, the less we have to import from dictatorial sewers like most of the Middle East and Venezuela.\n◾The less we are dependent upon foreign oil, the more secure our nation will be.\n I disagree. Oil, is a commodity and sold on the open market. Oil that is extracted from American soil does not necessarily stay here. It is sold on the open market to whom ever will buy it. America is producing more oil now which is putting pressure on prices as there is now more oil on the market. \nIt's all about supply and demand. If China wanted to buy 100% of the oil produced by America they could.",
"Oil exploration costs a LOT of money. Companies spend many years and billions of dollars in the *hope* that they will find a large oil deposit. Much of the time, years are spent surveying and digging only to be left with nothing. Beyond that, the price of actually getting that oil from the Earth to your nearest refinery is heinous. Without subsidies to the oil companies, we would be producing far less domestically and paying a hell of a lot more per gallon.",
"Alaskan here. The quick and dirty answer is that most of the easy oil has been found. To find and extract new sources of oil is going to take billions of dollars. Shell has already spend $1 billion dollars up here on an offshore project that didn't produce anything but they're going to try again. Conoco Phillips is also looking to expand operations thanks to tax breaks. \n\nBeing a liberal I'm usually highly suspicious of tax breaks like these, but being able to see firsthand the amount of investment required to get the oil opens your eyes a bit. ",
"This doesn't directly explain the question because I the OP has a different kind of \"oil company\" in mind than the ones that actually see tax breaks. It's not really the Exxons and BPs of the world that get tax breaks. If anything, these companies are generally penalized (explained further below). Small partnership structures that collect royalties on oil wells are the ones who get temporary tax breaks because they are allowed to deplete (expense) the cost of oil produced in excess of the amount they actually paid for the well. This is a temporary difference because when the company disposes of the oil well, they will have tax gain on the excess depletion expense they took in prior years.\n\nFor the most part the big oil companies do not have industry specific tax breaks. As many people have mentioned below, one of the biggest tax breaks, the Sec. 199 Domestic Production Activities Deduction (DPAD), is designed to encourage employment of US workers in all industries. Oil companies get effectively 2/3 of the deduction that other industries get.\n\nI pulled the 10ks for two random Fortune 500 companies, Exxon and Apple. In 2011, 2012, and 2013 Exxon's effective tax rate (ETR) is roughly, 42%, 39%, and 42%. Apple's ETR is 24%, 25% and 36%. I believe Apple's tax expense is lower largely due to their ability to claim that a large portion of their income was created by activities overseas.\n\nOn a side note, the DPAD deduction for employing US workers also serves to reduce companies abilities to source income over seas (as Burger Kind is attempting to do). The rules that determine in what locale income was created (and therefore who can tax it) are largely dependent upon where it was produced. If you're taking advantage of the DPAD deduction, that means a lot of your income must be sourced to the US.\n\nSource: Big 4 CPA who works in Texas on large oil and gas returns.\n\nTLDR: The tax breaks largely go to high net-worth individuals who just own a partnership's share in oil wells. Not to the huge multinationals.",
"Ok so let me start by saying I'm a Rockefeller Republican. The best of both worlds.\n\nCorporate tax breaks are actually meant for innovation and R & D. Those giant breakthroughs in technology that pop up? Most companies won't take the giant financial risk without some sort of immediate guaranteed incentive (the tax break money). The long term benefit can be profit from whatever the develop, but it's still a risk. \n\nOverall, the idea is that if they have the money they'll stimulate job growth and advances in their fields. ",
"the same reason every other company gets tax breaks. There are no \"special\" breaks for the oil business, in fact they get taxes much more than most others. \n\n\nThey take advantage of tax write-offs, carry forwards, etc. just like everybody else.",
"Easy. Oil companies need to make an amount of money in order for it to be worth extracting oil. The cost of extraction has increased so in order for them to continue extracting oil it needs to produce more revenue. The government is providing the subsidy to keep the price down for the end user, thereby socializing the cost of energy.",
"Just like they rationalize the gazillions they GIVE to any other number of companies?\n\nTax breaks are different from outright subsidies (which they do give to other industries/companies). But making it a bit easier for oil-based energy companies to do business actually benefits the economy, the citizenry, and even our national security more so than a lot of \"crony capitalism\" stuff the government does.",
"The simplest answer is that the idea that oil companies are given special tax breaks is mostly inaccurate. All companies are allowed to deduct the various costs of doing business from their revenue to determine their taxable income and oil companies are no different (see non-oil companies like GE that actually get tax refunds every year on billions in revenue). An oil company deducting its exploration and drilling costs is no different than a medical company deducting research and development or marketing costs (remember - only profits are taxed). The only real tax benefit that energy companies get is the ability to use a MLP (master limited partnership) structure in which the net earnings (revenue - expenses) from the LP entity flow through to the parent company (similar to a dividend) untaxed and the parent company is then taxed on the income (unlike normal dividends which are double taxed). However even the MLP is subject to restrictions on its use.",
"For those of you who don't know the big oil companies (Chevron, Exxon, etc.) actually pay some of the highest effective tax rates in the world. Chevron pays an effective rate of 43%, Exxon 39% and Conoco Phillips pays 51.5% (source: _URL_0_) \n\nThat doesn't mean corporate welfare isn't wrong and incompatible with a true free capitalist society but it's definitely something to keep in mind rather than blindly assuming they all pay off the politicians to the point where they pay nothing in taxes.",
"If you're talking about [the $70 billion dollars in subsidies](_URL_0_) summarized in that article than it may be simplest to just tell you that we don't give nearly that much in subsidies. \n\nIn that piece they add many standard accounting principles that companies normally use and call them tax breaks. They also overstate the amounts that their sources claim. \n\nSome of those subsidies are true. The manufacturing subsidy of $1.8 billion per year is one. The rational is \"more jobs\", whether that is the best course of action is debatable. ",
"How about the fact that oil companies pay the highest taxes among any corporations in the United States?\n\nExxon has produced $118 billion in net income the last three years. They've paid $86 billion in income taxes during that time.\n\nChevron has produced $74 billion in net income the last three years. They've paid $54 billion in income taxes during that time.\n\nThese companies are paying 40% corporate income tax rates and are the largest corporate tax payers in the world.",
"Seems like most comments attempt to explain how the tax breaks function or simply say Americans couldn't handle the costs of energy without them. I don't think the tax breaks can be explained rationally, and I think that Americans would stills manage without the them. However, I'm also not of the opinion, as many are, that the sole justification is some sly collusion between oil execs and corrupt politicians. The truth is that energy is a highly elastic good, meaning that the demand for it doesn't fluctuate dramatically with price. Most people won't stop driving, using electricity, or heating their house because of fuel prices, but they will be angry about it. Come election time, politicians are awarded with every success and failure, luxury and hardship of every voter in the country. In essence, politicians are held liable for high energy prices, not the energy companies. The result is legislative body willing to give energy companies an arm and a leg in an effort to lower energy costs. In practice, the energy companies tend to take a large percentage of the breaks as profits, rather than reducing prices. The joys of capitalism and democracy.",
"As there has already been rationals for it. I thought I'd post some of the criticisms. \n\n\n- Oil Companies are of the most profitable in the country. It's not rational to think that without the tax breaks and subsidies that they would close up shop and choose to just not make money. \n\n- Many of the corporations are sitting on drilling rights that they aren't using, just parking on the land to prevent other businesses from engaging on it.\n\n- That money could be better served investing in renewable/green energy. Industries that would actually benefit from the money. \n\n- Doubling down on investing in oil breeds dependency on an already diminishing resource. That such dependency makes it more difficult to break away from oil and gas. ",
"Oil companies do not operate in a perfectly competitive market for a variety of reasons. Instead, it looks a lot like a monopoly. Without subsidies, a monopoly will not produce the optimal \"equilibrium\" value of a good for the market. Direct subsidy would surely be even less popular than indirect tax breaks.",
"Hi there.\nI think your premise is a bit faulty. You are assuming that politicians are trying to rationalize this.\n\nThey are not.\n\nWe do that for them every time we fill up the tank.",
"You ask that question while working under the assumption that our federal representatives are voted into office with votes from the general public, when they are actually voted into office with special interests money, back door deals, media that lies about the lies they're lying about, and the occasional endorsement from a sitting member of Congress or a president.",
"I don't understand why people don't also mention that the majority owners of these oil companies are typically held in 401k and pensions aka the common man's retirement. Tax then more you make it harder for us middle income Americans to grow our retirement accounts. Substitute oil companies for large banks Wal-Mart or McDonald's.",
"The same way they justify calling a reduction in the overall baseline budgeting increase a \"cut\".\n\n",
"The so called \"tax breaks\" are the same tax breaks that any industry receives to write off certain costs. Farms can write off the costs of tractors, wind farms receive write offs for the turbines (not to mention huge out right subsidies), and oil companies get write offs for their costs as well. ",
"They don't have to. Nobody demands it.",
"Every subsity has basically the same argument. You have a company that pays taxes, and all of the employees that also pay taxes and they pay taxes on everything they buy. The general math is the subsity is less than the total amount of taxes that they take in from every aspect of the business. Oil has that and the benefits of low oil prices on the entire economy.\n\n",
"It's simple, oil companies donate large sums of money to the campaigns of both Democrats AND Republicans. Oil companies also donate large sums of money to any incumbent's challenger who isn't pro-oil. Thus, the people making the tax rule-Democratic and Republican politicians- are beholden to the oil companies. The oil companies get what they want: more money through the guise of tax breaks. ",
"Other than the obvious reasons (oil companies are huge so as a % of their revenue, the tax breaks aren't that significant, wanting to subsidize energy production):\n\n1) Other countries give tax breaks to their oil companies. We want our oil companies to be able to compete with foreign companies on a level footing, so we give them similar breaks.\n\n2) As easy-to-access oil runs low, oil companies have to get creative with how to produce more oil. However, these new methods are risky and untried, so the tax breaks act as kind of a cushion to encourage development of these new techniques.",
"Not the proper forum but I want to ask you OP, where do you get the idea that they actually do rationalize these billions in tax breaks? Or, where can you point to signs of them having to defend such systems publicly? \n\nI'm not calling you out, it's just that so many fundamental problems in the US are seemingly \"just there\", ongoing, impossible-to-pin-down-the-blame-for, morasses of wastefulness. \n\nIt's specifically these huge issues that go un-rationalized, undefended, unchecked because both parties are on board. There are countless other examples, but a good guide is if you don't hear much about it, it's a problem with significant contributions from both political parties.",
"Probably because like it or not, with probably less than a dozen or so exceptions, petroleum based energy and/or products are something that every single person in America uses.",
"They provide jobs for thousands of people who need them and they provide domestic oil sources so we don't have to fight wars over oil.\n",
"Consider this, once elected to office no matter which party a person represents, no matter how good their intentions, a politician's main goal becomes staying in office. To stay in office they need money for campaigns and the easiest way to get those funds for campaigns is through contributions which come with an unstated or sometimes overly stated understanding that said politician will return the favor when votes on tax breaks are presented. This goes for oil as well as any/every other industry. US politicians' number one priority is holding that office.",
"They pay the politicians a small slice.",
"They don't need to be approved every year, that's how. \n\nThey are old tax breaks - some a century old - already permanently in the tax code, just as solidly permanent as each year's mortgage deduction is. It doesn't come up for a vote any more. So it is not up to congress each year to approve them. \n\nDemocrats do try to but till we have another Democratic majority House/super-majority Senate and President to sign it, we can't do it.\n\nPelosi tried it: got $40 billion in oil & gas tax breaks out of the permanent tax code in the first bills through the House, but Franken (#60 Senator) couldn't get seated in time so Senate Republicans prevented a vote.",
"It helps \"grease the wheels\" for campaign contributions.",
"Republicans say it keeps energy costs down (which is debatable).\n\nDemocrats wanted to end them and talk about it whenever budget issues are brought up.\n\nIIRC, Obama proposed using the money to reduce the taxes we pay at the pump, but the idea went no where in Congress.",
"With the fat checks filling their wallets when they get paid for pushing forward that legislation.",
"Its easy to rationalize anything when you don't have a conscience and view the general population as beneath you",
" > Don't post just to express an opinion or argue a point of view. \n\nHow the fuck is this post still here?",
"Well Oil companies provide us with the one resource that basically keeps us alive and our economy alive and at this time is the most valuable resource in the world and does it for a 6% profit.\n\nConversely Soda companies do nothing but make us fat and unhealthy and they make a 14% profit.\n\n\n",
"By the way, oil companies pay more money in taxes in the United states then every other company types combined ",
"They don't have to. The US government has 0 accountability. I'm amazed that people continue to vote for representatives when there is no representing going on. \n\nStop voting people! Vote for issues, but not for people. It's the only way anything will ever change. This is 2014, representatives are no longer needed. ",
"If we didn't give them tax breaks how much more would refilling my gas tank cost? ",
"They don't bother to rationalize, they just vote to give their fat cat buddies a tax break and collect their corruption money. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://video-cdn.abcnews.com/110309_pol_barton_karl2.mp4"
],
[
"http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/barton-govt-subsidies-necessary-to-keep-exxon-from-going-out-of-business"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324789504578380684292877300?mobile=y"
],
[],
[
"http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/breaking-it-down-oil-industry-tax-breaks-20110512",
"http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324789504578380684292877300?mobile=y"
],
[],
[
"http://www.eli.org/sites/default/files/eli-pubs/d19_07.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mef45kghl/1-exxon-mobil/"
],
[
"http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/tax-reform/news/2011/05/05/9663/big-oils-misbegotten-tax-gusher/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4pfuki | how is energy carried by electric currents? | I’m a fully grown human who thought he understood electricity, but after probing deeper I’ve come to realise my wrongness.
In a simple DC circuit, I thought that the chemical energy in the battery was converted to the kinetic energy of the electrons, and then through different processes relying on resistance in components, that energy would be converted into light, heat etc.
The water flowing analogies which are prevalent support this (wrong) view - if the current was water, it would be slowed by a water wheel, and kinetic energy would be transferred.
Back to electricity, thinking further this would imply that full resistance would equal full power usage - which is obviously rubbish.
So I have a two part question, which I think will lead to the answer:
1. If I have a simple closed circuit with a battery and a bulb, the bulb is lit and taking energy from the circuit. If I swap out the bulb with a resistor which matches the resistance of the bulb, so that the voltage and current of the circuit are the same, but no energy is being converted to light - will the circuit still be using the same amount of energy?
2. If the circuit is converting a different amount of energy, can someone explain what is happening in each case, what is different? How is the energy being carried?
NOTE: [This article](_URL_0_) appears to be on the money, but a bit above me, I’d like to hear some ELI5 type explanations preferably without dropping a bunch of equations :)
EDIT: Thanks folks, you've slapped some sense into me! I'd got everything backwards thinking a that more resistant bulb would use more power, and misunderstanding u/wbeaty's article got me imagining some invisible energy flow disproportionate to the current. So the answers to the questions are:
1. Yes.
2. The circuits are carrying the same amount of energy, so the question is stupid. Energy is carried in the usual way: voltage/current.
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4pfuki/eli5_how_is_energy_carried_by_electric_currents/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4klljg",
"d4ks1o2",
"d4kukfo"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, best to explain everything.\n\nCurrent = Amounts of electrons per second\nVoltage = Energy carried per electron (More correctly, energy difference between 2 spots)\nResistance = How hard it is for the current to pass.\n\nSo, from that, we know that the energy released is equal to the difference in energy per electron between the two points, multiplied by the amount of electrons per second.\n\n(VA -VB)*I\n\nSince we know the law of Ohm, we know that the result is \n\nP = I^2*R\n\n > If I have a simple closed circuit with a battery and a bulb, the bulb is lit and taking energy from the circuit. If I swap out the bulb with a resistor which matches the resistance of the bulb, so that the voltage and current of the circuit are the same, but no energy is being converted to light - will the circuit still be using the same amount of energy?\n\nYup. Assuming voltage, resistance and current are equal, so will the energy consumption. It just gets turned into heat rather than light.\n\nResistance is nothing more than something that impedes the flow of electricity. Everything that takes energy out of the circuit, no matter the method, impedes the electricity, and thus causes a resistance.",
"An incandescent light bulb is pretty similar to a resistor, one gives off the energy from the battery as visible light and heat while the other only gives it off as heat.\n\nThe question you asked boils down to, \"if I keep all of the factors that affect energy consumption the same, will I consume the same amount of energy?\" Which is going to be true, but probably not a satisfying answer.",
"Okay very simply remember that P=V*I. Power (P) is energy (Joules) consumed or produced over time (seconds), which is work. So your question is: does the energy consumed by the light differ from that of the resistor. The answer is no. Referring to the power equation above, the voltage of your circuit is static since you use the same battery in both. Therefore you have to ask does the current (I) change. Ohm's law says V=I*R. Again, voltage didn't change, resistance (R) didn't change, so current drawn from the battery didn't change. \n\nThe only thing that did change is what that energy was converted into. A light bulb is convert that energy to light and heat (light bulbs get hot). It is a function of burning that filament in gas. An LED will convert energy into a lot more light than heat, making it a more efficient light source. The energy doesn't change, just what the energy is used for changes. A resistor of the same resistance as the bulb will consume the same energy. The only different is what it converts it into. It won't be light, although, enough energy would certainly cause the resistor to glow. The main conversion would be in the form of heat. Resistors are used as heaters all the time.\n\nTo get to your first point, water analogies do work very well for electricity if you understand fluid flow enough. Your example is incorrect. A water wheel is not a \"full resistance\". Full resistance (imo as this is not a technical term) would be a water valve or faucet completely shut off which would do no work (Power is work in electrical form). In an electrical circuit that would be an infinite resistance such as a large enough air gap or some insulator. Therefore, \"full resistance\" in both fluid flow and electrical flow would output no work/power. Max power transfers is a different discussion that I would be glad to get into if you want to understand it more.\n\nI'm remaining as basic as I can for discussion. I can get deeper if needed."
]
} | [] | [
"http://amasci.com/elect/poynt/poynt.html"
] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a6rx2q | why does surface tension cast a shadow? | Just a [random picture on reddit](_URL_0_) but it made me wonder why changes in the surface of water do not cast shadows but when surface tension is involved there is a shadow? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a6rx2q/eli5_why_does_surface_tension_cast_a_shadow/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebxeias",
"ebxfbs9"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"It’s not the surface tension itself, more that the water bulges due to surface tension in such a way that it refracts the light round the centre of the bulge. Do you see how there are bright fringes around said ‘shadows’?",
"When the insect stand on the water it will bend down around the legs. The water surface is the concave and will function as a concave lens. The light in a concave lens diverged (spread out) so less light hit the bottom and it is less bright. The edge of the circles are brighter as more light will hit there.\n\nYou can see the same effect with a convex lens that concentrate light to the center but the surrounding is darker. _URL_0_\n\n\nA image that show how the water bends around the legs of a insect _URL_1_()/Surface-Tension-58c6c2365f9b58af5c534f71.jpg"
]
} | [] | [
"https://i.redd.it/q6ubex6hyn421.jpg"
] | [
[],
[
"https://www.askamathematician.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Magnifying-glass.jpg",
"https://www.thoughtco.com/thmb/lhvy7dbtToeqIwL9ux9Nu4yt0Ns=/768x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc"
]
] |
|
1eb3te | what is the proposed euro-zone banking union about and how will it work? | What are the advantages and disadvantages?
How will a banking union affect a) local businesses and b) cross-border businesses and c) the man in the street? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1eb3te/eli5_what_is_the_proposed_eurozone_banking_union/ | {
"a_id": [
"c9ysbnn",
"c9yvbk7"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nIt sounds like it's to give banks more power to lobby the government for bail-outs. So it's a bad thing that a few very rich people are trying to get away with so that they can go on staying rich and powerful by continuing to sell toxic investments back to the public through retirement savings plans.\nThat's all my opinion anyways.",
"Senior Economics Student in Europe here!\n\nThe Euro-zone's problems have been exasperated by the huge variation in the levels of credit accessible to states within the monetary union. This was a wholly new concept to economists as the principles of monetary unions were only really applicable to individual countries. (That last point is probably the most contested by political theorists and economists at the moment, but so far as the rest of your questions its irrelevant).\n\nIn order to combat those varying levels of credit, the proposal of a banking union that would centralise regulations. It's a novel concept as most regulators with legislative capabilities are tied to a country. In this case it would be tied to a currency, the euro.\n\na) Theoretically, it should help local businesses. Almost certainly in the short-term, there would be a substantial increase in credit internationally, as Eurozone's stronger economies will be able to sure up weaker financial systems in other nations. Local businesses should benefit via an increase in credit availability; allowing them to have financial flexibility, which is precious in such times of economic uncertainty.\n\nb) Again, cross border businesses should benefit from the influx of credit also. There would be the added bonus in credibility of exports. If the economies of Europe are strongly linked via unilateral regulations, the only effective barrier to trade would end up being possible differences in languages. Firms, particularly the financial industry but others as well, will experience trade legislation that will uniquely in their favour. It may even be comparable to the freedom firms experience in the United States of America, trading from state to state.\n\nc) However, being the only one who is truly affected by the long term, \"the man in the street\" may have the most to loose. To engage in an almost federal style policy, would cause huge constitutional change within the Euro-zone. It would see those who regulate the economy he needs to survive to outside his direct democratic control. Of course in the short-term, the influx of credit and capital will help the economy in the short-term. But the development of the European Central Bank's role would essentially sign of on European federalism. \n\nThis isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it would require substantial treaty changes within the entire European Union, something not everybody wants. This uncertainty, especially when a nation like the United Kingdom, the 3rd largest economy in Europe and 7th largest in the world, does not want this union to happen and is willing to leave the EU if it does. Separation within the EU would essentially render all European credit vapid destroying it politically and economically, and that would certainly affect a), b) & c).\n\nYeah, we certainly live in interesting times."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/47055db6-5b47-11e2-8ccc-00144feab49a.html#axzz2TIn3PGSN"
],
[]
] |
|
4a8mxo | how do computers/computer systems deal with daylight savings time? | Do they have a period of an hour of just missing data? And in fall do they have an extra hour of data? Specifically, businesses or hospitals that are dependent on time logging specific events | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a8mxo/eli5_how_do_computerscomputer_systems_deal_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0y93qr",
"d0y9i08"
],
"score": [
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Most computer systems don't work with timezones at all and prefer to store data in UTC only. Later they just convert time locally using current system settings for display purposes.\n\nWhen user needs to enter date (like schedule an appointment) computer converts it to UTC and stores in the database (or other storage). \n\nAnd if you need something more complicated (like overlapped shifts on night of DST change) - then it's just a lot of pain for developers.\n\nGood software don't use \"current time\" for timing purposes, using system timers instead.",
"Source: I used to do IT for a very, very large financial corporation. \n\nWe had servers all over the US (and sometimes the world), and it's a *huge* pain to have to look for data in the logs for something that happened a few days ago and you have to manually convert the time to whatever the system is set to (\"Ok, so I'm looking for 10:27 in Minneapolis and 8:30 in LA and... ugh, what's Arizona doing now?\")\n\nSo business practice was to set all systems to use GMT/UTC. That takes care of different timezones and has the added bonus of no daylight savings.\n\nHowever, we had some organisational units that *insisted* all their machines be set to \"California\" time, because they did a lot of log processing and apparently didn't know how to make a program add 8 to a number. \n\nAnd they would flip out every *single* year when \"an hour of data was missing!\" and we'd go \"Dude. Daylight saving.\" \n\nAnd they'd freak out later in the year when the log seemingly had double entries. And we'd go \"Dude. Daylight saving.\" \n\nSo basically, there are pretty easy and standard ways of dealing with the issue, and also pretty standard ways of *not* dealing with it and paging people at 4am because your whole OU is an idiot. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4eun2o | the madonna-whore complex | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4eun2o/eli5_the_madonnawhore_complex/ | {
"a_id": [
"d23l723"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The fundamental is the view that women are either virginal and pure, or unendingly slutty.\n\nThe concept goes back a long time. It can easily be traced in modern times to the thought that a woman must be a virgin until marriage, any woman who had sex outside of marriage was obviously for rent. Beyond that it can be traced to Roman times where women were an asset of their husband who could rent then out of he desired, sometimes used to make money. \n\nIn present times it is more about the balance that needs to be found between a woman being \"too uptight\" and so virginy, the Madonna side, or \"too easy\" and so the white side. \n\nOften portrayed as a no win situation for the women. Typically by people who believe there has to be a magical absolutely correct time to be applied to all relationships.\n\nIt also applies further. As we age we expect our sexual partner to have greater experience, someone who does not have this experience is viewed by many as flawed. Simultaneously anyone with too much experience is viewed by many as flawed. Again portrayed as a no win situation, but again this portrayal is strictly by people who believe there is some magical absolutely correct amount of experience.\n\nThe correct answer is of course to have the right experience for your intended relationship. Simply because people are different."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
21f2uo | why hasn't the ukrainian military fought back against the russian invasion of crimea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21f2uo/eli5_why_hasnt_the_ukrainian_military_fought_back/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgced9u"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"An excellent analogy posted by /u/CallMeMrKnowItAll in a similar thread:\n\n > If I'm out skinny dipping in a pond in the woods and a Grizzly Bear wanders up and sits its butt down on my boots, I think maybe I'll just walk home barefoot.\n > \n > I'm Ukraine. Russia is the bear. Crimea is the boots.\n\n_URL_0_\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2103s6/eli5_why_isnt_ukraine_fighting_back_for_crimea/"
]
] |
||
56qtak | legality of war | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56qtak/eli5legality_of_war/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8lo96c",
"d8lpd84"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"So, the first notion to dissuade yourself from is that there is international law on when a war is \"legal\" - there is not. Every country decides for itself whether a war is legal or not and imposes penalties if they feel it is \"illegal.\" And there has not been a single case in the modern international system where such a decision has come down to anything other than international politics. For example, the League of Nations and UN Charter both forbid all offensive wars, but it only takes a quick glance at a history book to see how pointless both of those were/are.\n\nIn the US wars are governed by the Constitution, the War Powers Act, and the political reality of whats going on in the US. Under the constitution only Congress can declare a \"war\" but the President is free to commit troops to combat. Under the War Powers Act the President can only commit troops to combat for between 60-90 days without explicit Congressional approval. \n\nThe political reality of the situation is that the President can do whatever he wants, and then after 60 days Congress can exercise a sort of veto power over the President's actions, at which point he has an additional 30 days to remove the troops. But if the President commits troops and Congress takes no action then it is assumed that Congress has tacitly approved of the action and the troops stay.",
" > however if only the president declares war then it's breaking international law until congress declares it.\n\nNo, the Congress has no bearing on international law other than ratifying treaties. International law is composed of bilateral and multilateral treaties between states.\n\nAs to warfare, the UN Charter authorizes warfare either in self-defense or when authorized by the United Nations Security Council. However, international law is not enforced - it's a gentlemen's deal, with say the UN having to call upon its members to take action against the offender. And since China and Russia are on the UNSC and have veto power, it is a good idea for the US to just go ahead and break international law, because nobody is likely to nuke them over some backwater patch of land, and visa versa."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
brlr7g | looking for an in depth explanation of stocks and their market starting from the basics all the way to the complex. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/brlr7g/eli5_looking_for_an_in_depth_explanation_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"eoex25a"
],
"score": [
16
],
"text": [
"Sorry, didn't realise the sub. My link to [investopia](_URL_0_) was removed.\n\nA \"stock\" or a \"share\" (they're the same thing) is owning a slice of a company. Big companies are spilt into many millions of separate shares, but it varies company to company. \n\nSay your friend wants to set up a lemonade stand. They need $10 to buy the essentials (lemonade, cups and table) but they only have $5. So they come to you and ask if you'd like to start a \"business\". You'd both put $5 towards it, and you'd both have an equal share. You could consider the lemonade business at this point has 2 shares, one issued to each of you. You now have _equity_, which is ownership of stock. You each have a 50% _equity stake_ in the business. You agree your share of the business entities you both to vote on business decisions (your share comes with _voting rights_) like who should be in charge of day to day decisions at the table.\n\nLemonade trade may go well and soon you are making $20 profit a day. You may decide to issue profit to the shareholders (this would be called a _dividend_) or you may decide to keep profits in the business in order to expand.\n\nThe spot your lemonade business owns is a good one and you have lots of customers. You also have a track record of managing the purchase and sale of lemonade well. So when you go to a meetup of all local lemonade stands, you find that people are quite keen to own your share of the business (this is because it'll give them access to the profits or a decision in how it's run). In fact you find that there are many offers for you share but the best one is $142. Most of this value comes from the fact that if someone owned your share they'd be entitled to a stream of your share of the profit which works out at $10 a day.\n\nYou decline their offers for now but realise from week to week that the offers being made for your share go up and down. People tend to be willing to offer less when you've had a quiet week and profits are lower. Likewise when you've had a good week and _especially_ when other lemonade stands are also doing badly, offers seem to go through the roof. This is how the _stock market_ works with respect to shares/equity. In fact most of the people at the market aren't other lemonade stand owners, they're mostly other kids who want to _invest_ their pocket money somewhere that's going to get them a return (they'd like to own a slice of a successful lemonade stand so they receive a share of the profits - this gets a better rate of return than just leaving their money in the piggy bank)\n\nAs time goes on you and your friend find that you're not able to serve all the customers that go past because you can't make lemonade fast enough. You see that an automated juicer machine is $500 so you're not sure where you'll get the cash from but it would immediately help if you were able to buy it. So you go the market and find that people would now be willing to pay $200 for your share of the lemonade stand (business is going well) but the total value of your lemonade stand ($400) still isn't enough to buy the equipment. So you ask the market a different question: who would be willing to lend you the $500? Which you would some interest on. You find that you get a lot of offers, because your business is strong and reliable, and people competing with each other to lend you the money means that the best offer you get is from someone willing to ask only 1% interest (you notice lemonade stands that aren't run so well get offered higher interest rates 5% .. even 10% because the lender isn't sure they'll make all the repayments). So you make an agreement with the person lending you $500. As part of the agreement the overall loans is considered as 5 parts of $100 each. Each of these is called _a bond_ and the process of securing the loan via the market is called a _bond issue_. You notice that the values of the bonds tends to vary less from week to week, because after all they're a pretty safe bet, and highly likely to get repaid. Meanwhile buying an actual share in a lemonade stand might sometimes offer better profit returns, but you notice if the lemonade stand closes down that those who own shares get nothing but the bond holders need paying back out of any remaining cash in the piggy bank. So _bonds are safer than equity shares_ but offer lower returns.\n\nYou agree that the lender can swap with anyone else on the market who wants to take over lending you the money. This is because the lender is taking some risk lending you $500 and they might want at some point to reduce that to $200 by selling 3 of the bonds to someone else. The actual value of each bond on the market turns out to be $105 because other kids work out that each bond will not only get repaid $100 eventually, but also get the interest in the meantime. The process of people buy and selling who they are lending money to forms the _bond market_.\n\nOver time you come to notice that the other kids at the market are just part of a wider team. The ones you actually see there are just particularly good at judging the right moment to make an exchange - they're called _traders_. But behind them you have kids whose hobby it is just to understand the running of lemonade stands _really well_. These guys are very good at looking at your sales and how well your stand is run and working out if the offers your getting on the market for your share are at the right value or too high or too low. These kids are _equity analysts_ and they sometimes pay a bit of pocket money to other kids who do special _research_ to give them the inside edge on making good decisions.\n\nAfter a few seasons of lemonade stand trading you find that one of the biggest risks to your business is that the cost of lemons can go up and down quite widely. In fact, at the start of the season when you're deciding how many cups to buy and how many helpers to hire, you don't yet know if there are going to be loads of lemons on the tree (and the price is lower) or if the harvest is going to be bad (and the cost of lemons high). The worst case for you is if you spend a load of money assuming you'll be able to buy cheap lemons all through the season only to find out later that the cost was higher than you thought. In order to plan your lemonade stand better you go to the market and talk to the kids whose dad owns the lemon trees and see if you can some to an arrangement. What you agree on is that while prices of lemons vary of $0.05 to $0.25 from season to season, for this year you'll agree that lemons in August will be sold at $0.15. You haggle this with each other, based on your priorities, and available weather information, but in the end are both happy to lock the price in. On the market this agreement to buy each batch of 100 lemons at $0.15 is called a _futures contract_. Each contract can be bought and sold to other kids on the market. The person buying it becomes entitled to the delivery of lemons in August. You find that as you get closer to August and lemons are actually in short supply that the day to day price for lemons goes up to $0.30 (this is called the _spot_ price). And the value of each futures contract has gone up in value too. This is because it allows you to receive a batch of lemons, which you could immediately resell for $0.30 if you wanted and make a profit. Because the value of the futures contract is derived from the price of the lemons it's called a _derivative_. The main value of these type of derivative is that it let's you know what your lemonade stand costs will be in advance. The kids who owns the lemon trees also benefits because he knows in advance how much he's going to sell his dad's lemons for and that let's him plan to spend his extra pocket money on his new go kart.\n\nNow that you've locked down a pretty solid and reliable business you look for additional way to drive profits. You notice that the weeks when lemonade sales are worst are when there's a bout of rainy weather and you consider if people are likely to buy umbrellas from your stand when they're not buying lemonade and vice versa. You see that one of the risks to your business is buying lots of lemons at a good rate but then being unable to make a profit due to bad weather. So you consider offsetting the risk of your futures contracts in lemons with an option to buy umbrellas in August. You go to the market and make an arrangement with someone that gives you the _option_ to buy umbrellas at $1 each in August. You don't have to make the purchase, you just have the option to, but if you want to then the other person agrees they'll honour the sale. This is called an _options contact_. Because its value is also dependent on the value of umbrellas it's also a type of _derivative_. The process of balancing your lemon futures contracts with an umbrella option contact is called _hedging_.\n\nedit: typos"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.investopedia.com"
]
] |
||
56otq4 | does waking up during the night but going back to sleep pretty immediately affect the benefit of sleep for that night? | Let's say you plan on going to sleep around 11 and waking up at 7 to be well rested, but you have medicine for example to take around 3 in the morning. If you take it quickly and go right back to sleep, does your body feel the positive effects of a good night's sleep the next day? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56otq4/eli5_does_waking_up_during_the_night_but_going/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8l9nzf"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"[](/adsleep)Few and short breaks in sleep, **as long as** they don't interrupt the deep sleep cycles, won't affect you. \nIn fact, is normal to wake up by yourself, and stay awake a little while at the end of a cycle, it's not mandatory to go back to sleep immediatly, as long as the sleep cycles are respected. \n\nIf you need to program a quick \"Waking up\" in the middle of the night, try to roughly calculate it in multiples of 90 minutes. \nIf you have to get up at 3 AM, go to sleep 11:45 (15 mins to fall asleep) or 10:15."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4gvo1k | why are djs like calvin harris and david guetta getting billing over the singers in their songs? | There were always people mixing the back beats for artists. Why are they only now getting credit as the artist with the featured singer only a "featuring" credit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gvo1k/eli5_why_are_djs_like_calvin_harris_and_david/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2l6hni",
"d2labvo",
"d2lbj5n",
"d2lct5a"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Besides producing the music, they usually also write/co-write the songs (though the singer may co-write also); so it usually is their song, they just asked a famous singer to sing it. \n \nSince these DJ's are popular, they negotiate it. It's a simple business move.",
"It's not just limited to DJs. Carlos Santana doesn't sing, but the band has his name on it. The Alan Parsons Project too, though Alan has done some singing in there. ",
"DJs like Calvin Harris tend to be the creator of the whole track, so it's their track but with a guest vocallist.\nDizzee Rascal did release a track as the lead artist with Calvin Harris (Dance wiv Me), and Calvin actually sings on that too.",
"Calvin Harris writes a song and then finds a singer. He says to them \"Hey, would you like to sing this song? The song will be credited to me, but you'll get 20% of the revenue\" and the singer says \"Yes, OK.\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1rel6x | neurologically what is happening at the moment i fall asleep and why can't i ever remember transitioning into sleep. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rel6x/neurologically_what_is_happening_at_the_moment_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdmh5fp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"there is a theory that consciousness is something that when numerous subsystems of the brain are online and fully coordinated, and when these go out of communication with each other then that is you go to sleep.\n\nThere is much more to the idea, but that is the general idea\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3dagjn | why do dog paws smell like fritos (corn chips)? | And why do I love it so much? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dagjn/eli5_why_do_dog_paws_smell_like_fritos_corn_chips/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct3bfax",
"ct3c813",
"ct3lhwj",
"ct3prng",
"ct3r7kf"
],
"score": [
12,
16,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"That's the dog version of body odor. Dogs sweat through their paws, lick their paws, tramp through mud, all kinds of things that get them wet and covered in bacteria. The bacterial growth is what produces the \"frito feet\" smell. Unless it is overpowering, it is generally harmless and nothing to worry about. Just don't start licking their feet.\n\n_URL_0_",
"better question is: 'Why did they make Fritos smell like dog paws?\"",
"Frito feet! It's just due to bacteria, sweat, etc in a dog's paw pads. My older German shepherd has that really corn-chippy smell to his feeties. It's kind of adorable.",
"Wow I thought I was just a weirdo because I used to sniff my dog's head and say it smelled like corn. I'm not alone. ",
"I am so happy right now. Every time I tell my boyfriend or anyone really that our dog smells like corn chips no one believes me. Yay Im not crazy. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.dogingtonpost.com/my-dogs-feet-smell-like-corn-chips/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4ah8ci | why are most call centers based out of india? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ah8ci/eli5_why_are_most_call_centers_based_out_of_india/ | {
"a_id": [
"d10dn7j",
"d10g3m0",
"d10gm6q",
"d10k807",
"d10ko9u",
"d10ks3k",
"d10lwoy",
"d10mz5n",
"d10n8va",
"d10nuaa",
"d10o8hf",
"d10paqr",
"d10qzqv"
],
"score": [
83,
2,
40,
5,
2,
10,
3,
2,
2,
2,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It started because of the abundance of English speakers and the relatively low wages. Now that there are a lot of call centers, the infrastructure is in place and it's easy to train workers.\n\nGeneral Electric was one of the first companies to establish a call center in India - possibly because there were Indian executives who promoted the idea. Then everyone else copied GE. \n\nThe Philippines is also a popular location for call centers. \n",
"I don't know what you're talking about. India was like 10 years ago, nowadays it's either America or the Philippines and those people are just the fucking worst. ",
"It's all about money. In Spain we use a lot of southamerican call centers for the same reasons: common language but much much much cheaper than local. \n\nIn the dev world they also use a lot of India devs because of the money. When you buy in China you do it for the same reason: cheap. \n\nI get a bit pissed off about this facts because those people work their asses for a shit pay. But unfortunately that's how the world works: all about the money",
"Anything businessrelated: Profits.\n\nIndia has a large amount of english speakers, and there's a very low wage so you can have an army of english-speaking indians and pay them the same as one half-decent translator in America. ",
"Geographical location makes it so that any shifts past regular US time is covered without paying third shift rate. English speakers. Low wages compared to American/UK counterparts (e.g. 3 India = 1 US salary).",
"There are a few reasons: \n\n* The official language in India is English. So across states which may speak different native languages, the one language that is used for communication is English.\n* There is a high focus on good primary education (by parents), so most people can speak basic English\n* The government subsidizes lands for Industrial parks and gives them tax breaks, cheap electricity etc..\n* The calling rates in India are very low. Most local call cost less than 1 cent. Inter-states calls less than 5 cents and International calls about 7-8 cents. \n* Labor costs are low. A good salary in India for a BPO employee in a metro is around 250$ per month. This goes down as you move into Tier 2 cities.\n* The amount of graduates entering the workforce every year is huge. This provides a lot of skilled labor for a very low price. ",
"Happens in Australia as well.\nA lot of helpdesks and IT is outsourced to India.\n\nFor us though it's not so much about saving money on direct wages. It's a way companies can get rid of staff, especially the long term ones who have worked there way up the food chain so they don't have to pay them long service leave.\n\nStep 1 - Outsource to India/China/Malaysia etc\n\nStep 2 - Lay off local work force\n\nStep 3 - Wait a few years until the contract with OS providor is up\n\nStep 4 - Recruit locally. This time with people starting day 0 and having no benefits.\n\nStep 5 - Repeating in 5 years time.\n\nThis has happened with Rio Tinto a few times now. Back and forth.",
"Most call centers are in the Philippines, and it looks like they make decent money doing it: _URL_0_\n\nBut for the same reasons as call centers in India: lots of native English speakers and lower wages than domestic call centers for US-based companies.\n\nThere's also a growing number of call centers in the Midwest US for escalated calls that require US-based English speakers.",
"It may depend on the industry a bit but the belief that most call centers are based out of India is false. I have worked in several call centers in several industries, and it can cause problems.\n\nEven out of the people that have called me, only one has ever been Indian, and then its hard to say if being from India means being IN India, and that was a customer service fraud protection from chase bank.\n\nHow ever alot of people hear any accent or stutter and assume they are from India, due to the belief that most call centers are in India. ",
"any time i hear about indian call center reps, i always think about this.\n\n\ni worked at a call center for IBM. we had a woman that worked there that was from India, but was a citizen of the USA. people would regularly complain to her that they didn't appreciate the jobs being sent out of country and that they wanted to speak with an american.\n\n\nShe would say some variant of: but i AM an american. i actually live right down the road from you. we are practically neighbors.\n\n\ni felt so bad for her. but she was a hard person to like, so not that bad.",
"I'm going to assume you're an American, see companies just love taking your money and they love keeping as much profit as possible to themselves which mean they will cut costs wherever possible.\n\n\nNow running your own call centre has costs, but they can't just cut the call centre as then their products would look worse to the Americans that pay for them and they would bring in less money from their American customers.\n\n\nOne area in which they want to cut costs, remember lower cost more profits and the CEO is happier, is salaries if they can find some people to work for less while delivering a product (call assistance) that isn't quite shitty enough to trigger an American customer revolt.\n\n\nNow the key skill for call support is speaking English, and India has a lot of English speakers due to their British occupation and since they are a developing country their salaries are very low.\n\n\nSo you see the CEO's have found a perfect compromise they can still sell their product to Americans which have a high salary thus earning high profits and pay the Indians which demand a low salary (they also buy their products at low prices so they don't suffer) thus keeping all the profits for themselves making them even happier (as they can now afford more hamburgers with gold dust).\n\n\nSure the Americans who lost their jobs have lost their salaries and won't be able to purchase goods at American prices but who cares, not the CEO's the formerly employed still have to buy their products as they watch their savings drain away, because really what can they do stop eating and etc ?\n\n\nAnd even if a lot of companies employ the same strategies for other things beyond call centres, the formerly employed have enough savings to keep the CEO's very very happy for many many financial quarters until they're completely **strip-mined** of their life savings, kids college funds, emergency funds.\n\n\nAnd the awesome thing about this process is that as the Indian workers demand more and more pay, the Americans or some other smucks will get desperate enough tow work for the old low wages when you're the CEO of a international corporation the world is your oyster.\n\n\nYou can just hop from country to country, leaving old flames behind as they become too demanding because there's always some fresh young workforces ready to race to the bottom in terms of salaries for the privilege of working for you.",
"I think that in addition to the short and excellent answer by /u/MontiBurns, it's also the lack of opportunities to do other kind of businesses. Indian government and bureaucracy make extremely difficult to manufacture, import or export anything physical. There are just too many licenses to be acquired and too many people to be bribed at every step of doing virtually any business. Import and export through the highly corrupt customs is also extremely difficult.\n\nThat just leaves software and call centers. The only things that go in and come out of the country through optical fibers and hence not subject to extreme and corrupt government control. Add to it the huge number of English speakers, a geographic location that's twelve hours away from most of continental US, and there you have it. A huge IT industry and them call centers.",
"Well, here it goes...the real reasons why call centers are located in India (especially technology related call centers).\n\n1) Extremely cheap labor rates (20-25% of American wages) which allows companies to pass the savings onto their executives. \n2) Some grasp of the English language (emphasis on some).\n3) An education system that is beyond question, corrupt to the core, technical certifications can simply be bought/made up. CEOs are then conned into thinking that these people have an actual clue as to what to do (in my 15 years of experience, I've only met 3 that actually knew how to do their jobs).\n\nDon't let the timezone thing fool you. Most Indian tech call centers operate 24x7x365 (which is convenient for holidays). The couple bucks an hour in American shift differential for 2nd and 3rd shift is peanuts compared to the 75-80% less wages and no benefits being paid to the Indian workers.\n\nOTOH, I've worked with some real rock stars in Australia and New Zealand. Those guys are usually solid, and awake when you should be sleeping."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-philippines-economy-20150202-story.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4awtwz | why do some states prohibit recording your own phone calls? | I understand a prohibition of third parties recording calls. There is an expectation of privacy between two trusted parties. What I don't understand is the legal justification to prohibit recording my own phone calls without the other persons' consent. Especially when dealing with business related phone calls.
Edit: On a related note, why is recording a call sometimes protected as privacy, but there's no law against taking a call with "Speaker Phone" with out consent... | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4awtwz/eli5why_do_some_states_prohibit_recording_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"d146jgh",
"d146o1h"
],
"score": [
28,
5
],
"text": [
"Because a phone call isn't \"yours\", it is the person you're talking with too. If they are under the impression that it is private, it should be. If you want to record, tell them. ",
"When you are talking to another person, there are two people's privacy interests at stake--yours and theirs. There is not just the concern of a third party listening in on the conversation (which is obviously a major problem), but also the reasonable expectation the other party has that an ephemeral conversation will not become a permanent recording that is carried away to somewhere else. When you record a conversation without their consent, you violate that expectation of privacy.\n\nIt is for the people of each state to consider whether they think that evil is great enough to make illegal, and whether it outweighs the utility of a person recording their conversations without asking the other parties. Federal law (applicable to interstate calls) adopts the least restrictive rule, of one-party consent."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7ymi5l | -- why do people blame the nra for mass shootings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ymi5l/eli5_why_do_people_blame_the_nra_for_mass/ | {
"a_id": [
"duhljfl",
"duhlmab",
"duhlt1u",
"duhlu82",
"duhlvbr",
"duhm0wa"
],
"score": [
8,
6,
6,
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"they’re a big part of the reason why gun control laws are so lax in the US, and give tons of money to politicians for their special interests. hence why it’s so easy to get a gun.",
"Their power over politicians. Most NRA sponsored politicians well seek NRA board approval on all thing gun related or could be gun related. They will not pass a law over the smallest control because the NRA believes if they do Banning guns is just around the corner. Example:_URL_0_",
"They're not just \"the gun lobby\", they're a very large & influential lobbying group that is completely unwilling compromise on *any* sort of gun control laws. The spend lots of money supporting pro-gun politicians & they tell their members to vote for them. If a politician steps out of line and starts to talk about gun control, the NRA will send massive funding & support at their opponent in an attempt to prevent reelection.\n\nIf you think that gun control would prevent mass shootings, the NRA is a **very** big part of why we haven't been able to pass any gun control laws.",
"The NRA will cite the inalienable \"right to bear arms\" as the reason for its existence, and that the acqusition thereof should not be met with any government interference. \n\nThen there's the corruptive motivator of $$ and gun lobbyist (_what /u/funfetti mentions_).",
"The 2nd amendment historically was about the people’s right to protect themselves from tyrannical governments. Kings and dictators and shit. \n\nBut the NRA is the largest group to start pushing the “right to bear arms” part. Paying millions so no laws would be passed limiting who can buy guns. \n\nWhich is why a kid in florida can go buy a gun to shoot up a high school but can’t go get drunk at a bar. ",
"It comes from seeing the very high availability of guns and lax gun laws as a reason for why mass shootings occur. NRA lobbies for letting people have guns for self-defense and is against gun control. They have also managed to stop research into the causes of mass shootings:\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_986cb390-2602-11e7-814a-e7d182461ecb.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.newsweek.com/government-wont-fund-gun-research-stop-violence-because-nra-lobbying-675794",
"https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence"
]
] |
||
7u81ym | why is the president saluted while they retain a civilian status? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7u81ym/eli5_why_is_the_president_saluted_while_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtibjtq",
"dticgj3",
"dtidq8o",
"dtig8y3"
],
"score": [
20,
5,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"The President of the USA is also Commander in Chief of all branches of the military. So, he is technically a part of the military chain of command, and is treated appropriately by military personnel.",
"Because Ronald Reagan wanted to make a big deal about how he served in the military. Presidents did not customarily return salutes before his presidency. Military members salute the POTUS because he at the top of the chain of command. ",
"Because they are the Commander-in-Chief of all the US military giving them the absolute highest rank in the military chain of command. They are both military and civilian at the same time. ",
"The President controls the military. That's why. The larger question is this: Why is the President not a formal military position instead of a civilian one? \n\nBecause hypothetically *anyone* native born to the United States of America could become President. For this to work realistically you need President to technically be a civilian position and have commanders of individual branches answer to the President. \n\nAlso it is something of an effort to smooth foreign relations. As a civilian office the President doesn't have to wear a uniform or behave in a military fashion so there's a greater degree of freedom which is incredibly useful in foreign relations. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
aosmvh | what causes cavities and how do dentists fix them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aosmvh/eli5_what_causes_cavities_and_how_do_dentists_fix/ | {
"a_id": [
"eg383y3",
"eg386um",
"eg717nb"
],
"score": [
13,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Bacteria on the surface of your teeth consume sugar from the food and drink you ingest and secrete acid. The acid wears away at your teeth, creating holes called cavities.\n\nDentists will drill out the hole and fill it with a material, then cap it off so it matches the countours of your other teeth.",
"not a doctor/dentist. Acid secreted by bacteria. The acid will demineralize the tooth enamel layer, exposing the soft layer below, thus making it more vulnerable to damage.\n\nThe bacteria also form \"colonies\" (plaques) and will multiply more quickly and easily. thats why brushing is so important.\n\nThere also the acid in food and your saliva. so eating lots of acidic foods will also cause cavities",
" \n\n**Cavities :** Tooth decay is the softening of your tooth enamel and refers to the damage of the structure of the tooth caused by acids that are created when plaque bacteria break down sugar in your mouth.\n\nIt is important to understand the causes of tooth decay so you can learn the proper way to care for your teeth and care for your health.\n\n* **Poor Oral Hygiene**: Not brushing your teeth regularly allows plaque to build up and attack the tooth enamel.\n* **Plaque Formation**: Plaque is caused when bacteria, acid, food particles, and saliva all combine in your mouth. This plaque adheres to your teeth and builds up over time. The acid in plaque attacks the enamel of your tooth and eventually can cause holes in your teeth, otherwise known as cavities.\n* **Dry Mouth**: Saliva helps wash plaque from the teeth. If you have a dry mouth with very little saliva, plaque may build up more quickly.\n* **Eating and Drinking**: This is where it all begins. Since we all have to eat and drink to live, there’s no way to avoid this, but it does play a significant role in the formation of cavities. When you eat or drink, carbohydrates remain on your teeth until you brush. Even after brushing, you may not be able to remove all food particles or carbohydrates from your teeth. Foods that tend to cling to your teeth can increase your risk for a tooth cavity. Be sure to brush your teeth regularly, especially after drinking milk or soda, or after eating dried fruit, dry cereal, hard candy, caramel, taffy, raisins, sugary cereals, cookies and breath mints.\n* **Bacteria and Acid**: While most people don’t like to think about it, bacteria naturally live in your mouth. When these bacteria digest the carbohydrates that linger on your teeth and in your mouth, acid forms."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
fjdml8 | how does food become skin, blood, organs, etc? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fjdml8/eli5_how_does_food_become_skin_blood_organs_etc/ | {
"a_id": [
"fkmgu4h"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Food is broken down to proteins, carbs, lipids \n\nThen these molecules are further broken down to amino acids, simple sugars cholesterol and fatty acids. These are simple building blocks containing mostly carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphate (among others) that make up all the cells and tissues in our bodies\n\nDNA is a instruction sheet on how to arrange amino acids in order to make enzymes and other proteins\n\nThese proteins/enzymes then make things like cell walls and DNA or whatever the cell needs using the other building blocks"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
42q88l | what are snails even trying to do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42q88l/eli5what_are_snails_even_trying_to_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"czc9h05"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Make more snails. It's what life does. There are more snails than humans, so arguably they're better at it than we are."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
kheir | how do video cards, gpu's and ram work together in terms of gaming? | And what's the difference/interaction between the RAM intrinsic to the video card and the computer's RAM? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kheir/eli5_how_do_video_cards_gpus_and_ram_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2kak8n",
"c2kcs77",
"c2kak8n",
"c2kcs77"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Approved, but I suggest you resubmit.",
"First here are the components I am going to describe:\n\n1. CPU (Central Processing Unit) The main controller, calculator and processor for the PC. \n\n2. RAM (c) (Random Access Memory) The \"working memory\" of the PC, it is where currently needed or soon to be needed data is stored by the computer. The (c) is to remind you that this is the computer RAM and not the video card RAM. \n\n3. RAM (g) (Random Access Memory) This is the RAM that is built into the video card and dedicated to storing graphics data. (g) to remind you that this is not the computer's RAM but the video/graphics RAM. \n\n4. GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) This is the main controller and processor for the video card. \n\n\nTo see how these components work together let's trace the path through the system that is used when you game. \n\n1. The user chooses to launch a video game they want to play. \n2. A signal is sent to the CPU to start the program. \n3. The CPU sends a request to load the game data. This request goes to the RAM (c) and if the data is not already loaded into RAM (c) then the request is sent on to the hard drive. The game data is loaded into RAM(c), this includes everything from the AI to control the enemies, to the textures, pictures and video files that are used to make the graphics in the game, the sound files that are played. (note: with many larger games, not all the data can fit in RAM(c) so only the portions of the game that will be used first are loaded, so likely you will get the data that makes up the intro movies and the main menu, once you click start the game you might notice you get another loading bar, this is the game loading more resources from the hard drive into RAM(c) and RAM(g) as the game engine itself is loaded). \n4. As the game engine is loading, the CPU sends instructions to begin loading textures and graphics data into the RAM(g). If the RAM(g) is not big enough to store all of the texture data that is currently needed, then the data will be stored in RAM(c) and can be loaded into RAM(g) as needed. The video card's RAM(g) is very fast, and is located close to the GPU, so for performance reasons it is desirable to have any data the GPU needs on the RAM(g), any time that RAM(c) has to be used instead of RAM(g) there will be a performance degradation. \n5. As soon as the game engine is done with its loading, and you start actually playing the game, then the GPU is going to work. Modern GPUs can handle a large chunk of the processing needed to do graphics and physics calculations for games, so it will be working hard to render and compute as much as possible. It uses its close connection to RAM(g) to get data very quickly, and since it is directly connected to the output device there is no bottleneck for the data, it can send it is fast as possible. \n\n\nSo the difference between the two types of RAM is that RAM(g) only stores graphics/physics data that will be processed by the GPU. RAM(c) can store that same data if RAM(g) is full and RAM(c) will also store everything else that makes up the game (The AI, the sound, the menus, the game engine). RAM(g) tends to be faster, is located in the video card and is usually smaller than the RAM(c). \n\nThe interaction between the two types of RAM is that usually data will go through RAM(c) before being loaded into RAM(g). RAM(g) and RAM(c) will pass data back and forth as it is needed or not needed by the GPU. \n\nHope this helps, this is all from memory and my understanding, so of course I might have made a mistake or two. \n",
"Approved, but I suggest you resubmit.",
"First here are the components I am going to describe:\n\n1. CPU (Central Processing Unit) The main controller, calculator and processor for the PC. \n\n2. RAM (c) (Random Access Memory) The \"working memory\" of the PC, it is where currently needed or soon to be needed data is stored by the computer. The (c) is to remind you that this is the computer RAM and not the video card RAM. \n\n3. RAM (g) (Random Access Memory) This is the RAM that is built into the video card and dedicated to storing graphics data. (g) to remind you that this is not the computer's RAM but the video/graphics RAM. \n\n4. GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) This is the main controller and processor for the video card. \n\n\nTo see how these components work together let's trace the path through the system that is used when you game. \n\n1. The user chooses to launch a video game they want to play. \n2. A signal is sent to the CPU to start the program. \n3. The CPU sends a request to load the game data. This request goes to the RAM (c) and if the data is not already loaded into RAM (c) then the request is sent on to the hard drive. The game data is loaded into RAM(c), this includes everything from the AI to control the enemies, to the textures, pictures and video files that are used to make the graphics in the game, the sound files that are played. (note: with many larger games, not all the data can fit in RAM(c) so only the portions of the game that will be used first are loaded, so likely you will get the data that makes up the intro movies and the main menu, once you click start the game you might notice you get another loading bar, this is the game loading more resources from the hard drive into RAM(c) and RAM(g) as the game engine itself is loaded). \n4. As the game engine is loading, the CPU sends instructions to begin loading textures and graphics data into the RAM(g). If the RAM(g) is not big enough to store all of the texture data that is currently needed, then the data will be stored in RAM(c) and can be loaded into RAM(g) as needed. The video card's RAM(g) is very fast, and is located close to the GPU, so for performance reasons it is desirable to have any data the GPU needs on the RAM(g), any time that RAM(c) has to be used instead of RAM(g) there will be a performance degradation. \n5. As soon as the game engine is done with its loading, and you start actually playing the game, then the GPU is going to work. Modern GPUs can handle a large chunk of the processing needed to do graphics and physics calculations for games, so it will be working hard to render and compute as much as possible. It uses its close connection to RAM(g) to get data very quickly, and since it is directly connected to the output device there is no bottleneck for the data, it can send it is fast as possible. \n\n\nSo the difference between the two types of RAM is that RAM(g) only stores graphics/physics data that will be processed by the GPU. RAM(c) can store that same data if RAM(g) is full and RAM(c) will also store everything else that makes up the game (The AI, the sound, the menus, the game engine). RAM(g) tends to be faster, is located in the video card and is usually smaller than the RAM(c). \n\nThe interaction between the two types of RAM is that usually data will go through RAM(c) before being loaded into RAM(g). RAM(g) and RAM(c) will pass data back and forth as it is needed or not needed by the GPU. \n\nHope this helps, this is all from memory and my understanding, so of course I might have made a mistake or two. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
13mxm9 | - why does eating a banana help with muscle cramps? | I've always been told that eating bananas, or other foods rich in potassium, will help with muscle cramps when you work out. But I've never understood the science behind it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13mxm9/eli5_why_does_eating_a_banana_help_with_muscle/ | {
"a_id": [
"c75d501"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Well, you probably know that muscles contract when you run electrical current through them. The stuff that actually conducts the electricity within your muscles is called electrolytes. It's a combination of sodium, *potassium*, and calcium.\n\nWhen you're working hard you can sweat out these electrolytes. If your muscles can't conduct the electricity they need to move, bad things happen. Like them not working when you want them to, or moving when you don't want them to.\n\nTo fix this, you can take a source of electrolytes, such as a banana(Or electrolyte drinks). Bananas are also great because they have carbs, and a lot of nutrients, and easy to eat.\n\nTL;DR : Bananas make your muscles work, and are good for you in general. Eat them, unless you are me, and allergic. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1rpjnq | why are different audio channels/layers played through left and right earphones and not all layers through both? | I was wondering why it is that when I play songs on my iPod and inevitably one of my earphones stops working, I can only hear select layers of the song? Surely it would be easier to have all the elements of the song playing through both earphones at the same time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rpjnq/eli5_why_are_different_audio_channelslayers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdpjze4",
"cdpk3nz",
"cdplrrp"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Not necessarily. If there are two similar sounds (like two guitars for instance) it might be better for one to be on the left and one to be on the right so that the sounds stay independent until your brain mashes them together.",
"Basically, to make you perceive the sound as \"wider\" and more realistic.\n\nStereo sound attempts to recreate the experience of hearing a real band (or whatever) playing in the room with you--you hear with two ears, of course, and each of your ears picks up slightly different sounds because they are different distances from the source. So your left ear might hear a little more guitar while your right ear hears more keyboard.\n\nSound mixers try to reproduce that effect by making certain tracks louder in one stereo channel than the other, tricking your ears/brain into thinking you're hearing sounds coming from different directions, which makes the sound \"wider.\"\n\nEventually people also began using stereo as an effect in itself, for example having certain sounds \"pan\" quickly from one side to another, which isn't particularly realistic, but sounds cool.\n\nTrue, it would be easier to mix everything in mono, but when your equipment is working properly, stereo sounds better (to most people). :)",
"Essentially, Stereo sound [different sound for each ear] exists because we *can* distinguish which ear a sound is being played in -- and we use this information to determine where sounds are coming from. Putting everything through both earphones at the same level makes it sound like everything's in the same place, right in front of us. It's not *terrible*, but not ideal. By making different elements louder for one ear and softer in the other, producers can create the illusion of different instruments existing in different places around you. This sounds more realistic, and also makes it easier for you to distinguish and follow particular instruments. \n\nBut others have explained this stuff. I'm here to demonstrate it. \n\nMost iPods have an accessibility setting to make both earphones play the same thing. On iOS, you can find it in Settings > General > Accessibility > Mono Audio. Enable it with functional headphones, and you'll notice a substantial difference. It also serves as a 'fix' when one of your earphones breaks. Or, if you want to use it as intended, when you go deaf in one ear.\n\nEDIT: Buuut... quick question. When you say you can only hear select layers of a song, does that include having the main vocals getting (mostly) stripped out of (most) songs? Because that's usually what signals the end of my ear-buds, and it's a different issue entirely. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
92shvc | how did scientists breed produce for specific traits hundreds of years ago | I've never understood how you're able to breed a basic plant for enhanced traits such as less seeds or larger leaves. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92shvc/eli5_how_did_scientists_breed_produce_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3823ay",
"e382khp",
"e38c9rs"
],
"score": [
19,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Take the seeds of the offspring you like, and plant and nurture those. The offspring you don't like as much, just destroy the seeds.\n\nBam. Evolutionary pressure via artificial selection.",
"Ancient farmers might not have had the scientific knowledge to know the genetics or why the seeds of desirable plants grow a desirable plants. But they knew that seeds from desirable plants made desirable plants. \n\nSo they saved the seeds from the good plants and planted those. Or in the case of domesticated livestock, kill the sick, weak or problematic animals before they can breed. For example that one cow keeps trying to run the farmer over, kill/eat it, eliminate those genes and keep a herd that doesn't run over people.",
"I would to the question in part as if you say scientists you paint the picture of the breeding program we have today with organises testing and breading of plants. Commercial crossbreeding in a way that we do it today started in the late 19th centuy and Gartons Agricultural Plant Breeders in England was established in the 1890s was the first success.\n\nSo to look at is as a organised and highly scientific endeavour like today is not a good representation of the past.\n\n\nBefore the is was less organises so the way to think about it is more that it was farmers that selected the large seed and panted them to get larger plant. Farms was not nessecery an small one family thing but there was large estates where there was a lot of people that worked there and they would have someone that was in charge of storing the seed for next year and is was in that way to changed thing.\n\nPlant breading have been done by farmers for a estimated 9,000 to 11,000 years. Animal husbandry is up to 15000 years old so humans that we would consider farmers have done it since the agricultural revolution started as that was what was needed for it. Animal husbandry have existed since we domesticated animals. \n\nSo the simple idea that offspring to animals and plant look like there parents. It you let the one with the traits that is best for you breed you will likely get a better animal/plant. To understan and observe it simple. The face that children look more like there parent then other adult is common knowledge and easy to observe for humans.\n\n\n\n\nI suspect that people that did that would not call them self scientists no only because it was coined in 1833. The name before that was natural philosophers. I would assume that most people that was involved in plant and animal breading would not call them self that but more likely say that they are farmers.\n\nThere are people today that breed new types or roses and other flowers in there garden as a hobby. The are more like breeding in the past and would not call them self scientists. \n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5uulzl | how are boneless fish made? | I have seen plenty of those, where there's a whole fish, and it as just no bones in it, as if it never was born with any (I doubt that, though.). What's the process behind it? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uulzl/eli5_how_are_boneless_fish_made/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddwy80e"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"When they slice open the fish to pull its guts out they pull out the bones too since they are all connected. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3oa9ep | why are there fewer blue raspberry jolly ranchers than every other flavor? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3oa9ep/eli5_why_are_there_fewer_blue_raspberry_jolly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvveodl"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They might have a more expensive ingredient. I know blue dyes are often more difficult to create than others.\n\nMaybe they wanted to include blue, for a 'rainbow' effect, but the blue dye (or some other ingredient specific only to the blue ones, like a flavour) makes them expensive, so they put in enough for there to be *some* blue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2dbm84 | are humans designed to eat meat? i get that we have canines, but aren't our digestive tracts too long? | Thank you. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dbm84/eli5_are_humans_designed_to_eat_meat_i_get_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjnxt0t",
"cjnxyt8",
"cjnzxmp"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Much like our mouths being somewhere between the mouths of carnivores and herbivores, the length (and structure) of our digestive tracts as compared to similarly sized animals is somewhere between that of herbivores and carnivores. If we had been designed to be herbivores, not only would we have another source for certain b-complex vitamins (besides meat), but our digestive tracts would be longer, and would probably contain additional stomach chambers or other means to process cellulose. Had we been designed as carnivores, our tracts would be rather shorter.",
"We're evolved (not designed) to have an omnivorous diet. ",
"The length of the digestive tract argument, and the \"meat actually rots in your body\" claim, are both horrifically inaccurate and are deliberately played up by the more evangelizing members of the vegan crowd.\n\nHumans are opportunistic omnivores, in that we have a wide variety of foods that we are \"meant\" to eat. That means fruits, nuts, grains, vegetables, and yes, meat.\n\nEdit: Proof, because I was getting hit by downvotes earlier...\n\n[Meat does not rot in your gut.](_URL_4_)\n\n[Scientific American](_URL_1_)\n\n[NPR](_URL_0_)\n\n[Moar NPR](_URL_7_)\n\n[Huffington Post](_URL_8_)\n\n[Washington Post](_URL_3_)\n\nAnd blog posts, not that they are always suitable evidence, but they'll add some more weight:\n\n[Other sources](_URL_5_)\n\n[Reasons to eat meat](_URL_6_)\n\n[Why do we eat meat?](_URL_2_)\n\nNow none of this is to say that you *must eat meat*. There are many people who will see improved health by cutting meat in their diet, and there are others (myself included) who just prefer a more veggie-heavy diet. This is just evidence against many of the motivations and reasons (particularly the bullshit evolutionary arguments) given by the more hardline vegans.\n\nEdit 2: Changed \"evangelical\" to \"evangelizing\" so as not to confuse vegans with fundie Christians."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/2010/08/02/128849908/food-for-thought-meat-based-diet-made-us-smarter",
"http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/should-humans-eat-meat-excerpt/",
"http://www.splendidtable.org/story/why-do-we-eat-meat-tracing-the-evolutionary-history",
"http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/sorry-vegans-eating-meat-and-cooking-food-is-how-humans-got-their-big-brains/2012/11/26/3d4d36de-326d-11e2-bb9b-288a310849ee_story.html",
"http://www.healthyfood.co.nz/articles/2007/april/fact-or-fiction-meat-rots-in-your-gut",
"http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/evidence-for-meat-eating-by-early-humans-103874273",
"http://authoritynutrition.com/7-evidence-based-health-reasons-to-eat-meat/",
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/04/20/150817741/for-most-of-human-history-being-an-omnivore-was-no-dilemma",
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/10/early-human-meat-eaters-vegetarian_n_1765521.html"
]
] |
|
1rvcyx | why do humans have sex (mostly) in missionary, when nearly all other animals do it doggy, even apes / chimps? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rvcyx/eli5_why_do_humans_have_sex_mostly_in_missionary/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdrc3zh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Throughout the evolution of human history, the vagina (well, to be perfectly accurate, the vulva) has moved forward. It seems as though face-to-face sex is likely to keep the father around longer and likely to have more sex with the female. Since human babies need a lot of support in order to develop through the first few years, keeping the dad around was a huge evolutionary advantage. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7nke3y | why do our teeth feel dirty after sleeping? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7nke3y/eli5_why_do_our_teeth_feel_dirty_after_sleeping/ | {
"a_id": [
"ds2hrk1"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"When you brush your teeth at night, your teeth are clean and smooth. When you sleep, your mouth isn't moving the saliva around your teeth like it does when you're asleep. Plaque accumulates naturally from your saliva. Because your mouth is mainly stagnant when sleeping, the plaque is just staying on the surface of the tooth and can feel slimy when you wake up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1xg5g7 | art thieves. for those who do it for the money and not the challenge, how do you get by the fact that everyone knows it's stolen? | I mean, if you are stealing art in today's world, people have to know it's stolen, especially famous items. How does someone fence something like that? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xg5g7/eli5_art_thieves_for_those_who_do_it_for_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfb0z8c"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I am going to guess a private collector hired the thief. Or they steal not so popular art. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3tklyy | how can companies like t-mobile offer streaming for certain products that doesn't count against your cap? isn't this prioritizing one company's data over another's? | How is this any different than Internet "fast lanes?" | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tklyy/eli5_how_can_companies_like_tmobile_offer/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx6xc6x"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"The short answer is yes. It's not quite as problematic as the old fast lane issue because TMobile does not have a steaming service they are trying to push, they aren't charging companies for the privilege of streaming their stuff without going against the cap and they're trying to add as many competing companies as possible to the service. There isn't the conflict of interest issue, but it still might be bad overall since larger, more established services are more likely to be added than smaller start ups which gives them an unfair advantage. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
10xqow | what things happened (not the actual weather) that caused hurricane katrina to be such a disaster. | I have seen a couple documentaries but they mostly focused on the plight of individual families. Can someone explain to me in an unbiased as possible way, what happened leading up to, during and after the physical hurricane that made this such a terrible event. Thanks!!
Edit: I'm more interested in what was going on with Ray Nagin, and FEMA and the Federal Government as a whole. Why people were left behind in such a manner, The Army Corps of Engineers role etc. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10xqow/eli5_what_things_happened_not_the_actual_weather/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6hjgjv",
"c6hk3nt"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"most of the city of New Orleans is below sea level...just think about that for a minute...it can not exist without a complex and expensive system of canals, levees and pumps. given that, and the fact that it had been about 75 years since the last major NOLA flood, it was probably inevitable that some kind of disaster was going to happen eventually. check out _URL_0_\n",
"Basically New Orleans and surrounding suburbs (Kenner, Metairie, etc.) are in the bottom of a bowl compared to surrounding areas (Thibodeaux, Mandeville, etc.) Because New Orleans has always had 'wonderful' pumping systems that fail in the middle of a 3pm shower, the water rose dangerously fast. Two parts of the levee broke due to lack of maintenance on the levee board's account (IMO) which caused the majority of the problems for the lower 9th ward and the lower income sections of New Orleans East (the parts the media mainly focused on, treating that as all of New Orleans).\n\n\nAlso Ray Nagin (Mayor of New Orleans) and Blanco (Governor of Louisiana) didn't do much to prepare its citizens for evacuation because everyone down to Bob Breck (NOLA weatherman known to always provide wrong information) was telling people it was going to Lake Charles and Baton Rouge, when it turned around 36-30 hours before landfall. I'd estimate at least 40% of the New Orleans population at that time didn't officially own a car so by that time, evacuating over 400k would be a nightmare.\n\n\nSource: I experienced Katrina."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/storm-that-drowned-city.html"
],
[]
] |
|
3szpa9 | if anonymous is just an idea, then what are these social media accounts and websites. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3szpa9/eli5_if_anonymous_is_just_an_idea_then_what_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx1tz3h"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Groups that loosely identify with the ideas behind anonymous and band together to act upon those ideas and/or people who like Guy Fawkes masks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
57il19 | what is "the stack"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57il19/eli5_what_is_the_stack/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8saq1b",
"d8sawy8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Gonna need the context. In ultimate frisbee, it's an offensive tactic where member of the attacking team forms a line to begin their cuts from. ",
"\"The stack\", without context, usually means the call stack. This is a region of memory where function arguments and local variables are stored during program execution.\n\nIt is called a stack because it acts like a stack - data is pushed on at the top, and then popped off again. Unlike data stored on the heap, previously allocated data can't be deallocated until all the data allocated since is deallocated. This is fine for storing data associated with function calls - a function does not return until all the functions it has called have returned. This simplicity makes stack based allocation extremely fast (just updating a couple of registers), and entirely automatic (the compiler can insert code for allocating and deallocating stack variables, even in a language without a garbage collector).\n\n\nWhen a function is to be called, first the function arguments are pushed onto the call stack, then the return address. Then control transfers to the function code. The first thing the function will do is allocate space on the stack for its local variables. When the function is finished, it will remove the local variables from the stack, and jump back to the call site via the stored return address. Depending on the calling convention in use, either the caller or the callee is responsible for removing function arguments from the stack.\n\n\nNot all languages do use a call stack for their implementation - some languages allocate local variables on the heap. The advantage of this is that the memory need not be deallocated when the function exits, which may be necessary in languages that support first-class continuations (since a function could return a continuation that allows control to transfer back to it at any time). The disadvantage is the increased cost associated with heap allocation, and the need for a garbage collector to deallocate unused data."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2ve8ih | why do votes recorded on electronic voting machines need to be counted separately? is it not possible to count the votes as they are cast? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ve8ih/eli5_why_do_votes_recorded_on_electronic_voting/ | {
"a_id": [
"cogujkh",
"cogusbp"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The votes can be counted as they are cast, however the ballots are also counted separately because the machines could be in error, could have a bug and miscounted, or were intentionally programmed to commit fraud.\n\nWithout paper votes that can be counted separately, you'd never know if the machine was accurate.",
"Because the of all the security that has to go in to the voting machine. Electronic voting is actually quite a bad idea when you think about all the ways it could be compromised.\n\n_URL_0_ \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI"
]
] |
||
zh710 | callouses | I get why they form... But I don't understand HOW. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zh710/eli5_callouses/ | {
"a_id": [
"c64mg4p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's like light scar tissue. A tool runs on you hand. But not enough to cause a blister. It doesn't mean the same actions that would cause a blister didn't happen. The small tears heal. But with repeated use more tears happen. More healing. More scaring thicker dead skin layer. Callous."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a0rpxf | if i have a large sum of money sitting in a checking account, then why would bankers from the same institution encourage me to invest the funds? doesn’t the bank make more money off of my funds if i’m completely hands off? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0rpxf/eli5_if_i_have_a_large_sum_of_money_sitting_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"eajx109",
"eajx5bs",
"eajy6kr",
"eajyqb2",
"eakaj8h"
],
"score": [
11,
5,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They do, but if you invest then you have the potential to be putting in even more money. They're looking at it long-term, you'd be putting in more money over time from investments rather than one lump sum. ",
"2 reasons.\n\n1, if your money reserves get larger so do they.\n\nThey only have on hand some small percent of the total debt they owe, so the minor fluctuation in your account is meaningless unless you have a lot of money.\n\n2. \n\nThey are trying to get people in the door, expending the minor effort to get you into investing is worth looking like they care about their customers and makes them more attractive as a bank.",
"Bankers are more like salespeople than fiduciaries.\n\nIt starts out as encouragement to \"invest\". But it quickly becomes \"perhaps you'd be interested in one of these high-performing mutual funds?\" Those funds have MERs, some of which pay for marketing and sales. Care to guess who the selling agent is in this case?",
"Banks make money by taking money from depositors and lending to borrowers and/or investing funds in the money markets. The way they do that is by charging borrowers more than they pay to depositors. They also have to maintain something called liquidity which means that they need to be able to pay out money to depositors when they ask. \n\nDifferent types of bank account allow depositors to access their cash over different periods of time- a current account allows instant access while bonds can be for a fixed term in years. Bonds generally attract a higher rate of interest, encouraging investors to invest longer term. Banks can pay a higher rate of interest on longer term investments because they can invest the funds longer term themselves, knowing that they won’t have to pay out the cash in the long term bond for a while.\n\nWhen Banks get this short/long term balancing act wrong and can’t meet changing needs of their depositors to access cash, then this is where depositors lose confidence and cause a ‘run on the bank’- a vicious circle where depositors can’t get their cash out because everyone wants to do the same and the bank doesn’t have sufficient liquid funds to pay everybody out at the same time.\n\nTLDR: Banks encourage long term investment so that they can always pay depositors back and stay in business.",
"Fee’s and Liability. \n\nChecking accounts represent liabilities to the bank since they “owe” you the money in your account, if they invest it and lose it then they are on the hook. \n\nBy putting that money into an investment. They no longer owe you the money, they owe you the investment. If the investment goes down in value they arn’t liable. Thereby putting the risk back on you, while collecting fee’s. See below.\n\nChecking accounts generally have tiny fees and they r usually waived if you have enough capital in the account. Investments managed by the bank are either 1. Purchased on commission or 2. Pay a ongoing fee to be managed. \n\nBoth are more lucrative for the bank then checking account fees, generally."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
11e0lx | if reddit was against sopa and other censoring freedom of speech on the internet, why are many subreddits pushing to ban others? | It's literally all in the title. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11e0lx/eli5if_reddit_was_against_sopa_and_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6lmqkg",
"c6lmt0a",
"c6lqyb5"
],
"score": [
15,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because Reddit is not one person. \n\nBecause a private operation like Reddit imposing content restrictions on itself is far different from government imposed censorship that applies to everyone. ",
"To the extent that \"Reddit\" can be described as having a consensus of opinion — it can't, but we'll go with it anyway — it opposes regulation because Reddit is *extremely* opposed to property rights and *extremely* in favor of theft. Regulation of Internet traffic makes it possible for governments to enforce property laws and prosecute theft crimes, so Reddit — again, in a barely-meaningful generalization — opposes that.\n\nBut when it comes to matters of common decency, Reddit in general tends to be more reasonable. There are plenty of exceptions, of course, but the vocal consensus is not nearly so opposed to basic norms of moral and ethical behavior.",
"There is a fundamental and important difference between government censorship, and private citizen/private enterprise censorship.\n\nIf you, as private citizen on your private (that is: non-governmental) subreddit decided you do not want certain kinds of content in your subreddit that is not censorship; that is you exercising your prerogative in controlling the kinds content available in those spaces/forums where you have control. No one is obligated to use/read/post in your subreddit, and if they do not like the rules you've put in place they are free to go elsewhere and start their own subreddit with rules they like.\n\nWhen the government censors something, there is no appeal; you can't just go start your own government with rules that you like more, and in the context of governments \"going elsewhere\" means moving to a new country, which isn't exactly feasible for the vast majority of the population. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
37q6rd | why would anyone choose a revolver over a pistol, given the substantial reload time? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37q6rd/eli5_why_would_anyone_choose_a_revolver_over_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"crov9d4",
"crovf3b",
"crovgl0",
"crowj2d",
"croy0n9",
"croy7j8",
"croyud3",
"crozmoq"
],
"score": [
4,
15,
3,
2,
25,
4,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"revolvers don't jam the same way semi-automatic pistols do. They can if used incorrectly or are not properly cleaned though...",
"Revolvers are less prone to jamming and failure when compared to a semi-auto handgun. \n\nMy primary home defense weapon is a .38 revolver. All I need to do is pick it up and pull the trigger .. no need to see if a round is chambered, or chamber a round .. just point and squeeze. And I like to believe that 5 shots is enough to take an intruder down. ",
"They're dead simple to use and reliable. There's value in that for home protection, when you're not used to people breaking in your house, it's not every day you shoot people, and you're panicked.",
"You can also use speed loaders, speed strips, or with the right kind of revolver (or modifications) moon or half moon clips. \n\nI own two .357 revolvers. A six shot Ruger GP100 and a little 5 shot SP101. It would also be hard for a semi auto to match my .454.\n\nRevolvers can jam though, catastrophically if the bullet jumps crimp and comes out of the casing enough to wedge the cylinder. You're not going to be working the slide to clear the jam there, it's tool time. ",
"Because there are still a great deal of myths about the capabilities of revolvers. People still believe that they are somehow easier to shoot and handle and there are a great deal of stories about over inflated reliability. They are still ok for pocket guns or a back up gun but the reality is that they are in fact obsolete compared to modern semi auto guns. Problem is that there is a plethora of myths about the draw backs of those as well. People often make the argument that the revolver is easier to use for newer gun owners or women which could not be more wrong. Also you will often here revolver guys say things like \" if I need more than 5 rounds Im screwed anyway\" which is absolute nonsense as there are numerous cases of individuals taking more than 5 rounds and continuing to fight and also multiple opponenets. Essentially, the vast majority of people who choose revolvers because they believe myths and/or have never actually tried to run that gun hard. Modern pistols are superior to revolvers in every practical aspect. ",
"The reliability versus a semi-auto pistol is definitely the main reason. However, another one that I haven't seen mentioned so far is that you can buy a double/single action revolver which allows you to just pull the trigger over and over for close encounters but also allows you to cock the gun manually for single action. This essentially gives you a hair trigger that is largely superior to most semi-auto pistol triggers. This allows you to place your shots more easily if there's some distance between you and the offender.",
"There is so much terrible gun advice on the internet.. So let me add to it!\nEveryone has their own opinion on the matter, and one persons experience or perception of a type of gun isn't invalid based on some other persons made-up criteria.\nHaving been in the nuclear weapons security field and a weapons instructor for the navy, I've had a lot of people ask me advice on if they should or shouldn't buy \"Gun A\" or \"Gun B.\" I ask the same three questions every time.\n* How does it feel when you hold it?\n* Have you shot it yet?\n* Have you priced it compared to similar guns?\nThe reality is people buy the gun that they think is the most \"bad-ass.\" More often than not for 18-30 yr old males, it's which ever gun was their favorite from the stupid video game they were playing.\n",
"The people that use revolvers are typically using them for concealed carry, where the odds of firing more than 3 shots are next to zero. If you're in gunfight and you actually perform a reload, you'll be famous. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cthtyg | how bad is the rain forest fire that's been going on for weeks now? how irreversible us the damage? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cthtyg/eli5_how_bad_is_the_rain_forest_fire_thats_been/ | {
"a_id": [
"exkuch8",
"exl5hwk"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, the nice thing is that forest fires are a part of nature. They happen, they happen often and within 5-10 years after the fire most of the damage is repaired.\n\nThe problems happen when these fires get so intense that they damage and kill the larger trees. So while these fires are part of the natural cycle, if they are enhanced by lots of dead plant matter on the ground, increased temperatures, drought or other external factors, it can be a real problem.\n\nThe scope of the damage won't be known until the fires are essentially done, but this is a record event that we haven't seen in the last 100 years. Now that is a relatively small time period, but still enough for concern.",
"I came here to post this too. Like I get that this is a big issue right now, but I've yet to see an explanation for why that doesn't just seem like hype. Scientifically, what lasting damage can be expected from these fires? I keep seeing the stat that the Amazon supplies 20% of the Earth's oxygen. Okay, but surely enough of the forest would grow back quick enough to not largely change that (someone with an ecology background, please correct me).\n\nI can understand the perspective of wildlife preservation - is an event like this scientifically likely to wipe out species?\n\nI'm not saying it's not a big deal, and I definitely think the intentional fire starting for farming should be addressed. I just have yet to see a real explanation for why this is a big deal beyond social media hype."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2vsnl4 | why would an artist want to start their own record label? | Why do some artists leave a well established label and try to start their own? What advantages does it give them as for production? How difficult is it to find distribution avenues? Do labels stifle creative expression that would be undesirable to some?
Curious since a well known artist left a major label. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vsnl4/eli5_why_would_an_artist_want_to_start_their_own/ | {
"a_id": [
"cokkf6q",
"cokl06f",
"cokl0j4",
"cokm9f5"
],
"score": [
11,
7,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"For the same reason the guy who makes $100k a year leaves hisbjob to start his own business. People like to work for themselves, not for others.",
"The business aspects of it I'll leave to other people to answer, but this question:\n\n > Do labels stifle creative expression that would be undesirable to some?\n\nThe answer is yes, this happens all the time. Labels have refused to release whole albums of material if they thought it wouldn't be successful. ",
"You get a larger cut of the profits if you control the distribution of your product. You're cutting out the middle man.",
"A lot of artists make art because they love art not because they love money. However the record labels typically (there are exceptions of course) buy this art because they love money and sign away the artists freedom by making them sign a contract essentially shuffling their talent down a path of profit. They hire producers to rearrange songs to make it more radio friendly or specifically build songs to get stuck in peoples heads. This where the term \"sell out\" comes from where the artist chooses money over creativity (once again exceptions to this). When you sign a record label you no longer make money directly from record sales or mechandise but a set rate from the label. Its guaranteed income but your music is technically not yours. \n\nWhen an artist starts their own label its normally about controlling and owning there own work. Its also a statement that they care more about their creative control then the money and gives their fans a sense authenticity. Depending on the band though this sometimes works in their favor and sometimes doesn't depending on the talent of the band as well as their goals. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4a9wbl | why do actors alter their credited name slightly between films, often long after they are an established name? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a9wbl/eli5_why_do_actors_alter_their_credited_name/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0ykskd",
"d0yku58"
],
"score": [
5,
12
],
"text": [
"This almost never happens. Can you give an example?",
"If an actor wants to join an actor's union (which is basically a requirement if they want to work in Hollywood) they can't use the same name as someone who is already in the union. \n\nSometimes actors will use a different name on a film in order to avoid certain union rules governing their participation in those films including minimum pay and other union required accommodations. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6qlbh9 | why aren't things in orbit constantly accelerating? | Objects in orbit are constantly in free fall correct? So shouldn't they be accelerating from gravity, I know that gravity's effect greatly lessens as you get further from the surface, but still it's a force that should be accelerating, so why isn't the moon and the ISS constantly orbiting faster and faster? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qlbh9/eli5_why_arent_things_in_orbit_constantly/ | {
"a_id": [
"dky4ben",
"dky4bwf",
"dky4co9",
"dky4cxs",
"dkyhand"
],
"score": [
52,
2,
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They are constantly accelerating. But it's important to know that, in physics, \"accelerating\" doesn't mean \"getting faster\". Rather, it means \"changing velocity\". And velocity is a vector, meaning that it has both a direction and a magnitude. \n\nWe tend to think of the magnitude portion of velocity as the \"speed\" of the object, and acceleration as increasing that speed. But changing the *direction* of the velocity vector is also acceleration. So the acceleration of objects in orbit manifests as the constantly changing direction of their velocities.",
"They *are* constantly accelerating. But they are moving so fast to the side, that the force of acceleration is perpendicular to their current movement. So instead of making them go faster, it makes them turn -- which is why they don't zoom away from the planet.",
"They are accelerating, that's what keeps them in a circle!\n\nAcceleration doesn't necessarily change speed as you normally think, it changes velocity. In the case of orbits that means it pulls the direction of motion slightly closer to the planet, the net result is that the object continues in a circle around the planet.\n\nNow if you start out far away and slow, you'll fall towards the planet picking up speed, if you miss the planet the gravity will keep changing your direction and you'll pass on the backside of the planet going very quickly, then get flung out decelerating as you go until you reach your original speed and distance and the process starts over, this is how an elliptical orbit works.\n\nIf you want to learn more about this, pick up KSP and blow up some Kerbins, they don't mind!",
"They are accelerating. If you move in a circle, you're accelerating, even if you move at the same speed the whole time. Acceleration is the change in *velocity*, and velocity has a direction. When you're moving in a circle, you're always changing direction, thus always changing velocity, and accelerating.",
"The answers here are all correct, I feel like it can be made a little bit more intuitive though:\n\nImagine you're shooting a cannonball from a hill. This ball will curve downwards due to gravity and eventuall hit the ground. However what happens if you shoot the cannonball with so much speed, that the earth essentially curves away under the ball (since it's a sphere) just as the ball is curving down towards the ground? Ignoring friction from the air you would have a ball that will always curve towards the ground but the ground curves away from the ball at the same time - > the Ball is in an orbit around earth.\n\nThat's essentially what happens to all the orbits. So the objects are always accelerating towards earth but they are so fast that the earth curves away under them.\n\nEDIT:\nno idea what got me the downvote as this is essentially what happens. The acceleration always goes towards the center of the sphere and bends your velocity vector at just the same rate that the curvature of the earth changes below you. (for circular orbits)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
21w6de | doppler effect and radar guns that cops use | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21w6de/eli5doppler_effect_and_radar_guns_that_cops_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgh79gz"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The gun sends out a wave of particles and then times how long it takes to get back.\n\nBased on the difference in times between two pulses, you can determine the distance traveled. \n\nIf you know the amount of time between pulses, you also know the amount of time it took to travel that distance.\n\nSince since Rate = distance/time all you have to do is divide the change in distance to the radar by the amount of time between pulses and you get the rate of the vehicle."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
41dbrn | what factors can cause a medication to produce fatally adverse reactions in humans during phase 1 drug trail, but pass animal testing with no problems? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41dbrn/eli5_what_factors_can_cause_a_medication_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cz1gpe5"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Different animals can be affected by chemicals in different ways. Breaking down chemicals requires *really* complex series of chemical reactions and not all animals use the same enzymes, pathways, etc so even if the drug isn't immediately toxic the byproducts of the drug as the body breaks it down can *also* be toxic.\n\nYou have probably heard that dogs can't eat chocolate. Theobromine is a chemical in chocolate, related to caffeine, and it's fine for humans (a mild stimulant) but toxic to dogs. In this specific case, they do not break it down as quickly as humans (plus dogs will eat *a lot* if you let them) so they end up with big doses in their body that doesn't get filtered and broken down, and then it kills them with arrhythmia, seizures, and heart attacks (because it's a stimulant!)\n\nFor every different chemical there will be a different process for breaking it down, how quickly it can be broken down, and different ways it can interact with organs and cells. \n\nFor the opposite effect, catnip has a large effect on cats but virtually none in humans."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5ko0q9 | why is cold water so effective at getting rid of suds? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ko0q9/eli5_why_is_cold_water_so_effective_at_getting/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbpdl19"
],
"score": [
22
],
"text": [
"Suds, or bubbles, in water are a result of decreased surface tension.\n\nAs the Surface Tension increases, the Surface Area is caused to decrease. Bubbles on the surface are a surfeit of surface area, compared to the flat surface of your non-soapy filled sink, so they exist at a much reduced tension.\n\nIt turns out, as water heats up, it's surface tension goes down. If you floated the largest sewing needle you could, on top of water in a pot, and heated it, it would fall in before the water boils. You could use a thermometer and over several attempts, the temperature when it falls in should be pretty close to the same every time.\n\nConversely, the cold water has higher surface tension and is better at pulling back the bubbles. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1pc7d9 | why do apps in the apple app store have 5 star ratings, but when i scroll down and look at the reviews, they're all angry customers who left one star? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pc7d9/eli5_why_do_apps_in_the_apple_app_store_have_5/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd0vkpc",
"cd0vrso"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because people who like the app just click the 5 stars. People who are pissed enough to click one star are probably going to also write up a diatribe.",
"Apple has not revealed how the star rating is calculated. Any answer is speculation. However it is known that some developers game the system with fake downloads and ratings, which apple does not seem to combat effectively yet. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
e7igok | why do movies/series always fake phone screens? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e7igok/eli5_why_do_moviesseries_always_fake_phone_screens/ | {
"a_id": [
"fa00dli"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The refresh on the phone isn't synced with anything and the persistence isn't very good. If they didn't fake them, you'd see all sorts of moire effects, that changed as the camera zoomed. It would be horrible. Like all things that look bad, they get replaced in post-production."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3zi68b | how does political instability in the middle east affect oil prices? | I see a lot of news sites mention that the instability in Syria and rising tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia affect the price of oil. Could someone explain this? More specifically, I read that tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia would lead to an increase in the price of oil.
Edit: If someone could specifically explain how current tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia would lead to an increase in the price of oil, it would be great. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zi68b/eli5_how_does_political_instability_in_the_middle/ | {
"a_id": [
"cymddxs"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"A lot of oil comes from the Middle East. Political instability might lead to chaos on the ground, that could result in less of it being produced in the future.\n\nYou're probably familiar with the idea that prices are determined by supply and demand. If just as many people want something, and there's suddenly less of it, the price will rise.\n\nOK, so how does this cause the price of oil to rise *before* there's actually chaos on the ground causing less of it to be produced? The way this works in practice is pretty complicated, and is largely controlled by [futures markets](_URL_0_), but, basically, if I think oil will be worth $60 a barrel in a month, why would I sell it to you for $35 a barrel today? I'd make way more money just holding onto it for a month and selling it then.\n\nSo, if you want to buy my oil today, you're going to have to give me more than $35 to get me to part with it — the price rises as soon as there's a reason to *think* it might be in shorter supply in the future."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futures_exchange"
]
] |
|
2oqmam | how is cgi put into non-digitally filmed movies? | My theory is that the film is digitally processes after filming, then CGI is added. But the question that arises there is, how does it get back on analog film again? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oqmam/eli5_how_is_cgi_put_into_nondigitally_filmed/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmplafy",
"cmpxwq9"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"They use a device called a [Film Recorder](_URL_0_) - modern film recorders simply expose a frame of film to a brightly backlit high res LCD screen, but previous generations would scan the picture onto the film with lasers",
"I am not sure if you are asking how they take Analog film, transfer it to a digital format and then add CGI or not?\n\n\nI may not be able to explain how they transfer analog film to a digital format, but I can explain how they add or super-impose CGI into film.\n\n\nMost movie studios use a compositing program such as [Nuke](_URL_0_) to impose 3d models or visual effects that have been created using other programs such as [Maya](_URL_1_) or [3ds Max](_URL_3_).\n\n\nNuke is a software best described as photoshop for video. Except it's workflow is a little different. It uses nodes to make adjustments to the film and overlay CGI. It can also layer videos in a 3D space like [Here](_URL_2_).\n\n\nHope that helps answer your question somewhat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_recorder"
],
[
"http://www.thefoundrynuke.com/",
"http://www.autodesk.com/products/maya/overview",
"http://www.btlnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/LR-The-Foundry-Nuke-7-10.jpg",
"http://www.autodesk.com/products/3ds-max/overview"
]
] |
|
1qq6fw | price fixing | Pertaining specifically to Nestle's price fixing of chocolate in 2008 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qq6fw/eli5_price_fixing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdfbocm"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Essentially, it is when competing companies agree to keep their prices higher than would otherwise be logical, in order to make more money, which is illegal. \nUsually, for every competing market, there is a price that everyone makes the most money to sell at, because their profit equation ([Sale price - cost]*number sold) is maximized. However, if anyone actually tried to sell at that number, some competitor would just have their product be slightly cheaper, totally selling out while the company trying to sell at the profit maximizing price would sell nothing and lose money. This means that everyone has to sell at a certain much lower point to avoid being undercut. However, if all the companies get together and agree to not undercut each other, they easily get around that issue. \nCollaborating in such a manner is called price fixing and is highly illegal. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
bz1kkz | why do lips get chapped in cold weather compared to hot? doesn’t the hot air absorb the moisture more? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bz1kkz/eli5_why_do_lips_get_chapped_in_cold_weather/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqoxitg",
"eqpm8t7",
"eqprgf5",
"eqpsotb",
"eqr24kb"
],
"score": [
163,
10,
6,
35,
2
],
"text": [
"Hot air does make moisture move more, but that also includes nearby water sources, making the air more humid. \n\nThe higher water content of the warm air doesn't suck from your lips as much as the very dry cold air. \n\nPlus, when it's warmer, you're sweating more, applying moisture more directly.",
"Air is like a sponge when it comes to holding water. Hot air is like a sponge that isn't being squeezed it can hold a lot of water, and if it's dry it will steal water from it's surroundings. Cold air is like a sponge that is being squeezed it can't hold a lot of water. Your heater takes the dry cold air from outside and heats it up (releasing grip on the sponge) this blows dry hot air at your face and takes all of the water from your body.",
"Nah, you dehydrate quicker in the cold. It’s usually drier than the heat, deserts being the exception of course, and also, the base point for “cold” is much farther from your body’s core and surface temperatures than the base point for “hot”, so your body is gonna use up a lot f water maintaining homeostasis. Think about it. What’s “hot”? 90, 100 F? Your core temp is 96, your surface temp is, maybe 80 to 85 F. Meanwhile, cold is 50 or so, even 60, the difference between the latter temperatures and your body’s temp is much larger than the difference between the former and your body’s temp. So you expend more resources maintaining. \n\nAlso, chapped lips are not solely a function of dehydration. Wind damage, and cell damage due to the actual cold factor in as well. Not to mention you end up licking them in the cold, effectively creating an evaporating layer that takes some moisture with it each time it evaporates.",
"Everybody who moves to Arizona (and other desert climates) ends up with chapped lips until your body gets used to it. Most people start off using chapstick, and you can do that indefinitely, but if you stop, your lips will be really chapped for about a week, and then they'll just adapt and you won't have to use chapstick any more.\n\nA lot of people end up with bloody noses as well, due to the lack of humidity. Thankfully you adapt.",
" > Doesn’t the hot air absorb the moisture more?\n\nYes, that's why hot air *contains* more moisture."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
38zgcb | butt smacking in sports. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38zgcb/eli5butt_smacking_in_sports/ | {
"a_id": [
"crz4hk7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In baseball, it's easier to smack someone's butt than pat them on the back. The smacking motion is way easier to do under handed than an overhand pat on the back. Plus, when they get excited, I'd imagine a vigirious smack on the butt is a bit more tolerable than an aggressive pat on the back. Usually it only happens after an exciting play.\n\nIt's just part of the game."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
88e069 | how does my phone number show up on a stranger’s call log even though i never called that person? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/88e069/eli5_how_does_my_phone_number_show_up_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwjvr82"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"This literally is still happening to my husband but he's recieving so many calls and texts that his phone can't function right now. It's been since this morning around 10, and it's 5pm now. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
22gx0w | how do child actors/actresses play roles in films and tv shows meant for mature audiences such as "game of thrones?" | I understand how they could be separated from the filming of sexual scenes and what not, but what about when they are a part of said scenes, or when their lines are composed of cussing and other mature aspects? Are they allowed to see the films they play roles in? I've never come to understand how children are exposed to things such as this. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22gx0w/eli5_how_do_child_actorsactresses_play_roles_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgmp082",
"cgmp2pl",
"cgmpf5m"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Depends on the rules in the country, but in the US, child labor/acting laws are pretty restrictive.\n\nThey have permission from their parents, they know they're acting, and they're well guarded from any potential abuse. If the parents are OK with it, and the kids are OK with it and no other laws are being broken, then everyone's happy. \n\nNot sure what else to say.",
"A lot of it is editing. Yea they do have to say their lines. That being said cursing is bad because of context not just because of the words used. It is up to their parents if they allow them to watch it or not. ",
"a rating system is a suggestion, not a law. the kids can cuss and flip there shit all they want as long as the parent permits it.more so they dont need to know what they're talking about, they just need to act like they do. as far as children witnessing a sex scene, im not sure. it is acted and id assume as long as there not involved in it, its fine. it becomes more like \"a kid walking in on the parents\".\n\n\nlegally a parent has no obligation to enforce any rule on what a child watches beyond porn.nudity is not _URL_0_ far as them being \"exposed\" its not a big deal. its not what a child watches that matters, its how they learn to interpret it.some parents do the \"cant watch your own movie/show\" others don't(cant find the link for this,sorry).\n\n\na childs actions are dependent upon its environment.the reason theres a tendency for kids to \"act out\" what they see is because the TV,games and movies are what parents use to avoid dealing with there kid.more learning is done at school then at home and its the kids learning from other kids.teachers teach the subject on board, not the one on there minds.\n\nif there were actual people spending time learning there child, problems with what they see and do would be minimal but its like the saying goes \"it takes a village to raise a child\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"porn.as"
]
] |
|
cqsxlm | what does inflammation have to do with a diabetics pancreas? | I was readying about a trial on CBD oil on diabetic mice and it mentions that it reduced pancreatic inflammation. But I am not sure how this is helpful to a type one diabetic. I don’t understand what inflammation has to do with diabetes. I was under the assumption the pancreas just doesn’t work but I believe I may be wrong.
Attached it’s the article I was reading.
_URL_0_ | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cqsxlm/eli5_what_does_inflammation_have_to_do_with_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ewz7erd"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Type 1 Diabetes is an autoimmune disease. i.e, the immune cells of the body like lymphocytes starts attacking the insulin producing beta cells of the pancreas. As more and more beta cells are destroyed, there will be reduced production of the insulin and ultimately the pancreas cannot produce anymore insulin. That is why Type 1 diabetic patients depend exclusively on external insulin injections and cannot be treated with other hypoglycemic tablets.\n\nThe key here is the lymphocytic infiltration of the pancreatic beta cells. An inflammation is nothing but an infiltration by the immune cells of the body here."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/27767974/"
] | [
[]
] |
|
1oc7nd | ruth's chris steakhouse. what is a chris steak? why is it ruth's and not ruth chris' steakhouse? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oc7nd/eli5_ruths_chris_steakhouse_what_is_a_chris_steak/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccqnzbh",
"ccqpfr1"
],
"score": [
10,
6
],
"text": [
"The original Chris Steak House (1927–1965):\n\nChris Steak House was founded on February 27, 1927 by New Orleans entrepreneur Chris Matulich. It was located at 11 Broad Street near the New Orleans Fairgrounds Racetrack, seated 60 people, and had no parking lot. During Matulich's 38-year management, the business was sold six times, failing each time, and enabling him to buy the restaurant back cheaply from the purchasers.\n\nOwnership by Ruth Fertel, 1965–1999:\n\nRuth Fertel (February 5, 1927 - April 16, 2002)\nMain article: Ruth Fertel\nAcquisition, 1965\nIn 1965, divorced single mother Ruth Fertel, realizing she needed to earn more money to send her teenage sons to college, mortgaged her house to purchase the restaurant, ignoring the advice of her banker, lawyer, and friends, and despite knowing nothing about the restaurant business. She initially planned to raise just $18,000 to cover the purchase price, until it was pointed out to her that she would need an additional $4,000 to cover the cost of renovations and food. On her first day, May 24, 1965, she sold 35 steaks at $5 each. Fertel personally took a hand in every part of the business. She had to teach herself how to butcher steak, and despite being just five-foot-two and 110-pounds, would saw up 30-pound short loins by hand until she could afford an electric band saw. She staffed her restaurant with single mothers, saying that they were hard workers and reliable. For many years, Chris' Steak House was the only upscale restaurant in New Orleans with an all-female wait staff.\nFrom the beginning her restaurant attracted local politicians as well as athletes, businessmen and reporters. Political reporter Rosemary James noted that she \"would not have missed a Friday before a major election at Ruth's Chris Steak House. That was the place to be if you wanted to get some scoops.\" Local celebrities like Fats Domino were regulars.\n\nName change to Ruth's Chris Steak House, 1976:\n\nIn early 1976, shortly after signing a new ten-year lease on the restaurant, a fire destroyed the building. Fertel had recently acquired a second property nearby to rent out as party space. Within seven days, she had relocated the restaurant to its new location a few blocks away at 711 Broad Street and re-opened it, expanding to 160 seats in the process. The sales agreement with Matulich prevented her from using the original name at any other address, so she named the new restaurant Ruth's Chris Steak House in order to keep some continuity with the previous location. She admitted later to Fortune Magazine that \"I've always hated the name, but we've always managed to work around it.\"\n\nTL;DR: Ruth Fertel bought the original \"Chris Steak House\" from Chris Matulich. Ruth was forced to rename the popular restaurant when moving locations due to a contract obligation that prevented her from keeping the name at any other site.\n\nDirectly from wikipedia: _URL_0_\n\nEdit: Summarized the important parts of the wikipedia page for the extra lazy",
"This sub has basically become Google for people who want to do more work than type their question on a search engine even though it could be found in seconds."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth's_Chris_Steak_House"
],
[]
] |
||
386aw0 | why do we have toll booths when driving through states and such? is it just an easy way for them to get tax money? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/386aw0/eli5why_do_we_have_toll_booths_when_driving/ | {
"a_id": [
"crsn7ml",
"crsnb51",
"crstaxg"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Toll roads are highways that pay for themselves. They're often used by drive-through states (like Kansas) that have people from other states use their highways but not spend money in their state to generate revenue to keep the highways cared for. ",
"Basically, you hit the nail on the head.\n\nTypically, toll booths are built and used to help pay for the initial construction of the road, by charging only those who use the road. Typically, they are built and used on very highly profitable stretches of road that connect 2 highly sought destinations where other roads would take 2-5x the driving to go around.\n\nPerfect examples are the West Virginia Turnpike and Jersey Turnpike. They provide a quick, and effective route to your destination, and in turn, you pay for the convenience of entering the roadway and using it.\n\nIn turn, they can turn around and keep the roads in good condition. The West Virginia Turnpike through the Appalachian's was one of the best roads ive ever driven. Highly illuminated, well paved, and no potholes in sight.",
"It is as you guessed. They pay for their roads that way. \n\nOpposed to toll booths we have a so called Tax Sticker which you need to buy to be eligible to use the highways. I couldn't say which system is better but surely toll booths are a safer way to make sure you get your money as you need to actually be caught without a sticker while on a highway to be fined. \n\nOTOH a sticker is way more convenient for the drivers."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3tfbdj | why do some people use comma (,) instead of dot/period (.) when writing decimals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3tfbdj/eli5_why_do_some_people_use_comma_instead_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cx5mm4z",
"cx5mq54",
"cx5mwyp",
"cx5n8jk",
"cx5oexy",
"cx5ozd5",
"cx5qpii",
"cx5qxiz",
"cx5r98q",
"cx5re5g",
"cx5rv0a",
"cx5sgrt",
"cx5vyj7",
"cx5w8bv",
"cx5w9m7",
"cx5wh3s",
"cx5yrzd",
"cx60pia",
"cx63hcj",
"cx63xkh",
"cx644bv",
"cx644uu",
"cx64kkv",
"cx6577d"
],
"score": [
19,
121,
18,
688,
81,
2,
26,
2,
45,
3,
2,
6,
2,
5,
7,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I would say different schools. When i was i school in soviet russia we use comma. When i move across atlantic i saw everyone was using dot like in calculators and use comma in big numbers for example 1,000,000.00. Plus i also think it has something to with the way money value being represented.",
"The decimal marker depends on the language (or country) here in France we use a comma. (Some software recognize that, i remember Office changing my dot for commas). I don't know the reasons for this difference but 20,7 is something that exists.",
"Most western countries use a comma, but in the english language, for some reason, the standard is to use points.",
"Historical reasons\n\n > In France, the full stop was already in use in printing to make Roman numerals more readable, so the comma was chosen.Many other countries, such as Italy, also chose to use the comma to mark the decimal units position. It has been made standard by the ISO for international blueprints. However, English-speaking countries took the comma to separate sequences of three digits.\n\nFrom [wikipedia](_URL_0_)",
"In the United States, decimals are notated with periods (for example, 1.23), whereas most of Europe uses decimal commas (1,23). That is just one instance in which style rules in the United States clash with those in Europe.",
"Question for those of you in countries that use a comma before starting decimals: How do you list numbers?\n\nIf I wanted to list the numbers 2 3 5 and 7, then I'd write 2, 3, 5, and 7. Do you write 2.3.5. and 7? \n\nOtherwise, doesn't the list 2,3, 5, and 7 get somewhat confusing? How do you know whether I listed 2.3, 5, and 7 vs. 2, 3, 5, and 7.",
"For those in countries that use the comma, how do you say it verbally? \"3 point one four\" \"3 comma one four?\" \nAnd am I understanding that there isn't much of a standard for separating big numbers? 1,000,000.00 Just using extra spaces or the non-standard, apparently incorrect way of using a dot as others would use a comma? 1 000 000,00 or 1.000.000,00 ?",
"In denmark , = . and . = ,\n\nIt is very confusing so we say four thousand : 4.000 and four point 20 is 4,20.\n\nI even had to look it up to be 100% sure that i got it the right way, and I am still not even sure.",
"In the Middle ages they used a bar over the last digit that isn't part of the fractal:\n\n _\n 9995 would today be 99.95\n\nI think (not sure) that they were the first to stop using a system that is comparable to the [roman numerals](_URL_0_) you see on clocks. \n\nThis did transition into a vertical bar like this:\n\n 99|95\n\nwhich is pretty close to 99,95 from the way you would handwrite it.\n\nThe change to the comma or the point/dot was made when they startet to print books, because there already was a comma and dot. This way they needed to create less different characters.\n\nIn France they already used the dot to make big numbers more readable, so they had to use the comma as decimal mark.\n\nIn Britain 99·95 was common, so they kept the dot an moved it a bit down.",
"It definitely seems to be an Anglo vs non-Anglo thing, with a few exceptions. Most former British colonies use the ,. format, most Europe/South America/non-Anglo Africa use the ., format.\n\n_URL_1_\n\nApparently it was due to the symbol used for multiplication. Europe used the '.' symbol to denote multiplication while in England it was already the 'x' symbol. \n\n_URL_0_\n",
"Friend all over the Mexican republic i talk with agreed that we arent thought to use commas for numbers.\n\nwe use dots for decimals, but the people that use commas for separating groups of 3 digits usually learnt them from curiosity or because it looked stylish or neat",
"I'm from England. For the number two thousand, eight hundred and twenty five, point five, I would write 2,825.5. My friend from Brazil said that the convention there would be to write 2.835,5. So it might just vary by country. \n\nAlso, here for money we have pounds and pennies. There are one hundred pennies in a pound. If something is two pounds and fifty pence, we would write £2.50. But in parts of Europe that use the Euro, I see them use a comma. So something that is Two euros, fifty cents would be written €2,50, although I think the euro sign usually goes after the numbers.",
"The dot is just to make the number more readable. Meanwhile, the comma is to show a more specific number, so instead of just 20, you'd say 20,7. It irritates me too.",
"As an Engineering student in Canada dots are used as a substitute for a multiplication sign. Therefore making it a great confusion when multiplying any decimals. Keep in mind the dot is not in the spot of a period. It looks like this 4•3=12",
"The decimal makes more sense to use. It's how we use it with letters. Periods are used to end a sentence. It should be used to end the sequence of numbers too. A comma is, some times, used to break up a bunch of letters so a comma should be used to break up a bunch of numbers.\n\nNow we just have to get the US on board with the removing the imperial system of measurement. ",
"In OpenOffice Calc you can actually style cells by locale. Mine is set to act Australian as the correct formatting for all my information. Despite being a livelong user of commas (Finland), I now occasionally use dots, because of habits picked up from programming. For example CSV-files (Comma-Separated Values) are much easier to work with using dot decimals as all the programs default to dots as decimals and commas as value separators.\n\nI still think commas are way superior as they make it so much easier to differentiate between dates and numbers. ",
"In engineering we use a dot as a substitute for multiplication, so you inevitably use a comma for decimals. ",
"For me the period for decimal makes more sense because it's a stop, and whatever follows is a fraction. A comma is continuation, so it makes more sense to represent thousands with a comma. But whatever someone grew up with will be the one that makes the most sense, I'm a little biased.",
"It's mainly regional. If you're from somewhere people use dots, stop using commas, you look silly. If you're from somewhere people use commas, carry on.",
"I always thought this was an anglophone thing? Dots if English speaking comma if other.",
"In German we actually say \"drei **komma** eins vier eins fünf...\", instead of \"three **point** one four one five...\". ",
"There was a compounding pharmacy down in Florida I believe who mistook a European equine vitamin recipe for an American recipe. Thus gave the poor horses something like 10000x the dose they should have because of this miscommunication.",
"My question is if you use commas how do you write the number 100,000.001?\n\nIs it 100,000,001? that doesn't make sense. is it: 100.000,001?",
"In the Swedish language we always use a comma instead of a dot. We even say comma. Like when an american person says 20 point 7 we say 20 comma 7."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_mark#History"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals"
],
[
"http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/wp-content/uploads/v31n2p042-043.pdf",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_mark#/media/File:DecimalSeparator.svg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
amva6y | why does mic feedback always present itself as high pitched ringing? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/amva6y/eli5_why_does_mic_feedback_always_present_itself/ | {
"a_id": [
"efotd70"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Audio Engineer here:\n\n & #x200B;\n\nIt doesn't always. Sometimes it's low end frequencies feeding back from a subwoofer into a mic stand or similar.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThe reason that *most of the time* it's high pitched is because:\n\n* The speakers are better at reproducing high pitches\n* The mics are better at picking up high pitches\n* High pitched sound waves don't need as munch energy to get from point A to point B as lower frequencies do, so they don't die out as fast as lower frequencies.\n\nWhen I tune a sound system to prevent feedback, there are usually at least 3 or 4 frequencies I have to filter and they are pretty well spread across the audio spectrum. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2wk8qr | regarding evolution. assuming the first life was single cell organisms that reproduced by splitting, or reproduced asexually. at what point was the male/female two-part system introduced...and why? | I'm just wondering how life somehow evolved into the male/female system that we have. It seems like asexual reproduction is more efficient and if life started that way, why would it "evolve" into a less efficient and effective way of reproducing? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wk8qr/eli5_regarding_evolution_assuming_the_first_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"corlf4u"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The downside of asexual reproduction is that it doesn't easily introduce new genes into the mix. Reproduction with a partner does do this, and generally those are genes are pretty good. (else they wouldn't have survive until adulthood) Species become more varied as a result which helps them survive in changing environments. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
20tl52 | if america were to do away with the penny, what would happen to all the pennies i have? | Would the government buy them back from me for 1 cent a piece? Could I keep them? Would the value of pennies I kept go up or become absolutely worthless? What happened in Canada to their pennies? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20tl52/eli5if_america_were_to_do_away_with_the_penny/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg6ku89",
"cg6kutj",
"cg6l7ng",
"cg6mdvx"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They're legal tender, so the government has to honor their value -- at least until they decide they don't anymore.\n\nPeople would box up their pennies, and take them to banks and get other currency for them. The banks would then send the pennies to the Treasury, who would dispose of them.\n\nYou could keep them, but after a certain amount of time (probably a long time), banks could refuse to take them, and they'd be more or less useless trinkets of metal to you.",
"You spend them. Or not. We don't make them here in Canada any more, but you can still spend them easily enough if you happen to end up with any. ",
"The removal of currency is a fairly well oiled practice, having been done in many places many times:\n\n1. in the EU, each country decided how long they would accept their original currency in exchange for euros. Just last week a woman in Italy found $100,000 in Lira in Italy and - because the window passed 2 years ago - she was unable to perform the exchange.\n\n2. when canada killed the penny, they just stopped circulating them..but...are letting them die out somewhat naturally by requiring that they are still accepted as payment for goods, by banks etc.\n\n3. The U.S. takes currency out of circulation all the time, thats why you don't see old bills very often. The U.S. also honors all legitimately minted currency at face value, period.\n\nSo...you can keep them and one of 2 things will happen:\n\n1. you'll have a finite period of time where you can use them as currency.\n2. they'll work as currency forever.\n3. their collector value will someday exceed their face value making you relieved and excited if number 1 happened and just excited if number 2 happened. I think we can expect that the collector value of late issued pennies will be low for a very long time. Will them to your great, great, great grandkids :) ",
"I am Canadian, and the situation with the penny is that retailers/banks should accept them as face value. Some don't accept them though.\n\n*No big deal for me, as I don't have a collection of them, just a few in my wallet."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2bao9u | why do antibiotics make you nauseous? | And possibly.. how can you prevent nausea? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bao9u/eli5_why_do_antibiotics_make_you_nauseous/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj3g37y",
"cj3h27g"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Your stomach is filled with bacteria, tons of it. And...that's a good thing. There is increasing amounts of research that show that our symbiotic relationship with the bacteria in our gut is a powerful part of \"feeling good\" in the belly. Anti-biotics indiscriminately destroy bacteria - even the good stuff. This is the rationale behind the pro-biotic craze (although...the research that shows that pro-biotics fix problems related to intenstinal bacteria isn't as clear as the research that shows that intestinal bacteria are really great). But...it's pretty common place now to take pro-biotics along with heavy anti-biotic regimes. It'll help more with recovering after you're off them, then from dealing with the discomfort day-to-day.\n",
"When I had to take antibiotics, the doctor stressed to take it after food. I'm not a breakfast person, so I thought, meh, what's the worst that could happen?\n\nTAKE THEM AFTER FOOD, AND ALL WILL BE RIGHT WITH THE WORLD ^feckin ^hell ^that ^feeling ^of ^death ^all ^day"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
ewtxsq | how do teeth move? | Teeth have there own holes in our jaw that keep them in place, so how the fuck do teeth move when you wear braces or invisiline? Do the holes move with the teeth? Our jaws are bone, how does it allow the teeth to move without creating a bigger hole or just making the teeth sideways? Im really confused. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ewtxsq/eli5_how_do_teeth_move/ | {
"a_id": [
"fg4clwc",
"fg4j3lj",
"fg4nhbd",
"fg4u7u9"
],
"score": [
9,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The hole is 'stretched' by the continued application of force, and then the gaps are slowly filled in by new bone as it heals. This is part of why you have a retainer to wear even after the correction is done with and it must be worn a lot more at first.",
"Bone is a living tissue and contains cells that are constantly breaking it down and rebuilding it. The cells that reshape your bone work in response to long term force/stressors on the bone, so applying a gentle force in the same direction for a long time (like with braces) eventually causes reshaping of the bone tissue in that general direction.",
"As best as my orthodontist explained it to me when I was like 10.... the teeth are connected to the jaw bone they sit in by lots of actually very tiny “wires”. Braces use continued application of force to break those wires. When the wires break, your body makes new ones to properly anchor the teeth. But again... this was my understanding of something when I was 10. So... may be wrong.",
"Another thing, how do teeth get pushed out of the gum, or am I wrong and they just grow out of it"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.