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
list | selftext_urls
list | answers_urls
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4fmho5
|
why is the phrase "fuck you" so gravely offensive?
|
Non-native here.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fmho5/eli5_why_is_the_phrase_fuck_you_so_gravely/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2a4ciq",
"d2a557r",
"d2ac7kc"
],
"score": [
2,
19,
10
],
"text": [
"When you say, \"Fuck you,\" to someone, you're essentially dismissing them entirely. You're telling them that they're not worth anything to you anymore - not your time, not your energy, nothing. There aren't many other phrases that can really convey how little you care about someone as well as \"Fuck you\" can, but I'd say \"Go to Hell\" is a close parallel. These phrases both imply that you'd prefer for that person to simply disappear off the face of the earth than put up with them for one more second. But that's at the extreme end of the spectrum (for example, if you're saying it out of anger) - depending on your relationship with the person you're saying it to, it can also be used more lightly without offending anyone. Why the phrase \"fuck you,\" specifically, does the best job of conveying your utter contempt for another person, I don't think anyone knows 100% for sure. It's definitely got something to do with the way it feels to skillfully pronounce the word \"fuck\" though - it feels really good to do that when you're pissed off.",
"It isn't. The word itself isn't overly offensive like every other curse word.\n\nIt's the aggressive delivery that offends people.\n\nI could say \"fuck you, fuck off and every other kind of fuck\" to my friends and family or even a crowd and they would laugh it off. I could say \"Go away\" in the tone that many people use \"fuck you\" and it would be deemed more offensive than just uttering the word fuck you.\n\nPeople just associated it as a bad word because our parent say that it's a no no.",
"Because it is intended to be offensive.\n\nOffence primarily comes from intent. I swear at my friends all the time and am not taken seriously because they know I'm joking.\n\nFuck is widely understood to be a curse word - so \"Fuck you\" is specifically directing a curse word at a person, and is usually delivered with an aggressive or spiteful tone. This lets us know that someone is trying to offend us, therefore it is offensive.\n\nIt is more offensive than other, less offensive phrases (\"Piss off\", \"screw you\", \"up yours\") etc, simply because with those phrases we know the person has deliberately chosen a less offensive term. If they were more angry, they would have chosen a more offensive term.\n\nIt's just a social norm - we know Fuck You is mainly used to be offensive, so we take it how we know it is intended."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6ehs2a
|
why are blind people's pupils a milky white? and does this occur in every case of blindness?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ehs2a/eli5_why_are_blind_peoples_pupils_a_milky_white/
|
{
"a_id": [
"diaemnp"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Milky white pupils are due to one type of blindness known as cataracts. Your eye has an adjustable clear magnifying glass known as the crystalline lens right after your pupil. Muscles change its shape, allowing your eye to change focus from things up close to far away.\n\nHowever, this clear lens can become cloudy with excessive exposure to UV light, age, diabetes, and other factors, preventing light from entering your eye and thus causing blindness. Luckily, eye surgeons can replace your cloudy lenses with an artificial lens that allows the person to see again. This is known as cataract surgery and it is one of the most common surgical operations done.\n\nThere are many other types of blindness. Your cornea, the clear part of your eye sticking outwards can also get cloudy, causing similar effects as cataracts. The light sensing part in the back of the inside of your eye can also be affected by disease and the nerves linking the light sensing part to your brain can also be damaged. Although these issues usually only occur with advanced age ( > 60 years old), regular eye exams are recommended since sight is so important in our everyday lives!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
e9817q
|
why people would be against paid parental leave in the usa.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e9817q/eli5_why_people_would_be_against_paid_parental/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fah28b1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Really good question. I can only state my own opinion on this. Just like universal medicine, universal income or anything else to eliminate poverty and disease in this world, it comes down to 2 basic things.\n\n1) Selfishness\nPeople are selfish and would simply walk past a family on the street asking for food to feed their kids. Not all people are selfish. I've been guilty many times of providing money and food to people on the street, especially families. Whether their plight is real or a sham, all I know is I would hope if I were ever in such a situation, the kindness of man would prevail. While my view is a bit different, others may say \"What Would Jesus Do?\" and that is correct. He would have given everything and anything to help another person, including his life, which was proven about 2,000 years ago. While I am not knocking anyone in specific, many (ahem) \"people\" feel that they are above such petty things and therefore such matters are not of their concern. Now how does this come down to Paid Parental Leave? Because these are the same people who think \"well why should they get paid for not working? isn't that like welfare?\" While in a way this is true, the truth of the matter is that families are stronger with time to bond. A mother gets 1 to 3 months maternity leave and IF a father gets any time at all, maybe a month at most. Many other \"evolved\" countries allow a minimum of 3 months to 1 year for BOTH parents, of course it's wise to alternate their leave time in order to maximize the time with their new child. The problem here is that critics feel that expense increases and productivity decreases when the parent leaves then return (respectively in that order). This has been proven false, but employers and critics do not want to review data on this. I would be willing to accept a contract for leave stating if I leave for 3 months, then I would be obliged to provide 3-6 months compensatory on the job time without rate increase just to prove my worth. No, the companies are selfish too just like the people who run them and do not want to extend any courtesies to the people. \n\n2) You ARE talking about the United States of America. This country has become a country of consumers, sheep, digital dependents. We accept whatever we are told. This is why you see so many politicians that appear polarizing but they are actually not. They are bringing up points that we've been conditioned to forget. For example, before 1973 health insurance was not required and the health industry was not a money hungry monster. Since Nixon signed the HMO act and many companies structured their systems based on Dr Paul Elwood's Cost Control methodologies, businesses of course figured out ways to capitalize on this and create a managed healthcare system. Over the past 40+ years they've pretty much mastered conditioning the way we think about healthcare in general. It's not a basic human right, it's earned.. or at least that is what they want you to believe. Because having a child means little to a company with rules, the employees, regardless of their difference of opinions with corporate policy must follow the company rules or face losing their jobs as well. Now why doesn't government do anything? Because of Special Interest Groups aka Lobbyists. Corporations hire special law firms which perform the task of lobbying members of government in order to \"voice their concerns\" and in return they help them with \"fundraising\". This basically means \"you push our agenda, we'll make sure you can use our corporate jet, corporate ski resort, we'll have election fundraisers for you, we'll find ways to help you acquire funds for whatever you may need\". Now why would a corporation have more power than the people of the United States of America? Because the courts have upheld that corporations have the same rights as individuals.\n\nAll this to save a few dollars? In the end if the country supports the people it would actually save money. If the people paid a few dollars more in taxes, the government would be able to better support the people now AND later. Sadly it goes back to point 1."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
c1pnyp
|
what exactly is glass?
|
How does glass become transparent if it’s made of sand. My lil brainy can’t make sense of small rocks (my knowledge of sand) becoming transparent by any process like melting or pressure.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c1pnyp/eli5_what_exactly_is_glass/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ereqyiy",
"erexf6f",
"erexg0t",
"erez3e3",
"erf74nd"
],
"score": [
24,
5,
20,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Think of it like ice cubes. Most ice cubes you see aren't clear, they're white. This has to do with impurities and bubbles while solidifying. But there is a way to make completely clear ice cubes (many companies are in business to provide clear ice), and it's done using a specific process. In this process, when water crystalizes, the water crystals form in such a way that light doesn't diffuse while passing through. The silica crystals that are made into clear glass do the same. the light passes all in the same direction (I don't say pass through, because in both water and glass, the light gets refracted, but all in the same direction).",
"So, the sand that glass is made of is quartz sand. You can have basalt sand, it just doesn’t look like what you’re used to. Quartz, in its purest form, is clear. Glass is melted and resolidified quartz.",
"If you're wondering why glass is clear but not other materials, it's because glass is mostly silicon dioxide, the same thing as quartz. In quartz it's a crystal, a perfect lattice of interconnected molecules. In glass they're randomly arranged and frozen into place. \n\nIt's clear to visible light because none of its atoms have electrons whose energy matches the wavelengths of visible light - if they matched, an electron could absorb that photon and store it as energy - so they just pass on through. However, it DOES match for infrared, so if you tried looking through glass with a thermal camera it would look solid. \n\nThis is also the cause of the greenhouse effect - visible light goes through glass, hits something that CAN absorb it, it's re-emitted as thermal light, which is BLOCKED by glass, so the energy stays trapped and keeps warming up like a bucket filling with water faster than it drains.",
"Thanks for all answers! My confusion is cured! Love you guys",
"Sand is basically transparent, if you look at an individual grain under a microscope, It is quartz, and pure quartz is perfectly clear. Sand appears white because it scatters light. If you smash up glass, the heap of broken glass reflects light in every direction. If you continue to crush it, and if you throw it in a cement mixer to roughen the surface, it will eventually look white like salt or sugar- which are also transparent crystals, if you look close. You can't see through salt because of surface reflections- same with sand. Sand can also have a bit of dirt, and especially iron oxide in it. Glass is made from the purest sand possible.\n\n\n\nEverybody is saying \"Glass is sand\", but pure quartz melts at an extremely high temperate, and makes very brittle glass. [Common glass is only 63% silica sand](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://sciencing.com/make-window-glass-6168364.html"
]
] |
|
359xe4
|
how does the pills and other type of treatment know where to go and treat?
|
I know this sounds stupid but, I been wondering this for a long time and today while taking 4 pills at once I had to ask. Thanks
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/359xe4/eli5_how_does_the_pills_and_other_type_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr2dv7e",
"cr2e34w"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Basically they work everywhere, which is why you get side effects. Some drugs are only taken up by specific places though which means they tend to be more effective. ",
"Depends very much on the nature of the drug. Some drugs such as Tums (calcium carbonate antacids can actually be considered a drug) or nasal decongestant sprays or dental painkiller Novocaine needles or cortisone shots go immediately to the site of the situation they're expected to deal with. They do so, and boom, fixed, and then they leave the body through whatever normal processes happen.\n\nOthers are delivered, largely by the bloodstream, to every part of the body and they only inter-react to the part that needs them. Oral antibiotics are an example. After you digest it, there's just as much drug around in your big toe as in the area around that infected cut in your upper arm, but the nasty bacteria in your upper arm are affected by it so that's where the treatment is seen to take effect. Headache and pain drugs target pain receptors or the nervous process that receives them, as another example. You feel them tackling your throbbing temples, but they're still present everywhere in the body after you take them, until your body flushes them out the same way it handles all of the other food-and-drink-handling metabolism byproducts."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3kynif
|
why drinking alcohol would/wouldn't help with food poisoning or other type of infection in the gi tract.
|
We use it on the outside of our bodies right?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kynif/eli5_why_drinking_alcohol_wouldwouldnt_help_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cv1m2wy",
"cv1m5lc"
],
"score": [
10,
6
],
"text": [
"If you were drinking enough alcohol to sterilize your GI tract you'd probably have other problems more serious than gastroenteritis or whatever you had.",
"First off, food poisoning isn't necessarily caused by 'living bacteria.' It could be, for instance, waste products of long dead bacteria, poisons, or so on. So the antibacterial properties aren't necessarily relevant. As well, the concentration of alcohol that is going to get into your GI tract and get 'the bugs' is not necessarily going to be sufficient to put a strong dent in their population. Remember that it is being absorbed and churned around with the rest of your contents, it isn't just rushing through your intestine as a stream of vodka or what not. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3rid1u
|
when and why did the us political parties "switch"? ex. republicans in early 1800s being generally progressive and democrats being generally conservative, but now it's the opposite.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rid1u/eli5_when_and_why_did_the_us_political_parties/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwoau8l",
"cwob1ps",
"cwocceg",
"cwol95v",
"cwor1ti",
"cwotdrr",
"cwov42n",
"cwowgmv",
"cwoxyp3",
"cwp1k7v",
"cwp3acc",
"cwp7bvd"
],
"score": [
433,
3,
33,
59,
14,
2,
2,
3,
10,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The switch started in the 1940's when the Democrats officially adopted Civil Rights as part of their party platform. What really kicked it into gear though was the 1960's.\n\nAfter JFK was assassinated and LBJ became President, he rammed the Civil Rights Act down Congress' throat. This was the first real sign to a lot of voters that Democrats were now interested in progressive values. \n\nIn the 1964 Presidential election, Republicans reacted by nominating Barry Goldwater, a very conservative candidate. He lost in one of the largest landslides in American history. The Republican party had to do some soul searching, and the hard-core conservatives seized the party power positions and started using populism to win elections. By scaring white voters about crime and civil rights and the end of morality in America, they could win elections. Ronald Reagan was swept into the CA governor's mansion on a wave of populism. The result is a more conservative Republican party.\n\nMeanwhile, northern liberal Republicans are getting ostracized in their own party (like John Lindsey) for supporting civil rights and voted out of office by voters for not being Democrats. \n\nAt the same time, northern Democrats are going harder for civil rights and voting rights while southern Democrats feel abandoned by their party and are starting to flip to Republicans (like Strom Thurmond) or going rogue (like George Wallace). \n\nAt the end of the day, the crazy cultural liberalism of the 1960's drove a huge conservative backlash that found root in the Republican party and turned it more conservative. ",
"It's less about them switching and more about whether federal or state power was a more conservative force. Republicans have sort of always been about less government and more state power and democrats have always been about federal authority. But once upon a time that federal authority was more conservative. Now it's less conservative. ",
"I think that viewing it as a switch isn't really necessary. The important thing in my opinion is to look at the core constituents and core issues for the parties over time.\n\nThe Republicans have pretty much always been the industrialist party and represented primarily business interests. The Democrats have mostly been more of a labor party (at least for most of the 20th Century). The 19th Century Republicans were seen as progressive I think because they supported the move into the industrial revolution away from a more agrarian society.\n\n\n",
"The switch is mostly a myth. Or rather, the concept as it's presented is. The people didn't switch parties. The goalposts of 'conservatism' and 'liberalism' moved, shifting people to different sides.\n\n\nAs a general concept, consider liberalism as being *-loosely-* synonymous with government activism and political agitation leading to good change.\n\nGo back to the 1970's. Heavy metal in the rivers. Blue smoke coming out of tailpipes. You could spend weeks in LA before you notice that there are hills out in the distance and you actually live in a valley. Back then, I was for the EPA - I was *liberal* on environmentalism.\n\nNow the EPA sticks its nose where it doesn't belong, and keeps spending more and more money and generating more and more regulations for small, trivial, or arbitrary gains. I think it's largely done it's job and it should call it quits. So now II'm considered *conservative* on the EPA and environmental issues. Because I think we've reach peak quality (or maybe overshot) and more agitation/activism won't improve things, but start to detriment things.\n\nIf you take this same concept and apply it to things like Civil Rights. Blacks in particular were systematically discriminated against to such a pervasive degree that forced integration of society was a *good* thing. But now you fast forward half a century, and things like affirmative action seem to be stepping too far past. Just remember, the same \"old, white, racist conservative Republicans\" today, were the same 20-something Republicans marching in the street for civil rights in the 60's.\n\nAs Thomas Sowell put it: *\"If you think people should be treated without regard to the color of their skin, you'd be called a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago, and a racist today.\"*\n\nIt's largely the goalposts that have moved, not the populace. The difference is, those who hate black people, and those who just think affirmative action is patronizing and is going too far, find themselves fighting to move society in the same direction, and so people somewhat unfairly lump them together.\n\nYou could translate the same thing to modern feminism - the fringe of which goes beyond equality and effectively implements sexism that benefits women and hurts men. In the same way honest femenists are grouped up with the radical kill-all-men crazies; the people were once feminists, and want to go back to the way things were in say, 2005, get grouped with the people that want to go back to 1955.\n\n**TL;DR** You could be an anti-racist or an anti-sexist all your life, never change your views, and yet find yourself called a different label, and in different company, based on current status of things. And if everyone stays consistent and remains in their party, you would still see this *\"switching places\"* occurring, as we indeed have. People haven't really switched ideologies much at all - which is why I label the idea as a 'myth'. Its just the labels that have shifted.",
"Because the people who lost the Civil War (the South) wouldn't vote for a Republican (like Lincoln) since he freed the slaves.\n\nIt took until a Democrat (LBJ) did something even worse, giving minorities civil rights protections in the '60s, to flip it back.",
"Not to stifle further conversation, and knowing this isn't a ELI5 answer, \n\n_URL_0_\n\nThis is an excellent review of how it happened. ",
"The first twitches of a switch started in 1912, when Democrats finally found themselves with a Progressive President (Woodrow Wilson). After that, it was a long but steady turning of fortunes.",
"I think the \"Switch\" You're talking about is more about a change in perceptions. The Democratic party has always been the party of identity politics \"Vote for us white people we'll give you what you want and protect you from the other ethnicities and all the bad things they do. (Blacks, Irish, Italians, Catholics\" was the call in the south, as multiculturalism arrived it became \"Vote for us every other ethnicity, we'll give you what you want and protect you from the white people and all the bad things they do\"",
"The best argument I've heard on this, although it sounds completely counter to how we view the era between the civil war and the civil rights movement, is that the parties didn't actually change. The Republicans were, and are now, the party of business interests and limited government, and the democrats were, and are now, the party of government intervention and centralized power.\n\nNow, I hear you saying \"but what about Southern states rights? And all those plantation owners having their property taken away from them?\" Yes, these are the arguments we hear *after* the fact. However, in reality the slavery system was hugely dependent on federal government intervention. First off, the fact of slavery existing alone is the federal government allowing plantation owners to effectively circumvent the labor market, and creating an artificial advantage for crop farmers in slaves states. Then you have to remember that if a slave escaped to a non-slavery state, the fact that he or she was in a non-slavery didn't grant him freedom. The federal government forced those states to have to defer to the laws of the slave states instead of their own, and the slave system was highly dependent on this government intervention in order to keep their practice profitable. On top of that, in many slave states it was illegal for whites to possess abolitionist materials. Once again, the slave states were dependent on the federal postmasters to enforce these laws and keep abolitionist materials from being delivered.\n\nThe Republicans in the North, however, were representing industrial business interests that were not happy about the economic advantages the slave states were getting and the government resources being used to prop it up. Furthermore, the agrarian slave system wasn't capitalistic, it was more a relic of British noblesse feudalism. And if you reject the notion that humans can be property, then liberating slaves becomes not an act of taking from a property owner, but rather just stopping kidnapping.\n\nSo what changes as the decades go by is that government intervention and limited government, pro-business politics start to mean different things. The Democrats started applying Keynesian economics and use of government to protect the downtrodden, prevent boom-bust cycles, and providing social safety nets (remember, the South didn't turn against these sort of programs until they started being equated with civil rights). Meanwhile, as the number of governmental limits on minority rights starts to dwindle, and the question of civil rights starts being more about things like social programs and affirmative action, the business interest and the wealthy starts turning against progressivism as they see it as being synonymous with taxes and government intervention.",
"Because that's not really what happened? The simplified version is that the Republican Party was the party of northern industrial elites. The Democratic Party was the party of southern and rural whites and the working classes of the northern cities. There were liberals and conservatives in both parties. The parties have gone from being parties that were regional to ideological coalitions, with conservative southern whites going over to the Republicans, and blacks and coastal liberal elites going over to the Democrats..",
"To quickly summerize:\n\nDemocratic-Republicans are the only show in town until Andrew Jackson tries to get rid of paper money, stop government involvement in the economy, and holds wild parties on the grounds of the White House. \n\nPeople love him or hate him, which leads to the Whig party, which pretty much defines themselves as everything he's not. \n\nWhich seems great but it turns out that there's a more important issue on the horizon and slavery basically rips them apart, but forms the Republican party in the process.\n\nThen the civil war happens and southerners basically become the new Whigs and define their party basically as not-Lincoln.\n\nTurn of the century Free Silver democrats essentially took over the leadership of the party and started actively supporting things, like leaving the gold standard, that I'm sure made Jackson spin in his grave. At this point, the dems are starting to define themselves as trust-busters, and not surprisingly, the Repubs take up the opposing banner.\n\nIt works and the Repubs win the next pres. election with Mckinley, but he gets shot and the guy they hired to balance the ticket, Roosevelt, basically acts like a democrat while in office and is hugely popular. So much so that he basically elects the competition when he waffles about running so much that he ends up a third party candidate and splits the vote (leading to Wilson's election).\n\nThe narrative continued to be about business vs. \"the people\" though, and while for a few years the Republicans seemed to be making headway, the market crash in '29 basically gets blamed on them completely.\n\nAs a result, the dems are kinda in a weird position: economically the are unquestionably progressive in focus, but socially the large contingent of southern democrats continue to push the party in more conservative directions.\n\nThe southern dems realize this, of course and form a voting block (and even a pseudo third-party for a time, the Dixiecrats) to make sure they get what they want. \n\nThis is the time where the Republicans start to use the southern strategy (or at least it's when the southerners started to consider jumping ship) and slowly, beginning with presidential elections and culminating in later shifts in local elections, the republicans took over the south as the civil rights expansions of democratic presidents pushed them away.\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_3_\n\n_URL_1_",
"Every time someone asks this question, the response always points to Nixon's [Southern Strategy](_URL_0_). That's definitely part of it...but to me this has always been a very unsatisfying answer.\n\nFor one thing, it paints the Right in a pretty bad light. It seems to suggest that, all of a sudden, the Right collectively compromised its most basic values in order to win an election. This simply isn't how party politics work—you cannot get a bunch of people that call themselves Republicans to agree overnight on something like this.\n\nTo get the real answer, I think you have to go all the way back to the colonies.\n\n**\"Conservatives\" and \"radicals\" throughout United States history** \nA confusing aspect of studying American history is the assumption that labels such as \"conservative\" and \"radical\" have remained constant over time. In fact, these terms have referred to dramatically different politics over the years. This is my attempt to summarize how they shifted over time up to the present day.\n\n*Colonial America* \nIn the days leading up to the American Revolution, pro-Crown colonials were known as Conservatives and those that advocated for independence were known as Radicals.\n\n*Early United States* \nAfter the revolution, Conservatives were called Loyalists (as in, loyal to King George III). The \"Radical\" moniker was split in two; those who were previously called Radicals were now known as either Conservative or Radical, depending on the type of independence they advocated for.\n\nThe new \"Conservatives\" were Federalists, for a democratic national government. This label was applied at this time because this Conservative wanted to \"conserve\" a strong central government (ruling from Philadelphia, though, instead of London).\n\nThe new \"Radicals\" were anti-Federalists called Republicans. This new Radical wanted to form a loose republic of more or less independent states. This view was drafted as the Articles of Confederation around the time the Declaration of Independence was adopted. The Articles of Confederation were ratified in 1781 and served as the fledgling nation's Constitution.\n\n*\"Conservative\" Federalists, radical \"Republicans\", and the emergence of strict constructionism* \nThe Federalists wanted a stronger national government and eventually the Articles of Confederation were superseded by the document we now know as the United States Constitution, adopted in 1789. These pro-democracy Federalists went on to establish a national bank that served as the means to regulate investment banking, which in turn spurred a national system of credit that solidified the economy. Little did they know it, but this prepared the economy for the coming Industrial Revolution.\n\nRepublicans were dismayed at the power the Constitution gave the federal government, but fell into line behind it and immediately began working from the inside of the system to limit the new government's power. Each statement was carefully parsed and anything proposed on the floor of the Continental Congress that was not specifically a power allocated to the new national government was objected to as being unconstitutional. This close reading and careful limiting of national power was known as a \"strict constructionist\" view of the Constitution.\n\nWhile this approach limited the power of national government, at the same time it accorded great power to everything that remained in the document, for the federal powers that remained were points of agreement, common ground that united everyone with a single voice.\n\nThe Jeffersonian Republicans advocated for states' rights and small federal government, which would have dramatically limited our growth early on, but it's important to recognize that the driver behind these political positions was the aggressive preservation of individual rights. Later the same ideals would underlie populism and New Dealers in favor of a big government that can support a welfare state, even though these positions seem to be a complete reversal.\n\n*Industrialism and the rise of the corporation* \nDuring the mid to late 1800s, the expectation of government underwent a sea change as far as protection of individual rights is concerned. When the new government was young and resource-poor, preservation of individual rights meant keeping the government from usurping too much power and imposing itself. The country had just fought a revolution against this and were acutely aware of what too much power in too few hands could do.\n\nBy the late 1800s, the nation's prosperity ballooned and corporations became the new threat to individual rights. In this new scenario, the preservation of individual rights required the protective shield of government. The Jeffersonian Republican radicals of the early United States morphed into the New Deal Democrats of the 20th century.\n\nLooking at it from the other side, the Federalists wanted to advance a Hamiltonian monetary policy that provided national credit and could spur business and trade. The principal concern of these folks was establishing a strong economy, without which there would be little to hold the states together. Here again the political positions are completely different than Reagan Republicans today–back then these \"Conservatives\" wanted big government and a loose interpretation of the document restricting government powers.\n\n*Summary* \nIn the early US, it was a \"radical\" position to want a small federal government because that was a break from the past—individual rights are more important than central authority in this view. It was \"conservative\" to want a strong federal government because a strong central authority was familiar to colonies that had been ruled by the Crown.\n\nOnce the Industrial Revolution kicked in, though, a strong focus on individual rights now required a strong federal government to protect people from robber barons. The idea of protecting individual rights now leads one in the exact opposite direction—toward big govt instead of away—because the context changed around that philosophy. So a Republican like Lincoln, in this new world of incredibly powerful corporations like Standard Oil, would have been right in line with FDR.\n\nOn the other side, those wanting a strong central authority (Federalists) primarily wanted a way to protect the fledgling country and recognized that fast growth was crucial to accomplish this, and the way to do that is allowing the establishment of a national bank that could regulate the economy. They were absolutely right, and the economy grew quickly. Today, the Federalist approach has morphed into modern Republicanism, but the shift from bigger government to smaller government makes sense when you identify the underlying goal: creating a strong business sector to drive the economy. Bigger government was needed to create a pro-business environment in the early days, but by the late 1800s, government took up the role of regulating those businesses and it because the biggest obstacle to further unbridled growth.\n\n**tl;dr** The organizing principal of modern Democrats is protection of individual rights which meant a very different thing in the early US than now, so they morphed over time as the surrounding context of the country changed. The organizing principle of modern Republicans is to create a strong business sector, so they too have morphed over time and for the same reason. But the basic philosophies of both parties has stayed consistent."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/yczua/can_someone_address_a_brief_history_of_democrats/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29#1828.E2.80.9360",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixiecrat"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy"
]
] |
||
sibga
|
the difference between mass, density and volume
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/sibga/eli5_the_difference_between_mass_density_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4e9egd"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"Mass is how much matter is in an object.\n\nVolume is how much space that object takes up.\n\nDensity is a function of the two. High mass + low volume = high density.\n\nAlso, don't confuse mass with weight. One gram of mass weighs one gram on earth, but that's because we take earth's gravity as \"standard\". Mass never changes due to gravity, weight does."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
18u9c7
|
how do text-to-speech programs like microsoft sam work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18u9c7/eli5_how_do_texttospeech_programs_like_microsoft/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8i2y9l"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"This is about concatenative synthesis, which is the most popular way of making text-to-speech programs. \n\nFirst, someone makes a script for someone to read. This script should have every sound (like the different vowels in the words \"beat\", \"bit\", \"bite\", \"bat\", etc) in all different contexts. These contexts can be determined by the sounds before and after (the \"i\"s in \"bit\" and \"sit\" have different sounds before, but the same one after), whether the sound is in a stressed syllable (as in \"a RECord\" vs \"what did you reCORD\"), whether the sound is in a word at the beginning or end of a sentence, and so on. The more contexts you pay attention to, the more recordings you need, and usually, the better the synthetic speech will sound.\n\nNext, you need to record someone reading the script in a consistent manner. If they read some sentences one way, say neutrally, and others another way, say sounding like they are bored, the output of the text-to-speech program will sound strange. Once the sounds are recorded, other people annotate the recordings with the exact sounds they contain and where they occur. A computer program figures out the contexts each sound was said in. It chops up the recordings, and stores these so it can say \"I need a 'p' from a stressed syllable following a 't' and preceding a 'i'\", and then find the appropriate piece of a recording. If people do a bad job slicing up the sounds and annotating them, the speech at the end will sound terrible.\n\nSo, now you give the text to speech program a sentence. It figures out how the words are pronounced by looking in a dictionary and occasionally figuring out the part of speech of some words (which it does by looking at previous words more or less). For example, if it sees \"the record\", it knows to say \"RECord\" because nouns follow \"the\" more often than verbs do. If it doesn't know how to say a word, it just guesses based on some rules it has.\n\nThe program then figures out what sounds it needs, and what contexts they need to be in. It then looks up the sounds that it needs (remember these were made by chopping up the recordings). If it can't find an exact match for some sound, it finds the best substitute. It then stitches the slices of speech together, and plays it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
13xoaj
|
why does everyone take the lower cash option on powerball?
|
For example, if there is a winner of the $500,000,000 Powerball tonight, you can collect payment a one time payment of $327,000,000 or collect the annuity, which consists of 30 graduated payments (increasing 4% annually) over a period of 29 years.
Why not collect $17,000,000+ each year for the next 30 years?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13xoaj/why_does_everyone_take_the_lower_cash_option_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7828lq",
"c782b7c",
"c78394n",
"c785vv1",
"c787la8",
"c788csd"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
21,
3,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"The current logic is that you can earn more money over that 30 years by taking the cash and investing in the market",
"Inflation makes that money worth less over time, you take it now and try to make it worth more overtime. Also, people always do this, they want as much now as possible and don't want to wait. ",
" > Why not collect $17,000,000+ each year for the next 30 years?\n\nBecause you could die tomorrow.",
"Honestly, I would probably just take the lump sum for two reasons.\n\n1. I could live for the rest of my life off $327 million dollars. \n2. I could probably invest enough smartly to make up the other lost money.",
"Because if you take the money, when you die your family can still have it. If you don't take the cash and you die the checks stop coming.",
"The Time Value of Money.\n\nNo one should automatically choose the lump sum. One should consider what they can earn investing elsewhere and compare the present value of the payments to the lump sum.\n\nIf you discount each of those $17 million cash flows at the rate you could earn some other way, like by investing in a portfolio of risky assets, the present value (what all of those payments would otherwise be worth if you received them today) is less than the lump sum. Over the course of the past 30 years the S & P 500 has earned ~9% per year. If you had chosen the annuity, the present value of those payments given an annual 4% growth rate, and an annual 9% rate of return, would be $256,884,091. This value is much less than $327,000,000 thus indicating you would be better off taking the lump sum.\n\nIn contrast, if you feel like you can only expect to earn 5%, the present value of those payments goes up to $424,236,631. This amount, being greater than $327 million indicates that you would be better off taking the annuity option.\n\nTL;DR Compounding interest is a powerful tool.\n\nEdit: Here's the forumla _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.financeformulas.net/Present_Value_of_Growing_Annuity.html"
]
] |
|
9kmo8i
|
if airport security is concerned our bottled water is explosive liquid, why can't we just drink them to prove they aren't?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9kmo8i/eli5_if_airport_security_is_concerned_our_bottled/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7089ke",
"e708dsw"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"If someone is willing to blow themselves up with a liquid explosive, they are most likely willing to drink a small amount of that same explosive in order to get it past security.",
"Many explosive liquids (or liquids that can be mixed together to make an explosive) won't cause immediately obvious harm to someone drinking them. If someone is planning to blow themselves up, and they can reasonably well hide whatever discomfort a sip or two causes them, they're not going to worry too much about the long term consequences of drinking a little of it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
eqbg1y
|
how does electricity travel between a car battery and the car, and why is it always said that one should disconnect the negative terminal first when removing the battery?
|
(Full disclosure, I'm afraid of messing with electricity and I want to better understand the mechanics of a car battery so I can be sure I'm safe when removing it.)
(Second disclosure, I don't know whether to flair this as chemistry or physics.)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqbg1y/eli5_how_does_electricity_travel_between_a_car/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fepgi3j",
"fepgrnd",
"fephauw",
"feplw0y"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The negative cable of battery is bolted to the frame of the car, so all the metal is the same as the negative post of the battery.\n\nIf you disconnect the positive terminal first, and your wrench makes contact with the metal part of the car you have shorted the battery. If you first disconnect the negative post and the wrench touches metal, nothing happens.\n\nWhen installing a new battery positive connects first so the wrench can’t cause short if it touched metal.",
"Cars attach the negative side of the battery to the frame, so every metal part on the car is effectively the same as the negative post of the battery. They do this so you only have to run one wire from the battery to the taillights, for example, and then you can just attach the negative side of the taillight to the car frame and it completes the circuit.\n\nFor this reason, the first thing to do when you work on your car is to disconnect the negative battery cable. That way the car is no longer attached to the battery, and you can't accidentally cause a short from any hot wire to the frame. Disconnecting the positive cable does the same thing except if you touch the frame while you are taking off the positive cable you will make big sparks, and maybe damage things.\n\nBottom line: the whole car is the negative battery terminal, so take the cable off the negative battery post first.",
"Batteries provide direct current electricity, which means actual electrons travel from the - of the battery, through the circuit that's connected, to the + of the battery. The battery makes these electrons by having chemical reactions inside, and chemical reactions are atoms that exchange or share electrons.\n\nSo a car battery has the - connected to the body of the car and the body of the engine. Because it's all metal and the electricity can travel through it, so you don't need a separate wire for it.\n\nAnd the + of the battery is connected with wires (typically red wires) to various connectors of the electronics, spark plugs, starter motor, etc. \n\nYou want to disconnect the - first because that disconnects the body of the car from the battery. The body of the car (and the engine), that's a lot of exposed metal, so if you start to unscrew the + first, and somehow your screwdriver slides and touches metal, you'll short out the battery and cause a spark / possibly overheat the battery. Disconnecting the - first basically cuts off electricity from all that metal of the car.\n\nYour (dry) skin typically resists the 12 volts that a car battery has, you won't get electrocuted. But that battery is designed to provide some 40-60 amps of power to start the car when you turn the key, so if you cause a shortcircuit the spark may be significant.",
"Related when jump starting a car, you should connect the red lead first (red to red on both sides), then connect the black lead to the negative post on the donor battery and finally, connect the other end of the black lead to an unpainted metal surface (radiator, engine bolt) and NOT the actual battery.\n\nThe reason is that the discharged battery may be outgassing hydrogen and can catch fire from the spark."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4r3mcu
|
why do many countries have aircraft carriers that have a, for lack of a technical term, "ramp" at the end while the u.s. carriers are flat?
|
Apparently Russia is sending a carrier to the Middle East...the picture of the carrier they are sending has a 'ramp' at the end that I can only imagine points the aircraft towards the sky (allowing it to fly, right?).
I know a little about very few things, so I searched aircraft carriers and many foreign carriers have similar designs.
So why are ours flat? Is there an advantage to one design over others?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4r3mcu/eli5_why_do_many_countries_have_aircraft_carriers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4y0vu1",
"d4y199v"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Virtually every aircraft carrier *except* for the US ones, uses a ramp. The point is basically to help it get some vertical distance off of the carrier deck (the takeoff length is *really* short, which is a problem for many planes).\n\nUS carriers use steam catapults, which basically throw the plane off of the deck at high speeds, such that the plane is actually going fast enough to generate enough lift for stable flight.\n\nThe catapult system is generally better in terms of ensuring the planes take off correctly, but it requires a lot of power behind it, meaning the carrier almost certainly has to be nuclear powered.",
"The skijump is cheaper, easier, and doesm't require as much power.\n\nHowever, as it lacks a catapult, it means the jet needs to have a high thrust to weight ratio(arcelerate fast), limiting the jets that can be used."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
9o4gpc
|
what is the difference between an organic and inorganic molecule?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9o4gpc/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_an_organic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e7r9ihj",
"e7ra30i",
"e7rcy1d"
],
"score": [
6,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"In the end, nothing. Once upon a time we thought the two were totally separate and it later turned out they weren't. Now we use the term \"organic chemistry\" to mean chemistry that involves carbon. Which we know now is a relatively pointless distinction but carbon chemistry is complicated and important enough having a whole class just about that still is useful so keeping the old time split works out well enough to just keep it, even if it doesn't ultimately mean much. ",
"Organic molecules contain carbon. But there are exceptions like:\n\n\ncarbon dioxide (historical reasons)\n\ngraphene/diamond (pure carbon)\n\ncyanide (triple bond?)\n\ncarbonate (because it’s a simple ion, I Guess?)\n\n\nSo I Guess the definition would be “Carbon-containing molecules, which have some other atoms included, which are complex enough, which contain at least 1 single covalent bond”. Even then there are probably exceptions.",
"Carbon can easily link (covalent bonds) to other carbon atoms, forming long chains, rings, and other complex structures that can involve other elements, particularly oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc. Sometimes the function of these carbon chain molecules happens because of the physical shape of the molecule, rather than the actual chemical / reactive ends of it.\n\nSo organic chemistry specifically focuses on this; the possible combinations and varieties of carbon-carbon chains, and the reactions they can undergo. There are a lot of possible combinations, and thus it requires an entire field of study to categorize and analyze them all.\n\nWhereas inorganic chemistry (just chemistry, really) focuses on chemical reactions between all the elements in the periodic table, including the reactions that involve carbon, but without special attention paid to carbon-carbon chains. The periodic table groups the elements by categories, and thus allows study of the various types of reactions that can happen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3v167b
|
why are black american families on average living in poverty more so than other american ethnicities?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v167b/eli5_why_are_black_american_families_on_average/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxjedvc",
"cxjftqr",
"cxjfuhf",
"cxjgluy",
"cxjj73e",
"cxjj9vm",
"cxjk3a2",
"cxjkdtp"
],
"score": [
59,
2,
12,
10,
3,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"It hasn't been that many years since discrimination against black people was legal in most of the nation. Those sorts of laws have a large impact. You had many black people who didn't get equal educations to white people, who weren't getting hired for well paying jobs, who didn't have hopes for the future because of racist laws and racist policies in workplaces. That has an impact. If you didn't get a good job, you raise your children in poverty. And it is difficult for people to escape the cycle of \"born poor, live in a bad neighborhood, get married to another poor person, and have poor kids.\" \n\nIt will take generations for real change to happen in this regard.",
"Statistically, black families are historically less wealthy for obvious reasons (slavery, etc.). When combined with a poorly regulated capitalist economy in which the rich have an innate advantage in making money, they tend to stay poor families. This is true for the poor in any ethnicity. A poor white family will likely remain poor. It just so happens that there are a higher percentage of historically poor black families.",
"Copied and pasted from an excellent post in r/personalfinance this morning:\n\n > 2.Wealth takes generations to build up. The legacy of Jim Crow runs deep in neighborhoods where black first-time homeowners with little wealth or social safety nets are given sub-prime loans (if you needed $3,000 by tomorrow for an emergency, how many people do you know who could oblige that request? The answer to that question is dependent on far more than just what you do for work).",
"When you consider that wealth takes a long time to build up through families, that our legal system enforced racism against black people like 40 years ago (many of the affected are still alive and never had the opportunity to get an education let alone advance in a career), that many (most?) people were *openly racist* until very recently, that some people are *still* openly racist, that many more may be secretly or subconsciously racist, and that black people are *still* overwhelmingly arrested more often and given longer sentences than white people for committing the same crime (often drug offenses), it would be absolutely astounding if they WEREN'T completely disadvantaged in modern society.",
"A part of OP question that's not being answered here:\n\nWhy are why Hispanics and Asians are to doing better then Blacks? They experienced problems similar to the ones that black people did but seem to be doing better and moving up in society faster. ",
"Simple answer. When slaves were freed in the 1860s blacks were free just shit poor. They could only afford to live in ghettos, which had lower housing costs because so many blacks lived in that area. The \"ghetto mentality\" continued until the 90s. People always visit the local school to there neighbourhood. So blacks went to ghetto schools. These schools were notoriously bad because they were ghetto schools so a degree from these schools wasn't worth anything. This meant blacks could only get low paying jobs so they couldn't move out of the ghetto, causing their kids to also have to go to shit schools and repeat the cycle. In the last 3 decades black people have only really started getting aware. The 1950-60 civil rights movement was a step but it didn't solve the problem. So now you have many blacks who want to go to good schools but can't afford to, and many other blacks who see it as disrespectful to want to leave the ghetto. So basically many blacks are stuck in a poverty cycle since the 1870s because they can only afford to live in the ghetto and can only afford to go to shit schools with no hope of university. This idea was explored in GTA San Andreas when CJ gets Sweet out of jail and says ever since he got out of the hood \"shits been banging\" but Sweet sees that as disrespectful and only wants to go back to the ghetto. \n\nThis ended up being way longer than intended. Just finished studying black civil rights in history. You guys better upvote this so my hard work isn't wasted.",
"[Here](_URL_1_) is one of the more interesting papers I've read. Essentially the results: \n \n > For cohorts born in the South in the 1920s and 1930s, we find that racial disparities in measurable\nschool characteristics had a substantial influence on black males’ earnings, albeit one that was smaller in\nlater cohorts. In a rough counterfactual, we estimate that southern-born black men’s annual income in\n1970 would have been from 5 to 9 percent (1920s birth cohort) or 2 to 5 percent (1930s birth cohort) \n2\nhigher if they had gone to schools with the same student/teacher ratio or the same length of school year as\nwhites born at the same time and in the same state. We also find that the link between school quality and\nsubsequent income was made primarily through increased educational attainment. Because easily\nmeasurable (and litigable) disparities in school resources had greatly narrowed in most states by 1950,\nthere may have been few direct economic gains associated with a continued pursuit of the “equal” part of\nthe “separate but equal” doctrine.\nBy that time, the NAACP’s lawyers were aggressively attacking the policy of segregation itself,\nincluding testimony on the social and educational impact of segregation per se on black students (Kluger\n1975). When we examine the labor market outcomes of male workers in 1990, we find that southernborn\nblacks who finished their schooling just before effective desegregation occurred in the South fared\npoorly compared to southern-born blacks who followed behind them in school by just a few years,\nrelative to northern-born blacks in same age cohorts. \n \nWhat this means is that black people, who were born before and after the Civil Rights era, had rapid and statistically significant differences in earnings relative to other blacks in the north. Obviously, post-Civil rights blacks made more money, but not as much as the whites. \n \n[This summary of various papers](_URL_0_) speaks about the vast disparities in wealth and literacy between blacks and whites since the Abolitionist movement gained steam. It basically concludes a variety of interesting things, which I'll attempt to summarize here: \n\n1. The rate at which black's began to be home-owners rose quickly from 1900 (22% owned homes, 24 percentage points below whites who owned homes) to 1990 (the gap between blacks and whites who owned homes, controlling for other factors, fell to just 19 percentage points) \n \n2. They say that black-owned property values fell sharply 70s, a phenomenon they attribute to civil disturbances/riots. These riots not only affected their property values, but also their incomes and employment prospects in a significant manner due to a variety of reasons. \n \nKeeping these two factors in mind, it is not difficult to begin to understand why blacks have it rough in the United States. They were literally slaves, and after Abolition, they went to separate educational institutions in their formative years that still put them behind their white peers [cause a significant wealth gap that can be seen in this Census data](_URL_2_). During and after the Civil rights era, the fact that blacks were effectively living in defacto segregated neighborhoods even after official desegregation that eventually lost a lot of value meant that southern blacks were uneducated even relative to their northern counterparts, and significantly poorer.\n \nThis was not helped by the fact that the moment segregation became illegal, \"crime rates\" rose with more and more black people being jailed due to the hawkish nature of public officials in the 60s through the 90s. This is captured excellently in the book *A race to incarcerate: A graphic retelling* by Marc Mauer and Sabrina Jones. \n \nThe book speaks about how public officials started setting finite prison terms, reduced opportunities for parole and expanded their general iron-fisted attitude towards drugs (among other things) - all of which affected blacks more than whites. \n \nNow reconciling the fact that they were already lagging in education, they were already poor and their neighborhoods became bad \"ghettos\", and they were/are seen as a high-crime community - and the fact that they had/have little to no chance at redemption via employment due to legal and other roadblocks - all contribute to the fact that black people have really got the short end of a horrible stick. \n \nAll these factors continue to contribute to why black people are impoverished relative to non-black people. \n",
"You're comparing immigrant populations, whom moved here in separate clusters and under separate conditions, with a population that was forcibly moved here in unison for the purpose of being slaves. \n\nIts an unfair comparison because the history of these groups are not similar at all. For example, you wouldn't compare the outcomes of a rich Nigerian immigrant family with the outcome of a poor Syrian immigrant. \n\n\"But why is the Nigerian family doing so much better than the Syrian one?\" The comparison doesn't make sense. Likewise, comparing entire swaths of immigrants, whose histories aren't all the same, with a population who's history is slavery and Jim Crow would be nonsensical. \n\nFor a more accurate comparison I would say look at the Native American population, whom also largely live in poverty. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.nber.org/reporter/winter05/margo.html",
"http://www.nber.org/digest/dec05/w11394.html",
"https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/"
],
[]
] |
||
cq8y42
|
how does militarily weak countries defend themselves from militarily strong countries?
|
What stops superpowers like China/US from conquering Malaysia/Singapore and take away resources/land etc?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cq8y42/eli5_how_does_militarily_weak_countries_defend/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ewum6mi",
"ewuma3p",
"ewuoujp"
],
"score": [
2,
17,
2
],
"text": [
"It's one thing to defeat a country militarily, a much harder thing to install a stable friendly government that can help support your goals (e.g. resource extraction). History is rife with examples of the challenge here. Look how long the US was in Iraq, and in that case the goal wasn't even resource extraction it was just trying to install a democracy.\n\nAny country that goes and invades other countries for its own gain would become an international pariah and will not be trusted as much in future trade and military negotiations. Russia only barely got away with it in Ukraine because of historical and cultural reasons.",
"1. *War is expensive* - Not only is it phenomenally expensive to move and supply armies abroad, but wars, particularly wars of aggression aimed at conquest, tend to hurt your ability to trade with the rest of the world and are very costly.\n\n2. *payoffs are low* - To quote author Yuval Noah Harari, \"there are no silicon mines in silicon valley.\" Resources, in the modern day and age, are overwhelmingly comprised of social structures, ideas, and organizations. An army landing in San Francisco can't seize Google. Google is an organization whose value is mostly comprised of ideas and intellectual property. Even if the aggressor were willing to bear the enormous cost of, say, invading Singapore, the value of Singapore comes from it being an excellent port with political stability, rule of law, and business friendly policies. A war conquering Singapore would undermine nearly all of those advantages.",
"Well it depend on different factors. \n\n1) These days invasion for taking land and ressources doens't really happen. The reasons are numerous but some of them is that ressources are not that important anymore, since most countries have 50 to 80% of their economy base on services and not manufacturing or natural ressources like in the past. In addition, international trade is so important that invading someone and making yourself the bad guy will cost you more than anything else, since other countries will stop trading with you and possibly launch an international intervention against you like in the first gulf war.\n\n2) Now if a bigger military does invade a smaller one, today or in the past, there is two main type of situation that can happen. The first one we are pretty familiar with and it's guerrilla tactics. We saw that in Vietnam, in Iraq and Afghanistan. We saw that in Indochina against the French or Afghanistan against the Soviet in the past. In those instance, the invading country never got control over the region, always forced to keep military in place to fight the local population, until the invaded ran out of motivation, pack and leave.\n\n3) Numbers isn't the only factor in a military victory, sometime the smaller military can win, or inflict enough casualties or delay on the enemies that they will gain some sort of victory. The Finns against the Soviet during the Winter War were completely outmatch in term of manpower, but also airplane and tanks. But the Finns were better adapted to the terrain and use that to their advantage, harassing the enemy in sky, building fortification in choke point, the thick snow immobilising tanks and heavy supplies of the soviet. With about 300k men the Finns faced twice their number and kill half the Soviet Front, forcing the Soviet into a peace treaty that left Finland independent."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cutbe6
|
why do wounds/injuries look more swollen and red in the morning, then go down after a few hours?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cutbe6/eli5_why_do_woundsinjuries_look_more_swollen_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"exzg4ap"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Since we're both still and horizontal most of the night, swelling is more pronounced when we first wake up. When we get active and vertical, our circulation responds to that and the swelling goes back down."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2a0bpv
|
what exactly are those people at the doors of walmart checking on your receipt? and can they legally stop you from leaving after you have already paid for the items you are leaving with?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a0bpv/elif_what_exactly_are_those_people_at_the_doors/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ciq8vny",
"ciq8vwp",
"ciq8win",
"ciq8x3i",
"ciq8yet",
"ciq8zkw",
"ciq944k",
"ciq9kuc"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
5,
5,
3,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I have no idea what you're referring to, my local walmart has a greeter at the door when you enter, but no one tries to check my receipts on the way out, my guess is that's why you have to pass through the scanner/detector when you exit.",
"loss prevention and no they can't legally stop you unless they want to accuse you of theft. only at membership places like costco and sam's club can they legally stop you. me at fry's yesterday while walking out. girl next to exit door \"may i see your receipt please?\" as i walk out, i stare at her blankly and proceed to continue walking out. after i've walked out \"have a nice day\"",
"They are checking to make sure that you don't have any additional merchandise. So, if you're receipt says you paid for a bottle of shampoo, a pack of razors and a shaving cream, and you have those three items plus toothpaste, they won't let you leave with the toothpaste.\n\nI'm not sure if they would call the police in that situation, and while they may not have the legal authority to detain you, they can follow you to your car and write down your licence plate number if you try to leave the scene.",
"They serve a few purposes. The publicly espoused reason is so that they can check and see if you've been double-charged for anything, for instance. That's the \"benefit to customers\" that companies will try to claim. In reality they serve as a deterrent to theft, somewhat, due to the fact that people aren't as comfortable leaving with stolen goods when there is a person watching you leave. Thieves would rather have an open exit with no people around for miles. It forces people to acknowledge when they set off the security alarms, instead of continuing to hustle out of the door under the guise of \"there was no one around to explain myself to\".\n\nCan they legally stop you? They can ask you to stop, but they have no actual authority or ability to force you to do so, nor are they expected to do so. ",
"No. They cannot legally stop you. Of that I am certain. You own the products you paid for. They can however disallow you from shopping again if you do not comply. I allow Costco to look at and mark my receipt. They glance into my car. Big deal. But fuck Walmart.",
"They are checking your receipt to make sure that you didn't steal anything. Technically, they cannot *force* you to show your receipt or prevent you from leaving, but you can \"voluntarily\" show your receipt if asked. An exception is some stores, such as membership stores like Costco or Sam's club specifically require you agree to show your receipt this as part of the conditions of membership OR if they actually suspect you of theft.\n\nSo you can refuse, but you're probably gonna have to deal with a ton of shit from security. And the store may simply decide to ban you from there in the future (that's perfectly legal)",
"Everywhere I have shopped its less about checking the contents of my cart than it is about marking my receipt. This prevents theft as follows:\n\nFor example: At Lowes or HomeDepot: (where there are many entrance/exits and multiple cash registers)Builder needs 20 2x4's, 4 peices of sheet rock, and 2 tubs of spackel. Builder and helper each assemble a cart with 10 2x4's, 2 peices of sheetrock and one tub of spackle. Builder pays, leaves store, loads truck, meets helper and hands off recipe. Helper takes recipt and leaves the store via a diffrent exit. ( Clearly he paid, he has a recipt that was just printed... ) Builder only pays for half of the materials. \n\nA store that checks and marks recipts as they leave will catch the helper when he tries to leave. This scheme can also be used in instances where you only need one item: buy one, take one, return one with recipt... ",
"This typically only with membership stores like Sam's and Costco. Then can do it because they put it in the membership agreement you sign.\n\nYou could legally walk out, and the could legally terminate your membership."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8jh2x6
|
when you bite your lip/tongue, you seem magically attracted to constantly somehow bite or scrape the exact same, very painful, spot until it heals
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8jh2x6/eli5_when_you_bite_your_liptongue_you_seem/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dyzlijd",
"dyzlw46"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Damage to tissues causes inflammation. Inflammation causes said tissues to grow physically larger (increase in volume due to swelling). Them being larger means they're a bigger target, and more likely to be struck by teeth or whatever else.",
"Normally when you eat your teeth are taking a kind of really precise path in your mouth in order not to bite yourself. When you hurt yourself one of the signs of the inflammation is that it swallow. So the swalloing part of your mouth is more likely to get in the path of your teeth and get hurt again... this is stupid, but usually the fact that the spot grows is a process that helps to fight infections or/and speed up the recovery \n(Sorry if bad english)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
527c8v
|
why haven't people still in the iron lung not been moved into more modern options?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/527c8v/eli5why_havent_people_still_in_the_iron_lung_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7hxvf7"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"There are only about 20 people still using the old Iron Lungs in the US. These people have been on the machine for **decades.** For example, in 2009 a woman named Martha Mason died having spent 60 of her 72 years of life inside an Iron Lung. Even if a modern and much more mobile system was installed, they haven't used any of their muscles for so long that they would just be as immobile with the new system as they are with the Iron Lung. There just isn't that much of point putting the person in danger by replacing the Iron Lung."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
8fjiar
|
what makes some materials conductors and insulators? is it something about their molecular structure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8fjiar/eli5what_makes_some_materials_conductors_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dy45rjg"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Metals are good conductors of electricity because the atoms in a chunk of metal are packed close together in a lattice, and so the electrons in the outer orbitals have an easy time jumping from one atom to the next. So when a tiny voltage is applied, electrons all start moving in the direction, like a river flowing among rocks.\n\nInsulators are the opposite, their atoms hold onto their electrons tightly, and a lot of energy is required to get the electrons to move around.\n\nThe energy required to get \"insulator\" electrons to move is high, but not infinite. Air is an insulator, and lightning is what happens when the voltage difference between the cloud and the ground is high enough to get the electrons moving. This can happen in a plastic insulator too, if the voltage difference is high enough, it will lightning right through the plastic. This is why higher voltage wires have thicker plastic insulation.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
ebq9sy
|
why do some stretches give your muscles pain while others give pleasure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ebq9sy/eli5_why_do_some_stretches_give_your_muscles_pain/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fb6y2o3"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"If you stretch too far stretch receptors in tendons send big no-no to brain to make bran stop stretching muscle so muscle doesn’t snap."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1s8qrd
|
how come when you angle your rear view mirror at the ceiling of the car you still see out the back window
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s8qrd/eli5_how_come_when_you_angle_your_rear_view/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdv0u71",
"cdv0u8j",
"cdv4jwf"
],
"score": [
5,
12,
4
],
"text": [
"Mirror-ception... _URL_0_\n\n\nEdit: Straight from the link: \n\n The mirror is not ground flat -- the front glass surface is at an angle to the back (mirrored) surface. So if you looked at this mirror out of its casing, it would be wedge-shaped with the thicker edge at the top. When you \"flip\" the mirror, the back mirrored surface actually points toward the dark ceiling, so you don't see that image. What you see instead is the image reflecting off the front of the glass, and this is much dimmer that the pure reflected image so it does not hurt your eyes.",
"The mirror has a wedge-shaped glass front (instead of flat, like most mirrors). When you angle the mirror toward the ceiling, you're putting it at the perfect angle for the reflection to now reflect off the glass front, which gives a clear (yet dimmer) reflection.\n\n**Edit:** [Here's an image showing what I mean](_URL_0_).",
"I've never actually looked this up but growing up I was always told there was a second mirror behind the first one which is slightly transparent. You can switch to the second mirror with the tab at the bottom of the rear view. The idea is that when another car is driving behind you at night and blinding you with their headlights you can pull the tab to adjust the mirrors and it will cut down on the amount of light shining into your eyes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.howstuffworks.com/question20.htm"
],
[
"http://www.edu.pe.ca/gray/class_pages/krcutcliffe/physics521/17reflection/definitions/rearview.bmp"
],
[]
] |
||
9rwvqd
|
why does resting with your eyes closed, in a resting position not contribute to sleep?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9rwvqd/eli5_why_does_resting_with_your_eyes_closed_in_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e8k94cp",
"e8k9bo8",
"e8kdf1g",
"e8kdtmk"
],
"score": [
6,
33,
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Its because your brain is still active and not going into deeper cycles of activity and eventually rem. Rem sleep is vital to waking up refreshed",
"Because you don't sleep with your eyes and the position of your body, you sleep with your brain; in other words, your brain needs the sleep, not your eyes or muscles.\n\nWe don't fully understand all the biology and neural science of sleep, but [REM sleep](_URL_0_) and deep sleep are both necessary for your brain to feel \"rested\". \n\nYour neurons keep firing (functioning) as you sleep, but in different patterns than when you're awake, and based on [what happens when you don't get enough sleep](_URL_1_), the point of sleep seems to be to [consolidate your memories](_URL_2_) and knowledge and get the brain ready to deal with the next day's worth of sensory inputs and learning.",
"Why were you *sitting*?",
"It almost does. If you have to go without real sleep, resting with your eyes closed can make a big difference. It’s much better for you than being fully awake when you should be sleeping."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_eye_movement_sleep",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_deprivation",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_sleep_deprivation_on_cognitive_performance#Memory"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
ye54t
|
why the rail companies are allowed to rake in millions of £s while receiving heavy government subsidy and charging ludicrously high fares?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ye54t/eli5_why_the_rail_companies_are_allowed_to_rake/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5urcy6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because David Cameron is a cunt"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
cx2gv3
|
if chlorine and urine makes toxic gas when mixed, then how come the air inside a bath house/swimming pool isn't dangerous?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cx2gv3/eli5_if_chlorine_and_urine_makes_toxic_gas_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eyhun8i",
"eyhwbcl",
"eyi6xno"
],
"score": [
21,
10,
5
],
"text": [
"Those are in almost pure concentrations. In pools etc the concentration of both is nominal.",
"If you piss in a bucket of chlorine you’ll produce gas. Chlorine in a pool or bath is extremely diluted, as it’s a caustic chemical, and thus there’s not enough to cause a reaction.",
"People don't really pee that much for there to be a sufficient accumulation of urine in a swimming pool to make the air toxic. And the amount of chlorine is low also."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3r30js
|
why is northrop grumman advertising on the television if no one can buy their products?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r30js/eli5_why_is_northrop_grumman_advertising_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwkg0pq",
"cwkgblg"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Is believe it is more for building and promoting their public \"brand\" or image. They want people to think of them as a positive force for their country, have more/better talent apply to their jobs, and win more government contracts. ",
"Northrop Grumman, like many large companies who don't sell to consumers, spends a lot on advertising; generally big splashy commercials which involve high-budget TV, full page newspaper ads and the like. Here are a few reasons why:\n\n1. Stock: Boeing, GE, IBM and the like often run ads touting their corporation because they help drive investor interest. A company appears on someone's radar, tooting its own horn, and that will likely push them to buy stock, whether they're looking to invest in aerospace, blue chip companies or just stocks in general. Just like a commercial for, say, California avocados might inspire you to order avocado on your next sandwich, Boeing commercials help boost Boeing stock prices.\n\n2. Corporate valuation: You sometimes see large entities, like processing company Beatrice Foods, run consumer ad campaigns before a potential merger or acquisition. Beatrice bombarded prime-time TV in the 1980s as a way to inflate its value and successfully sell to a big fish -- ConAgra Foods. Consumer TV is a good way to build buzz and increase the eventual profit from one purchase -- the purchase of their company.\n\n3. Politics: Sometimes, corporate ads will be run with an election or ballot measure. Advertising, along with public relations, can sway public opinion in favor of the corporation. Even more often, public issues come up; questions of defense contracts, corporate tax breaks and the like. Some of these end up on the ballots, some get hashed out in the court of public opinion. If you pay attention during the next election or during a big controversy where certain corporate interests have a stake. You just may notice that some big companies are running \"rah rah\" ads designed to create public goodwill and get the votes they want.\n\n4. Recruitment and retention: A company's hiring strategy can often involve commercials. \"At John Doe Labs, we are building the future, saving our planet, improving lives.\" They want potential candidates to know that they are a big company doing big things, so they'll apply to work there. They also do it to help their existing staff stay committed and engaged. A lot of times this can appear rather obvious, other times, it's not, but believe me, it's on the creative brief.\n\n5. Damage control: Again, this may seem obvious, but big companies may run campaigns after a major mistake, or even produce them in the event of a gaffe. BP created a lot of ads after their big oil spill in the Gulf Coast; this kind of thing is popular among companies who are perceived to be harming the planet. These often come after they have taken real steps to remedy the problem. I would not be surprised to see Monsanto comes up with a bunch of ads talking about their efforts to sustain an abundant food supply \"for our planet.\" Our planet is a popular target audience for this stuff.\n\n6. Ego: I have seen this again and again in advertising. Sometimes, it's just because a big shot wants to make a commercial and run it on TV. So their friends see it. Their family sees it. Most of all, their coworkers and rivals see it. If you want to be a critic, take note when these commercials feature the CEO (and sometimes, their families.) Ego can play a big part in whether an ad budget gets the green light. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
9zaw5q
|
how are people who are in jail/have charges on their record affected when laws change and that crime is no longer punishable?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9zaw5q/eli5_how_are_people_who_are_in_jailhave_charges/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ea7oudq",
"ea7p197"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
" > how are the people in jail affected.. are they released?\n\nNot unless there is a specific law passed to release them. Generally this is done only if there was some reason why what was illegal is recognized as it should never have been illegal. If for example an escaped slave was imprisoned for their crime of escape then they might be released because not only is it no longer illegal, it is recognized by the government that it shouldn't have ever been illegal.\n\nThat drugs are legalized now though doesn't excuse breaking past laws.\n\n > And do the charges get dropped for the ones facing trial and removed from the ones who have it on their record?\n\nIn general, no. Unless there is some overriding recognition that the government was fundamentally wrong to have that law in the past then past violations still stand.\n\nFor an analogy consider if someone is given a speeding ticket for exceeding the limit on a stretch of road. Later on the government increases the speed limit so the ticket, as yet unpaid, is for a speed that is now legal. Does the person still owe the ticket? Of course they do.",
"Most states have implemented a process in the legalization laws that allow for expunging certain violations, usually if under a certain quantity and if it was categorized as nonviolent. Some do it automatically via a review process, some may require petitioning the court. Some prosecutors may drop the charges because it's not worth fighting the case"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6g5qk2
|
at what point does something become a ripoff rather than an homage or just being similar?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6g5qk2/eli5_at_what_point_does_something_become_a_ripoff/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dinta7s"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"An homage gives credit to the originator. A rip off does not give credit for the originator and tries to convince people that they invented \"it\", whatever \"it\" may be."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3slgvc
|
why does rebar have that corkscrew pattern on the outside of the bar?
|
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3slgvc/eli5_why_does_rebar_have_that_corkscrew_pattern/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwya5bd"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"It's there to stop it slipping through the concrete. Without it, straight bits would be able to slip through and reduce the strength of the final item.\n\nBits with bends are less of a problem, but it'd be silly to have two sorts, so it all has it."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://teesolutions.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/MjMzMHRhZzIzMzA.jpg"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
22wtdv
|
how is encryption between a server and a computer kept secure? if the machines have to first exchange an encryption key can't a hacker see it and use it to decrypt the information that follows?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22wtdv/eli5_how_is_encryption_between_a_server_and_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgr5r1o"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_ \n\nHere you go! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QnD2c4Xovk"
]
] |
||
4fw0ei
|
if gravitational force decreases with distance, then why doesnt dropping an object higher up cause it to have lower acceleration?
|
This may be a really stupid question, but for some reason I cant wrap my head around the idea of acceleration on earth being constant. What happens to the acceleration between two objects if you increase the distance between them? Doesnt the force between them decrease, thus meaning a lower acceleration?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fw0ei/eli5_if_gravitational_force_decreases_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2cfyph",
"d2cg93o"
],
"score": [
19,
3
],
"text": [
"You're correct, the gravitational force does decrease with distance, and this DOES decrease the acceleration when you're at a higher elevation. \n\nHowever, for places you can actually reach on Earth there isn't much of a difference. For example, at the top of Mt. Everest, the acceleration due to gravity is about 0.4% less than at sea level. Since this difference is so small, it's pretty much constant (except for certain applications).",
"You are correct that acceleration due to gravity decreases with distance. For example, on Earth, the average is 9.81m/s^2 at sea level, but 9.77m/s^2 at the peak of Mount Everest. What you're not taking into account is that acceleration is not constant. \nLet's pretend we drop an object from the same altitude as the top of Mount Everest. Initially, it will experience an acceleration due to gravity of 9.77m/s^2, but as it falls, this will increase, because it's getting closer to center of the Earth. The acceleration isn't \"locked in\" from the starting point of the object."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2oj09d
|
the logic/science behind "drafting" in racing games (following behind a car to gain more speed)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oj09d/eli5_the_logicscience_behind_drafting_in_racing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmnko90",
"cmnkqqm"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's not just racing games, it's racing. When a car makes power, a large part of that power is dedicated to pushing air out of the way (air resistance) so if you let the car in front of you push the air out of the way, you can dedicate the power you would need to do so to going faster instead. ",
"When a car is moving, it experiences drag force, or air resistance. This is why fast cars are more aerodynamic, meaning they reduce air resistance. When another car is right behind a car experiencing this drag force, the subsequent drag force is less, since the air, which causes air resistance, is being pushed up by the car and over the car behind. Therefore, the car that is \"drafting\" is experiencing less air resistance and is able to go faster.\nPic: _URL_0_ "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://i.a.cnn.net/nascar/.element/img/2.0/sect/kyn/101/glossary/drafting.gif"
]
] |
||
1l048p
|
what is the purpose of pre-cum?
|
The most obvious reason seems to be a natural lubrication before sex, but what other function could pre-cum have?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1l048p/eli5_what_is_the_purpose_of_precum/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbuepmo",
"cbufi7x"
],
"score": [
13,
3
],
"text": [
"It also \"cleans the tubes\" before sex, adjusts the PH for the little swimmers, and keeps them from gumming things up on the way.",
"_URL_0_\n\n > Pre-ejaculate is believed to function as a lubricant and an acid neutralizer.\n\nand\n\n > Acidic environments are hostile to sperm. Pre-ejaculate neutralizes residual acidity in the urethra caused by urine, creating a more favorable environment for the passage of sperm. The vagina is normally acidic, so the deposit of pre-ejaculate before the emission of semen may change the vaginal environment to promote sperm survival.[6]\n\n > Pre-ejaculate also acts as a lubricant during sexual activity,[6] and plays a role in semen coagulation.[6]"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-cum"
]
] |
|
6o4cgc
|
what is the reason that almost every video game today has removed the ability for split screen, including ones that got famous and popular from having split screen?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6o4cgc/eli5_what_is_the_reason_that_almost_every_video/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkehjns",
"dkehtvm",
"dkeiplq",
"dken791",
"dkenauh",
"dkenjkf",
"dkeo3uw",
"dkep1hg",
"dkep5yc",
"dkep628",
"dkepvtc",
"dkeq5ug",
"dkeq7mv",
"dkeqdvd",
"dkeqngh",
"dkeqq15",
"dkeqs41",
"dkeqspu",
"dker4px",
"dkere77",
"dkergdy",
"dkergxt",
"dkernj8",
"dkerxyy",
"dkeryp6",
"dkes3zo",
"dkesjmu",
"dkesl1z",
"dkesmr7",
"dket38e",
"dketiwm",
"dketsi1",
"dketvll",
"dkexgol",
"dkexmce",
"dkexntw",
"dkeys1s",
"dkezif3",
"dkf06nl",
"dkf19gd",
"dkf20zr",
"dkf3dkf",
"dkf40jm",
"dkf4amt",
"dkf4msy",
"dkf5153",
"dkf5ccb",
"dkf5ph9",
"dkf6b8h",
"dkf6dcc",
"dkf91lq",
"dkf9a24",
"dkfeinq",
"dkfh681",
"dkfj0ho",
"dkfv5d1",
"dkjmjjq",
"dkjs935",
"dkjvt74",
"dkkflyb",
"dklg0rl",
"dklnq4g",
"dkp25vu"
],
"score": [
90,
16001,
4,
14,
531,
2298,
2,
4262,
6,
350,
147,
22,
28,
19,
14,
4,
4,
2,
3,
6,
2,
84,
9,
2,
3,
8,
5,
2,
5,
17,
4,
24,
4,
2,
2,
12,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
16,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the focus these days is on graphics and the online experience. Split screen requires nearly twice the processing power so the graphics quality and framerate had to be reduced. But graphics sell consoles so they just took it out.",
"3 Main reasons:\n\n1. It takes a lot of extra processing power to generate the split screen aspect.\n\n2. Its development work they would rather put towards their more lucrative multiplayer (usually with microtransactions)\n\n3. they sell more copies of the games to groups of friends who want to play it.\n\nNow all of those are horseshit reasons, and I want my couch coop back, but still. I would (and do) support games with couch coop, like borderlands, lovers in a dangerous spacetime, speedrunners, etc. I recommend you do the same.\n\nAlso fuck Halo 5.",
"People don't meet up to play with their friends as often anymore either. Many people prefer to stay home and connect via voice comms.",
"I think a lot of people regard split-screen with rose-tinted glasses. It wasn't necessarily a superior experience, it was just the experience we had at the time - and it happened to have the additional (and yes, valuable) component of being able to socialize with another person in the same room while you play.\n\nBut think about it - do you, any of you, feel as comfortable playing a game at a weird aspect ratio, with less than perfect framerate (due to the doubled processing requirements), and with a bunch of extraneous visual noise/distraction happening on the other half of your screen? Try it right now - launch a game in windowed mode, set it to the fuckiest aspect ratio imaginable, and play a full-volume twitch stream of the same game on the other half of your screen. I'd be surprised if you enjoyed that experience as much as the full-screen one.\n\nWe put up with splitscreen back in the day because it was the only option. Now we have a largely superior user experience - each user gets a screen of their own. Whether that's a LAN set up, or just online play, whatever you prefer.\n\nIt's an unpopular opinion, but splitscreen's gone because it's just a shittier UX than what's since replaced it. It was a solution for technical constraints of the time, not an ideal design.",
"The downfall of splitscreen is actually quite complicated. Somewhere between the 6th and 7th generation once Online Multiplayer became extremely popular, it suddenly became acceptable to make a game without splitscreen. This happened around 2010, once games could only have online multiplayer and not get punished for it since by that point most people didn't seem to care as much. The only system really exempt from this seemed to be the Wii since it focused on the family demographic that made splitscreen popular in the first place. Once the current generation rolled around, splitscreen seemingly became a relic of the past. People sort of accepted that the only way to play with others was through online in many games and many developers used this fact to make shortcuts on development. This is the reason why franchises who had been previously known for splitscreen multiplayer don't currently feature it, since online multiplayer has become almost unanimously accepted by major game developers as the new way of creating multiplayer in games. It's quite honestly a shame, since nobody wants to buy multiple systems and copies of a game to play with friends, or drag their setup over in order to play locally, but game developers will often use any shortcuts they can to cut out on development time (as a current indie dev, I can say that I'm guilty of this too.) Many features just have to be scrapped due to budget or performance concerns, especially if a developer doesn't necessarily have the time to optimize a game properly for a specific system or in general due to time limits, budget limits, or scope of a game. Games these days often times push the graphical limits of a console, especially since graphics are one of the biggest factors in both the current console wars, and also between game developers, who try to push out their fancy new 4k graphics in order to try and get your money rather than their competitors. \n\nTL;DR: Since online gaming has become accepted as a standard for multiplayer on current generation consoles, many developers don't add in splitscreen multiplayer in order to reduce development time, or to avoid having to optimize the game to run smoothly on all systems.",
"The core of it is that it takes at least twice the computing power to render two separate viewpoints, and simulate the physics, AI, etc for those separate viewpoints. Additionally, it takes extra memory and invalidates some \"hacks\" that work when you only have one viewpoint. \nThis means that it's a lot more work to render two viewpoints than it is to render just one. \nIt's a lot of work for graphics programmers. They have to: \n\n* Remove hacks while maintaining framerate\n* Find the memory to render multiple viewpoints\n* Figure out how to swap to cheaper assets and rendering techniques\n* Figure out how to render split-screen with whatever new, cutting-edge PBR/HDR/deferred techniques your game is running, and make it work on whatever potato Marketing has decided your min-spec is.\n\nIt's a lot of work for gameplay programmers. They have to:\n\n* Remove hacks while maintaining framerate\n* Help designers with AI issues. Things like an aggro system and limiters for AI numbers\n* Help designers with scripting issues\n\nIt's a lot of work for artists. They have to:\n\n* Build cheaper versions of the assets. Generally this is done already when they author LODs, but they have to make sure the LODs hold up close to the player\n* This step applies to nearly everything in the game - meshes, textures, explosions, etc...\n* Optimize the game for double-rendering. This means going through the game and tagging things to not show up at all in split-screen. This part is crazy time-consuming.\n\nIt's a lot of work for designers. They have to:\n\n* Make sure AI works with two+ player characters.\n* Make sure scripting works with two+ characters. What happens when one guy runs ahead and triggers a cutscene, for example?\n* Make sure pickups and items read well in smaller windows.\n\nAll of this while Marketing is complaining that the game looks worse in splitscreen and Production is changing the end goal and redefining what \"game\" means. \n\n\nOnce all this work is done, Marketing looks at the numbers of people playing splitscreen and decides it's not worth doing all this work on the next game. \nSource: Shipped a split-screen game.\n\n\nEdit: Obligatory \"Thanks for the Gold, stranger!\" ",
"Because of online play, and split screen would usually require graphics downgrades and was used generally for multiplayer game modes not coop",
"What I gather is that most people don't have siblings and thus the concept of \"if it's not split screen we can't play together\" doesn't get across. And maybe I have rose tinted glasses but it feels like games like halo reach or some of the older cod's had good graphics and split screen, and I mean we all know how fast cod pumps out games so it's not like they sacrificed getting the game out on time to allow my brother and I to get top of the leaderboards on cod zombies \n\nEdit: I meant most people commenting don't live with siblings currently or don't have any. I in no way mean that most people are single children. My comment was poorly worded. My bad ",
" > Easier to make a game without splitscreen. \n > Forces people who want to play together to buy separate copies. \n > Forces places like lan cafes to get multiple copies. \n > Game companies generally hate your guts and don't want you to have nice things. ",
"What's an example of a game that's gained fame from split screen and no longer has it?",
"Along with processing power, cost, selling more copies, etc. there's a huge change in how games are played nowadays.\n\n\nAs a child (really up until about 10 years ago), I used to go to my friends house (or they to mine) and we would play games together. Now we have online gaming. Back then, it was in it's infancy...not everyone had a network adapter (Playstation 2) or could afford Xbox live. Even then, not everyone had the broadband internet connections that are essential for playing online. \n\n\nNow, not only do most people have reliable and fast networks connections, paid subscriptions have become a standard way of living so the parent's of children have no problems paying for Xbox live/PSN. Also add to the fact that kids don't really hang out with each other anymore. A lot of them have their own game consoles and hang out with their friends online rather than in-person. \n\n\nI think the split screen demographic is there, but it's not huge. It seems like most people who want to play split screen are people my age (mid to late twenties) and older who grew up playing split screen. The younger generation probably couldn't care less about it and I think game developers realize this. ",
"Coming from the games industry, I can tell you the major reason that couch coop isn't as big as it used to be is because not a large enough population of players engages with it. Even when games have coop, engagement in coop modes is relatively low compared to single player and online modes.",
"It's not a computing power at issue, it's simpler than that. \n\nWhy sell one one console, one copy of a game, and four controllers when you could sell *four* consoles, *four* copies of the game, and your four controllers? \n\nNow drink the damn verification can! ",
"Actually other than Halo 5, which FPS franchise has lost split screen? COD still has split screen. Looks like Battlefront 2 will get it as well.\n\nLocal multiplayer is actually still doing very well on console. There is a good reason why sports game sells very well on console, sports games are some of the best local multiplayer games after all!",
"Well first you have to consider that most AAA console titles are struggling to hit 1080p at 60 fps and have to make some choices when it comes to graphical performance vs delivering a quality product. They would love to divide the screen into two or three or four. The only problem is when you compare the end result with a game that is single screen only you're going to say \" man this game looks like garbage compared to ______\".",
"People are not including what I consider the biggest factor in the removal of split screen. The internet and online multiplayer. For a long time, people simply prefered online play because splitting an already small screen was kind of annoying. Online gaming became a much more convenient way to play for the most part. \n\nAlso the need to make the most visually impressive singleplayer makes it virtually impossible to add split screen when it's barely making 30fps with one player.",
"The XB1 and PS4 were kind of lacking in power. Typically when you run split-screen you end up having to render more objects and they couldn't handle it very well.\n\nThe major game publishers use graphics to sell their games and many reviews/gamers pay a lot of attentin to graphics.\n\nIt is the same reason you seem them doing 30FPS with better graphics over 60FPS with worse graphics. 60 FPS tends to play way better, but 30 FPS looks better in videos and screenshots. It is better for marketing.",
"I'm not a game development producer/funder. But my guess is two things, one less production time and easier on the system to not develop it. And two so the system can charge a internet usage fee to use the game. And the servers probably get some kickbacks.",
"IMHO, why share the same unit and game when you can make them buy 4 of both units?",
"Money. The whole game industry has turned into a cash printing, soulless monster. Everything wrong with the newer generations of consoles and games can be broken down to increased revenue. The sad thing is, big companies don't even need to care in the slightest for the anger and subsequent loss of thousands of gamers. The lost of revenue from these guys has been replaced hundredfold by cash cows called microtransactions - talk about useless weapon skins a dollar each, effortlessly done sequels, garbage hd-grafic remakes of classics and the like.",
"Well equipment has become more cheap. (Hardware wise) comparatively. Meaning it's more likely than ever in our history for each kid to have a rig, whether consoles or pc or in many cases both, so they'll lan or multiplay anyway.\n\nOn top of that, faster internet speeds and more demanding games mean that it is less taxing on the hardware to join a non local match than it is to render to circumstances of the same localization. (Keep your fps and your multiplayer).",
"Let me oversimplify:\n\nMost first-person shooters heavily emphasize graphics as a key selling point. Splitting the screen forces developers to sacrifice graphics and performance in multiplayer mode. With the availability of (paid) online play, it's not seen as a feature that's worth the effort to add. Demographics also probably play a role, as an aging gamer population is less likely to come over to play at a friend's house.",
"The biggest split screen releases became popular before the age of almost universal network connectivity. In the intervening time gamers have spoken overwhelmingly: The real money is in online multiplayer, not couch co-op or competition.\n\nNintendo is the only company that seems to consistently try to go against the grain here. Too bad they're also Nintendo.",
"I haven't read any comments or anything so maybe this has been said, but...\n\nSplit screen has to reduce visual fidelity for split screen. Period. They can't render two parts of the map, at the same time, and just reduce the FOV and have the same kind of quality. They just can't. So either the framerate cuts in half, or you go from something that's 1080p to something that's 420p (or if it is really good, 720p) to deal with processing two potentially separate parts of the map at the same time and displaying them. Most games use a lot of tricks for optimization--limited horizons via mountains and walls, slightly lower visual fidelity... but cutting something in half when everything was shitty was, oddly, the only thing that was LESS noticeable when upscaled. 240p cut in half was actually just \"still shitty\" and less people noticed. But going from 4k to something WAY lesser is jarring, because you get half the polygons, half the textures, etc.",
"The reason is truly economics. It costs money to put a new feature in a game and though it's not alot, it's something that RARELY sells more games. On top of that, if we're talking about console, it means that in many cases you'll have one sale rather than 2. If I can just go to my buddy's to play then my parents don't have to buy me a console and a game to play on. It creates a need rather than just a want.",
"While I feel like this is a think veiled complaint thread, keep in mind internet access has become much more prevalent and accessible. If you can afford a game console and games, chances are you have internet. It's much easier for you to get online and play with your friend than it is to physically go to your house. It's also easier for the game company to only have to develop that single aspect of multiplayer. \n\nIt's the path of least resistance and also happens to make them a bit more. ",
"Mostly Split-screen went away with the capability to play over the internet. Now people do not need to worry about losing visual space or \"screen watchers\". This also is used as a tool to buy multiple systems for the same household; since siblings want to play against each other.\n\nNow, Nintendo went a different route; prime example would be Smash Brothers. Instead of split screen, it is one screen and all players play on a field. Nintendo has always been the \"family\" console and this method allows then to stick with that concept.\n\nSony and Microsoft go for the a console a person, a person a console method. Everyone will need their own console to play together. This has lead to what some call, the \"Console Wars\". And why many players would like to see cross console platform gaming.",
"Motherfing money. Everyone has siblings or friends that live close enough to meet up when they want to play a video game. almost no one lives far enough so no one can visit them. Companies just want us to buy two consoles, two copies of the same game and two TV's",
"The real answer is that before the xbox there really was no such thing as \"online multiplayer\" or \"online co-op\" in order to play games that included multiplayer or co-op support you had to play on the same console in split screen. \n\nNow I for one remember how poorly it was to play splitscreen. Cutting the screen in half vertically or horizontally greatly reduced your vision or field of view, or even worse if it was split 4-way made seeing things very difficult. \n\nWhen online play was introduced, it became more acceptable to play multiplayer games from separate locations. You could still communicate with a headset, you had the advantage of playing on a full screen, and if you wanted to you could just bring your tv/console to someone house and play together online or through LAN. The benefit to developers was they now no longer had to spend time (money) investing resources into developing split screen. \n\nOverall, these days the large majority of gamers would rather play online with friends rather than splitscreen, and game developers do not want to front the bill for splitscreen if 1% of gamers actually use it. (splitscreen play is more of a nostalgic memory us older gamers feel was better than it actually was) ",
"It's because of online multiplayer. The market for split screen games dropped beyond the point of the cost benefit ratio. You have to render everything 2-4 times instead of just once, which seriously taxes a game engine. In the world of hyper advanced graphics being such an important selling point, studios can't afford to put in the time and energy required for split screen when it's such a niche audience that still uses it. Online multiplayer fills that gap, so split screen became unnecessary. \n\nSource: Been in game industry for 10+ years as a game designer and marketer.",
"Money. They know that they can sell more devices if each individual person needs their own seperate device and game copy if they want to play with each other, as opposed to a single device and game if there's split screen capability. Therefore: more devices and copies sold.",
"Billy and Jimmy are best friends and they want to play a video game together. In order to do this, they will need the following:\n\n* One current generation video game console. (Maybe ~$400 or so)\n* A television capable of receiving input from the console. (We'll say ~$300 for tallying purposes though this can vary greatly)\n* One copy of their favorite video game (~$60)\n\nFor the sake of this scenario, they (or their parents) will have to spend (or already have spent) $760 dollars to play their favorite game split-screen, on a couch together, indefinitely or until one of these components breaks\n\n**20 or so years later**\n\nWilly and Timmy are best friends and they want to play a video game together. Their favorite game does not have split-screen multiplayer, so their requirements will be different:\n\n* Two current generation video game consoles (~$800)\n* Two televisions capable of handling the input from these consoles (~$600)\n* Two copies of their favorite video game (~$120)\n* Two subscriptions to competent internet service providers to facilitate matchmaking (Call it ~$45/month, multiplied by two. We'll assume a year's subscription, totalling an estimated $1080 to give them a full year to play together\n* Two subscriptions to their console's online multiplayer service (Considering Xbox Live's $60/year rates, we'll call this $120)\n\nFor the sake of this scenario, they (or their parents) will have to spend $2720 between them to play their favorite game together, for up to a year, assuming no DLC or microtransaction purchases. \n\nFor each additional year of multiplayer fun, someone is going to have to pony up another $1200 between ISP bills and console multiplayer subscriptions. \n\nIn addition to requiring twice the hardware up front, requiring an active internet connection for multiplayer gaming almost doubles the cost of multiplayer experience, and provides only a year of potential playtime as opposed to local multiplayer lasting the lifetime of the essential hardware. \n\nNot all of this money goes to the developers of the video game or the console it's played on, and there are many other factors involved besides money, but bottom line, everyone involved makes significantly more money, and many of these costs are recurring. Eventually, the servers hosting Willy and Timmy's favorite game will be discontinued and they'll have to buy the sequel, or maybe even the next-gen console to keep playing online.\n\nISPs will be able to sell more expensive internet packages based on potential gaming that would be done, and some manufacturers (for example Sony) will sell twice as many televisions as well as consoles, further increasing profits. Online multiplayer also tends to align the end user closely with the digital marketplace, making them more likely to buy DLC and related digital content (avatars, skins, etc). \n\nThese additional costs can be circumvented though other means, but the odds that Willy and Timmy are going to use Billy and Jimmy's old console and old games with their outdated graphics and control schemes is much less likely than the additional costs being absorbed by their parents, give or take some birthdays and holidays. ",
"It drives the sales of additional consoles and games because playing with friends requires them to both have the game and the console themselves.\n\nThere is no other reason besides the time spent implementing the programming to remove split screen functionality.",
"So far as I can tell with the PlayStation, it's to sell subscriptions to their service. This forces players who want to play MP to do so through said service.",
"For every person that wants to play with their friend, that's one more potential console and/or game sold.",
"Because the last thing they want is more than one person playing any game at any time without having paid for it. Split screen allows at least one person to enjoy a game without having paid for it.",
"The answer is companies became too lazy/greedy to optimize for split screen. Since online is prevalent now and they can get away with it, they will simply omit split screen because they can . It is not something we should be ok with but peoples' complacency made it possible. No one complains. RIP awesome local multiplayer sessions. Fuck you, greedy corporations.",
"There's really two reasons for this:\n\n1) The game is already pushing the limits of the console. Consoles are generally not as powerful as most PCs and to get the highest quality graphics the hardware is pushed to its absolute limit. Since most AAA games focus on graphics nowadays this is usually the primary reason.\n\n2) The amount of development time to make split screen possible is much larger than one would think. You have to make two user interface systems work simultaneously, handle keeping the players in the same level or area, balance the power surge of having two players, introduce an explanation for having a second player, and add art that the second player is going to see as their character. And this is all separate from getting the game to run fast enough and fixing the surprise bugs that show up.\n\nThe reason is really not seeded in greed, malice, or stupidity.",
"Money plain and simple. A splitscreen game allows two to four people to play on one purchase of the game and one purchase of the console.\n\nA single player game requires a console, a game, *and* the internet service purchase for *every* player.\n\nOn top of this a splitscreen game has to render multiple screens at once. This is expensive for devs who have to figure out how to make it do that. With single player they only ever have to worry about the console rendering one screen at a time.\n\nSo it's cheaper for devs, it's more lucrative for publishers, and it's more lucrative for console makers. And it's cheaper for devs doing PC ports to do the bare minimum necessary to get a console game to run on what is usually a more powerful platform anyway, so they rarely care about adding splitscreen for PC ports when it's online only on console.",
"The Internet is the reason really. When you, actually let me rephrase that, when I think of split screen, I think of games like Goldeneye and Mario Kart. Sure there have been other split screen games since then, things like Borderlands and Halo, but to be honest the glory days of split screen are over and it's not entirely unreasonable to see why. \n\nBack when split screen was in it's golden age, there really wasn't an alternative, the internet wasn't as widely available and used as it is now, so if developers wanted to add multiplayer to their games they HAD to add split screen, there just wasn't an alternative. Sure you could log your consoles to your friends house and lan or connect them to each other in some other way, but really that wasn't as widespread and was rather cumbersome.\n\nSo now that developers and more importantly publishers have the choice between split screen and the internet, they can choose, now the question as to why they are almost all exclusively choosing to do internet only is a good question. A Big part of it has to do with money I believe, not so much the part of what to spend the money on, but more on how to get more money. I can't imagine adding split screen in an already multiplayer game to be that much more expensive. \n\nIf they can force you to play through the internet through their service/network it helps against pirating, if someone with a burned copy of a multiplayer game wants to play multiplayer, they are out of lock as their pirated copy likely can't connect to that games servers, now if the game had split screen, there wouldn't be a way for the devs to prevent people from playing split screen, once it's burned and readable that's it. This is also why more games tend to add multiplayer components to their game, simcity and watch dogs to name two. Those games could work perfectly fine offline (gameplay-wise simcity could, but they gimped it so much that it really isn't worth it), but the devs added multiplayer components to the games which makes the game better (simcity could have been great with multiplayer if EA hadn't gimped it). I personally am totally fine with this and I think this is the best way to combat pirates, just add GOOD and meaningful multiplayer component to your game and you force players to buy legit copies if they want to enjoy the online aspect.\n\nThey can now also incentivize you to buy X skin/object for your game if online, if it's split screen everyone would have the access to the same things and it wouldn't be as \"special\".\n\nThe other part of the money is copies sold, if a game has split screen than 4 times as many people can enjoy the game through one copy (assuming it has 4 player split screen). So in that world you can buy Mario Kart, I can buy Goldeneye, Bob can buy Borderlands and Dave an buy Halo and we can just bring our copies of the game to whoevers house we are playing at that day and all 4 of us can enjoy 4 games. Without split screen, each one of us would have to buy 4 games each if we all wanted to play those 4 games, so that is 16 copies, you don't need to be a math genius to see that that is many more copies sold.\n\nSo part of it is there is choice now and bigger part of it is greed.",
"I often wonder this myself. Split screen games are really fun.\n\nMy guess is, making you buy more than one copy to play multiplayer, or with each other is why, to make more money off of each individual.\n\nI don't think processing power has anything to do with it, since they can just reduce visual effects to achieve desired FPS whilst rendering 4 smaller screens.\n\nI mean I still play 4 way split screen CTR (Crash Team Racing), just this past week as well.",
"Because they realized they make more money from forcing people to connect multiple consoles, subscriptions, and games, using internet and headset, than for them to play offline on one console and one game.",
"Lol so many replies in here making excuses for devs wanting to pump out generic trash for the quickest dollar possible just cause it works for AAA giants. People do not care about state of the art graphics it doesn't make a good game and it doesn't help reviews at all.... Look at the Order 1886... It was an experience for a day and looks absolutely amazing but I wouldn't call it a game, neither do 99% of the population. \nNow look at cod, I hate what that series did to the industry but they've kept the same engine for over a decade only polishing what they need to and it actually has a good amount of split-screen content it doesn't look good at all by today's standards but its good enough. nobody is paying attention to the details when they're shooting their friends or brothers head off... \n\nThe big spenders whom are likely older and grew up with couch co-op etc. You know the ones they're supposedly catering to lol, are more likely to forgive a graphical downgrade to have the option for split-screen as they'll miss it more even if their mates have their own consoles they can bring a game over, simple there's no screwing around. I get there is more work involved if you want to integrate split screen and they must want to stay relevant amongst everything else in terms of \"oh wow the graphics\" but real passionate devs are few and far between these days because they've all succumbed to the easiest route where if you want to play with your friends at all you need your own console, tv, internet, online subscription and game cause they're so poorly optimized anyway on release that would mean more work that they should want to do regardless if it meant something that will last for years. jesus not even the handful of empty shell racing games that came out this generation have it which is a joke look at some of the games over the past ..pssch 15 years almost all the ones you'd want to have split screen have it but now that technology is more advanced and has made things easier (apparently) it's become a relic of an option .\n",
"4 player split screen = 1 copy of game and console sold\n\n4 player internet = 4 copies of game and console sold\n\nBut we lost something magical.",
"So you can't have two people playing one console. They want each player to pay for their own console, their own copy of the game, and the online sub fees. ",
"Alright, a lot of the top answers fall under the \"evil corporation\" conspiracy, so I'll give some insight as a game developer with a large circle of game developer friends in various companies:\n\nSplit screen isn't done because it doesn't sell enough extra copies. It's really that simple. Everyone has Internet today and people visit each other much less than before. Split screen functionality is simply not something that is relevant to the majority of the customerbase. Selling 1% more copies thanks to split screen doesn't justify the cost and compromises of implementation.\n\nI feel that there's also a bit of an exaggeration with \"almost every video game today..\". Most games didn't have split screen before either. Classics like Resident Evil, Super Mario 64, Metal Gear Solid, Crash Bandicoot, etc - no split screen. And on the other hand, split screen games are still made and published. For PS4, there's for example: Lara Croft and the Temple of Osiris, The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth, Borderlands, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Call of Duty: Black Ops III, Dying Light, just to name a few.",
"Due to how big video games have gotten, it's getting increasingly difficult for games to be able to process what's going on between two players and keep the game operating at a steady frame rate, and graphical output. It has nothing to do with siblings, as the top comment mentions. The Nintendo switch is actually a very, very good split screen console, as the games that support split screen do not suffer when more players join in. ",
"If you are playing splitscreen you're not playing online, and if you're not playing online you're not paying for multiplayer.",
"More money basically, now for Christmas mum and dad have to shell out for two PS4s instead of one.",
"1: Most games on high-power consoles are pushing the hardware to the limits, and the market cares more about the demographic that prefers that over split screen, except...\n\n2: Nintendo. Your statement doesn't apply at all to Nintendo, considering the Switch allows for split-screen multiplayer without a TV.",
"Split-screen = Re-playability\n\n\nRe-playability = a games fun lasting longer\n\n\nGames fun lasting longer = less people buying new title at full price\n\n",
"Call me cynical, but I think it's just a tactic to force people to buy more consoles. If I want to play Battlefield 1 with my friends, I have to buy the game and a console to do so. Missing out on the experience of playing it with friends is enough incentive for people to do that. ",
"Possible explanations:\n1. Multiplayer over the internet has become much more accessible than 20 years ago. The technology allows many more than just 2 or 4 simultaneous players. People also seem to respond better to online multiplayer than couch multiplayer, or there would be more actual vocal demand for it.\n\n\n2. When you split the screen in the game you basically render it twice ( or 4 times for 4 player ). Games that have high graphical fidelity will have a harder time keeping the quality high for each screen.\n\n\n3. Pure corporate greed; companies earn more by selling more copies and forcing players to each own a copy in order to play with friends. Having a couch multiplayer feature in your game means that up to 4 players can enjoy a single purchase at the same time instead of each buying a copy.",
"I'm a fan of couch co-op myself, here are few great games for Xbox One:\n\nOvercooked- great game, very funny and involves a lot of teamwork\nCastle Crashers- like classic beat-em'-up arcade with unlockable characters and leveling\nVertical Drop Heroes\nTowerfall Ascension\nMoon Hunters- brand new, great story",
"Because why sell 1 copy of a game for 2 people to play when you can sell 2 copies of a game to force people to buy separate copies and consoles. \nThen force people to pay to play online with Xbox live / PSN. \n",
"I worked in the games industry for nearly 20 years as a senior technical director, and while I was never responsible for making this decision myself, I was in many of the rooms where the decision was made. Here are the most common reasons:\n\n1) Simple lack of demand. Playing games together in person on split screen is not as common as people wanting to play games over network/internet. The split screen fans are very vocal, but actually a very small minority, especially if you mention what would have to be sacrificed in the rest of the game to support it.\n\n2) It sells less units, both in terms of consoles and in the games themselves, if you only need one copy to play with your friends. Publishers and console makers are obviously not fans of this. Marketing people also don't like it when the 1:1 mapping of game copies to individual users is broken.\n\n3) Constant complaints from gamers about split-screen not being a \"real\" competition when you can see one another's screens, and a lot of time and money in design discussions around how to (usually unsuccessfully) mitigate this.\n\n4) Limitations in terms of UI design to support split screen and single player layouts in the same game for two different viewports. It's actually a lot of work to design a UI, especially in anything other than simple FPS games, that works in both full and half screen resolutions and layouts.\n\n5) Technical limitations in terms of rendering performance when you're supporting two independent cameras rendering to two separate viewports in the same screen. (Texture and shader pipes, etc.) While it's not *twice* as hard to render split screen as a single screen, it's considerably more expensive in terms of processing per pixel.\n\nAt this point, the number of users requesting split screen is a relatively small niche, and it never rises to the level of demand necessary to make it worth it from a business / effort perspective. The topic is so dead, I haven't heard it even raised in any design meeting in over a decade, except as a specific gimmick point to differentiate yourself to the small amount of fans who want it.",
"Split screen was ok but playing your own system and copy of the reasons I became a pc gamer now.",
"--- You can post your recommendation in the right way, you'll either get gibberish or nothing.",
"Ark just lowers the resolution of frames to maintain in half when everything was shitty was, oddly, the only games I work on, the biggest reason is that most AAA games are already developed.",
"Given that most people have to do with developers wanting to kick back and purchase 3 more games.",
"I'm 100% sure Microsoft and Sony both take that into account as well as high as it allowed more than just 2 or 4 years",
"Split-Screen is, basically, rendering two cameras essentially takes up twice as much money as possible with a couple others I can’t think of split screen, each one of the work is done, Marketing looks at the screenwatchers.",
"Also the need to be honest the glory days of couch co-op or multiplayer gameplay = more consoles and copies of the map at a mate's last week and we can stop playing and watch dogs to name a few."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
z9wmp
|
cinemagraph
|
How are they made exactly? I've been seeing lots of them for the past few days and I have always wondered, how does this work o-O
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/z9wmp/eli5_cinemagraph/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c62r5te"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"[This page](_URL_0_) helped me a lot with making my first cinemagraph. \n\nBasically, you take a video and turn it into an animated GIF using photoshop. Then you use the masking tool to 'erase' everything but the part you want to move in all frames after the first one. This makes one part of the image hold still (because it is exactly the same as the first animation frame), but the part you didn't erase continues to move."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.labnol.org/software/cinemagraph-tutorial/19453/"
]
] |
|
6nn0wa
|
why do certain sports have an odd scoring system?
|
For example: American football has 7 point increments for touchdowns, Tennis has increments of 15, etc..
EDIT: Football has 6 points per touchdown. I'm American and don't watch football.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nn0wa/eli5_why_do_certain_sports_have_an_odd_scoring/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkao9qd"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"It sounds like nobody is really 100% sure where [tennis' system](_URL_0_) comes from, but one explanation is that clock faces were used for keeping score at one point, and the hands were moved in increments of 15 minutes.\n\nAs for American football, I would point out that it's not necessarily 7 points for a touchdown, it's only 6 points. Which is key because it's double the points of a field goal (3 points). Because there are multiple different ways to score points in American football as opposed to soccer, hockey, baseball, etc., different point values have to be assigned, ostensibly based on the effort involved in achieving each method.\n\nIt's a lot more difficult to actually get the ball into the end zone than it is to get within ~30 yards of it and just kick it through the uprights. The extra point after a touchdown is just further incentive to try for the touchdown rather than settling for kicking a bunch of field goals. It also adds an extra layer of strategy with the option to try for a 2-point conversion instead of the 1-point, which again is illustrated by a doubling of the points for a more difficult method of scoring."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_scoring_system#History"
]
] |
|
52fhdt
|
who or what determines a road's speed limit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/52fhdt/eli5_who_or_what_determines_a_roads_speed_limit/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7jsih8",
"d7jv73j",
"d7jx3dn",
"d7jxjqd",
"d7jyn9y",
"d7jzeze",
"d7k2oda",
"d7k5ccf",
"d7k8bgc",
"d7k8jxq",
"d7k99r2",
"d7kaqvk",
"d7kauuc",
"d7ke0dh",
"d7ker52",
"d7kh1qc",
"d7kmuak",
"d7kpv9l"
],
"score": [
421,
3,
8,
12,
44,
10,
4,
5,
2,
3,
3,
2,
350,
9,
2,
6,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Who sets it, and puts up the roadsigns? Typically whatever governmental body is responsible for the roads in that area. In the U.S. most highways are managed at the state level, and local roads at the county/city level.\n\nSometimes there are laws that determine default speed limits; other times the relevant Dept. of Transportation determines it based on conditions.\n\nThose conditions typically are:\n\n- How narrow the road is, and how many lanes there are.\n- How many houses/businesses are along the road.\n- How much the road curves or changes elevation (which effects visibility).\n\n",
"It's traditionally done by the Government that paid for the road, be it City, County, State (Highways). City and County traditionally use population density as the guideline. Plus, people who bitch.",
"As others have said, but for a lot of roads in Europe that have developed from paths into roads over a long time, design speeds are often deduced from the existing geometry. Here's a UK guide for highway link design - _URL_0_\n\nIf you scroll to page 9 you can get some good ideas about how that design speed is worked out.",
"The Federal Highway Administration is the chief resource for transportation engineers, the people who make decisions such as speed limits, across the US. The FWHA doesn't make laws per-se, however they do establish guidelines that state-level bureaus (e.g. Department of Transportation) use quite frequently such as the concept of \"Free Flow Speed\", or commonly abbreviated as FFS.\n\nFFS is usually an somewhat arbitrary speed set by some governing body (typically a State Dept. of Transportation), most often 70 mph. Usually, in order to go above this speed, transportation engineers must perform a case-study involving traffic counts, land-surveys, etc. Once the FFS has been established, there are a series of factors that are applied to this speed that account for local factors such as vertical/horizontal stopping sight distance (i.e. the maximum distance that a driver can see past a curve or hill), typical congestion levels, proportion of passenger cars to freight trucks, number of lanes in a single direction, etc.\n\nOnce FFS has been multiplied by all the applicable factors, you then obtain what is referred to as the Design Speed, which is most commonly used as the speed limit rounded to the most practical multiple of 5. Many jurisdictions have statutes that dictate what the speed limit is in particular areas, such as neighborhood surface streets or school zones, which is why a 50 mph zone may drop to a 25 mph zone for no other reason than the buildings adjacent to that street.\n\nSauce:\n\nBS in Civil Engineering\n\n\n",
"Sometimes history decides:\n\n(Many of these things happened throughout the US; I grew up in Utah, so I'll use their highways as an example.)\n\nIn 1942 there was nationwide mandatory gas rationing, and new tires (and the factories and resources to make them) were needed for the military. Speed limits were lowered to 35mph to conserve gas, and to make the roads safer when most cars were driving on worn-out tires.\n\nPost-War the speed limits shot up again, but the highways that had been built between the two world wars were not in the best shape. In 1956 the US started building the Interstate Highway System, with individual states deciding what the speed limit on their stretches of the highways should be. In Utah the speed limit was 70mph. They banked the curves of the new highways to make them safer when the roads froze in the winters.\n\nFrom the mid-70's to mid-80's a nationwide maximum speed limit of 55mph was established to conserve gas during the two oil crises, the first when OPEC embargoed the US and other countries that had assisted Israel during the Arab–Israeli War, the second when Iran and Iraq stopped producing oil during the Iran–Iraq War. One side-effect of this in Utah was that at the slower speeds, cars were sliding off of the inside of those banked curves in the winter.\n\nAs the 80s recession ended, states turned their attention back to infrastructure. In Utah they decided to remedy the cars-sliding-off-banked-curves problem by making the new highways flat, with no banked curves.\n\nAnd then they raised the speed limit to 60, 70, and (starting in 2008) 80mph. So now in the winters, cars slide off of the outside of the curves. (But overall there has been a reduction in speed-related accidents on non-curvy parts of the highways since they raised the speed limit.)\n\nBased on all of that I'd say that speed limits tend to be determined by reactions to whatever came before.",
"There's also something called the 85% rule. Speed is monitored in an area before limits are imposed, and the speed at which 85% of the cars travel (considered a comfortable, safe speed by most drivers), then becomes the legal limit.",
"In Melbourne, Australia, speed limits are often set as part of a knee-jerk reaction to a fatality. Cyclist killed in the CBD - better cut 20 from the limit. Someone crashes in the tunnel - whoops, better cut that 100 to 80, or 60 if there's traffic, because we don't want it dissipating. Motorcyclist hits a car on the Monash - 80km/h it is. \n\nI've recently moved to the UK and I'm loving 70+**mph** on an ordinary motorway. ",
"To add to these responses, one major controlling factor is something called stopping distance, or how far it takes a car to stop. If it takes 100 feet for a car to stop (stopping distance), but you can only see 80 feet ahead of you (sight distance), there is a problem. The faster the speed limit, the higher the stopping distance. The smaller the radius of a turn, the higher the sight distance. Sight distance must always be greater than stopping distance. Keep in mind, there are other factors at play.\n\nAASHTO (american association of state highway transportation officials) publishes books with guidelines on how to design roads. ",
"Roadways have design speeds determined by criteria set forth in governing design standards, but typically the government organization (The Federal Highway Administration, state departments of transportation, counties, or municipalities) who owns the roadway will set the speed limit. This can be done in a few ways and some organizations have standards that will be used to set posted speed limits. For example, certain cities will maintain a consistent posted speed limit on certain classifications of roadways. Finally, sometimes a speed study is conducted along a roadway and is used to determine what the posted speed limit should be. The study collects speed data for every vehicle traveling on the road in a specific period of time, during free flow conditions (non-rush hour). The 85th percentile speed of the vehicles is often selected as being a reasonable and prudent way to set a posted speed limit.",
"Depends. In California, if I remember correctly, they have to do a speed survey, and the speed limit cannot be set lower than what 75% (or so) are driving (at least not without justification). The idea being that the majority will drive sanely, and the purpose of the law being to prevent dangerously low speed limits made for political or financial purposes.\n\nOther states don't have those laws, leading to \"speed trap towns\": The local sheriff, possibly working together with the major and/or whatever other corrupt government there is, set a ridiculously low speed limit, and then ticket everyone driving through.\n\n",
"Most of what's here is pretty accurate. Many considerations go into determining a road's speed limit: the horizontal & vertical alignment, the land use surrounding the road (commercial, residential, schools, etc), number/density of curb cuts, stopping sight distance, pedestrian/bike activity, parking availability, length of a road, intersection alignments, crash history, etc. There is a \"design speed\" that is higher (almost always) than the speed limit at which the road is designed to be traversed safely (in CT some of our highways have 80 mph design speeds, but obviously the limit is 65), and many people were right that the 85th percentile speed is an important factor, although I've often found that to be above the speed limit. Things like lane width (10 or 11 feet instead of 12) can be adjusted to lower the overall speed people travel (they travel slower when the lanes are tighter) and amount of clear zone along the ROW also affects people's speed (again a comfort thing). A lot more goes into determining a speed limit than most people think, and in CT all speed limits have to certified by the Office of the State Traffic Administration (OSTA). A local town engineer or public works director can't just go out and slap a speed limit on a public road and call it a day, it's technically unenforceable.",
"In California, state law does not allow speeds to be set in an arbitrary manner (for example, you are not supposed to be able to request that a speed limit be reduced just because you want people to drive more slowly on your street). There are three recognized methods for determining a road's speed limit:\n\n* __Statewide Maximum:__ There is a statewide maximum (65 mph), though exceptions are allowed.\n* __Standard Values:__ For certain road types and environments, the speed limit is defined in the California Vehicle Code. In these cases, speed limit signs do not need to be posted (though they often are anyway). For example, 25 mph in a school zone, or 15 mph in an alley.\n* __Engineering Speed Study:__ In cases where a jurisdiction wants to use a different speed limit than what would be dictated by the above, the speed limit must be set according to an engineering speed study, which measures (among other things) how fast most people naturally drive on that road. The purpose of speed limits is not to slow people down, it is to discourage dangerously fast driving.\n\nHere's a good summary with a bit more detail: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nEdit: formatting",
"The main factor in speed zoning is supposed to be the 85th percentile speed. Unless there are other compelling factors this is the most important component of setting speed limits. This is based on a large sample of actual speeds traveled on the road in question during favorable conditions. The speed limit should be at the 85th percentile of this data set of actual speeds, and it should also be an iterative process. This is based on the common sense notion that almost all drivers have the judgement to chose a safe and comfortable speed to drive, regardless of the posted speed limit. In reality, this is exactly what happens, speed limits, no matter how high or low they are set have a pretty small impact on the actual speeds people drive. Government studies have proven this, and they have proven that safety and efficiency are optimized when speed limits are set using this method. Here is a link the Massachusetts Speed Zoning manual that describes this process in more detail. _URL_0_\n\nAs you might suspect, it sure seems like a lot of speed limits don't really conform to this standard, and you'd be exactly right! Speed enforcement is a massive money maker for the state, municipalities, and insurance companies. If the speed limits are set at the high end of the speed range that people chose to drive, speed enforcement would be pointless! (Typically whatever the 85th percentile ends up being is rounded up to the next 5 mph, and Federal guidelines recommend a minimum tolerance level of 5 mph for speed enforcement, the net effect being a virtual 100% compliance rate and very small fines when issued). Misinformed or outright untruthful political pandering about making roads safer, and persistent misinformation of tired old lines like \"speed kills\", as well as the fact that odds are generally in your favor for avoiding a ticket, keeps the populace complacent enough that they get to keep bilking us out of our hard earned money. It's not right, and artificially low limits make roads less safe by promoting less than optimal traffic flow. So there's the way it should be, and the way it is, and they aren't the same thing!",
"One time I painted a curb red for about 200 feet down a road... I have nothing to do with transportation but the cops started to ticket everyone who parked there. It was a great day that curb is still being painted red by the city 16 years later. So maybe we can just make up our own rules some times. ",
"From a Civil Engineering perspective, roads are designed with a particular speed limit in mind. Higher speed limit roads have more gradual turns, banked turns, wider road shoulders, traffic in only one direction, more gradual crests at the top of hills, etc. \nPeople will only drive at a speed they feel safe at, regardless of the posted speed limit. If a road is designed for a low speed limit, people will typically drive near the intended design speed of the road, even if the posted speed limit is high. In other words, if the government drastically increased the speed limit for residential roads, people would still drive around current speed limits, because that is the speed where they feel comfortable and in control. (Straight well maintained highways are kind of an exception, if a road is designed for 85 mph speed limits then it will probably also work for 110 mph speeds)",
"Related quesiton: Why are there so low speed limits on certain desert roads, where you can see like 2+km ahead of you, with the street going in a straight line and in near perfect condition?\n\nI am visiting from germany, and US speed limits make me almost fall asleep (literally, not even joking).",
"Sometimes, as anyone who's traveled through St Paul on 35E has experienced, communities can lobby for lower speed limits to reduce noise. \n\n35E is 70 outside of the city and 55 in the city, except for a 3 mile long residential area where it drops to 45. Super frustrating. ",
"depends on where you live, here in germany the speedlimit is mostly defined by how fast your car can go.\n\naleast on the autobahn with good weather and low traffic in an unlimited zone."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol6/section1/td993.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cityofpalmdale.org/Businesses/Public-Works/Traffic-and-Transportation/Speed-Limits"
],
[
"https://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/8/docs/traffic/speedZoning_0512.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ukog8
|
in baseball, how does tagging work with three bases?
|
We have a simplified baseball-ish game in Sweden called burnball. One big difference(among many) in burnball compared to baseball is that there is only one base. To tag players, all you have to do is throw the ball to the player at the "burn-pad" and everyone caught outside the bases are tagged.
I've never understood how tagging works in proper baseball tho. When should the ball be thrown to the first/second/third baseman, and why not the other ones?
EDIT: I expected to get shat on with a stupid question like this but instead received lots of excellent comments! Thanks all! Baseball seems awesome!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ukog8/eli5in_baseball_how_does_tagging_work_with_three/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5qgh1e",
"d5qgngx",
"d5qgw2o"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The most general explanation derives from the concept that there cannot be more than one runner occupying any one base, and you can only move in one direction (counterclockwise). \n\nIf there is a runner on 1st base and the batter makes a hit, the runner on 1st must advance to at least 2nd base. However, if there is a runner on 2nd but none on 1st, the runner can stay and the batter can advance to 1st. \n\nThe ball is almost always thrown to the most advanced base where a runner is forced to go, as this will get the runner out.",
"You have to touch a player with the ball to tag them. However if they are touching a base pad they are immune. So the name of the game is to get the ball to the baseman before the opponent gets to the base.",
"In baseball, there are two ways to get a player out at a base:\n\n- A force out is when the defensive player with the ball touches the base before the runner, when the runner must advance toward that base. For example, a batter who hits the ball into the field of play must run toward first base. If a runner were on first base and a ball was hit into play, then the runner must run toward second base (since the batter must run toward first base). So if the player fields the ball and touches the base, or somebody else fields it and throws to a player who can tag the base ahead of the baserunner records an out.\n\n- If there is NOT a force play, then the defensive player with the ball must physically tag the player with the ball or mitt with the ball inside."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bmp92n
|
why do some cars (typically high performance cars) have front wheels smaller than the back ones ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bmp92n/eli5_why_do_some_cars_typically_high_performance/
|
{
"a_id": [
"emypbrd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A larger tire means that the amount of tire that is in contact with the ground (commonly called the contact patch) will be larger as well. \n\nIf more of the tire is touching the ground, it will be less likely to lose traction or behave in an unpredictable manner. This makes driving at the limits of the cars abilities easier and also increases those limits.\n\nYour question specifically asks about the rear wheels, which in most high performance cars, are the wheels that the motor sends power to. By making those tires wider, you can expect to get more grip when accelerating because more of the tire touches the ground.\n\nImagine trying to open a 100% stuck pickle jar with 2 fingers. That's a tiny wheel with a small contact patch. Now use your whole hand, that's a larger wheel with a larger contact patch. Using only 2 fingers you are more likely to lose your grip or slip. Using your whole hand you are more likely to retain your grip and not slip."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5j6su2
|
how do telephone exchanges work?
|
My local telephone exchange is under "high demand" so I cant upgrade to fibre broadband even though it has been available in my town for years, this got me wondering about what those places actually do.
Do people work there full time?
What are they doing?
What does it look like inside?
Most importantly, what purpose do they serve in the wider phone and broadband infrastructure?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5j6su2/eli5how_do_telephone_exchanges_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbdvlm9",
"dbe03db"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Did you ever have one of those string and cup things as a kid where you would have two cups connected by a piece of string, and if you stretched it tight and spoke into one of the cups, the person listening with his ear to the cup on the other end could hear you? And vice versa.\n\nOk so you have five friends. Amy, Billy, Charlie, Debby and Eve. And you all have a cup and a string. Your all stood in a circle and would all like to talk to each other, but you need to connect each others cups first. Your other friend, Yaris, offers to act as middle man between you all, running round and connecting the cups.\n\nYou want to talk to Billy so you tell Yaris. Yaris takes the end of your string, connects it to Billy's cup and SHAZAM...you and Billy can now talk to each other. When you finish talking to Billy, Yaris runs up and connects Eve's string to your cup because she wants to talk to you. This continues between you all for quite some time and all is well as you have one to one conversations with each other with Yaris running round connecting you all.\n\nThen you get five new friends join the circle. They are Freddie, Geoff, Herbert, Illiad and John.\n\nNow things start getting a bit hectic for poor Yaris in the middle of the circle. He's running round faster and faster having to connect more people in the circle. He's getting a bit puffed out but he's managing.\n\nThen one of you has the bright idea that while Yaris is connecting strings to the cup, he could also be carrying little objects between you all that you want to hand to each other like sweets, notes, books, etc, etc. You decide to call this object transfer service between you all \"The internet\".\n\nSuddenly you decide that you want to talk to Xavier and give him a sweet. Xavier isn't in your circle of ten friends. He's in another circle of friends across the room playing the same game and Yaris doesn't even know who he is.\n\nSo Yaris takes your sweet and your string and runs over to the middle man in the centre of that far circle of friends and asks him if he will connect this string to Xavier's cup and pass along the sweet to him before running back to continue connecting the cups between your circle of friends.\n\nAnd so this continues, with Yaris occasionally popping off to other friends circles to fetch and retrieve strings and objects, while occasionally gets visits from the middle man from the other circle of friends asking him to connect people from the far circle to your circle.\n\nAnd then Kelly, Lisa, Mike, Neil and Oscar come and join your circle of friends, taking the total to 15 not including you. Yaris can no longer keep up, and the length of time your having to wait before your string is connected to the persons cup you wish to speak to is growing longer and longer. The game desperately needs another person to join the middle of the circle but until someone comes along, you just have to get by.\n\nSo the above is a really basic (And like most things when you dumb it down to true ELI5, it's also a tad inaccurate) explanation of how a telephone exchange works on the Public Switched Telephone Network or PSTN as it's known to communication engineers.\n\nYour problem is that at the moment, going back to the string and cup game analogy, your exchange has only so many slots in the circle of friends that can be served by Yaris, so to stop Yaris from shitting his pants and dropping dead from cardiac arrest, they only let him carry small things like sweets and notes between people. Unfortunately you want to give him bigger things to carry, but to do that you need to move to a different circle of friends where the middle man is Beefcake who can carry whole couches on his back. Unfortunately that circle of friends is completely full and until they are prepared to increase the size of Beefcake's circle or replace Yaris with another Beefcake, you can't.\n\nIf you think of the fibre broadband as being \"Something bigger to carry\", you can start to see why you can't have it yet.\n\nMoving away from the ELI5 explanation. Exchanges are basically the point in which your phone line connects to the wider phone network, and indeed the internet. They are Yaris, Xavier or Beefcake in the above scenario. Your phone line travels from your house via a cable or overhead wire, traditionally using twisted copper wiring but can now be fibre optic cable to a junction box or cabinet that basically collects together a bunch of houses phone connections before relaying them onto the exchange where that call is then forwarded on to where it needs to go.\n\nTo answer your other questions in brief...\n\n > Do people work there full time? What are they doing?\n\nSome do have people there full time but most don't, depending on location and size. Automation has reduced the need for a permanent workforce in an exchange unless there is something that really needs looking at (Problems, upgrades, etc). The staff who do visit will be connecting new connections, performing maintenance and installing new kit. It's very rare to have staff monitoring connectivity at one unless its a high tier exchange.\n\n > What does it look like inside?\n\nVaries A LOT. [Here's a UK Openreach one](_URL_0_). Some can look VERY different.",
"So you have what are called public branch exchanges or PBX's for short. These are switch centers located throughout a city which interface between the plain old telephone system or POTS, and other networks like long distance, cellular, and data networks like the internet. The PBX may talk to other PBX's to switch traffic and it may also be wired to a termination point where the call goes out over the telephone wires to various businesses and residences. \n\nThere may be other equipment like line concentrators between the pbx and your phone line but I'm simplifying the description. \n\nThe important part for fiber to the home is the last mile, which is between your home, and the telephone companies equipment. If the network backbone supports fiber in your area, but they haven't upgraded their last mile infrastructure to support it, then you won't be able to get it. \n\nAs for what they look like, any switching center. You walk into a room, usually on a raised floor, and there are tall racks of equipment laid out in rows and columns with switching equipment, computers, servers, all bolted in one above another. Some of the equipment is network stuff like SS7 or IP, like a network switch. Some of it is switching equipment which would be like a switch or router in an IP network. And some of it will be termination equipment where actual phone lines plug in. \n\nIn a modern network everything would be run over fiber optics all the way to your neighborhood, where one of those big boxes you see in your neighbors yard would convert the fiber connection to copper for the run to the actual homes in your neighborhood. But depending on where you live, and how upgraded their infrastructure is, it can be a rats nest of fiber optic, frame relay, ATM, copper, and coaxial cables. \n\nIf you have ever seen the movie Robocop (the original), most of the interior scenes in the lab where Robocop sleeps were shot in the Nortel lab where I used to work. My old manager was actually an extra in the movie. The Nortel switches are the big racks of brown colored equipment which was a Nortel DMS. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/telephone_exchange.htm"
],
[]
] |
|
ckvb49
|
why do your teeth hurt when you have a bad head cold?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ckvb49/eli5_why_do_your_teeth_hurt_when_you_have_a_bad/
|
{
"a_id": [
"evqwe74",
"evqwylo"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"A bad head cold can include a sinus infection. Sinuses run throughout the skull, and when infected can fill with mucus and exert pressure on nerves, including the ones in the teeth.",
"When your sinuses swell from the infection or excess mucus, they sometime put pressure on nerves that run from your mouth past your sinuses. The pressure on the nerves causes sensitivity that can be felt in the nerve endings, i.e. the roots in your teeth.\n\nThe same thing happens to some people when they have a sinus infection or bad allergies."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3gjujc
|
why did isaac newton need to invent calculus to understand how objects move in space?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gjujc/eli5_why_did_isaac_newton_need_to_invent_calculus/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctysxvq",
"ctyt173",
"ctyt36m",
"ctyt3d0",
"ctyt6eb",
"ctywj1k",
"ctywuwa",
"ctyxgp6",
"ctyycly",
"ctyyq8j",
"ctyzp6r",
"ctz008h",
"ctz0v4x",
"ctz1w51",
"ctz2cip",
"ctz3uwe",
"ctz5ljn",
"ctz88yj",
"ctz8wu1",
"ctzapuq",
"ctzdkok",
"ctzfi6h",
"ctzhzd0",
"ctzqity"
],
"score": [
4,
4251,
201,
2,
12,
9,
13,
3,
81,
6,
2,
51,
5,
5,
4,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's just how the real world is; it requires the concepts of calculus to model many things reasonably well. The previously existing maths were insufficient to the task of describing what needed to be described. ",
"So, Calculus in its most basic form is the mathematics of change. So, if I'm in a car and I'm at a red light and it turns green, I change a whole bunch of things. Obviously, I start to move forward, so my location or position has changed. Also, I have increased my speed, because I was going 0mph at first and now I'm moving. In fact, you could keep going, and find that the rate of change of my speed is changing as well, and we could go on and on. One of the biggest reasons we have study physics is because we want to predict things, especially when it comes to motion. In order to understand motion, we need to understand how things change and use that to make predictions. Now, when things are constant, or unchanging, it is pretty easy to find things. However, when we start to study things that are not constant (which is more like the real world), it's not so easy. Look at the graphs [here](_URL_0_). Notice how easy it would be to predict the blue line. It increases at the same rate, which is why it is a straight line. Now, the orange graph is more complicated, and its hard to make predictions about it. I mean, it goes down pretty fast, then up, but then back down again. Without calculus, we wouldn't be able to find things about this graph, such as how fast it is changing *at one specific point*. This is easy for the line because it is the same all the time. Calculus gives us the tools to solve these problems.\n\nEdit- Clarity \n\nEdit 2- Wow, obligatory \"this blew up\" and \"RIP my inbox\". Thank you all so much! I typed this out last night pretty quickly, and I could go on and on about math and how beautiful and elegant it is. I don't have much time right now, but I promise that if you post any questions I'm more than happy to answer them, and I will deliver! And again, thank you all so much, I was originally a Physics education major but have since switched to just a Physics track, but I hope to teach someday. If there is interest, I'd certainly go into more depth into topics like Physics, from Newton's laws and maxwell's equations for E & M or Calculus 1-3 concepts. ",
"Inventing Calculus was almost a side effect.\n\nHe was interested in seeing the math behind the movement. He of course started with what was already possible in math. It simply was not sophisticated enough. \n\nThe movement of an object where only one gravitational force dominates the movement is relatively easy. The math before Calculus could be used to find that formula.\n\nThe problems arise when there are multiple bodies interacting with each other. The position of Mars influences the position of Earth, but Earth influences Mars. This moves both planets into new positions at the next instant, where they influence each other again. Before Calculus this could not be calculated.\n\nIn order to calculate this complex set of influences new techniques in math were necessary. \n\nThe new techniques are called Calculus.",
"He did understand how objects move in space and couldn't describe it using math. And then he found a way to make it work.",
"Calculus is used to determine things like the velocity of an object at a given time, when it is under acceleration so the velocity is not constant. The problem with trying to do that without calculus is that velocity is defined as \"rate of change of position\". In order to calculate the rate of change in position (without calculus), you need two different locations and a known time interval between them, which makes calculating the velocity of an object at a single point impossible to calculate. \n\nEnter calculus.\n\nUsing calculus, you can determine a *limit* value, meaning that you basically just keep moving to a cost and closer point in time until the two points are effectively on top of one another and determine what number is being approached. \n\nWorking from those limits, we can find derivative equations. A derivative of an equation that gives position of an object at time *t* will give the velocity of the object at time *t*, and the derivative of that equation will give an equation for the acceleration of that object at that time. This can also be done on reverse, and is called integration. Integration is useful when you know that something will be under constant acceleration and wish to find a formula for its velocity or position at any given time.",
"I actually do believe that the overall theme is that calculus made instants manageable in physics and mathematics. The fundamental constituent of calculus is the limit, which lets you calculate the value of a function as it's input approaches, but doesn't reach, a certain value. \n\nSo say you have two points where (time, x as a function of time), (t1, x1), (t2, x2). To know how fast something is moving between two different times, you would have x1-x2/t1-t2, ie the difference in position divided by the difference in time. To know what is happening at an instant, you can't use a difference 0, nor can you use just any old small amount, you need something that acts like 0 but isn't. That basically is calculus, 'tiny bits' as my calc teacher called it. The limit gets you closer to 0 than any real number, without ever being 0. Its amazing stuff.\n\nTo know what is happening not between 1s and 2s, not between 1s and 1.1s, not even 1s and 1.00001s but what is actually happening AT 1 second is powerful, and doable because of the limit. When an object is moving in space, the forces acting on it occur continuously, and so being able to model the force (and thus acceleration) at each instant, you can then model the velocity and position. All of them relate and calculus is the tool that allowed any physics deal with complicated motions. All in all, calculus made the instant a workable mathematical concept. \n\n",
"Before Newton and his calculus, there is a thought problem that I find illustrates the fundamental conundrum facing mathematicians at the time, which Newton ultimately solved.\n\nIf I need to cross a room 10 feet wide, at a rate of say 5 ft/min -how long do you think it would take me to cross the room? You'd think 2 minutes, right? But what if I did the math piece-meal? The first five feet would take me a minute, yes. What about half of the remainder? Easy, 30 seconds. Now apply that process consistently for the remainder of the distance. If you keep halving the distance, while the distance left to be crossed gets infinitely small, you haven't actually reached the other side of the room. So what is the answer now? Newton developed from that the concept of limits, which allowed us to equate the idea that while the calculation can continue infinitely, it approaches a number, that for all intents and purposes is equal to what we intuitively think it is, in this case 2 minutes. ",
"The problem that Newton had was a simple one. There are a bunch of different things happening/moving at the same time but there is no way to calculate the relationship between those things in an accurate way.\n\nYou can quantize the movements and add up instantaneous calculations to get close to the answer but to get an accurate answer he needed an infinite number of quantizations. This is what calculus is all about, a method of accurately calculating with infinite number of quantizations of a function. \n\nAnd differential calculus (which is also invented by Newton) is the method of accurately calculating multiple variables/functions like those at the same time. ",
"Newton's primary motivation for inventing integral calculus was to prove the [Shell Theorem](_URL_0_) which was fundamental to his analysis of planetary motion. The shell theorem says that the gravitational attraction of a sphere (occupying a finite volume of space) is the same as that for a point mass located at the center of the sphere.\n\nThis is not obvious (other shapes do not have this property), and needed development of the integral calculus to prove. Newtons Law of Gravitation applies to *point masses* and he needed to prove to himself that a spherical distributed mass behaves like a point mass (concentrated at the center) before he released his gravitational theory.\n\n\n\n",
"So, question:\n\nWas calculus invented or discovered?\n\nI mean, on the one hand, you could make the argument that Calculus is a theory as to how objects change, and how that change interacts with itself. Or something like that. Point is, Calculus refers to a theory, and a mathematical system to understand an observation that we see. The guy that came up with that theory came up with something original - therefore he invented it.\n\nOn the other hand, I would personally make the argument that the noun Calculus is not primarily the name of a mathematical system, but instead a descriptor for underlying interactions within our reality. It wasn't invented, instead by observing reality and extrapolating, the rules to dictate a mathematical system were discovered. Thus, Calculus was not discovered - in an alternate reality with the same physical interactions the same system would be discovered.\n\nI ask only out of curiosity of course.\n\nA similar seeming question would be \"was gravity discovered or invented?\". I'd make an argument that gravity was discovered, and describes a fundamental way that our reality interacts with itself. It could also be argued that gravity refers to a mathematical system invented to describe that interaction.\n\nMost of the time I see others are pretty good about saying gravity was discovered, or the system surrounding gravity was discovered; but I see it repeated in here quite a few times that Calculus was invented and it doesn't seem to me like it was.",
"I feel strange every time I see people taking about Calculus; when I was at school we learned this stuff but it was never referred to as Calculus, which for years left me wondering what Calculus was and why we were never taught it at school. It was only when I started reading up about it that I realised it was all very familiar, and that we had been taught it. But why didn't they call it Calculus?\n\nI did Mathematics GCSE and A-Level in the UK between 1995 and 1999.",
"A car doubles its speed from 1 mph every minute for 5 minutes, eventually going 32 miles per hour. \n\nWhat was the average speed?\n\nA rough (but not very good) estimate is that it was going 1 mph at the start and 32 at the end. Average of about 16 mph.\n\nBut wait, if it doubled every minute then it only got to 16 mph at the start of the last minute. For the other four minutes it was slower than that.\n\nSo let's add up the speed at the end each minute and divide by 5 to get a better estimate. 2+4+8+16+32 = 64 divided by five is 12.8 mph.\n\nThat's a better average speed estimate. Now we could do the same for seconds.... milliseconds.... and as we approach the smallest time value (aproaching zero) you get a very good average speed estimate. \n\nThat's a fairly roughshod intro to integral calculus. \n\nEdit: words ",
"So Newton is credited with discovering Calculus but it really didn't work out quite that way. \n\nDescartes and Fermat understood dedicates pretty well. You can find a description of derivatives of a polynomial in Descartes book Geometry. It won't look like modern Calculus but neither did Newton's\n\nIntegration was also somewhat understood. This is evidenced by the work Newton's advisor and predecessor Barrow did on the fundamental Theorem of Calculus. It was suspected and generally thought to be true but not yet proven. \n\nWhat Newton did was discover and prove three things; the product rule, the chain rule and the fundamental theorem of calculus. \n\nWhy did he want these things? Because he wanted to solve differential equations: that is his physics generated equations that related some function, say f(x) with its derivatives. Such an equation might be y(x)=-y''(x). \n\nThe bulk of what you learn in three semesters of calculus was material already generally understood, though oddly the vast majority of the techniques you learn wouldn't be developed until the 19th century by people like Cauchy, Riemann and Weierstrauss. On the other hand Differential Equations is what Newton was after. \n\nMy advisor said it best I think when he said (I assume not originally), \"The Calculus is a tool for solving differential equations.\"\n\nThe equations of mechanics are the equations in play when we talk about Newton. He laid down some simple laws relating force and momentum and wrote down equations to solve mechanical problems and his techniques provided solutions. ",
"Newton didn't invent calculus anymore than the first person who built a house invented wood. He discovered calculus in his pursuit to explain the universe.",
"Calculus is the mathematics of instantaneus change (or rate or slope). By instantaneus change we mean the change thats possible to happen in an instant. And by instant we mean a VERY SMALL braket in time (it doesnt necessarily needs to be time) smaller than a second, than a millisecond and any division of time we know BUT bigger than zero. This is perhaps the most critical point in calculus, we call that braket in time a time differential.\n\nSay you programmed a robot that set its speed equal to the function V=t^3+2t^2-20t+4. If you pay attention you'll notice this is a 3rd degree polinomial that slows down and speeds up. You can probably guess it must have acceleration. The problem is that the acceleration also changes with time, the acceleration is a function of time. With your regualr algebra methods it would be impossible to calculate. But with calculus you can get to the function of the acceleration that would be a=3t^2+4t-20. The acceleration is now defined for every point in time.\n",
"Honestly, most of these responses are not very ELi5... So I'll try to make it simple. \n\nImagine you go visit your parents' home 80 miles away, and you arrive at your destination in one hour. You would conclude that your travel speed was 80 miles per hour (mph). However, along the trip there were stop lights, speed bumps, you had to pee so you stopped at a gas station, etc... From this you realize that your speed was not always 80 miles per hour, but it changed. At some points along your travels you were not moving, at some you were going 80 mph and at others you were going slower or faster. 80 mph is merely your average speed. Isaac Newton invented Calculus to answer what was your exact speed at every single point along your journey. ",
"First, calculus was invented independently by Leibnitz. In fact our modern way of thinking about calculus is closer to Leibnitz thinking. BTW getting calculus to be formally correct required a major effort by the brightest mathematicians of the 19th century. This stuff is amazingly difficult to get right. \n\nSecondly, Newton built on previous work in the topic. Area computations via division into small area parts - the way one computes integrals - was already done by the Greeks in some cases. \n\nThat is in no way trying to shrink newton contribution to science, but inventing calculus is one of his lesser contributions. Since he did not invent it, and it was done independently. He is still probably the greatest scientific mind in history... ",
"I think the more important question here is how the heck he thought up calculus in the first place. That is what's astonishing.",
"Because the math didn't work. After several years with advanced 'observations', which is just watching what happens and recording the information, people knew the answer without calculus. \n\nThey could see the sun and the planets and record what they did. Then they applied the results to current understandings of physics and math and things didn't add up.\n\nNewton saw that there had to be an answer and a way to calculate the answer mathematically. People just had not figured it out yet. \n\nThis is where newtons genius and understanding of math kicked in. He didn't find the real answer he found a way to do the math backwards and cheat one of the numbers to give a result.\n\nDoing the math backwards correctly is impossible. Because for the correct answer h would be 0. But h is a divisor and you can't divide by 0 so the math is impossible. Newton realized if you pick a number close to 0 and set that as h you can cheat the math and get an answer. The answer will never be exact but if you set h low enough you can derive an answer that is close enough to the real answer to be within tolerances.\n\nSo the why is necessity. The math didn't work so he found a way to cheat it and get an answer that's close enough.",
"One of the earliest uses of calculus was to measure land. If a tract of land is a square, measuring it is easy. If it is along a curved river bank, not so much. ",
"He invented calculus to figure out non-linear equations. Such as the rate of non-uniform acceleration at a specific time.\n\nEssentially it works by taking two points in time infinitely close to each other and measuring the curve at that time to figure out the rate of change at a specific time. \n\nSince then calculus has been used for many more things. I always thought it was really cool that if you take the derivative of the formula for finding the volume of a cube, you would get the formula for surface area of the cube. Take the derivative of that and you get the formula for the length of an edge of the cube. I believe this works for all common 3d shapes.\n\nCube:\nX^3\nSquare\n3x^2\nline\n6x\n\nSphere (volume)\n4/3(pi)r^3\nsphere (SA)\n4(pi)r^2\nsphere(circumference)\n8(pi)r\n\nEssentially by multiplying the leading number by the exponent and then reducing the exponent by 1 you can figure out all the formulas for 3d shapes but you only need to remember the formula for volume :)\n\n~haven't taken calculus for a long time but it was one of my favorite classes. Still feels like mysticism to me a bit. \n",
"He needed it to solve something called the [\"Kepler problem\"](_URL_0_).\n\nJohannes Kepler in 1609 figured out that the planets orbited the sun in ellipses, with the sun in an off-center position called the focus (this is called Kepler's first law).\n\nBut he also noticed that the planets sped up as they were close to the sun, and moved more slowly as they were further away from the sun. What Kepler discovered was that the line from the sun to each planet swept out a pie-shape whose area was always the same for any given fixed time interval (this is called Kepler's second law). Because each planet had an interaction with the sun, but not with each other, Kepler suspected that there was a single attractive force towards the sun that drove these planets orbits.\n\nNow for each planet given a starting position and speed, these two laws governed exactly the rest of the motion and path of the planet completely. The problem is, there was no direct formula for figuring out where a planet was at any given time. What Kepler discovered is that it could be done with a complicated infinite sum, but he did not know how to perform this sum. Kepler was able to relate the size of the orbit with time taken for the planet to complete an orbit (his third law) but he could not pin point the position of a planet by any simpler formula.\n\nNewton invented calculus specifically to solve this problem. He invented a way to actually perform that infinite sum, a technique we now call integration, and differential equations. With the technique Newton was also able to show that Kepler's claim of a single central force that pulled things towards the sun was correct.\n\nUsing the formulas already derived by Nicole Oresme and Galileo Galilei, Newton was able to extend them them show, using calculus, that the central force that pulled things towards the sun was also the same as the force of gravity. Thus Newton proposed the universal force of gravity.",
"He didn't need calculus to understand motion. It's actually the opposite, Newton's prior understanding of motion is what allowed him to develop calculus.\n\nNewton's earlier paper, \"On the Motion of Bodies in an Orbit\", Newton already shows a very sound understanding of the relationship and interactions between force, acceleration, velocity, momentum, and position. That was released in 1684, whilst Principia, the book covering the mechanics of calculus and classical mechanics, wasn't completed until 1686 (and not released until 1688). In addition, history seems to suggest Newton didn't start developing calculus on its own until he was prompted by conversations with Hook in 1684, which was after the release of his orbits paper.\n\nWhy did he invent calculus then? In science, we want to do more than understand how and why something happens. We want the power quantify what is happening, and we also want the ability to use what we know to make predictions for the future. This is what calculus does for physical motion.\n\nIt's one thing to understand velocity of an object increases as a force is applied to it, but it's another thing entirely to be able to say precisely how fast that 10 kg object is going after having a a 5 Newton acceleration applied to it for 4 seconds. Only with calculus can we easily answer the second question.",
"Propose this. If i could make vector's that showed average rate of speed, you would see a bunch of lines everywhere for objects. Now lets say i give them a curved motion, But perfectly within a definable function you are familiar with (The unit circle... or an elipse.. or even parabolic..) all these functions in algebra you learn can use simple operations to find location.. BUT:\n\nThats not how things move. it's not perfectly fit to any function, and so to actually show a movement percisely, you need to do some calculus that will show functions that do in fact look like easy things you can manipulate. You can always get easy functions derived, if something has rate of change.\n\nNow for the more technical answer, and nobody has really explained this yet.\n\nI will give you a spaceship A, and it will fly parrallel to earth. Now, let's assume we found the velocity at every point we needed to...but we want the EXACT POSITION at like 4 seconds from when we measure. we found the velocity to make a smooth line at 4mph\n\nSo give me an exact position of the space shuttle.\n\nSo you would say after 1 hour the space shuttle would go 4 miles.\n\nfrom point a to point b.\n\nYou make arbitrary tick marks..\n\nThe problem is...you're off. Why? we found the space shuttle at constant rate completley?????\n\nIn the natural world..these functions never apply, because of the fact we measure the functions with the real number system.\n\nBetween 1 and 2 there is 1.5. between 1.5 and 2 there is 1.75. between 1.75 and two there is..idk fractions that well..but we can get 1.7599999999999999999999999 ad infinitum. \n\nThe actual huge development of calculus was the idea that though these normal algebraic functions are easy to compute when you put in whole numbers or even really complicated decimals, everything in the universe has some really bad margin of error. There is NO SUCH THING as a perfect \"2 miles\". Even if we made that 2 miles into an exact chopped, lazer tuned ruler, we are going to be off as we go smaller and smaller and zoom in past that width of the lazer. There is no actual end. In the natural world, there is no exact definition of percision at all. At some point you are off, and if you don't have math that adresses this, things will look off.\n\nSo that space shuttle was off by a few feet from 4 miles. But thats the thing, over the course of many measurements we will watch as that spaceshuttle will overshoot our entire line. Even if we tried to be so accurate, it wouldn't do anything. Nothing is percise in nature.\n\nSo calculus came in, and approached this problem by doing the instantaneous. This means no actual \"rate\" is needed to be found in the original function. You aren't taking the change in y over change in x. You are finding something about your function as the change in the independent variable gets INFINITELY CLOSE to eachother. As if that whole difference suddenly went away. We understand this now as limits, but back when newton was doing derivative work and liebnz was working on his integration before he invented the limit, they basically summed this up as finding change as it went to infinity. We magically can find a function from our initial function, that at any single x value those functions share, the original and new one, you can find something to tell you something about the original function. And it is completley percise because it gets rid of the problem of percision as well. We take analysis to infinity now, and make up for the devil that is the world not modeled to a complete whole number system, where things can go into their respective 1, 2, 3, 4 slots.\n\nThis is why he invented DIFFERENTIAL calculus. he didnt even know limits back then. if you look at his work you can see that idea come into play. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://imgur.com/I9Xnx2V"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler_problem"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
243z8d
|
how did the whole "brony" community come to be?
|
How long has that been a thing and how in the world did that start? It's just such a bizarre thing to me and I'd really like to know where it came from.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/243z8d/eli5_how_did_the_whole_brony_community_come_to_be/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch3cny9",
"ch3cstm",
"ch3cyk4",
"ch3e52u",
"ch3ef57",
"ch3fsls",
"ch3is63",
"ch3jkx1",
"ch3jrgg",
"ch3nahx",
"ch3pn09"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
236,
14,
8,
10,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The newest iteration of My Little Pony was headed up (originally, not currently) by Lauren Faust. She's been showrunner on a few other shows very popular among geek communities - the Powerpuff Girls probably being the best known - so that got a few people to tune in just for giggles. But it turns out that people who are lonely and a bit asocial* actually take a great deal of joy in an earnestly friendly and optimistic show, and so what began as irony became a serious following.\n\nI'd say it's the western equivalent of Moe anime. Sometimes guys like cute, emotional things too, and it hit just the right chord.\n\n\\* I say this not as a judgment at all - I count myself among them, and I think it did me and a lot of other people a great deal of good.",
"My roommate calls herself a pegasister. If you want an in-depth answer, [here's a decent place to start.](_URL_0_)",
"Ok. It all started on 4chan's /co/ imageboard, around October 2010. This board hosts a thread dedicated to most popular shows, and some guy posted about how the new season of My Little Pony was, well, surprisingly good. At the time Adventure Time was a huge thing on that board and people weren't too surprised to hear about a show for kids being more clever than it first appeared.\n\nTo be fair the pilot was surprisingly touching. And people who watched it immediately started posting pictures from it, and all the things 4chan does so well. But in my humble opinion that's not what made the brony community special, every popular show as I said has a circlejerky thread on that board.\n\nWhat made it different was people from /co/ also started to get together and post about MLP on /b/. No one really understands how it got so big, I personally know most posters from that time, and we were just having fun, posting ponies on a board full of gore and porn, and just being super nice to each other.\n\nWe started uniting under a single, uninterrupted thread, and organizing a bit. The concept of \"love and tolerance\" being attached to the brony community came from the copypasted OP of the /b/ thread which was written by Flutter!shy I think, and which reads:\n\n*“This is thе оfficiаl pоny thrеаd! If thеrе is аnоthеr thrеаd, rеdirеct thеm hеrе.\nEvеrypоny еquаl, еvеrypоn lоvеd, yоu dоn't hаvе tо have a tripcode to be a brony, it’s just for fun!\nLоvе, tоlеrаncе, friеndship, аnd kindnеss аrе thе mоst impоrtаnt things а Brоny cаn hаvе, lеt's sprеаd sоmе jоy аnd pоst sоmе pоniеs!”*\n\nFrom there... After February 2011 it just exploded, I don't think any of us had any idea of how big it'd get. And most of us to this day don't identify at all to the brony-cons, and all the stuff you see supposed to represent bronies. We were just a bunch of nerds who got together and posted funny pictures of ponies on 4chan. But to be clear and bust a myth, it was never ironic. From the start, a lot of members genuinely liked the show, and we just liked to get together and chat while sharing pictures of the show. Again, I personally know some of the first pony posters, the brony fandom isn't \"some joke people took seriously\", it's a light-hearted thing some people took, well, a bit too far in my opinion.\n\nI made a [pretty detailed post](_URL_0_) on the subject a while back, for new community members to know about the fandom's history, if it interests you.\n\nEdit: I had a name wrong, corrected. Also added words.",
"There are some other aspects im not seeing mentioned yet. Im on mobile and wouldn't know where to begin looking for a source but I've read several times how someone, somewhere wrote a blog/article ridiculing the state of modern animation. Among the shows that were named was the new MLP and that didn't sit well with people. Cases were made that it was actually quite an endearing, thoughtful show for its audience so people sorta rallied to its defense which just gave it even more popularity. \n\nFor the adult male audience specifically, there was a bit of tongue in cheek facetiousness (is that a word?) going on. Some people were pretending to like it more than they did just to irk the show's irrational haters. This is where the \"mods are asleep. Post ponies\" bit came from (look that up if you dont know what I mean. \n\nWhat really accelerated the brony community though came from the virtues the show promotes leaking into the mix when these guys on the internet began drawing, animating, and writing their own pony-related art. There are a lot of creative people that spend above average amounts of time on the internet because of its ability to share content. The brony community was first developed almost exclusively with these kinds of people, so take a bunch of creative loners and dump them in a highly encouraging environment with the freshest of breaths of air to its content (because who was drawing ponies before that?) and it's an easy recipe for a hit.\n\nSome credit also goes to the show's art style. It's really quite pleasing to the eye, from the color palette and animation to the proportions used to design the ponies' body shape (theybuse a lot of the golden ratio from what Ive been told)\n\nLast but not least, major credit goes to the show's creator and writers for embracing the bronies. They inserted many jokes into the show that no little girl would get (like references to the big lebowski), took fan requests seriously (see: the origin of the character Derpy) and even directly addressed bronies by name through marketing and took them seriously enough to host endorse cons and panels and all that jazz that geeks love\n\nThere are a lot of reasons that contribute to the show's tipping point but I think most of them intersect at this point where a person is curious why it's so popular so they check it out and discover it's surprisingly charming and entertaining",
"Okay.\n\nSelf Validation is the answer you are looking for OP.\n\nThe need for identity and belonging.\n\nIt is a very sarcastic joke, that all of these older young men would grow attached to a show made for little girls. It's a sarcastic kinda joke that caught on. \"Look at how crazy I am, I watch a show intended for little girls! Look at how secure with myself I am, as I openly embrace the fact that I watch a little girl's television show. This makes me somebody! This makes me daring, and funny!\"\n\nNo. \n\nNo it doesn't.\n\nIt's a bunch of people trying to desperately to find identity, to discover who they are. Like most folks looking for an identity, they cling to small, dumb things that don't really matter, and they use that to paint their identity's.\n\n\"I'm a Bronie!\"\n\nThe show is no longer just a show. It's taken shape into something else. You are now a Bronie. It's a costume. It's a false identity. These kids confuse themselves with it. They pat themselves on the back, thinking that they are just too clever, sarcastic, and daringly open for liking My Little Pony, but the truth is they are just scared and desperately searching for \"someone to be\".\n\nThankfully, Bronies give them an identity, that makes them feel like a funny, clever person, and also a community of other people who put on the same costume as them. A full community of other people who also chose to identify with a sarcastic joke such as being way too old to like a little girl's television show.\n\nNow this community all shares the same opinions, and they are pat each other on the back, reinforcing the delusion that they are all really clever, funny, and daring for liking a little girl's television show, and missing the fact that they are lonely and unsure of themselves, desperately seeking identity and acceptance within a community.\n \nBut it's okay! Because this is what everybody does with everything now-a-days. Replace \"Bronie\" with \"Republican\" or \"Democrat\" and you'll understand my point exactly. People are looking for ways to define who they are in things that are not real and do not matter. Some people call themselves a Bronie. Some call themselves a Republican, and they all hate on liberals. Some call themselves democratic and they all hate on conservatives. They all watch the same dumb, political nonsense which explains to them why they should hate liberals, or why they should hate conservatives. They all hang out with each other and only talk politics with each other. Their republican news programs, or democratic news programs tells them what to think, and when they are all together to talk, all of their views and opinions are the same, due to being formed by an outside source, and they get their self validation. Confirmation that their beliefs are 100% correct. The conservatives constantly bash liberals, and vice versa, because they represent a threat to their chosen identity. A threat to their self. A group of people with completely different views and thoughts than me? Well they MUST be wrong! Let me spend lots of time and resources with my chosen group of people explaining why this other group is WRONG! I will say that it's for the sake of the country, but the simple fact is it's for my own self preservation and validation.\n\nEveryone is looking for someone to be.\n\nPeople find it in different areas. Replace \"Conservative\" or \"Bronie\" or \"Democrat\" with \"Breaking Bad fan\" or \"Sopranos Fan\" or \"The Wire Fan\". Go to the imdb boards. See how people other their use their favorite television shows as a way to paint their identitys, and absolutely refuse to give other shows a chance. No it was good, but I AM A BREAKING BAD FAN. It JUST HAS TO BE THE GREATEST SHOW EVER or else....what does it say about me? what happens to my identity? THE SOPRANOS IS TERRIBLE! LONG LIVE BREAKING BAD!\n\nEveryone is looking for someone to be.\n\nEveryone is looking for ways to paint their identity. Things to cling to. People do it in different ways.\n",
"I think another factor is, a lot of the fans have young children of their own. A lot of children's TV is drek and terrible. Finding something completely kid safe that is also watchable, fun, and surprisingly interesting to an adult is a godsend, instead of watching winnie the pooh for the 457th time, or mickey talks about shapes for the 982 time. ",
"Amid Amidi (owner of the blog Cartoon Brew) claims he helped start it somehow. [Here](_URL_0_)",
"Oh wow, some people really have a deep hate for these other people.",
"A woman named Lauren Faust came up with a brilliant update of an old 80's little girls cartoon - so brilliant that adults could and do enjoy it.",
"Warning wall of text incoming.\n\nIn October 2010 I was browsing the /co/mics and cartoon board on 4chan and saw a relatively new thread with a youtube link to the pilot episode. The main body was something like \"Have you seen the MLP reboot? Its nothing like the original... it might actually be good!\" And being a glutton for punishment I watched it, expecting it to be terrible and hoping to enjoy every second of it.\n\nThis is not uncommon, for example there was a group of 2 or 3 dedicated trolls claiming [Problem Solverz](_URL_4_) is a good show (spoiler its terrible). There are groups of people who get together and watch any ~~shitty~~old cartoon they can find. Things like [Rocket Robin Hood](_URL_5_) or [1960s Spiderman](_URL_7_) or [Jem](_URL_3_) just to take screenshots or try to find [inbetweeners](_URL_6_). Most people who watched those original pilots in the first fews days thought it was going to be some moneygrabbing nostalgia powered reboot and were surprised... it wasn't?\n\nIf you've never seen any MLP, I encourage you to take some time and try to clear your head of everything you know about the community/phenomenon and watch the first two episodes and think try to think about what that show might be and what it might represent for TV. Replace the characters with an all male or a band of five (four guys and one girl) and it could be an action show. The world seems fleshed out, the characters are already developing relationships, it establishes there will be antagonists BUT they are not evil for the sake of evil. I thought it was going to be an action show. An action show for girls 8 to 12.\n\nSo what did we do? We watched it. We talked about it. It got corrupted the way 4chan corrupts things (not just porn/gore pictures but Grimdark imaginings of how the the world is ruled and what else lives beyond the village). People took screenshots and used them as reactions to things. Artists made them human. A community thats always looking for the [next hip obsession](_URL_1_) found something. It got a little out of hand but that's what happens. Later episodes disappointed me by not being an action show, but I was too invested in the characters and the world we were making from the world someone else made to really stop liking it. Was it a good enough show to warrant 24/7 discussions? No, but neither is Gravity Falls or Adventure Time or anything else. But people wanted to discuss it and the easiest way was to make one megathread and keep it there. Then it got out of control.\n\nCareer trolls used pony pictures to piss people off. /b/ decided they liked it, or maybe decided they hated it. The site staff banned pictures outside of /co/ and /b/ and the Streisand Effect made it even bigger. I think the only other franchise that had this treatment from 4chan was [Touhou](_URL_0_) but certainly not to the same level. Other people have covered what happened from there well enough for me, so I'm done rambling for now.\n\n\nEdit: One other thing gets the 100% enforced megathread treatment on /co/ but not the sitewide muzzle is [Homestuck](_URL_2_). Homestuck has a community that loves itself as much as bronies love themselves and is almost as hated by everyone else. But no mainstream media is going to hold it up as a Sign of the Times because its not as easy to judge from the outside.",
"Soon after it's premiere in October 2010, it got popular among the folks on 4chan. Needless to say, it caused a troll war, which resulted in a diaspora of bronies across the internet.\n\nUnlike many of the early 4chan bronies, most bronies are bronies because they watched My Little Pony (called MLP by bronies) and enjoyed it. Also, many people enjoy the fandom of the show.\n\n**TLDR: 4chan**"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.netflix.com/WiMovie/Bronies_The_Extremely_Unexpected_Adult_Fans_of_My_Little_Pony/70297884?sod=search-autocomplete"
],
[
"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yonxyTSCqc4dqeb1ImMLvCCp8hYcWeDS964kA0DHehs/edit"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cartoonbrew.com/ideas-commentary/how-cartoon-brew-spawned-bronies-55594.html"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_Xji_CtfpI",
"http://i.imgur.com/nhSVINe.jpg",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestuck",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/18/Jerrica_benton_jem.jpg/800px-Jerrica_benton_jem.jpg",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFLYtEoov8Q",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MfisiGqtEM",
"http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/ab255/garamendes/1_0007_Layer1.jpg",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/spideymeme"
],
[]
] |
|
5palf2
|
how do we know that the world's population is likely to level out and stop increasing so rapidly?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5palf2/eli5_how_do_we_know_that_the_worlds_population_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcpnszl",
"dcpnxk7",
"dcq76w2"
],
"score": [
2,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"Because we know what happens to population growth as countries become more developed. Right now, almost every developed country has a stagnant or shrinking population. This will eventually happen to every country.",
"Because we've observed such trends in developed countries in the past, and expect other countries to share them.\n\nDemographic stage 1: high birthrate, low survivability. Ten-fifteen kids per family, around seven of them die before reaching adolescence, they join the workforce at around 12 with zero education.\n\nDemographic stage 2: improvements in medicine and level of life trigger a demographic explosion. Survivability increases, birthrate is retained. This taxes the environmental resources as fewer people die from famine and disease. It's where many of the developed countries still are.\n\nDemographic stage 3: requirements of worker education increase to underpin improved productivity of labour. People join the workforce at 23-25, following significant investment by their parents. Kids are no longer a quick and easy way to get more working hands into the family, stimulating family planning; two-four kids is all the family can manage. This causes population to level out.\n\nDemographic stage 4: further social and economic developments cause family to have two to zero kids, resulting in a population decline. That's where a portion of the West is.\n\nSo, the end of a demographic explosion as the economic standing of developing countries improves, or we start running out of resources, at which point famine and global warfare will start culling the population down to a manageable level.",
"Human population will obey the same rules as bacteria in a Petri dish.\n\nFirst you have the lag phase- where the bacteria are too young to reproduce and are getting used to their surroundings. Very little reproduction happens in this stage.\n\nLog phase comes next - the bacteria become accustomed to their surrounding and begin to multiply, rapidly. \n\nThird stage - stationary stage. The birth rate and the death rate are the same. \n\nFinal stage- death stage/decline stage. All of the nutrients in the dish have been used up so there is no more food. The waste products the bacteria make start to kill them as there is nowhere to run. The population begins to decline. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2d30cn
|
spicy food
|
Why, when eating something very spicy, do you have to constantly eat more to delay the inferno in your mouth?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2d30cn/eli5_spicy_food/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjlkexq"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The capsicum in spicy food basically causes a pain response which is what makes it feel like your mouth is burning. That works by stimulating nociceptors (which are the \"pain\" nerve cells), which in turn send a signal to your brain informing it that your mouth is sore.\n\nIf you stimulate other nerves in a similar area though, your brain can't / doesn't focus on the two signals at the same time, so it ignores the background feeling (pain) in favour of paying attention to the movement of food in your mouth. That temporarily blocks the pain and makes you feel better. It's the same reason why rubbing the area near an injury helps ease the pain - your brain can't deal with two signals at once so it ignores the one that isn't changing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
209u14
|
how does artillery work in a modern military?
|
Artillery seems like such a old-fashioned weapon, but it's used all the time by first rate forces like USA and Israel. How is it accurate enough to be useful? When is it more useful than other options like air attack or shoulder-fired missiles?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/209u14/eli5_how_does_artillery_work_in_a_modern_military/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cg155ya",
"cg15qk5",
"cg16q4p",
"cg1ey4h"
],
"score": [
15,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Artillery is actually quite accurate, the muzzle velocity of an artillery piece is known (and gravity is constant) so you can calculate the trajectory with very high precision.\n\nWith a good spotter you can correct for wind after a shot or two and start pounding the target relentlessly.\n\nAirstrikes are fast, but they require air superiority and can only carry a small payload. If air superiority cannot be established (the target is protected by nearby AA weaponry) and cruise weapons aren't available (not all armies can afford multi-million dollar GPS guided warheads) artillery is still a good option.\n\nInfantry portable weapons have short ranges (they can fire back) and low payloads, making them poor choices for hard targets.\n\nArtillery provides a way to cheaply and accurately deliver a lot of ordinance to a target while remaining out of range of any infantry or armored vehicles that may be defending the location.",
"Artillery is \"the queen of the battlefield\". It will kill more opposing soldiers, and destroy more equipment, than any other weapons system in a conventional (non-nuclear) war between opposing armed forces(*).\n\nArtillery, compared to bombs delivered by aircraft, is cheap. It works in all weather. You can pre-build lots of artillery and munitions and store them without much worry that they'll become obsolete.\n\nArtillery is reasonably accurate, and can become very accurate when combined with spotters trained to relay instructions to the gunners. It has a long reach, miles and miles, meaning a given battery can \"cover\" a huge swath of territory.\n\n(*) Artillery is not great against irregular forces engaged in hit & run tactics. You don't want to use artillery to fight small disbursed units in jungles and urban environments.",
"Artillery is wonderful because it's cheap and less resource intensive than CAS (Close Air Support) and packs a bigger wallop than something like a rocket launcher. \n\nAn artillery fire mission is usually initially based off of a known point. This point can either be a known spot on the map or even the spotter themselves. If it's an already known point on the map, the artillery crews will have usually determined the sighting settings to hit that spot and will then dub it a TRP (Target Reference Point). TRPs are usually placed on spots that the enemy is likely to use as a route of travel or in spots that existing weapons systems cannot engage.\n\nIf the spotter is basing the mission off of their own location, they will usually give a distance and direction relative from their own position. Using the distance and a precise measurement of angle called a Milliradian, the artillery team can then set their firing solution correctly and deliver their fire mission.\n\nIf the spotter is sure of their directions, they may simply tell the artillery team to \"Fire For Effect\" or basically to fire until the mission is complete or they get told to stop. If they are unsure, they may ask the artillery to fire a few rounds and then adjust based on ADD/SUBTRACT distance and swinging the fire LEFT/RIGHT. There is a specific method of bracketing your adjustments, but I don't remember it off hand...\n\nThat's modern artillery in a very simple nutshell that ignores unique radio procedures and concepts like FDC (Fire Direction Centre).",
" > used all the time by first rate forces like USA and Israel. \n\nIs it? When was the last time the US used artillery in battle? I mean, specific engagements/employments. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4gf166
|
why are curved stretches of highway tilted?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gf166/eli5_why_are_curved_stretches_of_highway_tilted/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2gyaou",
"d2gyfbm",
"d2gyfjc",
"d2gyogp",
"d2gyp0i",
"d2h40mm",
"d2ho8v3"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
46,
9,
16,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"To minimize the centrifugal force of the turn. The higher the speed limit, the steeper the incline, to account for that force.",
"for the same reason NASCAR tracks are tilted.\n\nAs a car turns, the balance of forces on it changes such that the car is pushed towards the outside of the bend. In order to keep the car from flying off, engineers tilt the road surface towards the inside of the curve to cancel that force imbalance.",
"This is called banking, and it's done to prevent cars from sliding off the road at high speeds.\n\n\nWhen you're driving in a straight line, all the energy of the vehicle is aligned with the direction of travel. If you were to slam on the brakes, you'd decelerate in a straight line.\n\nHowever, when you're going around a curve, your energy becomes compound. It's not just in a straight line in front of you, but also away from the center of the curve. If you were going around a curve, and the road suddenly turned to ice, you'd continue moving forward, but also *outward* along the radius of the curve.\n\nThe banking is done to offset this outward energy and help cars stay on the road - without the banking, taking even a large turn will run the risk of the vehicle sliding left or right, since the amount of friction between the road and the tires is finite, and can be overwhelmed by sufficient speeds.",
"It's called super elevation. \n\nIt's partially to help keep vehicles on the road so they don't go flying off the outside of the curve. \n\nIt's also because a road has to drain water. A 'flat' road will usually be higher in the middle and slope to both sides so that water runs off. \n\nIf you had a curve and the outside lanes were angled to the outside, vehicles would be much more likely to fly off. \n\nSo because they need to drain the whole road to the inside, the whole road is tilted that way. ",
"It's because of physics. When a car drives along curve, the momentum of the car wants it to go straight off the road because its easier than turning. This is why if you turn a car suddenly, it will skid in the direction you were going before you turned. By making the road curved, the force of the road pushing against the car (known as normal force) helps push the car round the turn. You can think of like it being difficult for the car to skid uphill. Furthermore, think if the road was tilted 90°, so it is basically a curved wall. The car would have to turn as it drives alongside the wall because it can't go straight through the wall. A tilted road is a less exaggerated version of this. I can give a more physicsy description if you'd like.",
"For physics reasons already stated and occupant comfort. \n\nNot for water drainage. Crowning is for water drainage. Banked curves are not for water drainage. Crowning is done on flat roads. The center of the road is higher than the edges. ",
"It's to provide additional centripetal force towards the centre of curvature, which is required to keep the car moving in a curve."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7enair
|
why do we feel less need to pee when we are walking?
|
I was talking to my mother on the telephone. And the conversation was too damn good. We didn't talk like that in months. Then, the urge to pee begun and it was too damn strong. I started walking around the room and realized it was easier to hold when walking. Why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7enair/eli5_why_do_we_feel_less_need_to_pee_when_we_are/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dq6k81k"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The urge to pee is something which can be suppressed by the sympathetic (fight or flight) nervous system activity, or becomes more obvious when parasympathetic (rest and digest) nervous system activity predominates. Physical activity shifts the balance towards the sympathetic nervous system.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5we9bb
|
how are different domains(.com, .net, etc.) created and how do we connect to them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5we9bb/eli5_how_are_different_domainscom_net_etc_created/
|
{
"a_id": [
"de9h0pr"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"There's a set of servers called \"root name servers\". These servers are managed by ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) and form the basis of the domain name system. Only top level domains (.space, .io, .tv, .com, .net) that are recognized by ICANN and placed in these root servers are visible on the internet. You can't just arbitrarily pick a TLD like .zoiggy and start using it because it is not registered in the root servers.\n\nNow, if you want to get your own TLD, all it takes is a $250K check to ICANN and some legal paperwork."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
5jmfp9
|
what the job of an ambassador does.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jmfp9/eli5_what_the_job_of_an_ambassador_does/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbha90p"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"\"At the most simplistic level, an ambassador acts as a representative for her or his home country. Ambassadors usually live in a country different from their home one and work as a delegate for and representative of their home country in votes and activities. This means that they are responsible for understanding the culture in which they live as an ambassador, but they must always work to keep the best interests of their home country in mind.\n\nAmbassadors serve as delegates for the United Nations. They are expected to represent the views and standpoints of their home country, and therefore must vote on issues accordingly. They work with other ambassadors to pass legislation that will bring positive change to all countries involved. Ambassadors are responsible for understanding the world’s key issues.\n\nAnother major part of the ambassador’s role is his or her reporting function. Because ambassadors serve on different administrative bodies and committees, they must gather lots of facts and regularly report back to their home country. Their home government then makes important decisions based on this information.\n\nThere are various ways that somebody can serve as an ambassador, whether it be to a different country, on a specific administrative body, or with the United Nations, but the responsibilities of the role are quite similar across locations. As they are all representatives with different focuses, ambassadors must balance serving as diplomats within the country or body that they serve and gathering and reporting information. Ambassadors are true liaisons, as this is the main focus of their responsibilities.\"\n\n[Source](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://careers.stateuniversity.com/pages/7813/Ambassador.html"
]
] |
||
2v84z1
|
what did switzerland hope to gain by decoupling the franc from the euro?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2v84z1/eli5_what_did_switzerland_hope_to_gain_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cofa6ti",
"cofekt4"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"The swiss franc predates the euro. It is one of the last national currencies in Europe, but that's because most of the rest of the Europeans switched to the euro. Switzerland just didn't switch.\n\nInvestors like the swiss franc because the currency is stable and Switzerland has good government and a good economic system. Swiss franc hold their value relative to other currencies well. During a time when interest rates are low and there is financial risk for holding government debt and large currency positions, investors like the perception that swiss franc is \"safe\".\n\nAs investors like euros less, they were buying swiss franc more. As demand increases relative to the supply of swiss franc, so does the price. As the price of a swiss franc goes up, everything that Switzerland makes becomes more expensive to buy and it becomes more expensive for foreigners to visit. That hurts exports and tourism, which hurts the whole Swiss economy.\n\nThe Swiss central bank tried to keep the ratio between the euro and the swiss franc from moving outside of a range they were comfortable sustaining by printing more franc and by intervening in the markets. Eventually the bank decided it was doing more harm than good to make these interventions and they ended that policy.\n\nNow the swiss franc is \"floating\" against the euro, giving it a market price without much government interference. Swiss exporters and tourism businesses will have to make adjustments.\n\nThe reason a country like Switzerland wants to have its own currency and not join a bloc like the euro is made visible by the case of Greece. Right now, Greece uses the euro. It cannot make its currency less valuable (which would make it cheaper for foreigners to go to Greece as tourists, for example, or make its exports cheaper for foreigners to buy). This process, called \"devaluation\" is one way a government can react to an economic recession, but when your country is in a currency bloc, either every country in the bloc has to do it, or none of them can.\n\nBy remaining independent, Switzerland controls its own destiny in this regard.",
"You can also gain financial independence and do things like issue more currency. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1nj502
|
why can't someone just make a giant "rain cycle" machine to purify water for people in other countries?
|
I can't imagine that it would cost a TON of money to build one. It would probably be less expensive than the reverse osmosis thing they have going now. Just boil the water to kill contaminants, the boiled water evaporates, then comes out nice and purified.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nj502/eli5_why_cant_someone_just_make_a_giant_rain/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccj1o36"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"the heat would require a heat source, electricity or natural gas. Some places may not have the infrastructure to handle that currently, so it would cost a hefty sum just to get that working, and a pretty penny to keep it working.\n\nSecondly you would need to collect the waste water, which again, would require infrastructure, and a pretty penny to maintain.\n\nLast thing that I am going to mention is a facility. While it doesn't need to be massive, it would need to be fairly large. Again cost to create and maintain would be fairly high. You would require skilled labourers to tend to the facility which again, costs a fair bit of money.\n\nUltimately this system would probably cost more than what the country can afford. The bigger the population the larger and more costly the facility.\n\nNote: I originally wrote this with third world countries in mind, but still believe it to be mostly accurate for developed countries as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5o9dh1
|
what did george lucas do specifically to make him so hated?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5o9dh1/eli5_what_did_george_lucas_do_specifically_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dchmsgw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Nearly destroyed Star Wars with the digital releases with edited scenes.\n\nThen the prequels just about nailed the coffin closed for me. \n\nJar jar binks; han shot first."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3rfu3s
|
how can i have a crippling migraine that last for hours but a little bit of sleep instantly makes it go away?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rfu3s/eli5how_can_i_have_a_crippling_migraine_that_last/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwnov2d"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You need to be seen by a physician... Rule out aneurysm, or something else potentially very serious. Not kidding one little bit. Do it immediately. I'm a PT who works under a direct access environment which means I can see patients without a referral, and if you were my patient, I wouldn't touch you with a 10 foot pole until you were cleared by a physician first. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
b8m3la
|
what is a “visa” when people talk about traveling to a different country?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b8m3la/eli5_what_is_a_visa_when_people_talk_about/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejylhlw",
"ejymk4t"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"So a visa is a document which allows you to stay in a specific country for a specific timeframe. The stamp ypu get is just your entry and exit date. ",
"Visa is a permission to enter a foreign country for various purposes.\n\nMany countries let you enter visa-free or you can get a visa at the border, especially for tourist purposes or short stays. In these cases the stamp you get into your passport acts as visa.\n\nIn other cases you need to go to the embassy of the country in question beforehand and apply for a visa before you leave on your trip. This is usually the case with countries that aren't very friendly to citizens of your country (Russia to most Western European countries or US citizens wanting to travel to North Africa/Southwest Asia) or if you want to stay for longer, especially for studying at university or working.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
cousbm
|
why have guns in common stores in the us?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cousbm/eli5_why_have_guns_in_common_stores_in_the_us/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ewlc5p4",
"ewlc7o0",
"ewle8x2",
"ewleg8u",
"ewleitf",
"ewlesl4"
],
"score": [
23,
20,
3,
10,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Not as many Walmarts have guns for sale as you think. Mostly areas with heavy hunting in it because there aren't as many chain hunting shops out there and they can be cheaper to buy from than mom and pop gun shops. But almost any Walmart with a sports area sells ammo.",
"We also have stores that are specifically for guns, and they are often considered to be better stores with more knowledgeable staff and often better prices. \n\n\nThe simple truth is that a lot more people in the USA both legally can have guns and actually do buy guns. Plus hunting is super common in rural areas. So for big-box stores that by default try to sell literally everything... That includes guns.",
"It's just a business decision for Wal-Mart -- guns are something they can stock and sell at a profit, same as everything else on their shelves. Whether that's stupid or smart, morally right or wrong, isn't part of their decision-making process.",
"In some parts of the country, Walmart has basically pushed all the smaller retailers out of business. They want a monopoly so they sell everything people want.\n\nIn some parts of the country, it's perfectly normal to have guns & shoot them recreationally. There's plenty of people who live in the country & need them to shoot varmints & larger pests. It's not at all weird to see guns or just go shooting on a weekend outing. Some of these people live an hour away from the nearest cop & know that they need to be able to protect themselves.\n\nSince people buy guns, Walmart sells them. As much as you hear about violent gun crimes, the majority of gun owners are responsible people who would never consider breaking the law.\n\nThe core of the gun control debate is balancing out these people's wants, needs & feelings against the unhinged assholes who are criminal and the views of people who live in more urban areas where there's no good reason to have firearms..",
"The main appeal of stores like Wal-Mart is that you don’t have to go to seven different places to complete your shopping list. And in plenty of towns, guns are as commonplace as tools or sports equipment. Sure, the actual gun store might have knowledgeable staff and a more carefully arranged selection, but they sure don’t have ground beef, socks, or recliners. \n\nSometimes, the Wal-Mart becomes so popular that it drives all of the local specialty stores out of business.",
"The majority of walmarts do not have guns. Its mostly rural walmarts that stock them. America is giant and untamed, you people in the old world honestly cannot comprehend how vast it is until you come here and see the interior states. We have huge amounts of land, both public and private for hunting and other recreational opportunities. For many communities, walmart is the only store you need for 99% if your purchases. Why go to a gun store for a common rifle with common ammo? Why drive several hours to go to a big city with niche stores to purchase whats essentially the same thing except much closer to home? Additionally, walmart has killed off much of its competition that existed before it so even if you had a gun store nearby, it may now longer be an option. \n\nThis may also blow your mind, but I’ve seen gas stations with integrated gun stores in rural america. Its just another product. Hard to wrap your head around if you aren’t used to it. But just realized they are mostly used for hunting the abundant wildlife on the immense tracts of land that isolate our cities."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
w08av
|
how/why does the nba's poison pill contract, like the one offered by houston to asik and by toronto to fields, work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/w08av/eli5_howwhy_does_the_nbas_poison_pill_contract/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c595q7x"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Some teams cannot go over the cap or wish not to hurt themselves in the long run with a contract that is \"poisoned\". Using Asik's example, his contract I believe is made to go 5m/5m/15m in '13, '14, and '15. But when an opposing team offers this kind of contract to a restricted free agent, it is counted evenly across all three years like 8.3m/8.3m/8.3m, which gives it some cap flexibility across all three years. If the Bulls choose to match that offer sheet (since he's a restricted free agent), it will count against their team the same way Asik's contract is structure. So during 2013 and 2014 years, it will have a 5 million dollar penalty against their cap, but in 2015, Asik will be counted as 15 million in their salary budget and teams don't like to commit so much money to a player like him, because it severely hampers your ability to sign free agents. Therefore, Chicago is less inclined to match Asik and let him go, even though he might be considered a valuable asset to them. Toronto is doing the same thing to the Knicks, since there are rumors of Nash going to the Knicks, so Toronto is sort of bullying the Knicks in order to choose between Fields or Nash."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
217yss
|
as a 17 year old boy i am attracted to girls around my age, ie. 15-18. how/why do people stop getting attracted to people under 18?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/217yss/eli5_as_a_17_year_old_boy_i_am_attracted_to_girls/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgagz7d",
"cgagzpv",
"cgah2y7",
"cgah66b",
"cgahgfi"
],
"score": [
17,
4,
2,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"Someone 35 years old is at a very different place in their life than a 17 year old, and generally are interested in different things - maybe sipping from a glass of red wine while reading a novel rather than staying up until 4 a.m. doing shots of Jager.\n\nIt's not that 18 year old girls aren't attractive - the existence of cam sites proves they are - but just that it's more fun and interesting to be around people at similar places in their life. And somehow, people your own age become attractive, whereas someone that age if you considered them when you were fifteen years younger would just look old. Maybe partially because of them being into the same things and interests and stages of life you are makes them attractive.",
"I guess it comes with maturity. Once you really stop being a child, you no see underagers like yourself and thus you stop being interested in them. At least for me, I find this often to be true. ",
"Strict liability and life as a \"sex offender\"",
"Well there is a difference in physical attraction and personal attraction.\n\nI would say that they physical attraction mostly stays. Even a 90yr old man would probably find a 17yr old female physically attractive. \n\nAs far as personal attraction, it all has to do with maturity and interests. Can you imagine what it would be like for you to date someone in the 5th grade? Your mindset is in a different place as well as maturity. Would you really be able to date someone that can't really relate to things as you do because they lack the life experience?\n\nNot meant as an insult, but someone 5 years older than you views you as you would view someone 5 years younger than you.",
"Really they don't. They just continue being attracted physically but knows that since they wouldn't be mentally close to people that are too young for them and that the people that are young would not do well in a relationship with someone older, because of moral issues they avoid contact of that nature. Personally Im 18 and im going to break taboos here and say that occasionally il see a 15 year old that's hot. She'll be well developed and all. I find her physically attractive but when I find out shes 15 (which is a pretty big difference) i feel creeped out because i feel like if i were to enter into a \"relationship\" with here it would be manipulation more than an actual relationship. \n\nSo to summarize, physically you are still attracted but mentally you move on and it becomes creepy. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9ux0v2
|
what is gonna change because of the democrats taking over the house?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ux0v2/eli5_what_is_gonna_change_because_of_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e97o9uz",
"e97ps39",
"e97s8xr"
],
"score": [
29,
7,
6
],
"text": [
"It basically means that zero laws will be passed by either side for the next few years.\n\nRepublicans can't push any bills because the Dems have the house and Dems won't get anything passed because the Republicans actually picked up seats in the Senate.\n\nUnless there's a true bi-partisan issue that arises then it's going to be a very stagnant government.\n\nLook forward to executive orders from Trump. It's exactly what Obama did when he was in the same situation.",
"House intelligence committee won't be run by a Trump toady and you'll start to hear what's really been going on. If you care to listen. Most Trump loyalists won't belive it, but it will be there.\n\nAlso it will be much harder for Trump to bury the evidence from the Mueller investigation.\n\nAlso, when the recession caused by the tax cuts, deficit spending and trade war hits, Republicans will blame the Democrats (but they would anyway).\n\nAlso, your health care, coverage for preexisting conditions are safe for two more years, as is your Social Security and Medicare. ",
"Basically Senate confirmations will still go through, no Laws of substance will be passed, and the House investigations of suspected corrupt Republicans will increase since the House Democrats now have Subpoena power."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
22ti23
|
when an animal looks into a mirror, does it actually know it's looking at itself?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22ti23/eli5when_an_animal_looks_into_a_mirror_does_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgq7uff",
"cgq7w5b",
"cgq8nrp",
"cgqasqq",
"cgqfoj8",
"cgqgclb",
"cgqgz0z",
"cgqh9ga"
],
"score": [
16,
19,
8,
15,
2,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"At least some of our cats recognize their reflection. The others may simply ignore their reflected images. We had a cat who who pose sideways in front of the glass oven door every morning and, look at himself.",
"See: [Mirror test](_URL_0_)\n\n",
"If the animal can be described as 'self-aware' then yes, they do. Notable examples include us and dolphins.",
"Depends on the animal. Humans (after ~18 months of age) can, as well as chimps, elephants and a couple other animals. The way they test for it is by putting the animal in a room that has a mirror. After the animal is comfortable with the mirror, they mark the animal (called the 'test' mark, usually somewhere on the face) in a position that is only visible to the animal via use of the mirror (e.g. not on the stomach or hand). Now they have to do this in a way that the animal isn't aware of them putting the dot on, which can be quite tricky, but can be done by distracting the animal in some way. Now let the animal look at the mirror once again, if the animal interacts with the test mark, such as moving the hand up to touch the mark then we conclude that the animal knows it's looking at itself. Now they will also put another mark called the 'control' somewhere on the animals body that isn't visible to the animal. And they will only conclude that the animal thinks it is seeing a picture of themselves if they interact with the test mark and not the control mark. Try it out with your animals at home to see how the respond.",
"anecdotally, my dog does not pay attention to his reflection but does watch my and my SO's reflections if he does not have a straight view of us. \n\nWe have a small apartment and many mirrors to make it seem more spacious.",
"Yes, I'd like to understand this better as well. \nAnd why do some dogs seem to notice themselves in the mirror and respond as if it's another dog, whereas my dog has never seemed to even notice her reflection. ",
"Question, if you and your dog go in front of a mirror will the dog recognize you in the mirror? And if you pet it (so it knows you are touching it) while it looks in the mirror will it then recognize that it is looking at itself because of what it sees occurring in the mirror (itself being pet)?",
"Some do, some don't. Dolphins, whales, elephants are arguably self aware. Some animals can learn that it's themselves. A couple of the kittens I've had would attach the mirror like it's a strange cat, but after a while they would realize it's not another cat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
af96ns
|
why can radio waves go through walls, but infared cant go through glass?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/af96ns/eli5_why_can_radio_waves_go_through_walls_but/
|
{
"a_id": [
"edwj1ew",
"edwj39d"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Wiki... it's the size of the wavelength I believe...smaller are able to penetrate more dense objects while larger cannot. I may be wrong because I too didnt look it up so all corrections are welcome.",
"IR remotes work fine with devices behind glass. Infrared can go though glass unless designed to block IR. Example: Glass used in housing is designed to stop it for energy star ratings."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3iyz5g
|
iran before revolution
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3iyz5g/eli5_iran_before_revolution/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cukyukb",
"cukyvn8",
"cukyxto",
"cukyy61",
"cukzwno",
"cul0psq",
"cul193o"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
99,
10,
11,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Only if \"normal European countries\" have literacy rates under 50%. FYI Iranians massively improved living standards after the 1979 Islamic Revoution, so today Iran is deemed to be a \"Highly Developed Nation\"\n\nIranians gained 22 years in life span, and literacy rates went from below 50% to over 98%.\n_URL_0_\n\nAccording to the UN,\n\n > Only one country (the Republic of Korea) was able to do better.\n\n_URL_1_\n\n",
"The pictures were taken by elites who had the financial ability to take pictures, not that things are good now but most pictures of pre revolutionary Iran are not a true representation of how things were, if it did there wouldn't be a revolution ",
"Before the revolution Iran was ruled by Shah Reza Pahlavi. Power was clustered among a close network of the Shah's relations and friends. During the 1970s the gap between Iran's rich and poor grew. Distrust of the Shah's economic policy and resentment of his autocratic style fueled dissent against his regime.\n\nOpposition voices rallied round Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a shia cleric living in exile in Paris. Promising social and economic reform, the ayatollah prescribed a return to traditional religious values, which struck a chord with many Iranians.\n\nAs the 1970s drew to a close, a series of large-scale, increasingly violent anti-Shah protests swept Iran. Instability, including a wave of general strikes, continued throughout the year, crippling the country's economy.\n\nIn January 1979, the Shah left Tehran for an \"extended vacation\". He was never to return. All over Iran statues of the Shah were torn down by Khomeini supporters.\n\nIn his final act before fleeing, the Shah appointed Prime Minister Shahpur Bakhtiar as head of a regency council to run the country in his absence. Mr. Bakhtiar tried to stave off the growing tide of opposition. He refused to allow Ayatollah Khomeini to form a new government.\n\nOn February 1, 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini made a dramatic return from exile. Political and social instability increased. Street battles raged in towns and provinces between pro-Khomeini demonstrators and police and security officers, and supporters of the imperial regime.\n\nOn February 11, tanks rumbled through the streets of Tehran amid rumours of an impending military coup. However as the day wore on it became apparent that the army had little appetite for seizing power. Revolutionaries stormed Tehran's main radio station and declared: \"This is the voice of the revolution of the Iranian people!\"\n\nPrime Minister Bakhtiar resigned. Two months later Ayatollah Khomeini won a landslide victory in a national referendum. He declared an Islamic republic, and was appointed Iran's political and religious leader for life.\n\n***TL;DR*** Iran's revolution began with a popular democracy movement and ended with the establishment of the world's first Islamic state. The revolution turned Iranian society upside down and became one of the defining moments of the 20th Century.",
"Which Revolution? The one installing the Shah or the one removing him?",
"Before 1979 revolution, Iran had a secular-ish monarchy government system. I say secular-ish, because although law and constitution wasn't based on Islam and Sharia laws, but still it was influenced by it. If I remember correctly Shia Islam was still the official religion of Iran, and the marriages in royal families were done according to Islamic tradition. \n\nIn late '30s, then monarch of Iran, Reza Shah, started an unveiling movement, to eliminate *[Chador](_URL_9_)*, which was traditional piece of garment used by women, to satisfy the requirements of Islamic dress code, Hijab. And there was lots of backlash and oppositions from religious community. I just brought this up to show that there was a big chunk of society that was religious. \n\nAnyways, before 1979, there wasn't a dress code like there is today, and people were free to choose how to dress. Most picture that you find on the web are from beach resorts, where swimwear is common, and universities, where most students were liberal minded, hence you don't see lots of people with chador or hijab. And sometimes there were sight like [this](_URL_3_). \n\nFrom politics' point of view, if I want to summarize in few sentences, the monarchy was slowly morphing into a dictatorship, and that's how the whole revolution process started. Shah closed all the parties, and formed a [single-party](_URL_6_) political system, he was totally anti-communism and started to actively fighting them, he also formed a secret police named [SAVAK](_URL_8_) to go after political activists. Also, the government had [corruption problem](_URL_4_), and there were clear [violations of human rights](_URL_5_). \n\nThe movie industry was blooming, there were few masterpieces, to name a few: [Qeysar](_URL_0_), [The Cow](_URL_1_), and [The Deers](_URL_2_), but most movies were shitty comedy dramas, with occasional nudity in them, that wasn't something the conservative part was happy about. Also, prostitution was legal in the [\"red-district\" of Tehran](_URL_7_). \n\nSo, comparing pre-1979 and post-1979, pre-revolution Iran feels more like a European country feel, but still far from what you may call 'normal' European country, since those pictures don't show the whole picture. And also, there is a slow, but steady progress made in regard to social freedoms and rights in Iran. \n\n\n\n\n\n",
"This was also the reason my parents immigrated from Iran to America back in the 1980's. My mother did not believe in the extremist values of covering your entire body, even though she follows the religion such as no drinking/smoking/eating pork/ gambling. My father as well saw more education opportunities here and studied hard enough to be the top of his class and got to get out of enlistment in the Iranian military. Even though they miss Iran sometimes, America has been their home more than Iran ever was and it's such a shame to see such a beautiful land being run by such a crazy person (the ayatollah) ",
"long story short: america and england tried to get some oil and caused a lot of fuckups which leads to a lot of trouble in the whole middle east"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2013/apr/01/un-stats-life-longer-and-healthier-iran",
"http://www.undp.org/content/iran/en/home/countryinfo.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qeysar_%28film%29",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cow_%28film%29",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deers_%281974_film%29",
"http://www.online-instagram.com/media/982672433025034952_1652905425",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_the_Pahlavi_dynasty",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_State_of_Iran",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastakhiz_Party",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahr-e_No",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAVAK",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chador"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
294er7
|
why do soccer/futbol players flop? what's the benefit of acting like you femur's been broken when you tripped over your shoelaces?
|
What's the benefit of acting like you femur's been broken when you tripped over your shoelaces? Why don't the ref's see through this shit instead of handing out yellow cards like they're Oscars? I don't mean to insult the sport (hockey fan here), I mean, it's a really athletic sport and takes a **lot** (more so than most other sports) of talent to be great at, but why the bull shit flopping?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/294er7/eli5_why_do_soccerfutbol_players_flop_whats_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cihbiwj",
"ciheuzj",
"cihf7xf",
"cihfxt4",
"cihhe4r",
"cihhixw",
"cihjdsk",
"cihxqyf"
],
"score": [
15,
3,
3,
52,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"With only one referee on the field even pretty obvious fouls don't get called (and there's nothing like hockey's fights that allows players to even out perceived injustices), so flopping serves two purposes, buying time and drawing attention to minor fouls (in a game where penalty kicks are one of a few rare solid goal opportunities and cards can result in a power play for the rest of the game absent substantial penalization of flops they're going to happen pretty often). ",
"Gary Neville, retired former professional and current coach, gave a great explanation on Sky MNF (you can see it on Youtube [here](_URL_0_)).\n\nBut to put it simply, it's because diving works (and not diving doesn't). Refs will call more stuff when players flop. They'll often *not* call even obvious fouls when players battle through and don't go down.",
"Taking a dive in football can give a team the chance to retain ball possession in situations where the attack doesn't look promising, the player is certain to lose the ball to the attacking player, etc.\n\nIf the referee mistakes the dive for a real foul it can result in a free kick, a penalty kick, and/or a yellow card for the opponent player. The \"theatrics\" help to \"sell\" the foul and make it more likely that the referee will call it.\n\nNote that this applies to \"real\" fouls as much as it does to pretend ones.\n\nIMPORTANT: Taking a dive is considered unsportsmanlike and referees will punish the player if they recognize a player is just pretending to having been fouled. Before 1999 referees could decide on the punishment, since 1999 a player pretending to be fouled is punished by a yellow card and the opposing team gets a free kick.",
"Culture plays a large part in it. \n\nI believe there was a term in Argentian/Brazilian (sorry I forget) where it's used to describe a folkloric or cartoon character that mischievously does whatever it takes to get the upper advantage. \n\nThusly, taking a dive or embellishing a light touch is not so much seen as a shameful and dishonorable tactic (which is my opinion, and the same holds I'm sure even amongst the most devout Latin American football fans) but rather a cheeky 'if-you-can-get-away-with-it' ploy.\n\nHaving a video referee to aid with referree verdicts + the existing instant yellow card for diving would be a fantastic addition to the sport.\n\nHowever, let me put on my tin-foil hat for a second...\n\nFIFA and other association football governing authorities are corrupt as all hell. Adding a video ref to eliminate diving calls will also reduce chances that penalty calls will be effectively made in either Team A or Team B's favour; match fixes etc. would be very difficult to succeed under the obfuscating blanket of dive calls.\n\nTherefore, things will stay the way they are until Zinedine Zidane has had enough, goes on a righteous rampage, breaks into FIFA Headquarters and starts assassinating the members of the FIFA inner echelons; delivering unstoppable kicks that break necks and rip apart spines to fat weak bodies as they try to scramble away like rats to no avail. And finally Zidane reaches Sepp Blatter cowering underneath a table.\n\nHe pulls him out and holds the squirming executive up by his expensive tie. \n\n\"Who...who are you?!?\", Blatter squeaks in terror. Zidane is covered in blood and guts; unrecognizable to Blatter. He looks like an angel of death. *Une manifestation du revanche.*\n\nZidane is silent as he reaches inside Blatter's suit and pulls out a crisp white business card (raised lettering, pale nimbus) and wipes the blood and gore away from his face to reveal his identity.\n\nBlatter gasps and soils himself.\n\"Zi..Zid...Z....\", he stammers helplessly.\n\n\"Bonjour Blatter\", Zidane says softly. \"Eet looks like you 'ave been...\" \nHe holds up the business card, now drenched in blood. \n\n\"...*Sent Off*. Au revoir.\"\n\nBlatter manages to let out a scream just as his skull explodes like a soft canteloupe as Zidane's vicious headbutt completely annihilates his existence, plowing through bone and brain.\n\nAnd with that, Zinedine Zidane exits just as quietly as he entered, adjusting the lapels of the fine peacoat he now dons as he walks out into the cool, crisp night.\n\nSo, uh yeah, it's a cultural thing.",
"To the casual fan, or non-fan, the writhing and rolling looks really theatrical and groan inducing. And yes, there are a variety of reasons to feign injury, as detailed in other posts in here. The fact of the matter is that anyone who has played soccer at a relatively competitive level can tell that the type of injuries that are common in soccer are EXTREMELY painful...for a couple seconds. \n\nFirst, the shoes they're wearing? Basically bare feet with spikes. Getting stepped on or kicked on the top of the foot, a very common occurrence, is outrageously painful. But on replay, it doesn't look like shit, so the casual viewer is free to think \"oh man, look at this European pussy rolling around like he got shot.\" The other very common injury is impact injuries to the shins and ankles. Anyone who has experienced this can tell you that the pain is very real and very immediate, and will naturally take you to the ground, especially if you're running at speed. The rub is that while it feels terrible for a short period, the worst of it quickly subsides. So you can feel like you broke your leg, and then 10 seconds later be able to jog it off pretty easily.\n\nSo yes, there is diving in the sport, and there are cultural reasons, and sporting reason, and other reasons. But the type of injuries involved in the game are conducive to pants shitting pain quickly followed by an ability to continue the game.\n\nTL;DR Its not diving and play acting, the shit really hurts...for a little. ",
"I want the same question answered for basketball. These guys flop just as much or more with those silly charge calls . . . silly",
"Lots of interesting posts but none address why you flop to get a foul. Contact itself is not a foul. Hip to hip contact is fine, even if it does knock you over. Shoulder contact is fine even if it knocks you over. The rule is subjective in that a foul is called for excessive force, or an unnatural movement that would not have resulted in a play on the ball. \n\nso, in other words, no foul is called unless such excessive force is used the other player is thrown violently from his feet. Except in the case of a properly executed slide tackle. \n\n\nsource:former professional soccer player\n\nPS when I played I made sure people knew they were being pussies about it. ",
"Somebody once said the difference between soccer and rugby is that soccer players spend 90 minutes pretending they are hurt and rugby players spend 80 minutes pretending they are not hurt."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNx5ok60U6A"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3euxy3
|
how do concussions lead to comas? and how does falling asleep after a concussion increase the likelihood of a coma?
|
Or, if it is easier to explain, after someone has knocked their head how does keeping them awake help prevent a coma?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3euxy3/eli5_how_do_concussions_lead_to_comas_and_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctimvtu",
"ctin5ee"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Falling asleep after a concussion is actually not dangerous. What is important is your *ability* to not fall asleep. If you are trying to stay awake and can't, it can signal something more serious being wrong after a concussion.",
"Concussions don't lead to comas. A concussion is simply a diffuse shock to the brain significant enough to temporarily interrupt regular brain function for a few seconds. \n\nBut any jarring of a brain can cause additional injuries (like bleeding or swelling) that might not present symptoms right away.\n\nIdeally, you want to wake someone who has been diagnosed with a concussion every two hours or so to make sure they haven't developed any NEW symptoms (like a raging headache) that indicate a new problem has arisen."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
36bygd
|
does running a shaving razor across a pair of jeans in the opposite direction actually sharpen it? if so, how does it work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36bygd/eli5_does_running_a_shaving_razor_across_a_pair/
|
{
"a_id": [
"crcme95",
"crcr4uc"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"That's a good way to destroy denim. If you want to do that, use some leather. This does not sharpen the blade by the way, it hones it, flattening and straightening the edge of the blade. It's not sharpening, it's more like refreshing the blade.",
"For the edge of knife, imagine a saw with little teeth of metal, but they're not all sticking out in the same direction.\n\n\nRubbing it the right way gradually nudges them all to point along the same line of cutting.\n\n\"Real\" sharpening would be grinding the sides of the saw to make the whole thing thinner.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2q1xlw
|
why can't president obama order the military to stop housing prisoners at gitmo?
|
As a service member, this confuses me. The president may not be able to order the closure of GITMO, but as the leader of the military he should be able to issue an order/executive order that detainees will no longer be held at GITMO, right? This seems like it should be exactly in his realm of power.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q1xlw/eli5_why_cant_president_obama_order_the_military/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cn22ygz",
"cn2760j"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Let's say I want to close one of the sales departments in my company. Department A. Sure it's my company but I can't just close the sales department and be done with it. I have to talk to Rob, our lawyer, and he says that we have to make sure we don't break any laws. But now we have to talk to Susan whose in HR to work out what's going to happen to the employees, if they're going to get transferred and where.\n\nNext I have to talk to Steve, our finance guy, he tells me how this decision could effect our income, our expenses, and where money is going to be allocated.\n\nWell the manager of all of the sales departments doesn't want to lose Department A because that means the amount of money allocated towards his expenses next year will be less. And Susan says that there's not enough room is certain departments to retain all the employees. Rob says that this decision could also lead to lawsuits if information was released to the general public.\n\nPlus after talking to my knowledgeable staff, I have to ask my board of directors if this is the right decision to take the company in.\n\nAs you can see, the president, while in charge, can't just get something like that done. He's gotta analyze potential issues as well as deal with people who plain ol' don't want it to happen. And the bigger the task, the more roadblocks and bureaucracy that gets in the way.",
"As a Republican I'll be the first to criticize Obama on other issues, even I will admit this one is not his fault.\n\nWhat do you do with the people there? Most of the ones that were there on flimsy evidence have already been released, so it's mainly the most dangerous ones left. If they've committed real crimes we want to keep and punish them. If not, they're still the type that other countries aren't going to want around. Congress tacked on a measure preventing them from being transferred to the mainland US on a budget bill that he wasn't in a position to veto. Before that Obama's plan was to move the detainees to either an existing federal prison in Michigan or a state prison that Illinois built but never opened.\n\nIf a detainee we let go moves on to blow up a building, you can guarantee the Republicans will make sure it blows up in the Democrats face at the next election..\n\nAny ideas how to close Gitmo?\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1mupuu
|
why do so many girl's write in that soft bubbly handwriting?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mupuu/eli5_why_do_so_many_girls_write_in_that_soft/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cccrxtz",
"ccct8u6"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"And why do guys write so tiny that the smallest mistake makes the word illegible?",
"This has been asked a whole bunch of times, please search first.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=handwriting&sort=new&restrict_sr=on"
]
] |
||
6fd4o2
|
what are zionists and why do some people hate them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6fd4o2/eli5_what_are_zionists_and_why_do_some_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"diha88l"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_1_ \n\n_URL_0_\n\nAnyway zionism is a movement with the aim of founding an israeli state where \"antisemitism could be impossible by definition\". \n\nmany people hate them of course because antisemitism is still around and because it hasn't been founded in a virtually unoccupied piece of land (one of the places proposed was for example argentina, lot of space, virtually nobody) but (with the blessing of the united nations) in Palestine, which was inhabited by, of course, palestinians. \n\nThis of course has been taken by many as an example of capitalistic imperialism and the people who hate capitalistic imperialism, hate zionism and israel as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1e8tq2/eli5_zionism/?ref=search_posts",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jy9iy/eli5_what_is_zionism/?ref=search_posts"
]
] |
||
bl8oih
|
how are employees forced to sign non disclosure agreements? i always hear that former employees of corrupt companies were forced to sign nda’s so they can’t speak about their time at their companies. do they receive large settlements for these or what?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bl8oih/eli5_how_are_employees_forced_to_sign_non/
|
{
"a_id": [
"emmk3hr",
"emmkatk",
"emmm785",
"emmm9wp",
"emmmppf",
"emmnwgs"
],
"score": [
76,
29,
4,
2,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"It's usually a condition of employment. So before an employee starts work on their first day they'll be told \"your job will have access to sensitive information. In order to work for us you must sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. If you are not willing to sign the offer of employment will be withdrawn\". I've worked in two companies who have required then for legitimate reasons (one was prevention of insider trading, the other worked with the government and had access to classified information - had to be sec screened for that too) but if you're concerned about the dodgy state of it you can question why you need to sign an NDA. \n\nAlso, in the UK at least, there are whistleblowing laws that allow you to work around the NDA if the company is involved in illegal activities, so it is not really as much of an excuse as people make it out to be.",
"Don't sign the agreement? You don't get the job. However, there are whistleblower protection laws prohibiting an NDA from specifying \"you can't talk about our illegal activities\". If you witness a truly illegal act and decide to pursue action, you are immune from the repercussions of your NDA agreement \\*if\\* you would violate your NDA by spilling the beans. That does not mean that you can witness something like a sexual assault in the bathroom then run out and tell everyone about your companies new perpetual motion machine without legal ramifications. But if the machine is bullshit and the company is using its claim to perpetuate tax fraud, you're okay (but always talk to a whistleblower lawyer first).",
"An NDA is usually just about protecting intellectual property.\n\nLet’s say you work for coke. And you just so happen to know Coke’s super secret formula that they would go to the ends of the earth to protect. They’re going to have you sign an NDA and probably also a non-compete so that if you ever try to get a job at Pepsi and give them the recipe they will legally have you by the balls.",
"All contracts contain some generic NDA. Some are more specific. \nIt’s part of the deal, and a bit of common sense, that you don’t leak the crab burger recipe to the chum bucket.",
"I have signed an NDA before to protect trade secrets. It is a useful instrument because it allows you to have open discussions within the organisation about a top secret new idea without worrying its going to get splashed all over the press. New ideas can often develop into highly valuable new products but it takes time before the company has something ready to take to market. In this time, a competitor could come along, steal the idea and beat you to market. An NDA reassures everybody that nothing will leak and that all their hard work in developing the new product (which can take years) will not be wasted. \n \nUsing them in the way Weinstein and others did, to hide their own bad behaviour from the press and the police, is a gross perversion of the intent of an NDA. It gives them a bad name when they actually serve an invaluable purpose when used properly.",
"An NDA cant stop anyone from reporting illegal activity. While the contract may not say that, simple not enforceable. That said, not all misconduct is per se illegal. But if reporting to authorities versus going to the press, an NDA cant stop you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4kty2j
|
what's the difference between logarithm and exponential equation?
|
I know everyone told me that logarithm is inverse of exponential. BUT, essentially, both of them are x^y =z. So, why are their functions different and why are they thaught like separate operations?
Sorry if my English sucks, I never talk about math anyway.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4kty2j/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_logarithm_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3hpxdc",
"d3hxhop"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"They are separate operations. If b^(x) = y, then log_b(y) = x. In the first equation, you're given b and x and need to determine y. In the second, you're given b and y and need to determine x. What you know determines which operation you need to do to find the unknown quantity.",
"A logarithm is just an exponent. It answers the question of \"What exponent is needed to go from 3 to 9?\" All of its properties can be directly tied back to properties of exponents. \n\nWhen you’re graphing a logarithmic function, you’re actually graphing all of the (result, exponent) pairs. So if 3 is the base, you’d end up graphing (3, 1) (9, 2) (27, 3) ... Your values of y are increasing very slowly since exponents just tell you how many times to multipy the base, and accordingly increase much slower than the result of that multiplication.\n\nExponential functions answer the question of \"What’s the result if I square 3?\" \n\nWhen you’re graphing an exponential function, you’re graphing all pairs of (exponent, result), so if your base is 3, that would be (1, 3) (2, 9) (3, 27) (4, 81) ... Your values of y are increasing very quickly because the result increases much more quickly than the exponent. \n\nYou can see then that they’re asking for different parts of the same expression (exponent vs. result), but they’re inverses because their domains and ranges have switched or they’re reflected over y=x (conditions for functions being inverses)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
chtxf8
|
explain fads, why do things that seem great to us now, eventually seem so terrible? like mullets or 1970s wallpaper.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/chtxf8/eli5_explain_fads_why_do_things_that_seem_great/
|
{
"a_id": [
"euxrzca",
"euxzp7w",
"euz9k0s"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Style, fashion, design is all pretty cyclical. So we are reminded of days passed where all was great and good. Of course, after a while, we realise that the memory was better than the actual experience and we see truths ugly face. The mullet or ‘Satan’s new did’ is perhaps the exception that confirms the above statement.",
"Fashion is liking what is new and different because it is new and different. The idea is to show you are 'with it' and special. Whereas style is to look good and rarely changes like a tuxedo or a little black dress. \n\nSo fashion almost by definition cannot look very good or else it would be style and not change, when the goal of fashion is to change",
"Also keep in mind that fad fashions are waaay overplayed by movies. \n\nEvery person didn’t go around in bell bottoms, most people didn’t. Same with mohawks (more common now than they used to be), mullets, etc. \n\nWhen a movie wants to say “80’s” every person in the scene will have be adorned with at least one iconic fad from the time period... it’s too exaggerated. \n\nStranger things does a decent job of capturing the 80’s vibe for decor and fashion. \n\nFads and trends are different. Fads to me are the more extreme attention seeking fashion styles. Examples today might be pants hanging down around one’s ankles, beats headphones worn always or more recently airbuds headphones worn everywhere. \n\nWhereas to me, a fashion trend is more universal. This is most noticeable to me with glasses styles. People in the 80’s really did tend to commonly have obnoxiously huge lenses and giant frames, vs. the generally much more subtle styling of frames and lenses today.\n\nYou see trends in buildings also. The popcorn ceilings vs. textured. Flattened textured walls vs. the older more wavy/bumpy style. A return to tile / hardwood (or simulated hardwood) vs. linoleum flooring. \n\nThings like the wall paper, and general aesthetic (when looking in a room and immediately just knowing, yup, 70’s”) are more from trends that overall define a time period visually. \n\nOften it wasn’t a specific choice, it was driven by manufacturers. The wall paper looked that way because that was what was available commonly on the market, same with the glasses frames. It wasn’t so much that people truly loved that distinctive carpet style... it’s just what was in the store, and what people bought."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7yciv6
|
why is everything weighed in kg and not newtons even though kg is the unit mass and newton is the unit of weight
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7yciv6/eli5_why_is_everything_weighed_in_kg_and_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dufazz6",
"dufbch3",
"dufbgcl"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Newtons are the unit of force, and weight due to gravity happens to be one. \n\nSince we’ve all got about the same gravity acting on us, they’re the same in everyday use, or just as useful. But, when we want to know what something weighs, technically mass is what we really wanna know, and if then distinction happens to matter in the future, it avoids ambiguity. ",
"The weight is a less useful / universal quantity because it doesn't just depend on the mass of the object, but also on the gravity at the point of measurement.\n\nThe mass is a more useful quantity, because it just depends on the properties of the object, and theoretically doesn't change if you move the object to different places with lower gravity.\n\nModern balances / electronic scales have to be calibrated with standards / the exact value of the force of gravity at the location. For convenience, the measured values can be displayed in kg, lbs., newtons, etc.\n\nUnfortunately, the words \"weighing\" and \"weights\" are much more commonly used than \"masses\", \"measuring the mass\", etc. But yes, in general, people mean \"mass\" when they say \"weight.\"",
"When we usually talk about weighing something, what we really mean is finding the mass of that object.\n\nNewtons are a unit of force, which is the equivalent to weight in this context. Weight is equal to mass multiplied by the acceleration of gravity (*g*). Since we are all on Earth, we have about the same gravity (*g ≈ 9.8*) acting on us, so there is no point in using weight in everyday life.\n\nAnother problem is that *g* varies between areas on Earth since it is not a perfect sphere. Therefore we use mass, since mass *is* constant, unlike weight."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1uj5fx
|
why does my breath sometimes smell fruity?
|
Just happens and I don't know why.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uj5fx/eli5_why_does_my_breath_sometimes_smell_fruity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceimg7g"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Please see a doctor"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2xek0f
|
what does it mean that the bill to fund the department of homeland security has failed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xek0f/eli5_what_does_it_mean_that_the_bill_to_fund_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cozemms",
"cozf1bx"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If the DHS \"shuts down\", non-essential workers will be furloughed until funding is passed, at which time they will come back to work and receive back pay. It's like a forced vacation, lol. Essential workers will still keep working.",
"It means I'm going to throw a fucking party, because the DHS is an unnecessary, evil giant that was created in response to 9/11 and has trampled over Americans' civil liberties and forced onto us a whole new bureaucratic structure of authority we don't need."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
28n78k
|
why does my brain choose random songs throughout the day for me to hum or sing to myself?
|
Sometimes it's songs I haven't heard for months or years.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/28n78k/eli5_why_does_my_brain_choose_random_songs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cickn47"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Our brains are big, chattering association machines. Sometimes we're not even aware of the associations we're making. Catchy songs are songs that, well, catch your attention when you hear them, so they're likely to have high priority in the chain of associations you're running.\n\n* You wake up, and it's breakfast time, so you grab a doughnut. That reminds you of how much Homer Simpson loves doughnuts, and all of the sudden you remember that Monorail episode where they're all singing, and your brain starts jabbering \"Monorail! Monorail! MONORAIL!\" until you want to exorcise those cartoon demons.\n\n* You're ready to go to work. You pick up your keys, and your brain starts repeating that line from the old Harry Chapin song, \"What I'd really like, dad, is to borrow the car keys / See you later--Can I have them, please?\" Guuhh!\n\n* Sometimes they're less direct. Maybe on the way to work, you pass a green car, and that reminds you of the green car that the next-door neighbor kid's mom used to drive when you were little. You remember going to the movies with them one day, and suddenly your brain starts repeating \"Let's all go to the lob-beeee...and have ourselves a snack!\" But the associations fired so quickly you weren't even entirely aware of them, so you're like \"WTF? Where did *that* come from!?\"\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
5oqmss
|
does climate change lead to an increase in extreme cold weather as well as extreme warm weather? if so, why is the average yearly temperature continuing to get warmer?
|
I've heard that the term "Global Warming" is a misnomer because really not everywhere on the planet is getting warmer and that there can be cold extremes as well as hot ones, leading the term "Climate change" to be more accurate. Any truth to this? If so, why is the earth's average temperature increasing instead of the extremes balancing each other out in terms of a yearly average?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5oqmss/eli5_does_climate_change_lead_to_an_increase_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcl9yi5",
"dclc4j5",
"dcmewwe"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"That's a little backwards.\n\nGlobal warming means all storm systems are larger, in addition to the obvious that average temperatures are very slightly higher. However, larger storm systems means that cold fronts that used to die out as they head south will go much farther, bringing freezing weather to places that infrequently freeze.\n\nThus, a little warming can produce more extremes, including extremes of cold.",
"Global warming is a misnomer and leads to confusion and misinformation because you also have extreme cold weather which make some (a lot?) of people question the validity of the scientific community's claims.\n\nThe phenomenon needs to be talked about more in therms of energy. The energy the Earth receives from the Sun is pretty much constant what changes is the amount that remains trapped in our system versus what gets reflected and radiated back in space.\nGreenhouse gasses offset the balance causing more energy to remain trapped further fueling weather events and their extremes.",
"Extreme cold in the cold season, extreme heat in the hot season, so average is a rise but the extremes are more extreme than before. Global warming is not a misnomer because almost every place on earth will get warmer on average in the process.\n\nWe're retaining more of the sun's input (energy) as heat (solar warming) and a net higher retention of energy is a net warming, which we can measure.\n\nIt's the chaotic nature of winds and water in the wind that's yielding more extreme weather events that is driven by the added heat."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
15wyl5
|
what's the talent in streetracing?
|
Like I'm talking about fast and the furious type stuff. Is it all about what's under the hood, or what exactly makes a 'good' street racer. Other than shifting gears and pressing the peddle there doesn't seem to be a whole lot to do in a quarter mile.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15wyl5/eli5_whats_the_talent_in_streetracing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7qkjkd"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"First of all, shifting gears and pressing the peddle are HUGELY important when you're in a short, .25 mile race and all the cars have very similar performance capabilities. You need to have the reflexes to start the race the instant you can, the experience and skill to press the accelerator to get just enough wheelspin at the beginning of the race to heat up your tires without causing too much and waste time, you need to shift the INSTANT it needs to (short-shifting and shifting too late both cause you to lose precious tenths of a second), you need to know the precise moment you should activate NoS, you need to keep the car going perfectly straight along with watching the road for any hazards. There is A LOT involved in racing, even a simple drag race. These things may seem insignificant because they only affect a few tenths of a second, but since you're in a race where each car can do roughly a 12.5 second race, losing .2 seconds because a gear change can actually lose you the race. Not to mention, in street racing, everyone's car will have roughly the same capabilities. No one will want to challenge the cars they know are fantastic, so most end up around the same level. Even if you could upgrade your car secretly, after the first race you use it, everyone will see that it's better and refuse to race you. Thus, it boils down to skill. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ae1fyr
|
why does the wifi on busses (peter pan, greyhound, etc.) never work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ae1fyr/eli5_why_does_the_wifi_on_busses_peter_pan/
|
{
"a_id": [
"edlou6q"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"The bus needs to get the WiFi from somewhere. That somewhere is basically a cell phone and reception is bad in a lot of areas. What little comes through is shared by twenty passengers who want to watch porn at the same time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2xdimy
|
why cannibalism can make people sick. could eating yourself expose you to the same risks?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2xdimy/eli5_why_cannibalism_can_make_people_sick_could/
|
{
"a_id": [
"coz76ua"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There is the risk of prions, which are mis-formed protiens that have the potential to fuck up other protiens, which in turn can cause all sorts of problems.\n\nHumans are more likely to contain prions that can affect you (not all can), and therefor have a greater risk than consuming other animals.\n\nEating your own flesh would not have the same risks because you would not be exposed to anything new, and any prions present would necessarily have been present in your body already."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2yo4gc
|
basic eye conditions like near-sightedness, far-sightedness, astigmatisms, etc...why are people so different when the basic eye structure is the same?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yo4gc/eli5_basic_eye_conditions_like_nearsightedness/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpbbmbs",
"cpbbmt1"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"because eyes aren't the same. Some eyes are too short (leading to far farsightedness), some eyes are too long (leading to nearsightedness). sometimes the lense is too hard or soft, sometimes there are clouds on the eye, e.t.c.\n\nSmall variations are often enough so that the lense improperly casts the image on the nerves and cause an incorrect or blurry reading ",
"Because the eye is an incredibly complex mechanism with many different parts that have many different functions. If any one of these parts stops functioning as it is supposed to, the quality of the resulting vision is compromised leading to the issues you listed. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
a9bx6r
|
what's is a "bear market"?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a9bx6r/eli5_whats_is_a_bear_market/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eci37ki",
"eci3mo5"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A “bear market” is one that's on a downward trend. This apparently was named so because bears attack with downward swipes, contrasted with a “bull market,” which got its name from a bull's tendency to attack with upward strikes.",
"Possibly why there's a figure of a bull on Wall Street, since the traders would rather see a bull market than a bear market."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2trtyc
|
what does "mastering" do to audio?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2trtyc/eli5_what_does_mastering_do_to_audio/
|
{
"a_id": [
"co1qyjr",
"co1t63p",
"co1t72j",
"co1va8c",
"co1xokn",
"co1xraf"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
12,
77,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"A master recording is the first recording of a song or other sound, from which all the later copies are made. Since sound recording was first invented, master recordings (usually called just \"masters\") have been made on discs, tapes, and computers.\n\nA multitrack master is an original multitrack recording, which may be worked on over time. This may have four, eight, sixteen or more tracks. Such a recording cannot be played on an ordinary machine, and needs a special machine to be played or recorded.\n\nMultitrack recordings are mixed when they are finished, into a mono (monaural), stereo, or Surround Sound recording. This is called a \"mixed master\". Copies of the mixed master can be played on an ordinary machine.\n\nMaster recordings often become valuable, especially if the recording artist is popular. Most masters are owned by record companies, but many artists and bands own their own master recordings, or are able to buy them later.\n\nRecordings are sometimes remastered, to copy them to another format, or to make them sound better. Digital recording allows for older analog recordings to be \"cleaned up\", and preserved.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Mastering is the process of taking a basic multitrack recording and basically adjusting all the different parts so that it sounds good on all systems to all listeners all of the time (or as close as one can get to this ideal).",
"Once all of the components (instruments) of a song are put together at the proper timing intervals and audio level ( which is the process called mixing) the song goes to a mastering engineer, usually in the form of \"stems\". One \"stem\" for each group of instruments. It varies, but generally the mastering engineer will get one track that has all the drums, one track that has all the vocals, etc. \n\nThe mastering engineer then goes through the song bit by bit, sometimes even millisecond by millisecond to correct any unwanted sounds. For this he/she uses really high-end speakers, and often a large variety of speakers to make sure it sounds good through a wide range of listening. A master engineer's speakers can cost tens of thousands of dollars just for one speaker, not the pair. While consumer-grade speakers focus on having a pleasant sound, a master engineer's speakers focus on having a true sound that is accurately able to replicate any harmonies, clicks, pops, and other audio errors that may go unnoticed. Having separate stems make it easy to correct errors and apply any effects that might be added. These effects usually focus of altering a specific range of frequencies (called equalization) or the dynamics of the sound (effects like compression). Effects can have a separate ELI5 all together because there are so many.\n\nOnce all that is done and the song is put together to the master engineer's liking and the artist's liking, the song is done. However, if the master engineer is tasked with working on an entire album, the engineer has to also make sure the songs are fitting as a whole. This might mean going back and making sure every single song flows properly, has equal volume levels, and is mastered with a similar style.",
"Keeping it relatively simple for ELI5, mastering audio is basically the process of preparing a mixed song or album for duplication and distribution.\n\nYou can break mastering up into 2 broad sections.\nAural and Technical.\n\nAural would be the manipulation and processing of a song/songs to get the best possible listening quality on as many different devices as possible. People can listen to a song on anything from a clock radio, cheap earphones, home hifi, car stereo, on their tv etc... All of which react completely differently and a given song will sound different on every system. There are techniques such as EQ and compression that can be applied to a song that can help it to translate as well as possible between different systems. A lot of bass would sound great on a good hifi or in a recording studio but would not sound good at all on a clock radio or cheap earphones. So mastering engineers use many techniques to \"smooth out\" the song dynamically (called compression), and also techniques to balance the song sonically (EQ).\n\nLimiting is also applied which is a technique which basically makes a song louder. The louder the better with modern music it seems, but there are draw backs and this is an ongoing argument in the mastering industry. Limiting a song too much can cause it to distort, or can lose clarity in drum strikes etc. There's a happy middle ground here but these days most songs are over compressed and limited.\n\nOn an album the mastering engineer would ensure that the transition between each song is as the artist wants. So they will do fade in or fade outs as appropriate. They would also ensure that an album has an overall \"tone\" or \"sonic signature\", which basically means that the songs sound consistent in both volume and tone. If one song was bass heavy and was followed by a song that was lacking in bass the listeners attention might be drawn to that, and we want to avoid that.\n\n\nTechnical side to mastering would include > \n\n* Embedding ISRC codes which stands for International Standard Recording Code. These codes are embedded on a CD and simplify the collection of royalties.\n\n* Track order on an album.\n\n* Gap times between each track. How much of a gap a listener hears before the next song.\n\n* Creating hidden tracks.\n\n* Creating a disk image that complies with international CD standards (Red Book).\n\n* In recent years mastering engineers often supply tracks for online releases only and may be required to encode the song in the various versions that are required. MP3, m4a, flac etc...\n\nAnother big aspect to mastering is the listening environment. Mastering engineers use extremely expensive speakers called reference monitors. Although these speakers can be loud and can have massive bass response, they are more useful because they somewhat mimic home hifi speakers (but are much much higher quality), these speakers are clinical and are comparable to using a magnifying glass. Unlike recording studio speakers which no average person has in their living room. A mastering studio would sound very very nice and would be a lovely environment to sit and listen to an album. A mastering engineer would be an expert and know exactly how a song should react/sound in their studio and know how to manipulate it to get it to translate well onto car radios/headphones/home stereo etc...\n\nFinally a mastering engineer is often a fresh pair of ears who only hears a song or album at the very last step. Everyone else involved to this point may have been listening to the songs for months and may not notice little errors. A fresh perspective can often discover the strangest mistakes and errors that need to be fixed. A mastering engineer could often send a mixed song back to the mix engineer if something needs to be addressed.\n\nIt is a very important job and a role that many claim they can do but few do it well.\n\n",
"The very basic:\n\nYou record a song with drums, bass, guitar and vocals, say a total of 12 tracks.\n\nA mix engineer mixes those 12 tracks together, making them all play nice with eachother, add effects, etc... In this process he mixes the 12 tracks together into 2 tracks, a left and right, stereo track.\n\nThe mastering engineer then goes to work fine tuning that resulting stereo track. They make very precise adjustments on very expensive eq's, compressors, etc... to make the overall stereo track the best it can for playback by the end listener.\n\nSo mix gels all the individual tracks into one stereo track, and mastering fine tunes that stereo track. In basic terms.",
"I graduated last year with a bachelors in audio engineering (so take what I say with a grain of salt) but my understanding of the difference between a \"Mix\" which is made by the recording engineer in the studio and a \"Master\" which is typically sent to a separate mastering studio is surprisingly vague. Mastering engineers will typically use many of the same tools as a mixing engineer - the difference lies in 3 main things. \n1. Mastering engineers have never heard the song before. This is really important when creating that lacquered professional sound. A mastering engineer might only spend a day or so \"polishing\" a track - but fresh ears are a huge help in creating a conformed (radio quality) sound. \n2. Mastering engineers are typically very seasoned (older), and get their start as Mixing engineers. A good mastering engineer is supposed to be able to make very minute adjustments to EQ and compression that require years and years of ear training. It really is an art. So while a mixing engineer might be using broad strokes and experimental effects, a mastering engineer will typically be concerned with surgical EQing to cut out annoying resonance or artifacts in a track that a mixing engineer might have missed (due to listening to the song over 9000x) and using their seasoned judgement to make minor cuts and boosts to give the song a more even and full sonic spectrum. \n3. Mastering engineers are usually responsible for formatting the track. Because I didn't go to school for mastering, I am not as familiar with what exactly this means, but my basic understanding is that Mastering engineers have programs that they use to normalize volume and make sure its set to whatever regulated standards it is trying to meet before it is put on the radio or whatever medium it is meant for. I think some mediums might have different formatting regulations. \nSo to summarize your question, mastering is a final step - the polish and formatting - before a track is released. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_recording"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
44quk8
|
when asking people to conserve water, why is turning off the tap when brushing your teeth the first thing a lot of people think of? it seems ludicrous when showers use so much more water than a faucet...
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44quk8/eli5_when_asking_people_to_conserve_water_why_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"czs5mgm",
"czs5u76",
"czs78ur",
"czsb4rf",
"czseigq"
],
"score": [
16,
4,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, your logic is slightly flawed, a shower has to be running for it to be of use, and some showerheads come with a quick stop lever to \"pause\" the flow while you do things like wash your hair. But having the tap running while you brush your teeth has no purpose, the water is just being wasted.",
"Asking people to stop showering is a big change. Turning off the tap while you brush is comparatively easy, and it's a simple case to make that that water is completely wasted.",
"It's because people don't really like being told what to do. Something like turning the water off while brushing is simple and easy. Taking shorter showers, using less hot water, that will be more noticeable. ",
"Can we just focus on golf courses instead?",
"A lot of green movements or conservation efforts are aimed at the perceived benefit of doing the right thing on a personal or homeowner level. Even though the individual savings are minuscule, but the thought is that if every homeowner does it then there will be a great return. In some cases this may work, but generally it represents only a small fraction of waste or pollution. \n\nLike hybrid cars, the savings in emissions is never offset because of the high carbon footprint of sourcing the materials for the batteries etc... Or home recycling, the volume recycled in homes is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things. \n\nSo why still do it? Why care at all if it doesn't even matter? \n\nThe perceived benefit is greater than the actual benefit. By you feeling good about it and having a conscious mind about your individual impact on the environment carries with you as a person throughout your every day life. So if you are a person that recycles at home and conserves water, would you stand for that at work? Would you stand by seeing a faucet pouring out onto the ground? You'd turn it off. You'd push for your company to recycle more and be more conscious of things. That is where the real value is. The education of doing something simple carries with someone throughout their life and helps then make decisions down the road. If a large enough percentage of the population cares about conservation and green businesses, then companies will offer those products or services that meet those needs. But it all starts small with turning off the tap at home when you brush your teeth, or putting that can in the recycling bin. It is a societal change, even though it's not a lot, it's moving the needle, one grain of sand at a time. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
49a0ew
|
why do humans get debilitating knots and muscle spasms whereas animals do knot?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49a0ew/eli5_why_do_humans_get_debilitating_knots_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0q6yrr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Actually, they do - muscle spasms and knots are well-documented for a number of other animals."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
32t7vj
|
iran's nuclear program
|
On the way to work, my girlfriend and I were talking about Iran's nuclear program and realized we actually weren't sure whether or not their intentions were to power their country or to develop weapons. I suppose this question may be the crux of the entire controversy, but I'm wondering if someone could please shed a bit of light on this for me?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32t7vj/eli5irans_nuclear_program/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqedef3",
"cqee1uq"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"If their intention was to develop nuclear weapons, we would not be having any conversation about lifting sanctions on them. They want to replace their oil and natural gas based infrastructure with nuclear power. ",
"It's a rather weird combination of both. \n\nIf Iran were, purely, interested in Nuclear energy, they would simply buy both reactors and fuel from Russia, a much cheaper, and less politically contentious option.\n\nHowever, Iran also wants a certain amount of security in it's fuel supply, a concern which is not entirely unjustified, given the fact that historically the US and other Western nations has succesfully prevented Iran from acquiring nuclear fuel.\n\nThat the entire enrichment program also gives them a break-out capability is not a bad thing either."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3b2py3
|
us supreme court: king v. burwell. obamacare subsidies
|
In light of the recent ruling on King v. Burwell (in favor of the Government, 6-3) and the number of questions it's already creating we decided to make this sticky thread. Feel free to ask any questions related to this ruling in this post or offer an explanation of the ruling and the background behind it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b2py3/eli5us_supreme_court_king_v_burwell_obamacare/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csi8thg",
"csi8wh4",
"csi90ft",
"csi9uts",
"csiac0a",
"csidue9",
"csif9ja",
"csif9lo",
"csil4me",
"csinuom",
"csiv7rv"
],
"score": [
10,
6,
7,
3,
6,
3,
2,
82,
11,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"\nThe law saying \"exchanges get subsidies\" does not automatically mean that federal exchanges do NOT. The intention of the law is that everyone should get subsidies.\n",
"As someone who doesn't really understand a lot about insurance, can I get a good ELI5? ",
"Question: what did the GOP try to accomplish? What does this ruling mean for obamacare, and what would have happened had the ruling gone the other way? ",
"This was helpful for me\n_URL_0_\n\nI do still have some questions though.",
"I've been trying to get healthcare for my parents in Florida, but our governor hates Obamacare. My parents have no income and are physically unable to work. Medicaid is the only option but you can't get it if you aren't working.\n\nDoes this ruling mean they'll now be eligible for healthcare and how soon can I get them covered? They've been living with injuries and no insurance for a couple months now.",
"Honestly, the [opinion itself](_URL_0_) is written in pretty plain language and does a good job of explaining the background info. Maybe not understandable to a 5 year old, but y'know",
"Essentially the debate was whether or not the word \"state\" implied the federal gov't or the states had to set up a portion of the Affordable Care Act system. The people suing alleged that the wording meant that it was solely the individual states responsibility to set up such, and that the federal gov't was powerless should a state not set up such an exchange. The supreme court ruled that, especially due to wording elsewhere, the word \"state\" meant that the federal gov't could set up exchanges. \n\nI am honestly surprised at the 3 judges that didn't vote in favor of the law. Seriously, a federal gov't interpretation is in the very definition of the word state.",
"\"Obamacare\" made health insurance exchanges. Each state had the option of making their own exchange, or using the federal exchange.\n\nThe part of the law in question gives federal money to people who are within 100% to 400% of the federal poverty line.\n\nHowever, the law technically says the federal money can go to people who buy insurance from an exchange created \"by the state\" not \"by the state, or by the federal government.\"\n\nIn the background of all of this, there is the fact that WAY more states refused to make their own exchanges, and used the federal exchange than Congress expected, because of negative reaction to the law.\n\nSo there are LOTS of people who got the federal money for insurance bought on the federal exchange. \n\nIf the \"by the state\" language meant just \"by the state\" the whole insurance scheme would fall apart, because there are so many people who rely on the subsidies and the federal exchanges.\n\nHowever, the Supreme Court just decided that \"by the state\" actually meant \"by the state or the federal government,\" essentially because the law would not work without that interpretation.\n\nSo people get to keep their federal subsidies now, regardless of whether they bought their insurance on the federal or state exchanges.",
"For a true ELI5, and a classic law school hypo: a park has a sign that says \"no vehicles allowed.\" But the park also has an area set aside for children to ride tricycles. Are tricycles allowed?\n\nThere are two competing arguments. The government's intent appears to be to allow tricycles in the park, in context of the tricycle area. But the text of the sign says \"no vehicles allowed,\" and tricycles are vehicles. So do we go off of the words on the sign, or do we look to context to figure out the government's intent? \n\nThe majority went with the latter: though the government literally said that subsidies are only allowed for state exchanges, the context of the law indicates that congress intended to provide subsidies for federal exchanges as well. The dissent disagreed, arguing that the plain text said state exchanges only, so the federal exchanges should not receive subsidies. ",
"1. How does Obamacare interact with tax credits?\n\n2. How do tax credits reduce premiums?\n\n3. What was the argument for and against these provisions in the bill?",
"I'll take a stab at ELI5. \n\nTeacher says every student gets some star stickers! But first the students have to separate into groups, then the teacher will give each group leader a pile of stickers to share in their group. As usual there's a few kids that don't have friends and aren't invited to a group, or they just like being lone wolfs. Teacher gives these individuals star stickers anyways. Some of the group leaders yell \"that's not fair, we followed rules and they didn't so they shouldn't get any!\" And some of the lone wolfs yell \"I don't want any stickers anyways!\" So the school principal comes in to settle this escalating feud and comes to the conclusion that since the teacher original said \"everyone gets star stickers\" then that is what was meant. So everyone still gets to keep the stickers. Yay! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/04/supreme-court-obama-health-care/24320547/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-114_qol1.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
11fabo
|
what does the hz value in computer processing speed mean?
|
Also how does it relate to frequencies on the audio spectrum?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11fabo/eli5_what_does_the_hz_value_in_computer/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6ly0se",
"c6lyp6p"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Hertz is a unit which basically means actions per second. In a sound wave, that's oscillations, in a CPU, it's fetch-execute cycles.",
"Hz is short for Hertz, which means cycles per second. In audio, the unit occurs because audio is sound waves—and Hertz measures the speed of the cycle of the sound waves.\n\nIn computers, the *clock rate* of a processor is also measured in Hertz. The way computers are designed, each little bit of work that the processor does happens during what's called a *clock cycle*.\n\nThe clock rate of a processor is a good *relative* measurement of how much work it can do per second, **compared to other processors of the same design**. If two processors have the same design, then a 3.5 GHz processor can do up to 17% more work per second than a 3.0 GHz processor in the same time.\n\nNote that I said \"up to.\" There are other factors that mean you might see less (or more) than that. The \"same design\" part is also really important—processors of different design do different amounts of work per clock cycle, so you can't compare them that way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4nqw46
|
why is there so little coverage on reddit about the orlando shooting?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nqw46/eli5_why_is_there_so_little_coverage_on_reddit/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d463mmv",
"d463nab",
"d463njm",
"d463nve",
"d463pj5"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"R/news started censoring comments once we learned the identity of the shooter being Muslim ",
"I'm in the US and outraged that this isn't a major post on the front page. The people in /r/conspiracy are saying mods are quickly deleting posts about it. Wtf is that all about?",
"News mods are censoring everything that doesn't fit their narrative that there \"is no such thing as Islamic terror\" ",
"The latest news is that the shooter apparently has links to ISIS and is an Islamic Terrorists. The overly politically correct mods are removing all of these posts because... They're racist? All news stories about it are being removed.",
"The mods are saying they're \"only deleting comments that violate the rules\".\n\nIt's because the shooter was Muslim and it's harder to push the \"blame America\", \"blame gun owners, \"blame healthcare\" agenda they want to push."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6qdda0
|
why are there only two companies who make gpus and cpus? shouldn't there at least be foreign competitors?
|
I've only ever heard of AMD & Intel as well as AMD & Nvidia (who I believe is owned by Intel?) making Processors and Graphics Cards respectively.
Why are there are no other competitors in America and why aren't there competitors from other countries like China too? If there are, how come they never get mentioned? Does every other country use AMD and Intel?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qdda0/eli5_why_are_there_only_two_companies_who_make/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkwduz5",
"dkwen9p",
"dkwfh3v",
"dkwhc13"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There are indeed more companies. You are just noticing the two leading manufacturers in each category.",
"For CPUs, Intel and AMD have a licensing deal; Intel licesnes x86 to AMD, AMD licenses AM64 to Intel. This was perhaps ironically done in the first place for competition and parity between the companies, but regardless Intel has no reason to license x86 to any other companies.\n\nThat's a huge blow to any new company looking to make desktop CPUs.\n\nI don't believe any such issue exist in the GPU world, but still, GPUs require an intense amount of research and development. There use to be several GPU companies, but they all went out of business, leaving us with the red team and the green team.\n\nNote that in the mobile space neither Intel nor AMD dominate at all. In fact, recently Samsung has become the world's largest CPU fab, beating out Intel.\n\nAlso Intel doens't own Nvidia.",
"No, Nvidia is not owned by Intel. You may be thinking of AMD (CPU maker) who purchased the GPU maker ATI in 2006, Nvidia's main competitor. In 2010 AMD dropped the ATI name and now sells both CPUs and GPUs under the AMD brand.\n\nIn terms of competition those 3 companies make up almost all CPU and GPU sales for the PC (x86 compatible) market. Other companies selling graphics cards (in particular anything for games), like Asus or Matrox, are selling their circuit board, memory and cooling system paired with a GPU from Nvidia or AMD.\n\nThere are a few smaller companies (like VIA makes CPUs and who bought S3 who made GPUs) however these compete in specialized areas (you probably won't find them at Bestbuy).\n\nApart from simple market dominance modern CPUs and GPUs for PCs are very complex designs with decades of knowledge built into them. It can takes years for these manufacturers to design a new model and that's with the advantage of reusing many elements from previous models. Starting from scratch would be a multi-billion dollar project and you still wouldn't even be competitive at that point. And then there are the IP issues - just making an x86 compatible processor wouldn't be enough, you'd need at least everything up to SSE2 plus a few other things to run modern Windows (more then that for Mac OS X) which means you are calling both Intel and AMD to try and get them to licence their tech. GPUs are in a similar boat - at minimum you'll need to fully support all DirectX9 level features from day one or your GPU is not going to work for consumer PCs.",
"Foreign competitors...against the US...in computer technology. It's for sure an uphill battle. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1ocrxz
|
how is comcast able to change me to a new data usage plan without me signing anything?
|
got an e-mail from comcast saying this new plan that i'm apparently on, which lead me to _URL_0_ and then i googled it and found _URL_1_
is there anything to do about this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ocrxz/eli5_how_is_comcast_able_to_change_me_to_a_new/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccqt1s3"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"If you don't have a contract with them, they can pretty much do as they please.\n\nCall and tell them you want to cancel your service. They will transfer you to the retention department. The retention department is likely to offer to keep you at the same rate, usually for 6-12 months. Then, you call back and do it again."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-support/internet/data-usage-plans-expansion-data-plan",
"http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Comcast-Expands-Usage-Cap-Trials-Into-Several-New-Markets-126087"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
4dmtys
|
why do planets almost always have circular masses at the north and south poles, is it just a centrifuge effect from spinning?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dmtys/eli5_why_do_planets_almost_always_have_circular/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d1se0ny"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"I'm sorry, I don't think I follow. Where do you get that planets always have \"circular masses\" at the poles? And what circular masses do you mean? Are you referring to polar ice caps?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3grihn
|
why does smelling something like wasabi or horseradish immediately clear your sinuses?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3grihn/eli5_why_does_smelling_something_like_wasabi_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu0sppt",
"cu0togp",
"cu0uuvt",
"cu0vbf8",
"cu0ye9b",
"cu0ytqh",
"cu0zolt",
"cu101mf",
"cu14gma",
"cu14k34",
"cu15y0f",
"cu17sdf",
"cu18cwm",
"cu19yvs",
"cu1c3p5",
"cu1df7f",
"cu1du7b",
"cu1e2rn",
"cu1f1wa",
"cu1hxe5",
"cu1j84t"
],
"score": [
3478,
292,
43,
14,
134,
4,
27,
107,
5,
3,
2,
2,
289,
3,
5,
3,
2,
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The things that do that are irritants. Basically, when your body comes in contact with them, it reacts- in the case of eyes and nose, your body tries to flush irritants by producing tears/mucous.\n\nYour sinuses are blocked because mucous in them is thickened and staying in place instead of flowing- the natural flushing from the irritants mixes fresh moisture in to the existing blocking mucous, which allows it to flow properly and clear out of your sinuses.",
"So most, if not all, of the wasabi you have eaten isn't really wasabi but is a mixture of horseradish and ingredients. Horseradish contains a compound called allyl isothiocyanate which has antibacterial properties and is a lachrymator. From wikipedia: \"Lachrymators are thought to act by attacking sulfhydryl functional groups in enzymes. One of the most probable protein targets is the TRPA1 ion channel that is expressed in sensory nerves (trigeminal nerve) of the eyes, nose, mouth and lungs.\" From what I have found high concentrations of this stuff are basically tear gas.\n\n\nNo sources on this part, but if I had to guess when you chew or agitate the horseradish it gives off the allyl isothiocyanate inside your mouth as a gas. Which can then travel into your sinuses and stimulate your TRPA1 ion channels. Because it isn't as highly concentrated we feel this as cold, or a tingling sensation.\n\nI couldn't find if there is any actual sinus inflammation reliefe but it does appear that horseradish root is being used in some sinus relief medicine that has been shown to work as well as other prescription strength medications.\n\n\nEDIT: My bad guys! I was browsing /all and I really thought this was askscience! Thanks for the generous upvotes anyway :P\nSorry if this wasn't a great answer. I'm no expert but the question interested me so I did a bit of searching!\n\n\n\n_URL_5_\n_URL_2_\n_URL_3_\n_URL_1_\n_URL_0_\n_URL_4_",
"ELI5: Horseradish, wasabi and mustard are basically chili that reacts in you nose rather than to your tongue.\n\nWhen you eat chili, it burns your tongue and often makes you salivate. When you smell horseradish, it burns your nose and makes it runny.",
"Sorry to go off topic where I've got a cold if I eat mustard or horseradish will it unblock my nose?",
"don't forget about tear gas too. former army guy here. in basic training, we went through the \"gas chamber\" which was a room filled with tear gas. the drill sergeants made us sing the army song even though no one knew it. went out with snot and spit running down my nose thinking i was going to suffocate to death. but it cleared up my sinuses when i was able to catch my breath again\n\nedited* i meant cs gas. i thought they were the same.",
"Thought this was an interesting fact about wasabi processing, and since the question you asked has already been answered i thought i'd post it. \"Wasabi is often grated with a metal oroshigane, but some prefer to use a more traditional tool made of dried sharkskin with fine skin on one side and coarse skin on the other. A hand-made grater with irregular teeth can also be used. If a shark-skin grater is unavailable, ceramic is usually preferred.\" - _URL_0_",
"IT DOES?!? I'm gonna start sniffling wasabi like it's cocaine then.",
"Side note: \nMost wasabi is food colored horse radish. Real wasabi is too expensive to just hand out for free to every table at a high volume sushi restaurant. ",
"You may have to actually [ingest wasabi](_URL_0_) to see its full effects.",
"A good cure is to snort hot curry powder into both nostrils using a straw or small tube similar to cocaine snorting. This will clear your sinuses but may cause some secondary irritation in the nostrils and throat.",
"Fun fact, if you don't have these things handy and you need to clear your sinuses, jerking off can have the same effect. ",
"My nose was so stuffed up one time that nothing worked at clearing it -- no OtC mess, no sinus washing, no nothing. Then I got the idea to put a little cayenne pepper on the end of my pinky and give as best an inhale as possible with my stuffed up nose.\n\nOh boy that did the trick! One might say it worked too well. It was like breathing fire. ",
"Everyone else has gotten it wrong. \n\nFirst you have to understand blocked noses. A nose gets blocked, or congested, when the inside of your nose gets swollen. The more swollen the more blocked your nose. Sometimes this may feel like a big \"snot plug\". If it were a snot plug then you should be able to blow really hard and clear it, but you never can. \n\nSmelling those things will irritate thin side of your nostril and cause blood vessels to squeeze and tighten up. This causes the swelling to go down and opening up your nasal passages. \n\nIt's similar to having a big swollen bruise and putting an ice back on it to bring down the swelling. ",
"The blood vessels in your sinuses constrict and tighten, widening the pathways and allowing for the blockage to free.",
"Easiest most pleasurable way I've found in consuming both:\n\n\n\nWasabi-blend into soy sauce until the soy is a greenish gray. Dip sushi/sashimi in it, brace yourself for the boom.\n\n\nHorseradish- One of two ways. Make your own cocktail sauce.50% horseradish, 40% ketchup full the rest with lemon Tabasco and worcestershire. Dip shrimp crab clams or lobster.",
"I remember a thread where some scientist had proved that wasabi doesn't clear your sinuses. It's merely an affectation that feels like they're opening up. \n\nI'm on mobile now, so I'll see if I can find it later. The thread was about Fran Drescher's 'real' voice. ",
"Jesus the best lifeprotip I've ever seen and I find it in ELI5. Why do I even bother subscribing when all they do is tell you how to turn useless crap into slightly less useless crap.",
"eli5: why does eating wasabi make the top of my head feel like it is being blown open?",
"Everyone else has gotten it wrong.\nFirst you have to understand blocked noses. A nose gets blocked, or congested, when the inside of your nose gets swollen. The more swollen the more blocked your nose. Sometimes this may feel like a big \"snot plug\". If it were a snot plug then you should be able to blow really hard and clear it, but you never can.\nSmelling those things will irritate thin side of your nostril and cause blood vessels to squeeze and tighten up. This causes the swelling to go down and opening up your nasal passages.\nIt's similar to having a big swollen bruise and putting an ice back on it to bring down the swelling",
"Horseradish has a \"small\" chemical in it called allyl isothiocyanate that is readily aerosolized and escapes your mouth into you sinus cavities. Once there, it acts as an irritant like other posts have mentioned.\n\nA pepper, contrarily, contains capsaicins which are \"larger\" molecules that tend to stay in the mouth and cause irritation/burning more locally",
"All the mucus immediately vacates your sinuses in order to protect your ass once you've eaten it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transient_receptor_potential_cation_channel,_member_A1",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tear_gas",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseradish#Nutritional_and_biomedical_uses",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allyl_isothiocyanate",
"http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/16618018",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasabi"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasabi"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DJ8B1ek_L0"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b5xvg1
|
why do buffer overflows allow an entry point for exploits?
|
I don't understand how more data than expected can allow for unsigned code?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b5xvg1/eli5_why_do_buffer_overflows_allow_an_entry_point/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejgolol",
"ejgpeoa",
"ejgyn7v"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"A buffer is an area of memory--and it shares main memory with other code.\n\nA \"buffer overflow\" exploit is where you get the computer to reach beyond the boundaries of that array--which, with low-level programming, is pretty easy to do. \n\nMore particularly, though, it's when you put your malicious code just beyond the boundary of the buffer in memory and then trick a program into accessing it.\n\nImagine if memory was set up like this, with the first three elements being the buffer:\n\nMemory: {\"Good\", \"Good\", \"Good\", \"Bad\"}\n\nNow, what happens when you get your computer to reach beyond the buffer, to the fourth element in memory? You run the bad code, and the malware has successfully exploited the buffer overflow error.",
"A buffer is a chunk of memory which is used to hold temporary data for any reason until it is used for something.\n\nNormally to run code on a closed system, it has to be signed. Normally the system is designed such that the developer of the hardware only allows a few ways for code to be run on the system and restricts what this code does. If all of these check that code is signed, then you're out of luck if you want to execute your own code. \n\nAdditionally, the code running on the machine, be it the operating system code or what not is specifically designed to never ever run code in the buffer. \n\nHowever if the code filling the buffer allows for a buffer overflow, then we end up with some of the data that was supposed to go in the buffer go slightly outside the buffer.\n\nNow this alone is not enough to trigger arbitrary code execution. Buffer overflows are more of a question \"where does this buffer overflow into.\"\n\nThe buffer in the case of the Nintendo switch hack for example overflowed into the \"execution stack,\" aka where the code the switch was running was. After the code running the buffer copy in that case finished, it jumped back to the execution stack code. As such, it overwrote the code the switch was running with whatever an attacker wanted, taking control of the system in such a way that allows the attacker to add their own method of executing code without signing. ",
"Think of a buffer like a wall of PO Boxes at a shipping store. Each part of memory (the wall) has its own unique shipping address. \n\nA computer program needs a certain number of memory addresses/PO boxes in order to fit into the memory buffer, and this can be allocated by the OS beforehand. Lets say PO Boxes 10-20 are given to this program. \n\nNow if the program overflows and exceeds its allocated memory size, the person placing mail into the PO Boxes (the OS) might stuff mail/program data into PO Box 21 because it needs the room. Exploits can sometimes then steal the information that was already stored in PO Box 21, or instead overwrite whatever was in there and replace it with malicious code.\n\nKeep in mind not all PO Boxes are equal, some are more secure than others. If PO Box 21 was a very secure box with elevated code privileges then whatever the overflow forced into it would gain those same elevated privileges and be able to run malicious code. The postmaster (the OS) would pull the data from PO Box 21, see that it came from a box with elevated privileges, and would run it without knowing any better. \n\nI am ignoring that there are a huge number of safeguards put into place to prevent this, but it is still possible particularly if a poorly coded program doesn't use the safeguards or uses one of them incorrectly. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2kzx4s
|
why does blinking take me almost no effort at all, but winking forces multiple muscles/areas in my face to move oddly that aren't even near my eye (i.e. side of my mouth being raised/lowered)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kzx4s/eli5_why_does_blinking_take_me_almost_no_effort/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clq59g9",
"clqd24i",
"clqju4d"
],
"score": [
28,
9,
27
],
"text": [
"The sequence of movements and the muscles involved are the same group of muscles that are active when something's in your eyes. You are not winking but using those muscle groups separately (one side only) to express yourself. It has to do with what nerves are supplying those areas and the nuclei of those nerves. Closure of the eye lid and movement of the muscles are done by the same nerve (Facial nerve). Hence the effort.\n\nIt is also a movement that is almost an instinct because you have used them before even as an infant when something gets into your eyes. So kind of like muscle memory but for the wrong task, but it still works at expressing so you keep using it. Practice hard enough, and winking will be effortless. ;)",
"**Am I The Only One Around Here** \n\n**Who Can Blink With One Eye??**\n\nSeriously, I would assume that consciously blinking one eye (to flirt or to convey \"I'm joking\") is an **act of communication** and by scrunching up that side of our faces we are exaggerating for effect. \n\nI'm also one of the few people I've met who can blink with either eye, so much so that I have to consciously decide which to use or I will end up doing both at the same time. ",
"A muscle called the [levator palpebrae](_URL_1_) is what keeps your eyes open. A muscle called the [orbicularis oculi](_URL_0_) is what closes your eyes.\n\n\nYour levator palpebrae muscles CANNOT move independently - they both have to be working at the same time. However, your orbicularis muscles can move independent of one another.\n\n\nWhen you blink, your levator muscles relax, then your orbicularis muscles contract, which closes the eye. To open back up, your orbicularis muscles relax and your levators contract.\n\n\nWhen winking, one eye stays open. But remember that your levators can only contract/relax together at the same time. So during a wink, both levators are contracted, keeping both eyes open. Then you voluntarily contract the orbicularis of one eye - and it struggles against and overpowers the levator of that eye. That's why it's trickier to wink - you've got muscles \"fighting\" against each other in that eye.\n\n\nSource: I'm an optometry student and had a test on this stuff yesterday."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbicularis_oculi_muscle",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levator_palpebrae_superioris_muscle"
]
] |
||
1repi7
|
can lifeforms be created out of antimatter?
|
I have a very basic understanding of matter and antimatter but not enough to understand this question. Is it possible that under perfect conditions, life could form from antimatter rather than matter?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1repi7/eli5_can_lifeforms_be_created_out_of_antimatter/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdmi65i",
"cdmisav"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"If there was part of the universe that was antimatter-dominated, with anti-matter suns and planets, anti-matter water and air, everything, then it would be indistinguishable from the matter equivalent.\n\nAnd the people on this anti-matter planet would create matter in their high-energy particle colliders, and observe the energy that is given off when it interacts with (their) normal matter.\n\nAnd someone on their anti-reddit logs on and posts an anti-ama asking if life could be made of matter :D\n\nTL;DR: Yes.",
"Chemically speaking there's no known difference between matter and antimatter. The Alpha experiment at CERN is investigating the energy levels of the Anti-hydrogen atom to see if it is the same as it's matter counterpart.\n\nNote that there is a reason that the observable universe is matter dominated, and we are not sure what that is yet. The current understanding is, if there were to be a anti-matter universe, it would behave in the exact same way. However, once we determine why matter dominates, that prediction might not hold.\n\nTL:DR: From what we know of physics thus far, yes.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
184vrc
|
why does it take longer to create copies of files than it does to "cut/paste" or delete them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/184vrc/why_does_it_take_longer_to_create_copies_of_files/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8bm6tw",
"c8bm7vr"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"When making copies, or moving across different physical storage devices, the computer has to replicate the data, i.e. write the whole thing again, byte by byte.\n\nWhen deleting or moving within the same physical storage device, you just rewrite the \"location pointer\" to \"there is nothing here\" or \"from now on, this is officially over there\" respectively. The file system of folders and files is rather abstract and in actuality it is a sort of a lookup table of where what physically is. So if the table says, there is nothing there, it is as good as deleted for most purposes.",
"Because when you cut/paste them or delete them, the operating system only needs to update an entry in a table to point to the new location. \"Oh, you want that document? It used to be at address ABC but now it's at XYZ. Here you go.\" When you create a copy of a file the OS has to actually make a new copy of it (allocating disk space and all that).\n\nPS cutting/pasting a file is only fast if you are moving it somewhere on the same disk (because the OS keeps one table for each disk). If you move it to another drive then it takes just as long as copying.\n\nCutting/pasting is like moving from one apartment to another. You just tell the post office to update your address. Copying is like building a whole new apartment and then moving in and then telling the post office. You are making a new thing that wasn't there before. My analogies are shit!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
5lq2a8
|
what is the reflective foil inside chip bags for?
|
Was eating a nice bag of chips today. Thought of why it was there.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lq2a8/eli5_what_is_the_reflective_foil_inside_chip_bags/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbxmp13"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The whole bag is made of that material, it's just the front is printed to fit the advertising goals of the company. It's a cheap, hermetically sealable material, so it doesn't cost much to use. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
56mtd8
|
could you survive on a water and peanut only diet?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56mtd8/eli5_could_you_survive_on_a_water_and_peanut_only/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8kkm2u",
"d8kkqdu"
],
"score": [
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Easy answer...No...Why??? Neither Peanuts nor Water have Vitamin C... You would die from scurvy.",
"Short answer: No. Your body needs much, much more than just water and peanuts to stay healthy. To survive, but be extremely unhealthy and have a horrible time staying alive, you could eat only peanuts and water, but you wouldn't like it. Peanuts are high in protein (for a non-meat food) and energy. Water is good for hydration. However, your body needs iodine, iron, magnesium, calcium, etc. to stay healthy. Without these, your bones become brittle, your skin loses its elasticity, your muscles deteriorate, your brain starts losing functions, you will hallucinate, you will have constant diarrhea, your immune system will start failing, your heartbeat would become irregular and your blood pressure would drop significantly, you would have constant low blood sugar, low oxygen saturation, low hormonal responses, severe anxiety and depression (because hormonal and chemical imbalances), the onset of a slew of diseases and infections, kidney failure, kidney damage, blood toxicity, bladder infections, kidney infections, stomach infections, lung infections, nose, mouth, and throats infections, itchy, watery eyes (because tears are salty, and you would be low on salt), muscle spasms, involuntary convulsions, constant aches and cramps, back pain, joint pain, neck pain, swelling of the joints, I could keep going. Eventually you will die, either from infection or malnutrition. A vitamin cannot keep you alive, as it can't provide nutrients to you. It can provide some, but not nearly all the vitamins and minerals you need to stay healthy. Peanuts don't provide you enough sodium and potassium to keep your muscles working, and water won't provide you the additional nutrients, but will keep you hydrated. Don't try this. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
23t15a
|
if 2 parents share 50/50 physical custody of a child why might one parent still have to pay the other child support
|
if a child has one week at mom's then one week at dad's and is covered by both parents medical insurance's might one parent still have to pay the other some child support?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23t15a/eli5_if_2_parents_share_5050_physical_custody_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch0asmi",
"ch0asu8",
"ch0e4xr"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Is this a serious question? The court will consider the incomes of the parents when determining the proper amount to award in child support. One parent could have been the breadwinner while the other was a stay at home parent. ",
"Generally it's decided based on the income difference of the two parents. \n\nIf the parents were still together, let's say they had an annual income of $100,000, but separated, those incomes are $30,000 and $70,000. You now have a situation where it is more difficult for one parent which can cause all sorts of strain that negatively affects the child.",
"As others have said, it's mostly based upon income. \n\nMy mom and dad had 50/50 custody of me and my older brother and sister. \n\nBut when they got divorced, it went from a 200k household, to a 180k and a 20k. \n\nObviously a mother of three would have a difficult time supporting herself and her kids, so the court decided to have my dad pay child support. \n\nMy dad had to pay ~1000 a month for child support. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.