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
5xsn04
why are pandas black & white?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5xsn04/eli5_why_are_pandas_black_white/
{ "a_id": [ "dekjrin", "dektafd" ], "score": [ 6, 5 ], "text": [ "It's basically saying the white is to blend into snowy environments and the black is to blend into dark or shady environments.\n\nIt also says some of the black features on the face help other Pandas to recognise individuals and help the panda convey body language.", "Pandas are notorious for not seeing all sides to an event or situation. They will make up their minds before all the information is gathered and refuse to change their view points, and will go off eating bamboo like they know everything." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
54kjs9
stopped clock illusion
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/54kjs9/eli5_stopped_clock_illusion/
{ "a_id": [ "d82ldxb", "d82xw3h" ], "score": [ 13, 2 ], "text": [ "If you're talking about when you look at a clock and it seems to have stopped for a second I know why. Apparently when you look at a place quickly your mind \"deletes\" the blur and then fills the remaining empty memory with what you started to look at (in this case a clock). ", "Your eyes have very little \"high resolution space\" right at the point of focus. Things that are not in the hot spot are largely filled in from memory.\n\nBecause so little of your visual field is actually updated every instant, you get things like \"change blindness\"; that is, if you don't expect things in some part of your vision to change, your brain will not register that things there are changing or have changed.\n\nMovement is the big indicator of a need to update part of your field of view. It takes relatively little in the way of neurons to schedule your eyes to glance over at something once movement is detected.\n\nIn computer display drivers (such as Xorg's display driver) they call this \"damage\". The system compares what's on the screen to what the program wants to be there and then only changes what was \"damaged\" by the new intent.\n\nSo when you first look at a clock, if you've ever seen that kind of clock before, your brain (essentially/apparently) puts a \"that kind of clock\" template into play, then fills it in with the exact details of the clock at hand. That includes a face and the fact that there should be hands and such.\n\nYour brain reconciles the imaginary clock template with the real clock to establish it's reality.\n\nBut the thing is, your memory isn't linear and procedural. It's not like a tape, where each moment is memorized after the moment before it. If it were, then you'd have no memory of \"scenes\", like an entire landscape or the full image on your computer monitor.\n\nYour memory is, instead filled and back-filled as it's composed in the short term memory. From there real memories that are considered \"worth keeping\" are promoted from short term to intermediate term and then long term storage. The latter two are more complete.\n\nSo your brain works like a sketch artist, quickly composing the moment of experience by marking down what's important.\n\nBut your brain _hates_ things to just appear or disappear. It's unsettling and problematic. Sudden appearances can invoke danger because in the real world, sudden things are often trying to kill you.\n\nSo by the time you get around to needing or wanting to fill in the second hand on the clock, your brain will happily back fill the instant position of the second hand as \"the place it always was\". \n\nAnd this is even more true if you look for it. So you'll likely only experience the illusion once you are looking for it.\n\nMost of the time the second hand is irrelevant and you don't even care that it's there at all." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3ht68i
when you buy a song on itunes, why do they only provide you with a 256 kbps m4a file after you've spent a good $0.99- $1.29 for the song?
Shouldn't they give you at least a 320 kbps MP3 after you've given them your money? Similarly, why don't they give you the option of downloading a lossless quality file for a higher price? Thank you!
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ht68i/eli5_when_you_buy_a_song_on_itunes_why_do_they/
{ "a_id": [ "cuac9de", "cuaipca" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "I agree that they should at least supply an ALAC option (eww), but M4A has better quality and compression algorithms then a comparable MP3 file.", "Anything above 192 kbps is undiscernable in quality difference. Do a blind test if you're not sure about it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
v4a2e
what are the possible/actual ramifications of pirating movies/music/games?
To satisfy my curiosity. What are cases that have happened? I'm not talking every movie on the top 1000 movies of all time, just a movie here and there.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/v4a2e/eli5_what_are_the_possibleactual_ramifications_of/
{ "a_id": [ "c517ix7" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Ramifications for you: almost nothing, short of maybe a virus in a malicious file. \n\nRamifications for the content creators: They are not getting paid. You are taking their content and they are not being rewarded for it. This applies to big corporations, little indie teams, and everyone in between. It is not stealing but it *does* hurt them.\n\nIt is also worth knowing games are hit hardest by piracy. A new game has a few weeks to make its money before it is taken down from store shelves. Digital sales and Amazon help keep a game running longer but the reality is that a game flopping can sink a developer. And games do flop far more frequently then movies or music. Game are only relevant in the pop culture for a brief window \n\nMovies have huge lifespans they get the box office draw,DVD sales, and then Netflix or other streaming licensing deals. This super long lifespan make it a bit harder for a movie to really flop.\n\nI know nothing of the music industry so i cant speak to them, but since services like iTunes and Spotify have actually made buying music easier then pirating they are doing ok form what i understand. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
eq2491
how do they extract natural gases?
It may be possible for me to understand the extraction of natural gases in our modern days, by using such a cutting edge technology, but what I don't understand is how they did it back in the 1800'? It is not like they could just go in a pit and catch the gases with a jar... Or could they?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eq2491/eli5_how_do_they_extract_natural_gases/
{ "a_id": [ "fen6fmk" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "There is a difference between Methane, the natural gas in the pipes that your stove uses, and all the other gases - which are also naturally gases.\n\nMethane is found underground with oil deposits, it;s what causes a \"gusher\". You drill a hole into the Earth, and cap it with a valve and pipe. The refining process also produces more methane, and all that goes into the pipe.\n\nOther gases, like Oxygen or Nitrogen, are extracted from the air through distillation. Instead of heating a liquid, the air is cooled. Different gases condense at different temperatures, and can be separated that way." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2yysbj
why are butterfly knives illegal
IN CANADA? or in general whyyyyyyyy omg man
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2yysbj/eli5why_are_butterfly_knives_illegal/
{ "a_id": [ "cpe81rk" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "When folded, it does not look like a knife. People can easily be fooled by it. Even with an X-Ray, it would look like a phone, a pencil bag, a toilette container, etc. \n\nHow old are you? \"whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy omg man?\" You don't seem old enough to buy a butterfly knife, so just don't." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
b8lznm
if 1 g fat = 9 calories so 1 kg of fat = 9000 calories why is it that 1 kg of body mass is = 7700 calories?
If you search online to lose 1 kg of body mass you need to lose ~ 7700 calories. But 1 kg of fat has 9000 calories. So that would mean that if you eat 1kg of animal fat you gain more then 1 kg of body mass. Where does the discrepancy comes from?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b8lznm/eli5_if_1_g_fat_9_calories_so_1_kg_of_fat_9000/
{ "a_id": [ "ejykaz6", "ejyla0a" ], "score": [ 12, 6 ], "text": [ "Is your entire body fat?", "Because humans tissue even if it is fat cells are not just fat but other stuff. Proteins and Carbohydrates have 4kcal/g and water has 0.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nFat tissue contain \\~10% water. Sop if you solve the equation 9\\*x+4\\*(900-x)=7700 you could get the 82% fat, 8% proteins/Carbohydrates and 10 % water.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo the 7700kcal input reduction to loose 1kg is because it is not just fat." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
b8hgo2
why aren't babies allowed to sleep on their side?
My girlfriend is about 34 weeks pregnant with our first child and she recently asked me if I knew what position you're supposed to lay babies down in to sleep. I said that I thought you lay them on their side, so that if they were sick in the night they wouldn't choke, but she told me that babies were in fact only allowed to sleep on their backs. I obviously believe her and since going to antenatal classes they also said the same thing, so without question I will lay our baby on his back to sleep. I still feel a little bit anxious about doing it though. Maybe I'm thinking of the situation in adult terms too much, but I just can't seem to shake the worry that, similar to an adult who'd passed out, if he's sick while lying on his back he might choke. Please can you explain why it's safer to lay him on his back and why it's unlikely he'll choke if he's sick in the night/during a nap.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b8hgo2/eli5_why_arent_babies_allowed_to_sleep_on_their/
{ "a_id": [ "ejxs82y", "ejxsdke", "ejxsfz0", "ejxsgyr", "ejy6nve", "ejy7bu4", "ejy85un", "ejyfdpj", "ejyhxct", "ejyia68", "ejyj7n6", "ejyl0qt", "ejyox7f", "ejyqseb", "ejyri9q", "ejyrl1c", "ejysho4", "ejysz7y", "ejyt5p5", "ejyufdw", "ejyuqc8", "ejyuyid", "ejyvep5", "ejyyyy1", "ejz0ali", "ejz5p6u", "ejz9ilw", "ejza9ie", "ejzkix0", "ek02gql", "ek083su", "ek0ftja" ], "score": [ 13, 13, 1494, 62, 9, 7, 81, 4, 3, 3, 2, 8, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "The [studies](_URL_0_), recently at least, seem to indicate that lying on the back is best. The linked study is one of many. ", "Recently, more and more epidemiological studies have been done on this and they’ve found that babies who sleep on their backs are far less like to die of SIDS ", "Babies can't really lay on their sides. They're pretty round and have little control over their limbs, so if you lay them on their side, they pretty quickly roll either to their back or to their front. So your only options are on their back or on their front.\n\nThe evidence is overwhelming that babies are way less likely to die from SIDS if they sleep on their back. It's not clear why that is (mostly because we won't experiment on babies and watch them die to figure out why, for obvious reasons); the leading theory is that babies on their front can end up with their mouths and noses in a position where they can't breathe and they're not strong enough to clear them.\n\nOverall, being sick while on their back is actually not a big concern. They have a functioning gag reflex which makes them spit out anything that gets in their throat. The problem with adults is usually being drunk, which impairs the gag reflex and makes it possible to choke if liquid ends up in their throat. Unimpaired adults don't normally choke on their own vomit either.", "Okay, not a native speaker here, so please excuse wrong terms or anything.\n\nLaying on it's back is the safest way to prevent sudden infant death syndrome. Your fear of choking is good, but know that newborns have enough reflexes to prevent it - also the esophagus is underneath the trachea, which helps a lot.\nWhat you should most take care and be aware of is suffocation by things INSIDE your newborns bed. It should be completely empty at all times until it's able to move it's head by it's own. Keeping the airways clear is - obviously - also achieved by lying on the back.\n\nYou should make your newborn lay on sides/stomach as well for motoric development, but definitely switch to back when it falls asleep.\n\nEDIT: fixed a sentence that sounded like the opposite I wanted to say", "All the reasons above are why you should put a baby “back to sleep” but also know that once a baby is rolling over on their own it’s appropriate to allow them to stay on their tummy if they roll over by themselves in their sleep. At this point, developmentally, they’re capable of turning their head completely on their own in order to manage their own airway even while they sleep. ", "Just FYI, for everything about Back to Sleep, when my little one was born back in November, we quickly discovered that she would pull HERSELF onto one side to sleep. Basically the doctor's answer was : put her to sleep on her back. If she pulls herself to her side, it's okay. :)\n\nShe grew out of it within a few weeks, and only just now regained the ability as she's working towards rolling over!", "First off, congrats! Just to add to this, in addition to sleep position, the sleep environment is important in SIDS prevention. An easy way to remember how to make a safe sleep environment is ABC: Alone, on the Back, in a Crib. \n\n\nAlone meaning nothing else in the crib. No stuffed animals, no blankets, no crib bumpers. Loose or fluffy bedding has been associated with an increased risk of SIDS, believed to present a suffocation risk. As for warmth, they make wearable blankets and a good general rule of thumb is to keep your house at a temperature that you are comfortable in wearing light clothing. If the house is that temp, the baby should be comfortable, but you can always check the tip of his or her nose and the ear lobes. If those are cold to the touch, turn up the furnace (and vice versa if things are too hot). \n\n\nBack has been previously discussed. Sleeping on the back has been shown to reduce the risk of SIDS by up to 40%. While being demonstrably safer, the one trade off is a slightly increased risk of something called positional plagiocephaly, which is molding or flattening of the skull. To minimize the risk of flattening, being sure to do tummy time while awake and change the direction the baby is lying in the crib each night, since babies will often tend to look into the center of the room while they sleep. Doing those two things should give the head enough variation in position to avoid any flattening. It should also be mentioned that this flattening is oftentimes very mild and is reversible most of the time. \n\nFinally, crib. A firm crib mattress made specifically for infants is the best sleep surface. Softer mattresses also increase the risk of SIDS. \n\nBest of luck with everything!!\n\nSource: am a pediatrician. Did community outreach in my city, where infant mortality and SIDS disproportionately affected certain communities. ", "Just wait until your baby arrives, you think this one thought is keeping you up at night, causing stress. Wait until they take there first nap. I checked on my kid every 2 mins to make sure he was still breathing.", "The \"downside\" of laying on the back all the time can be a flat spot on the head (goes away) and less developed muscles. Doing Tummy Time sessions is really important to build baby muscles for back sleepers.\n\n & #x200B;\n\n & #x200B;", "When my kids were born (early-mid '90's) the consensus was for infants to be on their sides. This was accomplished by putting a small rolled up towel behind and in front of them and then tucking the blanket to make whole thing secure. Pain in the ass!", "There are lots of good resources on helping babies sleep safely. Tiny babies are scary, but if you follow all the guidelines it will help keep them safe. \n\n_URL_0_", "You know by now all the reasons why you put a baby to sleep on their back. \n\nBut when they live in a hospital (neonatal unit) you'll frequently see then sleeping on their front. Freaks some people out. In the hospital it's ok because they are wired up to all sorry of monitors. Additionally, on their front they find it easier to breathe as there's less weight on their lungs. Premature babies, who are the main residents of a neonatal unit, don't have fully developed lungs so it's a really comfy way for them to sleep and rest. ", "**A**- Alone \n\n**B**- Back\n\n**C**- Crib\n\nNo blankets or things to choke on, on their back, in a crib- as easy as ABC", "Also if you get home from a drive and the baby is asleep in the car seat you should take them out and move them to a crib. When setting a car seat on a flat surface it can cause their chin to lay closer to the chest and they can stop breathing. \n\nOverall, there are basic principles to follow like back is best etc. as long as you follow those, you will do fine. Do not worry a ton about thinking you cannot do anything with a baby without hurting it as I know it can be overwhelming as a new father. ", "In the UK we have NCT for antenatal classes. I found the whole experience ridiculous. Completely unscientific and scare mongering already petrified parents to be.\nIn short, making your baby sleep on it's back is not scientifically proven to reduce SIDS. The campaign to make babies sleep on their backs coincides with a reduction in SIDS. A reduction that can be attributed to huge increase in funding for social care and better methods to determine death (thus ruling out SIDS). \nAs an aside, SIDS is incredibly rare. Be confident in the fact that your natural common sense and innate parenting skill will prevail and you will have a healthy, awesome and wonderful baby. ", "First off. Generally it’s best to sleep them on their back. But quite often they will roll to their side or stomach and aside from getting up and rolling them there’s not much else to do. My daughter is a tummy sleeper. We worried ourselves sleepless for the first 3 months, but she hated being swaddled and wouldn’t sleep on her back. She would wiggle out of a swaddle and end up on her side or tummy. Doctor said back is best, but didn’t have a solution that worked for us. So we went ahead, placing her on her back to find her rolled over every night. \n\nSecondly. The throw up thing, as explained by my pediatrician, isn’t like a drunk college student who has passed out and should be placed on their side. The babies have the proper reflexes and instinct that they are far less likely to aspirate (inhale) their vomit. We were told not to worry. Turns out babies are rather resilient and have evolved to survive despite their anxiety stricken parents.", "Side note- new babies typically only breathe through their noses for at least the first several weeks too, they don't realize they can breathe through their mouths. So if they do drool or spit up, it doesn't necessarily clog their nose, it comes out of their mouth. ", "So the scientific research does seem to indicate that back sleeping reduced the number of infant deaths while sleeping. But lets put this number in perspective. There are about 4 million babies born in the US yearly. Before the huge push for back sleeping there were about 5,000 infant deaths while sleeping a year. That is .00125% of births and even of those deaths not all or even a majority of them can be blamed on belly sleeping. After back sleeping became the norm, there are now around 3500 deaths while sleeping. Not an insignificant decrease but again a very very small portion of the population. Keep in mind some/many of these deaths include other factors beyond just back or belly sleeping, blankets, items in the crib, sharing a bed with the parents, etc. Also, a recent 2015 CDC study reported that over 20% of mothers say their babies side or belly sleep and they are not dropping like flies.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nI say all of this to tell you this. I have three children. All have survived thus far into teenagers and two of them were belly sleepers. They just slept better that way. They straight up just did not like sleeping on their backs. If you let your kid sleep on their belly, because it is their preference, you are not a bad parent or a monster. If your children back sleep, please by all means have them do so. You put your child at greater risk placing them in your car than you would by allowing them to belly sleep.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nEdit: One more super important factoid. Babies being on their belly is not inherently evil! While they are awake your baby will need a lot of belly time for muscle development. So please don't think your baby needs to always be on their back. Only while sleeping/napping.", "20+ years ago, we used a wedge pillow specifically made to let our baby sleep on their side. Don't know if these are still available. I've never heard that babies should not sleep on their side. I have heard the risk if SIDS is increased by having things like blankets and stuffed toys in the crib.", "Also slide them down so their feet are at the bottom of the crib so they don't squash their head or crick their neck if they wriggle upwards ", "First things first:\n\nRelax. \n\nYou're right to try to do the right thing for your child, but don't actively worry about it. \n\nAt the time, the best practice is to put the baby on her back for nap time.\n\nHowever, it wasn't that long ago that they recommended on their stomach, and babies lived and thrived in spite of that.\n\nThe biggest danger to your little one is co-sleeping so try to minimize that. You can roll over onto the little one and drop her or suffocate her in your sleep. But as far as cribs are concerned, I managed to raise both of my daughters successfully by putting them on their back, in their crib, in a sleep sack style onesy. No blankets until they get to 4 or 5 months or so. \n\nIt worked for me. Good luck. ", "We have a 3 week old and after few days he started rolling on his side to sleep most of the time. Nurse/Docs said its fine if they roll on their own but to always put them down on their backs", "I haven't seen it mentioned here yet. If you or mama smokes, you should consider quitting.\n\nNew research indicates that the risk of death from SIDS is doubled if mom smokes during pregnancy. Smoking in the home or car with kiddo also increases the risk of SIDS, along with their odds of developing asthma and frequent respiratory infections. If you won't quit, please smoke outside with the windows closed to protect baby's health. ", "I asked the Dr something similar when he instructed that the kid be on the back. He explained that the safest position is on the back. When the kid learns to flip on the side from the back, on their own, they're ready to sleep how they want. Till then back only. ", "There are lots of good comments on here which talk about the lack of neck control and the affect on the airway + their innate swallowing reflex, but you can also look at the physical anatomy of a baby as to why they're unlikely to choke on their back. Their airway (trachea) is at the front of the throat, and the food pipe (oesophagus) is at the back of the throat. As a result, when the baby is lying on their back the food pipe ends up below the airway and is the lowest point. This way, if the baby was to vomit into their mouths the sick would drain down into the lowest point (the oesophagus) and would be less likely to affect the airway. ", "Hmmm I work in pediatrics and we lay kids on their sides all the time! But these kids are sick and in critical care...I use little rolled up blankets to prop them up so they don’t lay all day on their backs and get skin sores. \n\nIf you need help remembering how they should lie at home it’s always back to sleep! I still remember that from school and it’s what I tell other parents when they ask that question too. ", "Like you, I didn't like the idea of putting my babies to sleep on their backs. I, too, was worried about them throwing up and aspirating it. So, I did put my babies to sleep on their sides but I used a device to make sure they stayed on their sides and didn't roll onto their tummies. It was two elongated triangles of foam that were connected; one triangle went behind baby's back and the other went in front of baby's tummy. It was spefically designed to help babies sleep on their sides. Worked for us!", "This will probably be buried in comments but as a mum of two who often stopped breathing in their sleep, a baby monitor pad under the mattress was fantastic. \n\nIt monitored the baby’s breathing and alerted us of either stopped breathing so we could go and check them. \n\nI still of course put them to be in their crib, on their back with no loose covers but the angel monitor really helped us know they were ok. \n\nAnd from one parent to another - congratulations and good luck!! ", "I honestly never understood it. Didn't help that they went and switched it up on me when I was having babies. With my daughter I was told to lay her on her tummy for the reasons you stated. Two years later I had my son and the rule was now 'back to sleep.' \n\n\nI lucked out. My daughter had laryngomalacia and projectile vomited until she was three months old. Had I been trained to put her 'back to sleep' we may have had a very bad outcome. \n\n\nWith my son, he was rolling over at eight weeks and then it didn't matter what position I put him in, he'd make himself comfortable as he liked. I think the idea here is that, by the time they're old enough to move themselves around, the dangers of improper positioning are over. They aren't as helpless.", "My daughter slept on her side. She did NOT like being on her back but she liked being angled on her side. But she had terrible reflux problems and an intolerance to her formula so that may be why. Her dr said she'd be fine if she wanted to sleep on her side. ", "Just had our first baby - every doctor has told us that sleeping on their side is completely equivalent to sleeping on their back and just as safe. Everyone has their own opinion on things, but that was pretty universally expressed to us.", "Fun fact for you: in Finland every new family gets a care package from the government with bits and pieces for the new baby (by sponsors). It comes in a cardboard box and the box doubles as a crib for the newborn. Their infants sleep in a cardboard box on a soft mattress with nothing else. Finland has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world, 3.4 out of 1000. In comparison, the US has a rate of 5.98 out of 1000. Most experts believe the box crib is the reason for this. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/reducing-risk-cot-death/" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.cdc.gov/features/babysafesleep/index.html" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
j92qs
serrated vs. straight knives?
Specifically for cooking. What kinds of things are each type best at and why?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j92qs/eli5_serrated_vs_straight_knives/
{ "a_id": [ "c2a55n1", "c2a9yr8", "c2a55n1", "c2a9yr8" ], "score": [ 6, 3, 6, 3 ], "text": [ "Serrated knives are best for sawing through tough materials, like meat.\n\nStraight knives are good for quickly chopping softer things, like fruit and vegetables.\n\nStraight-edge cleavers are good at both, provided that you have the physical strength to chop straight through meat and bone.", "Aside from usage, Serrated knives stay sharp for much longer, because only the tip touches the cutting surface. This leaves the indentation part of the serration very sharp.", "Serrated knives are best for sawing through tough materials, like meat.\n\nStraight knives are good for quickly chopping softer things, like fruit and vegetables.\n\nStraight-edge cleavers are good at both, provided that you have the physical strength to chop straight through meat and bone.", "Aside from usage, Serrated knives stay sharp for much longer, because only the tip touches the cutting surface. This leaves the indentation part of the serration very sharp." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
6rc6eg
could you jump off the moon, towards earth, and eventually get to earth?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rc6eg/eli5_could_you_jump_off_the_moon_towards_earth/
{ "a_id": [ "dl3vklq" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "If by jump you mean without any mechanical assistance, no. You would need to jump at 2.38km/s, which is the escape velocity of the Moon." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
24bxst
when i get that random, stabbing / shooting pain in in my chest that doesn't let me take a deep breath... what's actually happening? (and is it normal?)
I'll be hanging out watching TV and then suddenly get this pain in the left side of my chest. I'll feel fine otherwise - I just can't take deep breaths without a stabbing sensation. Thirty seconds later, it's gone and I'm good as new. What's the story? (I've always just assumed it's a normal thing that happens to people. Please let me know if I'm going to die. Thanks!) **Update: Thanks the help, guys. I think /u/syllabeargrylls nailed it with Precordial Catch Syndrome.**
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24bxst/eli5_when_i_get_that_random_stabbing_shooting/
{ "a_id": [ "ch5m21v", "ch5mqzk", "ch5s8up" ], "score": [ 8, 9, 3 ], "text": [ "What you're feeling is called pleuritic pain, and is the pain you feel when the linings of your lungs rub against each other. It has a vast number of causes. If this is the first time you've felt it then I would not be majorly concerned, but if you feel this pain often then I suggest you see a doctor.", "It's probably this (Precordial Catch Syndrome): _URL_0_\n\nSimilar symptoms to yours (pain in left side of chest, short duration, worse when taking breaths)\n\nI suffer from it as well, but only happens to me during strenuous activity. This is not fatal, so you're not going to die (I thought this pain leads to heart attacks before)", "Have had these on and off since early teens and still do (twentys now) although less frequently. Stabbing sensation, no longer than thirty seconds, happens randomly during non-strenuous and sometimes strenuous activities regardless of how healthy I am. Tons of people get it, and it's perfectly normal. Your doctor will probably say the same. Don't believe the hype, your not gonna die, and certainly no need for drugs. \n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precordial_catch_syndrome" ], [] ]
5qxt24
what is intersex?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qxt24/eli5_what_is_intersex/
{ "a_id": [ "dd2wlvn", "dd2woxm", "dd2wx0j", "dd2zzjb", "ddcrak8" ], "score": [ 3, 4, 6, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "As I understand it, they're people who exhibit partial or whole reproductive parts of both sexes. This can be internal or external. Like having a penis and ovaries, for example. I think having full sets of both is more rare.\n\nI could be wrong in some way though. I'm not 100% sure on some details.", "When your body doesn't conform to a specific sex, i.e. have genitals from both sexes and/or have chromosomes that correlate to both.\n\nIt's different from being trans, which usually defined as your body being one sex but your identity being a different gender.\n\nIntersexuality is relatively rare but it does exist.", "An Intersex person is someone born with both or unclear genitalia, this can present at time of birth or become present later in life when going through puberty. Many infants born with both or unclear genitalia go through surgical or hormonal procedures to get \"socially acceptable\" sex organs, sometimes without the parents consent or after giving the parents misleading information.\n\n[wikipedia](_URL_0_)", "Someone else will probably have a clearer explanation by the time I finish typing this, but oh well. \n\nBeing intersex is when someone has a mix of typically male and female sex characteristics- chromosomes, gonads, genitals, or sex hormones. There are lots of ways for and reasons for it to happen. \n\n We all start from the same blueprint, then it differentiates. Males and females have analogous parts. In some people, it doesn't differentiate in the typical way. Their reproductive organs can naturally exist between the most common male and female phenotype. \n\n\n\nZygotes start off as neither male nor female. We start off with just one opening like a cloaca. Usually if you have a Y chromosome it will then develop into a typically male configuration, and if you don't then it develops into a typically female configuration. But the differentiation can stop at any point in the process, or have features of both, leaving the fetus with genitalia that is not typically female or typically male. \n\n[This picture of fetal sexual differentiation might help](_URL_0_)- we start off with one opening and a tubercule-bump- above it. Then the urogenital opening forms separate parts for the the anus and urogenital opening, and the tubercule develops into a clitoris glans or further lengthens and fuses with more tissue into a penis (the penis usually gains a new outlet on the tip, but even in men with unambiguous penises, the opening can be located in a different location such as any point along the bottom of the shaft or immediately below the base of the penis, analogous to where the female urethra is.) Tl;dr: some people have ambiguous genitals.\n\n That's one type of intersex. There is a focus on activism for this group of people because it is/was common for parents or doctors to cosmetically surgically modify the ambiguous genitalia of intersex newborns into more typical, more socially acceptable forms- ie either typically male or typically female. \n\nSomeone can also have unusual chromosomes that don't match with their apparent sex- for example, someone can have XY genes but look like a typical woman because they have [androgen insensitivity](_URL_1_), meaning they never outwardly developed typical male features. ", "Intersex person here:\n\nIntersex is an umbrella term used to describe someone born with traits/characteristics of both male and female.\n\nSome Intersex people have genitals that are somewhere between male and female. But a lot of Intersex people can appear as typical looking males or females at birth.\n\nFor example, I have XY chromosomes, was born with a vulva/vagina, and internal testes.\n\nSome don't even find out they're Intersex until puberty or until they're much older.\n\nThere are many different conditions covered under the term Intersex. Some more complicated than others. In general it just means that biologically they have traits of both male and female." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex" ], [ "http://i.imgur.com/R9QgcmV.png", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome" ], [] ]
1ri0yx
why, if i have a great health insurance policy through my employer, do i still have to pay a $20 co-pay for a routine 5 minute doctor visit?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ri0yx/eli5_why_if_i_have_a_great_health_insurance/
{ "a_id": [ "cdnfloy", "cdnfpb8", "cdnix2j" ], "score": [ 7, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "So you don't go every 15 seconds. It's cheap enough to use more or less freely but not enough to abuse it.", "Also, unless your doctor does clinic/walk-in hours, they usually cut out blocks to see patients. If people know they can come in for a quick appointment and get out without a co-pay it becomes harder to schedule - what should have been 5 patients in 2 hours becomes 5 patients in 25 minutes, meaning hours are lost that could have been filled with patients who had to wait for another day to come in.", "In addition to all the things stated already, health insurance (or insurance in general) is meant to cover costs that you would otherwise not be able to afford - expensive surgeries, cancer treatment, etc.\n\nUsing it for little things like short doctor visits increases the cost of healthcare overall, similar to how wide availability of student loans allows colleges to hike up tuition. Charging the copay helps limit how often people use insurance for those little things and helps reduce the amount the insurance company is paying out for tiny stuff." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
6smodo
can someone explain why this is wrong?
_URL_0_ So I have seen this video and quite a few like it. Fundamentally what they are saying seems to be confirmed by reputable sources, but there must be something in there that is not correct. TLDW: Central banks create money out of thin air and loan it out at interest, there isn't enough money to pay back the interest in the system so we have to ask the banks for more money to pay it down and the cycle continues.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6smodo/eli5can_someone_explain_why_this_is_wrong/
{ "a_id": [ "dldxf90", "dldy4i4", "dle08zg", "dlefai2" ], "score": [ 4, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "It's not so much that what they're saying is 'wrong' as that the assumptions most people have about money are wrong.\n\nPeople tend to believe that things have some sort of innate value to them. A gallon of milk costs $X, a bar of gold costs $Y and so forth. Working off this assumption, you then to react to prices different than this as being some sort of 'scam' - someone is getting rich at your expense or there is some other problem in the system.\n\nThis assumption is so common that it took virtually the entirety of human history for people to realize it was incorrect.\n\nGoods and services do not actually have any sort of 'intrinsic value'. They are only valuable in terms of what other people are willing to pay for them. We could wake up tomorrow and discover that everyone in the world decided they didn't want gold any more - and gold would be valueless despite the fact that it was every bit the same metal it was the day before.\n\nWhile this is unlikely, it demonstrates the truth that money itself is merely a form of *information* rather than a concrete entity imbued with special properties. Effectively, money is just a way for people to vote on the allocation of goods and services throughout an economy. Unlike political voting, money is far more efficient because it can be accumulated in various ways so you can more effectively represent strong and opinions about specific allocations.\n\nWhen you look at 'bankers' and think that they aren't doing any 'real' work, you're misunderstanding what they're doing. They're maintaining the mechanisms necessary to operate that 'voting system' for the allocation of goods and services. And it's a *hard* job without any deterministic answers. Now, it can be argued that the people who maintain this system are going to benefit from it more than a strictly 'rational' allocation might provide in much the same way that a fisherman probably gets better fish for his dinner than the average citizen. But that doesn't mean they're not necessary - if the fisherman stops fishing, you don't get any fish for dinner either (not even the crappy ones left over after he takes his first pick).", "Because it's false.\n\nI think you misunderstood a central bank *is not* a private bank. It's a national bank run by the government, just like the Federal Reserve in the United States (the central bank of the US that isn't ever referred to as a central bank).\n\nIt's easy to be mislead by separating \"central bank\" and \"government\", but you shouldn't. When countries create new money, this is how they introduce it back into the system.\n\nThe biggest failure of this conspiracy-theory video that hardly contains any valuable information is the fact not everybody is getting a loan. Of course there's enough money to pay back interest in the system if not all the money in the system is being lent with interest. The premise is fucking silly to put it as best as I can.\n\nAnyway, the *purpose* of a central bank to loan out money is to create liquidity for the banks in order to give out more loans to the general population, which in turn boosts the economy (the majority of people will pay back their loans). A central bank will also loan out money to private banks, who will pay interest on their loan. They will then lend *that* money to all sorts of other clients, charging more interest than they're paying for it. *Inflation*, which is caused by the introduction of money to the economy, is a good thing. We always aim to have inflation, but not too much and not too little. We generally try to have inflation tied up to the growth of our GDP, usually 2%-3% a year. If inflation starts getting out of hand, a central bank will *increase* the amount of interest banks have to pay, making it harder for people across the board to secure loans. If inflation is loan, central banks will lend for far less and sometimes they'll loan for pretty much nothing, which is a process known as \"quantitative-easing\". This is generally used in dire circumstances, such as the 2008 financial crisis, but its drawbacks are minimal.\n\nTL;DR: That was the dumbest video I've seen in a long time. Not many facts in there, my friend. I almost lost it when it started out by saying money gets lent by \"privately-owned\" central banks. If it's privately run, it isn't a central bank my guy. If it isn't a central bank, it can't introduce currency.\n\nEdit:\n\n > Because all banks are either owned or controlled by private bankers.\n\nNope. \n\n > only 3% of the world's money is in bills and coins\n\nNope. Closer to 10%. This doesn't even count for wealth in commodities (ie, gold, widely accepted to be as good as cash or better).\n\n > this created money is issued as debt.\n\nWell, yeah. When you issue money *not* as debt, it's automatic inflation and you might as well have not issued it as all. When you issue it as \"debt\", you secure tangible returns, generally as manufacturing.... If you don't issue it debt, you might as well have not issued it as all.\n\n > money=debt and debt=slavery, therefore money=slavery. Our monetary system is a carefully concealed system of slavery.\n\nDear god this is worse than I thought.\n\nInterest on loans paid is a great thing for an economy, it's some of the gears that help it turn. It helps everything function. Also, I have no clue what this guy is talking about when he says the founding fathers were against private bankers. Does nobody fact-check anymore?\n\nAdditionally, the mathematical *proof* does not account for the fact things have no intrinsic value. Our economy is based off things that have fluctuating values, like bonds, securities, and pretty much all commodities like gold and oil. Plus, when we extract resources we're paying less than their value is worth. Otherwise there'd be no incentive for mining gold, drilling oil, etc. Obviously if this is a big game of musical chairs you'd hear leading economists pointing it out, not some nutjob on *meh youtubes*.\n\n > the moment we sign a loan the bank creates money out of thin air\n\nNo, they borrow money to give out loans the same way we do, haha. They're not making it out of thin air, they don't have that power.\n\nAnnnnnd, now I'm at the part of the video where he says inflation is evil. Oh boy. This guy needs to go take an Econ 101 class.\n\nAdditionally, what is this dude talking about when \"banker controlled media praises banks\". A.) If you look into it, there are minimal \"banker-owned\" networks. Like, Fox, CNN, NBC, all these other networks *are not* run by bankers. Additionally, if you've ever turned on the news you should know banks are nothing *but* slammed in the media.\n\nI doubt you could find sources on all these claims the founding fathers supposedly made, but if you somehow you could find them and they managed to make sense even with context, I for one doubt the ability of a man living in the 1700s to understand the complexities and intricacies of 21st century banking, which even people with multiple PhDs are beginning to have a hard time understanding.", "The guys that made that video have some basic information right, but clearly don't understand the banking system and make a lot of assumption and hyperbole.\n\nIn a sense, yes Central Banks create currency out of thin air. But you have to understand the reasoning behind it. Wealth is created everyday by people. Someone buy 100K$ of machinery to cut down trees that they can sell for 500k$. A lumber mill buy those log and create lumber plank that they can sell for 1 millions$. Then contractors buy those planks and make a couple of houses that they sell for 10 millions$. From 100K$ worth of machinery, you end up with 10 millions worth of houses. (Of course those are make up numbers to explain the point). The added value came from natural resources and human work.\n\nSo the wealth of your country always increase. And your currency is suppose to represent that wealth. If the amount of currency your country have stay stable, but your wealth increase, it create deflation. There isn't enough currency for the demand, so the value of your currency increase. That can be bad for several reasons. The goal would be to print new money at the same rate your country create new wealth, but that's impossible to get exactly right. The other option is to target around 2% inflation. That give you a safety net to never reach deflation and give you room to change the central bank interest rate in case of an economic crisis. Because you can fight hyper inflation by increasing the interest rate, but you can't fight deflation because you can't go further than to reach 0% interest rate.\n\nSo creating money out of thin air might be an easy to way to demonise the system, but if you understand how economic work, you should understand that it's a necessary thing. As long as we create new wealth, we need to create new currency.\n\nNow the way our current banking system create that new currency is by backing with debt. This system demand by design a exponential growth. And that's is what people view as a problem. How can you exponentially growth an economy, in a finite environment like the earth. Is there a point where the exponential growth will collide with physical reality? But that's a problem we can't fix by just demonising central bank or creating of money.\n\nOf course, another problem is that organisation like central bank are controlled by humans and that sometime human can try to fix the system to their advantage so we need to put safety in place to make sure that doesn't happen. Not all country have the same system. For example, the Federal Reserve is private, but the Central Bank of Canada is state-owned.", " > there isn't enough money to pay back the interest in the system so we have to ask the banks for more money to pay it down and the cycle continues.\n\nI think the 'aha' moment on this one is by realising that the interest paid is not lost, but makes its way back into the economy. It can be recycled again and again to repay the interest. It's not a requirement to ask the bank for more money just to pay the interest.\n\nSuppose the Central Bank creates $1000 and lends it at 5% interest. ($50 per year)\n\nWe have the money to pay that. We can take it out of the $1000.\n\nThe mistake is to think that in order to pay the $50 annual interest payment, that after 20 years the whole of the original $1000 loaned will have been used up just to pay the interest and now there is no money left. Hence the need to borrow more.\n\nBUT, of that $50 paid to the Central Bank, some of it is used to pay the Bank's employees, some of it is used to pay the bills (electricity, water etc.) and the remaining profit is given to the Treasury, which then uses it for public spending (e.g. paying police officers or teachers) So, although we took $50 out of the economy, we just went and put it all back in again. There is still the full $1000 out there, and we are still able to take $50 out of it to pay the interest bill again next year. Which will also make its way back, and the cycle will continue.\n\nThe reason we need to make more money is not to pay interest, it is because the economy is growing. The population today is much greater than 20,30,40 years ago. Those extra workers are producing (and consuming) goods and services, so more money is needed to facilitate the exchange of the fruits of their labour.\n\nWhen there were only 10 people in the village, $100 may have been enough to facilitate trade. Over the years the population grows to 10 thousand. Clearly $100 is not enough. The Central Banks role is to make sure the money supply keeps up with the demands of the economy. *That* is why it creates more money.\n\n" ] }
[]
[ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9IH-XKQpOI" ]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
1vikdf
what is physically different from a "normal" brain and a psychopath's?
Is it a small change like millions of different connections or a big change like different brain sizes?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vikdf/eli5_what_is_physically_different_from_a_normal/
{ "a_id": [ "cesm47m" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "The term 'psychopath' refers to a large array of behaviors, which do not necessarily correlate to brain differences. Some people may behave differently based on their upbringing and experiences, for example. However, some brains do function differently than most human brains, and we know a small bit about this.\n\nTo start, human brains are composed of a large number of parts which work together (and against each other, at times) to form our consciousness. Some parts of the brain perform different functions, like vision, memory archiving, and abstract processing.\n\nThe amygdala is the fear center of the brain; trauma or injury here can make people more or less afraid of things. Sometimes, the amygdala can be intact but not functioning. We don't know why this is, and this is the case for a lot of mental disorders.\n\nPeople with schizophrenia and Alzheimer's often have brain-wide tissue shrinkage, so there can be large differences in actual brain structure. However, to answer the question, *sometimes there are large brain differences in people with mental disorders, and sometimes there aren't.*\n\n[Here is an MIT lecture on brain disorders.](_URL_0_)" ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/brain-and-cognitive-sciences/9-00sc-introduction-to-psychology-fall-2011/psychopathology-i/" ] ]
aem1cl
if jeff bezos looses half of his money upon divorce, why is he worth all of the money when he is married?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aem1cl/eli5_if_jeff_bezos_looses_half_of_his_money_upon/
{ "a_id": [ "edqe2c9" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Because the money is his. If Jeff went into the bank while married he can take out every penny, but when they get divorced he loses whatever amount he ends up losing, giving it to his wife. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4nxsat
why do batteries have a best before date?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nxsat/eli5_why_do_batteries_have_a_best_before_date/
{ "a_id": [ "d47uv8m", "d47viw5" ], "score": [ 6, 2 ], "text": [ "There is still a flow of electrons in the battery even if it is not being used. Because humans have not discovered a way to freeze electrons, there will always be a loss of charge as time goes on. Therefore, if batteries are not used before the best by date, they will have a shorter lifespan than if they were used earlier.", "Batteries are made of acid and metal. The acid corrodes the electrodes as well as the casing, degrading both the battery's efficiency and safety. A double A battery that is leaking acid is not as serious of a hazard as a leaking car battery, but it still poses a risk as well as probably won't work. Electrons also still flow, albeit slowly, between the two electrodes within the battery. This causes the potential difference between the electrodes (aka, the remaining charge of the battery) to lessen. Older batteries are less likely to work as efficiently as newer batteries regardless of if they have been used, they are also more of a hazard." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
45698o
how does game testing work?
How do developers find glitches and bugs within their game? Let's use an FPS for an example. Do they create the map then spend countless hours running around and going into every corner, nook, area and so on? I love videos games have always wondered how the bugs/glitches are found and fixed.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45698o/eli5_how_does_game_testing_work/
{ "a_id": [ "czvi0ke", "czvi16b" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "They hire a shitload of testers to play through the same areas, actions, scenarios, etc over and over again. A lot of people think \"Video Game Tester\" means you get to play all the new cool games first. In reality it means you get assigned to jump at a tree 500 times to see if you glitch into the model, or start a conversation with the same NPC 100 times wearing every hat in the game to see if hats cause a bug.", "They have a team of very low-pay employees (or unpaid interns) that play an Alpha version of the game and indeed spend hours trying to fuck up everything. These guys then take copious notes on what went wrong with the game and the devs fix it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
4i24s4
why do some colleges lower their admission rates every year?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4i24s4/eli5_why_do_some_colleges_lower_their_admission/
{ "a_id": [ "d2ude3a", "d2um7g2" ], "score": [ 6, 2 ], "text": [ "Partly, its a semi-vicious cycle. Admissions rates are part of every ranking system I can think of for colleges. The more selective the college the better. The better the college, the more applicants it gets (and the more it has to reject), etc.\n\nAs competition increases, applicants also feel pressured to apply more broadly than before, which also lowers overall admissions rates for the same reason.", "Let's say you have 1000 applicants & room for 100 new students, that's a 10% acceptance rate. Next year, you have 1100 applicants but *still* only room for 100 new students, that's a 9.1% acceptance rate.\n\nMore students are applying to go to school & more people are applying to more colleges but the colleges aren't expanding nearly as fast." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3rqagl
why do really cold foods, like smoothies and ice cream, make me cough?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rqagl/eli5why_do_really_cold_foods_like_smoothies_and/
{ "a_id": [ "cwqe6ms" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "You may be inhaling slightly as you are eating/drinking it. Your lungs like air to be warm and moist. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
71affn
why is the united states still considered the richest nation in the world when our national deficit is so high?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/71affn/eli5_why_is_the_united_states_still_considered/
{ "a_id": [ "dn98ni6", "dn9928c", "dn9aelc", "dn9xdb8" ], "score": [ 5, 2, 24, 2 ], "text": [ "When comparing the wealth of a nation they generally use Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is the sum total of all of the goods and services produced inside a nation. The US has the largest GDP by a giant margin. The US GDP is at $18.6 trillion for 2016. All of the European Union was only $16.4 trillion and the next closest individual country was China at $11.2 trillion.\n\nThe US government does indeed have a lot of debt but that is a different sort of calculation. ", "Debt in terms of nation's is largely unimportant. The world's economy is primarily a faith based one where the people's faith in how much their money is worth is what ensures stability. It's for this reason that Greece ended up going to such shit over debt. The world lost confidence, it's people lost confidence. ", "The US earns the most. Think of it like a guy with a big salary and a big house but a big mortgage payment. The US still has the most money because he's good for it. He can easily make his payments. ", "Holding a high amount of debt doesn't matter to countries, not really. Certainly it doesn't matter to powerful counties. \n\nDebt matters to individuals because eventually you, as an individual, will die. You have a limited amount of time to pay back what you owe. \n\nNow, we can argue about how strong the United States is and whether or not the empire may collapse as so many others have throughout history, but from a practical standpoint the US is the strongest country on earth, militarily and economically, and it's not going to \"die\" the way a person does. As long as the US looks like it's going to continue existing, there's no reason to think it won't eventually pay back its debts. \n\nFurthermore, despite the hysteria about China, most of the money the United States owes, it owes to its own citizens and institutions, and, more importantly, it controls its own currency. \n\nWith a country like Greece, it owed a lot of money to foreign countries, and it was at the will of the Euro. \n\nWhen a country goes into debt, the way out is usually through inflation. Make the currency worth less, print more of it, and use it to pay off the debts, then, when the crisis improves, re-tighten through higher interest rates. \n\nThis pisses off creditors (people who hold debt) which is why rich people get spitting mad over the idea of higher inflation being used as a way to stimulate the economy, and why there's such hysteria over the debt and deficit in the first place. \n\nInflating the euro to save Greece means soaking French and German bankers, which is never\ngoing to fly in France or Germany. In the US, however? Even when interest rates were NEGATIVE people were still buying treasury bonds (which is how the government issues debt.) \n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
16wkhx
why don't they make a "best" car engine?
I see "car people" on Facebook and the like arguing about fuel injectors and better thermal gaskets and junk, and I just wonder, can you just quantify a "best" of each part based on price/value or something?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16wkhx/eli5_why_dont_they_make_a_best_car_engine/
{ "a_id": [ "c800fvq", "c801t52", "c802966", "c804aig" ], "score": [ 21, 10, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "There are always tradeoffs in engineering. Cost, performance, weight, reliability, etc. ", "The best engine for an F1 race car is going to be different than the best engine for a drag racer. They're both going to be different than the best engine for your mom's minivan or the 18-wheeler your cousin drives.\n\nEven for cars of the same basic purpose, some people are just willing to pay more for the \"best\". There's a bunch of little things that come together to make a BMW cost twice what a Kia does.", "Because 'best' is subjective.\n\nWhat may be the best engine for, say, a minivan, will not be the best engine for a truck or a sports car, and vice-versa.\n\nIt's all about tradeoffs, torque vs. speed vs. fuel efficiency vs. durability vs. weight and such. No one engine can be built to fit every possible need, and even among engines and engine parts made for the same niche there's still some tradeoffs of performance going on.", "how are you defining best? i think the \"best\" engine means a highly advance straight six, to others it could be a flat/H6, or H/V12. some probably don't even care about block itself, they could define it as more power to weight(m156) or more power per liter(S54) without a turbo. Some don't care about power, they care about Materials and Reliability. some care about simplicity: the ease to work on it, swap it out or swap in new parts without issues from the computer or injectors and variable valve timing. some Don't even think the best engine is gas, some think it's electric, some think it's diesel, for some the engine probably isn't even a four stroke.\n\nmany manufactures think they ARE making the best car engines. just look at their Halo/Flagship car. McLaren calles theirs the M838T, Toyota calls theirs the 1LR-GUE. but who can afford those? for the price of an LFA you could probably buy 100 Hondas with a fun indestructible 4-pot. if Honda are too small then how about 100 of those ford mustangs and their amazing new eargasmic V8s.\n\nsaying you have the best engine is like saying the alligator is the best animal. it all depends. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
6x04ka
at what speed would someone have had to move across the us to stay in the path of totality during last week's solar eclipse?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6x04ka/eli5_at_what_speed_would_someone_have_had_to_move/
{ "a_id": [ "dmc0nte", "dmc0ula", "dmc0wlm" ], "score": [ 5, 3, 8 ], "text": [ "You would have to travel somewhere between 1400 and 2000 mph, depending on your longitude. The reason the speeds differ is because the shadow is cast at different angles.\n", "The speed changes due to the physics of the whole thing, but at its *slowest* it was around 1,400mph. Pretty fast.", "It hit the west coast at approximately 1320 EDT and exited the east coast at approximately 1450 EDT. So it spanned the entire US in about an hour and a half.\n\nThat's about 2,400 mi. So you would have to travel an average of 1,600 mph." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
3lv3g9
docker and container technology
Can someone explain to me how Containers are used? Particular with upcoming release of Windows Server 2016
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lv3g9/eli5_docker_and_container_technology/
{ "a_id": [ "cv9ked8" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "As far as I can tell, they're like Jails in FreeBSD and FreeNAS. Basically, it's like having a virtual machine, but without the performance overhead, making it more resource efficient. It's a way of installing an application without it having access to the rest of the system, or walling off a portion of the system from everything else. It's done to make things more secure. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
948t8p
; why do you sweat when your stomach hurts really bad?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/948t8p/eli5_why_do_you_sweat_when_your_stomach_hurts/
{ "a_id": [ "e3kajfc" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "Stomach pain — > activates sympathetic nervous system (responsible for stress response) — > leads to sweating " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
444hfx
why does quick dry nail polish stay wet in the bottle and on the brush but dries as soon as you apply it?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/444hfx/eli5_why_does_quick_dry_nail_polish_stay_wet_in/
{ "a_id": [ "cznddd7", "cznkt4m" ], "score": [ 5, 3 ], "text": [ "Drying the process by which water/alcohol evaporates from a substance, leaving behind whatever else is in the substance.\n\nWhen the nail polish is in the bottle, the bottle is often sealed and there is a large amount of the nail polish (relatively). As such, there is little chance for the water in the nail polish to evaporate into the air. When you apply the nail polish you apply a very thin layer over a relatively large and open area (your finger nail). As such, the water/alcohol can easily evaporate into the air.\n\nEDIT: Quick dry nail polish is likely to use alcohol rather than water to make it, as alcohol evaporates more rapidly than water.", "Vapor-liquid equilibrium is established when the bottle is sealed. Basically it means for every molecule of solvent that evaporates to a gas in the sealed bottle, another molecule of solvent gas condenses to liquid. Net effect, nothing happening in the bottle, no drying out. \n\nOnce applied to the nail, the solvent tries to establish equilibrium, but the surrounding air is so freaking huge that all of the solvent evaporates before an equilibrium can be established. So the nail polish dries as all of the solvent evaporates. \n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
e541a3
- why do smartphones charge slower in cold temperatures?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e541a3/eli5_why_do_smartphones_charge_slower_in_cold/
{ "a_id": [ "f9hljmj", "f9ht7u9", "f9i28qv", "f9il0pc" ], "score": [ 3, 4, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Batteries are designed to operate in an optimal range of temperatures. Going too far outside of that range can cause problems with the battery’s function, including draining it of power.", "Batteries produce power via a chemical reaction. Rechargeable batteries reverse this reaction when a charge is run through it. Temperature can effect how easily a reaction can occur. Whats more, different temperatures can change what reactions will occur. In effect, charging a battery outside of its optimal range will reduce how many effective charges it can take. So your phone is programmed to reduce how quickly it charges the battery, which reduces the adverse effects of charging at those temperatures.", "From a safety perspective do not charge cold batteries - especially car batteries, they can explode\n\nEvery battery comes with a datasheet, if it is below the minimum temperature or above the maximum temperature then don't bother trying to charge it.", "To answer this generally, heat can be thought of as energy.\n\nIf something has lots of energy, the particles within it move fast. If it's cold, the particles are moving slowly.\n\nThe same applies to batteries - the chemical reactions happen more slowly , meaning the battery charges more slowly." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
6614f1
why do certain buildings consistently have static electricity in them?
A recently built gym on my college campus has these metal doors that shock me 9/10 times while all the other buildings have never shocked me once.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6614f1/eli5_why_do_certain_buildings_consistently_have/
{ "a_id": [ "dgetkp8", "dgeuft5" ], "score": [ 6, 2 ], "text": [ "You are the one that builds up static electricity, the building only shocks you when it grounds you and removes your charge. It's likely that the gym has something that is building up static electricity on you. \n\nIt's usually caused by wool carpet rubbing on leather shoes but it might also be something to do with your gym clothes rubbing on your hair as you put them on/off. ", "my apartment building consistently shocks me - especially the front door. a neighbor told me it had to do with the dryness in the air within our building. something about how the lack of moisture allows for better electric conductivity...? either way, we got a pretty big humidifier and are no longer shocked by our lamps, door handles, etc within our own unit.\n\nwould love to see this explanation more ELI5-ified. i had a hard time listening to my neighbor because not enough LI5 was happening." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
5twqqt
why do companies put their eggs in cardboard boxes if they don't want them to get crushed? you'd expect they just get better packaging?
Working in a grocery store, I've never understood why companies don't just come up with better packaging for their eggs so they don't get crushed in the cardboard containers?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5twqqt/eli5_why_do_companies_put_their_eggs_in_cardboard/
{ "a_id": [ "ddpljar", "ddpo2ia" ], "score": [ 3, 9 ], "text": [ "A few posh brands do use more expensive and elaborate plastic packaging. But it costs more and increases waste. Most eggs are pretty cheap so the producers would rather lose some than spend more on packaging.", "You actually don't want a super hard material, you want something with some flexibility, since it will help absorb shock from things like loading boxes on top of each other, and hitting bumps while transporting, cardboard is really one of the most effective solutions. The next best would probably be silicone or some kind of lined/cushioned hard container with foam, but then the packaging is worth more than the product.\n\nA very hard packaging like a hard plastic shell you're mentioning a lot, would just transfer energy to the egg and crack the shell, like banging it on a hard surface to crack open, if you tried to open your eggs against a pillow you'd have a much harder time even with more force." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3w07im
why is only $15 a day given if selected to be on a jury?
I understand it's our civic duty to do jury duty but $15 a day is doesn't account for production time lost on jobs. In my line of work, I have to deliver $1.6 million dollars worth of merchandise before my 4qt. is over at the end of this month. $15 a day doesn't quite pan out in my line of work.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3w07im/eli5_why_is_only_15_a_day_given_if_selected_to_be/
{ "a_id": [ "cxs8afg", "cxs8ogj", "cxs8qfv", "cxs98dh", "cxsabpg", "cxsbcw6" ], "score": [ 3, 7, 4, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "It doesn't really pan out in anyone's line of work.\n\n$15 a day is like $2 an hour. Not even a stay at home bum wants to work something as strenuous as jury duty for that much. ", "Because no one wants to raise taxes in order to pay jurors more money. And most people would not want to pay more taxes to pay jurors more money.", "That fifteen dollar amount was decided a long time ago. It was a reasonable amount then, but simply hasn't been updated. Sort of how minimum wage is: back in the 70s, minimum wage was equivalent to $13 an hour, adjusted for inflation. Although the dollar amount of minimum wage has increased, the overall value has decreased due to inflation. The worth of the dollar has decreased more than the wage has increased.", "It is part of a 'civic duty'. Part of living in a free democracy is trial by peers. So you serve your jury duty, and in return when you are convicted of a crime, your peers will also serve on a jury for your case. ", "It's not universally $15... when I did it in Chicago a few months ago, it was $17.25, but soon after raised to $25 and then $50 for each add'l day if on a jury.", "If I get drawn for jury duty I am going to tell them to keep there 15 dollars they obviously need it more than I do." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
dd56sa
hybridisation (sp3 in ch4, nh3, h2o)
Hi guys, could someone explain to me what happens in terms of energy levels in this particular bond? I am doing A level chem and just struggling to get my head around what actually is happening to the 's' and 'p' orbitals respectively, are they sharing the energy or drawing more from somewhere to 'promote' the s orbital? The clearest illustration so far is this one on ChemGuide ([_URL_0_](_URL_0_)). Also, is the general idea that atoms are already in this 'excited' state? Or does it happen only at the point when they are reacting? Sorry for the long post, hope I have asked a clear enough question! Any help would be greatly appreciated! I'm sure I will get there in the end!
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dd56sa/eli5_hybridisation_sp3_in_ch4_nh3_h2o/
{ "a_id": [ "f2ebhni", "f2em6uo" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "I think the answer to this lies in [transition state theory](_URL_1_). For the reaction to occur, the electrons need to enter a high energy state, the transition state. How the electron density at that point looks is not very clear and hard to calculate. But as it is a transient state it doesn't really matter for the reaction to go through, only the energy level of that state does. The minimal amount of energy needed is called the activation barrier and dictates the reaction rate. If the molecules collide and are trying to react but don't have enough energy to cover that activation barrier (and don't quantum tunnel through however much of the barrier is left), the reaction will not go through and the molecules will likely just bounce off each other. The required energy to cross the barrier usually comes from the kinetic energy of the reactants (due to their temperature). So if you heat them up, they come into contact more frequently and are more likely to have enough energy to cross the barrier and successfully react more often. Some reactions can also get the required energy from light (eg UV cross-linking DNA) where the reactants absorb a photon, an electron jumps up to a high energy state (different from the transition state) by changing the first quantum number (n) ending up above the energy barrier for the reaction.\n\nIn practice transition states ('excited' states in the language of the notes you linked) don't really occur, even during the reaction. These states are not stable, short lived, and by the [uncertainty principle](_URL_0_) (low duration, so low uncertainty in time - > high uncertainty in energy and position), not really measurable. The QM system can also just tunnel through the energy barrier without ever reaching the transition state. So they are more of an abstract concept used in designing reactions than something that actually happens.", "Think of orbitals as areas where it is likely to find a specific electron. For example it is likely the electron of a hydrogen atom will be found in the 1s orbitals— more specifically the 1s^1 degenerate orbital. Now that electron takes part in forming a bond with a carbon. The thing is only valence electrons can create bonds. The carbon has 4 valence electrons, in the 2s orbital and 2p orbital. These both have a higher energy level than hydrogen’s electron in the 1s orbital, and have different orbital shapes too (as a result of different energy levels). So now we are combining the 2p orbital with the 1s orbital to create a new orbital. The 2p orbital has 3 degenerate orbitals and the 1s has 1 degenerate orbital this make a s^(1) p^3 orbital. You don’t write the 1 on the s though so it’s sp^3" ] }
[]
[ "https://www.chemguide.co.uk/basicorg/bonding/methane.html" ]
[ [ "http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/uncer.html", "http://butane.chem.uiuc.edu/jsmoore/chem232/notes_current/Understanding_Reactivity/NOTES-Transition_States.pdf" ], [] ]
5lesef
why is it when we chew/swallow food or drink, we don't gag but if we have to have a medical procedure that involves something going down our airway or dentist, we don't gag?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lesef/eli5why_is_it_when_we_chewswallow_food_or_drink/
{ "a_id": [ "dbv4ou7", "dbv4t2l", "dbv4v2s" ], "score": [ 5, 4, 3 ], "text": [ "Because you have no gag reflex. You have likely lost your gag reflex through the repeated taking through your throat hole of various large objects. What these objects might have been we can only guess. It is possible that you are bulimic and have lost your gag reflex that way. Perhaps you're a sword swallower. But the fact that you do not gag under any of the circumstances you've described strongly suggests that you have suppressed your gag reflex in some way. ", "The gag reflex is almost a defence against involuntary inhalation/ingestion of things. \n\nYou're scenario where you don't gag on food, but do when the dentist tries to put stuff back there isn't quite right. \n\nWhen you \"don't gag on food\", it's because you're swallowing. As someone who has had tubes down their throats for medical procedures I can assure you that if you try and swallow while their putting the tubes in, it makes you stop gagging. ", "The software in your brain differentiates between an unwanted intrusion, i.e. the dentist who you don't really know who sometimes causes extreme discomfort sticking things in there that you know normally dont go there, so you gag to try and expel it. \n\nFood you want otherwise it would make you gag too. \n\nEdited, spelling." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
5j9mw9
other than planet-conscientious reasons, why is india planting so many trees?
Is there a direct economic benefit? I'm just trying to understand why a current goverment regime would be so future-conscious unless there was some immediate benefit.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5j9mw9/eli5_other_than_planetconscientious_reasons_why/
{ "a_id": [ "dbefjsu", "dbegn8l" ], "score": [ 6, 6 ], "text": [ "In a few decades the trees will have grown into big forests and forests can be cut down and sold for money. In general it is better for the economics of a region to plant trees rather then do nothing with the land.", "Trees keep soil from eroding. They serve as wind breaks. They can be harvested later for timber or firewood. The extra shade can help the soil retain moisture as well. Plenty of practical benefits. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
2lz7ak
what do all the people and companies in the opening credits of a movie actually do?
I wish I had screen shots of the movie I watched last night because it had so many of these... In the opening credits you have things like "A Mike Smith Film", "In Association with Movie Makers Inc", "A Cinema House Production", "Distributed by Screen Co"... The movie I watched last night had about 6 or 7 of these types of credits. How do they all actually contribute to the movie?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lz7ak/eli5_what_do_all_the_people_and_companies_in_the/
{ "a_id": [ "clzhabk" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Google the name of the company/person. It will probably be obvious what they do/did\n\nFor example - Mike Smith is probably the director\n\nMovie Makers Inc. probably did the technology used to make the movie\n\nCinema House bankrolled the whole thing\n\nScreen co are the people who pushed it out into the theaters." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
5t4xe7
why do smokers get a calming response from cigarettes when they are distressed, nervous, or anxious; when it seems like nicotine (a stimulant) should have the opposite effect?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5t4xe7/eli5_why_do_smokers_get_a_calming_response_from/
{ "a_id": [ "ddk6rv3", "ddk7da9", "ddk7zjz", "ddk92k5", "ddk9mtw", "ddkciw7", "ddkcr7b", "ddkduyt", "ddke257", "ddkfhqo", "ddkfi49", "ddkfkcl", "ddkgd86", "ddki9c3", "ddklas0", "ddksws5", "ddkvo6n" ], "score": [ 399, 10, 37, 8, 5, 6, 14, 3, 3, 2, 25, 477, 9, 3, 11, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "You have to see what part of the nervous system it stimulates. There's sympathetic (which is fight or flight) and parasympathetic (which is rest and relax). It stimulates the parasympathetic part which gives the relaxing effect. Apart from that it increases blood flow leading to more blood to the brain making you more alert and focused. Hence why people smoke when they are anxious, to be more focused and calm.", "Smokers are addicted to nicotine. Addicts who go too long without the substance they're addicted to go through withdrawal, the symptoms of which include stress and anxiety. By smoking a cigarette, a smoker gets more nicotine, curbing his withdrawal. ", "Nicotine acts on different receptors in the brain than the stimulants you're probably thinking of. A chemical's effect on the body can't be adequately explained in one word such as \"stimulant\" so you're bound to get nuanced effects that require greater understanding to differentiate rather than lumping everything into one category", "I've had a theory for awhile but I could be off base. Smoking requires some sort of controlled breathing. Try copying the behavior. Taking some shallow but deep breaths, holding them in, exhaling and repeating is very relaxing without a cigarette. ", "smokers are used to having a certain level of nicotine running through the bloodstream. because it's such an addictive substance, smokers experience physical withdrawal in the form of anxiety or general shittiness, etc. by smoking another cigarette, the nicotine level rises and the negative feelings are relieved. AKA negative reinforcement - the frequency of the behavior (smoking) increases due to its ability to remove a negative stimulus (withdrawal/general shittiness). the behavior of smoking can also be classically conditioned as a stress reliever, as smokers often feel triggered to smoke when they feel stress, and in turn the physical relief of smoking will lead them to continue the cycle of stress triggered smoking in addition to many other triggers. ie. finishing a meal (in which case the feeling of satiety and the positive feelings induced by eating become associated with the behavior of smoking afterwards). not to mention the fact that smoking generally increases blood glucose in a way that's similar to the increase you'd expect after eating a piece of candy or small meal, and that in itself is a pleasant feeling. consistent with positive reinforcement, the behavior would be expected to happen again as it provided a positive stimulus.\n\nalthough yes, in high doses nicotine will function in smokers as a stimulant.\n\ni'd add a source or links but i need a smoke", "I think Alan Carr nailed this one. His idea was that cigarettes cause the nervousness/anxiety/whatever in the long term but alleviate it briefly in the short term hence the strong and regular compulsion to spark up (plus the addictive chemicals obv). Everyone is different but it certainly worked this way with me. (30-40/day for 20 odd years, quit using vape) ", "The answer is rather complex, actually. No, its not just response to an addiction. No, you do not go into full blown withdrawls after an hour. Yes, this has been studied by many groups; some more reputable than others. Stimulating the parasympathetic system is part of the answer. The dopamine released is an obvious answer. The trained neural response towards the activity of smoking is another. And, obviously, the clearing of a nic fit does intensify all of these. First time i inhaled tobacco, i received relief from chronic anxiety. It was like finding an answer to a question i was created with. Im not saying its superior to other anti anxiety medicine- just that it helps myself. ", "There was a study done that determined it was partially based on how you inhale. Unfortunately I don't have a link. But smokers fluctuate between both uses. ", "You wear LiveStrong bracelets because they're cool.\n\nThey take getting used to, but they're cool.\n\nYou take them off, and your hand feels weird. Not right. Bad.\n\nPut it back on. It feels better.\n\nHand only feels good now if you wear the bracelet.\n\nBracelet is addictive! Take it off!\n\nOoof. Took it off. Hand feels bad.\n\nBracelet is not addictive. Just makes hand feel good.\n\nThis is addiction.", "Breathing. It's very focused breathing like you'd do in yoga or meditation. \n\nIt's also an addict getting a fix. It doesn't take but 30 to 60 minutes to want a nice fix. \n\nAnd for some it's also a very nice break. You can step away from a desk, an awkward situation, or just out with friends, and it's nice. \n\nI smoked for 13 years and haven't touched a cig in 3. Sometimes I still miss them for the above, though I'd never risk ruining my high score of 1,000+ days cigarette free by smoking again. ", "There is a lot of crazy unsubstantiated nonsense posted so far. This is complicated so I'll try to give you a thorough yet layman explanation. Nicotine has different affinities for receptors in the brain versus the peripheral nervous system. It also does not bind all nicotinic receptors equally. What the result of this is: is that nicotine produces both a sympathetic type of effect, due to the actions of epinephrine, norepinephrine, and glucose released from liver, and also parasympathetic type actions that improve cognition and decrease stress through the actions in the central nervous system, chief among these being the release of dopamine.\n\nIn a nutshell it puts your body in fight or flight Mode, while putting your brain in a relaxed state that is better suited to cognition. There is also a weird pharmacokinetic property that the stimulant versus sedative effects reverse based on the level of nicotine in your blood. At a low concentration in your blood it will act as a stimulant, but at a high concentration like a sedative. This effect plays out not only due to the amount of nicotine ingested, but also the distribution of nicotine throughout your different body fluid compartments due to their varying permeability to the molecule.\n\nClear as mud? ", "When your brain wants you to do something, it releases **dopamine** to force you to do it. The more dopamine your brain releases, the more you feel compelled to do whatever it is your brain wants you to do.\n\nIn other words, dopamine is your brain's \"gotta have it\" chemical. It is what makes you crave things to varying degrees. And the more dopamine your brain is outputting, the more uneasy and uncomfortable you feel until you act on its urges.\n\nThen when you finally complete that task that dopamine has forced you to act on... and you've gotten whatever \"prize\" was waiting at the end of that task... your brain releases a rush of **serotonin** to match the dopamine it just outputted.\n\nSerotonin is your brain's \"got it\" chemical, shutting off the fountain of dopamine that was compelling you to seek out whatever you wanted.\n\nBut, more importantly, the **brief combination of high dopamine and high serotonin in your brain** acts as a reward mechanism. It gives you a feeling of immense pleasure.\n\nIt's nature's way of rewarding you for taking a specific behavior.\n\nThink about a time when you were a little hungry... then really hungry... then completely starved. It was dopamine being released in varying quantities in your brain that caused to feel those growing levels of hunger.\n\nAnd think about how relieving it felt when you finally ate. You likely gorged yourself and you felt INCREDIBLE. That was the combo of high dopamine and high serotonin in your brain.\n\nYou experience the same thing when you build up the nerve to ask a girl out... and then she says yes. Or when you go on a long run and then make it home, safe and sound. And when you jump out of an airplane (followed by landing safely on the ground). And when you watch scary movies (then go back to \"safe\" reality).\n\nIt's all dopamine making you feel uneasy (escape! eat that food! make it to safety! get out of this awful situation!)... followed by serotonin when you'd achieved your mission... followed by pure unadulterated bliss in the brief moment when your brain was flooded with both chemicals at once.\n\nLong story short, **nicotine \"artificially\" creates this rush of serotonin in your brain**. So if you're stressed (i.e. you have extremely high dopamine levels from something being incomplete or scary in your life), cigarettes temporarily create the surge of serotonin that turns off dopamine -- and leaves you feeling extreme pleasure.\n\nBut, since they're not *actually* solving the issues causing high dopamine for you, the dopamine just comes back... but eventually comes back at higher, and higher, and higher levels. It acclimates to your \"artificial\" serotonin source.\n\nSo the pleasure and calm you get from cigarettes (and their \"artificial\" serotonin hit) increases with time -- but your addiction (and stress) also grows.\n\nSource: [The Craving Brain](_URL_0_) by Ronald Ruden", "Reward factor..\n\nJust part of the addiction really..\n\nI sat through a nice meal,a cigarette will be the icing on the cake.\n\nJust finished that assignment,i deserve a cigarette.\n\nNice coffee,even better with a smoke.\n\nCrack a beer,cigarette will go perfectly.\n\nFuck this is stressing me,have a smoke and think about it...\n\nThey are all just an excuse to light up..\n\nSource:\n\nFormer 18 year smoker..\n\n\n ", "Because nicotine affects the addiction center of your brain. It basically gets linked up in the part of your brain that gives you urges based on survival like the urge to eat, drink, and sleep. Once you begin to go without nicotine for a while, your brain thinks you need it to survive and starts causing all kinds of problems; like a kid throwing a tantrum until it gets its way. Withdrawals can range from simple anxiety and nervousness, all the way to more severe symptoms like back pain and ulcers forming in the mouth. Once you indulge in that addiction, your brain releases dopamine, a substance also released in response to other primal urges being satisfied. Dopamine is a powerful chemical that causes a deep down satisfaction and state of relaxation. That is why smokers get a calming, relaxed sensation after experiencing nicotine. ", "I started taking Wellbutrin for depression a while ago and the doctor told me that one of the side effects is that it could severely curtail your desire to smoke. He said that Wellbutrin was developed years ago to help people quit smoking but they also found that it could help people with depression, so that became the primary focus of the drug - I still smoked for several months before I decided to quit, but it was like forcing myself to smoke because I lost the desire to do it, the drug is so strong and so good at stopping the urge to smoke (at least for me it was) - In January, 2016 I stopped smoking after over 40 years (and many frustrating years of trying to stop on my own) and I have not had any urge at all to smoke since then and I am very grateful - I feel fantastic now just like everybody said I would. Quitting smoking completely changed my life.", "Part of addiction is Pavlov's good ol' classical conditioning. The more you use a drug in a predictable way, the more your body learns to predict your drug use. For example, if you take a heart rate stimulant every night at 8pm, then eventually by 7pm on following days you might start finding yourself with a decreased heart rate. Thus, when you take the drug, you reach equilibrium. So, at first, drugs have their full effect on their users, but over time their bodies homeostasis shifts and they eventually become dependent on the drug via the symptoms I described. So, in this case, the drug acts to return the user to their functional state, rather than getting them extra high and wired up. ", "The effects of nicotine on the brain have been gone over ad nauseam by other posters, but I'll just add this non-nicotine related tidbit:\n\nWhen you smoke, carbon monoxide in the cigarette smoke binds to your hemoglobin and actually reduces your blood oxygen levels temporarily. This has the effect of making you feel slightly tired or \"relaxed\". Full on carbon monoxide poison, basically, gently puts you to sleep as you suffocate and die.\n\nSmokers who smoke regularly have increased red blood cell production to make up for this. It's almost a little like blood doping. So in addition to titrating your nicotine levels because you are addicted, if it's been a while since your last smoke, your blood oxygen levels are higher than you are used to, and you feel energetic and antsy. Smoking that sweet carbon monoxide takes your nervous energy down a peg.\n\nIf you've ever quit smoking cold turkey, you can attest to the fact that you have an insane amount of energy for the first week or two. Like constantly fidgeting. It's a combination of the nicotine withdrawal and your blood oxygen levels being higher than usual." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.amazon.com/Craving-Brain-addiction-overeating-alcoholism/dp/0060928999/" ], [], [], [], [], [] ]
ek8b9b
what is a cyberattack when it comes to warfare?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ek8b9b/eli5_what_is_a_cyberattack_when_it_comes_to/
{ "a_id": [ "fd77tmx", "fd7a6d9" ], "score": [ 7, 3 ], "text": [ "An attack carried out on a digital system instead of one carried out physically. This is usually done by engineering a virus to attack the system. Some examples included Stuxnet, a virus which is speculated to have been created by the US and Isreal and targeted power plants in Iran, WannaCry, a crypto virus which is speculated to have been created by North Korea and with no known specific target, and Petya, a crypto virus which is speculated to have been created by the NSA and which was likely targeted at the Ukraine. \n\n\nEdit: The attack may be against a specific system, such as Stuxnex, or may generally attack computers in a specific country, or just computers in general.\n\nEdit: a commenter pointed out that Petya was likely created by Russia not the NSA.", "The use of cyber resources to cause economic or physical harm to an opponent.\n\nFor example, a state sponsored cell attacks the system for an enemy’s power distribution or stock exchange or flood gate controls at a dam." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
kfbdu
how does plankton give off light?
Inspired by the image of plankton growing on the front page.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kfbdu/eli5_how_does_plankton_give_off_light/
{ "a_id": [ "c2jsqes", "c2jsqes" ], "score": [ 5, 5 ], "text": [ "The process is called [bioluminescence](_URL_1_). It's under a subset of a wider range of light-producing chemical reactions known as [chemiluminescence](_URL_0_).\n\nBasically, some chemicals are mixed together and reacts to produce a product with an excited electron, which eventually relaxes to a ground state. Whenever this happens, a photon is emitted - this is a process known as [spontaneous emission](_URL_3_). This phenomenon is utilized in a wide range of light-producing technologies - fluorescent light, LEDs, and plasma, to name a few.\n\nThe word [fluorescence](_URL_2_) may be familiar to you too. It's pretty much the same process, except the initial input of energy to get the electron in an excited state is another light source.", "The process is called [bioluminescence](_URL_1_). It's under a subset of a wider range of light-producing chemical reactions known as [chemiluminescence](_URL_0_).\n\nBasically, some chemicals are mixed together and reacts to produce a product with an excited electron, which eventually relaxes to a ground state. Whenever this happens, a photon is emitted - this is a process known as [spontaneous emission](_URL_3_). This phenomenon is utilized in a wide range of light-producing technologies - fluorescent light, LEDs, and plasma, to name a few.\n\nThe word [fluorescence](_URL_2_) may be familiar to you too. It's pretty much the same process, except the initial input of energy to get the electron in an excited state is another light source." ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemiluminescence", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioluminescent", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_emission" ], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemiluminescence", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioluminescent", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_emission" ] ]
177oqi
why do scandals end in "-gate"?
Examples: Watergate, Apple's antennagate, and just today I read about Beyonce's lip-sync-gate. Why the "-gate"? Where does that come from? Is it *because* of Watergate?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/177oqi/eli5_why_do_scandals_end_in_gate/
{ "a_id": [ "c82yqun", "c832bl4" ], "score": [ 46, 2 ], "text": [ "It's because of Watergate. Watergate was the big scandal of the latter 20th century, and as such, its name (-gate) has been applied to other scandals as well.\n\nThe Watergate scandal is named after the Watergate Complex in Washington, DC, where the break into Democratic Party Headquarters occurred.", " > Where does that come from? Is it because of Watergate?\n\nYes. Imagine President Obama was thrown out of the white house because he did something illegal, like hiring a squad to break and enter into someone's office and steal their shit. Well that actually happened to a *different* president, and it was all anyone talked about for like a year straight.\n\n[Here's a documentary.](_URL_0_)" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFID6Qkwh88" ] ]
5uj7iv
how will religious freedom laws affect federally protected classes other than sexual orientation?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uj7iv/eli5_how_will_religious_freedom_laws_affect/
{ "a_id": [ "dduhztu" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ " Not sure what you're asking, but it sounds like basically if a Christian thinks that gay marriage shouldn't be legal, but a gay man thinks that it should be legal, who gets authority?" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2vw4ht
what was it that aaron swartz did to invoke the wrath of the government? why does it matter?
I saw a lot about this on reddit and the news earlier this week and I still don't understand much of what he did and what his legacy is.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vw4ht/eli5_what_was_it_that_aaron_swartz_did_to_invoke/
{ "a_id": [ "colmvi3" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "He was an activist and entrepreneur. He helped develop some interesting website technologies (including making TOR more accessible), and was even involved in the early days of Reddit helping recode parts of the site. He was a public figure protesting SOPA and attempted to join Wikipedia's Board of Trustees. He was a smart guy driven to try and do a lot with his life.\n\nHe also didn't agree with the ethics behind a big online database of academic papers (called JSTOR) being behind a paywall, and felt it should be free. Because of this, he hacked in and downloaded a substantial portion of the database. As an MIT student, he had access, but it was supposed to be limited, yet he got extra access and ran a script that just kept downloading and downloading articles onto a laptop.\n\nWhen he was found out, the MIT Police stopped the download and detained him. Instead of pursuing a civil lawsuit, they simply agreed to settle if he'd just surrender everything he'd downloaded without copying or distributing it.\n\nA month later, federal authorities *did* decide to pursue a lawsuit, charging him with a whole range of rather far-reaching crimes related to data theft. Some were entirely warranted, some were considered ludicrous by many.\n\nAfter 18 months of attempting to fight these charges, he committed suicide. It was picked up by the media who highlighted several issues: One is that if MIT and the JSTOR crew, the \"victims\" in the case, didn't want to charge him, why did the feds feel the need to do so anyway? Two is the range of charges thrown at him, a lot of people felt to be completely disproportionate to his actions. Three is the aggressiveness in pursuing him which many commentators feel bullied him into taking his own life.\n\nHe's been mentioned a bit lately because it's been the 2-year anniversary of his death, and tech-minded internet users have begun to view him as an idealist who became a bit of a martyr." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
dezgll
how do benzodiazepines work to quiet anxiety/panic?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dezgll/eli5_how_do_benzodiazepines_work_to_quiet/
{ "a_id": [ "f2zy8qx" ], "score": [ 10 ], "text": [ "There is a molecule in your brain called GABA. Think of GABA as the brakes of your brain. With anxiety, your brain is basically pushing the accelerator down all the time. Benzodiazepines work by increasing the effects of GABA, sort of like adding a brick to the brake pedal. This helps slow down the over-stimulation of anxiety." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
7sk5cn
why is, that we can't take the picture in our head and simply put it on to the paper, what makes it so hard?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7sk5cn/eli5_why_is_that_we_cant_take_the_picture_in_our/
{ "a_id": [ "dt5dhyj" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "What you have in your head isn’t a complete image. It’s a notion of an image, maybe some specific shape elements and colors, and your imagination as to the sensation you’d get looking at it. It’s not like a image file sitting in your brain that you can recall and “print” at will. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2aquep
why do some substances sting an open wound (rubbing alcohol) and some do not (saline solution)? what is happening at a molecular level that causes the stinging?
I've had to resort to some unusual antiseptics in the past for emergencies (hand sanitizer, listerine) and the thought crossed my mind.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aquep/eli5_why_do_some_substances_sting_an_open_wound/
{ "a_id": [ "cixvw23", "cixw7or" ], "score": [ 2, 4 ], "text": [ "Not an expert here but I'm pretty sure the main reason alcohol causing stinging is because it lowers how much heat a nerve needs to feel to set off pain so the nerves believe you are being burned by something fairly hot when its just your own body temp.", "The skin has various receptors that get exposed when cut. The receptors, called VR1, that trigger the sting are the same ones that tell will send warning signals to the brain that something is hot. Since alcohol evaporates fast and it can cool a surface rapidly, it inhibits the receptors' ability to send those warning signals. To compensate (though unconfirmed), it is thought that the cells counter alcohol's instant cooling effect by amping up the heat it releases.\n\nOn the other hand, normal saline solution is formulated to be similar to the saline levels in the body. So when a cut is irrigated with this solution, the receptors won't find anything out of the ordinary." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
2pnmud
what's so great about an ivy league school versus a state school?
Besides the fact that Ivy League schools are older.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pnmud/eli5_whats_so_great_about_an_ivy_league_school/
{ "a_id": [ "cmycqyy", "cmydkfc", "cmyed7a", "cmyflh9" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "At an Ivy League schools students are rubbing shoulders with other future movers and shakers. They will have connections in Washington, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and academia that wouldn't be necessarily made at Chico State or community college. \n\nIn addition, graduates of these schools make more money which they give back to these schools to ensure that they continue to have the best facilities. These facilities (in addition to the traditions of Ivy League institutions) ensure the best professors are doing the best research there.\n\nThe education is also generally considered more demanding and specialized, these institutions have reputations to maintain, and they would not keep them if they weren't giving their students the best possible training in their fields. Ironically, the \"best\" professors courses at Ivy Leagues are taught more by teacher assistants as they are more focused on research and writing. \n\nI'm really not touching on everything, but like everything in life it comes down to reputation and who you know.", "Aside from the things others have mentioned, it's very hard to get into Ivy League schools, so having a degree from one shows that you have met the rigorous requirements to be admitted to one of these schools. Not just anyone can get a degree from the Ivy League.", "They were the first, which made them the best. As people saw successful people come out, they wanted to go there. They had the opportunity to choose from many that applied, which made them have only the ones that would be successful either way. \n\nAlso, people with money graduated from there. People with money gave money to them, to make sure they stayed strong (and therefore people with money's education had more prestige). More money meant better education, and therefore more successful students, which just kept adding up.", "Mostly that you will meet and befriend other people who are attending an Ivy League school. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
3rb9c7
how can every car/truck be "the most fuel efficient"
Is it false advertising or very biased information? If it is very biased information, shouldn't there be regulations on what "facts" are put forward?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rb9c7/eli5_how_can_every_cartruck_be_the_most_fuel/
{ "a_id": [ "cwmjmm7" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "They can't. You're missing the key word, \"in it's class\"\n\n* full size luxury coupe\n\n* full size hybrid sedan\n\n* performance convertible\n\n* heavy duty double cab truck \n\nand so on. It's easy to create a \"class\" such that your car is the best in some feature you want to highlight." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3lylw6
what and why is the foreclosure process and what happens when the owners move?
I've been seeing more and more forclosed houses in my area. Edit: Answered
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3lylw6/eli5_what_and_why_is_the_foreclosure_process_and/
{ "a_id": [ "cvaent4" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Foreclosure is a legal process that allows creditors (people who have loaned money to someone) to force the sale of some property that the debtor (the person who owes the money) owns. In a foreclosure, the debtor had originally offered the property to the creditor as \"collateral,\" so the money was only given because the creditor knew that, if the debtor didn't pay, they'd have the right to foreclose on the property. \n\nUsually, the term is applied to the sale of real estate, like land or homes. \n\nThe process varies by area and by loan, but the general outline is that someone takes out a loan and then offers some collateral. At some point they fall behind on the loan or refuse to pay, and the creditor decides to foreclose. When the creditor is ready, and auction is held, and the property is sold to the highest bidder. \n\nIf there's not enough money to cover the debt after the auction, in some places the creditor can sue the debtor for the difference. In other places that's not allowed. If there's more than enough money, any extra money goes to the debtor. \n\nAt some point---either before or after the auction---the original debtors who owned the property will have to leave, since the property belongs to the bank." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2upf9j
how does someone get a mortgage for more than the purchase price of the house?
On home improvement shows like so many on HGTV, the people always say they have a budget of X amount. So the host(s) will get them to buy a house for less and use the "left over" money to fix it up. How does someone go about doing that? When I bought my home, that was never really an option. I told the financial company what the purchase price was, and she handled the rest. Was it because I was using a VA loan?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2upf9j/eli5_how_does_someone_get_a_mortgage_for_more/
{ "a_id": [ "coagfy5", "coaglxv" ], "score": [ 5, 2 ], "text": [ "It probably wasn't because of it being a VA loan. A mortgage is really just a loan secured with your house. A bank could give you a $100,000 loan to buy a house worth $90,000, but that would be foolish on the banks part, since if you defaulted they would be out $10,000. \n\nSometimes you can get a mortgage for more than the house is worth, then make some improvements that increase the value of the house. Like, in the previous example, you say, \"Yes, the house is worth $90k, but it has a busted out water heater, oven, fridge, and most of the bathroom is fucked. I need an extra $10K to fix that.\" The bank loans you the extra money, more than the house is worth, you fix up the house with the extra money, and boom, the house is actually worth the mortgage amount.", "There used to be special loans, or rehab loans one could get. I think they are called 203K loans. Usually the rehab money is kept in escrow and monitored by a third party and paid directly to contractors. Not sure if they are offered anymore or by who.\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
60dkmz
how big is space?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/60dkmz/eli5_how_big_is_space/
{ "a_id": [ "df5j56a", "df5j681", "df5jwyo" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "All of space is likely infinite in extent. We can only see as far as light has had time to travel, which is 46.5 billion light years in any direction. Because we cannot see any more than that we cannot verify that the universe is infinite but everything we see indicates that is the case.", "_URL_0_\n\nthe universe is at least 93 billion light years wide. one lightyear is 9,500,000,000,000 kilometers.\n\n\nthat's just the lower border for the size of the universe. it might be bigger, all the way to infinite.", "Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.\n\n- DNA" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "https://phys.org/news/2015-03-universe-finite-infinite.html" ], [] ]
1mbpr2
why hdtv's cause latency with consoles.
Why do HDTV's cause latency? As someone that plays FPS, I can tell a difference all the time. What should I look for in a HDTV to ensure that I get one with the smallest latency for the next generation of consoles? How do monitors differ?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mbpr2/eli5_why_hdtvs_cause_latency_with_consoles/
{ "a_id": [ "cc7ok4c" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "HDTVs generally do a lot of processing on images it displays. Check and see if your TV has a game mode. It'll turn off the processing effects and offer less latency." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
95rupq
why wouldn’t netflix original series scrap show intros? why does it seem the intro has to be shown to all shows?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/95rupq/eli5_why_wouldnt_netflix_original_series_scrap/
{ "a_id": [ "e3uzelk", "e3uzws6" ], "score": [ 8, 3 ], "text": [ "Netflix shows are sometimes carried by other carriers in other markets, including being shown on TV at times. They also do have a skip intro button and will automatically skip at times. ", "Actors negotiate to have their names presented a certain way and in a certain order in the credits. I'd think the more mainstream binging becomes the more we'll see the credits over the opening scenes rather than in an intro." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
74n5co
why can’t/don’t atms give you money in denominations smaller than $20 these days?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74n5co/eli5_why_cantdont_atms_give_you_money_in/
{ "a_id": [ "dnzkw32", "dnzlntn", "dnzmg8s", "dnzni02" ], "score": [ 12, 3, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "It's how they are setup . Every ATM has canisters in them filled with cash and only so much can fit in them so the people who own the ATMs decide to put only 20s in there so they can fit more money in there. The ATM at my old job had one that only gave 20s and 1s for the vending machines. It's also easier for independent ATM owner just to fill it with only 1 denomination.", "Back in the '90s a handful of ATMs also used to dispense $10 bills. I think Citi was one. There are probably some out there that still do. ", "There's a PNC Bank by my house and the attached outdoor ATM dispenses anything from $1 bills - $20 bills. ", "There's a few reasons.\n\n1. It means less frequent refills, as you only ever have to refill one type of bill. If you have 20's and 10's, and the 10's run out earlier than the 20's, you're always there topping up the 10's.\n\n2. Refilling routes only need a single type of bill. If your armoured truck going around refilling ATM's needs to have a stock of 10's and 20's, it is more likely for them to run out of one while on route and have to go back to restock.\n\n3. Simplicity in programming. How do you decide when someone takes out $80 that they get three 20's and two 10's? What about $100, is it four 20's or four 10's instead? How do you design your UI for people to be able to make a final withdrawal amount that is a sum of bill types, but compensate for those canisters sometimes being empty?\n\n\nIt really just creates a lot more work than needed to be effective." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
1ho3ue
why does the u.s. government spend so much on defense, and so little on education/exploration/infrastructure?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ho3ue/eli5_why_does_the_us_government_spend_so_much_on/
{ "a_id": [ "cawb7np" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Because to Americans jobs is the highest priority, and defense spending is mostly a big jobs program. It takes people to build tanks, people to build the parts that make a tank, people to build the machines that makes those parts, and you can go on. \n\nEducation and infrastructure are expensive and don't provide \"immediate results\" such as giving money to defense produces jobs immediately, good jobs, jobs people need. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
79ohsa
why is something annoying to everyone except the person doing the annoying thing?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/79ohsa/eli5_why_is_something_annoying_to_everyone_except/
{ "a_id": [ "dp3j0ff" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "If they were aware enough of what they were doing to be annoyed by it, they wouldn't do it. You only get annoyed by the things they are not aware of.\n\nAlso, we perceive what we are doing very differently than others perceive us. If you are, say, chewing your food loudly, that sound is going to be a small component of your eating experience, and likely go unnoticed. Also, since can hear the sounds in your own mouth even when you are eating quickly, you aren't going to notice much difference." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2qd9v2
why do i feel embarrassed for others as if i'm somehow connected or responsible for the act they are doing?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qd9v2/eli5_why_do_i_feel_embarrassed_for_others_as_if/
{ "a_id": [ "cn52828" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Most likely mirror neurons.\n\nThese are nuerons that fire both when you perform an action, and when you observe someone else perform that action.\n\nThis probably applies to emotions as well, and is generally thought to be the basis of empathy." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4j4tr9
why are muslims so hated in america, even if it has been a decade since 9/11?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4j4tr9/eli5_why_are_muslims_so_hated_in_america_even_if/
{ "a_id": [ "d33p0zd", "d33p3um", "d33p9dy" ], "score": [ 3, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "The vast majority of Americans do not hate Muslims. It's also been 15 years since 9/11. There are a vocal minority of folks who say awful things, but most Americans just give them a sidelong glance and continue on their day.", "To be fair, can you really explain human hatred and fear of anything different? \n\nWell to start even before 9/11 the exposure of Islam to many Americans is limited. While the religion is expansive, this doesn't always translate to understanding. The religion is an overall mystery to some, due simply to lack of exposure (since the religion obviously isn't a mystery of any sorts).\n\nNow, for many there wasn't much of an opinion originally and then 9/11 happens. For many it probably retroactively cast a separate opinion on the religion as a whole. People are lazy, lazy seekers of patterns. It's hard for people to accept that some people are bad devoid of anything that would identify them as such.\n\nOverall though, most Americans don't personally know many Muslims, very many do, but a lot don't. It's a culture many are unfamiliar with, and not knowing is all it takes for one disaster to change the minds of many people, even though it is clearly out of ignorance. \n\nEDIT: I should add in, as another commenter said, most Americans don't hate Muslims, just a very vocal collective.", "If you have a bully in your classroom, will the bully stop being a bully if no one in the room is an easy target? The bully will pick on somebody. The rest is relative.\n\n9/11, lesser acts of terrorism, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the situation in Israel, lead to Muslims being the best target for American hostility. If it weren't Muslims, these Americans would just go down the list to the next group (be it Mexicans, blacks, the Chinese, Jews, whatever.) They'll rationalize their decision, but it's not an action born of rationality. It's an action born of emotion. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
7ko15l
what makes a scientific study a good one? what are the best practices?
Like, control groups, placebo, whatever. I don't have much knowledge about it. And how to check when some study seems reliable but it's actually flawed? Thanks.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ko15l/eli5_what_makes_a_scientific_study_a_good_one/
{ "a_id": [ "drftc6z", "drftdi1", "drftnbw", "drfvrac", "drfxktd", "drg3450", "drg9dnt" ], "score": [ 25, 6, 3, 2, 13, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "It's almost impossible to tell if a study is flawed, unless you are an expert in the topic. Instead you could see if the results have been replicated by other people. By the time you see 3-5 papers published that confirm a result, that's pretty good evidence that the study is true. It's also **super important** to read the actual scientific study, even though it might be really hard to decode, because the \"science news coverage\" is likely to be wildly different than the actual paper that was published.", "It's pretty rare that what's flawed is the study, what's a lot more common is that the media draws conclusions that the study does not make (and that the authors do not make).\n\nWhen in doubt, go to the actual study, and you will usually find that the authors have been careful to outline their technique and its limitations.", "The other two answers here are great, and accurate, but the best practice for determining if a study was any good is peer review and replication. If the study was flawed or biased, a good peer review and an attempt to replicate will suss that out.", "It depends on the field and the specific study. You mention placebos - they are typically important in medical studies, but not in physics, for example.\n\nThere can be some obvious flaws that you can catch even as non-expert, but studies with these flaws typically don't make it through peer review in somewhat reputable journals. Basic mathematics errors (especially in the statistical analysis), no control sample when there is obviously a need for it (\"we gave X to 20 patients with the cold, and after two weeks everyone was healthy again!\"), and similar things.\n\nTo be able to find flaws, you don't always have to be an expert in the field.\n\nTo be able to determine \"yes, this study is good\" you need to be an expert in the field.", "I think what you're asking about is study design. Your question is a bit open-ended so it would be hard to answer completely here. You can [learn more about study design on khan academy](_URL_0_).\n\nThere is a lot to know about good scientific practices, and much of it follows from basic logical and statistical reasoning.\n\nThe basics are like this:\n\nYou start with an idea about some specific observable cause and effect in the world. For example, you predict that a new drug will help alleviate migraines in most people. You set it up as a **falsifiable statement**, like this: The null hypothesis is that the new drug will have no effect on patients. The drug is only useful if your experiment shows that the null hypothesis is unsupported. I know, the wording sounds confusing, but its meant to be very specific.\n\nSo you gather a large group of people (you can determine through statistics how large that group should be) in order to test the new drug. There are a lot of things that can affect a headache that we don't know about. There are some things that can affect it that we do know about. Without accounting for these things, we might end up concluding something that isn't true. We want to try to account for these variables as much as we can in our study, so we have some methods of doing this.\n\nTo simplify the idea of an experiment, there is a **control group** and a **variable group**. The variable group for our study would be the people who take the new drug. The control group would be those who don't take the new drug. This is important because we want to study the difference in reaction between the two groups to the variable (the new drug). \n\nBut what if by simply taking a pill, some people feel relief, regardless of whats in it? ([the placebo effect](_URL_1_)). Well, you can do a placebo-controlled study where everyone takes a pill, but only some of the people are taking the new drug. None of the test subjects know which pill is which. This kind of experiment is called a **blinded trial**, because the test subjects are unaware of the control and variable groups.\n\nBut what if we know that the scientists giving out the drug and the placebo tend to have a bias in who they hand the placebo to? We can mix up all the pills so that even the scientists don't know which is the real drug. This is called a **double-blind trial**. (There are ways to make sure who actually took the new drug and who didn't, afterwards).\n\nThere is so much more to learn and it is all important and useful to just about anyone, even if you aren't a scientist. The more you know about scientific studies, the more you can learn for yourself without relying on others' conclusions and assumptions.", "The gold standard is [reproducibility](_URL_0_)\n\nCan someone else, using the experiment you designed, arrive at corroborating conclusions? If not, your conclusions mean bupkis. \n\nA key to this is making sure you have a large enough sample-size to reach a meaningful conclusion and aren't just drawing spurious conclusions from a limited data set.", "A scientific study has three main purposes:\n\n* to determine whether some phenomenon exists\n* to make sure you aren't mistaken\n* to allow other people to check for themselves\n\nLet's say you have a hypothesis that dipping your hands in Dr. Pepper will cure warts. You soak a bunch of warty hand in Dr. Pepper twice a day for two weeks, and some of the warts get smaller or go away. Just proved your hypothesis, right?\n\nNot so fast, you don't know if they would have cleared up on their own. You have to repeat the experiment, with two groups, one who gets the treatment, and a **control group** who does not. The Dr. Pepper group still gets better, time to declare success?\n\nOf course not. Maybe the people who people who are treated act differently. Maybe the test creeps them out and they wash their hands more. Maybe they are trying to \"help\" with the experiment, and pick at their warts more...less. You need both groups to act the same way, so you **blind** the test by having the control group soak in club soda with food coloring. Still see fewer warts, time the call the press?\n\nToo soon. You want your experiment to succeed, you job might depend on it. Maybe you are fudging a bit when you try to decide if a wart has gotten smaller. It could be subconscious, so you can't even trust your own judgment, so you have to **double blind** the test by having your assistant, who doesn't know who is in what group, count warts so the process will be free from bias. You're still seeing good results, you can start working on your Nobel acceptance speech, can't you?\n\nYeah, you know the answer. Now you have to analyze the results, and see if they are significant. If the treatment group only had 2% fewer warts than the control, that might just be random noise. If the results are significant, then you submit to a peer-reviewed journal and hope they find it interesting enough for them to have their experts try to tear it apart. If it passes that, you get published, and *everyone* in your field gets to try to tear it apart. Then they try to replicate your results. Only then can you claim enough success to ask for another grant to do bigger and more complete tests.\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [ "https://www.khanacademy.org/math/statistics-probability/designing-studies", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo" ], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproducibility" ], [] ]
280qqv
how did i forget how to speak my native language?
I lived in the Philippines for about 10 years until I moved to the US. I can still fluently understand Tagalog (my native tongue) but for the life of me I can't speak it at all anymore. Trying to think of words to put together to make a sentence in Tagalog doesn't really work and I never really minded because my parents understand english, but I am currently job hunting and a strong requirement is to be fluent with a 2nd language. With that said, how did i forget how to speak my own native language while still being able to understand my relatives who speak it fluently?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/280qqv/eli5_how_did_i_forget_how_to_speak_my_native/
{ "a_id": [ "ci699h7", "ci69kee" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Lingustically speaking, comprehension is much easier than production. I can read a sentence in French and kind of get the gyst of it, but if I try to write something in French, it'll be pure nonsensical jibberish. For whatever reason, with language you either use it or lose it. At one point, you may thought in tagalog, but now, you probably exclusively think in English, meaning you never really use the language, even in your head.", "Your brain has trillions of connections between brain cells, called dendrites. As you practice a skill, electrical signals travel through these connections which makes them faster and stronger. But if you do not use the skill, no signals travel through the connections, and the cells break the connections.\n\nAn analogy is walking a path through a field. The more you walk the same path through the field, the more it leaves a trail. But if you don't walk through it for a while, the grass stands back up and you can't find the trail anymore.\n\nThe good news: If you practice your Tagalog, since you already learned it once, you will pick it up again a lot faster than someone who is learning it from nothing (like me)." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
44ens4
why does perishable food after going bad always has to smell bad?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/44ens4/eli5_why_does_perishable_food_after_going_bad/
{ "a_id": [ "czposb1", "czpospy", "czpr9of" ], "score": [ 7, 3, 18 ], "text": [ "The bacteria on the food release gases as they consume the food. (It may not be bacteria in all cases. Mould as well). Likewise it is our internal flora that causes our own smelling gasses.", "It doesn't always smell bad.\n\nMost food smells bad when spoiled because we have evolved in a way that the smell of spoiled food, which is harmful to us, repulses us. This helps us avoid eating spoiled food.", "You sort of have it backwards. They smell bad to us because our sense of smell developed in part to help us know whether something was safe to eat or not. That sense became tuned to detect the chemicals released by bacteria-laden food and perceive them as highly unpleasant.\n\nIf a genetic variation in a creature made rotten, unsafe food smell good to them, they'd be more likely to eat some, and therefore more likely to die, filtering that variation out of the gene pool. For the inverse, those for whom rotten food smelled especially bad would be even less likely to eat some, and therefore less likely to die and more likely to perpetuate that variation. After ages and ages of that, we've ended up with noses and brains that are quite good at knowing when something's wrong with food." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
3e1eyd
i hear about these gamma ray bursts, a direct hit of which would obliterate the earth, make it sterile.
Question: what and how exactly it would happen if it hits us? Would people and all things alive drop dead immediately? Or this would be more of longer process that would take hours, days, years?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3e1eyd/eli5i_hear_about_these_gamma_ray_bursts_a_direct/
{ "a_id": [ "ctalz18", "ctamooe" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Actually, there is a theory that in 775 earth was struck with a gamma ray burst.\n\nIf a seriously powerful one hit earth, it would tear off our atmosphere, give everyone that was outside radiation burns, give everyone that was inside cancer, screw around with our electronics, and generally mess things up.\n\nTimescale, well I think that depends on the power, although it appears we lived through one, so that may be a good sign.", "The big danger from a gamma-ray burst is that it'd destroy the ozone layer. If it were close enough, the atmosphere would protect us from most of the gamma rays themselves, but the intense radiation would break apart nitrogen and oxygen molecules, creating nitrous oxide that would destroy the ozone. This would be catastrophic, not just from the sunburns this would cause, because it would kill all the plants, and most life on earth would starve to death. Even if we stayed out of the sun, we'd have no way to produce enough food to feed ourselves.\n\nIn order for this to happen, though, the gamma ray burst-creating star would need to be at the end of its life, within maybe a thousand years, AND have its pole pointed at us, and we have no evidence that there are any massive stars that match that description." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3kcqoz
why do we still use the hubble space telescope when it's 25 years old?
If I went to a party and started taking selfies with [this](_URL_0_) people would laugh.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kcqoz/eli5_why_do_we_still_use_the_hubble_space/
{ "a_id": [ "cuwgr1b", "cuwgrgj", "cuwgymf", "cuwgzuk" ], "score": [ 5, 3, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Why wouldn't we still be using it? It works just fine for its intended task, and launching a newer model just for the hell of it isn't exactly cheap.", "They keep upgrading it, so it's actually still pretty relevant. Plus, the hardware in it was pretty state-of-the-art, so it ages better than consumer level tech. Also, replacing it completely would cost a TON. ", "The Hubble is still the best telescope around. Additionally, there are more projects that need research telescopes than there are research telescopes; most telescopes are 100% booked for years in advance.", "Primarily because the expense of getting another instrument up there would be extremely high.\n\nStellar photography is not the same as you taking a picture. The Hubble cameras are overlapping and very sensitive, and spend a lot more time doing stuff than you would. It's like if you were trying to get a good image of your friend, and spent an hour taking thousands and thousands and thousands of pictures of them, then went to a computer and digitally processed all the pictures into one really perfect image that takes absolutely every single detail possible and renders it.\n\nGetting another one up there is a very expensive prospect, and somebody needs to pay for it." ] }
[]
[ "https://i.imgur.com/6QD6Nxv.jpg" ]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
5gt8ij
if a plane is forced to land on ocean, are there good chances for survivors?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5gt8ij/eli5_if_a_plane_is_forced_to_land_on_ocean_are/
{ "a_id": [ "dauufl3" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "If a plane is forced to land, then yes things are already quite good considering the circumstances.\n\nPassenger Planes can glide for a long time, and they have plenty of communication abilities to reach out for help before they even touch water. The entire plane will have plenty of time to get there needed equipment out and on, and rescue will be enroute.\n\nIt's still dangerous but in the scheme of things, a controlled set down in the ocean is a lot better than the alternatives." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
41d0ni
why does a song sound completely different after listening to it while asleep?
I fell asleep last night listening to David Bowie's "Life on Mars" on repeat. Today I went to listen to the song and I didn't even recognize it, I thought Spotify was messed up so I tried YouTube and it was the same. Then I used the same headphones I was wearing before and it still sounded wrong, just something was way off. I googled around and found some other people who had experienced the same thing. What causes this, and will it ever go away? That was my favorite song of his and now I can barely listen to it. Edit: Just to clarify what off about it, the piano seems louder even though I had never really noticed it and his voice seems to be deeper and slower tempo. The intro of the song is almost completely unrecognizable besides the lyrics.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41d0ni/eli5_why_does_a_song_sound_completely_different/
{ "a_id": [ "cz1f6vw", "cz1ffkf", "cz1gbc8", "cz1jz0t" ], "score": [ 2, 17, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "I did this once with a Pearl Jam song and the next day, other than the song sounding all weird, I knew all of the mumbled lyrics. Don't get me wrong, I am a big Eddie Vedder fan, but it was a mumbling old song. I actually woke up and checked the cd player because I thought it had shat itself.\nEdit; spelling.", "During REM (Rapid Eye Movement) sleep, the brain activity fluctuates & changes very rapidly and processes the music constantly. The sound of the music will get so familiar, after listening to the same song for several hours on a constant loop, the brain anticipates what will happen in the song. So basically, you know when a riff is coming, or when a tone will pitch. In other words, you get bored with a song eventually.\n", "The simplest way to get bored of a song is to listen to it a lot, with very low volume, without actually focusing on the song. Your brain learns to treat it as unimportant background noise that can safely be filtered away.\n\nSame works other way around, if you want to make sure your favorite song sounds awesome decades later as well, if you listen to it, blast it with full volume and give it your full concentration every time it plays.\n\nYou probably have at least temporarily ruined that song for you. If I were you, I'd try to avoid listening to it for a couple of weeks or months, then try listening with full volume and full concentration. Maybe you can salvage the experience. Dunno, I haven't really seen much research into this subject.", "Interestingly, what you describe the effect as (lower/slower voice, instruments' relative loudness is off), is strikingly similar to the effects of the \"research chemical\" DiPT... Which is unique among hallucinogens for only affecting the sense of sound with little effect on the other senses. \n\nWhen I tried this once I got seriously freaked out because it made any song I listened to sound totally weird and off, and I got worried it would never go back to normal. It was mostly having to do with the lowered/distorted vocals, but also it was like there was no context for the tones relative to each other (in other words, every note or key change sounded like it was constantly \"resetting\" to the same lower drone note so you couldnt discern the melody, very disorienting). \n\nBut this was especially disconcerting for songs you knew well because your memory knew what the next notes should sound like, yet your perception in the moment did not match that expectation. (In my case, I listened to Neil Young Harvest Moon and I wasn't able to listen to it for months because it sounded off even though the acute/perceivable DiPT effect went away in a few hours).\n\nNeedless to say, I had a bit more caution with \"research chemicals\" after that experience! " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
1nium3
why does icahn (investor) urge tim cook to buy back so many stocks and how is buying stocks back good for the company?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nium3/eli5why_does_icahn_investor_urge_tim_cook_to_buy/
{ "a_id": [ "cciyvfc", "ccjancz" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "A company buying back its own shares reduces the number of total shares of the company and thus, increases the earnings per share of the company.\n\nApple has a lot of cash on hand, ~~but does not maintain a regular dividend.~~ Rather than using that money to buy an existing company,~~or institute a dividend~~, Icahn feels that the money would be best spent buying shares of Apple to reduce the total number of shares available. \n\nIdeally, the decrease in total shares and subsequent rise in earnings per share will lead to an increase in the market value of the remaining shares, resulting in value added for the remaining shareholders.\n", "There are many reasons. Some are covered by others. Here's one I didn't see:\n\nApple has roughly 150 billion in cash reserves. Granted, that isn't just piles of cash, much if it will be invested in one way or another so it is appreciating in value.\n\nBut, consider it as if it were a big pile of cash. Inflation is a real thing, it happens. That means that as time passes, that 150 billion would still be 150 billion, but it would gradually be losing value as money is worth less and less due to inflation.\n\nSo, what do you do with the big pile of cash so it doesn't lose value? You could expand by buying other companies, either for their capabilities, intellectual capital (ideas), or people. You could invest it in various financial vehicles (stocks, bonds), or you could invest in research and development.\n\nApple has done all of the above, they still have a huge pile of cash left over, doing too much more of the above and the fear is that you end up spreading yourself so thin that all of your different divisions lose identity, vision, and become difficult to manage.\n\nApple has the advantage right now of being well-known, \"the most valuable brand\", etc. \n\nBy doing a stock buy back, the stock value remains high (investors like this), the earnings per share goes up since the earnings are the same but there are fewer shares (investors like this), and that big pile of cash shrinks without diluting the value of the company (since to Apple, it's shares are a liability, a debt it owes to its investors)." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
1t27to
why do we arch our lips and show our teeth when we smile?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1t27to/why_do_we_arch_our_lips_and_show_our_teeth_when/
{ "a_id": [ "ce3p2l6" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "I am no expert on this, but I think it was originally a symbol of aggression/fear, but it somehow morphed into a symbol of happiness. Similarly, laughing is theorized to have come from a way to reduce stress in early humans and yawning is theorized to come from a way to get more oxygen to the brain and stay more alert. We used to hunt in groups, so if one person yawned, it was a signal to the others to also yawn so that the whole group would stay more alert." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
blm78j
why we need to use money in a society.
I tried literally explaining the reason for money to my 5 year old and I couldn’t get it to not sound totally pointless and just an extra step for acquiring goods and services. It was getting real philosophical! Like even after explaining that all things cost money to produce...”but why?” I’m missing some key elements at the root here.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/blm78j/eli5_why_we_need_to_use_money_in_a_society/
{ "a_id": [ "empjfgd", "empjgw9", "empjhu7", "empjl13", "empk6fh", "empkmb0", "empl5i3", "empo9u6", "emppyal" ], "score": [ 13, 25, 4, 2, 3, 7, 2, 15, 2 ], "text": [ "Money is something that everyone can trade. Bartering with goods and services is only possible if the other person actually wants your goods/services.", "Because if I have chickens and need a blanket, not only do I need to find someone who wants to trade a blanket, but also needs chickens.\n\nMoney is just an accepted placeholder for trade. \n\n\n(we've gotten out of money and into currency as a people, but that's a whole different can of worms.)", "It removes the specifics of a transaction. If Joe has eggs but wants Strawberries, Mike has sausages and wants eggs, and Tony has Strawberries but wants sausages... No two of those people can make a deal. But if you can swap out what you have for something that isn't specific, but represents an amount of value you all agree on, you can now make those exchanges without the other person having exactly what you want.\n\nLikewise with work. You can give someone food, you can give someone lodging for their time and effort. Or you can give them, essentially, a gift voucher for anything they want of a certain value instead. It removes the specifics of the transaction and affords the buyer and seller more opportunities.", "The way I think of it is kinda like a universal place holder. Instead of trading something or giving an i.o.u. for a good or service that can be used in other only very specific cases, using money as a placeholder for these thing means that you can go into any town, provided they use the same currency and use the money universally. Society establishes and agrees that it has this value and so it does. Not sure if this is a very helpful explanation but if you think about the evolution of it from a bartering society in this way, it makes some sense.", "I'm a writer, but when I need beer, the local brewery doesn't have any use for my writing services. Hence, I give them money instead (which I earned writing) that they can use to obtain the products and services they do need.", "For the 5 year old. Money is like candy, if you have some someone else will want it, allowing you to ask favors in exchange for candy. Like wouldn't it be nice to give someone candy to go to school for you? Or how about receiving candy for going to school? Now how about this. What if someone wanted to give you green beans for going to school? Or a sculpture from Italy that you are not allowed to touch? Not as enticing right? The value of green beans or statues depends on the person, but everyone loves candy right? \n\nCandy, just like money, has a constant and understandable value in society that the majority people can agree on, allowing them to exchange money to fulfill their desires.\n\nWithout money, it would be hard to determine what you need to give someone in exchange for something you want from them.\n\nEven without money, the most desired thing, let's say candy for instance, would become the new \"money\". Money will always be the most valuable and desired thing in society, whether it's pieces of paper or candy.\n\nFor an interesting concept look up frozen tea currency in the arctic!", "To make a trade, both people involved have to have an interest to satisfy to be able to benefit from the trade. Without money, trade would be more difficult because it would only occur if each person involved could satisfy the other person’s interest. So if you make chairs and you really want to trade chairs for a table, you’d better hope that the person who makes tables wants your chairs. Otherwise, you would have to wait for the day they want chairs and that wouldn’t be very efficient at all. Money just helps to create a common interest. Each person’s interest is converted to an amount of money, and money acts as a third person who always wants everything - tables and chairs. Then everybody involved can benefit from the trade", "#Store of value\nI have 10 gallons of milk today. \nIn 2 weeks it will be spoiled. \nI won't be getting any more milk for 4 weeks. \nI want to eat sometime 3 weeks later. \n \nI could go around making everyone promise me that in 3 weeks they'll give me food. \nOr I could give them milk now, they give me something back that doesn't go bad, and that everyone will take later on. \nSo nobody has to write down they owe me food in 3 weeks, I just show up with money. \n \n#Coincidence of wants \nI have 10 gallons of milk. \nYou have shoes I want. \nI want to give you the milk for the shoes. \nYou don't want the milk, because you are lactose intolerant. \nI cannot get the shoes because you don't want my milk. \nIf only there was some 3rd thing we could trade for that we both want. \nMoney is a 3rd thing everyone could trade for that everybody wants. \n \n#Means of Subdivision. \nI have a cow. \nI want a pair of shoes. \nA cow is worth much more than a pair of shoes. \nIf I cut up the cow, it stops being a cow. \nSo I need something I can trade the cow for that can be split up. \n \n#Measure of value \n \nI have 1 gallon of milk. \nHow many apples is that worth? \nHow many chickens? \nHow many back rubs? \n \nI now have 1 gallon of milk and 2 chickens, how many back rubs can I get?\n \nIf only there was some number we could just peg that worth to.", "Simply because money allows you to exchange something else than your personal abilities. \n\n\nIf I trade the milk of my cow against your bread, it's fine, but what if I want to buy some bread, like 50 other people this morning and we don't have anything to exchange (you don't want 50 websites for your bakery, do you ?) or you don't need 50 stuff/services ? You can't sell bread and I can't buy it. \n\n\nMoney allows me to buy your bread right now, and money allows you to trade it against a service or object you need when you need it." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
3768ik
why is nuclear reactor cooling water unsafe to drink?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3768ik/eli5_why_is_nuclear_reactor_cooling_water_unsafe/
{ "a_id": [ "crk1l7p", "crk1zx9", "crk6pbn", "crk8owb" ], "score": [ 12, 9, 2, 4 ], "text": [ "I don't think there would be a problem drinking it. For modern designs, the water doesn't actually touch radioactive material so it should just be normal water.", "[Here's an excellent article](_URL_0_) explaining some of the dangers. \n\nThe problem is it is not \"certifiable\" to be safe enough. The risks are too high and advantages too few. It doesn't have very many contaminants but it likely has lead. \n\nRadiation poisoning acts slowly (certain kinds) and hard to diagnose. So, instead of taking the risk, we drink water that is NOT from nuclear reactors. ", "There is always a small chance for fission products to leach into the coolant. How much depends on the design of the fuel. But even if there are no fission products in the coolant, the water should not be drunk. As the water flows through the core there will be some neutron absolution which can make the water it's self radioactive, a process call neutron activation. This radioacty is small but still best avoided.", "Nuclear engineer here. \n\nBefore the water ever hits the reactor it is filtered, demineralized, and purified down to being almost pure water. Even the oxygen gets removed before its used in the reactor. \n\nThat pure water is unhealthy/unsafe to drink as it is. It would throw your electrolyte balance off and probably drown your body on its own. \n\nOnce the water is in the reactor it acts as a sponge for all sorts of radioactive materials. Between stuff that diffuses or leaks out of fuel rods in extremely minute amounts, stuff from metals in the core that gets activated and becomes radioactive, and water that becomes tritium, the water is a significant radiation hazard. Every reactor has a continuous reactor water cleanup/purification system designed to remove these materials and even at max efficienc we cannot reduce the radioactive material inventory low enough to ever call it safe. \n\nFeel free to ask more questions. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [ "https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/" ], [], [] ]
bxiwgq
what are hypersonic missiles ?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bxiwgq/eli5_what_are_hypersonic_missiles/
{ "a_id": [ "eq72py5", "eq7t8f1" ], "score": [ 10, 2 ], "text": [ "Missiles that travel faster than Mach 5. Supersonic is faster than the speed of sound up to Mach 5, then Hypersonic is above that.", "Since people said what are hypersonic missiles I'm gonna say why they pose a huge threat. A Hypersonic missile represents a nearly unbeatable weapons platform. Not only does the target have an extremely hard time shooting it down, but also almost no time to actually act and properly respond to it's threat. Both current military technology and procedures are inadequate to respond to their threat. Multi billion dollar military property like aircrafts carries and installations might not even have enough time to respond leaveing them completely defenses and non threats ruining modern military doctrine.\n\nEssentially hypersonic weapons completely overturn modern military strategy. This can almost be akin to the introduction of airplanes into combat or the shift from firing lines of soldiers to more modern tactics." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
5ijd2l
if bill gates decides to give all of his $84 billion to every single one in wyoming state, what would be the aftermath from an economical standpoint?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ijd2l/eli5_if_bill_gates_decides_to_give_all_of_his_84/
{ "a_id": [ "db8ky7h" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Stop asking the same question over and over, some users have already answered it. This sub isn't as active as say /r/funny, it's super easy to notice." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3ncdbm
why is the wounded warrio project needed, does our government not take care of these soldiers after sending them to war to get maimed?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ncdbm/eli5why_is_the_wounded_warrio_project_needed_does/
{ "a_id": [ "cvmqt3k", "cvmrn38" ], "score": [ 6, 3 ], "text": [ "Not sufficiently. They get medical care, but help readjusting to life after severe injuries isn't covered by the Veterans Affairs office. Counseling, therapy, and advice on how to return to normal aren't given by the government. There's a reason why many veterans end up homeless. The government does the bare minimum to repair their bodies, but not enough to ensure they recover.", "The VA hardly does shit. You get half assed care and that's after jumping through endless hoops and sitting in long ass waiting lists. Source: me going through their bs. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3mqub6
why do small dogs think they are big and big dogs think they are small?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mqub6/eli5_why_do_small_dogs_think_they_are_big_and_big/
{ "a_id": [ "cvhf7bj" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "I believe it is discipline.\n\nLarger dogs are heavily disciplined - controlled from barking and mis-behaving. \n\nWhere as small dogs receive little discipline from barking or jumping because they are more harmless do to their size." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
4xir58
what is the difference between a near death experience and a coma from a biological perspective?
What is happening biologically that gives people in a coma the "sleeping state" feeling and near death experiencers the "see a light" feeling?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xir58/eli5what_is_the_difference_between_a_near_death/
{ "a_id": [ "d6ghryj" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "A coma is a wide description for complete loss of consciousness without an ability to be roused, while a near death experience is a delusional state before losing consciousness/dying. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
c5phdb
how do goldfish manage to remain small when forced into a small container?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c5phdb/eli5_how_do_goldfish_manage_to_remain_small_when/
{ "a_id": [ "es36itb", "es3nw8a" ], "score": [ 6, 7 ], "text": [ "They become stunted and die very young. Please never keep a goldfish in a bowl or anything less than 10g with a filter honestly even that might be small.", "This is a myth. Given adequate nutrition, at least, fish will grow to their full adult size. It's really unfortunate to see, because if they survive, fish usually end up with skeletal deformities, having been forced to fit in an environment too small." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
6qps49
is there a biological or social reason as to why there is always a line for the ladies restroom as compared to the mens?
Do women have smaller bladders or something?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6qps49/eli5_is_there_a_biological_or_social_reason_as_to/
{ "a_id": [ "dkz0y6i", "dkz0zch", "dkz2wsm", "dkz3h22" ], "score": [ 14, 5, 6, 3 ], "text": [ "People tend to pee more often than they poop.\n\nPeeing takes less time than pooping, but takes more time for women as they need to go into a stall, sit down, pee, wipe, flush, and then proceed instead of just walking up to a urinal, unzipping, peeing, then rezipping.\n\nThere's less demand for toilets for men, so if someone's taking a massive shit and taking forever, he's not holding up people who want to pee. If there's a women's bathroom with 4 toilets and two people are taking a crap, you've halved the throughput of the restroom for people who want to pee as well. Talk about a bottleneck!", "It takes women longer to pee, that's the main thing. They have to go into a stall, close the door, remove some clothing, sit down, pee, wipe, get up, open the door -- many extra seconds compared to a man. Even worse, you can fit only 2 stalls into a space that would hold 3 urinals.", "It's an architectural engineering problem. \n\nMen have the ability to urinate while standing in a normal, upright position. For women, it is more efficient and hygenic to urinate while seated on a toilet (or, in some countries, squatting is the preferred method). \n\nBecause a standing urinal takes up far less space than a toilet stall, given an equal amount of space, you will be able to provide more facilities per room for men to urinate (urinals and toilet stalls combined) than you can for women (toilet stalls only), therefore the potential throughput (number of people who can be accommodated in a given amount of time) of a men's restroom is greater than that of an equally-sized women's restroom. \n\nSo if you normalize for both sexes defecating in the same frequency and manner and frequency, and both sexes urinating with the same frequency but in a *different* manner, then the net benefit accrues to the men's restroom because of the ability to fit a greater number of facilities for urination in the same-sized space. ", "You can fit more urinals in a rest room than stalls. \n\nWomen's rest rooms only have stalls.\n\nMen's rest rooms have some stalls and some urinals.\n\nMore men can use the restroom at one time than women. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
4a8n9z
why do suicides/murders lead to others copycatting?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4a8n9z/eli5_why_do_suicidesmurders_lead_to_others/
{ "a_id": [ "d0y9tw9" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Because of sensationalism in media. The news agencies will either martyr the perpetrator (if a suicide or if the given reason for the murder is one that matches the political leanings of the reporting agency) or martyr their victims usually by over reporting the body count. When one psychopath sees another psychopath become famous for mass murder, they find that they want the same thing and they try to achieve that fame the same way with more victims. \n\nAnother reason for copycats is that the copycat crazy actually idolizes the first crazy and feels himself a disciple of the initial crazy killer. And in cases of suicide it's usually people who want to be remembered do they off themselves in a flamboyant or extravagant way so as to get the same media attention." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
68teby
is excessive laziness a sign of depression?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68teby/eli5_is_excessive_laziness_a_sign_of_depression/
{ "a_id": [ "dh13mo7" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Definitely a symptom of depression. I'd speak with a doctor or therapist. There are plenty of non drug methods for getting out of depression. Unfortunately I am one of those lucky ones who needs the meds to be a functioning human." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
10bnnx
why are old people generally/stereotypically republican?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10bnnx/why_are_old_people_generallystereotypically/
{ "a_id": [ "c6c1rqo", "c6c215s", "c6c2oeb", "c6c4tj7", "c6c4xzf", "c6c6fr5" ], "score": [ 17, 6, 14, 2, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "I can think of examples to prove & disprove your generalization. My grandfather was so right-wing he still hated FDR - all the way in to the 1990s - he got over it finally when he died. God help you if you asked him his thoughts on JFK. His younger brother (my great-uncle) is still alive, and is a left-leaning centrist. My great-aunt is so Lefty she still talks about sexual freedom and the healing power of crystals. EDIT: and I just remembered that she has a black boyfriend. No, seriously. These are all people born in the 1910-1925 range.\n\nPeople are people, not categories.", "In the most simplistic terms possible, generally speaking, on most social issues, the Republicans favor traditional values while the Democrats are more focused on progressive ideas.\n\nRepublicans want things left alone and Democrats want things to change. (The major exception to this is on the abortion debate because the Democrats were pro-choice prior to Roe v. Wade and they couldn't just switch sides just because the law changed,)\n\nIsn't it obvious as to why older people who be more inclined toward the party that values tradition rather than change?", "**There's the old quip**; \n\n > \"if you don't vote Democrat when you're young, you have no heart, and if you don't vote Republican when you're old, you have no brains\". \n\nIt's a variant on the age-old theme that the young are idealists and greater risk takers, wanting to change the world for the better - and that people grow to become more ... \"realistic\" with old age, placing more emphasis on what they really care about, like providing for your loved ones, family values etc. \n\n\n\n\n\n", "Generally when people are young, they look at the world and want change. In the 1950s and 60s when today's older people were young there were a lot of changes going on in America. At the time, those kids were progressive and wanted changes like more gender equality and sexual freedom (on the social issues side). By and large, many of those changes did happen. Now they see the world and culture as something their generation created and the new young people are trying to change it. Possibly they were only ready for some change and not more, possibly they have grown comfortable and don't want to \"rock the boat\" now that they are older, its possible it's even as weird as feeling like criticizing society is an implicit criticism of them that they didn't do enough to fix the world when they themselves were young. Regardless, they then become conservative, wanting to maintain the way things are. In social policy, the Republican party tends toward conservatism and reactionary (believing we've made enough change and should stop, or that we've made too much and should go back).", "From a number of conversations I have had with elder clients, I would say there are a few reasons most of them vote conservatively. However, most of the arguments I have heard revolve around conflicts in political ideologies.\n\nFirst, most elderly people I know grew up and lived during the Cold War. I believe the fear of the Soviet Union led to an instinctual fear of any \"socialist\" idea. Many times, to the older generation liberal political ideologies are associated with some Communist philosophies. (i.e. Social Welfare Programs) \n\nTo them, many social programs are creating a welfare state that will \"cripple\" our economy. They believe that many recepients of state aid take advantage of the system and have created an \"entitlement culture\". \n\nIn addition, the economic changes caused by globalization and free trade agreements have created an unfamiliar geo-political landscape. It is thus feared that the United States will no longer be the dominant global power. \n\nHaving grown up or lived during many wars that were opposed to some Communist threat, has created a world view of forces that are diametrically opposed. Thus any world view in conflict with the U.S. is seen as wrong. ", "There is an old saying, \"if you're not liberal in youth you have no heart, if you're not conservative in old age you have no mind\"." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
5dw3xs
why is acne found more on the face/upper torso than elsewhere on the human body?
Back/neck acne is quite common, but from there, finding additional patches become much more rare. Never quite knew why, but I am certain it must involve the frequent amount of hair follicles upon the upper torso. **Edit:** Thank you for the front page.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dw3xs/eli5_why_is_acne_found_more_on_the_faceupper/
{ "a_id": [ "da7si92", "da7ylfs", "da7zmd4", "da80w58", "da82c4a", "da82l70", "da85hdi", "da86ek0", "da8755x", "da87sxq", "da884kx", "da8a373", "da8a78a" ], "score": [ 2359, 4, 8, 234, 9, 34, 3, 5, 5, 2, 8, 2, 20 ], "text": [ "No one is completely sure exactly what causes acne, but we know some things that put you at higher risk. \n\nAcne is a disease of the glands that secrete sebum onto hair follicles, sebum is a waxy/oily substance that protects the skin. These glands are most dense on the face. Then hormones, especially \"male hormones\" (androgens) cause these glands to secrete even more, providing a nice oily, anaerobic (no oxygen) little bubble for the bacteria that causes acne to grow in. The glands that are most sensitive to these hormones are found in face/neck/chest/back, which is another reason why those are the sites of acne flares.", "Mind that this trend is not ubiquitous. I've almost never had facial acne to any severe degree but massive amounts across the rest of my body.", "Just a thought, but acne is often caused by stress, and stress often shows up on other easily noticed places. Seeing a problem makes it easier to identify and try to remedy.\n\nEdit: why the down voting, I suffered from acne as a teen as well. I was just sharing my thoughts.😅", "To directly answer your question, the face and chest/back not only have the largest sebaceous glands of the body, they are also the most hormonally sensitive. This is why acne is more common in those areas. The sebaceous glands are what produce sebum and is where acne arises from.", "Did the Mayans have acne? ", "Skin that gets exposed to all temperatures and conditions tends to be thicker. ..but our face is very soft in comparison. It's full of sebacious glands and we experience a lot of dirt in the air, bad diet,hormonal imbalances due to diet and environmental conditions. I have scars from acne that NHS doctors forces me to have until i had tried all antibiotics twice causing stomach problems that ruined my life. Eventually they allowed me to see a dermatologist who gave me yet another cream called epiduo which i only had to put on a few times in tiny amounts and after a few weeks it disappeared FOR GOOD. I'm sharing that for any people searching for answers to acne as it's very upsetting.", "Tell that to my (painful) assne, I get huge subsurface pimples on my ass and inner/outer thighs, seriously painful, they last for days up to over a week and leave ugly dark purple scars. Makes me never want to approach a woman because I would never feel comfortable undressed in front of her.", "The face and scalp are made up of millions of hair follicles, of these only about one hundred thousand produce hair so what are we left with? Open pores, these pores produce oils that's your base right there. Genes, cleanliness, sebum, the list goes on and on and on. HORMONES are huge cause, so is inflammation, so is infection. There is no \"the reason you have acne is because x and y\"\n\nELI5 acne is a combination of things coming together and producing the broad term in question", "Since many answers are addressing causes:\n\nAnother somewhat common but less known cause of acne is food allergies. Some common food allergies are dairy, nuts, eggs, soy and wheat. \n\nMost solutions only address the skin, but for food allergy acne do not address the underlying cause. If you can eliminate a food allergy from your diet, you can eliminate the cause of the acne in these cases.", "I have a theory that washing your face and doing all the stuff that tv commercials want you to do and buy is what causes the irritation and pimples. Here me out, the more you wash your face the more your face wants to replace the oil you just wiped it clean of. The more oil it produces the more likely you are to get pimples. I know this is anecdotal but I've stopped washing my face and my face stopped breaking out. Maybe coincidence? I don't know?", "Don't a lot of people also have problems with acne on their ass? Thats not in the face/torso area.", "oil. \n\nonce i controlled oil production my acne went away.\n\noddly it wasn't about cleansing or benzyl peroxode or exfoliating. it was about moisturizing so your skin didn't have to create more oil to protect the surface.", "There are three types of sebaceous glands in the body.\nOne associated with thick hair on the scalp, these sebaceous glands have a thick duct (due to the size of the hair) and thus do not normally get blocked.\nSecond are plain sebaceous glands without any hair follicle in only a few sites of the body like around the nipples, axilla etc. These get active very rarely and hence do not cause acne.\nThe third types are the sebaceous glands on the face, chest and back, these are big glands associated with small hair follicles. We, call these glands sebaceous follicles, and due to the small size(thickness) of the hair, these glands tend to get blocked when stimulated with the androgenetic hormones(testosterone, 5DHT).\nThe moment these glands become hyperactive, the entire duct becomes sticky and combine that with the skin debris and external agesnt (pollution etc), a plug is formed in the follicle (comedone). \nThere is still continued activity of the gland, leading to increase size of the comedone eventually forming papules. \nNow P. acnes (which are normally present on the skin) sense this rich nutritious fatty area and invade them, forcing the body to react and cause pustules (pus is due to neutrophils).\nEventually when this pus filled pustule breaks, body tries to contain it further forming a big deep nodule. \n\n**TL;DR,** The follicles associated with the sebaceous glands on the face, chest and upper back are thin. Thus the duct and the opening of the sebaceous glands are thin as well, while the sebaceous glands are not. When they are stimulated by androgenic hormones during puberty, the ducts are more likely to get blocked and cause acne " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
1j1xoz
tracert
every time my internet craps out on me (i use time warner, so read that as "every 10 minutes or so") im usually asked to just "unplug it and plug it back in" which anyone whos used a computer for a normal amount of time will try anyways, but one time i was asked to CMD "ping _URL_0_" and "tracert _URL_0_" ping i understand. when my results came back as "minimum 1660 ms highest 16660ms average 1660ms" i knew something was wrong but the tracert results just lost me... and if some one can understand them and would like to see my results for it i can post those.... its bad...
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j1xoz/eli5_tracert/
{ "a_id": [ "cba9u04", "cba9vd4", "cba9woa", "cbabbtp" ], "score": [ 4, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "When you connect to another computer on the Internet, you don't have a cable going directly between the two computers. Instead, the messages are forwarded past multiple routers and gateways at different points.\n\nThe tracert (trace route) command lists all of the intermediate \"hops\", and finds the latency of each one. That way, you can try to identify whose fault a bad connection is.", "The TRACERT diagnostic utility determines the route taken to a destination by sending Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo packets with varying IP Time-To-Live (TTL) values to the destination. Each router along the path is required to decrement the TTL on a packet by at least 1 before forwarding it, so the TTL is effectively a hop count. When the TTL on a packet reaches 0, the router should send an ICMP Time Exceeded message back to the source computer. \n\nTRACERT determines the route by sending the first echo packet with a TTL of 1 and incrementing the TTL by 1 on each subsequent transmission until the target responds or the maximum TTL is reached. The route is determined by examining the ICMP Time Exceeded messages sent back by intermediate routers. Note that some routers silently drop packets with expired TTLs and are invisible to TRACERT. \n\nTRACERT prints out an ordered list of the routers in the path that returned the ICMP Time Exceeded message. If the -d switch is used (telling TRACERT not to perform a DNS lookup on each IP address), the IP address of the near- side interface of the routers is reported. \n\nIn the following example, the packet must travel through two routers (157.54.48.1 and 11.1.0.67) to get to host 11.1.0.1. In this example, the default gateway is 157.54.48.1 and the IP address of the router on the 11.1.0.0 network is at 11.1.0.67. \n\nC:\\ > tracert 11.1.0.1\n\nTracing route to 11.1.0.1 over a maximum of 30 hops\n\n1 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 157.54.48.1\n2 75 ms 83 ms 88 ms 11.1.0.67\n3 73 ms 79 ms 93 ms 11.1.0.1\n\nTrace complete.", "tracert is 'trace route'. It basically causes your computer to report every server it 'hops' to in order to get to _URL_0_. So say you couldn't get to _URL_0_, well that doesn't necessarily mean it's your network or google's network that's the problem; it could be some network in between that's the problem and that's what tracert helps you see. \n\nYou can watch your 'packets' leave your network, then hop to the next server, and the next, and the next, and then suddenly it stops at 204.70.207.121...well, whose network is that? You could run a 'whois 204.70.207.121' and see it belongs to [Saavis](_URL_1_). \n\nAnd then the next question you should ask is, why are you able to get there but no further?", "A ping is a simple question sent from one computer on the internet to another to let the first computer know that the second is available.\n\nIn a trace route a computer pings every router on the way to the destination and times how long each response takes. This is useful as it tells a technician if slowness is inside of their control or outside of their control.\n\nYour technician is hoping to find where along the path the slowness is occurs. If the slowness is in the google network then you won't see the problem on other websites. If the slowness is on the router which controls your block, then maybe someone in your neighborhood is clogging the connection. If the slowness is on the main switches, then there could be routing problems which can be fixed or traffic can be rerouted." ] }
[]
[ "www.google.com" ]
[ [], [], [ "google.com", "http://www.savvis.com/" ], [] ]
6wwrqx
do we posses technology to detect and stop a nuclear missile?? if yes how does it work? if no is there hypothetical solution that could be developed in the near future?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6wwrqx/eli5_do_we_posses_technology_to_detect_and_stop_a/
{ "a_id": [ "dmbe0s5", "dmbe6vp", "dmbg3hr", "dmbjlrl" ], "score": [ 5, 9, 4, 3 ], "text": [ "Detecting a ICBM is easy. Radars and satelites will see it thousands of miles away. As for stopping it is a bit more tricky. First of most, ICBM's got multiple warheads so one missile might turn into several smaller \"nuclear missiles\" as it closes in on its target. To stop this you would need to physicly shoot it down at a safe distance, imagine a speeding bullet comming at you and you need to stop it using another speeding bullet to hit it. Needless to say this is insanely difficult to do and even todays supercomputers and radar guided missiles can not guarante a 100% success rate.", "Detect an incoming missile? Absolutely. We've been able to detect ICBMs shortly after launch with over-the-horizon radar (now supplemented with satellite surveillance) since we began developing them in the 1950s.\n\nStop an incoming missile? Much harder, and whether we could do so today is an open question. There are missile defense systems deployed around the world that can launch a smaller missile to—theoretically—intercept and destroy an incoming warhead. The effectiveness of these systems is essentially unknown, at least to the public, since the weaknesses of such a system are a huge national security concern. The military command likely has a much more complete picture of what to expect.", "The brutally short answer is yes, but don't test it.\n\nThe best missile defense in the world is economics. The second best missile defense is mutually assured destruction. The third best is probably [the GMD.](_URL_0_)\n\nThis is a network of radars and missiles based mostly in Alaska and California. There's a fair amount known about it because it's not really possible to hide a missile defense test. The upper stage of the missile looks like an ugly ball of rocket motors which tries to get in the way of an incoming missile, and it hits most of the time against basic dummy targets without stealth, decoys, or the ability to dodge.\n\nYou don't want this system to ever be used because even a pissant nation can probably produce enough nukes to just overwhelm the system - there are only 36 GMD missiles available. The radars are also very likely vulnerable to EMP. Oh, and a human needs to make the decision and hit the button in literally a couple of minutes or it's too late. \n\nFortunately we have two better missile defense options which is why the world continues to exist.", "Just to add to this, at the distances as of late from launch to detonation a nuke can be there in 20 minutes or more and it takes about 4 to 6 minutes to detect a launch. \n\nOne thing you CAN rejoice in is ICBMs are known to fail, and NK isnt known for its quality control.\n\nHell back during the first years of Redstone and Atlas the success rate was 70 percent or less. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Midcourse_Defense" ], [] ]
jp9ot
if i get 60hz electricity from the wall, why don't my light bulbs flicker?
I'm assuming there's a rectifier somewhere, but where, from the power lines to my house to the light bulb itself, is it?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jp9ot/eli5_if_i_get_60hz_electricity_from_the_wall_why/
{ "a_id": [ "c2dzmky", "c2dzt5p", "c2dzmky", "c2dzt5p" ], "score": [ 3, 8, 3, 8 ], "text": [ "Your light bulbs do flicker. It's just that they flicker 60 times a second which is too fast for your eyes to notice.", "For incandescent light bulbs, there's no rectifier. They work just as well with either polarity. Incandescent bulbs have a considerable fade-on/fade-off time since it takes a while for the filament to get hot or cool. This is easily enough to keep the light on continuously even as the power to it blinks on and off and changes direction.\n\nFluorescent and LED bulbs are different and use various designs of rectifiers, low-pass (smoothing) filters, and higher-frequency oscillators. And as DazBlintze point out, the incoming 60Hz is already fast enough to look smooth in most cases. \n", "Your light bulbs do flicker. It's just that they flicker 60 times a second which is too fast for your eyes to notice.", "For incandescent light bulbs, there's no rectifier. They work just as well with either polarity. Incandescent bulbs have a considerable fade-on/fade-off time since it takes a while for the filament to get hot or cool. This is easily enough to keep the light on continuously even as the power to it blinks on and off and changes direction.\n\nFluorescent and LED bulbs are different and use various designs of rectifiers, low-pass (smoothing) filters, and higher-frequency oscillators. And as DazBlintze point out, the incoming 60Hz is already fast enough to look smooth in most cases. \n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [] ]
100b74
how would a fourth dimentional being perceive a three dimentional being?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/100b74/eli5_how_would_a_fourth_dimentional_being/
{ "a_id": [ "c699v2q", "c69b12r", "c69b7bj", "c69cr2a", "c69cwd6", "c69dxkl", "c69gbbh" ], "score": [ 3, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "probably analogously to how we might perceive of a two dimensional being. In this case we could look at something like a bacteria which lives on a flat table, which is pretty close to two dimensional. They can move around freely on the surface but the idea of anything below the table or \"above\" them would be strange.", "We have no idea, because we don't even know if a fourth dimension exists, let alone what constitutes it.\n\nHowever if you're the reading type, I'd reccomend Flatland. ", "Dont know if this helps, but here you go. Saw this in AP phycis my senior year. _URL_0_ \nActualy that might be the updated version, I like it better.", "I also recommend Slaughterhouse 5, by Kurt Vonnegut. The protagonist comes across a species that exists four-dimensionally.\n\nSo it goes.", "As a sequence of 3d shapes appearing, morphing and disappearing.", "Like being flat in that fourth dimension -- if the fourth dimension is time, then we're only able to see what's going right now, where a four-dimensional being could freely move backwards and forwards. You need to ignore the memory bit though -- pretend you're a (stupid) fish, so you have no idea of past or future.\n\nA really good way to toy with the concept is the [book Flatland](_URL_0_). Old, but easy and fun to read!", "Imagine drawing a two dimensional entity. As in - it has organs, it has sensory organs, digestive organs, circulatory organs and so on. How would you perceive that two dimensional entity? Like that. \n\nThe problem is as we are not four dimensional entities, we cannot conceive of a fourth spacial dimension other than mathematically. That makes figuring out how a fourth dimensional being would perceive us problematic.\n\nA four spacial entity would be able to clearly see our internal organs, circulatory systems, and so on. Dinner last night? They'd see it working through our systems. That crap in our teeth? They can see it, if they look for it.\n\nWe'd kinda be a little gross to them. Without trying really, really hard, they couldn't help but see every bit of our internal anatomy." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "http://www.youtube.com/watch?nomobile=1&v=zqeqW3g8N2Q" ], [], [], [ "http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/a/abbott/edwin/flatland/" ], [] ]
1ge31h
eli15: how did 'cum' rather than 'come' become the coloquial spelling for ejaculate? nsfw i guess?
See above
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ge31h/eli15_how_did_cum_rather_than_come_become_the/
{ "a_id": [ "cajcfz6", "cajdpr4", "cajfbl0", "cajfr1u", "cajgt94", "cajgtd3", "cajh3v5", "cajj3tp", "cajjf2a", "cajka41" ], "score": [ 268, 109, 34, 20, 63, 3, 13, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Someone spells it wrong then it catches on, like many changes in language.\n\n[Specific info on the etymology of 'cum'.](_URL_0_)", "It was derived from the name of the first director of the British Secret Intelligence Service, Captain Sir George Mansfield Smith-**Cum**ming after it was discovered that semen made a good invisible ink and he noted of his agents that \"Every man (is) his own stylo\". \n\n_URL_0_", "cum \nverb and noun, by 1973, apparently a variant of the sexual sense of come that originated in pornographic writing, perhaps first in the noun sense. This \"experience sexual orgasm\" slang meaning of come (perhaps originally come off) is attested from 1650, in \"Walking In A Meadowe Greene,\" in a folio of \"loose songs\" collected by Bishop Percy.\nThey lay soe close together, they made me much to wonder; \nI knew not which was wether, until I saw her under. \nThen off he came, and blusht for shame soe soon that he had endit; \nYet still she lies, and to him cryes, \"one more and none can mend it.\"\nAs a noun meaning \"semen or other product of orgasm\" it is on record from the 1920s. The sexual cum seems to have no connection with Latin cum, the preposition meaning \"with, together with,\" which is occasionally used in English in local names of combined parishes or benifices (e.g. Chorlton-cum-Hardy), in popular Latin phrases (e.g. cum laude), or as a combining word to indicate a dual nature or function (e.g. slumber party-cum-bloodbath).\n\n_URL_0_", "At the high school where I work, students' cumulative files are labeled with the shortened CUM files. It would seem to me CML would do the job given the setting.", " You don't need to know. You're 5.\n", "I remember seeing it spelled either way in the '70s and '80s, but more recently the currently preferred spelling became more commonplace. What? I read everything as a kid...", "Oh! You mean cumming [like](_URL_0_)", "Because it's the phonetic spelling of come along with people wanting to make a distinct word. ", "No one should be explaining this to a five year old.", "I get annoyed when people spell it \"come\" but I don't know if I should or not " ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://etymonline.com/?term=cum" ], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansfield_Smith-Cumming#cite_note-2" ], [ "http://etymonline.com/?term=cum" ], [], [], [], [ "http://i.imgur.com/0mEQ5VC.gif" ], [], [], [] ]
2mib8y
the american conceptualization of freedom
Being from Europe, I've felt free all my life, yet I am fully aware that I, and everyone else, have given up the freedom to do a few things for a more secure and stable society. On the internet, however, I am systematically bombed with American freedom, and I can't quite understand how you view it. I feel it is all about freedom of choice, but I am not sure. I was hoping some local would be able to explain it to me like I was some foreign five years old.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mib8y/eli5_the_american_conceptualization_of_freedom/
{ "a_id": [ "cm4hnpz", "cm4i6oz", "cm4ier7" ], "score": [ 2, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "freedom means being able to do what you want with the least amount of restriction. The least amount of laws needed to maintain a coherent society is the american ideal.\n\nthe hangup europeans can't seem to understand is freedom is a right that is separate from and does not guarantee other rights. For instance the ability to walk down the street without being randomly attacked is a right, but it is not freedom. It in fact impinges on freedom to some extent. (people are no longer free to randomly attack people) Too much freedom is obviously a bad thing. \n\nabsolute freedom would be total anarchy.", "Freedom is important to us for it's own sake. It's not because it leads to X. To suffer free is more desirable than to be taken cared for with added restrictions. If it comes between material comfort, safety, health or freedom the last is most important. Compare the French \"liberty, fraternity, equality\" with the more simple \"give me liberty or give me death\". It's basically freedom from organized intrusion into one's life. \n\nSo even if I have less choices de facto due to my socioeconomic position , more importantly there are less involuntary obligations and associations. It's why Americans love charity but in general hate the idea of a welfare state. Anything besides which would create a complete break down in civilization that infringes on our negative rights makes us very upset.", "Freedom means different things to different Americans (as I am sure is the case in Europe, and everywhere else). I consider freedom to be \"the right to be let alone\", and generally subscribe to the Libertarian view. I see that as meaning that I don't have a responsibility toward the day-to-day well being of my countrymen, and cooperation should be restricted toward specific and limited purposes (I.e., to protect ourselves from territorial infringement). \n\nDemocrats tend to look at freedom (as I understand it) as being free from want, that there is some human right to basic necessities (which is a pretty squishy idea in the first place), and that where people lack those necessities, society should provide them, by taking from those who have more than they \"need\" to be given to those who don't.\n\nRepublicans lie about wanting to be let alone (pretend to be Libertarians), while in practice supporting big government like Democrats, and throwing on top of that an authoritarian social order based loosely on fundamentalist Christian beliefs (that they sort of make up based on what is, and is not, offensive to their own sensibilities).\n\nRepublicans live in the South and Midwest, Libertarians in the West (not counting Oregon and California), and Democrats live in the Northeast and California and Oregon (maybe Washington). Basically, the closer one is to a major population center, the more they lean toward Liberalism (Democrats). \n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
5pk58y
why football leagues sell players as opposed to trading players like in american football.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pk58y/eli5_why_football_leagues_sell_players_as_opposed/
{ "a_id": [ "dcrr2iz", "dcrwp58" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "In American professional sports leagues, they operate under a closed system with the franchises cooperating financially to grow revenues for the league. In this system every franchise is roughly on the same playing field, and selling players for cash is discouraged or outright banned. In European Football, the clubs are independent entities that don't cooperate with one another financially. It's a free for all with mega clubs and tiny clubs who are in no way, shape, or form comparable. In this system the smaller club benefits massively by selling star players to larger clubs. It can provide a major influx of cash that can allow them to grow their operations. ", "Trades wouldn't make sense for most football transactions since they are in different leagues on totally different tiers. A superstar club like Real Madrid might buy some rising star from a random Mexican team. It makes more sense to take the transfer cash and use it how you see fit." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
5y4jrr
differences between country and state?
Never really understood in history class before.
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5y4jrr/eli5_differences_between_country_and_state/
{ "a_id": [ "den4618" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "A country is defined geographically and/or culturally. A state is defined by its government.\n\nEngland, Scotland, and Wales are each a country, and all are part of the United Kingdom, which is a state." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
2vggcl
why do some (usually low paying) jobs not accept you because you're overqualified? why can't i make burgers if i have a phd?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vggcl/eli5_why_do_some_usually_low_paying_jobs_not/
{ "a_id": [ "cohe3co", "cohe3yj", "cohe5ia", "cohe7g1", "cohe7i2", "cohea3b", "coheg2m", "cohgms3", "cohgz01", "cohiofo", "cohje0h", "cohjk8s", "cohjy9t", "cohjz0m", "cohk5eo", "cohkfb3", "cohkgwg", "cohkk9s", "cohl8d7", "cohla95", "cohlb9u", "cohlfzy", "cohlu4n", "cohmlou", "cohmwtz", "cohmzq0", "cohnb1f", "cohnf80", "cohnnxs", "cohnocy", "coho0ji", "cohobcp", "cohpcyh", "cohpwbq", "cohq2ly", "cohrcxs", "cohs2ll", "cohsinn", "coht29v", "coht98e", "cohuvc3", "cohv60h", "cohvawy", "cohvcdk", "cohvi1o", "cohvnux", "cohvqkd", "cohvs4j", "cohw0si", "cohw4sx", "cohw59k", "cohwbbn", "cohwbvt", "cohwdx1", "cohwqno", "cohwwa3", "cohx1f7", "cohx8y2", "cohxaxl", "cohxhvk", "cohxlup", "cohxuak", "cohxw1o", "cohxwmo", "cohxxmk", "cohxyp6", "cohy6qq", "cohyd0n", "cohydaz", "cohydsb", "cohyfcn", "cohyjbg", "cohykkp", "cohynbv", "cohyovh", "cohyqb5", "cohyyqw", "cohz0ut", "cohziv4", "cohzndg", "cohznuu", "cohzpfl", "cohzubt", "cohzubx", "coi04n7", "coi0afi", "coi0ass", "coi0lnh", "coi0w1t", "coi0zy7", "coi166i", "coi17l4", "coi18jc", "coi1gfe", "coi1gip", "coi1hvb", "coi2j6m", "coi2jaf", "coi2mr1", "coi2sxe", "coi36tj", "coi3i1z", "coi3nzh", "coi3sms", "coi3ucc", "coi417e", "coi42ih", "coi4305", "coi45ad", "coi4fuj", "coi4fx4", "coi4iwc", "coi4lgm", "coi4mvb", "coi4npk", "coi4t6a", "coi4t7f", "coi4xng", "coi565i", "coi5o04", "coi5swv", "coi5vx5", "coi61rg", "coi6k52", "coi6w63", "coi7uzt", "coi8bbv", "coi8e8s", "coi8m54", "coiac2o", "coib1fg", "coidehr", "coig0bd", "coijvgx", "coinnzb", "coio0hz" ], "score": [ 3335, 117, 957, 194, 298, 12, 8, 2, 18, 3, 23, 411, 3, 20, 25, 4, 7, 12, 6, 79, 4, 7, 84, 2, 16, 13, 3, 58, 3, 3, 2, 7, 32, 2, 18, 33, 2, 2, 8, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 50, 3, 2, 2, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 54, 2, 4, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 16, 10, 2, 5, 3, 2, 3, 2, 2, 7, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 7, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 7, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 4, 2, 4, 18, 2, 2, 2, 4, 2, 2, 2, 8, 2, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Usually because the employer is worried that applicants who are overqualified will high-tail it out of there as soon as they can find any better job. \n\nEdit: This can work both ways, especially in a poor economy. In the last few years, a lot of jobs that shouldn't require a college degree have been demanding them, just because the employer knows the person will probably be stuck there a while, and they'll benefit from having an (arguably) smarter employee real cheap. ", "They fear that you will be bored with your work and also keep looking for a better job, so only be there a short time.", "1) they are afraid that you would be less motivated working a job that is obviously beneath you.\n\n2) you would probably leave for a better paying job as soon as you find one, and they do not want to waste the money training you only to having to train someone else two months down the line.\n\n3) the fact that you cannot find employment that befits your qualification would make managers question your moral character (i.e. what non-professional failing caused you to fall *this* far?).", "People who are highly qualified tend to know their rights better, so they can be more trouble for bosses who like to skirt the rules.", "They also fear that you will have some self respect and not be quite the level of desperate that will let them treat you like a disposable peasant", "Employers are looking to invest into an employee when they are hired. For overqualified candidates, there is a high likelihood that the candidate will leave the low paying job once they find a job more suited to their skill set. Employers are also unwilling or unable to pay the overqualified candidate a wage that's suitable for the candidate.\n\nThat being said, a person with a PHD can flip burgers, if someone's willing to hire them to do so.", "Obviously it depends on the job in question, but at most workplaces, it costs thousands of dollars to get a new hire set up and trained. If the hiring manager thinks that you're going to jump ship after a few months, why waste the time and money to train you?", "In less extreme examples of over-qualification, the employer may be concerned with the negotiating power that comes with being more highly qualified. ", "Because you are a threat to the hiring managers job and he/she is worried about being upstaged by someone smarter and w. more experience.", "And over qualified employee is less likely to stick around for the long haul. Time and money invested in training goes to waste and then you have to hire & train someone else. More experience and abilities means and over qualified employee will either expect more raises or become disgruntled because they feel they should learn more. ", "One reason is probably that you are less easier to intimidate and more likely to know your legal rights when it comes to wages & work rules. \n\nFor those saying \"because you'll soon leave\" - big fast food franchises, ESPECIALLY McDONALDS, actually count on attrition because of tax incentives. ", "This was ten years ago...\n\nI temporarily located to Lafayette, LA, though I was open to staying long-term if the right opportunity came about. At that point, I already had a college degree, and had completed 2/3 of a Master's Degree. Once there, I started applying for any available job fitting my experience and education, but *no one* would give me an interview, or an explanation as to why I wasn't getting one. \n\nAfter two weeks or so, with rent on my mind, I started looking for part-time work. I applied at eight places, and *one* called me back--a Godiva chocolate store. I interviewed, and was hired.\n\nAfter getting the job, I relayed my job-seeking odyssey to my new manager. She laughed and said \"Of course! You're a Yankee academic!\" Apparently, everyone distrusted me because of my education and origin--the assumption being that I wouldn't work hard. She also told me the only reason she gave me a second call was because she herself was not a native Cajun, and knew very well that no one else would give me a chance.\n\nIn the seven weeks I slung overpriced (but amazing) chocolate products, I had several locals accuse me of carpetbagging my way into someone else's good-paying job.\n\nI made minimum wage.", "Ego. The boss doesn't like knowing he's dumber than you, and doesn't want to be corrected when he makes mistakes. Dumb people will call the IT guy a know-it-all, even though that's his job, to know more about computers than you.\n\nAll the other answers here are wrong. It costs nothing to hire a new employee for low paying jobs.", "For one, it doesn't take long to figure out the stress from making money is way better than the stress created from having no money. As a result they know you will leave. Corporate employers only want some one barely intelligent enough to do the job. \n\nFor two, an intelligent person pays attention to what is going on and how to correct it. This very much includes mistreatment from management. You are far more likely to communicate to hr, and do so successfully. \n\nIntelligent workers in low paying entry level jobs are basically saboteurs laying in wait. The regular tactics of steam rolling, bullying, and veiled threats that pervade that level of management won't work. So the manager has to take the chance of you actually wanting to do the job, but they know so much bs comes with the job that you won't want to do it for long. So you hire a retard that's desperate that will be there for years. ", "I think there's two reasons.\n\n1: The person hiring is threatened by someone more qualified than them.\n\n2: They have a lot of other options and they are trying to find someone that will be happy working for a specific wage for a long period of time, and they feel you will demand more compensation and leave forcing them to rehire. \n\n2 can sometimes be used to rationalize 1. ", "I think the ego factor is predominant.\n\nEmployers don't want to hire someone smarter than them. ", "As a chef, i wouldn't hire professional students as you tend to have a stereotype of being highly entitled, slow and no work ethic for a high paced job. Though this is for an actual restaurant not a \"burger flipper\".\n\n\n", "I actually just had this happen to me. I hired a girl that had moved from Alberta to come home because of some family stuff. Our province isn't exactly job rich, and she had a lot of trouble getting work. I interviewed her for an entry position, mostly because I had plans to promote her and put her in a position to take a job like mine. \nI told her she was overqualified, and that was a concern for me, but I thought she had a shot at a career with us, but it would take a little time. She seemed into it, and promised she would do the time. \nFast forward 3 weeks, and she had a family emergency. So I helped her out; moved shifts and whatever I had to do. Then she had surgery (this one I can 100% verify) and some after care issues, so I helped her with that. \nLast week, she texts me to say that she got a job doing recruitment for a local company and her contract starts the next day. She wants to stay to do weekends, but that's not what I hired her for. No idea how long that will last. \nSo, she kinda ruined it for the next person that is desperate for a job but woefully over qualified. I'll have to really look at that next time. I could always insist on a 6 month contract, but I don't want to keep anyone back from bettering their situation. \nI wish she had given me at least the last 3 days of the week as notice; could have made arrangements for the next week. ", "1) Some managers (not all) can feel threatened by a prospective employee who is more qualified than them and will be unwilling to give them an interview.\n\n2) A company's goal when hiring a new employee is to have a good \"turnover\" with that employee. This means using the least amount of training resources in order to have the employee to start making money in the least amount of time possible.\n\nSo for example if employee A has been at the company for 3 years, and is very experienced at his job as a warehouse worker, and can package and ship 80 products per hour, compared to employee B who is on his first day at the company who has to be supervised (the person who is supervising is not putting out their usual workload) can only package and ship 10 products an hour. Which do you think is more valuable to the company?\n\n3) Low paying jobs USUALLY do not require much intelligence in order to be successful (not to be disrespectful for people in these positions). A waiter for example does not need a degree, or any formal education. All they need is good customer ineraction skills, puncuality, ability to work within a team and to time constraints (people get pissed when their meal is delayed) and the ability to carry plates. \n\n4) Time at the company. If someone with a degree applies for a minimum wage position its fairly safe to assume that is not what they are likely to do for the rest of their life. If they only last 6 months before they find a better oppurtunity, that means the company will then need to hire, and train a new employee which costs the company time and money.", "There are a lot of good answers here, but this is something it doesn't look like anyone's mentioned: you are more expensive to hire for certain jobs, particularly in the public sector. For example, if you're a high school teacher, most places have a scale that determines your pay based on experience and education. If you have a PhD, you're at the top of that scale and thus more expensive to hire than someone with just a Bachelors. ", "Recruiter here. That PhD will get board as hell and when job satisfaction suffers, a decrease in job performance is more often than not going to follow.\n\nOf course this is in very general terms.", "most bosses and managers don't want to hire someone smarter than they are..they know that they have reached their pinnacle of their work career, abusing minimum wage employees.. not to mention the threat of you taking their job.", "Personal anecdote here: I have a Master's degree and I deliver pizza. \n\nObviously, I'm still looking for a job in my field but until I have money to move from where I am to a more populated area with more job opportunities, I needed a job to make ends meet. I was up front with my employer when they hired me, but at that point they were basically desperate so they took me on.\n\nWhat it comes down to, is they wasted *two weeks* training me to *deliver pizza* which is all a 'sunk cost' into an employee that is most definitely going to leave or kill themself before they commit to a lifetime of delivering pizza. When I leave, they will have to replace me and spend *more* money training that employee as my replacement. Not to mention, since I am already planning on leaving I give literally zero fucks. \n\nNot that I don't do a good job, because I fulfill every requirement/suggestion that they want with a sunny smile on my face, but I also have no committment to the company or their cause or improving the store in even minute ways. If shit goes tits up, I'm not going to be the one to handle it because I don't have any emotional investment in their success. Unlike, say, a high school graduate who wants to work there for a year and then apply for a management position and then eventually transfer to corporate (a legitimate career track, btw, I'm not knocking it). *That* type of person is the one they want because the become what the industry calls 'lifers' where they are loyal to the company and see the company succeeding as an extension of themselves. When the company succeeds, so do they. I am removed enough to admit that whether or not the company succeeds is irrevelevant to me, as long as my paycheck allows me to keep looking for a 'real' job. ", "Job security, Most people associate degrees with intelligence. If they believe you have the potential to move up through the ranks they could possibly lose their job to you.", "My biggest worry is a possible demoralized attitude. I personally, wouldn't want to work a minimum wage job after just working so hard to get a PhD. Most applicants I've interviewed that have anything beyond a bachelors go into the job thinking it's so easy, then they end up fucking up more than anyone on staff because they just assume they're omniscient.\n\nPlus, they will not make enough at my store to pay off grad school, and sorry, but part time is 15-25/hrs a week and we don't budget part timers for more than that. \n\nSource: currently dealing with this shit right now.", "I work in a mid-low level kitchen and my manager only hires people with less than 2 years kitchen experience and who are under 30 years old. People who are over qualified (5+ years of experience, cooking school, etc.) tend not to listen that well to their supervisors who are younger and less experienced, they are bitter about the fact that they are technically more skilled yet are stuck working the same job or under someone they deem to be less qualified. \n\nThey may be very good but if you only have so much to offer an employee then you have to make sure you aren't hiring people who want more than you have to offer. They end up becoming wannabe tyrants and spread negativity throughout the business when they inevitably become unhappy with working conditions, compensation and over all lack of respect they feel they deserve.\n\nEdit: I think it goes without saying that this is a problem because it costs a lot of time and money to train someone and having to get rid of them is a waste of a pretty big investment. It's also possible that in some cases the hiring manager doesn't want to be shown up by someone he himself brings into the business and so only hires people less qualified than him. \n\n", "Just so I'm clear - Employers won't hire the overqualified because they'll bolt and hiring is expensive. But they also don't want to train people on the job, want people to hit the ground running, and have stringent and specific experience demands that you often need to meet. So know everything you need to know beforehand, but don't know too much where you might be a threat to leave so they can continue paying peanuts. Job hunting blows.", "If you aren't smart enough to remove your PHD from a Subway application then you don't have enough common sense for the job", "I hire lot of contractors for my company. Technical employees but not FTE to do project work in support of my full time guys. I always have to balance the whole need a job vs want a job. I mainly hire fresh Ga Tech grads bc they have the smarts to do the job but I can train them up and have them for at least a year. \n\nJust 2 weeks ago I had a guy give 8hr notice. He got a new job on a Thur night but he had to be in the office Monday. I got to move everything around that Friday... Which wasn't fun. He had been laid off and was a steal but he was in and out quickly. I can understand why someone wouldn't hire an over qualified employee. ", "They're afraid that you'll just be using the job as a short-term way to get by until you get a better job somewhere else. Its like an unattractive person not wanting to date someone who is \"out of their league\" because they're scared the person has too many options and will leave the first chance they get.", "A guy with a phd will bolt from mcdonalds when he gets a good job offer. A 21 year old art student will likely not have many oppurtunities to get out so they will be a more long term employee. Hiring and training cost money, why hire someone who has a much higher probability of quitting when u can get someone who will likely stay for a couple years.", "IT Hiring manager here. To get a job any my company requires a lot of effort and training due to the fact that all of our systems are proprietary. It will be six months before that person is up to speed. \n\nYou want to provide a growth path for that person so that they do not get bored and move on to something else. A lot of people apply to these positions just because they need work. When I look at a candidate I have a 5 year rule. Will that person be happy in this department for at least 5 years?", "Because if I'm a manager at McDonald's and you have a PhD, you're probably gonna put my job at risk. Don't need no super star stealing my job.", "Management must be authoritative and followed without question. Having an employee who may question an unwise decision or make a more highly developed observation can cause disruption to the flow of the business. Employees can begin to question their managers judgement, which can cause the manager to be insecure and/or the employees to feel they need to find a company with better leadership. (The manager needs to be the biggest fish in a small pond).\n\nAlso, many companies take advantage of compromising employees to increase their profit margins. Want people to work overtime without pay or question? Don't hire someone with vast knowledge of labour laws or civil rights.", "I had this happen to me right out of high school. I was looking for some shit job, just to start working and making some $$. Two of my cousins were working as dishwashers at one of the nearby hospital kitchens and informed me they were hiring. I landed an interview and at the end of it, they lady told me I was overqualified for the job. My high school dimploma was what did it for me. She said it would cause tension with the other workers and raise suspicions that I might be getting paid more.", "Over the years i've realized this happens more often then not because the boss doesn't want someone smarter then they are working under them.", "Companies don't like having to train people every few weeks. They want people who they train once, and they will start there for years.\n\nIf you have a degree, you will do the work, but you will continuously be looking for another job.\n\nAlso, the work is boring. The more educated the are, the more bored you will be.\n\nAlso they might want you to work long hours or do some shitty work. Someone who has an out, such as the possibility of a higher paying job will not take as much shit.", "Being over qualified usually means you think outside of the box better then most. Ex: production work. You could have uneducated bob do what he's told without question or have over educated Jim do the job and not do what he's told because he thinks he knows a better way( which may be the case, but thats not why he was hired)", "People will say that it's because you'll find another job soon. But that's pretty bogus because all of those places have such insane turnover that they expect most people to leave after 6-12 months anyway.\n\nThe reasons have mostly to do with the fact that management thinks that you'll be difficult to control and perhaps will see an educated worker as competition for their job. Many fields that require extensive education have rules in place so that the people in management are at least as educated as their reports and it's for this exact reason. \n\nAnybody who's lead a team of engineers can attest to the difficulties of getting people with more education than you to do what you ask of them.", "A point people don't seem to be touching is because it makes you a threat.\n\nPeople at McDonalds or whatever are typically looking to fill a slot. They want you for a specific task, they're not usually looking for someone who wants to advance, but sometimes they are. The person hiring you probably started out where you were at some point even if it was for a different company and a lot of them aren't too keen on the idea of someone who is potentially more qualified to do their job than they are taking a position where they could eventually usurp them since people with high qualifications tend to advance in their careers.", "I've been applying for various jobs for months, I'm starting to feel like I *do* need a PhD to flip burgers", "A few reasons, mostly because they want to save those jobs for people who have less experience. You know how a lot of people say their first job was at a place like this? That's why.", "Not necessarily true with fast food places, but many \"large\" corporations that refuse to hire because you are \"overqualified\" do so out of the fear that you won't stay with that department. Whether it is because once in the company you will move up to a higher position in the company in an area your hiring manager might not control, or you might leave. It is smarter to hire someone that will stay in that position for a long period of time.", "Its simple really, turn over costs money. Hiring someone that is just going to keep looking for a different job or get bored and start looking again means your going to have to start the recruiting and training process all over again. All draining the company of money", "Because people who have a phD and make burgers, are usually depressed and lonely or sad, and no one wants that in a burger.", "1. You will quit soon after and that will cost the company money.\n2. You are more qualified than the person you are being intervieiwed by.\n\nTypically the first one due to boredom.\n\nSource: Web developer that has interviewed quite a few people. No. 1 happened more than I care to admit.", "You will get bored and approach the job differently that his minimum wage offer needs you to approach it.", "I worked as a cook while making my way through engineering, but I didn't talk about it much. Just tried to be one of the guys. Another guy joined, who was doing his masters philosophy, and made sure everyone knew it. He corrected the spelling and grammar of all the signs in the kitchen on his first day. He was lazy and bitter and dragged morale down until he quit a few weeks later.\n\nI guess that sort of thing is what they are afraid of. You can be a graduate long before being mature enough to evaluate if you can really see something through. ", "You'll get bored, then quit, then they'll have to find someone else.\n\nInterestingly though, Einstein worked for the postal service to give him a mundane menial task that would allow him to think all day. It was through this he came up with the basis for General and Special Relativity.", "Employers want an employee that is dependent on what the employer has to offer.\n\nExample \n\nIn a bad economy, an employer does not necessarily mind hiring \"overqualified\" people. The employer assumes that it is difficult to find work for anyone. The employer could also assume that they are getting the best bang for their buck. Lastly they could assume that an \"overqualified\" person has incurred large amounts of debt, and are desperate for work.\n\nIn a good economy, hiring an \"overqualified\" person scares an employer because they could assume that the employee will flee the second the opportunity arises. They could also assume that an \"overqualified\" person would demand too much in pay.\n", "This is an over-generalization. If that was really the case, don't put all of your education on your resume after being told that once. Everyone acts like everyone that has an advanced degree has lost all ability to do manual labor.\n\nAs a hiring manager, I'll gladly take a harder/more competent worker for a brief period of time over a shitty worker that won't ever leave. I've never told anyone they were too qualified and denied them a job. I've told people they'd be better suited in another position but never told them to go kick bricks without seriously considering the potential candidate.", "In education, principals of poorer schools tend to not hire teachers with master's degrees because they're required to pay teachers with higher degrees more money. So it ends up being a cycle of worse schools only hiring average teachers and well-qualified teachers not being able to find work.", "As a short-order restaurant manager, I hired a few over qualified cooks. Red seals, the whole deal.\n\nGOD what a mistake.\n\nThe shop I ran was fish and chips, so it's pretty much the same thing, every day, for 8 hours. Basic stuff, but easy.\n\nEvery time I had a red seal chef in there, they would fuck up the prep by doing it their own way instead of how we needed it done and whine about not being able to use their creativity to their full potential. I get it, they're talented, but holy christ no one came to us for our fillet Mignon. \n\nTLDR: They're terrible.", "If you don't know the answer to this... You're going to be a fast food worker", "One of the reasons is management. If you've got a PhD, you're likely gonna be quite a bit more intelligent then the manger/supervisor. The employee would have a difficult time conforming to a less intelligent authoritative figure. ", "If your PhD is in philosophy you can probably get a job at macdonalds. ", "There are several reasons an overqualified applicant is a much bigger red flag than an under qualified: \n1. By far the biggest one, why are you applying for this position ? If you are so qualified and if you're any good, you should be able to find a position of your liking. \n2. How will you stay motivated in this position ? You are a PhD, why would you enjoy flipping burgers and why would you take shit from a high school graduate\n3. You'll think you know better than everybody else and they've really been doing it wrong all these years. \n\n", "If you are overqualified for the job, odds are that't you'll quit and leave for a better paid job at the first opportunity. The employer will thus have wasted a lot of time and energy training and preparing you for a position which you will only hold for a limited period. From an employers perspective it is thus far more desirable to hire a person with less qualifications, who is less likely to get a new and better paid job any time soon. It's a simple business decision, pure and simple.", "When I was 19, I was a manager at a CompUSA. This really nice older guy came in looking for a job because he was really into electronics. The problem was that he was retired from some law profession and was looking to just keep busy. I asked him why he wanted to work here and take orders from a 19yo with so much life experience. He said he just wanted less responsibility and to work around technology. I, being a 19yo insecure little shit, never called him back and never hired him because I figured he wouldn't listen to me. It was all my insecurity and life inexperience that cost him that job. I've felt really bad about that for the last 17 years and wished that I'd have given him a chance. I'm sure he had a lot to offer. TL;DR: I didn't hire an older overqualified guy out of my own insecurity. I was a dick.", "Simply put, the negative impacts will likely outweigh the positive ones. \n\nAt the end of the day, your PhD doesn't major you a better burger flipper than the 16 yr old kid from down the block. Also that kid isn't going to feel under utilized, over worked, or generally dissatisfied as quickly. They won't quit and leave you having to pay to find and train a replacement two weeks in, or hurt morale by complaining to their peers or making them feel inadequate.\n\nI'm sure there are other impacts but Im drunk and on my cell phone and I talked about hamburgers earlier and now I'm hungry. ", "Don't worry. If you have to ask that question, you are NOT overqualified.", "*This type of person do not want to compromise with their work so they don't accept lower profile work.\n*Generally this type of employee find good job in some time and leave the dumb job.\n*Employers thinks that \"Employee want know the business strategy of burger store otherwise why he/she applied for a dumb job ?\"\n*Many times employees applied for dumb jobs for temporrary work because of their personal purpose like money,stand on his own,do real work,can not find perfact job,wanna learn business...etc. So they leave the job in short time.", "You will educate your coworkers. They need them stupid...", "Well these may be the reasons according to me: \n1) Chances of them leaving for better jobs are much higher resulting in high employee turnover, which is not good.\n2) And over qualified people may have problem adjusting to the other group members ( which may be due to superiority complex) (Though i personally believe it depends on person to person) \n3) Well sometimes having PhD in great science, does not necessary mean the one is good at burger making or any other low paying works. your hands might be too tender and not used to such physical work but smart enough for vigorously punching the well analysed data . ( I am not great at making burgers, but i dont have a PhD either :P) ", "They know you have zero intention of sticking around. They already have trouble keeping long-term employees.", "At my last job they didn't hire overqualified people because management feared that the applicant would ask for more advancement opportunities. This would cause all parties to be unsatisfied and management would have to shell out more to keep them in the end. ", "No one says you have to put your PHD on your resume.", "Essentially, the employer would be worried that the person would bail once they realize that the job is mediocre for someone who is as 'smart' as they are. Also, someone who has a Masters degree for example who takes a subordinate job would feel as if they don't belong there and try to leave or grow an ego and stop taking orders. Apparently, it costs more to hire a person than to keep an existing employee. ", "Because they're afraid you'd know better than them and or meaning you'd have some self esteem resulting in you questioning their authority causing disruptions in the workplace.", "Someone smart enough to have a PhD wouldn't tell their prospective employer that they have a PhD unless they needed to.\n\nEmployers worry about the high turnover rate of over qualified people.", "Lots of people are talking about turnover costs. Maybe you'll leave quickly if you find a better offer elsewhere, and if they had someone less qualified they wouldn't have to worry about this as much.\n\nBut I think another aspect that I haven't seen many people discuss is the idea that an overqualified person may be tougher to manage. Lots of low paying jobs are content with people who can say yes and follow instruction without providing outside input (creative thinking may even be considered detrimental). There might be a fear that an overqualified person would be more apt to chime in with ideas and be less focused on taking direction and following orders. ", "If you're genuinely intelligent then you're more likely to call out the management on their shit and challenge them when they engage in bullying or exploitative behaviour.", "Making burgers does no require a PhD. It's like wearing sunglass at night.", "Because unless that PhD is in burger flipping you'll still be looking for a better job in a different field. They could hire you for a month and then be in the same position they were in before hiring you or they could hire a high school drop out that will be there for a couple of years. ", "Many jobs have a pay scale.\n\nThe more schooling you have, then the more they have to pay you.\n\nTherefore, there is no incentive to employ you if your schooling is not required for a remedial job (aka: flipping burgers). \n\n", "I had to tell someone just today that they're over qualified. Just don't need short termers", "Because they need low skilled workers that don't speak up. ", "I met someone who told me they were once denied for a job and then told that the company doesn't hire overqualified people out of the fear they'll \"Get done too fast and then think of ways to steal money\"", "Probably because you won't want to stay there long, and will leave when a better job comes along.\n\nHowever, if you really wanted to work for Burger King, I'm sure you could just take your PhD off your CV!", "Because they know you'll leave for better things.\n\n\nHiring a dead shit means less training for them because they stay for years.", "You can, it's just that they don't want to spend time and money training you, just for you to fuck off after summer, or when you find a better job. They'd prefer to hire some idiot who will never leave or complain or cause a fuss.", "Because the managers doing the hiring are afraid you will take there job.", "In most low-skilled jobs compliance is valued over initiative. So the guy just doing what he's told is liked better than the one constantly rocking the boat by trying to make suggestions on how to do things better. Also supervisors will fell threatened by someone who is obviously smarter than themselves, which will lead to tension.", "Because the owners dont want to employ anyone smarter than themself", "Because they know you'll be bored and leave quickly, wasting your training.\n\nIn fact I have been rejected for several jobs for exactly this reason. The interviewer actually told me I was the best qualified interviewee ... and asked me why I was wasting my time applying for it.", "Haven't read any other response with this in it, but it's my two cents.\n\nIn construction, in my field, it's common that over qualified personnel are not often considered for positions due to their bosses being job scared. If you have a degree in ca construction related field, you already will understand scheduling, ordering, man hour compensation, bidding, etc. Your boss, usually, only has field experience. \n\nField experience goes a long way, but at the end of the day, end users, especially in industrial construction, are looking for educated people to lead meetings and schedule work.", "If it's a union company they could be afraid that you'll be what most places call an exceptional employee. Working harder than your coworkers at a union company makes them look bad in comparison, and will likely result in your car being keyed and the tires slashed. As far as the managers are concerned, you're just creating drama by being there.", "There was a soviet joke that, I think, is relevant to you question:\nWhy do the policemen always walk around by three?\nOne of them can read, the other write, and the third one is there to keep an eye on the dangerous intelectuals.", "This is easy really. They are afraid the one with the higher education will skip out at the first opportunity at a better job. Either that or the higher ups who barely have a high school degrees, or at most an associates degree, are afraid you will take their job.\n\nShort simple and right to the point.", "It's easy, the hiring process is a big expense and for an overqualified individual to work there they will assume they will be getting a better job soon in which would force them back into the expensive hiring process. It's all about limiting turnover.", "Because you're likely to going to leave them within a year, whereas someone without qualifications is likely to last longer.\n\nAn \"educated\" person is likely to be more proactive in complaining against injustices, same goes with point A, if you're qualified you can go \"Fuck you I quit\" and have a better chance of getting another job. Whereas the guy with no qualifications has to take whatever is thrown at him", "Training costs money.\n\nTraining someone who will leave shortly is less cost effective than training someone who will stay longer.\n\nOverqualified means you have options.", "I'm going to be getting a master's degree in science this spring. My experience so far has shown me that the life of a scientist is incredibly stressful, and probably not something I ever want to do for a career. There isn't anything in particular I'd rather be doing, but how does one tactfully convince an employer, \"Don't worry about the degree, I'm not interested in seeking work in that field?\"", "Bc you will leave them as the inbetween when a better job comes by and they aren't about paying for raining new staff every few weeks.", "I have been turned down from a lot of job opportunities for this reason. They don't want to pay for your training when you could be gone within the month to a better job you are qualified for. ", "They don't bring the 5 years of working experience needed to make burgers.", "One thing to remember is that the other candidates may just be more qualified than you: if you have a PhD and they have 10 years of burger experience, who would you hire?\n\nYou're underqualified, not overqualified.", "Three reasons:\n\n* It takes the business time and money to train someone, and they fear overqualified people will take the next higher paying job that comes along and leave.\n* Really smart people often find repetitive jobs boring, which can lead to a number of problems. They can get angry at themselves that they are doing such a \"menial\" job, and become unpleasant. They can start to find ways to \"improve\" their job, often in ways not welcomed by management.\n* If the hiring manager perceives you as smarter/better than they are, the overqualified person is a threat. Wouldn't the bosses further up the line rather have the PhD as the manager, rather than the burger flipper?", "Same reason they don't want smart people being cops. They need people to follow orders and not questions things.\n\nOver qualified people don't fit that. They are too smart and question things.", "Not to mention that you'd be taking the job slot of someone who cant get a better job like you could. ", "To be honest, some employers have had experiences with overqualified people who act like they're too good for a job. I've worked in restaurants with people who were ABOUT TO GO to college, hadn't started yet, who acted like it was demeaning for them to be there at all.", "Easy. There are costs involved with hiring and no one wants to waste money on someone who will be easily lured away for more money", "The hiring company fear what the job entails will be beneath your capabilities, you'll get bored then leave. They don't want to invest in training and recruitment just to do it all over again.", "Overqualified = Not desperate enough to be controlled efficiently with minimal pay", "If you had a PhD, you would know not to put it on your Burger King application. ", "Because after spending however many years it took to achieve a Phd. And with the stress of your insurmountable student debt , you'll most likely commit a mass murder in restaurant during first week in job.", "\"You're overqualified\" is code for either \"We don't like you\" or \"You're not good enough to work here\".. so you can't sue the company or interviewer.", "because by that point, you should be smart enough to understand the game and hide your overqualifications from your employer.\n\nIt punishes Ph.D.s with 0 street smarts, basically.", "It is quite simple, a manager of such a business does not want someone smarter than themselves taking their job. It is all about protecting their job and nothing more. \n\nPlay dumb and you can flip all the burgers you want.", "A manager or higher up that is looking to higher doesn't want someone more educated or experienced than themselves A) because they think you will get quickly bored and leave B) because you may be direct competition to their job at some point ", "I have a degree in computer science. I worked at a Genghis Grill for about a month. Which was enough time to realize I was getting royally screwed over by the management. It's possible they prefer less educated people that are more easily manipulated.", " > Why can't I make burgers if I have a PhD?\n\nDepending on what your PhD is in, sometimes flipping burgers is your only option.", "Because you will leave the job the moment something in your field turns up.\n", "1. They think you likely to not stay long so training is wasted.\n\n\n2. They expect you wont find any challenge and likely not work well at a menial task.", "The sad harsh reality is simply this; They want you to **need** the job. They want to keep you as long as possible, for as little as possible. If you're overqualified, it's most likely because you won't be the mindless drone they seek.", "I hire people with 2 things in mind:\n\n1) can they be trained to do the job?\n\n2) are they a dick?\n\nNot necessarily in that order. The last thing you want is someone coming in and big-timing their coworkers. Causes too many headaches.", "My father has had this problem since getting laid off six years ago. He was an auto insurance claims adjuster with 30+ years experience, and when he got laid off no one else would hire him because they would have to pay him more due to his experience and age. They could pay a college grad 40% of what my father's salary would be.", " > Rant incoming\n\nIn large corporate environments, my experience has been this:\n\nEmployers want an employee who is educated. But not so well-educated that they might have other opportunities. It's important to be desperate to keep the job you have.\n\nEmployers want an employee who is ambitious, flexible and willing to work tons of extra hours. But not so ambitious that you need any motivation beyond, \"be happy you even HAVE a job.\" It's important to make sure your manager doesn't actually have to MANAGE.\n\nEmployers want an employee who is willing to be trained. But not so willing to learn new things that you might advance and leave **their** department short. It's important that your interests never exceed your employer's interests.\n\nEmployers want an employee who will work for the minimum amount that they can possibly pay. But not so willing to work for minimum wage that you might move onto something else that pays better if given the opportunity. It's important that the job that the employer values so little that they pay menial wages is the be-all end-all for the employee.\n\nEmployers want middle managers they can classify as exempt to avoid paying overtime without actually giving them any management training or adequate staffing so that middle managers often end up having to personally cover staff level jobs, for more hours, for what ends up being less pay because OT adds up, dammit. Middle managers get fucked too.\n\nOR...and I know this is crazy...consider hiring people at a wage that is commensurate with the position. And then encourage people's ambition, train them and promote the deserving so you get the continued benefit of a stable workforce without fucking over everyone. Problem is...this requires effort from the employer and *they're* not there to work, they're there to squeeze you for everything while giving you scraps in return and then express confusion about your lack of gratitude.\n\nObviously, there are employees who are not willing to work, over-value the worth of the position they're filling, or are not interested in your company and not ever going to be an asset. Fire these people or explain what they need to do to become more valuable. But hiring or hanging onto mediocre people because it's too expensive or too difficult to find quality employees and actually work to retain them is total bullshit in the current environment. There is a surfeit of educated and qualified people in the job market. But those same people are tired of being told that they should feel lucky for being ground down to the smallest, meanest, least educated, least empowered employee you can make them while multi-million dollar bonuses go to the top three people and tens of millions are paid out to shareholders. Stop telling employees they are greedy because they want to be treated like human beings with self interests while a select few gorge themselves at the trough.\n\nEmployers bitch that they can't find anyone ambitious nowadays. But if you tell people walking in the door that they're going to be paid minimum wage, work 60-80 hours a week to barely survive, spend decades as slaves to the student debt that they were told was vital to get a job but now makes them overqualified for a job, that they should be grateful and, by the way, you'll probably never do better than this so don't even bother trying (which IS what they're saying when they won't bother to train you, onboard you or discuss how you can prepare yourself for opportunities for advancement)...yeah, you're going to get some shitty candidates.\n\nI work at a mid-size family-owned (not my family but A family) company now. They're thrilled to have me because I'm excited at the prospect of actually being given enough autonomy to do my job. I'm thrilled to have them because they actually give a shit about whether I'm happy enough to be productive. I make less than I would in the city doing the same job but I still make a fair wage. It's not perfect and it has its frustrations like anywhere but I will continue to work my ass off for them because I also get to feel like a goddamn human being instead of a worthless cog.\n\nOkay, I'm done now. I feel better. I'll humbly accept my downvotes.\n\nEdit: eight words for clarity.\n\nEdit the second: one more thing - employers often think that the biggest thing that motivates people is money. It's not. In [this] (_URL_0_) research, it only accounted for 7% of employees who were \"engaged\" at work. Most people will accept less money if they feel like they have a future. This result has been replicated numerous times.", "They're worried you'll get bored and leave them shorthanded once you find a better job", "I recently interviewed upwards of 50+ candidates for $10/hr production line assistant positions. Quite a few of the candidates had BA degrees in communications or english but had little to no work experience and said in the interview that the degree wasn't helping in their job search. We had someone with a MASTERS degree in chemistry apply for the position. My boss wanted to hire them but I suggested we shouldn't because I can only assume that this person would take the next high-paying gig that comes along. My boss decided to hire them anyways. We spent a few weeks training the new employee and right when he became proficient, he left the company to go work in a lab for $28/hr. I'm not shocked. If you are 'overqualified' for the position you are applying to it is a huge red flag for me. It screams either laziness, incompetence, temporary foothold or that you did something in the past that prevents you from working at your level of education/experience. I want to clarify that if you have a generic BA you aren't really qualified for much but a Masters in chemistry tells me that better paying work shouldn't be too difficult for you to find.", "its because they want stupid people they can control easily.", "You would think people being so educated they would be smart enough to omit these kinds of details from an application when applying for a job they'd be overqualified for.", "It has been mentioned but to reiterate: a hiring manager will know damn well that you will leave the low paying job the very instant you find a better paying job. Training employees is expensive and it takes a while before hiring an employee begins paying off. They would be better off trying to hire someone who they don't think is going to quit any time soon.", "And why can't I be a doctor just because I didn't finish highschool? Bullshit man", "That was a little annoying for me. I got out of the military, and just needed to hold down a part time job temporarily, the summer before college. Nobody even dared to hire me, but I had no problems the moment I took the Navy off of my resume.\n\nThey are sort of right, though. Why would you hire someone overqualified who will probably leave for a higher paying job? Why would they stay to make minimum wage if they could make salary?", "Your in luck, I had a friend of mine explain it for me.\n\nHe's 29, a McDonald's Manager, and unambitious as hell\n\nHe explained it like this, \"so a guy comes in with a Bachelors degree in (blank) and wants to work 9-5 for minimum wage because the economy is shit. I won't hire him because \nA). He could have a new job in a heart beat which leaves me short a worker and two weeks of training before I have another one\nB). Unlike most of the guys who shuffle in this guy is EDUCATED. He knows what I can and can't do and how hard it is for me to actually fire him. Most fast food managers manager employees by holding hours over there head and bullying them into working longer hours by threats and compliments. This guy knows his rights and is more likely to report me for this behavior\nC). Promotion time comes. Upper brass sees I have a highschool diploma and this guy has a MFing BACHELORS! Now most of these guys also have college and will take one of there own before having to mold me into them.\nIt's nothing personal; it's just good business\n\n(These are his words and not mine so...yeah)", "Because they're afraid you will disappear as soon as a better job comes along.", "When I was a clerk at a local grocery store, we hired a PhD who had a background in forensic science.\n\nHe mopped, swept, chatted, and was pleasant as fuck.\n\nIt would have been a mistake to not take him in. He stayed for almost 2 years before getting a job at 3M.", "In general, people who are grossly overqualified for a job aren't going to stick around at that job for very long. They're probably only applying as something to \"get them through\" until they can get a \"real\" job, at which point they will quit.\n\nWhen an employer hires somebody they incur costs because the employer needs to train the employee. They do so in the hopes that at some point in the future the employee will be productive enough to allow them to earn profit from having hired them. Think of it like an investment. \n\nTake these two facts together. It is very likely that a grossly overqualified applicant will get hired, soak up training costs, and then quit before they become productive enough to offset those training costs, ultimately leading the employer to have lost money for having hired them in the first place.", "I applied at a company once that did psyche profiles. They said mine showed real leadership potential, and they weren't looking for that. They were looking for a lemming. \nSo, consider this. You have an MBA and you're a brilliant businessperson. Why would a manager who has a high school education want to hire someone who will look down on them? Or worse yet, try to take their job? \nFor some jobs, it's better to have some hard working lemmings. ", "You'll quit for something better and training new people is expensive. ", "While all the comments regarding business practices and management are great, I spent four years working food service with a Bachelor's degree. To know that your education level is not as important as someone's tenure, even if they only have a GED, will make the employee (me) feel invaluable. Plus, being managed and supervised by people who know that you can and will outsmart them is annoying because so many times you have just keep your mouth closed and grind on - even when there are so many obvious improvements that need to happen. Plus, most people graduating these days seem to have an attitude of entitlement, not an actual work ethic. ", "You *can* make burgers. Start a place called Dr. Burger. Serve gastronomically advanced burgers borne of years of lab research. Or name your burgers after prominent academics, if you want. ", "Customize your resume for the job for which you are applying. You are not peacocking to everybody, you are trying to get a job.\n\nTell them what they NEED TO KNOW, nothing more. ", "\"You know what they want? Obedient workers ­ people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club.\"\n\n- George Carlin", "Because most educated people aren't sheep like they want plus if you have a Phd you probably aren't staying at the job long and they want someone who is trapped in that job without many options" ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://www.tinyhr.com/2014-employee-engagement-organizational-culture-report" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
1lbyiq
what would be the effects on your body if you wore ankle weights and wrist weights all day, every day, for a year?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lbyiq/eli5_what_would_be_the_effects_on_your_body_if/
{ "a_id": [ "cbxos38", "cbxqybv" ], "score": [ 5, 2 ], "text": [ "You'd quickly build up enough muscle that the weights don't bother you.", "You would build muscle but it will also cause some minor damage to your skeletal structure. Depending on age and level of fitness it can be a big problem. Having the weight distributed evenly is key. The problem with ankle weights and arm weights is that they are on the very ends of your limbs and if you swing them hard enough and long enough it will add uneeded pressure on your joints. Yes, effectively the weight of your own arms or legs do kind of the same thing, but the weight is spread evenly and not as adverse.\n\nIf this is something you would like to do then I would suggest the breast plate weight set. This rests on your shulders and adds minimum weight to you, its centralized and its compressing you rather than pulling your limbs down, which is better for you. Those weights on your ankles and arms are about a few pounds each and they would be noticeable when you mover around, but if you have the breastplate the added, lets say, 8 or 10 pounds will be much easier on your body." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
4nkcmf
how did people in the days before daily showers and teeth brushing not have terrible acne, rotting teeth, infections, etc?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nkcmf/eli5_how_did_people_in_the_days_before_daily/
{ "a_id": [ "d44n9qt", "d44n9xk", "d44nkwm", "d44qc6l", "d44vf9r", "d4520he" ], "score": [ 13, 6, 9, 3, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "First things first: showering *daily* is less healthy than you think it is. Unless you have a very active lifestyle (tons of physical activity - be it during leisure time or work), you don't need to shower more than 2-3 days per week to stay healthy. \n\nThen, moving onto the matter at hand: the thing is, they did. When health practices were less used, people were a lot less healthy. They tried to hide it by using perfumes, but they really were extremely unhealthy below their dresses. Don't let movies/TV-shows fool you: health conditions during the middle ages were terrible. From the skin, to the teeth, and even the hair; be it peasants or even nobles: you really do not want to ever have lived during those times. Infections were one of the most common causes of death, and the average lifespan was 40-50 years. ", "Acne isn't caused by hygienic reasons, it's more genetic. Teeth rotting only occurs with modern processed food consumption... check out some modern tribal pictures and see they have perfect teeth. Infections? Yeah, they had plenty of those.", "In a book written in 50's for Soviet women there was phrase that she should be clean and wash her hair regulary 3-4 times a month. A *MONTH*. \nActually skin and hair has it's own fatty layer which overproduces for modern people because of excessive hygiene. It would be perfectly enough to wash yourself once a week. Because nowadays most of us shower everyday, natural skin control is imbalanced. For some people skin and hair gets too oily and for some too dry.\n\nAs about acne. Most of it is hormones/genetics. It determines whether your skin is prone to active fat tissue glands or not. If it is then hygiene adds, because pimples are very local skin infection, which is mostly caused by dirty hands.\n\nOral hygiene was terrible. Rotten teeth, fallen teeth and so on. Ancient people used some herbal remedies, but since 20th century it was terrible.", "People actually brushed their teeth in the olden days. The toothbrush isn't such a modern idea (evidence of primitive,crude toothbrushes) and people also used to clean their teeth with a rough cloth. Ancient civilizations also tried different ways to make tooth picks and even some form of primitive toothpaste. I can't say how effective it was though.", "I'm not claiming to know why but one thing to be taken note of is people in those times would have eaten far less sugar, incomparably less sugar than the amount modern man consumes, sugar's the main factor in rotten teeth, also acne prevalence is related to diet too ", "Today's rotten teeth are a product of a high-sugar diet, which is a modern invention. Old skulls show teeth worn down from heavy chewing, yet with very little decay, because they didn't have white bread and Snickers bars and Coke.\n\nPeople in primitive societies even today *do* get infections a fair amount. However, exposure to bacteria helps the body to build up immunity to some degree." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [], [], [], [] ]
20yn88
legally speaking, what's the difference in streaming a movie/tv show on a site like project free tv and downloading a torrent via a site like the pirate bay.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20yn88/eli5_legally_speaking_whats_the_difference_in/
{ "a_id": [ "cg7yor2", "cg8jezq" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "You don't only download with a torrent. You are also uploading(distributing) at the same time.", "Actually, it's not illegal to watch a movie from a site like that.\n\nUnlike downloading copyrighted material that is not in any way illegal to watch streamed movies. The law has an exception that allows \"temporary copies\", which is what streaming movie is called, not equated at download. Rather, it should be compared to listening to a radio station that plays music without permission. Radio publisher commits a copyright violation, but the listener does nothing wrong.\n\nSo it's not actually illegal to watch pirated movies that are being streamed from a website.\n\nEdit: And I don't know how project free tv works but we similar sites here in Sweden.\n\nSource: Read an article on this topic, they asked a bunch of experts and stuff like that. It was 5 months ago though. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
6cyn99
what is that horrible clear juice that comes out if you don't shake up a ketchup bottle, and why does shaking fix it?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cyn99/eli5_what_is_that_horrible_clear_juice_that_comes/
{ "a_id": [ "dhydyrt", "dhye58t", "dhyrnyt" ], "score": [ 2, 17, 3 ], "text": [ "It's the watery part of the ingredients in the ketchup, tomatoes have a fairly high water content, and when it sits the water separates from the denser ingredients. Shaking it just causes the ingredients to recombine, in a much simpler sense, imagine oil and vinegar in a bottle together, the denser ingredient sinks to the bottom, but vigorously shaking it causes them to temporarily combine", "It is water. The technical word for this is called syneresis. It is due to the poor emulsification of the tomato paste and water in ketchup that leads to natural separation. Luckly it mixes easily with a quick shake.", "Chemically that liquid at the top of the ketchup is vinegar straight and true. I tested it in my own ketchup bottle before this post just to be sure. It's WAY acidic- not water.. Spot on for vinegar though. If you just read the ketchup bottle itself the 2nd ingredient is vinegar. You could argue water all day if this were a physics question. But it is chemically vinegar and that's what is faithful to the question." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [] ]
18ygbd
interest rate, apr, loans, credit, bankruptcy ,etc
How is interest rate calculated, what is APR the same thing? How should one repay debt (such as student loans) the most effective way, and why are some people always end up only paying interest even when they make large payments every month? how does bankruptcy work, and what's the repercussion of filing for one?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18ygbd/eli5_interest_rate_apr_loans_credit_bankruptcy_etc/
{ "a_id": [ "c8j4ryi" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "APR is annual percentage rate, but it's not always the actual amount you pay, which is dependent on how often it's compounded.\n\nLet's say, for instance, if you have a credit card with 24% APR. You pay every month, so you're actually paying 2% interest every month. \n\nLet's say you owe $1,000 and don't pay anything for a year on a 24% APR loan.\n\nIf interest is compounded yearly, you'll get charged $240 (24%) at the end of the year, for a total of $1,240.\n\nIf interest is compounded monthly, you'll get charged $20 (1/12th of 24% = 2%) at the end of the first month, bringing your total to $1,020. However, at the end of the second month, you'll get charged 2% again, but this time it will be 2% of $1,020, not 2% of $1,000. So you'll get charged $20.40. At the end of the third month, you'll get charged 2% of $1,040.40, and so on. At the end of the year, your total will actually be $1,243.37, which is slightly higher than it had been when it was only compounded annually, since you're paying interest on the interest you've accrued during the year.\n\nIf you compound weekly or even daily, it gets even higher." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
3bd5qt
why do dj's use macs over pcs?
Skillex uses macs for example
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bd5qt/eli5_why_do_djs_use_macs_over_pcs/
{ "a_id": [ "csl2w0b" ], "score": [ 8 ], "text": [ "Music production (and other creative fields) was a market Apple targeted from the early days while Microsoft was more focused on business. \n\nMusic software for live performances requires low latency, that is from the time you press a button to the time you hear a sound you want it to only be a few milliseconds. This is something that was supported on Mac OS early on, but didn't get added to Windows until Vista. There was 3rd party support for Windows called ASIO that provided low latency audio, but it never worked as well as CoreAudio on the Mac.\n\nMacs also came with Firewire ports, while PCs didn't have them as often. Firewire worked better for low latency audio interfaces with more than 2 channels (something that's required for DJing). I seem to remember that 4+ channel USB audio interfaces didn't get popular until after about 2008 or so. \n\nOS X also has aggregate sound devices which are virtual audio interfaces where you can use several separate audio interfaces as one and OS X will keep all the audio in sync between them.\n\nOS X has audio units which are audio processing plugins like compressors, limiters, EQs, etc that can be used by any audio software on the Mac. There is also VST which is cross platform.\n\nOS X has it's own file format for loop files. Short bits of music that have their bpm, beats, key stored in the file so you can add them to music and they automatically beat / pitch match. There are also acid loops, but I don't think the format is open and it had to be reverse engineered for other software to use them.\n\nWith better support for audio, developers often focused on the Mac, so musicians bought Macs and the cycle continued. Apple also has it's own music production software like Logic Pro and Garage Band which draws musicians to the Mac. It also means there are lots of audio unit plugins for DJs to use.\n\nYou can see this happening again with iOS and Android. iPhones & iPads have 6 or 7 milliseconds of latency whereas Android is all over the place. The best Android device has 15ms latency, but that's with Samsungs special audio support, the best standard Android device is 29ms and the best Android 4 device is 39ms. All the good audio apps are only coming to iOS." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
61wx6z
difference between single and triple phase power? also, what determines what kind of power is being ran to a location, is it some kind of transformer on the powerlines that leads to the house?
[deleted]
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61wx6z/eli5_difference_between_single_and_triple_phase/
{ "a_id": [ "dfi7jrp" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "I'm going to be assuming a basic knowledge of AC power for this:\n\nSo in single phase AC your active wire is cycling from +240V to -240V and back at 50Hz (Depends where you live). This means that the circuit will be at 0V (turned off) for an instant 100 times per second.\n\nIn 3 phase AC, 2 more active wires are introduced. These are the same (240V, 50Hz), but they are out of phase with each other by 120^o . So when one reaches it's peak, the other 2 will be part way. Similarly when one reaches 0V (off), the other 2 will still be on. see [reference image](_URL_0_AC/AC_10.html#02181.png)\n\nThis means that you can run AC motors allot smoother by wiring the inductors physically at 120^o intervals around the motor's spinning magnet [like so](_URL_0_AC/AC_10.html#02193.png) (This is a basic 3 phase motor, I'll leave the more complex ones out).\n\nIn addition This allows for for the motor to be self starting, and direction controlled. Both extremely useful in industrial situations.\n\nGenerally, single phase goes to homes and 3 phase goes to factories, for running AC motors in machinery.\n\nI'm still just a student, so forgive any minor errors. Here's my uni's proscribed textbook (free ebook) for further depth: _URL_0_\n\nReccomended section: [Polyphase motor design](_URL_0_AC/AC_10.html#xtocid35103)\n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [ "http://www.ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/electricCircuits/", "http://www.ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/electricCircuits/AC/AC_10.html#xtocid35103", "http://www.ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/electricCircuits/AC/AC_10.html#02181.png", "http://www.ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/electricCircuits/AC/AC_10.html#02193.png" ] ]
eoajhc
why do certain train cars make scratching sounds on train tracks and other train cars don’t?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eoajhc/eli5_why_do_certain_train_cars_make_scratching/
{ "a_id": [ "feawk2p" ], "score": [ 7 ], "text": [ "If each pair of wheels on a train are attached to a single rigid axle and the train goes around the corner, one has to pass over more train track than the other which means one of them has to slide at some point (or an important moving part of the train will break). \n\nIf each wheel is able to turn independently, there's no need for any of them to slide under normal operation." ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
eqggvp
why do kids and teenahers find every sexual term or word, or anything to do with intercourse funny?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqggvp/eli5_why_do_kids_and_teenahers_find_every_sexual/
{ "a_id": [ "ferke1t", "ferrc5c" ], "score": [ 17, 6 ], "text": [ "The leading question aside...\n\nPart of it has to do with something being a social “taboo,” what with the high social stigma involved with sex. It’s an awkward transition to make if we always tell children and teenagers that sex is an adult thing, but still bring it up in their presence. The healthiest way to deal with that awkwardness is usually going to be a sense of humor, even if it sometimes seems out of place.", "Not exclusive to kids and teenagers. \n\nMy wife and I laugh about it too and we’ve been together and married for more than 10 years." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
3to6oe
what happens when your body "rejects" an organ?
I'm trying to say what makes your body "reject" it, and why does it do that?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3to6oe/eli5_what_happens_when_your_body_rejects_an_organ/
{ "a_id": [ "cx7taqa", "cx7te9q" ], "score": [ 2, 8 ], "text": [ "Your immune system sees the organ, recognizes it as a foreign object, thinks it's an invader, and attacks it.", "Your immune system is designed to recognize things in your body that don't belong; foreign cells and substances, basically.\n\nWhen you get an organ transplant, that organ is one big foreign body, and your immune system sees it as an invader. As a result, your body will actively attack and destroy the transplanted cells, and the organ will be damaged to the point of ceasing to function. Normally, they put transplant patients on immunosuppresant drugs to keep this reaction in check, but since that also opens you up to infection from actual pathogens it's not exactly safe, and sometimes the drugs won't stop the rejection." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]
arg9ag
what is the cause of the film on our teeth after drinking pop soda? after eating spinach?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/arg9ag/eli5_what_is_the_cause_of_the_film_on_our_teeth/
{ "a_id": [ "egmzre1" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Bacteria colonize the surface of your teeth and eat the remaining sugar that clings to the surface creating a biofilm called plaque. " ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
tkbqo
what are some actually solutions to prison over-population in the united states?
Everyone knows that there are too many people in prison in the US and they always say that we need to fix this. But how? We can't very well just release all of the criminals. The only one that I've really heard is that we should legalize marijuana, which would actually take many people out of jail, but that's only a solution if you believe marijuana should be legalized.
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tkbqo/eli5_what_are_some_actually_solutions_to_prison/
{ "a_id": [ "c4nc70o" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "End stupid drug laws.\n\nNo prison for non-violent crimes.\n\nRehabilitation programs.\n\nNot treating cons like total irredeemable scum.\n\nEducation, education, education.\n\nEducation.\n\nOpportunity.\n\n" ] }
[]
[]
[ [] ]
1eihyl
why could we clone a sheep in 1996 but we still cannot clone a human?
Is ethics the only barrier?
explainlikeimfive
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1eihyl/eli5_why_could_we_clone_a_sheep_in_1996_but_we/
{ "a_id": [ "ca0jq5x", "ca0k7zh", "ca0kjow", "ca0ksi7", "ca0kuly", "ca0mbuf", "ca0me2j", "ca0mm4p", "ca0psg9", "ca0q2iq", "ca0wz96" ], "score": [ 22, 9, 4, 2, 8, 2, 3, 6, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "That'd be my first guess. I mean, in a nutshell we've proven we can clone stuff, but there's a lot of red tape when it comes to human experimentation. And this would be even more so because you would literally be creating a life as part of an experiment. No ethics committee would ever greenlight that kind of a project.\n", "I think it took something like 177 tries to get a cloned sheep to adulthood. Anything even close to that many human failures (think Alien 4? with all the mutant Ripleys in the med bay) would be... unsightly. \n\nMaybe we just aren't ready yet. ", "Basically because it is frowned on by the law and treaties. It's not necessarily against the law everywhere but it's a legal gray area that few people are willing to risk the time and money to enter. And frankly, if people were to spend time researching it I believe laws would quickly be enacted. As long as there isn't much work done on it there's no push to create a law.\n\nA [United Nations Declaration condemned human cloning](_URL_0_). \n\n[Here are cloning policies of various countries](_URL_1_)", "What would we even do with the power to clone a whole person? ", "Basically, yes. Quite awhile ago [some scientists in california](_URL_0_) took stem cells from a person and developed these to a \"blastocyte\" stage, which is the same state of development that is usually implanted in a uterus with other reproductive technology. Theoretically, if you could get one of these blastocysts to implant into a uterus and grow to term, you would have a little cloned baby. \n\nHowever, it is possible that the baby could have health problems, or psychological problems about being a clone and not having parents. There are a few places that will clone your own personal pet, but there is a lot of stuff that goes on during development. Growing is a bit like baking bread - even if you have the right amount of flour, water and yeast, it depends on how hot the oven is, how long you leave it in, how long you let it rise, and a lot of other things, so even clones will not be identical. That's why identical twins aren't perfectly identical, even though their DNA is. \n\nOkay, I got on a tangent, but it's still a little bit relevant. Yes, ethics are a big barrier to cloning, but also genetic modification which is pretty interesting too.\n\nEdit: Corrected link. Thanks marcospolos.", " > [Dolly was euthanised because she had a progressive lung disease and severe arthritis.[14] A Finn Dorset such as Dolly has a life expectancy of around 11 to 12 years, but Dolly lived to be only six years of age.](_URL_0_) ", "[This guy](_URL_0_) has stated that we cloned ~ 40 animals already. We'll clone extinct mammals soon. \n\nAlso, who is to say there are no cloned humans in dark projects that are not public.\n\nWe already grew artificial kidneys, and 3d printed them!\n\n", " > Is ethics the only barrier?\n\nPretty much. And it goes further than cloning being spooky.\n\nThere were hundreds, perhaps thousands of failures before the first sheep was cloned. Many involved birth defects and stillbirths. Asking a woman to carry a fetus in these conditions would be an enormous physical and emotional strain, bordering on human experimentation.", "\"Hey! Welcome to Earth! You're not you!\"", "Clones have rampant health problems. _URL_0_", "The reason is ethics- a lot of people get scared when you start messing around with intelligence. Another reason is the belief that humans have souls, and if that's the case, what happens if you create a partial human or a mutant? Does it have a soul?\n\nPeople can also do these things in secret, but it is hard to fund that sort of thing if you do it in secret, and your findings could never be made public." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [], [ "http://www.bioeticaweb.com/content/view/1267/765/lang,es/", "http://cnx.org/content/m14834/latest/" ], [], [ "http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080117/full/news.2007.350.html" ], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)#Death" ], [ "http://www.ted.com/talks/juan_enriquez_on_genomics_and_our_future.html" ], [], [], [ "http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/tech/cloning/cloningrisks/" ], [] ]
95deju
why is sex seen as worse than violence?
explainlikeimfive
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/95deju/eli5why_is_sex_seen_as_worse_than_violence/
{ "a_id": [ "e3rtc9e", "e3rukc9" ], "score": [ 3, 3 ], "text": [ "Social conventions and parenting styles vary from region to region and person to person and do not need to conform to any form of logic or consistency. There are plenty of parents that would not allow their children to partake in violent media at such an age as well. For example, my mother forbade me from playing Goldeneye on my brother's N64. As an example of inconsistency, she did not mind me playing Half Life.\n\nAt the end of the day, gratuitous violence and some displays of sexuality may be harmful to children and it's up to parents to determine what they do and do not think their kids should be watching or doing. Not because they know exactly what's best, but because they're legally responsible for their kids and also (generally) want what's best for them. Your mom might not have known exactly what sort of \"sexual references\" were in the sims and instead decided to be on the safe side, or she might have had some other reason for not wanting you to have it and used an excuse.\n\n > I don't understand why people getting shot or stabbed is more acceptable than a boob.\n\nThat much I share confusion on. But again, people aren't consistent in their opinions.", "Because children have context for violence, but not for sex. Even in relatively peaceful times, children have likely experienced interpersonal violence on the playground. But they haven't experienced sex at all - much less with all the attendant social elements that surround adult sex.\n\nAs a result, they have no ground truth for understanding sexuality in films while they have some degree of understanding the nature of violence." ] }
[]
[]
[ [], [] ]