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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8qwzcz
|
why do car manufacturers always put their logo on the steering wheel of their vehicles ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8qwzcz/eli5_why_do_car_manufacturers_always_put_their/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e0mp8se"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
" > Do they want us to not forget what car we are driving?\n\nMore or less.\n\n > Or maybe its because they want us to associate the logo with the driving experience?\n\nDing ding ding - we have a winner. You've answered your own question."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1xavtl
|
why was anything regarding pussy riot such a big deal?
|
I don't understand who/what they are and why everyone was so fired up about everything that happened with them.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xavtl/why_was_anything_regarding_pussy_riot_such_a_big/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf9oekh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\n > They stage unauthorized provocative guerrilla performances in unusual public locations, which are edited into music videos and posted on the Internet.\n\n > On March 3, 2012, two of the group members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, were arrested and charged with hooliganism. A third member, Yekaterina Samutsevich, was arrested on March 16.\n\n > The trial and sentence attracted considerable criticism, particularly in the West. The case was adopted by human rights groups including Amnesty International, which designated the women prisoners of conscience, and by a number of prominent entertainers.\n\nTL;DR: They are protesters who protest in unique ways. Some of them were arrested and convicted of \"hooliganism,\" which gave off a bad vibe to the West. There was considerable controversy over the idea that they were arrested simply for protesting."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pussy_riot"
]
] |
|
21jvl7
|
cannabis causing cancer cells go apoptosis (self destruct)
|
What is the deal with unexplored and kinda rumors of data that cannabis trigger some cancer cells to go "apop"? Shed some light, anybody.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21jvl7/eli5_cannabis_causing_cancer_cells_go_apoptosis/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgdrtl4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There hasn't been scientific proof of much other than it increasing appetite, getting you high, and a couple of other minor side effects that could be considered beneficial. But stoners and other people (including some doctors and scientists) trying to make money off of it will claim it is a miracle drug in hopes of gaining support and getting it legalized everywhere.\n \nJudging by the number of pot smokers on reddit, I expect the number of downvotes to be pretty damn high... no pun intended."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
355wpd
|
current uk political candidates/parties policies & consequences if they win
|
Can someone explain to me what parties and candidates are running in this current UK election, and what their policies are? Further, what are the consequences if they win? I have seen a lot of posts about UK leaving the EU, and privatization of services like the Royal Mail and NHS, but not sure which party has which policies etc?
Thank you! :)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/355wpd/eli5_current_uk_political_candidatesparties/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr1apkk"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I'll slightly reverse your question, and for the specific issues you mention I'll tell you which parties make each one an issue of interest.\n\n* **Leaving the EU**. The only party that has this as a formal policy is Ukip. The Conservative Party say they'll hold a referendum on whether or not to leave. All the other main parties are in favour of remaining in the EU.\n\n* **Privatising Royal Mail**. This has already happened -- it was privatised 18 months ago by the Coalition government.\n\n* **Privatising the NHS**. None of the parties have this as an explicit manifesto item, probably because it's considered \"toxic\" to suggest the idea to the voting public. However Ukip have strongly hinted that they would radically alter the way NHS funding is provided. The Conservative Party believes that some NHS services could be provided equally well by the private sector, whilst the NHS remains free at the point of use. The other main parties are largely not in favour of any additional private-sector provision to the NHS."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3q7w8f
|
"ensure the device is ejected before removing from the usb port."
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3q7w8f/eli5ensure_the_device_is_ejected_before_removing/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwcuflw",
"cwcvmdv",
"cwcwi6t",
"cwd0cen"
],
"score": [
10,
7,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Honestly you should be fine most of the time if you just rip it out. This just makes sure that nothing is being written or read off of the usb media while you take it out. Windows even has a bit of a safe guard against file corruption because it disables caching of usb media's data automatically. In the rare occurrence that you did mess something up, most likely this would just be a corrupted file that you'd just have to re-transfer.",
"Pulling out a drive while operations are occurring can potentially cause data loss. It's rare but in the event that it does happen, they'd rather have warned you so you can't blame them. Eject waits until all operations on your drive are completed then virtually disconnects it, so you know it's in a safe state to remove.",
"Not many good explanation. So, I'll throw my expertise in as a OS programmer. OS as in operating systems like Windows, Linux (Android, Ubuntu, etc). \n\nWhen you read or write to a disk, the OS stores a copy in the RAM/DDR/memory. So, if you read the same data again, it's faster to give it to you from memory instead of going and reading it again from the disk. Similarly, if you write to the same file again and again (think saving the word doc every few sentences) it's much much faster to just store it in memory and update the copy in memory multiple times instead of updating the copy on disk multiple times. \n\nNow if you pull out the USB disk without telling the OS, you don't give the OS a chance to store the latest copy in memory onto your disk. And the copy on disk would be an old or corrupted copy (say you unplug it in the middle of saving the document to disk, then half the pages would be old and half new and won't make sense together). \n\nBut most (really, all) modern OSes update the disk with any new data in memory every few seconds or when the machine is idle (say, when you pause to think about what to type) or when the memory starts getting very different from what's on disk. That's why it's mostly safe to just pull out the USB. And as someone else said, Windows apparently doesn't do this for USB disks (I'm sure they only avoid doing this for writes and still do it for reads). ",
"Imagine you are writing notes and suddenly your co-worker comes along a snatches the paper away from you mid sentence. \n\nThat is what could potentially happen if you don't eject first. If some program, in the background, is still writing data to the drive, it can corrupt that data. Ejecting is basically a double check to make sure no program is currently writing to the drive."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5ssqzn
|
how much more would every americans have to contribute to make social security solvent for another 100 years?
|
We often hear a lot about how Social Security is going to collapse because it is underfunded, and I've never been able to get a simple answer on roughly how much we'd all have to give out of our paychecks to right this ship. I know it's not an exact science, but does anyone have a pretty basic answer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ssqzn/eli5_how_much_more_would_every_americans_have_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ddhhyki"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"It's not really a question of how much more to contribute it's a question of can the govt stop taking money from it to fund their other projects. Congress would also need to pay back the amount of Money it took from it. Here's an article I found from the Washington times explaining it better than I can. _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/26/drew-johnson-simple-steps-make-social-security-sol/"
]
] |
|
3d0lct
|
what happens physically when a person learns something
|
What happens in the brain?
Any differences in "getting better" in something and learning something completely new, too?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d0lct/eli5what_happens_physically_when_a_person_learns/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct0xra7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Getting better = stronger neural pattern connection\n\nSomething new = novel neural pattern \n\nHopefully I get this right, but when you strengthen a memory, the genes responsible for the amount of neurotransmitter receptors (and following intraneuron pathways) on a neuron are affected, making it easier for that specific neuron to recieve a signal. \n\nIf a memory is a pattern of neuronal activation and each neuron in that pattern experiences increased reception capabilities, then the memory has been strengthened.\n\nSomeone correct me if I'm wrong."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3n03mo
|
why do hamburger buns sometimes get moldy within days and other times last for a month or more even in the same environment?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n03mo/eli5_why_do_hamburger_buns_sometimes_get_moldy/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvjm2pb",
"cvjp48m",
"cvjrcwj",
"cvju5yr",
"cvjupdy",
"cvjv59w"
],
"score": [
57,
17,
11,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Sometimes they've been on the shelf at the grocery store longer than others before you purchased them. Sometimes maybe the package wasn't closed properly, or the humidity changed. There are a lot of factors at play when it comes to food spoilage.",
"Mold doesn't just appear. Spores have to find their way onto the bread. \n\nPerhaps you opened the bag after running around the house stirring up mold spores. That would cause it to go bad faster. Or maybe your central air is running and blowing spores around the house.\n\nIf you were to always open the bag in a controlled environment like a clean room, it would take longer for mold to find it's way onto the bread which would make it last longer. \n\nSince you likely don't have a clean room to open your bread, it is best to open it and close it quickly without letting too much air in and to not touch the other unused bread.\n",
"Pastry chef/baker here. If someone touched the bread with their bare hands before it was packaged, then it will likely spoil quicker. We have done tests with different kinds of breads and the ones that were touched before packaging had clear molds spots where the fingers touched it.\n\nIn big production factories, it's likely to be fully automated, but in smaller bakeries, this can happen.\n\nIt also depends on if the bread was slightly warm before packaging. If they are still kind of warm, the humidity gets trapped inside the packaging and it spoils quicker. Preservatives are a factor as well.",
"It depends on how quickly and thoroughly the bread loses moisture. Perfectly dry bread won't mould. Of course, perfectly dry bread would be hard as a rock.",
"A big thing here that hasn't really been pointed out is the product you're buying has a lot to do with this. Certain bakeries have artificial preservatives that help keep the mold away, and keep the bread 'fresher' for longer, so they have a longer life for the shelves and for the travel from bakery to store shelf.\n\nAt our bakery, we use no artificial preservatives and so our stuff molds more quickly. ",
"Or maybe the bakery has crappy sanitation and dumped moldy stuff into the bread to begin with.\n\nI just bought a three-pack of walnut bread, and made a sandwich. The stuff was baked fresh that day, but they used moldy walnut chunks in it, so it already tastes like drakh."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dxhzyp
|
why dont all rear wheel drive cars have the engine in the rear to avoid power loss in the differential?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dxhzyp/eli5_why_dont_all_rear_wheel_drive_cars_have_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f7qjb9c",
"f7qkae3",
"f7qlz6q",
"f7qwf0i"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Rear engines are quite dangerous for a few reasons. Foe one, that's a lot of weight *behind* the passengers which can crush them during a collision. Meanwhile, it makes it inconvenient to have the transmission near the driver as most RWDs are manuals. Lastly, a differential is necessary no matter where the engine is. No power is lost through transmission down a driveshaft.",
"You would still have a differential. The differential would be built into the transmission and would then be called a transaxle. For example, the Porsche 911 has had a rear engine and a rear transaxle for decades. The differential isn't an individual component, but it is there inside of the transmission.",
"rear engine design with water cooling has a problem of routing coolant to the front mounted radiator. you'll basically have two 10ft pipes carrying coolant that needs to pumped back and forth and not leaking.\n\nfront engine design also helps with safety. in a frontal impact, the engine is the heavy mass that absorbs alot of the energy, leaving the occupants with less energy to dissipate",
"In addition to the other answers, weight distribution is important. The heavy engine sitting over the front wheels — the ones responsible for steering, is desirable for many applications."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
tg0j5
|
why does ron paul seem to be doing leaps and bounds better recently?
|
It was said by his supporters that he would do much better later in the campaign in terms of support and delegates, but as a layman I brushed this off as wishful thinking. However, it's quickly turning out to be true. Why does it seem like the sun is coming out from behind the clouds all of a sudden?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/tg0j5/eli5_why_does_ron_paul_seem_to_be_doing_leaps_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4mamza",
"c4mbexc",
"c4mboo0",
"c4mbydy",
"c4mdri2"
],
"score": [
11,
8,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you're reading too much reddit.",
"It could be argued that with the recent withdrawal of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum from the race, Ron Paul stands as the alternative vote for those not keen on Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. \n\nRomney also has many detractors for various reasons (his wealth, his religion, his more moderate positions than other Republicans, his perceived lack of charisma etc.), all of which would prefer to vote for a candidate that isn't Romney.\n\n**TL;DR: Those who hate Romney vote for Ron Paul as he's the only other alternative left**",
"The Paul supporters are much more passionate about their candidate, they stayed around after voting to become delegates. Finally their work has officially paid off, although his support hasn't increased all that much.\n\nWe area democratic **republic** this means the majority doesn't rule, the most passionate minority can influence policy. That is the reason we hold caucus' and not primaries.\n\nIt's looking like Ron Paul suddenly has more support, and he does, but these delegates were won a long time ago and the media simply ignored it.",
"Ron Paul is the only alternative to Romney and he's stacked his supporters in leadership positions and the race is over and Romney has won so no one apart from his supporters are bothering to turn up. He's using loopholes in the rules to get delegates despite consistently losing the popular vote.",
"Now that he doesn't stand a chance at winning, the media is allowed to talk about him now."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1v826u
|
paleo vs keto diets?
|
I've heard people arguing over which diet is better but I don't even know what the differences are. What are you allowed to eat in each? I just want to know the differences.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1v826u/paleo_vs_keto_diets/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cepwcfy"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Paleo consists in eat a diet similar to the one of the paleolithic men, because that period comprises most of our history as species and we are better adapted to that type of diet than the modern.\n\nThat means meat, eggs, vegetables, fish, some nuts and fruit. No processed or refined food, no vegetable oils, no grain or grain products, no legumes. There is some controversy over some things, like dairy or cured meats, but in essence all that can be consumed raw or with little manipulation and is obtainable in the wild is allowed.\n\nKeto consists in putting the body in a state of nutritional ketosis (not to be confused with ketoacidosis, very common mistake), in which ketone bodies are produced from fats in the liver. These ketones are then used for energy, mainly by the brain, which derives most of its energy from them instead of glucose as usual.\n\nThere is not foods allowed or forbbiden, but a ratio of macronutrients to meet. No more than 20-30 grams of carbohydrates per day, enough protein (but not much more) to maintain/growth muscle, fat up to satiety. Usually it's based in fatty meats and animal fats, eggs, dairy (butter, cheese, heavy cream, etc), fruit oils (olive, coconut), fatty fish, and nuts. Some add vegetables and a little of fruit while others don't. Anything high in fats and low in carbs is ok. Of course food choices matter health-wise, but to be a ketogenic diet following the ratios is a must.\n\nBoth diets mix very well, and it's not uncommon to see people following both of them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3z54b2
|
why don't freezers have lights but fridges do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z54b2/eli5_why_dont_freezers_have_lights_but_fridges_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyj9y53",
"cyja52z"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Many/Most do. All the refrigerator/freezer combo's I have had (and most I've seen at other people's houses) have had a light for both. Only my old deep freezer didn't have a light. \n \nSo I guess the answer to your specific refrigerator/freezer combo is that you didn't pay enough to get one that had a light for both, or you overpaid for a cheaper one.",
"The fridge I have is an older style freezer-on-top model with no light. The manufacturer figured that since the freezer is on the top of the fridge and at eye level, you can see what's in it by using the available light in the kitchen. Sometimes I have to use a flashlight because my wife hides Ben and Jerry's under stuff in the back."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2mi41t
|
how do surveys account for the inherit bias and lying in the answers it receives?
|
I always feel like I am bias in certain questions and wonder how it affects my outcome.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mi41t/eli5_how_do_surveys_account_for_the_inherit_bias/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cm4g65i",
"cm4gzt8",
"cm4steo"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Surveys are inevitably biased to some degree, but bias can be minimised using a number of strategies:\n\nSurvey design - trying to get the wording and ordering of questions in such a way that respondents are not influenced to answer in certain ways. \n\nSize of sample - a large sample with more respondents could potentially minimise bias, because even if a couple of participants deliberately lie, their impact on the overall findings is minimal. \n\nControl groups - testing the same survey with different target groups or slightly different formats (for example changes to the order and wording of questions) to see what difference this makes. \n\nCareful reporting - the reporting of survey results need to explicitly acknowledge potential biases, the gaps in the sample and the limits of the methodology. The findings must not be treated as 'facts' but as evidence that is limited by the nature of the research. For example, rather than report that \"our survey found that 15% of people cheat on their wives\", a good researcher will report that \"15% of survey respondents - mostly white males in their 40s - reported cheating on their wives\". ",
"They can check the internal consistency of your responses.\n\nOne method it to as the same question in different ways. Someone lying on the survey may not remember their previous responses, and not answer all of those questions the same way.",
" > inherit\n\nHi! It seems the word you're looking for is \"inherent\", thought you might like to know. Have a great day!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1szkow
|
why did tv resolution take so long to catch up to computer monitor resolution
|
Until about 5 years ago most monitors had more (and more dense) pixels than all but high end televisions. Why did it take so long for televisions to catch up? Even today, the iPad has more pixels than a 1080 TV.
Edit: to summarize below, computers monitors outpacing TVs in terms of resolution is a relatively new and short lived phenomenon. And the reason for the lag was largly dye to media not existing that works with the TV. In that respect, the question I still have is why didnt manufacturers use upscaling to increase thebperciwved image quality?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1szkow/eli5_why_did_tv_resolution_take_so_long_to_catch/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ce2tzpr",
"ce2u4qj",
"ce2ukbn"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Hundreds of millions of existing TVs that had to be supported by OTA broadcast signals.",
"You can take any computer monitor, and display any image (still or motion) on it. You can show it in a window at its native resolution, resize it, even stretch it to fill the monitor--video cards are quite versatile, and since computers tend to show images that need to be studied in detail, there has been a natural impulse to increase the resolution as fast as the processing power and video memory would allow.\n\nTelevision is harder, because everyone (manufacturers, broadcasters, content producers) has to agree on one fixed resolution (or a mere handful, such as 720p, 1080i, 1080p). Then they must produce flat panels, television sets, cameras, editing machines, broadcast equipment, etc, etc. All to those standards. Because TV is supposed to be \"easy\" for consumers to handle, many things get \"set in stone.\" You wont see TV resolutions increase until the next standard is hammered out. I think \"4k\" is in this process now.",
"There's a simple reason for this:\n\nThe TV **Stations** needed to be in synch with the improved resolution on the TV's before it'd make a difference. And lining that up is nontrivial. No consumer is particularly interested in paying a 300% premium for an \"HD\" TV when no broadcasters were supplying HD signal that could take advantage of it. Nor, for that matter, are TV broadcasters interested in doing the same *and believe you me*, their hardware's a **helluva** lot more expensive than our TV's.\n\nSo you ended up with a chicken-egg problem. This really was an impediement for a long time, until finally the FCC stepped in and said \"this is ridiculous\", and decided they were going to take back the airwaves (the radio channels broadcasters were transmitting their SD NTSC signals on).\n\nEven then, it was delays for about ten years past it's original plan before all *over-the-air* broadcasters finally switched over to HD. The original plan was late 90's. Remember when there were all those federally subsidized ATSC-to-NTSC converter boxes for sale in the mid-2000's? Those boxes were for the transition. They took the new ATSC (HD) signal out of the air and converted it to a regular NTSC (SD) signal that old TV's were used to.\n\nContrast this to how monitors & PC's work. Your PC is obsolete three years after you buy it. And your monitor gets replaced along with the TV about half the time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
14zo49
|
why does a big social network like twitter let me change my username, but virtually no other websites don't?
|
I my have used hyperbole, but right now I'm very upset that there is no way to change my Snapchat username. (I spelled hungry as "hugry" and me being Asian doesn't help the situation)
But I've always wondered why Twitter still lets me change my username. I thought they would stop letting people after it grew bigger--but nope. I can be JBlove95 one day and OnEdIrEcTiOn4LifE another as long as no one else uses them.
Is there a special reason?
*edit: ELI5 how do I change the title ;_;
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/14zo49/eli5_why_does_a_big_social_network_like_twitter/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7hx5vp",
"c7i340q",
"c7i5tcn"
],
"score": [
17,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Probably how the database that stores all the account information is set up. There needs to be a unique field for each account - either an account number or a username that nobody else can have. Allowing the user to change names means that all the other inter-linked things with that name, all the assosciations with other databases and so on, may be lost - or, the computer system will need to go through each of these and update each one, which is a pain in the ass and uses computational power that could be used elsewhere, which increases the risk of downtime just to keep a few people happy who change their names for stupid reasons many times a week.\n\nImagine if a bus company randomly decided that the number 44 was now the number 55. It would have to go around every bus stop and update the entire timetable, then update it's online timetables, then it'd have to deal with all the people that get pamphlets with the timetable on who have missed the 44 because it's now the 55. It's easier just to not do it.",
" > Why does a big social network like Twitter let me change my username, but virtually all other websites do\n\nDouble negative. But you're 5, so I'll let it slide.",
"My bank let me change my username. Boy did that come in handy after the divorce."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1yfzyb
|
why is it that calling/texting another country costs more but when visiting a website thats hosted in another country doesn't effect price.
|
Surely they use similar cable runs (not share) so wheres the cost incurred?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1yfzyb/eli5_why_is_it_that_callingtexting_another/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfk6rv6",
"cfk7km5",
"cfkgxsx"
],
"score": [
13,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm going to go ahead and guess it doesn't cost anywhere near as much as it used to do call internationally, but phone companies keep the prices jacked up for profit.",
"Partly because people are used to paying higher prices, and partly because it costs the phone company more.\n\nThe telephone system is separate from the internet, and uses different cables. The big difference is that while the internet uses packages, the phone system uses a dedicated channel, which gets set up when you place the call, and stays in place while the call is active.\n\nThe cable between the different countries can only handle a certain number of channels, so they charge for usage of them, to prevent them from getting flooded. \n\nVOIP works for the most part, but has to deal with bigger lag (as each package gets routed separately), dropped packages, and the possibility of packages arriving out of order (if they took different routes). The dedicated channel for telephones means that once you are connected, you generally stay connected.",
"It's a thing from the past, but companies are still milking it. Essentially, back in the day phone lines where actual copper all the way. Copper run from your house to your local exchange, and from there nationwide. International calls where part copper, part radio, radio being either land-to-land or land-satellite-land. The entire network didn't belong to the same operator, and even if it did, he still had increased costs for a longer call. Satellite bandwidth is insanely expensive. \n\nNowdays, it's all IP. Even companies that sell you regular landlines have their backbones in IP, and their connection to other carriers is over IP too. It's fiber all the way, and a phone call uses relatively low bandwidth, so the physical cost of actually calling someone on the other side of the globe is negligible, most of their cost is in the last mile and backbone. But of course, companies are still milking a thing of the past, so, when you want to buy minutes from another exchange, that exchange will sell you minutes at a different price than it sells them locally, even if that provider is the local exchange for that particular destination. So, say, the phone company in Somewhere, Some country will sell minutes at 0.01 to their local users in Somewhere, or will even offer unlimited plans, but when Someotherplace, Someothercountry wants to interconnect with them, Somewhere will sell (and buy) those same minutes at a higher price, when actually their cost of selling them to Someotherplace is lower, since it's a telco to telco interconnection, which most of the time is just a SIP account, and the maintenance and setup costs of that trunk is lower than a single last mile for a single local customer. \n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5opskq
|
why do cars take longer to warm up as they age?
|
A brand new car that I bought in November warmed up faster than a brand new car I bought in August; also, my old car would still be pumping out cold air despite the temperature gauge (near the speedometer, not the hot/cold dial) being in the middle when I reached work, whereas the new cars will have warm air coming out within 3-5 minutes.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5opskq/eli5_why_do_cars_take_longer_to_warm_up_as_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dcl3eht",
"dcl9vff"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Not nearly enough information to actually answer the question, but if the car is at operating temperature, and still not providing heat, I'd have the coolant system checked. You could be low on coolant, have an air pocket, or something could be broken/clogged. A car should not have \"aged\" between August and November enough to make a difference on the heating",
"Well, there's the obvious issue with the thermostat going bad (i've seen a few start opening sooner as they get older, so in effect it takes the car longer to warm up completely), but the biggest factor is design. Cars pollute a lot more when they're cold. There's been a huge push in the past 10-15 years to make engines warm up as quickly as possible. This is done through more complex cooling systems and thermostats (some newer cars have 2 thermostats), and mostly reduction of cooling system volume. Older cars used to have a cooling system capacity in the 3-5 gallon range, but a lot of newer cars may not even have a full gallon (though, to be fair, engines have gotten smaller as well)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
elw0wg
|
why are people more aggressive when driving than in other aspects of their lives?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/elw0wg/eli5_why_are_people_more_aggressive_when_driving/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fdkkw2y",
"fdkmehp",
"fdkmstp",
"fdknucg",
"fdko5mk",
"fdkopv4"
],
"score": [
36,
6,
9,
9,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It's easier to be free with your emotions when you are insulated from other people. \n\nIn a queue, you're face to face with people and you feel more vulnerable socially and physically. You have to deal with the consequences of any outbursts. So most people stay quiet. \n\nIn your car, you are practically alone and in a metal box. You don't have to deal with anyone else. So you feel more able to express any bad feelings.",
"While driving you are on high alert, it's a different mindset, a simple mistake/slip up could be fatal or have major financial implications. This stress causes you to be in fight or flight mode, more adrenaline and chemicals prepping you for action, leads to more aggressive behaviour",
"Because if another driver, in charge of a 2 ton deadly weapon acts like a dick by cutting you off they could quite easily kill you.\n\nI think getting angry at other drivers for appalling driving is very understandable. This then causes road rage and more aggressive driving on the victim's part.",
"According to Tom Vanderbilt in \"Traffic\" being in your vehicle allows a driver to dehumanize others and see them as an object rather than a person like them stuck in traffic. \n\nSo it isn't \"that guy is driving slow \" it's \"that red car is so slow\"\n\nWe are much more aggressive and less patient with objects than with people",
"I think it's related to the reason of why people are so toxic while online. They don't fear the consequences as much when someone isn't right in their face.",
"Same as the internet.\n\nPersonal interaction is governed by a set of societal norms: politeness and respect are often key to success. \n\nOn the internet, or driving a car, you anthropomorphize the car instead of treating it like a driver with a vehicle. It's easy to be mad at a machine, and you can't communicate with it effectively how you feel - so you rage."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2jevjl
|
how, if at all, is the love/attachment humans feel different from the love a dog feels for its master?
|
Or any other animal that seems capable of love/attachment
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jevjl/eli5_how_if_at_all_is_the_loveattachment_humans/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clb0vu6",
"clb1h1y",
"clb1z9g"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We can't really answer this, since we lack the means to truly probe a dog's emotional feelings, and they lack the means to articulate them.",
"my dogs' eyes dont light up like my sons' when i buy him the new roller coaster tycoon 3 for the wii u entertainment system",
"Honestly, I don't imagine it is different, except that arguably, our social systems are more complex than a dog's. Dogs and humans both feel love because of various hormones like serotonin and dopamine. When those chemicals release, we feel affection for someone. Love is love. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8c2xp6
|
why does paper books and notepads always curl at the corner after use?
|
For example notebooks, and notepads, the corner will always start curling as you use the books...I have a feeling it has to do with humidity, but never quite understood how that works. Any easy explanations?
And also - is there a way to prevent it from happening? To reverse it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8c2xp6/eli5_why_does_paper_books_and_notepads_always/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dxbr8cc"
],
"score": [
12
],
"text": [
"Paper Sales Rep checking in. Paper is manufactured in rolls and then slit into sheets. It has a curl to start out with. Humidity and wear. Are probably the biggest factors in your case though. \n\nAlso paper has a grain direction - direction it came off the machine at the mill - that it will naturally tear and curl in. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4v31ar
|
how is it that wheels allow movement of something several times that of one's strength?
|
I realize it's an odd question, I just mean normally pushing a 500lb block would be impossible for one person, but put it on a cart and it becomes doable. What is it about wheels that makes them move so easily?
Edit: Holy cow, thank you for all the answers. That's one less question burning in my head. You guys are awesome!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4v31ar/eli5_how_is_it_that_wheels_allow_movement_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d5v0ib2",
"d5v0j6a",
"d5v0nwu",
"d5v0qve"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Wheels don't require you to overcome the friction of the object, just the friction of the axels. So instead of having to produce the minimum force necessary to overcome friction to move the block (which is very large), you only have to overcome the friction in the axels to make the block start accelerating (which is much smaller)",
"Wheels reduce friction. if that same 500lbs block was on ice ( with a layer of water in between) you would be able to move it as easily or even easier than on a wheel ( because there is still friction, just a lot less)\n\n\n",
"On a flat surface you are not changing the 500 lb block's vertical position at all. It would take force to raise them higher. Changing their horizontal position does not change their potential energy. The only thing that makes moving them on a cart difficult is that we have friction between the moving parts (connecting the wheel to the cart, and between the wheels and the surface) and the weight of the object increases the friction vs the surface.\n\nIf we had a frictionless wheel and surface, the weight of the object inside the cart would be almost irrelevant. You could give it a push and without friction it would continue moving forever until you stopped it. I say almost because its own gravitational effect on other objects would start being relevant at some point i.e. things would be different if you were trying to cart the Moon :)",
"To push a 500lb block that's sitting on the ground, you have to overcome friction. Friction is a force that resists two objects sliding against each other. It scales with how hard they're pressed together, so a 250lb block will resist sliding across the ground with half the force as a 500lb block will.\n\nWheels are a way to get around friction. Wheels don't actually slide across the ground. They roll, meaning that any given point on the tire will get pressed down onto the ground, then pulled up off the ground as the axle moves by above it, but it shouldn't ever slide. When a wheel starts sliding is when you get the \"screeeee\" sound of a car skidding out of control.\n\nIn effect, you get the same result when pushing your block with a cart as you would sliding it on an icy or otherwise frictionless surface."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2hln70
|
if the west spends almost a trillion every year on their military, why can't they easily neutralize organizations such as isis?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hln70/eli5_if_the_west_spends_almost_a_trillion_every/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cktt5cr",
"cktti7k",
"cktttto",
"cktusq7",
"cku17ik",
"ckuga8u"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Mainly because we don't know exactly where they are nor where their main infrastructure/weapons are. Sometimes we nail them but for the most part it's 50/50. ISIS is a terrorist org that does not fight for a state - they are a network of people performing acts of terrorism. These type of people find shelter in less accessible places like mountains/underground, or in places like normal houses on a street. \n\nThus it requires more resources, department agencies, and money to analyze all the data, locate targets, coordinate, execute missions, etc.",
"There are multiple factors aside from the initial of actually getting approval for pursuing ISIS.\n\nThey are not representatives of a nation or actual territory. They represent an idea and what they are doing is calling for all Muslims to assist them in attacking Western nations. Which then means that any Muslim could be apart of ISIS, and then that means that its cause can be carried on by anyone.\n\nAtop of that, you then can't just target every Muslim. This is the difficulty with insurgencies (look up Insurgencies. It's what the \"War\" in Afghanistan is) in that targets are not overly obvious or evident.\n\nAnother factor is that by making the first big blow perpetuates their cause and ideals. They say the West is bad. The West attacks them and essentially is twisted into proving their point.\n\nAll in all, it is the same reasons for why the Al-Qaeda still remained a treat and haven't even come close to \"losing\".\n\nI'm certain there are a lot more reasons why it can't be done so readily but it isn't a matter of money or muscle. The US budget is irrelevant in this case.",
"It basically comes down to the fact that ISIS is not just a military; it's basically a kind of government or organisation that people live in and fight for. Not everyone living in ISIS-controlled towns is part of ISIS, but because ISIS doesn't have a uniform, you can't know who is or isn't an ISIS fighter until they start shooting at you or until you have evidence that they've recently been fighting or supporting the fighting.\n\nIf you're able to identify who is a fighter for ISIS, you can kill them, so long as there is going to be minimal collateral damage. When ISIS fighters come out to fight, they're easy targets. However, those that do come out into the open only form a small fraction of those that exist or are willing to fight. You can kill those small groups of fighters, but then you upset their families and neighbours who may then become more encouraged to fight.\n\nIf the US wanted to destroy ISIS, they could, simply by using nuclear or other heavy weaponry to destroy ISIS-controlled towns, etc.\n\nOf course, that would mean killing a massive amount of innocent people, which is wrong from a moral and ethical perspective and is likely to result in friendly nations nearby becoming a bit less friendly / a bit wary of you and your methods.",
"Because ISIL is an idea, not a person. It's a collection of people rallying to a common cause and fucking shit up. We could kill leaders that come up, but it would at best splinter the group into smaller, more radicalized (if that is possible) subgroups. Which is exactly how ISIL (a splinter of AQ) was created in the first place.",
"We spent the majority of that money to fight a type of war ISIS is incapable of and unwilling to fight. Our defense forces are asymmetrically aligned against this type of threat. The west could steamroll most conventional enemies. ISIS is not organized, uniformed or equipped like a traditional military.\n\nImagine you spent $100,000 on a performance sports car but all the sudden everywhere you wanted to drive could only be reached by gravel roads.\n\nWe're taking a Ferrari off road; it's not super efficient even if it might eventually get you where you'd like to go.",
"We could, if we didn't care about civilian casualties. In Iraq and Afghanistan and pretty much every military mission, our troops fight with one hand tied behind their backs. \n\nIf for one 24 hour period we gave a weapons free, no rules of engagement to our troops. ISIS would be devastated along with the entire country "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3gcovi
|
why do bugs all have more than four legs, while basically every other terrestrial animal has four or less?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gcovi/eli5_why_do_bugs_all_have_more_than_four_legs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctww1mq",
"ctwwazb",
"ctwxjmx",
"ctwzap4",
"ctx7jol",
"ctxitzb"
],
"score": [
14,
115,
24,
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Insects were there before any other land animal, so in their name let me say: \"shut up you degenerate legcount-challenged mutant\".\n\nOk, seriously, having lots of legs has definite advantages like better grip and having a few to spare. Also walking is a whole lot easier when it comes to falling over.",
"Insects' evolutionary journey favored 6 legs. Ants can carry items with the front legs and still have 4 legs for balance and weight distribution. A beetle with a big ass has 6 legs to stabilize all that rear weight. Climbing walls with 6 feet means more contact with the wall at any given time. \nThink of ants digging out s tunnel or bees finding pollen or s dung beetle rolling up poop. Think of a butterfly emerging from a cocoon or a moth landing on a vertical surface. Every action is easier because of the multiple points of contact. Even flipping over if they're upside down is easier with 6 long, multiple-jointed, centrally-anchored legs. ",
"The exact reason is there is no exact reason, this was just the number of legs that worked for their ancestors at a certain point in time. \n\nLand vertebrates are *tetrapods*, all evolved from the same common ancestor. Amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals evolved from fish with leg-like fins, and even by that point they had already settled on four limbs. Different circumstances might have easily led to a different number of limbs, but it didn't (many of these early examples have different numbers of *fingers* or finger precursors but 5 fingers just happened to win)\n\nInsects, arachnids, and other arthropods evolved from aquatic arthropods that were already using lots of legs to move and swim in the ocean. Think about shrimp and crabs and stuff, lots of legs. These different groups of arthropods ended up with different numbers of walking legs (6 for insects, 8 for arachnids, many more for millepedes and centipedes, etc). Some insects only use 4 legs for walking and have adapted the other two for other jobs (like a praying mantis)",
"Because all four legged creatures are related to one another and share a common ancestor. The four limbs has been part of our body plan since before the first fish crawled out of the water. All the creatures who something like a inner skeleton have it.\n\nMeanwhile a different more flexible body plan came up with the Arthropods, basically all the creatures with an exoeskeleton. It gave rise to all the 6-limbed creatures like insects, but also to all the 8 limbed creatures like spiders and scorpions and to some with many limbs like centipedes etc.\n\nBecause of the segmented was these creatures are build it is relatively easy to add another segment thanks to a mutation.\n\nMeanwhile with 4-limbed creatures gaining another set of limbs is much less likely to work.\n\nThere is actually a very large and diverse number of 'bugs' around but we tend to group them all together because they are all small creepy crawelys. Their body plan does not allow for growth beyond a certain point.",
"Hardly any terrestial animal has 4 legs (or limbs). Insects have 6, arachnids (spiders and scorpions) have 8, crustaceans have even more, and myriapoda (centipedes and millipedes) have up to lord knows how many. As far as I know no anthropode has 4 legs and they make up 80% of all animal species in the world.\n\nAs for vertebrates, the animals you seem to mean, they've evolved out of fishes. Our limbs used to be fins, which can be seen particularly well in the coelacanth. A fish that has fins with a similar bone structure resembling the limbs of terrestrial animals. I imagine a long time ago a coelacanth like creature found it usefull to use it's fins to drag itself forward along the mud. As time passed and evolution did it's magic these fins slowly morphed into limbs. Hence most terrestrial vertebrates have 4 limbs. The ones who don't have lost them again later on, or evolved them into wings, and some early mamals even retreated back to the sea and evolved their limbs even further (not back) into fins.they became whales and dolphins.\n\nWhen viewed in this light, the question becomes, why don't fish have more fins?",
"an important thing to note is the bugs out number all other types of terrestrial animal combined. That being said having 6 legs must be a pretty big advantage to survival"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
17bz0p
|
emission and absorption spectra:
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17bz0p/eli5_emission_and_absorption_spectra/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c84ismu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The first thing you have to know is that light has energy, and that it can give that energy to other things that it runs into.\n\nDifferent atoms, however can only exist at specific energy levels. Picture it like a ladder. You can climb a ladder by taking a step up to the next rung, but you can't put your feet in between two rungs. It takes a specific amount of energy to take each step.\n\nA perfect light source emits light at all energy levels, a *continuous spectrum*, like a rainbow. If you put a cloud of gas between the light and yourself, the gas will take away any light that matches exactly the energy that it wants, whatever will help it climb the ladder. This means that you see an *absorption spectrum*. It's mostly a full rainbow, but there are a few pieces missing.\n\nAtoms don't like being at high energy states, though. Maybe they're afraid of heights or get dizzy or something, but they'd rather stay at the lowest energy they can, the *ground state*. To get back down, they give away energy as light. Just like during absorption, it has to put its feet on the rungs of the ladder, so there are only certain colors of light that it can emit. It's also important to note that this light can be emitted in any direction.\n\nThis means that if you look at the same cloud of gas from a different angle, without the light source in the background, the only parts of the rainbow that you will see are the ones that were removed in the first place. This is an *emission spectrum.*\n\nCheck out this cool [picture](_URL_0_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~jbattat/a35/images/figure_05-14.jpg"
]
] |
||
5a6945
|
why do our hairs stand up when we get the chills?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5a6945/eli5_why_do_our_hairs_stand_up_when_we_get_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9dzx1j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It stems from back when our body hair was a lot thicker. When we got cold, or frightened, your hair would stand on end either to insulate us better, or to give the appearance that we are bigger that we are. Picture a cat when it gets startled. Over time, our hair got thinner, but this trait remained."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7kxlym
|
what is so bad about fur that gives somebody who eats meat the right to be outraged about it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kxlym/eli5_what_is_so_bad_about_fur_that_gives_somebody/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drhy0vg"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I would suggest that it's not entirely rational (what about leather; what about meat), but makes an easy target since most people don't own any furs (and those who do are often the rich). And in *some* cases fur is obtained in cruel ways.\n\nAhoy, matey! Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5:Why do people get angry over fur and animal fashion items but not meat? ](_URL_4_) ^(_11 comments_)\n1. [ELI5:Why fur is evil, but leather is fine. ](_URL_0_) ^(_14 comments_)\n1. [ELI5: What's the difference between animal fur and animal skin? ](_URL_1_) ^(_14 comments_)\n1. [Why is it bad to wear/buy real fur? ](_URL_2_) ^(_6 comments_)\n1. [Why is leather considered more ethical than fur? ](_URL_3_) ^(_ > 100 comments_)\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2irle7/eli5why_fur_is_evil_but_leather_is_fine/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5jfgyd/eli5_whats_the_difference_between_animal_fur_and/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/3w8k1b/why_is_it_bad_to_wearbuy_real_fur/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/17mmhc/why_is_leather_considered_more_ethical_than_fur/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7hegl9/eli5why_do_people_get_angry_over_fur_and_animal/"
]
] |
||
2ciaoo
|
cross ventilation
|
My room has just one window and opposite to it lies a bathroom door with a vent. If I keep the window and the bathroom door open, the room is cool. Else it warms up pretty fast even when just the window is open.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ciaoo/eli5_cross_ventilation/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjfqg6s",
"cjfr3zq"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Pressure. So you want some cool air from the onside to come in? The air already inside is like a full cup of water: you can't efficiently add anything to it without allowing some to leave. The second window is a pressure-release to let air come in from the first window.",
"The cool air from the vent is replacing the air in the room when you have the window open. cool air comes in and warm air leaves. When one of the two is closed, air is not circulating and thus sits still and warms up eventually through your presence and any electronics functioning.\n\nWhen the window is closed, the cool air has to distribute the energy from the air that is already in the room to cool the room down. With the window open, the cooler air simply replaces the warm air.\n\nSource: Heat and Mass Transfer class, HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning) is a specialty of mechanical engineering\n\nyou could say it might have a little to do with pressure, but since your room isn't pressurized (air likely escapes through the door and any other vents) the pressure will not change and the air from the vent will still continue to flow. The issue is heat distribution\n\n-------------------------\n\nTo add to this (not really necesarry but interesting) when you have air moving, it will feel effectively cooler on your skin than when it isn't moving. This is due to natural convection, the air against your body heats up pretty quick and is removed from your skin due to the convection currents created by the temperature difference. Warm air rises and cool air descends. When the window is open, the air is flowing across your body and removing heat, thus feeling much warmer. The air is once again leaving the room as well, so the heat from your body and the surroundings is picked up by the cool air and carried out of the room. The room will equalize with the vent temperature eventually. If the heat has nowhere to go the cool air will absorb and evenly distribute the heat around the room, lowering the temperature. There is a limit to this, and the temperature will be somewhere between the previous room temperature and the temperature of the vent"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
33nb7f
|
why can i play online games with zero lag with 11 other online players in a 1080p game at 60fps but a webpage is often very slow to load?
|
It seems so backwards!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33nb7f/eli5_why_can_i_play_online_games_with_zero_lag/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqmixp3",
"cqmiy5y",
"cqmol86"
],
"score": [
12,
2,
11
],
"text": [
"There's relatively little data being passed around for the game, it's not like streaming a 1080p 60fps video. The computers are just exchanging information about who has moved, fired their gun, etc, and all the rendering of the images happens on your computer based on that information.",
"A multiplayer game is much more optimized in terms of the amount of data that it needs to send than the average web page.\n\nAlso, the netcode of a good game has all sorts of stuff built into it to try to compensate for lag. If the game doesn't get some packets that it's expecting to tell it where another character went, it might try to interpolate where the character went and show that to you. It's probably not entirely accurate, but hopefully it guessed closely enough that when it gets the data and updates, you won't notice too big of a shift. \n\nIt doesn't always get this sort of stuff right though, which is why you sometimes see characters rubber band around a map or die to bullets when you thought you were already out of line of sight or whatever. ",
"First time poster here after years of lurking, and for whatever reason this question pulled me out of the depths. So here goes... I think its because I'm a gamer, web programmer and also have a CS degree and felt like this question was calling my name. :D\n\nIn its simplest form, the other commenters are correct that there just isn't a high volume of information being passed over the network/internet between the players of a video game (even faster if you are playing on a LAN - Local Area Network, which is not over the internet, but you can kind of think of a LAN as a 'personal internet'). You aren't passing graphical information or anything, just locations and the like, coordinates/positions. The graphic and physical computation is all done on your machine. Lets break that down a bit for fun.\n\nNotice, that the 'loading' of a video game and the 'loading' of a web page are more similar:\n\nIn the first situation, your computer is loading the game; its engine(the physics etc), its graphics(think of a ton of tiny pictures that are used to construct your 'graphics'/'rendering' of the game), etc all from your hard drive and into your RAM(Random Access Memory). Reading information from a hard drive is 'expensive'(it takes a long time). Things on the hard drive need to be located, read and sent to RAM before they can be processed. In contrast, RAM has no moving parts, and data/information can be read almost instantly (I wont go into specific as to exactly why). When your computer is on, every program you are running, including the operating system is located in the RAM.\n\nIn the second situation, your computer requests information from a URL(the page 'name' you typed into the browser search bar). The request goes out to something called a DNS (Domain Name Server), websites are registered there with their address(the URL) and from there it knows where to forward your request to retrieve a page or information. Your request then arrives at the server actually hosting (making available to the internets) the web pages, and it sends you the page that you requested. This part of the page request is actually pretty fast(sometimes), but the rendering of all the components on your end (called the Client) can take some time, depending on how fancy the page is!\n\nYou can think of it like this. If you want to retrieve information out of a book at the library (before you know... internets) you have to; Look up the book location on some computer, locate the book on the shelf, find the relevant information the book (you are the hard drives moving arm/reader, the library/shelves is/are the hard drive). Now that you are on the page however, the information just has to go from your eyes to your brain(kinda, and as long as you can read). That connection between your eyes and the brain represents RAM, its fast!\n\nWell that was fun, time for me to leave work, hope someone finds this informative!\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1dkbok
|
why are so many dvd video torrents always something like 101% the size of a dvd?
|
I haven't really done much of this stuff for many years because I just default to Netflix and other streaming options nowadays. But this has always bothered me, so I might as well ask this.
I can understand it in the case of CDs, because CDs allow overburning. I remember trying to figure this out on my own years ago, and my research told me that DVDs can't possibly allow for overburning for one reason or another.
But yeah, I always see packages for things that are something like 4500+ MB, when my burning software tells me DVDs can only hold 4483 MB. And this is the same deal with dual-layered DVDs. I'll see stuff offered at 8.9 GB, but my software tells me the capacity is 8152 MB.
Obviously, from my perspective, those sizes are so close to the capacity of DVDs, that I figure they were meant to be sized to be burned directly to DVD with no problems. So why are these things always roughly 101% the capacity of a DVD (or in the case of the dual-layer, 110%)?
EDIT: Discrepancy of the dual-layer stats/percentage.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1dkbok/eli5_why_are_so_many_dvd_video_torrents_always/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9r5exv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"While I'm not 100% sure this is the answer to your problem, there is a discrepancy in the terms. Memory storage is created in 2^x bytes because that is the logical design when using binary data storage, however they are often described in 10^x bytes because of marketing and public familiarity with the prefixes. \n\nThe prefixes Kilo-, Mega- and Giga- actually represent 10^3, 10^6 and 10^9 respectively and aren't the prefixes that make sense with the memory design, however these prefixes are used because we are familiar with these prefixes from the Metric System. The prefixes that make more sense would be Kibi-, Mibi- Gibi- which represent 2^10, 2^20, 2^30 . \n\nSo while you're DVD promises 8.9 GB ( 8.9 x 10^9 ), its actually delivering 8.289 GiB ( 8.289 x 2^30 = 8.9 x 10^9 ).\n\nThe problem gets worse when you realize that all of your data connections are described in Mega**bits** (Mb) as opposed to Mega**bytes** (MB)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
78pxjm
|
confidence intervals? what are they and what do they do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/78pxjm/eli5_confidence_intervals_what_are_they_and_what/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dovr8y7"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"When we talk about statistics, we have to distinguish between studying a sample and studying a population.\n\nWe very rarely can test the population as a whole, so we tend to take samples of the population to run our calculations on.\n\nNow, a sample is only part of the population, so the confidence interval lets us approximate a population parameter if we're only given a sample statistic\n\nLet's say that we want to know the average height of every adult male in the united states. We take a sample of 100 people from each state for some reason, and find that the average height of the sample is 5'9\", with a standard deviation of 3\"\n\nThen, if we know that the sample came from the population, we can make the assumption that the actual mean height of the population of adult males in the United States is within some range of 5'9\"\n\nSpecifically, we can say with some degree of confidence that the population mean is somewhere between 69-3z and 69+3z inches, where z is a value that is determined by the degree of confidence you want.\n\nSo let's say you want to be 95% confident, so mostly certain, but with just a small degree of uncertainty. Then z=1.95, so we can say that the average population height is somewhere between 69-3(1.95) and 69+3(1.95) inches tall"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2r04sr
|
how apple devices know if i'm using an official apple cable or not?
|
I bought a third party iPhone USB cable when I lost my first one. I can plug it into a wall-charger fine, but when I use it to try to sync with iTunes on my computer, the phone starts acting like it's going to detonate.
If cables are just wires, how do Apple devices know they are not authentic?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r04sr/eli5_how_apple_devices_know_if_im_using_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnb578j"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"There's basically a chip in the lightning connector, which effectively sends a signal saying \"Im legit\". The device just registers this."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1pgz3y
|
if an ambulance is responding to a call and on their way they see a hit and run/car accident what is the emt's priority?
|
Who gets helped first? Are they forced to continue to respond to the first call or can they stop and help the people that are right there in front of them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1pgz3y/eli5if_an_ambulance_is_responding_to_a_call_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cd26jjb",
"cd26sah",
"cd26ua7",
"cd27loe",
"cd28rpc",
"cd29np8",
"cd2a0u3"
],
"score": [
9,
5,
2,
7,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I'm sure it depends on severity. If they see a severe collision and were on their way to a broken bone, they'd probably stop to help after radioing to the dispatcher their status and diversion. If it were a minor collision but they were on the way to a multiple-casualty attack, they might drive on, again notifying dispatch of the situation.",
"It's a triage situation. If they're already responding on a time sensitive issue (heart attack, gun shot, etc.), they're going to blow past it and call dispatch for another ambulance. \n\nIf they're responding to something lower priority, and see a high priority incident, they'll defer and call dispatch for another ambulance for their original call.",
"If it isn't a serious accident then the ambulance can continue else its the responsibility of the ambulance staff(or the hospital which own the ambulance) to arrange for an alternate vehicle for both. ",
"I don't know about ambulances but years ago my house caught on fire. A kid at a nearby school had pulled a fire alarm, the fire truck had to drive past my burning house to go to the school. House ended up being a complete loss. There was a big uproar about it since there had been 3 false alarms at the school that week but I wasn't mad about it, what could have been was far worse than what was.",
"Responding Fire and Ambulance crews can exercise discretion when responding to an alarm. In short, if they happen upon an incident with a higher degree of risk to life and limb, they may stop and offer assistance. in the case of the homeowner who lost their house as a fire truck drove past responding to a fire alarm at a school. I would have done the same thing. A school full of kids is a higher priority than a single home dwelling. ",
"These guys are all correct. I will usually slow down, and take a look. If it is 2 people outside of their cars walking and talking on their cell phones, I will just wave and drive on. County dispatch is usually already aware their is a crash. But, if I pull by and I see someone slumped over a steering wheel, it becomes different. Then it's a question of whats worse? If I am on the way to a drunk guy who calls every day for nausea, yeah, I am gonna stop for a minute and tell county. If I am on my way to a ped seizure, I will usually let county know the location of the accident and keep going to my call. \n\nOne time on the turnpike on a rainy day, we stopped for 2 accidents on the way to the accident we were originally dispatched for. We ended up at the hospital with 2 patients and a dog. It was a 3 ring circus. lol.",
"My experience: we'd stop and check out what happened in front of us, advise dispatch, and someone else would go on the original assignment. My understanding was that having witnessed the accident we were now on scene for an email call and leaving would constitute potentially abandoning a patient. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3p50ui
|
why can't we use the puplic air waves, radio and tv, to supply wifi to most metropolitan areas?
|
almost no one uses these for tv any more, and radio has been dead for years but no one has the heart to tell them
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p50ui/eli5why_cant_we_use_the_puplic_air_waves_radio/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw35qfy",
"cw35qwd",
"cw35zc6"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"With wifi you need to both send and recieve a signal to upload and download data.\n\nRadio and TV are one way systems, and if you did use a hand held transmitter, you would have limited range. Think: Walkie Talkie.",
"Neither of your claims about these being dead are true. People listen to radio in cars, and people still watch broadcast TV.",
"The thing that's keeping us from having ubiquitous wifi isn't not-enough-RF-spectrum. It's needing to have thousands and thousands of wifi hubs, and figuring out how to pay for them, plus the internet connections they use.\n\nWhy wouldn't we just have a few hubs that serve a broad area? After all, that's what we do with, you know, radio and tv. Because those things are one-way: you only need to get a signal *from* the broadcast tower; for wifi, your computer needs to send signals back to the hub, and your laptop can't transmit far enough."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7n25qz
|
why can you smell the cold on someone?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7n25qz/eli5_why_can_you_smell_the_cold_on_someone/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dryfg9b"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I know what you mean, I always thought the smell was kind of “ozone-y”, and figured it had something to do with that, like when it rains? I don’t have an actually answer, just weighing in. I’m curious too! ^~^"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
1ro2br
|
why i can't cook with my coleman camp stove inside, but my cabin stove is propane fueled?
|
Is it just a liability thing or will I really die?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ro2br/eli5_why_i_cant_cook_with_my_coleman_camp_stove/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdp55w0"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A camp stove does not have a precision burner or a gas valve that delivers the fuel at a precise pressure. The emissions from that burner are not as well controlled as they are on a domestic cooking appliance. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
1cps72
|
the public safety exemption to miranda rights
|
According to CNN's Jake Tapper (twitter feed 4/19 6:34 PST), the police invoked the 'Public Safety' exemption to Miranda rights when they arrested the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings. I found the FBI's page (see below) on it but I'm a five year old.
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1cps72/eli5_the_public_safety_exemption_to_miranda_rights/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c9iuhjx",
"c9ivukw",
"c9ixctf",
"c9izkcz",
"c9j0mvf"
],
"score": [
2,
7,
20,
10,
3
],
"text": [
"Came to ELI5 to post this same question - Wikipedia [mentions it](_URL_0_), but it seems to be quite narrow and not necessarily applicable in the case of somebody already in custody like this.",
"It basically means the public is still at danger so your rights (the suspects rights to miranda) become over shadowed by the need to control and secure the situation. \n\nMiranda its self is pretty simple, just a brief explanation of the rights you do have and assurance that you understand that you possess these rights. This is saying \"hey, your rights are null and void because you are still an extreme danger to the us or the public even though you are in custody so to bad, tell us everything we want to know\"\n\nThe majority of the time suspects are under control and the situation is secure and all the hoopla is over, which is not the case in this situation so those rights have to be suspended in order to protect the public. ",
"The link you provided gives an excellent summary. As it says, \"...police officers confronting situations that create a danger to themselves or others may ask questions designed to neutralize the threat without first providing a warning of rights.\" In other words, if you think that you or the people around you are in danger of being seriously hurt, you can take action to protect yourself before worrying about reading the Miranda warning. \n\nThere are some further details that go on to elaborate on when the rule can be applied. In one case, a man is arrested and found to have a gun holster but no gun. A police officer arrested him and asked him where the gun was. In another case, police and multiple suspects got into a gunfight. One of the men reached for a bag that was later found to contain bombs. Upon finding these bombs, police officers talked to a suspect and asked if there were other bombs and how to disarm them. \n\nThe article analyzes these examples further by explaining a few key patterns in cases where the public safety exception applies. Basically, the information at hand must relate to an immediate threat to the safety of the cops or the general public. The other key element is that the information must be provided voluntarily, not coercively. In other words, you can ask the suspect a question but you can't beat him up to get him to talk. \n\nTL;DR: Information can be used in court without the Miranda warning if it meets 2 conditions. First, it must relate to an immediate safety threat (eg. \"Where is the bomb?\" or \"Do you have any weapons on you?\"). Second, the suspect must voluntarily answer the question without being forced. ",
"The Public Safety exemption is supported by a Supreme Court ruling stating that the general well being of public is more important and because of that, the Miranda warning may be waived in order to allow immediate interrogation. This is usually reserved for cases of urgency where every minute counts. \n\nThe current usage is somewhat uncharted territory because the officials have basically confirmed that any real danger has passed. There's always the argument that because his is a terrorist that he may know of further plots and out of urgency they need to interrogate him to find more information to prevent any further attacks.\n\nIt's also important to point out that the Miranda warning is needed or any confession made *can be* ruled inadmissible in court. There's no legal requirement that a suspect must be mirandized, it's just procedure to ensure that any confession or correspondence between a suspect and authorities is \"sound\" in a legal sense.\n\nIn this case, there's a large quantity of evidence that will easily get him convicted. This allows the government to basically take the risk of any confession being thrown out because they have a case without it. This way, they can get as much information as soon as possible from him without having to go through all the legal loopholes of providing a lawyer, etc and the fear of losing the legal battle.",
"Let's take a step back, first. Despite the media latching on to this, there is no Miranda rights reading at arrest. You are read your rights prior to questioning. Furthermore, the suspect has been reported as unconscious at the time of arrest so they would have to wait and read him his rights when he comes to anyways. "
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/february2011/legal_digest"
] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning#Public_safety_exception"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
q1gb9
|
why do we have sleep cycles?
|
After reading a couple ELI5 threads I understand we have sleep cycles and working with them can help us feel more refreshed when we wake up.
But WHY do we have sleep cycles?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/q1gb9/why_do_we_have_sleep_cycles/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3tybb1",
"c3tydxp"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"The honest answer is that we don't really understand sleep.\n\nThere's some evidence that some phases of sleep serve to refresh the brain contents, sort, arrange and interpret stored memories, kind of like \"disk check and defrag\" for the brain. A massive pruning of certain types of synapses appears to occur as well. It probably goes beyond just that.\n\nSleep deprivation is definitely not good, could be even lethal in the extreme.",
"Sleep is one of the most mysterious things in psychology and neurology. We really don't know a lot about it. We don't know exactly why we need to sleep, and what exactly is occurring when we do sleep. We just know that most people, except a weird farmer in Vietnam, will die in under 2 weeks without sleep.\n\nWe seem to have a sleep cycle because there is a cycle of day and night, and only a few hundred years ago, it was only really feasible to do productive things in the day before having to go to sleep at night because there were no electric lighting fixtures. Even more so for our distant ancestors, who were yet to discover fire. Since sleep is clearly a necessity, and there is already a natural day/night rhythm in place that represents useful daylight hours for hunting and gathering food, and night time, which isn't much good except for... well, sleeping and sexing. Almost every organism has at least some kind of *circadian rhythm*, which is just a daily pattern that it biologically follows. Ours is most obviously demonstrated by our sleep cycle.\n\nFrom a physiological perspective, we have sleep cycles because of our hormones."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
22pit1
|
how can the french have such relaxed work standards and not have their economy collapse?
|
It's now illegal in France to answer emails after 6pm. [Link.](_URL_0_) Are they that more productive when they work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22pit1/eli5_how_can_the_french_have_such_relaxed_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgp3g6n",
"cgp3rux",
"cgp3v16",
"cgp671z"
],
"score": [
3,
10,
4,
2
],
"text": [
" > _URL_0_\n\nNo, their productivity is just low.",
"France has one of the most tightly regulated labour markets in the EU (the only country which comes close here is Spain).\n\nFrance ranked 8th in GDP per hour worked in 2012 (my source is the OECD) and this may suggest that labour is being underemployed. This would seem to be correct if you compare its unemployment figures to that of the UK (a neighbouring country with very similar population).\n\nFrance has 10.4% unemployment whilst the UK has 7.1%.\nNot only that, but the only labour reforms France has bother to undergo have come at the margin and this has led to a more pronounced dual sector labour market. Now we are seeing more people on short term contracts: \n\"it turns out that about 70 per cent to 90 per cent of entries into employment are in temporary jobs with very short duration (on average less than one month and a half in France)\"\n\nThese types of jobs are characterised by lower job security and higher job turnover.\n\nTLDR: If you go to France, due to the crazy labour laws you are unlikely to find a job because regulations are deterring employers from hiring you. If you do somehow find one, it will probably be one on a short term contract where the strict labour laws don't apply and as a result you can be easily fired.",
"I think this article may be a slight misrepresentation of the story. After going to the original source (I will admit my French is not so good), it appears to me that this is simply a collective labor agreement, not a law.\n\nFor example, in North America, you may have unions which require all members (e.g. employees of a company) to go on strike if the union is unable to negotiate a satisfactory collective labor agreement. In this case, it's not really illegal if you are a member of the union and don't strike, but you may be required to strike in order to keep your union membership and benefit from the labor agreement.\n\nFrom what I can see, that's pretty much what's happening here except that the mega-Organization/Union (Syntec) representing the employees (and their respective unions) is telling employees they must not respond to business emails etc. after 6 PM as part of a new labor agreement. \n\nIn other words, it just seems as though this organization which represents employee unions has negotiated a new agreement where members of the union are not to do business work after 6 PM and employers are not to force employees to do such work (as a means of further protecting employees).",
"There is a mandatory minimum eleven consecutive hours per day of rest (that's not French law, that's EU law). What the collective labor agreement referenced there says about email is that internal regulations of compagnies should mention that one is allowed not to answer emails during that time."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.theguardian.com/money/shortcuts/2014/apr/09/french-6pm-labour-agreement-work-emails-out-of-office"
] |
[
[
"http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-01-06/more-evidence-france-is-the-new-sick-man-of-europe"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
62y2l2
|
why is the scotus not chosen by a an independent committee of judges and law experts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62y2l2/eli5_why_is_the_scotus_not_chosen_by_a_an/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfpxa7m"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"...and who would choose the members of that \"independent\" committee? "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4g8gpy
|
why do people, mainly conservatives, say that president obama has set race relations back fifty years?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4g8gpy/eli5_why_do_people_mainly_conservatives_say_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2fdz6j"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"European here - do they actually say that? This is the first time I've heard of it. Though if it's mainly conservatives, I wouldn't be surprised if the explanation turned out to be \"because those people don't like President Obama.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3034a3
|
why is bioengineering humans unethical? like in brave new world
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3034a3/eli5_why_is_bioengineering_humans_unethical_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpoo2nv",
"cpoo38n"
],
"score": [
6,
5
],
"text": [
"At the moment, we have about a 2% success rate in creating transgenic organisms. Once we have successes, we breed them.\n\nHow high does that success rate have to be before it's ethical? 99%? Are we willing to kill one in every hundred people just to be superhuman? For a non-life threatening procedure on a person incapable of giving consent, the success rate would have to be huge.\n\nOnce we've achieved that, is it cheap? If we make one race of wealthy supermen who have all the money to rule us into perpetuity, that's hardly ideal. We would need bioengineering with a 99.99999% success rate to be available for under $5000, with a subsidy from the government to cover minimum wage workers.\n\nWith those two things? Probably not unethical. But we are so ludicrously far from that right now that it's not really plausible to even speculate about it.",
"Realistically, the vast majority of citizens in *Brave New World* could be wiped out quite easily by one or two plagues. The problem is that bioengineering promotes specific genotypes which appear ideal under certain conditions, but those conditions may not remain consistent, and the increased dominance of those genotypes brought on by bioengineering would have a homogenizing effect on the gene pool that would increase a population's susceptibility to certain threats. The most serious threats would be unforeseeable viral mutations, rapid (and unplanned) alterations to our living conditions, etc. There's a detailed post [here](_URL_0_) about the importance of biological diversity within the context of conservation of other species, but in principal many of the arguments made there could be applied to humanity's genetic diversity as well."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26alo9/eli5_why_is_it_so_important_to_save_the_life_of/chpbizj"
]
] |
||
3ekz67
|
why can't the nfl broadcast it's games online separately from cable and satellite much like hbo and showtime did?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ekz67/eli5_why_cant_the_nfl_broadcast_its_games_online/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctfwd43"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"It probably can... assuming their deals with the networks and cable/satellite TV companies do not prohibit them from doing so.\n\nHowever, the question is not whether they can, which they can surely figure out or negotiate the ability to, it is if it is actually in the NFL's best financial interest to do so.\n\nThey sell the rights to broadcast their games to the networks, who pay massive sums of money to the NFL for this. If the NFL allowed direct to consumer access, bypassing the networks and pay-tv companies, they would not be able to charge anywhere near as much for selling their game rights.\n\nSo if they think they can make more going direct to consumers than they lose in the deals with the networks its a good option. As of now, the networks pay such ridiculously high fees for carrying NFL games, its unlikely a direct to consumer method is more profitable."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2dbi3c
|
how can a successful human like robin williams be depressed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dbi3c/eli5_how_can_a_successful_human_like_robin/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjnww3s",
"cjnwxce",
"cjnx46a"
],
"score": [
18,
7,
12
],
"text": [
"The same way a successful human can come down with cancer or heart-disease. The brain is physical; depression is a physical condition. It is better to think of it as brain disease rather than a problem of attitude and outlook.",
"We only saw the bright, or manic side; when the mood swings the other way - plunges, more accurately - a swing over which one has no control - then utter despair and self-contempt can dominate the mind.",
"First, let's be very clear that depression does NOT mean a 'low mood' in the context of Robin Williams. He battled severe depression - the medical term and condition - for years prior to his death.\n\nDepression and other forms of mental illness are just that, illnesses. You're actually **sick** and not operating normally. The chemicals in your brain aren't working the same as for other people, or other things that cause it. And these don't pay any attention at all to how much money you have in the bank or how entertaining you are, in the same way a common cold doesn't.\n\nSuccessful people can be depressed because there's not a causative relationship between the medical condition known as depression and the sufferer's level of success (or of the opposite, failure). In fact, there's a correlation between intensely intelligent people and depression rather than the opposite. And it can cause the most successful person to think about nothing but their failures, but failing doesn't always cause depression. \n\nAs an extra bit of data, it also won't show unless they want it to or you're around them a lot. Someone that appears bright and cheerful and can have everything apparently going their way can secretly be deeply struggling and loathing their life inside but we'd never know it because they manage their condition so it's outwardly not visible. Like many comedians such as Tom Hanks or Bill Murray, Robin Williams was an incredible actor - look at how well he went from zany to serious in Good Will Hunting - so it would have been second nature for him to make you see the face he wants you to see.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
uihmo
|
why we like music the music that we like.
|
My sister recently asked me why I liked such music as The Mars Volta, and i really didn't have a proper answer. The Mars Voltas music is just kind of noisy yet melodic. I want to find out why I like it so much.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/uihmo/eli5_why_we_like_music_the_music_that_we_like/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c4vnwoj",
"c4vp5gt"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It does pleasant things to you brain. Your brain wants moar.",
"Most people like music that has had some influence on them. Quite a lot of people start to like music that they are around, like if you hang around with new people, after a while you might start liking their kind of music. Like, if you listen to music and it subconsciously brings back good memories, you enjoy listening to that song."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
j77rf
|
when a bullet goes through an apple, why does it explode out both ends?
|
This picture is what I'm referring to [apple](_URL_0_)
It is fairly famous, and I would expect it to spread out as the bullet leaves, but why does the apple spread outwards, and not inwards, in the area where the bullet enters?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j77rf/when_a_bullet_goes_through_an_apple_why_does_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c29pyd8",
"c29pyd8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When the bullet enters the apple, but before it exits, the displaced apple matter has to go somewhere, and it will try to find the easiest place to go, which happens to be the hole the bullet created.",
"When the bullet enters the apple, but before it exits, the displaced apple matter has to go somewhere, and it will try to find the easiest place to go, which happens to be the hole the bullet created."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.esu8.org/~stmarys/edgerton/apple.html"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3jkase
|
why don't sheep in the wild become over burdened by the weight of their wool?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jkase/eli5_why_dont_sheep_in_the_wild_become_over/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cupylrb",
"cupymvv",
"cupyoxx"
],
"score": [
6,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Domesticated sheep have been selectively bred to produce the maximum amount of wool, in the same way that chickens have been selectively bred to produce either maximum meat or maximum eggs.",
"Haha. Although you are the first to give context for this question, you are not the first to ask it in the past 24 hrs. Domestic sheep are bred to make lots of wool. Wild sheep dont grow tons of wool. Wild sheep with overgrown wool are either escaped domesticated sheep or their offspring",
"The search feature is invaluable. This has been answered many times before.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=sheep+wool&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all"
]
] |
||
bsxe8l
|
how do package trackers for ups & amazon work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bsxe8l/eli5_how_do_package_trackers_for_ups_amazon_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eorikd1"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Each package is assigned a number, which is why you get a tracking number you can use to see where it was last seen. \n\nThat number is entered into a computer database. When the package is loaded onto or off of a truck/plane that number is scanned and tagged with the time and location where it was scanned. \n\nThe computer makes a best guess on when the package will arrive based on all of the scheduled travel between the package’s origin and destination."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
193y81
|
encryptions
|
How does it work? If both the sender and receiver can decode what it says, why can't someone in the middle?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/193y81/eli5_encryptions/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8kjuwz",
"c8kkw86",
"c8kpc2z"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's because sender and receiver have some piece of information that nobody else does. This is usually called a \"key\". ",
"There are different kinds of cryptography. \n \nIn private key cryptography, the sender and receiver can decode the encrypted message because they both know a secret...the \"key\". \n \nIn public key cryptography, only the receiver has the key that will decrypt the message (the private key). The sender uses a public key that isn't secret to encrypt the message. But once the sender encrypts a message using the public key, he can't decrypt it! Only someone with the private key can do that. ",
"There is a well-worn ELI5 description of the two main kinds of cryptography involving Bob, Alice, and their padlocks:\n\nBob wants to send Alice a message in secret, so he buys a padlock and has a copy made of the key, which he gives to Alice ahead of time. In order to send her a message, Bob closes it in the trunk, then puts the padlock on the trunk and locks it with his key, and sends it to Alice. Since Alice has a duplicate of the one and only key, she is able to unlock the padlock with it and open the trunk and voilà, she has the message.\n\nThis illustrates what is called symmetric key cryptography, since the key is the same for both Alice and Bob.\n\nBut there is another way this can be done where everyone gets their own key.\n\nIn this system, Bob has his own key and padlock, and Alice has her own key and padlock. Here, in order for Bob to send Alice a secret message, first she sends him her unlocked padlock, which he uses to lock his message in the trunk, then send back to Alice. Alice uses her key to open the trunk and voilà again.\n\nThis is called asymmetric key cryptography, and it's actually more complicated than that, but that gets the main idea across.\n\nBut wait! What if Bob wants to encrypt a message so that it can never be decrypted???\n\nHuh? Why would he want to do that?\n\nLet's say, years ago, if he wanted to communicate with his bank by trunk, the trunk had to contain in addition to his bank messages a slip of paper with Bob's password on it. The teller would receive the trunk, unlock it either with the Teller's key (asymmetric) or the pre-shared key (symmetric), and verify Bob's password with a copy of the password the Teller had written down somewhere else.\n\nLuckily, people eventually figured out this was a BAD IDEA.\n\nLet's say there's a person, Eve, who wants to pretend to be Bob. If she broke into the bank, she could have his password and use it to send messages as Bob. This is bad.\n\nInstead, what Bob does is put his password inside a tiny box that he locks with a padlock that CANNOT BE RE-OPENED. He puts the tiny, forever-closed box inside the trunk, locks it and sends it to the Teller. The Teller unlocks the trunk, takes this tiny box and compares it to another identical tiny box Bob had originally given to the bank to see if it is legitimate.\n\nThis way, Eve can't discover Bob's password. She would have to guess at what to put in a tiny box that would give off the same characteristics as Bob's box, which is a lot harder to do.\n\nThis is called hashing.\n\nBut this example doesn't really get at the destructive nature of a hash.\n\nLet's expand it by starting over with some new assumptions: First, assume that cloning is possible.\n\nIf Bob wants to go anywhere, he just sends a clone of himself to go in his place. Clone to go to the store. Clone to go to the dry cleaners. Clone to take out the trash.\n\nBut if Bob wants to go to the bank, both he and the bank want to make sure the clone Bob sends is REALLY Bob's clone and not an impostor. Otherwise that impostor could clean out Bob's bank account and embarrass the bank.\n\nSo the bank makes a clone of Bob's clone, then shoots the clone in the face with a shotgun. They do this in a special room, with the clone held in a specific spot of the room, and with the shotgun held at an exact angle. This is done incredibly meticulously so that every time they shoot a clone of Bob's in the face, the blood spatter on the wall behind him is exactly the same. It doesn't matter how many times they do it, each time they shoot Bob's clone in the face, the exact same pattern of blood is produced on the wall behind him. In fact, this is true of everyone else's clones; Every clone of Alice produces the exact same unique spatter, but different from Bob's, for example. (Actually there is a one in a million chance that two different clones will produce the same spatter, this is called a collision).\n\nYou can't recreate Bob's clone from the spatter, but you would know an impostor Bob by the different blood pattern on the wall. In fact, banks will hang their own special composite material mesh behind the clone before shooting it in the face to alter the spatter. This makes it that much harder for an impostor clone to be created by Eve studying Bob's blood spatter, and is called salting."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6j2t9p
|
how does my brain decide whether a repetitive song is catchy or annoying?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6j2t9p/eli5_how_does_my_brain_decide_whether_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djb8140"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Those two things are not mutually exclusive - something can be extremely catchy and ALSO very annoying ([example](_URL_0_)).\n\nI'm not a music theory expert, but how catchy a song is I think is mostly dependent on simplicity and familiarity - e.g. a simple song is easier to remember and our brain tends to like things that are at least a bit familiar. Of course, *too* simple is boring and not mentally stimulating at all, so there is a bit of a balance.\n\nAnnoying I think tends to be more subjective and down to personal preference."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiIwZvQ3tTUAhVPwGMKHQIcD6cQyCkIKTAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMWYj1BOfV6I&usg=AFQjCNHhvNDro0Irk42g8K82AHXSTSulOQ"
]
] |
||
26h6p4
|
how are buildings constructed to the accuracy of the buillding plans
|
How do the architects ensure that everything fits together and what happens if/when there are 'gaps'.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26h6p4/eli5_how_are_buildings_constructed_to_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chr130b"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Math and measurements."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ymb5o
|
the origins of the hispanic race and why so many people that can be classified as black or white are still hispanic
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ymb5o/eli5_the_origins_of_the_hispanic_race_and_why_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5wvctn",
"c5wvd16",
"c5wwnf2"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
3
],
"text": [
"It just means \"comes from a country on the American continent that was colonized by Spain.\" (Latino includes Brazil as well, which was colonized by Portugal.) People living in those countries today are descended from a mix of European settlers, native peoples and African slaves, much like the US. Each country's a little bit different in their proportion of who settled when and how much they mixed together, so you get a whole rainbow of skin colors within each country. ",
"Hispanic is not a race it is a nationality or more specifically ethnic group, there are only 3 races of humans. Caucasoid (white), Negroid (black) and Mongoloid (asian). We use the term race far to frequently, hispanic does not refer to a race but rather to a linage to Spain. ",
"\"Hispanic\" means \"Spanish speaking\". If you're from a culture in the Americas that was traditionally Spanish speaking, you're considered hispanic. So it's not a race, it's an ethnicity."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
a0abmy
|
how would the earth’s atmospheric co2 levels react to a mass die off of humanity?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a0abmy/eli5_how_would_the_earths_atmospheric_co2_levels/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eai5vhd"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"No more CO2 pollution. Atmospheric CO2 goes up. All humans that are dead provide biofuel for plants. It will probably be a gross place initially whilst everything is decomposing. But after everything decomposes plants will sprout up everywhere. \n\nDesertification will be reversed, ocean levels probably stop rising. Eventually the world will be utopia. \n\nAnd then 1 monkey will evolve into a human, and we’ll fuck it up again"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
negpp
|
what's the difference between the "top" and "best" in reddits sorting options?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/negpp/whats_the_difference_between_the_top_and_best_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c38glzt",
"c38k0ke",
"c38ke6j",
"c38lg3d",
"c38m13m",
"c38glzt",
"c38k0ke",
"c38ke6j",
"c38lg3d",
"c38m13m"
],
"score": [
207,
5,
23,
4,
3,
207,
5,
23,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"\"Top\" is the comments with the most points. This doesn't always work so well because old comments will hover near the top and stay there, as that's what most people will see first. \"Best\" works on the ratio of up/downvotes to predict where the comment will end up, allowing a relatively new comment to reach the top. [This](_URL_1_) explains it in more technical terms, while [this](_URL_0_) is easier to digest.",
"I wish upvotes would count more when sent from the comments then when sent from the front page. There are so many front page articles that were clearly just upvoted by people who didn't even read it.",
"“Top” is simply the post with the highest net votes, i.e. upvotes minus downvotes.\n\n“Best” is more complicated. Flabbergasted1 gave an excellent [LIF explanation](_URL_0_) of the concept a few months back:\n\n > Imagine a racetrack for horses that goes on forever in one direction. The start of the track is labeled \"Jan 1, 1970 12:00am\" and there are equally spaced notches labeled \"Jan 1, 1970 12:01am\", \"Jan 1, 1970 12:02am\", and so on.\n\n > When you submit a post, a horse representative is dropped onto the racetrack at the time of submission. If I submit a post now, it will be dropped at the marker reading \"Aug 15, 2011 1:02am.\"\n\n > Now hopefully, my horse will start running! Every time my post gets an upvote, it gets a little burst of energy and moves forward. Every time my post gets a downvote, it trips up and loses some distance. If it doesn't get much attention, it'll stay around the marker of the time it was submitted. But if it gets lots of upvotes, it will start to race faster and faster, even past the horses that are being dropped onto the track upstream for newer posts!\n\n > **The front page of r/all is a top 25 list of the horses currently winning this race.** The front page of a given subreddit is the top 25 list of the horses *from that subreddit* currently in the lead.\n\n > Even the very best submissions will stop getting upvotes after a while, so the horse will start to slow down and eventually come to a stop. Even if it ran out way in front of the other horses, newer horses will have the advantage of being dropped further along the racetrack, so even if my post got a whole ton of upvotes in its lifetime, it won't stay in the top 25 for much longer than a couple hours.\n\n > To make up for this, there's also the \"top all time\" option, which lists the horses who traveled the longest distance, so the time they were submitted plays no role anymore.",
"Does this really need to be explained to you like youre five? you think just an \"r/askreddit\" would have sufficed?",
"One gives you the submissions you need.\n\nThe other gives you the submissions you deserve.",
"\"Top\" is the comments with the most points. This doesn't always work so well because old comments will hover near the top and stay there, as that's what most people will see first. \"Best\" works on the ratio of up/downvotes to predict where the comment will end up, allowing a relatively new comment to reach the top. [This](_URL_1_) explains it in more technical terms, while [this](_URL_0_) is easier to digest.",
"I wish upvotes would count more when sent from the comments then when sent from the front page. There are so many front page articles that were clearly just upvoted by people who didn't even read it.",
"“Top” is simply the post with the highest net votes, i.e. upvotes minus downvotes.\n\n“Best” is more complicated. Flabbergasted1 gave an excellent [LIF explanation](_URL_0_) of the concept a few months back:\n\n > Imagine a racetrack for horses that goes on forever in one direction. The start of the track is labeled \"Jan 1, 1970 12:00am\" and there are equally spaced notches labeled \"Jan 1, 1970 12:01am\", \"Jan 1, 1970 12:02am\", and so on.\n\n > When you submit a post, a horse representative is dropped onto the racetrack at the time of submission. If I submit a post now, it will be dropped at the marker reading \"Aug 15, 2011 1:02am.\"\n\n > Now hopefully, my horse will start running! Every time my post gets an upvote, it gets a little burst of energy and moves forward. Every time my post gets a downvote, it trips up and loses some distance. If it doesn't get much attention, it'll stay around the marker of the time it was submitted. But if it gets lots of upvotes, it will start to race faster and faster, even past the horses that are being dropped onto the track upstream for newer posts!\n\n > **The front page of r/all is a top 25 list of the horses currently winning this race.** The front page of a given subreddit is the top 25 list of the horses *from that subreddit* currently in the lead.\n\n > Even the very best submissions will stop getting upvotes after a while, so the horse will start to slow down and eventually come to a stop. Even if it ran out way in front of the other horses, newer horses will have the advantage of being dropped further along the racetrack, so even if my post got a whole ton of upvotes in its lifetime, it won't stay in the top 25 for much longer than a couple hours.\n\n > To make up for this, there's also the \"top all time\" option, which lists the horses who traveled the longest distance, so the time they were submitted plays no role anymore.",
"Does this really need to be explained to you like youre five? you think just an \"r/askreddit\" would have sufficed?",
"One gives you the submissions you need.\n\nThe other gives you the submissions you deserve."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://blog.reddit.com/2009/10/reddits-new-comment-sorting-system.html",
"http://amix.dk/blog/post/19588"
],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jiwxs/eli5_how_the_reddit_frontpage_is_determined/c2cj9wy"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://blog.reddit.com/2009/10/reddits-new-comment-sorting-system.html",
"http://amix.dk/blog/post/19588"
],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/jiwxs/eli5_how_the_reddit_frontpage_is_determined/c2cj9wy"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
41tgw8
|
why do words like aisle, isle, and island, have a silent "s"?
|
I want to know the origin behind this.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/41tgw8/eli5_why_do_words_like_aisle_isle_and_island_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cz50m10",
"cz50n3d",
"cz50s29",
"cz52fgl",
"cz63xu0"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Isle comes from French and that language seems to love to drop the \"s\" sound; listen to how the pronounce \"Paris\" just for a start. They seem to understand that it's dumb to keep the \"s\" letter around so they've started dumping it and just leaving a circumflex behind on a nearby vowel as some kind of memorial, e.g. , île, hôtel and fête instead of isle, hostel and feste.",
"Not every word in English came originally from the English people. A lot of modern English words come from the French via the Normans, Germans, Dutch and the Romans. The folks at r/words would probably be a better source. \n\nAisle came from the old French word ele, which evolved into the modern French word aile. \n\nIsland is from the old English word igland, which further came from a proto-german word and from before that PIE (Proto-Indo-European) language.\n\nI think these might be of interest to you\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_",
"For Aisle, it also originated from French but it never had an \"s\" sound. According to the OED, \"in Middle French and early modern French spellings with medial -s- this is a purely graphic device serving to indicate the open quality of the vowel.\"",
"With \"island\", the \"s\" actually shouldn't be there. It was added because people wrongly thought it was related to \"isle\" -- a reasonable assumption to make, but unfortunately it just happens to be a complete coincidence.\n\n\"Isle\" may from Latin \"in salo\", which means \"in the salt sea\", or it may be of Celtic origin -- nobody really knows. But in any case, it eventually appeared in Latin as \"insula\".\n\nHuman speech is a complicated thing, and we always have a tendency to \"skip\" over some sounds -- for example, we tend to say \"wanna\" instead of \"want to\". When \"insula\" came into the French language, they first skipped the \"n\" and the \"u\", leaving \"isle\", then they skipped the \"s\". At first they continued writing it (just as in English we have silent letters that we stopped pronouncing, but didn't stop writing), then they stopped writing it, making \"ile\". That's how it first came into English, but a couple hundred years later the French decided to revert to the historical spelling \"isle\", and soon after the English copied the French and also put the \"s\" back in -- but didn't pronounce it. After that, French removed it again, but marked the place where it used to be by putting a circumflex over the \"i\" to make the modern spelling \"île\". But the English stuck with the \"isle\" spelling.\n\n\"Aisle\", like \"island\", also shouldn't have an \"s\" in it. But when \"isle\" got its \"s\" back, people just started mistakingly writing an \"s\" in \"aisle\" as well. Over time, this mistake became so common that it became the official spelling.",
"The word \"isle\" used to be spelled \"ile\". However, it came to us via Old French, from Latin \"insula\". Latin was the language of the elites back then, so to make the word resemble the original Latin, they added the etymological < s > back into it, making it \"isle\".\n\nThe word \"island\" used to be spelled \"iland\". It is similar to the word \"ile/isle\", but happens to be unrelated. However, people thought there was a relation, so they erroneously added an < s > into this word as well.\n\nThe word \"aisle\" used to be spelled \"ele\". It also sounded like \"ile/isle\", but again, it is unrelated. But people thought it was related due to the similarity, so again, they added an < s > . Later on, they also added an < a > because of the French cognate \"aile\".\n\nTL;DR: People screw with spelling for no reason."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.google.com/#q=etymology+island",
"http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=island"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8nvo94
|
how did the idea of santa come into society?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8nvo94/eli5_how_did_the_idea_of_santa_come_into_society/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dzyprp5",
"dzywl95"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"While Santa Claus is a an amalgam of various stories and legends, most historians agree that it he is the evolution of the story of St. Nicholas, a monk from the 3rd century. The legend goes that there was a man who was too poor to offer a dowry for his three daughters (so they would be unable to marry and would have to be sold into slavery and/or prostitution) and Nicholas came under the cover of night to provide purses of gold, which he threw anonymously through the window. Thus dowries could be provided and the women could wed.\n\nIn the 18th century, many families (primarly Dutch) would honor the death of St. Nicholas on December 6 by holding feasts and giving gifts to one another (symbolic of his generosity) The Dutch name was Sinter Klaas, a shortened form of Sint Nikolaas (Dutch for Saint Nicholas), so Santa Claus became the anglicized name. \n\nThe celebrations continue to this day.",
"Santa dates back to pre-Christian Germanic mythology. At Yuletide (winter solstice), Odin would leave gifts in the boots of good children. Early Christian missions would adapt existing pagan traditions to fit their own theology. Likely to make conversion more appealing to the locals. Many Christmas traditions we still celebrate today have their origins in ancient Yuletide festivals, such as Yule logs and decorating trees. St. Nicholas's story bares many similarities to the Odin myth, so the two eventually melded into one figure. Santa's elves were also originally black demon like figures who'd listen at chimneys to see if children were good or bad. They'd punish bad children. That's where Zwarte Piet comes from.\n\nSinterklaas didn't really come into being in Holland until the renaissance era. He originally had his basis in medieval traditions around the celebration of the Feast of St. Nicholas. Some people started dressing up as the bishop and acting out his life. His feast day was Dec 6, close to Christmas, so the two holidays were eventually combined. \n\nBy the 19th century, romantic British and American poets were looking to revive old traditions around the Christmas holiday. The modern Santa's look can be largely attributed to Clement Clarke Moore, who wrote \"A visit from St. Nicholas\", aka Twas the Night Before Christmas, in 1823. This is the first time we really see him depicted as a jolly fat man. Dickins' Ghost of Christmas past solidified this depiction. You often find obese men of this period being used as symbols of wealth and generosity. \n\nThe myth was expanded upon in the latter half of the 19th century through Harpers illustrator Thomas Nast. George P. Webster wrote a poem in 1869 establishing that Santa was from the north pole. Songwriter Katharine Lee Bates popularized his wife, Mrs. Claus. L. Frank Baum's 1902 book \"The Life and Adventures of Santa Claus\" again expanded on the myth and made him an immortal. This also seems to be the source of the 10 reindeer from my brief research. \n\nContrary to popular belief, Coca-Cola did not invent the red suited Santa. Sinterklaas has usually been depicted as wearing a red bishop's frock dating back to at least the 16th century. In America, the red Santa was pretty much the norm long before the ads came out in the 1920s. They just sort of made it official. Rudolph though is a wholly commercial creation, originally written for Montgomery Ward. \n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6iecg4
|
suffering from depression, i exercise to try and get those "endorphins" and that "runners high"... but i don't experience it, why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6iecg4/eli5_suffering_from_depression_i_exercise_to_try/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dj5iodg",
"dj5jjjl",
"dj5k5n2",
"dj5o5au",
"dj5ogtu",
"dj5p04a",
"dj5pg3n",
"dj6k6lh"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
5,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"We internet strangers don't have the knowledge specific to your case to help you. You should contact your doctor.\n\nAlso, have you tried doing weights instead of running? I absolutely loath running, but I find weight lifting very satisfying.",
"Disclaimer: I'm only a few months into running.\n\nI saw that you tried walking outside. Do you have any nature preserves/trails near you? There is a small reserve in my county that has a couple three miles of unpaved trails. Out there is where I end up getting that high you speak of. Something about running on a treadmill or paved path/street takes away from it for me.\n\nI also use an app that tracks for me and I get equal enjoyment from bettering my time/distance. ",
"Depression is a medical condition that you don't \"treat\" with long-distance running, please seek medical help",
"Fellow sufferer here. Don't know why it doesn't happen, but I get the runners high when properly medicated, and I don't if I'm unmedicated.\n\nAll these people saying you're not pushing yourself hard enough are full of shit. \n\nSwitch your meds, then do exercise. Go to a real psychiatrist, you'll get a much better perscription (better dosing, etc). Exercise is actually fun when you have ordinary seretonin and stuff.",
"the runners high comes from conquering a certain distance that you didn't feel you was able to do. Pushing through the pain barrier and to keep going. Despite your body screaming to stop. Its more of a satisfied content feeling. ",
" This is going to be *incredibly* anecdotal but...\n\nI also tried and tried to exercise and it always made me feel worse afterwards. I thought I was one of those fat people who just made excuses why they hated to exercise. Turns out I was anemic from kidney failure plus my thyroid is dead. So maybe get your blood work done to make sure nothing's wrong? It would be unusual but it can happen. \n\nAlso if your brain is hurting from depression, everything is harder so you might not see the results everyone else gets. I think you're awesome for trying and think you should keep it up anyway cuz it certainly can't hurt (unless there's something else wrong like I already mentioned). I hope you find something that works for you! ",
"Excercise can help. But it has to be additive with other therapies to have the fullest effect. \n\nI saw in the comments that you go to a doctor. That's good. But you need to see a weekly therapist if you can afford to do so. Most insurances do cover them as well.\n\nAlso, if you're psychiatrist is being as dimissive as you are saying it's time to look for another one. Everyone is different and requires different therapies.\n\nAs per a runner's high. It's not at all what it's chalked up to be. Do your best to get consistent excercise. Daily you should aim to do at least 30 minutes of light excercise and 30-45 minutes of rigourous excercise 3 to 4 times weekly. Join a gym and lift weights (even if you are a girl!)",
"In life every one has things that naturally make them happy, the trick is to seek out and define those things that make u happy, the more the better! kind of like a stock pile of weapons to fight the bad feelings. I try to order them from least effective to most effective to know what strategy I need to take at the time, like a favourite show or speaking to someone, drawing, reading, even if I have to employ multiple strategies to feel happy again, diet and the sun are very important to ones mental state, u need a stable healthy diet and to keep your vitamin D up, vitamin D plays an essential role in our happiness, so make sure you get plenty of it to get those endorphins pumping! We also have triggers, things that will swing us straight into a state of depression, I try to define those things to help me stay away from them. The answer is, there is no one single answer, it's a several pronged attack that you need to come at from all areas. I hope this helps."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
15rucs
|
why does the issue of women's rights stir up so much anger?
|
In the US at least and on the internet, I can thing of few issues more s# & @storm-inducing than that of women's rights. Even Israel and Palestine seem to cause less anger. The sheer vitriol with which this topic is usually discussed is somewhat amazing.
Is this peculiar to the US? I realise a large number of redditors are American. Will anyone with experiences in multiple countries give a perspective here? I'm not sure it's as big of a problem in Europe, where I am.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/15rucs/eli5_why_does_the_issue_of_womens_rights_stir_up/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7p8pz7",
"c7p8xwq",
"c7pabvk",
"c7pad0k",
"c7pat4k",
"c7pb68m",
"c7pc294",
"c7pgwdz",
"c7pnfhx",
"c7ptuvs"
],
"score": [
33,
27,
44,
45,
8,
31,
22,
9,
8,
8
],
"text": [
"Because people like the status quo and hate change. No one wants to think of themselves as sexist (or racist or whatver) so they defend their thoughts and actions and get angry when someone implies these are sexist.",
"I'll try this out:\n\nPeople fear change. A lot. [Consider this clip from a campaign speech by Strom Thurmond in 1948.](_URL_0_) Let's pick apart what he's actually saying here. He's not saying that segregation is okay. He's not saying blacks aren't human. He's not saying they should be killed. All he is actually saying is this: You (the federal government) are not going to stop the Southern whites from segregating. It's what we do here.\n\nThat's the crux. \"It's the way we do things 'round here\" or \"We're set in our ways.\" Think about how your racist grandfather is treated. \"He's from a different time, let it go.\" Think about how wars are started. \"They threaten our way of life.\"\n\nNow consider how much more crucial and fundamental gender and sex are to society and humanity than race. Race doesn't actually amount to much except resistance to or a propensity to get certain diseases (sickle-cell & c.) and a different cultural background, and even that is diminishing as the world gets smaller.\n\nGender, however, is huge. It effects everything about your life. If you ever get the chance to talk to anyone who has transitioned, I encourage you to do so, because the difference is staggering. Men and women are decidedly different. Should they be treated differently? No.\n\nBut, historically, they have. They have been treated very, very differently. The reason why feminists tend to go on about the patriarchy is because of how monstrous and huge and old and insidious it is. And it's *maddening.* Think about it: If everywhere you went you were reminded that you had blond hair. Not necessarily mistreated, just treated differently. If every blond person in movies talked about people with brown hair. If every opinion you held was met with, \"Yeah, but you only think that because you're blond.\" It would *get to you.*\n\nSo you get mad. You get vitriolic. You call people with brown hair scum, or Nazis. Now imagine that in that society you have brown hair. All you've ever known is that people with blond hair are treated that way. And now here comes the Blond Liberation Movement. It would confuse you more than anything, but after a while, you'd get defensive. This is how you've lived, this is the way you do things. \n\nSo on the one side you have a group of people, slightly more than half of the world's population, trying to get what is by all rights theirs: equal pay, equal treatment, and so on. Then you have the other half of the world, who are paid better and treated better. They're not going to be jumping at the bit to change that, and even if they weren't treated better, it's still the way things work. It's what people do. \n\nI remember reading a post on one of the more feminist subreddits, I think it was 2XC, and someone was just feeling really depressed about all of the Senators talking about rape etc., and they had a teacher give them some encouraging words, saying that all they were hearing was the shrieking of dinosaurs. So, you know, um, that. I kind of went all over the place here, but it's a big question.\n\nTL;DR: On one side you have a group of people who like things the way they are and fear change, and on the other side you have a group of people getting really angry about something that is omnipresent and deeply, deeply embedded into society. It causes a lot of anger and hate. \n\nStillTL;DR: People are assholes.\n\nEdit: Also a big thank you to the whatever marvelous person gifted me reddit gold. You are a saint, you.",
"It isn't necessarily women's rights issues which are the area of conflict, but feminist advocacy. The two are not necessarily the same. My explanation as to why: \n \nFeminists fail to differentiate between having a fundamental *need*, and having a fundamental *right*. The pursuit of conditions or factors to meet fundamental needs (eg., putting forth effort to obtain food and shelter) is a human right. The receipt of conditions or factors to meet fundamental needs (eg., having food and shelter provided at the expense of others) is not a fundamental right, but an act of charity on the part of the provider (as long as it's voluntary - otherwise, it's theft by the recipient, even when those things are needed.) **With this misapplication of the word \"right,\" feminists treat the condition of being given possession or position as if it were the same as the condition of having one's pursuit not be being wrongfully obstructed**. \n \nAnother problem which has a side effect upon this is that feminist advocates fail to differentiate between fundamental needs, and dearly valued/wanted conveniences. Food and shelter are fundamental needs. Yummy food and nice shelter are dearly valued/wanted conveniences. **Feminists go beyond claiming the right to the pursuit of fulfillment of fundamental needs to claim the right to receive dearly valued/wanted conveniences.** \n \nOne outgrowth of that combination of beliefs is the sense of entitlement to enforce the *provision* of the fulfillment of needs or dearly held wants upon other human beings; **treating as a given fact upon which society must base law and policy, \"If *A* has a need for or dearly held want of factor 1, B must provide it,\" where A is the individual with whom feminism identifies itself, and B is the individual with whom feminism takes issue.**\n \nThis is further modified by another fundamental flaw in the movement; Patriarchy Theory, which in short, blames upon male society all issues or conditions which feminists define as oppression of women. **Patriarchy Theory makes female society group A, and male society group B.** \n \nSo you have a group which labels *having* (as opposed to not being prevented from reasonably pursuing) that which *women* want or need to be a right, and asserts that as justification for demanding or taking it from *men*. \n \nNow, the feminist movement has been treated as the architect and arbiter of women's rights advocacy since its inception, even though **not all women subscribe to the feminist line of reasoning, much lest feminist *theory.* Many of us do not believe that there is systematic, institutionalized discrimination against women in first world countries.** Antifeminist women do not believe in Patriarchy theory, Rape Culture theory, or even the feminist description of gender roles as male oppression of women. **This leads to conflict between groups of women, who do not all hold the same sets of beliefs and values or all perceive society in the same way, over what is or should be defined as \"women's rights,\" and advocated in the name of women in general**. \n \nThen, you have men in the western world waking up to the fact that as society has changed, and women's roles have evolved (in part through feminist advocacy, and in part due to advancements in technology and the advent of conveniences which reduce the effort which both sexes must put into simple survival,) **society's expectations of men, and the legal requirements accompanying those expectations, haven't relaxed much at all.** \n \nThat realization has been one of the bigger contributing factors to the growth of the men's rights movement, comprised of people who have noticed that **the practical application of feminist advocacy in enforcement of male gender roles *authoritative societal imposition* of provision for women's wants and needs upon men - is in fact a violation of men's basic human rights**, particularly the right to liberty. \n \nIn some cases this involves a direct transfer of material possessions from men to women (alimony, child support) and in some, indirect (social programs for custodial parents, funded by income taxes; free birth control for women, funded by taxes.) \nIn other cases this involves wrongfully obstructing men's pursuit of the fulfillment of needs and wants (preferential treatment in hiring and promotion.) \nIn some, it involves wrongfully unbalancing the application of policy in the justice system (infringing upon due process rights, unequal treatment in civil disputes and criminal cases, for the imposed protection of only women.) \n**In other words, despite decades of feminist advocacy claiming female independence and female responsibility, the *practical application of feminist theory/advocacy* manifests in the difference in social and legal obligations between the sexes, where men are expected to protect and provide, and women may be shielded from conditions and responsibilities which men are expected to face and embrace.** \n \nThat's the *base* issue between those movements, before you even get to the concepts of what constitutes discrimination or oppression, and what constitutes equality. **At the very bottom of every area of conflict between feminism and antifeminist women, and feminism and the MRM, is a struggle over that disagreement; the feminist belief that women have the right to demand or take what we want or need from men, and the antifeminist and MRActivist contention that no, we don't.** This is the conflict which creates the big hullabaloo over pretty much any discussion on gender rights. \n \n \n \n",
"Very few people have issues with women's rights - the issue, rather, is with the feminist political movement and its tendency to advance laws and policies based on statistics that are at best misinterpreted and at worst actively deceitful - the Violence Against Women Act, for example, is based on the Duluth model which operates from the assumption that only men are abusive, and only women are victims - assumptions that are [provably false](_URL_0_)\n\nThen there's the shocking state of family courts, gendered language all over the place in national and international law, the preponderance of government spending on women's health issues despite the fact that women have a *higher* life expectancy, medical collusion in the concealment of paternity fraud, quotas replacing meritocracy... all sorts!\n\nBasically, if you can find a right men have that women don't I'll support them getting it - but I don't support discrimination against men, no matter how prettily it's wrapped.",
"Because women's rights really means all the rights with none of the responsibilities. How about equal rights for women to be drafted? Equal sentencing for women in courts? Equal child custody? Equal spending on healthcare? Equal college admissions? Equal treatment for domestic violence. And on and on. The same folks who advocate for 'equality' are against equal treatment for women when it is not advantageous. Its hypocrisy. ",
"Because a lot of people view the current women's rights movement (which is feminism) as lobbying for unfair entitlements and special privileges.\n\nE.g. successfully lobbying for men to subsidize women's health insurance even though women cost more, remaining silent when men get unfairly charged more for auto insurance due to statistics.\n\nLobbying against shared custody (currently women get automatic custody).\n\nFurther, feminism gets anger for \"claiming to be the solution to men's issues\" while actively harming or dismissing men.\n\nFor example, domestic violence shelters, run by feminists, **actually mock male victims who come to them for help (as in personally, to their face), and tell them they are the true batterers**, as proven by scholarly studies:\n\n_URL_0_\n\n > Of the 132 men\nwho sought help from a DVagency, 44.1% (n=86) said that\nthis resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those\nmen (n=81) said that they were given the impression that\nthe agency was biased against men. \n\n > Some of the men were\naccused of being the batterer in the relationship: This\nhappened to men seeking help from DVagencies (40.2%),\nDV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over\n25% of those using an online resource reported that they\nwere given a phone number for help which turned out to be\nthe number for a batterer’s program. The results from the\nopen-ended questions showed that 16.4% of the men who\ncontacted a hotline reported that the staff made fun them, as\ndid 15.2% of the men who contacted local DV agencies.",
"It's not women's rights themselves that causes the anger and shitstorm. It's the way the they are brought up. Let me give you an example or two.\n\nA woman makes a false rape accusation against an innocent man. This gets commonly turned into a \"woman's rights\" issue by claiming that the real harm is the fact that the woman that made the false accusation serves the purpose of scaring women who have been raped from speaking up. And vola, you have just totally silenced and minimized the innocent man that was harmed in that situation. And attempting to bring him up is seen as being against women (or in extreme cases showing concern for innocent men in false rape accusations is seen as supporting rape).\n\nA woman abuses a man. When covered by the media the term \"domestic violence\" is expertly avoided. When (if) charges are brought they are sometimes a lesser charge than what a man would face. When the court of public opinion talks about it they will go out of their way to assert that she couldn't have done it because she's a woman and he must have done something to deserve it. And in the entire mess an innocent male victim is lost in the fever to show empathy and compassion for an abusive woman. Trying to point this out is regarded as support for male against female violence.\n\nA woman rapes a man. It's still argued if a woman can rape a man. The media will avoid calling it rape (if it was woman/boy it will be called everything from \"had sex with\" to \"affair\" before it's called rape). On his gender alone he will be shamed and blamed for what happened to him. What do so called progressives say? They comment on how he has the \"male privilege\" of not being slut shamed all the while magically ignoring the fact that he is being male shamed (his claim of rape is denied on the grounds that guys are up for it all the time thus it can't be rape)\n\nThe anger doesn't come from women's rights themselves. The anger comes from the ways that \"women's rights\" are invoked to silence the concept of \"men's rights\".\n\nHope this helps.",
"FYI, /r/mensrights has brigaded this post.",
"I'd say that the true answer is something that no one else here has mentioned. Women's rights stirs up so much anger for a number of reasons. One of them is that the feminism is misrepresented by many people. While true feminists believe in equality of men and women (and all other genders), there are many people who call themselves feminists who don't agree with those basic values. People who \"hate men\" are not feminists, but they will stir up anger for a lot of people who think that they are feminists, and they will get defensive because they are being attacked.\n\nEither that or there are people who actually believe that men are better than women, and believe the way society works right now is the best and they feel threatened at any attempts to change it, whether it be by feminists, gay rights activists, or any other civil rights activists.",
"For starters women don't lack any rights in the US relative to men and in fact have access to several extra rights men don't get in addition to fewer responsibilities. \n\nSo it comes across as a bit spoiled to demand even more rights on top of all that. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Strom_Thurmond_1948_Speech_Clip.ogg"
],
[],
[
"http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence"
],
[],
[
"http://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1k56e9
|
"moody eyes", how do they work?
|
When someone has to ask my eye color, I tell them I have Hazel eyes, a combination of brown and green. When my mood changes drastically, my eyes change color. If I'm calm, my eyes look hazel, but if I'm really upset, my eyes turn a fairly vibrant green. What's the deal?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1k56e9/eli5moody_eyes_how_do_they_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cblh5v5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Your eyes don't change color. The only thing that might happen is your irises expand and contract, stretching out what pigments you have which might make the green more prominent."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
7ms5xr
|
why can food be heated relatively quickly (in microwaves, ovens, toasters, etc.), as opposed to cooling (refrigerator, freezer), which takes longer?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ms5xr/eli5_why_can_food_be_heated_relatively_quickly_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"drwa9st",
"drwaean"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Think about the temperature difference relative to room temperature. Ovens are like 300 degrees above room temperature whereas your fridge is 40 below.",
"You’re talking about adding (heating) or removing (freezing) energy. Adding energy is easy. Microwaves vibrate the water within the item producing enormous amounts of energy, and the heating elements in regular ovens are shooting 300-500 degree heat straight at your food.\n\nRemoving energy on the other hand doesn’t happen on the same level in a home environment. Your stove goes to upwards of 600, which is around 530 degrees above room temperature. Your average home freezer on the other hand is more like 20 degrees, or 60 degrees lower than room temp.\n\nTo put it simply, Home heating options offer you a fire hose, while Home cooling options are a drinking straw."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
6sn94j
|
i've lived in a foreign country for a while and can no longer hear the accent, but when i speak to my friends on the phone it's as obvious as day. what's happening here?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6sn94j/eli5_ive_lived_in_a_foreign_country_for_a_while/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dledwos",
"dley4xd"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"It's a mostly subconscious process. If you spend time around people with a different accent, you'll slowly start to mimic their mannerisms. This helps you to fit in. As it's a slow process, it then becomes the new normal, but to your friends, it's a completely different accent.",
"It could be due to the digital quantization your phone performs.\n\nEvery time you talk on the phone, your phone takes a few samples of your voice each second and transmits them. Each sample is placed into a quantization level usually based on pitch or frequency. \n\nHere's an analogy. Say you have two rulers long enough to measure your height. One is the detailed enough to measure all the way to the nearest inch. Another one only marks the nearest foot. If you are 5'6.5'' tall. In one, you will know your height is between 5 feet 6 inches and 5 feet 7 inches. The other ruler will only tell you your height is between 5 feet and 6 feet. The markings on the rulers represent quantization levels. The more you have, the better resolution or detail you get.\n\nIn order to ensure you get fast transmission, your phone attempts to compress your voice data by reducing the quantization levels. Since not everyone has a very high-pitched voice or a very deep voice, they will take very high and very low frequencies and shift them down/up, respectively, to the nearest available pitch level. \n\nAs a result, certain sounds become more distinct over the phone. This is also why music played over the phone sounds awful, especially piano (which is often high pitched).\n\nMore Info\n_URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_error"
]
] |
||
3z1v6d
|
how do non gregorian calendars work?
|
Not the actual calendar, but living your life using them. I get that January 1st is completely arbitrary as the start of the year, but the calendar itself is based on a full rotation around the sun. You know when Summer starts. You know when it's the shortest day of the year. You know that on your birthday you've gone one full turn around the sun. It's consistent.
The Jewish calendar is a modified lunar. The Arabic calendar is straight lunar. They're certainly good at tracking the holidays of their own religions. But on a year to year basis they're so inconsistent. How does it work? Why would you use it? Do Muslims just have birthdays like 10% more frequently?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3z1v6d/eli5_how_do_non_gregorian_calendars_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyikros"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Celebrating birthdays is a pagan tradition that Christianity adopted after centuries of resisting. Therefore, religious Islamic and Jewish people never really celebrate birthdays, only the secularized Jews/Muslims. And if they are secularized, they also use primarily the Western Gregorian calendar. In fact, virtually every nation in the world uses the Gregorian calendar in civil matters. The only thing the Islamic and Jewish calendars are used for nowadays is... as you said... their own religious holidays."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
36yqyw
|
what is that feeling when you're talking to someone about something serious, where your head feels out of body and you feel so far away from the person, but they're right in front of you?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36yqyw/eli5_what_is_that_feeling_when_youre_talking_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cria0m4",
"criabg7",
"criaku9",
"crie5xs"
],
"score": [
25,
14,
3,
13
],
"text": [
"Just to be clear, this is the feeling that everyone gets when they get lectured by their parents back during their childhood days, yes? ",
"It probably has to do with attempting to suppress your body's fight or flight response.\n\nSerious talks make people nervous and your body releases adrenaline when you get nervous. So now your instincts are telling you that you should be running away or fighting, but you're in the middle of a conversation, so obviously you have to resist this urge and remain calm. It's possible that the peculiar out of body feeling is a result of your instincts telling you to do one thing (freak out and run away), but your conscious mind telling you to do something else (remain calm and have a normal conversation).\n\nThis is mostly speculation so I'd be interested to see someone with a background in this kind of stuff weigh in.",
"I believe this is the same feeling that man, if not all people get with certain trigger phrases, for example \"we need to talk.\" It most likely does have a lot to do with the fight or flight response, and your brain confusing it's self basically causing the feeling. \n\nOn another note, I believe this can also happen when your having a high anxiety or stress moment, I get it a lot myself from both. I think sometimes it can even cause a \"spacing out\" moment for people, won't swear that's common though.",
"Dissociative symptoms, like depersonalization are psychology terms that may be what you're looking for. Dissociation is what you do when you day dream, or any time your body is in one place but your mind is somewhere else. Depersonalization is when you lose your sense of self's reality (while another term, derealization, is when things feel unreal—like you're in a movie, or colors appear differently to you. But I'm only explaining that for breadth)\n\nLike day dreaming, we all dissociate. Even though dissociation is associated with Dissociative Identity Disorder, like most things the amount that is healthy or not lies on a spectrum. \n\nI hope this helps!"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
31uzv1
|
why bad music becomes good after listening to it for a long time?
|
I don't know if it happens to you, but it happened to me a lot of times that I first hear a song and hate it, but later, after listening to it on repeat for a couple of hours, I start really liking it. It also happens to many of my friends.
What is the reason for this? Is it because the brain is flexible with music preferences?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31uzv1/eli5_why_bad_music_becomes_good_after_listening/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cq57a55",
"cq5ax29"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Our brains like repetitions. When you hear a song for a second time your brain will recognize the sounds and remember the next tones and will have a brainboner that makes you like the song more",
"The Mere Exposure Effect is a psychological phenomenon where our liking towards someone or something increases the more we are exposed to it, as it becomes increasingly familiar. That's probably what's happening with you at the moment. The theory suggests that liking for a stimulus generally follows an inverse U curve, so it will initially increase but eventually there will be a turning point where you will eventually get bored of the song because of overexposure.\n\nAlthough it's interesting because sometimes no increase in liking occurs if your initial reaction to the stimulus was particularly negative, but your anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6lgdkc
|
if i have a credit card with a lot of debt, can i get a second credit card to pay off the balance, then use the first credit card to pay the second cards balance, and keep doing this back and forth until i have enough rewards points to pay off the entire debt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6lgdkc/eli5_if_i_have_a_credit_card_with_a_lot_of_debt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"djtmddn",
"djtmlp9",
"djtmmgz"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Paying one credit card directly with another is called a balance transfer. The cards usually charge fees to do this, but occasionally you can find one with free balance transfers over a period of time. Doing a balance transfer awards no points/miles on any credit card that I am familiar with.\n\nNow, that being said, there are other routes that you can use to churn up points/miles, but they all cost some amount of money to do and it is up to you to determine if they are worth it. Also, if the credit card companies find out that you are doing this (and they do check), they can revoke the points/miles, so you have to be careful.",
"It is not easy to pay one credit card off with another, most companies do not allow you to do this directly.\n\nYou can do a balance transfer, which usually costs money, or cash withdrawals, which cost a lot of money, both enough to outweigh any benefit from reward points and the like.",
"you don't get rewards for balance transfers and you pay fees to do balance transfers. \n\nAt the end you will be owning more and have no points to show for. \n\nAlso opening multiple credit cards will kill your credit until you can't open new ones. \n\nThe only way this model makes a little bit of sense is if the new card offers zero APR for 12-18 months and the 3-5% balance transfer fee is smaller than the interest you would pay in the original credit card.\n\nThe best option is not to overspend and owe interest at all. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ap13b
|
google analytics. how does it work and what is the information used for?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ap13b/eli5_google_analytics_how_does_it_work_and_what/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8zf9pu"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You visit a webpage somewhere on the internet. The site owner added some JavaScript to the page that you never see. When your web browser finishes loading that web page, it automatically runs that JavaScript. The script makes your web browser send a bit of data to Google servers. It tells them the page you just loaded, your computer's IP address, your language, and a unique code that identifies you.\n\nFrom your IP address, Google can tell where you are geographically located (or at least where your Internet Service Provider is, but in most cases this info is usually accurate to a mile or two).\n\nNow Google has some useful information:\n* Who you are (not your name, you're just some ID)\n* Where you are connecting from\n* The web pages you've visited on this site and in what order\n\n\nAs a site owner, I can use that information to find out things about my visitors to make the site better. A few examples:\n\nI get a lot of visitors from Russia (I should think about adding a Russian language version of the site!).\n\nPeople always visit my main help page and don't open any other help pages (Maybe my help section sucks!).\n\nPeople spend an average of 5 seconds on my welcome page (Maybe I should just get rid of the page if nobody's spending any time reading it!).\n\nMost of my users always visit the same page (I should focus less effort on other pages, or put in more effort into making those other pages more appealing!).\n\nA lot of users visit page A, then page F, then page B. I expect them to go to page A and then page B. (Why are they always going to page F? My site is confusing people!).\n\nAnalytics can do a *lot* more than that, but, in a nutshell, this is what happens.\n\nYou can compare Analytics to a member/club card at a grocery store. They don't care who you are specifically (you can lie on the application form, if they even want you to fill one out) - what they care about is spending habits. Whether you're Barack Obama, Sinead O'Connor, a homeless guy with an eye patch, or a Labrador Retriever, they're interested in shopping patterns. You usually shop on Friday nights? You usually buy frozen pizzas when they're on sale, regardless of brand? You're loyal to buying Coca Cola Classic, regardless of whether it's on sale? That's useful - it tells them a little bit about people's habits and not just what the \"average shopper\" buys (which they could figure out by looking at the receipts at the end of the day)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
9d2u6p
|
why a car window won’t break if i hit it in the center, but will shatter what hit at the corner?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9d2u6p/eli5_why_a_car_window_wont_break_if_i_hit_it_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e5f1465",
"e5f1ejr"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I don’t know, but there’s much more torque on the glass when hit with the same force at a corner than the center, so I’d go with that.",
"It is made that way, the process is called tempering. Tempered glass is compressed in the middle. It experiences a lot of stress, which makes the window much stronger. The edges stay weak because they need to provide tension. Tempering is also why the window shatters entirely into tiny bits, since the stress is being released across the whole glass when its integrity is broken."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1slss5
|
how does procedural generation in video games like minecraft, starbound, and no man's sky work?
|
How do game developers go around creating a system that makes randomized, detailed 2D/3D planets with flora, fauna, and terrain all random and unique?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1slss5/eli5_how_does_procedural_generation_in_video/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdyvweu"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"First, you should understand how a computer generates random numbers. Generally, it will employ various mathematical operations to a starting number (this is called the seed) to create a sequence of numbers. This is called a **psuedorandom** number, as it is not truly random, but it is random enough for our purposes. A general seed might be \"the number of milliseconds of the current time\" or maybe from some hardware device that may have a higher level of randomness. If you start with the same seed, the mathematical operation (for example, the [Mersenne twister algorithm](_URL_2_) will generate the same sequence of random numbers thereafter. This is why when you create say, a Minecraft world, you can create the same world by starting with the same seed - it will generate the same sequence of numbers and those numbers are what defines the properties of the world.\n\nNow, random numbers like in Minecraft aren't that useful by themselves. You could imagine one way of generating a procedural world would be:\n\nTo create a new chunk:\n\n* For each block in the 16 by 128 block chunk\"\n * Get a random number between 1 and 5.\n * If the number is one, make the block gold ore.\n * If the number is two, make the block dirt.\n * ...\n\nNow this would work, but it would create a very distorted world. The type of every block would be random, so you would get water next to gold, iron next to redstone, and there would be no sort of discernible pattern. Where in Minecraft you get 'veins' of mineable coal ore, our naïve chunk generator would be populated with a block of one type next to a block of another type, next to a block of another type.\n\nThis is where **interpolation** comes in. With interpolation, we can get two random numbers and create a smooth line between them. Take a look at [this](_URL_0_cubic.gif) image, showing the cubic interpolation method. You can see the points on the graph which would be the random numbers, but rather than using the plain random numbers to generate the world, you can use the line between them. You can read about different interpolation methods [here](_URL_0_).\n\nTake for example, you wanted to create a hilly terrain in Minecraft. Using random numbers, you would have a widely varying height, with blocks that are at bedrock and blocks that are at sea level right next to each other. But we could use interpolation to create a smooth curve and make the height of the terrain the same as the height of the curve. This method could also be used to decide what kind of blocks go where.\n\nImagine you choose two random numbers between 1 and 100 and then interpolate a curve between them. You could then move a small amount along this curve and then check how high (the y-coordinate) the curve is and you might choose that if the y is between 0-1, the block will be dirt, if the y is between 1-2, it will be snow. Then for the next block, you move a little bit further down the curve and repeat. The curve will smoothly go between the two random numbers you have, with multiple block types being generated near each other as travelling a small amount down the curve can still be between 1-2, 3-4, etc.\n\nThis is the essence of it, although you can imagine it on a much larger scale and a bit more complex."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://paulbourke.net/miscellaneous/interpolation/",
"http://paulbourke.net/miscellaneous/interpolation/cubic.gif",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_twister"
]
] |
|
345kdz
|
why have there been so many protests recently?
|
The police have always made mistakes/there's always been occasional instances of police misconduct. Why is it NOW that there are so many protests/riots (Michael Brown, Tamar Rice and now Freddie Gray)? 8 years ago when we elected Obama, we thought that would improve race relations but it seems to have gotten worse, both in politics from the GOP and also from all these stories about police targeting black people. Did something happen in the police or Black community that I'm not aware of?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/345kdz/eli5_why_have_there_been_so_many_protests_recently/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cqrfr4d",
"cqrgd7n"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Whether it's happening more or people are just filming it more, the public is being made aware of police \"misconduct\" (to put it very mildly) with a quickly increasing frequency. What used to be a once per decade occurrence (Rodney King), is now happening (or at least being uncovered) on seemingly a monthly basis.",
"People are carrying cameras around in their pocket. Nearly everyone has one. This is a different world from 10 years ago in that regard. When we don't see it, we ignore it. Out of sight, out of mind. We just can't handle that kind of input (for the same reason we mostly ignore stuff like the Rwandan genocide). \n\nNow we get to see daily when police abuse their power. Stuff like that doesn't spontaneously start. It's part of either the institution, or it's the reason some people become police officers, and has been that way for a very long time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
8joykh
|
why do a lot of insects have a lifespan of only a few days or sometimes even hours? how can’t they live longer??
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8joykh/eli5_why_do_a_lot_of_insects_have_a_lifespan_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dz1bfd1"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That's misleading.\n\nMayflies, for instance, are popularly described as only living for a few days or hours. They don't even have mouths, and thus inevitably starve to death.\n\nIn actual fact, mayflies and all other insects have a life cycle, and it is only the final sexually mature stage that lives for such a short time. The only purpose of the final stage is to reproduce and lay the next generation of eggs.\n\nThose eggs don't hatch into adults, they hatch into larva or nymphs. Those stages can live for several years before they metamorphose, become sexually mature, and die."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4fwnj7
|
why do flowers stay alive in vases even after the roots are removed, but plants will drown when there's too much water in the flowerpot.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fwnj7/eli5_why_do_flowers_stay_alive_in_vases_even/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2cpi2s",
"d2cpjnn"
],
"score": [
3,
53
],
"text": [
"In all likelihood cut flowers in a vase are dead or slowly dying. The water just keeps them from drying out and withering. Lack of nutrients from the soil will kill them.",
"Flowers are able to stay alive temporarily after cutting if you put them in water immediately, and they do so by taking up water through the stems. The reason they don't last this way is because they're not getting any of the minerals and nutrients they would be getting from the soil. \n\nHowever, plants don't actually drown when they're overwatered. They suffocate, because they cannot pull the oxygen they need from the oversaturated soil, and then they become more susceptible to fungal organisms in their weakened state. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
587m8e
|
why do governments insist on making public utilities private?
|
I've been reading about the boondoggle in Ontario Canada after the provincial government made their hydro utilities private. Prices have gotten so high that some families are having to choose between heating and lowering their house. So what would be the point of privatizing and creating a profit motive for public utilities like this?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/587m8e/eli5_why_do_governments_insist_on_making_public/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8y4dwa",
"d8y5w8z",
"d8ydaqt",
"d8yhyv8"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because there is a political movement in the world that believes that Government fundamentally sucks ass at managing anything... so clearly the answer is to privatize *everything* so that the free market and business can fix everything and run it efficiently.\n\nOf course... all evidence to date suggests that is *fucking stupid*... but people keep voting for those clowns.",
"People think that if a supplier can't fail because it is supported by government funds, it will become a bloated money sink and cost tax payers. They believe a for profit utility would somehow be more efficient, despite the fact it would be insane for them not to abuse their monopoly.\n\nI really, really hate Wynne.",
"Sometimes the government is incapable of managing a company they own. The services would be better and cheaper if there was a competitive market. Or at least cheaper. Or at least better.\n\nThe tricky part is that when the government proves incapable of handling one business everyone immediately assumes that every single business director the government has appointed is completely incapable of doing their job, which hopefully is not the case.\n\nIn fact, some government companies are working really well. Providing excellent service at a reasonable cost. No one will gain from privatising those. Well, apart from the government.\n\nSelling a government asset gives a lot of money right this instant. If you desperately need the funds, perhaps it's a good idea.\n\nIf you think that whoever buys the company is going to just sit still and watch heir money flow away, you are clearly mistaken. Their goal is to make it a business. With an income. The government probably ran it at a break even budget before and if there is any money to be made something has to change. The customers will either be charged more for less or get less for the same cost.\n\nA smart seller builds measures into the contract that protects the customers, but if you build in too many of those you basically make the deal unworthy of anyone's attention and there will be no sale. And no instant boost of funds.\n\nIt's a thin line to walk on for the government, and sometimes the make the wrong choice.",
"Because privatization of government services and assets is when business intervenes in government to get government to intervene in business to the advantage of the politically influential business. \n\nThe fallacy of any government relying on it over the long haul is that the infrastructure will fall into disrepair when the drive to make private short-term profits to please Wall Street stands in the way of our national interest. The deception is that corporate management can do a better job than government. Sometimes yes and sometimes no. That short term savings expected by our elected officials who advocated privatization of public water systems has in many cases cost taxpayers way more money to acquire the asset back at a higher cost with a profit built in and make the infrastructure repairs that were not done under privatization. \n\nPrivatization is a deception because it does not relieve government of the expense. Government still has to budget the taxpayer funds. And the savings and corporate profit will likely come from the reduced payroll, fewer employee benefits and computerization. Many of the contracts have clauses that guarantee the privatizer a profit at taxpayer expense when it is easy to inflate costs by reporting fraudulent losses to justify fictitious interest payments on loans to balance its books. See [The Center for Public Integrity article](_URL_0_) *Water and power: The French connection*"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.publicintegrity.org/2003/02/04/5711/water-and-power-french-connection"
]
] |
|
787g51
|
why do deer antlers all look different? how do they grow? what purpose do they have?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/787g51/eli5why_do_deer_antlers_all_look_different_how_do/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dorvq2j",
"dorw7zc"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"They grow like normal bone, and are covered by \"velvet\" until they rub it off to expose the bone. They grow and fall off every year in male deer. There's a lot of genetics and environmental factors behind how they look. Healthy adult deer will have bigger and stronger antlers. And they are used for clashes between males competing to mate with females. They can also be used as a method of protection against predators.",
"Different species of deer grow different shapes of antlers (which grown and fall off every year). As a buck gets older he grows a larger set of antlers. There is slight variations of how the \"points\" grow but it's pretty much the same within the species.\n\nThe antlers are mostly used by the males during the rut when they spar with each other. Sometimes they lock together and the animals will eventually starve (or get eaten) as they cannot free themselves. They can also use them to itch themselves, as they will turn their heads and use the antler to itch.. and have some \"threat\" defense against predators."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
e1fo8o
|
can the sky change colour permanently and what would it take for green, orange, purple sky's?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e1fo8o/eli5_can_the_sky_change_colour_permanently_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f8op9qw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It depends on the atmosphere of the earth. As light pases through it, the rays get scattered and or absorbed. \n\nThe sky has different colours depending on how much atmosphere the light has to move through. When the sun is at it's highest point, the light only passes through the atmosphere more vertically. Therefore it gets scattered differently then when it would travel longer through it. Such as when the sun is at the horizon.\n\nIn order for it to permemantly change, the atmosphere needs to change in density and perhaps composition. But that wouldn't be good for us. Here is an article about the sunset/rise on mars: _URL_0_"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/925/what-does-a-sunrise-sunset-look-like-on-mars/"
]
] |
||
5ztvvu
|
before toilet paper was invented, what was the main source of cleaning oneself and how bad was hygiene?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5ztvvu/eli5_before_toilet_paper_was_invented_what_was/
|
{
"a_id": [
"df10o2e",
"df10za9",
"df11vdo",
"df16kkw",
"df17j2i",
"df1a67q",
"df1ajlr",
"df1avuj",
"df1depe",
"df1fk4t",
"df1g3p5",
"df1g75k",
"df1gnbf",
"df1hdr7",
"df1hqxl",
"df1i5lr",
"df1mars",
"df1skv6",
"df1sp3d",
"df1suee",
"df1vi8m",
"df1wvtq",
"df1x07a",
"df1x8bq",
"df1y065",
"df1zl1g"
],
"score": [
408,
218,
66,
75,
11,
17,
10,
12,
5,
11,
18,
5,
4,
4,
6,
11,
190,
9,
3,
3,
4,
3,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"if you didn't have a banana leaf around...then you get handsy.\n\nthere's reason why in certain cultures, you don't eat or shake hands with your left hand. ",
"The ancient Greeks used stones/clay. The Romans used a community sponge on a stick (they kept it in salty water in a bucket at their bath house). In colonial America the old farmers almanac had a hole through the corner so it could hang in the outhouse (people could rip out sheets to use). Toilet paper began commercial production in 1857, but evidently they caused splinters until Quilted Northern invented \"splinter free\" in 1935. ",
"Does toilet paper seem primitive to anybody else? ",
"I'm reminded of the \"nursery rhyme\"\n\nIn days of old when knights were bold\nand paper not invented\nthey’d wipe their ass\nwith bits of grass\nwhich left them freshly scented\n\nSource: _URL_0_",
"Pouring water from a small can or jar actually works really well. Then with the left hand kind of dry it et voila..\n\nImo this technique is more legit than toilet paper, it makes your butt cleaner and is better for the environment.",
"Before toilet paper sponges were used, like the ones you find diving in Tarpon springs. Then were was a \"moat\" if you will or stream with running water nearby which you would wash your sponge after use. I suppose it is similar to reusable diapers and assuming you cleaned your sponge thoroughly each time it was probably more clean than using toilet paper today.\n\nThis was at least the model for ass wiping in Ancient Rome I can't speak for other civilizations ",
"Ancient Indians used hands and water to wash the bum. Then use soil/clay as a cleanser. They would rub soil and hands on a rock. Still prominent . But soil is replaced by soap. ",
"My dad used to laugh about using dried corn cobs in the outhouse. And once, just once, I did \"The Fido Scoot\" on my ex mother in law's family room carpet. (maybe two feet, but the pleasure has lasted for twenty-three years, now)",
"I know you were asking about the past but I can tell you:\n\nIn the future, they use 3 shells. I don't know how it works though",
"A while back I was making friends with a lovely old woman and we had some fun looking through a recent reprint of a Sears catalog that was from the time she was a young girl. I remember her telling me that the main difference between an original catalog and the reprint was that the paper in the original was way softer. She said she would never want to wipe with that reprint paper. ",
"Many places in the world still use the barrel and bucket. Wipe your bum with your left hand (two sides to each finger, finish with the thumb). Clean your left hand by running water over it. In places where water is scarce, you have to reuse the water. Try not to touch anything with your sinister hand.\n\nSource: Used to work with the poor in the Middle East.",
"If people squat instead of sit on a toilet, everything comes out easily and with usually no wiping required. People that have squatted their entire lives have wiped but question why because the paper was clean. :) ",
"According to this website, \"Ancient Greeks used stones and pieces of clay for personal hygiene. Ancient Romans were a bit more sophisticated than the Greeks when it came to cleansing: They opted for a sponge on the end of a long stick that was shared by everyone in the community. When not in use, that stick stayed in a bucket of heavily salted seawater in the communal bathroom.\" \n\nAlso, it says some people used corncobs. \n\n_URL_0_",
"I feel gross for using toilet paper now. What's the best option besides a bidet?",
"It greatly depended on where you lived. Many people used dried corn husks, leaves, or even paper from newspapers, catalogues, and flyers. \nOther people might use rags or textiles that could be washed and re-used. \n\nAs far as hygiene they could sponge bath or bath to keep clean after using the out house or chamber pot. ",
"Did a tour of a fs replica of cooks ship Endeavor. Was interested to see a section at the bow, that was basically a short plank with a hole in it jutting out over the water. Next to plank was a bucket with a short length of thick rope with a very frayed end (about 3\" loose strands by 1 1/2\" thick) . Technique was to dip the frayed end into the bucket and clean with that. Bucket and rope-end shared by entire crew of about 20 men. ",
"Note: Some of the content below might sound gross to some, but this is/was the way of life for a huge chunk of people that you might never come across. Also, please don't judge them if they are so poor that they can't even afford a proper toilet. \n\nI am from India and it is true that we (the general population, not the elite or upper middle-class) use our left hand to wash off the bum with water after nature takes its course. It is one of the first things that we are taught when we are around 3 years old (till then its your mom/dad/elders, because Indian style squatting toilets are not safe for kids and need supervision). We are taught to wash our hands with soap immediately afterwards. It is so ingrained in your psyche that transition from that habit to Western habit of using a toilet paper was so painful because I would never \"feel\" clean after using toilet paper. Also, I come from a lower-middle class background in India, and when I was a small kid and we used to go to our grandparents house in rural south-India, they didn't have a proper toilet. They had dug a pit in the estate behind their cottage and adults used that to take a dump. Kids would just go into the woods and take a dump where no one is seeing them and clean up afterwards. You always take water with you to clean up afterwards. \n\nBack when the caste-system was still very prevalent in India, people from a certain caste were responsible for cleaning up other people's shit from common area (dump sites like woods). It is still true in many rural locations in India, but education and general social progression is slowly changing it. Current Prime Minister, Mr. Modi, even started a campaign called Swachh Bharat (or Clean India) under which a chunk of the budget was allocated to build toilets in rural India and generate awareness in those area.\n\nAs a side-note, as the living standards are rising, people are moving towards toilet paper in India too and having a western-style lavatory in your house is considered a must have and a \"status-symbol\" (because we love to copy western culture as a mark to show better life-style). It is important to note that squatting is the most natural style of taking a dump, rather than sitting on the toilet seat. It is more healthy and less strenuous on the body.",
"Pretty sure it was a clean break because there was no Doritos and sour gummys giving us all gut rut",
"Water? In my country, for generations, we use flexible hose and attach it to pipe head / faucet. ",
"Have you heard of water? People wash down there too. Long before toilet paper.",
"My father grew up in a small town. His family of 7 used a communal rag that hung near the toilet. You picked an edge and used it to wipe your butt and when it got really dirty, they cleaned it.\n\nHe was born in the 50's not in the US. Sorry if this is more anecdotal than historical.",
"Washing yourself clean after a bowel movement makes sense to me if you use soap and water. But water, unless it is high pressure which I'm assuming won't be the case, doesn't feel like enough to make you clean. \n\nI agree that soap and water will be cleaner than toilet paper. But just water feels totally inadequate to me. Can anyone explain.",
"Why are more people not using a bidet?! They are like $30 on Amazon, install on your regular toilet in a breeze. Do your business, rinse, then dry with a bit of TP. Seriously, TP in and of itself now seems so primitive.",
"Indians still don't use toilet paper usually. They have a cup/container filled with water and they drip feed it via the crack between your balls and your thigh which leads to your ass crack. Then with other hand they clean while feeding water. After they're done, the hand and ass crack is most times visibly shit free but obviously you gotta wash/scrub the shit out of it afterwards with soap. \n\n\n",
"\nSears and Robuck catolog was used, or corn cobs that were chewed and softened by hogs and then washed and dried out. Kinda looked like a loofah",
"Why would hygiene be bad? toilet paper is arguabily less hygienic (but faster/more convenient) than a bidet for example, which is what most people used, just clean it with water and soap, then rub/dry with fabric. \n\nPersonally still use a bidet, its far better. TP won't remove smells or harder to reach 'bits', if anything its rather filthy. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://playgroundjungle.com/2009/12/in-days-of-old-when-knights-were-bold.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mentalfloss.com/article/48950/what-did-people-use-toilet-paper"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
6pm1ig
|
if houses are relatively sealed how come you still finds bugs like spiders in your house?
|
I get that bugs can get through windows and doors and other openings but what about finding some crawling bug on the floor of your bathroom that doesn't have any windows and happens to be many meters away from any doors, or how about spiders crawling on your wall even though the room you found it in is again many meters away from any doors and the windows located in the room haven't been opened in many months.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pm1ig/eli5_if_houses_are_relatively_sealed_how_come_you/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkqe9pt",
"dkqhnrm"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Oh man everywhere, cracks in the drywall especially around pipes (bathroom) the can come from the pipes if they are really intrepid. We had ants one summer coming from an electrical socket in the kitchen and the hole they go through was in the wall (so so tiny) that connected the stove bent out side. Homes are not completely 100% shut off from the world. (Maybe some professionally privately built homes, but neighborhood developers don't care that much. ",
"Houses are not sealed. If they were you'd die from co2 poisoning. All houses have a ventilation system that either pushes air in or sucks it out. Similarly your roof if it has an attic is not sealed as hot air needs to travel up and out. Your bathrooms probably have a vent as well when you shower, that has to go out. Same with dryer machine, fireplace etc. \n\nSecond temperature will cause your house to change shape with seasons. This will cause doorways to stretch or shrink depending on the temperature. So tiny gaps etc will appear at every entrance.\n\nTry taking a flashlight a night and shine it around the edges of your doors. If light goes through, you have a gap."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1sa978
|
why can't i bake things at higher temperatures, quicker?
|
If I'm supposed to bake cookies at 325° for 15 minutes, why can't I bake them at 400° for 10 minutes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sa978/why_cant_i_bake_things_at_higher_temperatures/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdvhqq1",
"cdvhqwm"
],
"score": [
10,
4
],
"text": [
"The reason they need to be baked at certain temperatures for certain times is because the heat needs to permeate the food (conduction). The outside of the food is heated first, and the energy is slowly transferred to the inside. Making it too hot outside will destroy the food. (think burned chocolate chips)\n\nIf you want to cook faster, make your cookies thinner.",
"The outside of the cookie will cook too fast and burn. Those temperatures and cooking times are so things will cook evenly throughout."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1xwylp
|
who exactly are the koch brothers? what is it about their actions that people don't like?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xwylp/eli5_who_exactly_are_the_koch_brothers_what_is_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cffcbno",
"cffdxbe",
"cffec3a",
"cffehaf",
"cffes0z",
"cffhftr",
"cffj2cn",
"cffj76u",
"cffw7rx"
],
"score": [
21,
429,
40,
7,
14,
3,
29,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"[The Koch family of industrialists and businessmen](_URL_0_) is most notable for its control of Koch Industries, the second largest privately owned company in the United States. The family business was started by Fred C. Koch, who developed a new cracking method for the refinement of heavy oil into gasoline.Fred's four sons litigated against each other over their interests in the business during the 1980s and 1990s.\n\n**David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch** — the two brothers still with Koch Industries — are affiliated with the Koch family foundations. Annual revenues for Koch Industries have been \"estimated to be one hundred billion dollars\". The Koch brothers have gained publicity in recent years for their funding of right-wing thinktanks and political campaigns.\n\nThe Koch brothers were also major funders of the Libertarian Party from 1976 to 1983, but they withdrew their funding after 1983 to focus on trying to spread libertarian ideas through major party politics and Beltway think tanks like Cato.\n\nTheir role within the Libertarian Party was initially welcomed -- David Koch was even nominated as the party's 1980 vice-presidential candidate -- but later controversial as they were felt by some more hard-core libertarian activists to be more interested in party machine politics than in libertarian purity, which eventually caused the 1983 split in the party when the Kochs and Cato's Ed Crane left. \n\nMore recently the Kochs have been putting their money into the campaign coffers of politicians of both major parties, mostly incumbents, but giving far more to Republicans than Democrats. While they continue to fund some libertarian think tanks, they now fund wingnuts and have been a source of recurring controversy around their backing of global warming denialists and the Tea Party movement",
"The Koch brothers-- having inherited vast wealth from their father-- engage in self interested advocacy under the rubric of \"libertarianism,\" seeking to pass the cost of their industrial businesses onto the citizens/taxpayers using numerous schemes, including regulatory capture. \n\nThey are known for ignoring health, safety and pollution regulations in the instances they have been unable to capture a given regulatory agency, including poisoning whole communities with cancer causing benzene: \n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_2_\n\nComparably, the Koch brothers have illegally sold arms Iran simply for the profit:\n\n_URL_4_\n\nContrary to one of the responsive posters here, they are the largest funder of climate change denial:\n\n_URL_3_\n\nAs mentioned in the Bloomberg link above, one former Koch Industries employee called the practices “The Koch Method” — with managers showing subordinates “how to steal and cheat.”\n\nAs the article provides: \n\n\"Koch Industries units \nhave also rigged prices with competitors, \nlied to regulators and repeatedly run afoul of \nenvironmental regulations, resulting in \nfive criminal convictions since \n1999 in the U.S. and Canada.\"\n\nThe issue most redditors know about is their wholesale poisoning of American politics for personal financial gain: they are creators and funders of the Tea Party, though they have tried to hide this fact. \n\n_URL_1_\n\nIn short, the Koch brothers are sociopaths who, having inherited vast wealth from daddy, have never had to toil in uncertainty, have never had to look in a mirror. Their general political scheme is to turn citizens against citizens, white against blacks, Christians against non Christians, heterosexuals against gays, class against class, etc-- to control them. \n\n\n\n",
"The Koch brothers are a wealthy family who have spent a lot of money on right-wing and libertarian causes, think tanks, and political candidates.\n\nThey are primarily disliked by people who disagree with the causes they fund.\n\nThey have also been accused of providing that funding to create an intellectual justification for policies that will benefit them financially, rather than out of a philosophical dedication to libertarian ideals.",
"Rich dudes buying control of government.",
"The only good thing I know is that one of them bankrolls NOVA on PBS.",
"Two interesting documentaries on Netflix that talk about their influence on a number of industries/government groups: \n\nPark Avenue: Money, Power and the American Dream\nThe Billionaires' Tea Party\n\nWon't comment further on the content included as I'm sure there are other sides to the stories, but interesting nonetheless. \n",
"This thread is very close to being locked, because we moderators are fascist shills for the corptacracy--I mean, we just don't like threads full of circlejerking. Most of the answers here are *not* objective or are stupid jokes are complaining about reddit. Not the point of ELI5.\n\nInappropriate answers:\n\n > Rich dudes buying control of government.\n\nBecause that's a single sentence that doesn't *explain* stuff but simply says it. This isn't /r/answers, it's /r/explainlikeimfive.\n\n > Boycott Koch products: [link removed by fascist mod]\n\nNot an appropriate answer because it's not an explanation.\n\n\n > ITT: Everyone will complain about the Koch's lobbying efforts while completely ignoring mirror images like George Soros\n\nInappropriate answer because it doesn't explain a damn thing.\n\n\n > n an effort to add more balance they also provide a lot of philanthropy to the tune of $1 billion dollars. Numerous programs on PBS are funded by the Koch Brothers. They fund cancer research ($100M last year alone) and numerous arts organizations including the American Ballet Theatre, NYC Ballet, Lincoln Center ($100M for all three), Metropolitan Museum of Art ($65M), American Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian ($35M). Everyone always seems to overlook the undeniable good that they are a part of.\n\nNot an appropriate answer because it's heavily biased and doesn't address itobjectively. This example is *positive* towards the Kock brothers. Additionally, the question is why people *don't like* their actions, so it doesn't answer the question.\n\n > fuckin scum\n\n...really guy?\n\nRemember, read the *rules on the sidebar*. Don't make it obvious what your viewpoint is! This place is not a soapbox, it's for explanations. Don't try to *convince* people of something. *Explain* to them.\n\nIf not this thread will probably be locked, so yeah.\n\n--fascist mod Hitler shill Zionist.\n\n\n",
"Because there have been no 5 year old level responses yet :\n\nDo you remember watching that old Disney film Aladdin? You know the bad guy Jafar ? Do you remember how he was really sneaky in the film and pretend to be good to the sultan, when he was really doing loads of nasty things to get more powerful? Well these brothers are a bit like that in real life, except the sultan is the president. \n\nI know you're wondering why the president lets them stay as advisors if we all know they're bad people. The reason is that they have an awful lot of money (imagine you saved years and years of pocket money, never spending a cent - well they did that, AND their daddy saved all of his money too and gave it to them). That means they can pay people to say nice things about them. They can also pay guards to go away if they are seen doing a bad thing. \n\nDon't worry though, **this** film isn't over yet, and if enough people tell the president they are baddies, he might tell the really good guards to arrest them. \n\nNow go kiss mummy goodnight and tell her that you're ready for advanced business classes tomorrow. If you want I could even make you a lemonade stand (or possibility a hot chocolate one given the weather) ! ",
"I have a far more pressing question, their names keep coming up in type, ive not heard them mentioned on the news in the uk, but when i read it is it cock, or ko-ch?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Koch_Industries"
],
[
"http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2000/September/573enrd.htm",
"http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html?_r=0",
"http://www.texasobserver.org/kochworld/",
"http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/03/31/205733/report-koch-industries-outspends-exxon-mobil-on-climate-and-clean-energy-disinformation/",
"http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-02/koch-brothers-flout-law-getting-richer-with-secret-iran-sales.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
73l9je
|
if inside my house is 60° in the summer it feels nice. if it's 60° in the winter it feels cold. why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/73l9je/eli5_if_inside_my_house_is_60_in_the_summer_it/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dnr4qs0",
"dnr5d0l",
"dnr5k85",
"dnr5yi2",
"dnr63hd",
"dnr66ot",
"dnr6hg1",
"dnr6n03",
"dnr759g",
"dnr7adg",
"dnr82ac",
"dnr9xlr",
"dnra5of",
"dnrb8jb",
"dnrcw0x",
"dnrdqq6",
"dnrdwe0",
"dnre3b2"
],
"score": [
30,
2,
26,
62,
793,
53,
116,
12,
58,
14,
1148,
2,
2,
2,
45,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your question's flawed as staying inside your house being 60 degrees in any season will not feel comfortable for long. Stay in there without anything but enough thin clothes for decency and you'll end up being cold pretty soon. \n\nBut this isn't so much a Physics question as a biology one. The reason it's immediately comfortable is due to a combination of humidity levels and your body being used to the other extreme.\n\nIf you've been outside in a \"true\" subzero winter where you're actually cold due to not enough insulated clothing and your body has chilled down, sixty degrees coming in feels GREAT because it's so much warmer than what you've been used to. On the opposite side of the spectrum, coming inside after being outside in sweltering humid temperatures where your body couldn't evaporate sweat (its primary mechanism for self-controlled cooling) because the air was already saturated so no cooling evaporative effect could occur, that sixty degree temperature also feels great. The conditioned air in your house, which has MUCH lower humidity, helps evaporate your built up sweat, and suddenly you're almost instantly cooler and more comfortable... for a while, until that sixty degrees starts becoming chilly.\n\nAnd part of how you feel is what you're used to at that time of year. If a northern Canadian goes to Florida in mid-winter, they can delightedly amble around outside in a t-shirt (as long as they don't get sunburned) while the locals complain about how frigid it is. But they'll shrivel up if the temp's 85 the next day while the locals are quite comfortable.",
"It’s about ambient temperature of the materials. Tough the window in the winter. If you have a laser thermometer it’s fun to shoot walls and windows to see surface temps vs the surface temp at your thermostat ",
"I'm curious if you really have your AC set to 60. Your electric bills must be insane. If you really do, one factor is probably the relative humidity. The second is how the thermostat knows when to turn on. Usually there are a few degrees it will drift above and below the set temp before turning on or off. So in the winter it would probably get below 60 much more often than in the summer, especially in rooms away from the thermostat this would be even more exagerated. ",
"It is the opposite for anyone I've ever talked to. 72 indoors feels cold in the summer and 72 indoors feels hot in the winter.",
"It’s due to heat transfer from radiation. There are three types of heat transfer: convection, conduction, and radiation. Convection and conduction both transfer heat linearly with changes in temperature, but radiation’s heat transfer is to the fourth power of temperature. \n\nSo basically if it’s 90 degrees out and you have a window pane, the inside of the glass may be 85 degrees, and it is radiating heat towards your body at a constant rate. Drop the outside temperature to 60 outside, and the drop of radiation heat transfer drops an absolutely massive amount. Remember, it’s not temperature you feel but the amount of energy that’s being transferred to your body ( think a 60 degree pool vs 60 degree air) \n\nEdit: typo ",
"For the same reason it feels different in winter when it's sunny or when it's cloudy even if the actual temperature is the same and no wind is blowing. The surface temperature of walls, windows, floor and roof is not the same. You feel the difference through thermal radiation.",
"Neat, I know this one. There are three basic forms of heat transfer, convective (transfered through air) conductive (transferred through solid material contact) and radiative (does not need a medium to travel). If you're standing in the middle of the room, the heat transfer rate between the air and yourself is the same in both 60 degrees scenarios, however you're losing large amounts of heat to the cold exterior walls/windows through radiative heat transfer in the winter, making you feel relatively colder.",
"It's hard to say for sure without more information but it's only 60 at the thermostat. There's going to be a gradient towards the outside walls and the outside temperature. Imagine a drafty house with 60 at the thermostat. In the summer it will be warmer closer to the window but in the winter it will colder closer to the window. If you are actually comfortable at 70 and you usual sit closer to the window you might need the thermostat at 80 in the winter.",
"ITT, Americans taking about temperatures casually while the rest of the world wonders how anyone could find 60ºC *cold*",
"I think it's expectations. Just like how if you drink room temp coffee it seems cold but room temp soda seems hot, even though they are the same temperature.",
"The real answer is relative humidity (moisture level of air), not all 60 degree temperature is equal, you are constantly losing moisture through your skin, and for that moisture to boil off (evapourate) it saps energy from you, cooling you down.\n\nIn the summer, there is a higher relative humidity in the air, slowing this process, if you heat yourself up enough, you will noticeably sweat as this moisture is having a slow evaporation process\n\nIn the winter relative humidity is drastically lower, causing this process to almost immediately draw moisture off of your skin cooling you rapidly, therefore making you colder, even though the air is still 60 degrees. This is more common in older homes that don't have a vapour barrier, if you install a humidifier, (or even have a hot shower or two without running the fan to raise levels) you may see noticeable improvements.",
"In addition to what other people have said, the temperature varies throughout the house and you probably aren't measuring the temperature everywhere. In the summer when the temperature is 60 in one place, most of the house is probably warmer than that. In the winter when the temperature is 60 in one place, most of the house is probably colder than that. ",
"Lol, the real answer is because your thermostat isn't a homogenous measurement of your room. I have to set my thermostat to 72 to keep an average room temp of 75 because the thermostat is right under a vent and away from exterior walls and windows.\n\nWalk around with a thermometer and you will find a wide variance of temperature in every room.",
"I’m an industrial refrigeration engineer but thats just like colder HVAC right? I’m not an HVAC expert but the trades share a lot of similarities. It could be a number of things. \n\nA major one could be moisture content of the air which can change with the seasons. Its generally less in the winter when the outside air is colder and can hold less moisture. Humidity is a big factor in human comfort, so I place my bets here. \n\nAnother idea is that your thermostat reads 60 degrees but the temperature sensors that communicate with your HVAC control system are poorly placed. I don’t know how this works in HVAC but refrigeration uses temperature sensors to provide feedback to the system. If the sensor is right next to the outlet of the AC unit of course its going to read 60 when the rest of your house may be at a higher temperature. \n\nAgain, I don’t specialize in AC but I do make things cold for a living. I would say try a dehumidifier in the summer and just turn the ac to a higher number and you should be comfortable all year round. \n\nEdit: more explanation of the second idea. \n\nA refrigerations system tries to reach a set temperature (steady-state temperature) using feedback information from a temperature sensor. If you set your system to 60 and the temperature sensor tells the system that its 65 then the system will increase the amount of refrigeration it is providing to bring the temperature as close as possible to 60 degrees. ",
"As a licensed professional engineer in HVAC, there are a variety of factors that have mostly been touched on already.:\n\n**Radiation:** You radiate heat to everything around you. When the temperature of everything around you decreases (such as the walls and windows would in the winter) you'll lose more heat. \n\n**Convection:** When the walls and windows are colder than the room, the air near them will cool, and this cold air will fall to the ground and move around your feet (Called a draft). In the summer, warm air goes up to the ceiling and unless you're 9ft tall, you won't feel that as much.\n\n**Humidity:** In the winter the air is often more dry in your house because the outside air can't hold as much much moisture. The sweat that you're always producing on some level will evaporate more quickly with low humidity, making you feel colder.\n\nIn general, temperatures don't make us comfortable. A certain level of **heat transfer** makes us comfortable. \n\nThere's actually a standard in our industry: ASHRAE standard 55 for thermal comfort that goes into great detail on this.",
"A 60F house in the summer would still be freezing. That's like 10 degrees below room temperature.",
"Sixty degrees inside your house in the summer? Ummm.... Sorry but for me, no way that 60 degrees is comfortable. ",
"60° in the Winter? I'm lucky if it gets above 20° where I live.\n\nGod damnit."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xbdh1
|
is there any actual verifiable proof that violent media causes violent behavior?
|
I keep seeing people criticize violent media, such as video games for their violent content. Some people have even said it drives people to commit atrocities such as mass shootings. I personally am not a violent person, per say. I will say this, I do think mass shootings are horrific and I'd never take a human life if it could by any rational means could be avoided. I think that makes me psychologically normal, even though I've watched media that involves violence.
I want to see if anyone found any causation, not necessarily just a correlation.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xbdh1/eli5_is_there_any_actual_verifiable_proof_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cf9tdf4",
"cf9y3ky"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"No, there is not. No scientifically conducted study has found a link. A lot of bad studies have found links, but they basically go like this, \"This person committed a crime. They played GTA, ergo GTA caused them to commit the crime.\"",
"There is no link. The most telling fact is that the violent crime rate has been on a steady decline over the last 20 years, while there has been a steady increase in violent films, TV, and video games in that same time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
dn48of
|
why is "water-tight" tighter than "air-tight" if water molecules are bigger?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dn48of/eli5_why_is_watertight_tighter_than_airtight_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f57ne3c",
"f57oa0d",
"f57ymx2"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Can you cite your source of inspiration for this question?\n\nIt typically wouldn't be considered to be.",
"If something is air-tight, it’s probably water-tight too. I’m going to assume that you meant waterproof as in being safe to use underwater.\n\nFor something to be water-tight significantly below the surface of the water, the sealing mechanism must be able to withstand the water pressure.\n\nTake a ziplock bag, fill it with air, and seal it. If you put it in the sink, water won’t get in, and if you squeeze it gently the air inside won’t come out. But if you try to take it to the bottom of a swimming pool, the water pressure will be stronger than the seal and it will open up.",
"Air tight usually means that air can not pass through but the bond might not be as strong, because air does not have weight to it. While water tight means that the seal might not be as tight but can hold more weight on the seal, holding back the weight of the water. Advertising is not regulated though so a lot of companies use those terms interchangeably."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
der6xx
|
why do gel pens randomly stop working for a little bit, and can this be fixed?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/der6xx/eli5_why_do_gel_pens_randomly_stop_working_for_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f2ybpqe",
"f2ybpzd",
"f2ycr56"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It could probably be because its dried up and when you start scribbling the heat from the friction and your hand melts the ink.",
"You're probably getting bits of paper dust and other gunk up the roller ball, temporarily blocking the ink from flowing. After some quick scribbling at a much higher pressure and speed, the gunk gets pushed out of the way and the ink can flow again.",
"I used to write in my journal using gel pens and they would stop working randomly. I saw a video of a teacher tying a piece of string to dried out dry erase markers, swinging it over her head in a circle several times, and the markers come back to life. I take the gel pen by the end and swing/shake several times and it’s always worked for me when I did it. Jabbing it up and down didn’t work, swinging motioned worked for me."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
622ax0
|
how much co2 to make a pound of wood? how many trees would be needed to neutralize co2 emissions?
|
Is it possible to work out how many tonnes of CO2 gas is absorbed from the atmosphere per pound/kilo/tonne (or whatever) of wood produced? Can it be done or what are the problems are there in trying to do that?
I did some chem at uni but even then looking at CO2 release, the numbers are big but not really meaningful, but if that number was expressed as say 1000 50m trees worth, enough 50m trees to cover California, it would take saplings covering half the US 25 years to remove that much etc. For me at least numbers like that are much easier to visualise and understand the extent of what we're doing.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/622ax0/eli5_how_much_co2_to_make_a_pound_of_wood_how/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfj6dsp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's certainly possible to [estimate it](_URL_0_). There are various ways to estimate the amount of green wood in a standing tree (this is important for timber owners and loggers to plan). From there we can estimate how much dry wood is in the lumber (based on experience) and how much of the dry wood is carbon and from that carbon how much CO2 was absorbed. (We have to convert from US tons (used for tree measures) to international metric tons (used to measure carbon, too). Since we're talking about theoretic trees we'll need to make some estimate of their size. I conservatively estimated 80' of lumber and 30\" diameter. \n\n50m trees are quite tall and usually take at least a century to grow. 1000 of them would require a bit more than 2 acres or a bit less than one hectacre. Because the tree's growth has slowed considerably at this age, most lumber trees are harvested long before they reach this size. \n\nUsing the merchantable wood as an estimate of carbon that could remain in the wood for the long term (after the tree is cut) lumber can remain preserved for a very long time. That would be about 9,500 tons of carbon in 1,000 80 foot tall 30\" diameter mature trees. If you covered an area the size of the state of California with new trees and preserved the lumber, you could potentially store 440 billion tons of carbon in the lumber from mature trees. \n\nTo put that in scale, the US emits about 5.5 billion tons of CO2 every year, while the entire world emits about 30 billion tons of CO2 annually. Since trees grow over time, you would need more trees to completely offset growth, and you must harvest them and preserve the wood (otherwise the trees will start to die and begin decaying releasing their carbon back in to the air). \n\nNote that those sequestration figures are likely best case scenarios, because some lumber is converted to firewood, paper, pellets, or other products that don't last very long (so are converted back into CO2) when decaying. If you somehow could keep the trees alive indefinitely, you could add roughly 33% to these figures (I was ignoring the parts of the tree that aren't made into lumber--both because they're much harder to estimate size and because they're almost always used in products that have a very short life like paper or firewood or left to decay). "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://www.forestry.state.al.us/HowMuchCarbonHaveYourTreesStored.aspx?bv=5&s=0"
]
] |
|
avvs6k
|
gymnastics scoring
|
Explain gymnastics scoring for landings to me. It looks like in some events and moves, a step forward or back on the landing is okay, but sometimes it looks like there’s a penalty for it. I’m an appreciative sports fan, no background in gymnastics at all.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/avvs6k/eli5_gymnastics_scoring/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ehi4l4y",
"ehi7m95"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe that a step on the landing is always a deduction, but there are different degrees. A small step or correction might only be a 0.1 point deduction, while a large step might be 0.3 points.\n\nThe basic rule is that a gymnast's score is composed of their starting value (the difficulty of their routine, according to the manual, essentially), plus a 10-point execution score minus any penalties on execution. So the gymnast enters with a difficulty value of 7 points, let's say, and if they did their routine absolutely flawlessly, they would earn those 7 points plus a 10-point execution value with nothing deducted, for a total of 17 points. If they had 5 tiny mistakes worth a 0.1 point deduction each, they'd end up with 7 + 9.5, which would be a 16.5. And so on. \n\nOmitting or missing a trick will change that starting difficulty value, while actually messing up on the trick (wrong angles, legs apart when they should be together or vice versa, not enough height, a million other details!) will knock off of the execution score. ",
"The old system was a 10 system of execution, you lost fractions of points for every mistake. The problem was that people did the easiest moves they were allowed to do so gymnastics stagnated. \n\nThe new system has the execution score where they deduct for mistakes but also has a difficulty score that goes up when you do difficult moves. \n\nSo the highest score now is by doing difficult moves well"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
zxuf1
|
where did the first bit of mass and space come from?
|
Hey, just to clarify, I'm not a creationist, but I'm curious about the start of the universe, like where the first energy or mass came from. Every article I try to read is basically 400 pages long and unreadable.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zxuf1/where_did_the_first_bit_of_mass_and_space_come/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c68oaim"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"We're still working on that. It's a hard question to answer because our current models of time don't really work 'before' the Big Bang."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3aw152
|
why are guys often more attracted to much younger girls, while younger girls are more attracted to much older guys?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3aw152/eli5_why_are_guys_often_more_attracted_to_much/
|
{
"a_id": [
"csgh9bu"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Young females are more fertile and capable of carrying a child. Older males are experienced, strong, capable of providing and protection. At least that's the very core. The outward reasoning has changed, I.e. \"I like younger girls cause they're cuter\". But our brain has a more basic reason.\n\nUnless you're talking about 20 somethings getting with the elderly. Then the answer is MONEY. Just money."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3g45q0
|
why is it that almost all black guys i have met irl and seen on tv always have their heads shaved?
|
Almost all the black guys I have met IRL and the ones on TV seem to shave all their hair off. Is this the norm only in western countries or is it the norm for all blacks even in Africa?
If it's true then maybe some black guys here can explain it? Is it because black guys need more shampoo? Is it because it get's dirtier? Is it because non-blacks view it as dirty? Is it because non-blacks view it as unattractive?
Because personally, even though I am completely straight, on most black guys a moderately sized afro seems more attractive to me than to shave it so short.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3g45q0/eli5why_is_it_that_almost_all_black_guys_i_have/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctuo1m8",
"ctuoah4",
"ctuocw6"
],
"score": [
14,
8,
17
],
"text": [
"It's a low maintenance hairstyle that is guaranteed not to be forbidden by any given dress code. It also hides baldness, which is another reason some guys do it. ",
"Black people tend to have *really* curly hair. If you've ever seen an afro, you know what can happen when they let their hair go.\n\nShaving the head is often preferable to high maintenance hairstyles that involve braiding (eg - cornrows) or using harsh chemicals to straighten their hair.",
"Because it's not the 90's anymore. \n\nAlso Black hair on men longer then a half inch looks \"savage\" to many potential employers and clients, so professionally we have to keep it short. I had a luscious footlong Afro until I was looking for an internship this summer and one of my interviewers, a Black dude, suggested that if I really wanted White people to take me seriously, I needed to cut the fro. My dad, the Black parent of my mixed heritage, said the same thing to me growing up, but teenage rebel me didn't listen. \n\nPlus a lot of White people associate cornrows, dreads, box braids, etc. with thugs, and Afros are hard as FUCK to maintain. I spent > 3 hours a day on my bush."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5guiv6
|
why does tilt-shift make things like that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5guiv6/eli5_why_does_tiltshift_make_things_like_that/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dav6989",
"dav6gdc"
],
"score": [
18,
2
],
"text": [
"The short answer is that your brain is just used to seeing that kind of focus on small things. \n\nLots of \"tilt shifted\" photography is just a normal picture where they simply pull the top and bottom parts of the image our of focus. Normally this kind of focus occurs when you take a picture or video of a very small object and therefore can only get a small depth of field in focus. Since our brains are so used to seeing small things like this, it just assumes that the image is of something very small. \n\nFunnily enough, this is the reason for lots of different optical illusions. Human vision is really really \"heuristic\" based, meaning it takes lots of shortcuts and uses lots of tricks to generate our perception of things. This is just one example. ",
"When you're looking at something small close up, everything around it will be blurred (try looking at your hand, but pay attention to how everything behind your hand will be blurry). The tilt-shift effect simulates this by blurring most of the picture, making objects in focus appear smaller than they really are. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
yqae4
|
why james holmes can be charged with 24 counts of murder after killing 12 people
|
From a news article: "Holmes faces 24 murder charges -- two for each of the dead -- and a total of 142 criminal counts."
However, the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states "Nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . "
I don't get it. If you plan to kill somebody and succeed you have committed a murder, not two murders. There's no logic in that.
**EDIT** Answered. Thanks /u/kikkit
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yqae4/eli5_why_james_holmes_can_be_charged_with_24/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5xv1d1",
"c5xw5re",
"c5xwps6",
"c5xx3v9"
],
"score": [
5,
12,
44,
3
],
"text": [
"They now have double the chance of getting a conviction. He received twelve counts of premeditated murder and twelve counts of acting with extreme indifference of human life. They can technically prove either or both. Same basic charge but from different angles.\n\nEdit-words and grammar",
"What the Fifth Amendment says is that, if he's found innocent, the Gov't can't get another lawyer, draw up new charges based on the same crime, and try him again.",
"The explanation you're looking for is called [lesser included offense.](_URL_0_) \n \nSome crimes have lesser offenses, which are technically different crimes, and the person charged can be held accountable for both. \n \nLarceny is basically stealing. Robbery is stealing along with the use of force or intimidation. So larceny is a lesser offense of robbery since every robbery includes larceny as part of the crime. So a person will be charged with both. \n \nThis is also why you see things such as Casey Anthony being found not guilty of Murder and Manslaughter, since manslaughter would be the lesser offense so she was charged with both. And the prosecution couldn't prove either. ",
"This is pretty common. Usually the government will charge lesser included offenses or alternative ways to commit the offense. For example, someone tries to rob someone else with a knife. This could be charged as aggravated assault (1) with the intent to rob, and (2) with a deadly weapon, and (3) with a thing that is likely to cause serious bodily injury. So the DA could charge aggravated assault these three different ways.\n\nFor lesser-included offenses, there's a doctrine called merger that causes the less serious crimes to merge into the most serious, meaning that you're only sentenced on the most serious crime. For offenses charged in the alternative (the aggravated assault example) you can only be found guilty one way. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesser_included_offence"
],
[]
] |
|
9yqy7q
|
why is it that when someone sleeps during the day they’ll have trouble falling asleep at night?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9yqy7q/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_someone_sleeps_during/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ea3faoq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Sleep pressure. There’s a chemical in your brain, adenosine, which builds up when you’re awake and is broken down when you sleep. If you have a lot of it, you start feeling sleepy.\n\nSo you wake up, with little adenosine and as you go about your day, there’s more and more produced and you are getting more tired. But if you take a nap, you also brake down the adenosine during that time, which makes you less sleepy.\n\nIf you take a nap too late (after 3 PM) or for too long, you can decrease sleep pressure to the point where you don’t have enough of it to feel sleepy in the evening.\n\nThis is also one of the effects of caffeine. It takes receptors (parking spaces) of adenosine and so prevents it from “parking” there and doing its job. But at the same time, adenosine is still being produced in the brain. \n\nSo when the coffee wears off and frees the receptor, all the sleep pressure created hits then all at the same time and you get a large energy crash. You feel tired then, so you get another coffee. While what you should do is just get some sleep.\n\nSource: Matthew Walker - Why We Sleep"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
b1ruz3
|
why does your brain tell you to do stupid stuff? like jumping across a gap you know you can't make.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b1ruz3/eli5_why_does_your_brain_tell_you_to_do_stupid/
|
{
"a_id": [
"einnp7r",
"einnzzq"
],
"score": [
9,
6
],
"text": [
"High place phenomenon or \"a call from the void\" is an urge that happens when your brain trips over itself. You see something dangerous and one half of your brain sends an alarm but the other half misinterprets it and instead of hearing an alarm you get an urge to do the thing your brain is saying is stupid/dangerous",
"There are quite a few reasons why people receive intrusive thoughts, like the urge to jump from a building, even when not contemplating suicide. And while doctors have noted a correlation between intrusive thoughts and anxiety or stress disorders, like PTSD, they can be had by anyone.\n\nThe truth is that the random nature of human thought creates these random ideas that only make sense if you look at them constructively.\n\nI see an open grate on the ground, and I'm carrying a book, so I think about tossing the book into the grate. I don't want to actually do it, I'm reading the book.\n\nBecause these thoughts are seemingly nonsensical, we remember when we have them more vividly than when we get similar thoughts that we are okay with. It is the anxiety caused by suddenly thinking of jumping into a canyon that causes us to remember it and worry about it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3eurxk
|
why is it so hard to see a general practitioner, but so inefficient to use urgent care?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3eurxk/eli5why_is_it_so_hard_to_see_a_general/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctiliwb",
"ctilsfz"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"What it comes down to is there aren't enough GPs to go around now that there are more people with health coverage (thanks Obama /s).\n\nIt's absolutely a systemic issue. We don't have enough GPs ultimately because specialists get paid better. Med students who graduate with hundreds of thousands of dollars of student debt are less likely to choose to become a GP because of this and we end up with a shortage. \n\n",
"That first appt is a getting-to-know-you appointment, and shouldn't be when you are sick, so presumably it's not urgent enough to schedule that day or even that week. Once you have had the new patient appt and give them your history and get established as a patient, you'll be able to get in a lot faster when you ARE sick and it IS urgent. Most GPs and internists have appts available each day for emergencies, but those appts are for established patients. Go on, make the appt a few months out, and ask them to put you on a cancellation list so you might get in earlier. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
7vjlzd
|
the dow 4% drop.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7vjlzd/eli5_the_dow_4_drop/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dtssbtk",
"dtssfa0",
"dtstluh"
],
"score": [
3,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"I put this in another comment earlier today, but I'll copy paste here. I posted this right after the dip/recover that happened between 2 & 330:\n\nI don't do equities (stocks) but rumor around the campfire is that we just saw some haywire algo trading. In plain english, someone's computers went into panic mode and started dumping and the rest of the algo world pulled liquidity (stopped buying). This was a mini flash crash.\n\nSource: work at hedge fund, but not in equities. I do debt - its relatively quiet over here.",
" > others claim it's due to the digital money crash\n\nanyone who says this has LITERALLY no idea what they're talking about. Though, with crypto currency investors, thats pretty much always true anyway\n\nTheres a lot of concern that interest rates are going to rise, and that panic is causing the drop",
"The US just announced that it will borrow an additional $trillion dollars over the next year. With no budget in place for the last year and the constant threat of the US government shutting down and the $1.5 trillion dollars tax cuts with an increase in military spending..... None of these are good. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2pliv0
|
if we are paralyzed while dreaming, how does sleep walking work?
|
From what I've read, people are paralyzed while dreaming. I've also read that sleep walkers are acting out the dreams they're experiencing. Don't these two statements contradict each other? Do sleep walkers lack the trait that keeps most of us grounded during dreams? Is one of those statements just some widespread misunderstanding?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pliv0/eli5_if_we_are_paralyzed_while_dreaming_how_does/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cmxrl93",
"cmxrn2c",
"cmxvl2q"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sleep walking is where the paralysis switch doesn't paralyze you.\n\nSleep paralysis is the opposite, where the switch is stick in paralyze mode.\n\nThey are both malfunctions of the same switch.",
"You have what is called atony (muscle weakness) in REM sleep, which is when dreaming primarily occurs. However, dreaming occurs outside of REM sleep to some degree, and sleepwalking does not occur during REM sleep but slow wave sleep.",
"Med student here.\n\nREM sleep is when dreaming occurs so your mind is active but your body is \"paralyzed\" in that you have no muscle tone. The brain waves of a person in REM sleep are identical to a person who is alert and awake- these are called beta waves.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThere are also phases of sleep called Non REM sleep. In med school, we learned phase 1, 2, and 3 non REM sleep, but I'm seeing now on other websites it shows a phase 4 as well. In Non REM sleep, the brain waves are different from each other, but the muscles are not \"paralyzed,\" so you can do some funky things during non REM sleep.\n\nPhase 2 Non REM sleep is when sleep bruxism, aka teeth grinding occurs.\n\nPhase 3 Non REM sleep is when night terrors (kids scream bloody murder at night but if you wake them up they have no memory of doing it), bedwetting, and sleepwalking occur.\n\nSource: A review book for passing the board exam"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/sleep.html"
]
] |
|
cnsxjg
|
why has beyoncé been elevated to such a high status? last i knew she was a pretty good artist, but lately it seems like people/other celebrities refer to her like she is royalty or something. what did i miss?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cnsxjg/eli5_why_has_beyoncé_been_elevated_to_such_a_high/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ewdm941",
"ewdmkaw"
],
"score": [
5,
4
],
"text": [
"i've always wondered the same thing. she's beautiful and has a good voice but i don't understand why everyone calls her a queen. personally, destiny's child had better songs than anything she's put out solo.",
"I don't get it either. It's not like she's done anything worthwhile. Just sang and danced and got paid way more than she deserves."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1vovpe
|
how can these currencies like bitcoin keep popping up? koinyewest and dogecoin? what does this type of currency mean for our future?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vovpe/eli5_how_can_these_currencies_like_bitcoin_keep/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ceudfiz",
"ceugh3j",
"ceuja0h"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Just like any currency not based on a physical item of any value, what gives cryptocurrencies their value is the fact that people think they have value. And honestly, I don't think anybody really knows if or how exactly they'll change the future of the dollar. Check back in 10 years.",
"I'm certainly no expert, but here goes...\n\nDogecoin and Fedoratip are jokes and I would surmise KoinyeWest is as well... pretty hilarious name at least. You can give anyone a tip of Dogecoin for free and it merely serves as a joke. \n\nThe value of BitCoin comes from the amount of goods or services that are traded for it, that determines how much you can buy a BitCoin for. Also, the fact that BitCoins are limited in amount, meaning there are only so many that exist and they can not be created or destroyed, the value of them grows as demand for the items and services you can buy with them grows. It really is just like a foreign currency, its relation to the USD is irrelevant. Much like currency trading, you could have bought a shitload of bitcoin at 0.01c each, and sell them at an astronomical profit, like one Redditor did a while ago (he did an AMA). \n\nIf no-one would accept BitCoin as payment, and you couldn't sell them for cash, it would be worthless. Thankfully for BitCoin, it ain't.",
"I like to use the sports analogy when explaining cryptocurrencies.\n\nSo let's say some guys invented and started playing a long game, with no definite ending and (a lot) more than two teams. They have some rules for what it takes to score points. You can trade the points between players, but to get new points (that don't come from another player) you have to solve a special puzzle.\n\nSome other guys think the rules or numbers in the first game (Game1) are stupid, and change them up a bit. People who agree start playing Game2. Naturally, Game2 points can't be used toward your Game1 score. But people who play both games might be willing to trade some of their Game1 points for some of your Game2 points.\n\nGame2, Game3, etc, are the \"altcoins\". Sometimes their rules are better, or sometimes they just have better, friendlier, more welcoming players. This is why a lot of people might prefer to hang around the DogeCoin players, as they have a reputation for being more welcoming toward newbies.\n\nThe different aspects of each game (how much inflation, how easy to \"score\", how easy to get help, how widely accepted they are in the real world) determine the exchange rates against each other and against real-world currencies."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4q1625
|
how do people walk across hot coals?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4q1625/eli5_how_do_people_walk_across_hot_coals/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d4pdcyw",
"d4pkg5e",
"d4q5m0p"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"The ash that forms on coals is a really good insulator. As long as people walk across it at a decent speed, they're not exposed to enough heat to cause burns. \n",
"The ash helps insulate your feet\n\nThe charcoal you walk across is a bad conductor of heat so it takes awhile for the heat to transfer. If you walked on a good heat conductor, like metal, at that same temperature, your feet would be burnt. With charcoal, not so much.\n\nThe walk is not very long so there's not enough time for your feet to heat up enough.\n\nThe leidenfrost effect may be in play--this is when water forms a protective layer between two surfaces, for a moment. So the sweat on the bottom of your feet may insulate them.\n\nFirewalks are often done at night, when the coals glow with a hellish intensity, it seems, in contrast to the dark of night. But really, they're not all that hot.",
"Thermal inertia. Different substances transfer heat at different rates, and you probably know this, even if you don't realize it. \n\nTry this: you're baking a cake in a 400-degree oven. The instructions say the cake is done when you can press on the surface and it springs back. So you put your hand in the oven. What is the temperature of the air in there? 400 degrees. Do you get burned? Nope, not right away. If you left you hand in there long enough, it would cook. Now you touch the surface of the cake. What is its temperature? 400 degrees. Do you get burned? Again, not right away, but a lot faster than just putting your hand in the oven. You decide the cake is done, so you grab the metal pan to take it out. What is the pan's temperature? 400 degrees. How fast do you get burned? Instantaneously. And badly.\n\nWhy? Because air, cake, and metal all transfer heat to your skin at very different rates. Air sucks at transferring heat, metal is REALLY good at it. Same reason you can walk around in 45-degree air and feel chilly, but you will die quickly in 45-degree water.\n\nFirewalking uses this concept. The coals they create have very high temperatures, but they suck at transferring heat. So as long as you keep moving and don't keep your foot on any one coal long enough, you'll be fine. The main reason people get burned in firewalks is they stop to take selfies--as happened with the Tony Robbins idiots--of they get small coals trapped between their toes.\n\nThere are those who claim firewalking represents some spooky power of the mind or whatever, and skeptic groups have repeatedly challenged them to demonstrate that by walking across heated steel trench plates instead of coals. To date, nobody has accepted the challenge.\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1xjj11
|
why 'space' cannot be used for password?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xjj11/eli5_why_space_cannot_be_used_for_password/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cfbwgbm",
"cfbwggx",
"cfbwqbz",
"cfbx6rs"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's an arbitrary decision made by the designer of each individual program. Presumably so you can unambiguously write a password down? Some programs/websites do allow spaces.",
"It depends on the policies of the site in question. Some places will allow it; others will not. I think it mostly comes from the idea of a password as a single word, while pass *phrases* would contain multiple words.",
"Spaces are ambiguous, because their internal representation could be one of several invisible characters like:\n\n- \n\nor \n\n- \n\nTo make it easier to manage passwords, spaces and other unusual symbols are usually blocked. \n",
"Spaces can't be used for passwords because someone doesn't want you to, there isn't something stopping them from letting you do that, it is simply how they have set up the program. \n\nyou can make a program do essentially anything you want, keeping junk passwords out would be something like:\n\n if (password == null) //if password is equivalent to nothing\n {\n //method to not accept password and return error message\n }\n\nor things like:\n\n if (inputPassword == null || (inputPassword == \" \"));\n {\n //don't accept password and prompt user again\n }\n else if (more conditions password must follow || and more);\n {\n // more functions that the user must follow to \n }\n else if (inputPassword.length() < 8) //don't accept passwords less than 8 char in length\n {\n //enforce minimum password length\n }\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ivyke
|
how do "screamers" (like spencer chamberlain of underoath) go on tour and perform 45+ minute sets for months on end? how do they not lose their voices after a few shows?
|
I think I would lose my voice after just a few songs, let alone a few shows on one tour.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ivyke/eli5how_do_screamers_like_spencer_chamberlain_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d31j9xp",
"d31kn56"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"There's a specific method you can use to make that sound which doesn't destroy your throat (as much). They get coaching from professionals in order to do it.",
"They practice proper vocal techniques that most amateurs, and even a lot of professionals may not practice. If you want advice about it you should check out [this](_URL_0_), in which he references a very good instructional dvd called \"the zen of screaming\" that discusses proper vocal foundations, techniques and exercises for hard rock and screaming vocals."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3g8WkxgRXUM"
]
] |
|
3bevig
|
why does slapping mosquitoes mid-flight with your hand or anything never work, no matter how fast?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3bevig/eli5_why_does_slapping_mosquitoes_midflight_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cslhq15"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you move your hand you push air in front of it. Mosquitos are very light so when air moves they move unless they hooked onto something. You push the mosquito out of the way as you push the air out the way. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
b04qj6
|
how could ancient humans get to america through the ice without dying?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b04qj6/eli5_how_could_ancient_humans_get_to_america/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eic5tni",
"eic6zyx",
"eidn2p6"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When migration was occurring, they would have walked across. On foot. They’d have brought food and shelter with them. There was a land bridge from what is now Russia to Alaska. ",
"Just watched a great episode of Nova about this exact topic. You should check it out. It's called \"The Great Human Odyssey\" \n\n_URL_0_\n",
"During the period of migration, the Beringian Straight was still above-water. This was because the ice age had lowered the sea level... or, if you prefer, the end of the ice age caused it to rise. It was about 120 meters lower. That's vertical, not horizontal. Ancient humans could, and probably did, just walk across it.\n\nHowever, when they arrived there, they would have been greeted by a 3 kilometer high sheet of pure ice, as well as a whole bunch of crazy wildlife like the short-faced bear, a 1.5 meter tall bear that hunted in packs and ate exclusively meat. It's for these reasons that the migration into Central America stalled for a few thousand years. They had to wait for the ice to thaw, and the wildlife to stop eating people.\n\nOr they just built canoes and sailed down the coast. They might've done that too."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/quwlSEpO0MI"
],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.