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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
7t0pu5
|
why does a candle not create smoke when burning but lots of smoke when you blow it out?
|
Source: blew out a candle today
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7t0pu5/eli5_why_does_a_candle_not_create_smoke_when/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dt8xgyc",
"dt8zcxe",
"dt941i1",
"dt971e1",
"dt97m41",
"dt9bosa",
"dt9dg2x",
"dt9ek9e",
"dt9f1kr",
"dt9fbjn",
"dt9g1hv",
"dt9ghwl",
"dt9h895",
"dt9huys",
"dt9iff2",
"dt9ji9a",
"dt9sylc",
"dt9uuau",
"dt9vzi6",
"dt9yrqh"
],
"score": [
11,
13822,
20,
126,
1321,
16,
6,
4,
5,
2,
17,
83,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not certain, but I believe it's because when its blown out the smouldering wick is a less complete combustion than the flame.",
"When the flame is lit...that smoke is being burned. The smoke is vaporized wax. When you blow it out, the wick is still hot enough to vaporize wax, but not ignite it. \n\nIf you cool the wick like lick your finger or put in water, the wick is no longer hot enough to vaporize wax.",
"Smoke is not a gas, but rather tiny airborne particles. With no ignition, they are seen as smoke. ",
"Its kind of been answered, but I'll add my .02 if I may.\n\nIn theory, a perfectly efficient flame will have no smoke, because the fuel combusts with the surrounding oxygen, and in a perfect world, you will have C02 and H20 byproducts, both of which are a gas and invisible. But in the real world, it is difficult to get a perfect rate of combustion. Instead, we often get incomplete combustion, when there is too much fuel for the air to mix with. \n\nIn the case of a candle, while it's burning, you will often see a little wiff of smoke every now and then, since we cannot control the rate of which the wax burns (the wick and candle design can get it close, but not perfect). When you put out the flame, the fuel continues to vaporise, but is unable to burn and thus you have smoke. \n\nThis is the same for all sources of combustion. If your campfire is really smokey, stir up the wood and get some air flowing through it, bringing more flame and less smoke.\n\nOld cars usually smoke more than newer more efficient cars, and in winter, a cold start generally has a lot of smoke because the engine is fed more fuel to help it run until it's at operating temperature. ",
"Long story short, [the smoke is flammable](_URL_0_), because it’s just unburned, vaporized candle wax. When the candle is lit, that same wax vapor is what sustains the flame in the first place.",
"Smoke is a byproduct of incomplete combustion. There is either not enough energy (heat), oxygen, or both, for it to completely combust the wax. ",
"When you're burning stuff you're turning fuel containing carbon (and other things, but we'll focus on the carbon) into carbon dioxide + water. When there's not enough oxygen and heat you get incomplete combustion where carbon monoxide is formed (bad stuff, don't breathe it) or just bits of carbon. Carbon is this black stuff that settles everywhere (don't breathe it either). Smoke is basically little pieces of carbon floating about. Fires get smoky when full combustion isn't happening because of a lack of oxygen/heat.\n\ntl;dr - incomplete combustion makes smoky bois",
"A flame is ignited fire gases. There are a great many fire gases that can be created in many ways. They all have different \"flammable ranges\" (temperatures at which it will ignite) and \"ideal mixes\" (amount of oxygen to most efficiently burn). When something like a candle, fire wood or a room in a house reaches the right temperature it will pyrolyse, first losing whatever water it contains through white steam and then decomposing into black fire gases which, with the right amount of oxygen and heat will ignite. This is why a fire looks like gas rising above whatever is burning, whenever you see black smoke it's because the fire is in efficient and not burning all the fire gases. When you blow a candle out the wick is still hot enough to pyrolyse but the gas isn't hot enough to ignite itself. To demonstrate how this works try blowing out a candle and then holding a match above the wick in the fire gases and watch the flame travel down to the wick. Also Google \"tounges of flame\" these are ignited fire gases which dance across the ceiling in house fires, way above whatever is creating them. Hope this helps, it truly fascinated me. ",
"Isn't this the difference between a clean burn where the stochiametry is even, versus a situation where the burn is running too lean or too rich?",
"Another name for \"smoke\" is \"products of incomplete combustion\" as it is simply particles (e.g. Carbon aka soot) that are released before being combusted due to inefficient combustion. This can be caused by lack of oxygen or heat.\n\nSource: had a fire safety course at work. ",
"Fun fact, this is more or less why backdrafts exist. Technically only gases burn - solids like wood or a candle wick, when exposed to sufficient heat, undergo a chemical reaction called pyrolisis, which basically just converts the solid compounds into flammable gases... which then burn. In order for fire to exist, you need the four elements of the fire tetrahedron: fuel, heat, oxygen, and a chemical reaction. When you blow out a candle, you temporarily separate the fire from its source of fuel and cool it off, extinguishing the flame. The candle is still off-gassing combustible fuel (smoke), but it is now too cool to combust.\n\nNow take modern homes. They are insulated extremely well, to the point of being virtually airtight boxes, and they are stuffed full of petroleum-based synthetic materials (mattresses, couches, curtains, carpet, etc.), which burn like straight up gasoline. What happens is a fire starts, gets ridiculously hot, and generates an insane amount of fuel/smoke. It's a hungry, greedy bastard though, so it eats up all the oxygen in the house. Because there are no gaps in the windows and doors, there is no way for fresh air to come in and continue to feed the fire... so it goes out.\n\nThe problem is that the house is still very very hot, and it is absolutely stuffed full of unconsumed fuel that's ready to go. If you break a window or open a door, you might end up accidentally introducing oxygen back into the mix and causing a catastrophic reignition that looks something like [this.](_URL_0_)\n\nSource: I enjoyed the classroom portion of Firefighter I training a little too much.\n\nEdit: [Clearer video of the money shot.](_URL_1_)",
"In 1848, Michael Faraday literally explained the science of candles to five-year-olds in a series of lectures. In his own words:\n\n > There is another condition which you must learn as regards the candle, without which you would not be able fully to understand the science of it, and that is the vaporous condition of the fuel. In order that you may understand that, let me show you a very pretty experiment. If you blow a candle out carefully, you will see the vapor rise from it. You have, I know, often smelled the vapor of a blown-out candle—and a very bad smell it is; but if you blow it out lightly, you will be able to see pretty well the vapor into which this solid matter is transformed. When I hold a lighted match two or three inches from the wick, you can observe a train of fire going through the air till\nit reaches the candle.\n\nengineerguy recorded himself giving the lectures with all of the practical demonstrations, and [put them on YouTube](_URL_1_). Here's the part where [he reads the paragraph above and does the experiment](_URL_0_).",
"Before burning a candle you should be trimming the wicks to 6mm if you don’t that’s when the candle will start producing black smoke as it’s making too much carbon. When you blow out a candle (which you shouldn’t be doing as it’s dangerous and can damage the candle) it’s just the excess carbon coming off the candle, instead of blowing it out, use a snuffer to suffocate the flame and capture that excess carbon. \n\nSource: candle seller for 6 years, need to educate people on how to burn them because some people are dumb.\n",
"Just want to put forward the idea that the smoke is not strictly speaking vaporized candle wax.\n\nIf it was vapor it would be a hot gas somewhere above the boiling point of wax.\n\nHasn't the smoke re-condensed into really small blobs of solid wax once its gone a few mm away from the wick? After all the smoke is cold.\n",
"So you already have an answer, but I'd like to copy-paste this super fire explanation of /u/Hypothesis_Null here, as it expands explanations to the colors and shape of the flame. \n\n[[permalink](_URL_0_)]\n\n > Fire works a little differently than people imagine.\n\n > When you look at something like a campfire, the actual wood isn't on fire. (Well, it's 'on fire', but combustion isn't occurring much at all on the wood's surface.) And the flames themselves are not super-heated *gases* emitting blackbody radiation.\n\n > Now, the gas particles are hot, and they *are* emitting red and even yellow light, but there's so little mass that the light from the gas is barely visible at all.\n\n > Instead, when you look at a fire, what you're seeing are little soot particles that are being vaporized off of the wood from the intense heat, and being carried upwards by the convection. That glowing soot is what provides the flame with enough mass to emit enough visible light for us to see it.\n\n > Now, this soot is plenty hot - well past its flash point. So as soon as it runs into enough oxygen it will burn. In a steady state flame, there is very little oxygen near the wood, so you have a lot more unburnt soot, so the flame is both redder (cooler) and brighter. As you go outwards (upwards due to gravity) the soot starts encountering more oxygen. So more soot burns and the flame gets hotter. So the flame is simultaneously more yellow - hotter, and dimmer - less soot, so less dense, so less overall light. As you get towards the tips of the flame, that's the boundary where there is basically more than enough oxygen that pretty much all the soot burns. So the flame is technically hottest there, but there's also no soot left - just gas - so the visible flame dies away. The heat being generated all the way up the flame, mostly towards the tip, radiates back down and continually heats the wood, freeing more soot particles and continuing the cycle.\n\n > And if it's not hot enough, fewer soot particles are liberated, less oxygen is consumed, so the edges of the flame shrink, get closer to the wood, and thus heat the wood up more. So there's a feedback system involved that will tend to keep the flames at some roughly constant height based on hot much fuel and oxygen you have available.\n\n > The reason that flame has so well-defined of edges is basically because if you consider diffusion of oxygen into oxygen-free gas, it's a pretty slow process. If I take a tank of oxygen and a tank of nitrogen of equal pressure and attach them by a hose, the two gases won't really mix all that quickly. An open flame is going to have a bit more active gas mixing, but it's a good first-order understanding on why there's such a well-defined, narrow barrier between *'not-enough'* and *'plenty-of'* oxygen for the soot to burn and thus for the flame to dissipate.\n\n > This is also why you can do cool party tricks like [re-lighting a candle from its smoke trail](_URL_1_) Smoke is basically unburnt soot - unburnt fuel. This is why you can tell a smokey fire is too cold and inefficient - lots of smoke means that the fire doesn't keep the soot hot enough for it to ignite by time it gets access to oxygen. \n\n > This is also why when you blow on a flame, the flames get smaller while the fire seems to get hotter - you're providing extra oxygen into the flames - where flames are basically the area of superheated soot suspended in gas too deprived of oxygen to burn.\n\n > **TL;DR:**\n\n > For a campfire, the wood is the fuel tank, the flames are the fuel line, and the tips of the flame are really the combustion chamber where most of the fuel gets burnt. What you see as 'flame' is actually the super-heated fuel in the line, which hasn't ignited because it's oxygen deprived, but is hot enough to glow from the heat radiating from the combustion chamber (flame tips). Once it gets far enough away that it has abundant oxygen, it all burns, heating up the fuel in the fuel line to keep it glowing, and signifying the edge of the flame, as there is no longer enough soot - enough mass - radiating blackbody emissions for you to see.\n\n > ***Edit*** - This is what I get from doing things from memory. Everything above is fine, but below in some of the responses, when talking about gas stoves I need to talk about where the blue color comes from - rather than blackbody radiation, the blue light comes specifically from chemical emission spectra as particular compounds gets Oxidized. In a number of comments I mention Carbon Monoxide, CO, being combusted into CO2 as the culprit. Wherever you see me say that, *please imagine instead I said \"C2, CH, and CO\"* as C2 and CH combusting into CO2 *also* emit blue light, and are far more [responsible for the majority](_URL_2_) of the blue light emissions than CO. The general principle that a blue flame is a result of a hotter fire with excellent access to oxygen, and represents more complete combustion still holds. Special thanks to /u/esquesque for correcting me.\n\n > Also I woke up today to discover that you guys all *really* love fire. Can't blame you - it's fascinating.\n",
"Hold a sheet of paper a couple of feet above that candle, or place the candle close to a white wall and let it burn for an hour.\n\nBoth will produce a dark sooty residue on the surfaces because candles do not burn perfectly to begin. \n\nThe increase of smoke is from the sudden shift of live fire to choked fire and out. Doesn't burn efficiently so makes more smoke.",
" Smoke is just unburnt vaporized material, so when you put the candle out its still vaporizing the wax, but not burning it.",
"Smoke is nothing but unburned fuel. When the flame is going it is effectively burning all of the fuel from the wax. When you blow it out and it is smoldering it is not burning up all the fuel and producing smoke.\n\nSource- Am firefighter.",
"If the smoke is vaporized candle wax, does that mean that it eventually soldifies again?\n\n\n\nSo if you burn a lot of candles at the same spot, the surroundings could eventually have wax sediments?",
"The smoke is the fuel. After blowing out a candle, you can relight it by igniting the smoke, which will travel down to the wick. It's a cool party trick. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://i.imgur.com/RGO6i.gif"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnUA04wyHg4",
"https://youtu.be/Et_Y_kZXoQQ?t=195"
],
[
"https://youtu.be/6W0MHZ4jb4A?list=PL0INsTTU1k2UCpOfRuMDR-wlvWkLan1_r&t=364",
"https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0INsTTU1k2UCpOfRuMDR-wlvWkLan1_r"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/5b80il/-/D9mljdx",
"https://youtu.be/C5eTn5d0cvg?t=14s",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Spectrum_of_blue_flame.svg/479px-Spectrum_of_blue_flame.svg.png"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bi0gve
|
what about brownies make them the go-to vessel for edibles?
|
You always hear about pot brownies before anything else.. why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bi0gve/eli5_what_about_brownies_make_them_the_goto/
|
{
"a_id": [
"elx29e5",
"elx29o1",
"elxq9xc"
],
"score": [
19,
19,
5
],
"text": [
"Hard to screw up, plenty of chocolate to hide the weed taste, brownie mix is in every supermarket and the recipe adapts well to extra butter.",
"Nothing really, except that brownies are rich and chocolatey to help mask the taste of the cannabis. Edible cannabis is typically infused into oil or butter so anything you make with those can be a vehicle for edible cannabis.",
"If you think back to the pre-internet twentieth century, there were only so many things that an individual with not much cooking experience and more than a little drug use could bake. If you don't have a cookbook lying around, your best bet is to pick up a mix at the store and follow the instructions on the box. Brownies are a logical choice because they're easier than cookies or cake, and can be easily portioned into individual servings. \n\nOf course, it might have something to do with the infamous [Alice B. Toklas Brownies](_URL_0_). Basically, in the 1950s, the late poet Gertrude Stein's \"good friend\" Alice Toklas wanted to publish a cookbook. Many of the recipes were submitted by friends, one of whom sent her a recipe for hash brownies as a joke. However, neither Toklas nor her publisher recognized \"canibus\" or \"haschich\" as marijuana, so it went to print. It was seen as a big publicity stunt, even though she swore it was an accident. I'm sure that incident did a lot to solidify the idea of pot brownies in the cultural consciousness."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/880/alice-b-toklas-brownies-the-recipe/"
]
] |
|
4j5scq
|
why do a lot of the elderly wear pastel/beige colours ?
|
Not a criticism, genuinely curious.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4j5scq/eli5_why_do_a_lot_of_the_elderly_wear_pastelbeige/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d33w2xa"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The elderly generally aren't clothes-horses like us when we are younger because they don't have to go to work or social events every day. So they generally have less selection in their clothes.\n\nPastels and beiges are a somewhat bright and cheery and clean-looking but not over-the-top way of comfortably dressing day after day for just about every informal occasion. When you don't have, need or want a thousand outfits, those colours are good choices for most occasions, particularly in places that they like to retire to where there's warmer and sunnier weather and where dark colours would be a lot hotter."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
6psk6p
|
what is the incentive for real-estate agent fight for the lowest price for a buyer?
|
I understand that the buyer's agent gets a part of the seller's agent's commission, most of the time.
A lower price, no matter who pays the commission means lower income. I do not trust the notion that "honor" would make them seek the *best, lowest price*. Reputation is unlikely to be a concern. A buyer will rarely find out, they could have gotten a house for much lower. I am a jaded five years old.
*What is the incentive for the buyer's agent to seek a lowest (not lower) price?*
Thank you.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6psk6p/eli5what_is_the_incentive_for_realestate_agent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkrvlzz",
"dkrvug8",
"dkrw3ry",
"dkrwews"
],
"score": [
4,
21,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"They have no particular financial incentive. They have a legal obligation to do what they can for their client, but there is a lot of room there to try harder or less hard.",
"Look at it this way... saving a client $10,000 cuts into the agent's take home pay about $150 (6% commission is $600, half to each agent who then pay half to their brokerage). Saving a client an additional $10k is MUCH more likely to result in referrals to friends/family and repeat clients, earning them well more than the $150 they gave up on the transaction.",
"Many people are buying house very close to the maximum price they can afford. The last thing a realtor wants is to get someone to put an offer in on a house, then get rejected by the bank because they can't qualify for the loan. And sometimes the reason they can't qualify is the bank doesn't think the house is worth enough as collaborate on the mortgage. Making sure the deal goes through is a pretty good incentive.\n\nBeyond that, whatever little influence a realtor has on a price just isn't worth leading customers astray. In a normal real estate market a reasonably priced house is going to sell for pretty close to what they are asking for it, usually within 5% or so. 5% of 3% commission is 0.15%, or $300 on a $200K sale. Realtors do a volume business, risking a sale for $300 usually is not in their best interest.\n\n",
"As the buyer's agent, the incentive is to get you a house as quickly as possible. The difference for them between your highest price and your lowest price is a pretty small delta in commission. But if they can get you under contract quickly that gives them time to get another client under contract. \n\nSo if your high price vs low price on a house is say 1% different, and they handle one client a week. If they can squeeze in an extra client a year, they made 2% more."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
475n88
|
how samsung's s7 and s7 edge can be water resistant without the micro usb flaps.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/475n88/eli5_how_samsungs_s7_and_s7_edge_can_be_water/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0ae2p6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If I was designing it, the USB socket would be sealed round the conductors and round the frame where it attaches to the case, so the only bit you'd have to worry about would be the conductors themselves.\n\nThose - well, you could coat them with water-repellent stuff so that when they get wet they dry out. You could rely on the hole being small so surface tension (particularly with a water repellent coating) would stop water getting in - just keep a bubble of air in there), you could sense when it's underwater and shut off any power to the conductors..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3v5qnu
|
rising ocean temperatures affecting phytoplankton.
|
Why would a 6 degree change in Ocean temperature so phytoplankton, why wouldn't the phytoplankton just start growing father from the equator?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3v5qnu/eli5_rising_ocean_temperatures_affecting/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cxkiqfe"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The water doesn't get too hot for plankton. There are nutrients in deep water that plankton need to bloom. When it's colder, water mixes, so nutrients can come to the surface where plankton are. Increasing ocean temperature lets that happen less."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2lh7j9
|
what exactly does it mean when people say a bear can smell up to a mile away?
|
If smells are just airborne particles in a particular area, how do bears smell that far? I don't imagine that smells can permeate that far unless the bear is down wind, but often they live in wooded areas that are pretty still.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lh7j9/eli5_what_exactly_does_it_mean_when_people_say_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clupq8m"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"As you say, smells are just airborne particles. As you move away from the source of a smell, there will be less of those airborne particles. The sensitivity of one's smell is based on how many of those particles are needed to generate the perception of smell.\n\nNow, particles floating around in the air behave rather randomly on an individual level, but we can generalize about how many particles there would be at given distances. We can then use that to deduce which animals could detect that smell at those distances based on what we know of the sensitivity of their sense of smell."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
e8h87x
|
why is peppermint associated with winter and christmas?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e8h87x/eli5_why_is_peppermint_associated_with_winter_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"facv0ph"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Long story short: it's a marketing ploy.\n\nSugar sticks had long been a treat in Europe for small children. In the 1600s, a choirmaster in Cologne, Germany, began handing them out in his parish during Nativity. However, he bent them into canes first as a shepherd's crook, which wasn't standard at the time. It became a tradition.\n\nThe tradition slowly spread until the late 1800s when someone in Ohio documented their use on a Christmas tree.\n\nHowever, up until then, the canes were solid white and only made of sugar with no added flavor. It wasn't until the turn of the century that marketers added the distinctive peppermint flavor and red dye to make them more bright and appealing."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3epq9b
|
why do people in big cities have the (for the most part) same accent (general american accent) and people in the countryside have a different accent?
|
So I understand that you get the accent of the people who you grow up around, but why in the long-scale (several hundred years of American history) did the accents diverge like this?
Some noteable exceptions that I can think of are Boston and Staten Island
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3epq9b/eli5_why_do_people_in_big_cities_have_the_for_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cth7tzr",
"cthbtfn",
"cthfoss"
],
"score": [
7,
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Cities are hubs of activity in the world. People from all over the world and your nation come to Boston and New York City, the accents mix together to form a metropolitan and generalized accent. Someone from New York City is going to sound more like someone from LA than someone from rural Massachusetts will sound like someone from rural New Jersey. Outside of cities, there is less exposure to people from all over the world and accents stay pretty much the same. If your city is not a hub of world travel like say Worcester, you are still going to have a city full of people with accents. \n\nThis is also partly why people from metropolitan areas dress differently than those from rural areas.",
"People in big cities in the US don't have the same accent so your premise is mistaken. I was born and raised in NYC and I've been to Chicago, LA, Houston, Atlanta and some other cities, and believe me, nobody mistook ever me for a native once I opened my mouth. ",
"This isn't the case.\n\nNew York, Boston, and Philadelphia all have accents associated with them despite not only being big cities, but being the oldest big cities in the USA. \n\nNew Orleans? Has its own private accent.\n\nChicago? Ditto.\n\nLos Angeles? You'd think L.A. wouldn't have a strong accent associated with it because it's a relatively young city in the West (and there's a lot of debate as to whether there's a definite \"Western US accent\" or not). But it absolutely does.\n\nI personally don't hear Houston or Dallas as having accents distinct from the rest of Texas, or Atlanta as having an accent distinct from the rest of the Coastal South. But it's possible that I haven't spent enough time there to know.\n\nAlso, the idea that there's a \"general American\" accent is simply incorrect. There are distinct regional ways of talking in every part of the country."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dt58pw
|
why do rollercoasters/fast rides make people vomit?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dt58pw/eli5_why_do_rollercoastersfast_rides_make_people/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f6vbggf"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Motion sickness is caused by your eyes and your ears disagreeing about your position and movement. You use both of them to find the horizon and orient yourself, to know if you're right side up or not, to know the slope of the ground, to know if you're moving or not.\n\nWhen your eyes and ears disagree, you get nauseous. This is a survival mechanism, because very often in nature poisons will affect your inner ear or your vision. Being nauseous is a good way to teach you not to eat that thing, and if it's really bad you will throw up which will get rid of any more of the poisonous thing left in your stomach, hopefully before you absorbed too much of the poison.\n\nRoller coasters really mess with your inner ear. There are little tubes with fluid in them that settle down towards the center of gravity of the Earth. The acceleration of the roller coaster up and down and around corners and around loops spins and swirls that fluid around in your ears, causing them to send false, confusing signals about which direction the ground is in. That alone might be enough to make you nauseous, since your ears aren't supposed to be that confused. But all those confused signals *definitely* conflict with what your eyes are telling you about your motion and where the ground is.\n\nThose conflicting signals trick your brain into thinking you've been poisoned, so it does what it evolved to do and makes you feel nauseous so you'll puke up the poison it thinks is in you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
8oohl8
|
how exactly were people’s bodies so well preserved in pompeii?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8oohl8/eli5_how_exactly_were_peoples_bodies_so_well/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e04xhad",
"e04yhau"
],
"score": [
21,
13
],
"text": [
"They weren't. The bodies you see are plaster casts of the gaps the bodies left in the ash bed. ",
"They were people who were killed when burning hot ash rained down on them and covered them completely. This ash hardened while their bodies rotted away, basically leaving people-shaped holes in stone. Centuries later, archaeologists injected plaster into these holes, then removed the stone leaving behind a cast."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
liv10
|
light fields
|
On /r/shutupandtakemymoney, someone posted a link to pre-order the [Lytro Camera](_URL_0_). I've been playing around with the website, and they keep talking about light fields. I have *no idea what that means* and I originally thought it was snake oil-y, but it's super-cool, whatever it is.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/liv10/eli5_light_fields/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2t2ila",
"c2t2ila"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Their claim is their camera sensor records light at multiple focal planes, which is probably true, so you can refocus a picture after taking it. You can do a similar trick with a standard camera just by \"bracketing\", which means taking the same shot multiple times at different exposure and focus settings, then choosing which shot you prefer afterwards.",
"Their claim is their camera sensor records light at multiple focal planes, which is probably true, so you can refocus a picture after taking it. You can do a similar trick with a standard camera just by \"bracketing\", which means taking the same shot multiple times at different exposure and focus settings, then choosing which shot you prefer afterwards."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"https://www.lytro.com/"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
3a3mo6
|
if testosterone levels start to decrease by 1%-2% every year in men(so i've been told), then why do men appear to become more hairy as they age?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3a3mo6/eli5_if_testosterone_levels_start_to_decrease_by/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cs91ven",
"cs9jvwg"
],
"score": [
41,
2
],
"text": [
"There are multiple types of testosterone. The one that decreases as you age affects muscle growth and head hair. The type that affects body hair is a dehydrotestosterone (I believe). And as one falls the other rises",
"Another main reason of this is that even though T levels do decrease as we pass by about 25, there is still enough T in the blood stream to mature new hairs. Hairiness is not just about how much T you have, but how long T has been in your system. An 18 year old male may have on average a 650 T level and a 50 year old male might have around 500. Even though the 50 year olds T is lower (on average), he has had T in his system for longer which over the years can mature baby hairs."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
19mrbl
|
war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity- difference
|
Can someone tell me the difference?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/19mrbl/war_crimes_genocide_crimes_against_humanity/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8pg96n",
"c8pgb8t",
"c8pms6f"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"War Crimes refer to *any* breaking of the established laws of conflict. Such violations can include use of illegal weapons (chenical or biological agents as an example), mistreatment of prisoners, deliberately targeting purely medical facilities etc. \n\nGenocide is a specific crime - deliberately targeting military and civilian targetes to iradicate a certain ethnicity. You don't necesserily need to be at war to do this - you could do it against a group of people within your own country.\n\nCrimes Against Humanity - whilst including many war crimes 'Crimes Against Humanity' can be conducted by governments against there own people - such as Apartheid and the use of torture. It normally refers to acts endorced by a government so that both the political and military branches of government can be brought to trial.",
"[War crimes](_URL_1_) are actions committed during a time of war that are outside of what the international community considers acceptable wartime activities. This often includes things like intentionally harming civilians or placing people in slave camps.\n\n[Crimes against humanity](_URL_2_) are very similar to war crimes yet they occur outside of war. For instance, a government that exterminates, tortures or racially/religiously persecutes is often guilty of such crimes.\n\n[Genocide](_URL_0_) is the attempt to destroy any religious, ethnic, racial, etc... group. This usually falls under one of the two previous categories as either a war crime or a crime against humanity. \n\nEDIT: Or what D_I_S_D said... that works too.",
"Genocide is the extermination of a group of people based on religion, race, ethnicity, or political affiliation. Examples would be the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide.\n\nWar crimes are violations of the laws of conflict DURING A WAR. Examples would be torturing and executing POWs, killing civilians, etc..\n\nCrimes against humanity usually refer to government actions that persecute a group of people. It doesn't have to be during a war. Genocide and war crimes are often classified as crimes against humanity but sometimes not. When someone is guilty of crimes against humanity, it usually does include genocide and war crimes."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity"
],
[]
] |
|
a4ql7t
|
computers at workplaces of major corporations warn us that upon logging in, we agree to be monitored. how are we actually being monitored?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a4ql7t/eli5_computers_at_workplaces_of_major/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ebgspr0",
"ebgt62f",
"ebgtulw",
"ebgwh9p",
"ebh1kda"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
3,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"Generally logs are kept regarding what sites each user visits and if you have permissions to download files that's also logged as well. ",
"They track your network packets being sent from your computer to your company network/firewall. The thing to keep in mind is depending on the size of your company it can be a lot of data do they don’t keep it very long. However, if they are building a case to fire you they may use your network browsing as one of several reasons. Also all your company email is copied as well. So if you get a dirty joke or porn links your company as a copy of it. Don’t do anything at work that could get you fired. If possible RDP to your house computer and do the bad stuff from there. 😁",
"Usually it's two part, they have a proxy, they do have logs of what websites your visit, and two, they are telling you that they can and will look at what you're doing. In practice, I think most are like where I work, they have logs and can see what you did, and they have the computers configured such that IT can see everything that you're doing right now. They probably won't look at the logs, and probably won't look at what you're doing, because honestly you're not that interesting. But if someone asks or they get a formal complaint, they'll look, and they won't tell you. A formal complaint could be the CEO saying they want anyone looking at porn fired, to the IT VP wanting a list of everyone who wastes company bandwidth with youtube.",
"I've worked in shops that in addition to standard network logging, system logs, etc. we've also had software that does keystroke capture, screenshot capture, and remote viewing of whatever was actively happening on screen. And since it's their equipment, it's generally legal (in the US). Ethical is a different statement... ",
"IT friend had a high pressure large company gig that got slow every once in a while. He scanned random hard drives on the network looking for porn (jpegs, mp4, avi). Caught several guys - could have been fired. Spoke to them privately and the files disappeared. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5qz176
|
what happens when a president is impeached, and who else in the gov't is affected by it?
|
Not raised in the US so I'm trying to get an overview of how the process would work. So the President would get removed, I assume, but who else would get removed along with him? Anyone involved in shady actions, or anyone supporting them, or...? VP just takes over, what happens if he was complicit in the actions of the President?
What happens if the Speaker is too?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qz176/eli5_what_happens_when_a_president_is_impeached/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dd37m8l",
"dd3a70j"
],
"score": [
6,
3
],
"text": [
"Impeachment means that the President is charged with having committed a crime by the House of Representatives. The Senate then conducts a trial. If found guilty the President is removed from office, and then other penalties such as fines, imprisonment, even execution are possible. \n\nThe President is the only one effected, in so far as being put on trial or being convicted of something. If it is though that they are guilty of a crime they go through an independent impeachment process. ",
"Firstly, sufficient evidence must be gathered to charge a federal official, such as a president, with *high crimes and misdemeanors*, which is a broad term referring to a number of offenses such as corruption. The House of Representatives impeaches the president by voting on a separate *Article of Impeachment* for each offense the federal official is being charged with. If the House votes for an Article of Impeachment, the federal official in question has formally been impeached. \n\nJust being impeached is not the same as being removed from office, however. (Bill Clinton, for example, was impeached although not removed from office.) After the Article(s) of Impeachment, the Senate conducts a removal hearing. This hearing is conducted like a criminal trial and is presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Senate acts like the jury. A minimum two-thirds vote is required to remove a president.\n\nFollowing the removal of a president from office, the vice president takes over. I'm not sure who then takes the position of VP."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
24a9m5
|
say we built a steel ring around the earth and it was always 1metre off the ground anywhere. what would happen if we dropped it? where would it lie? would it float? implode?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24a9m5/eli5_say_we_built_a_steel_ring_around_the_earth/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch542wr",
"ch5465r"
],
"score": [
15,
5
],
"text": [
"It would break, as steel isn't strong enough.\n\nOtherwise, assuming we have a perfectly rigid substance with the strength, it should float as gravity would be acting equally on all sides, at least until it got slightly disturbed. Any change in forces would cause it to come crashing down somewhere.\n\nKeep in mind, gravity isn't entirely uniform, so chances are you couldn't get that perfect balance.",
"Assuming we all ignore factors and that we can truly make a large ring - perfectly round around a perfect round earth - that is 1m from the surface everywhere.\n\nOnce let loose, it would \"hover\" towards the equator, since earth's rotational speed and gravity are the lowest there. It would spin at an equal velocity as the earth does, since the gravitational pull will keep it in place.\n\nI'm more curious to have a geophysicist explain what could happen with the earth's magnetic field, since that will seriously be impacted by a large steel ring."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
1qyvzt
|
why artificial colours/flavours/preservatives are bad
|
alternatively: why food marketers want me to believe they are bad
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qyvzt/eli5_why_artificial_coloursflavourspreservatives/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdhw9gb",
"cdhxt0s"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Artificial colours/flavours/preservatives usually are a chemical substance used to a purpose in a food composition. Think about medicine, for instance. You ingest it with one purpose, e.g. killing the pain, but the substance responsible for that is also responsible for a lot of other reactions in your body depending on the concentration. One sleeping pill puts you to sleep, the whole box kills you. So you can safely eat something containing artificial substances as there is a control over the usage of these substances in food, but overexposure can cause you some harm. And assuming food companies abide by this control, overexposure means eating too much of food containing artifical substances. You can go to McDonalds once in a while, you're gonna be fine. But trying eating it exclusively and you will undergo serious health risks as well as get chemically addicted.\n\nHope I could be of any help.\nSorry for possible grammar or lack of further information.\nI'm at work =/",
"They aren't bad just because they are artificial. It just so happens that several of the more popular ones happen to be bad for you.\n\nSodium nitrite for example is a common preservative used in meats, and it reacts to form carcinogenic compounds known as nitrosamines. Another good example is Red 40, which has been linked to ADHD.\n\nBut it is worth pointing out a counter example too, the artificial food coloring Methylene Blue has actually shown great promise in clinical trials to slow the progression Alzheimer's, and is a powerful antioxidant.\n\nSo you really have to take things on a case by case basis."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
1letaf
|
how do car companies make money from "0% apr financing" deals?
|
What's obvious to me is the fact that they somehow make money by people taking this option rather than paying cash up-front, otherwise they wouldn't be advertising it so heavily.
What I do not understand is how they actually make enough money from this option to justify all these ads...any thoughts or explanations on how this works in the long run?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1letaf/eli5_how_do_car_companies_make_money_from_0_apr/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cbyi11h",
"cbyi5v3",
"cbyji6j"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"More people coming in?",
"They still make money on selling the cars, they just don't also make money on the loan. And with the adverts, they probably get more people in the door, and sell more cars, than they would if they kept lending money at, say 7% and did not advertise.",
"It's an incentive to increase sales. The company is still making money on the price you pay for the car (this is why many times you will see either a rebate or a low rate offered). Most people finance their vehicles, and an extremely low rate incentivizes them to go in and purchase. Lots of people won't finance anything unless they can get a low rate on it, and those who don't care have already financed something at a high rate anyway.\n\nLarge car companies have an in-house branch dedicated to financing (Ford Credit is an example) - it's not a \"bank\" per se. It exists to provide financing options and make a car purchase available to more potential customers. It doesn't exist to make money or earn a return like a traditional bank, so it can use low-rate financing as a loss leader for the company as a whole."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
d753r8
|
— phone v. phoneme v. allophone
|
Please ELI5? I read the websites beneath but still feel befuddled. Are there some simple real-life analogies?
##[Can someone explain to me the difference between a phone, phoneme, and allophone? (reposted from r/linguistics : asklinguistics](_URL_5_)
> a _phone_ is a single sound that comes out of your mouth. The glottal stop is a phone.
>
> a _phoneme_ is the group of sounds that distinguish meanings within a language. The glottal stop is not a phoneme in standard dialects of English because they don't use it to distinguish between words.
>
> an _allophone_ is a collection of phones that shows up as the form of a phoneme either some of the time or under certain circumstances. In some dialects of English, the glottal stop is an allophone of the phoneme /t/ when it occurs between vowels or before liquids.
##[Phoneme – sound – allophone – phone | BLOG|ON|LINGUISTICS](_URL_4_)
> [![enter image description here][1]][1]
> **Phoneme** (Gr. _phone_ “sound, voice”) is the smallest contrastive unit of language that may change the meaning of a morpheme and, as a pursuant, a word.
> **Sound** (=**phone**) is a vibration or wave caused by an object.
> **Allophone** (Gr. _allos_ “other” and _phone_ “sound, voice”) is a variant of a phoneme.
##[What is the difference between phoneme, phone and allophone? - _URL_0_ Specialties](_URL_1_)
> \- A phoneme is the smallest contrastive linguistic unit which may bring about a change of meaning. For example 'mat' and 'bat'. Phonemes are based on spoken language and recorded by IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet). They are written between slashes e.g. /p/.
>
> \- Allophones are variations of phonemes. So, they are set of possible spoken sounds used to pronounce one single phoneme. e.g. \[pʰ\] (as in _pin_) and \[p\] (as in _spin_) are allophones of the phoneme /p/. They are written in brackets.
>
> \- A phone is a unit of speech sound. It may refer to any speech sound or gesture without regard of its place in phonology of a language. A phoneme is a set of phones or a set of sound features that are thought of as the same element within the phonology of a particular language.
##[Phonemes](_URL_6_)
> - **Phones** are speech-sounds;
>
> - **phonemes** are groups of sounds which speakers usually think of as "one sound";
>
> - **allophones** are the variations within each group.
##[English Language and Literature: Difference between Phones, Allophones and Phonemes.](_URL_2_)
> **PHONES**
>
> Minimum unit of sound is called phone. OR The speech sounds considered as units of phonetic analysis are called phones.
>
> Phones are any sound of language that can be consistently and individually produced and recognised by the speaker of language. Phones are represented by enclosing the appropriate alphabet/symbol in square bracket. Thus, \[p\] will refer to p sound (which is described more technically as a voiceless, bilabial sound)
> **PHONEME** Each one of these meaning-distinguishing sounds in a language is described as a phoneme. Slash marks are conventionally used to indicate a phoneme, e.g. /t/, an abstract segment, as opposed to the square brackets, as in \[t\], used for each phonetic or physically produced segment.
> **ALLOPHONE**
When we have a set of phones, all of which are versions of one phoneme, we add the prefix “allo-” (= one of a closely related set) and refer to them as allophones of that phoneme.
[1]: _URL_3_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d753r8/eli5_phone_v_phoneme_v_allophone/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f0xlaxj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Assuming you're a native English speaker, you have likely never noticed that the sound of the p in \"pot\" is different than the sound of the p in \"spot\". The former is an *aspirated* sound: if you hold your hand in front of your mouth while pronouncing \"pot\", there will be a noticeable puff of air released with the p sound. On the other hand, with \"spot\" there will be much less of a release of air: this p is an *unaspirated* sound. These really are two different sounds, but native English speakers don't think of them that way and often have a hard time even hearing the difference between them. Because these sounds are not distinguished from each other in English, we say English has a phoneme /p/ which has two associated phones, [pʰ] and [p]. Here, the ʰ marks aspiration. Allophones are not really a separate thing, but rather refer to this relationship between phones and phonemes: we would say \"[p] and [pʰ] are allophones for /p/\".\n\nPhones are purely units of sound, while phonemes vary between languages. For example, in Mandarin [p] and [pʰ] are considered two different sounds, and so Mandarin has phonemes for both /p/ and /pʰ/."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"Bayt.com",
"https://specialties.bayt.com/en/specialties/q/23493/what-is-the-difference-between-phoneme-phone-and-allophone/",
"https://tehreemali176.blogspot.com/2017/01/difference-between-phones-allophones.html",
"https://i.stack.imgur.com/AcXPh.png",
"https://blogonlinguistics.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/phoneme-sound-allophone-phone/",
"https://old.reddit.com/r/asklinguistics/comments/4mfsu9/can_someone_explain_to_me_the_difference_between/",
"https://notendur.hi.is/peturk/KENNSLA/02/TOP/phonemes.html"
] |
[
[]
] |
|
10xbvl
|
how come my shoes make so much more noise on my hardwood floors than bare feet?
|
I've noticed that when wearing sneakers or regular shoes, my hardwood floors tend to creak a lot more than when I'm not wearing shoes or only socks. Why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/10xbvl/eli5_how_come_my_shoes_make_so_much_more_noise_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6hftib"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Wearing shoes actually changes how you walk. Your bare feet (or with socks on) are soft enough to shape and deform somewhat to the surface you're stepping on. The soles of shoes, on the other hand, are much more rigid. To make up for that, shoes (especially sneakers) have a lot of padding in them that helps protect your foot and leg. However, the extra weight of the shoe and the rigid outside of it affects how you step and where you place your weight.\n\nI'll bet if you try stepping on different spots on your floor, you can figure out what places tend to make creaks. Then, take your shoes off and try stepping on those same places in different ways or pushing on them harder with your foot - I'll bet you can make those loud creaks even while barefoot if you figure out the right places and pressure."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
byqff8
|
when you see an amount of something is “adjusted for inflation,” how do they calculate that?
|
**EXAMPLE:** The Film/Musical “The Sound of Music” made $286,200,000 when it was released back in 1965. When “adjusted for inflation,” that amount is worth $2,564,000,000 present day.
How do they calculate that? How do they know that $X in one year is equal to $X to another year? Is there a scale or some sort of barometer that is used?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/byqff8/eli5_when_you_see_an_amount_of_something_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eqkfefy",
"eqkgn9f"
],
"score": [
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Inflation is measured every year (or whichever timeperiod) and inflation over all those years is basically stacking all those years of inflation on top of eachother.\n\n\nYear 2000 product X costs 100\n\nYear 2001 inflation of 2 percent so X costs 102\n\nYear 2002 inflation of 2 percent so X costs 102 times 1,02 = 104,04\n\nYear 2003 inflation of 5 percent so X costs 104,04 times 1,05 etc. Etc.",
"The practical calculation of inflation involves actually sending someone to the store to record the price of a \"market basket\" of goods. The percentage increase in the total cost of the basket is inflation. The main idea is to keep track of the amount of money it takes to buy some standardized amount of goods. Then you can talk in terms of \"1965 dollars\" because you know how much you could buy with a certain amount of money in 1965.\n\nThere are lots of complexities to measuring the market basket. Which market are you going to? (The US uses a national sample meant to reflect prices paid by \"urban consumers\") What goes in the basket? How do you account for brand new categories of good, like the smartphone? How do you adjust for changes in quality? Government statisticians do their best to address these concerns, but it's a tricky business. \n\nYou question might have a pretty simple answer though because it's dealing with just one good. We know the (average) price of a movie ticket in 1965 was about $1. We know the (average) price of a movie ticket in 2019 is $9. Therefore, if people bought the same number of tickets to the Sound of Music today as they did in 1965, it would make about $2.5b."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
4mx9yl
|
what data does windows 10 actually send to microsoft? is it really anything bad?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mx9yl/eli5_what_data_does_windows_10_actually_send_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d3z2qtj",
"d3z5vun",
"d3z84hx"
],
"score": [
9,
9,
4
],
"text": [
"It actually sends every keystroke you type.\n\nNow Microsoft says this is to help improve it's spelling corrections, but with a warrant the FBI could use it for other things. It's not stored for a long time, by default, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be ordered to keep records for longer.\n\nCortana sends every sound made within earshot of your computer microphone to Microsoft. That's where it is processed and analyzed. It's a hot mic in whatever room your computer is in listening to everything said. Not for a bad reason, according to Microsoft.",
"The fact is we don't know, cause whatever it's sending is encrypted so we can't look and see. You can prevent getting the telemetry updates on 7 or 8 but it's baked into 10",
"Part of the problem is that it's not really possible to know for *certain*. We really only have Microsoft's word on what they're collecting and what they do with it, but Microsoft has recently demonstrated that they are 100% willing to lie to users (just look at how they've been describing some of the Windows 7 updates).\n\nFor some, like myself, even if Microsoft was *actually* being completely honest, we no longer trust them. At that point, it doesn't really matter *what* is being logged; logging anything *at all* is unacceptable.\n\nHeck, even *if* someone presented hard proof as to what Microsoft was collecting, the constant rolling updates mean you have no way of knowing for *how long* that proof is still correct.\n\nThe one thing Microsoft absolutely *needed* more than anything to get me on board with Windows 10 was *trust*. Their recent actions have pretty comprehensively burned every last shred of it.\n\nThe comparison to browsers and iTunes is, to me, totally invalid. The operating system is held to a *significantly* higher standard than regular applications. First of all, I can switch from Chrome to Firefox to Vivaldi without too much trouble, but switching out the operating system is a comparatively *colossal* task, if it's even practically possible.\n\nSecondly, the OS \"sees\" a lot more of my interactions with the system. My media player sees what music and videos I play; the OS sees that plus the websites I visit, the games I play, what I search for, my banking receipts, every password I type, all my connected devices, my local network, etc. True, there's nothing to stop, say, Firefox from capturing this information, but Mozilla'd be hard pressed to explain *why* it's doing this. Microsoft, on the other hand, are effectively claiming carte blanche \"in order to improve the customer experience\", since the OS *needs* to interact with all these things.\n\nTo put it another way: they can use that reasoning to semi-justifiably monitor *everything I do*. Even *if* they're doing it for benign reasons, that is *not* a level of surveillance I am, or ever *will be*, comfortable with.\n\nAs for the telemetry patches for Windows 7, this is part of the reason I have automatic updates turned off now and manually vet every update, only installing those I feel are *absolutely* critical. Even then, it's essentially bailing a sinking ship; I can't *know* for certain that any given security update isn't tied to some monitoring or advertising update (like that IE patch a while back). It's why I'm actively searching for an acceptable Linux distribution to switch to when sticking to 7 becomes untenable."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
aalr0y
|
why isn't there a list of ingredients on alcohol?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aalr0y/eli5_why_isnt_there_a_list_of_ingredients_on/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ecszajh",
"ecszl8p"
],
"score": [
8,
20
],
"text": [
"I’ve seen some whiskeys or bourbons with ingredient lists. It’s not that interesting though — it’s like Water, Alcohol.",
"Alcoholic drinks are regulated by the ATF rather than the FDA, so they don't require the same labels."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
4z0ubs
|
how did the first humans drink?
|
We can't really drink out of rivers, lakes, etc today without getting sick.. so what did the first humans if they didn't know how to clean it at the time? Were they able to drink it anyways? If so, why can't we do that now?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4z0ubs/eli5_how_did_the_first_humans_drink/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6rw2xz",
"d6rw3o4",
"d6rw4t6"
],
"score": [
8,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"We can drink out of rivers, lakes etc today. It just depends which ones you're going for, there are safe drinking streams. The issue with water toxicity is more because of pollution and the like than an actual chemical issue in the water itself. These days there are more people dumping crap in the water that shouldn't be there, and there are more man-made things about to pollute it. Back in the good 'ol days we'd drink from streams the same way most other animals would, and not get sick because the water was more pure. \n\nPlus they may have still gotten sick, but their immune systems would be more adaptive to drinking terrible water than ours are because we've spent our whole lives drinking purified water, limiting the necessity for us to be able to drink the natural stuff. Also rain is something they can drink.",
"Once-upon a time two things were different:\n\n1. rivers and streams were cleaner.\n2. we were accustomed to drinking dirtier water with more microbes.\n\nMuch like an american has trouble drinking the tap water in mexico when they travel there, but locals have no problems, early humans were well accustomed to _their_ water.\n\n\n\n",
"you drink it and and take chance of getting sick. or you go dehydrated and die.\n\nrainwater is very clean if you gather it a leaf or a clay pot.\n\nunpolluted running streams are relatively clean. sure you might get worms or parasites. but better have parasites than dying from thirst. \n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
365vcg
|
why do people "feel" a storm or rain coming in, in an area where they have broken a bone or had surgery? myself included.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/365vcg/eli5_why_do_people_feel_a_storm_or_rain_coming_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"craze58",
"crb1c0r"
],
"score": [
2,
15
],
"text": [
"From what I've heard its because a storm has different pressure to what is \"normal,\" so when a storm is near the sudden change in pressure causes your aches. My sister gets headaches usually when a storm is coming in so its usually a good indicator.",
"Barometric pressure effects all of our internal bits as well. When pressure changes some people get sinus pain due to the pressure change in their heads which can cause headaches. This works the same for joints that may already be inflamed due to arthritis. Scar tissue also behaves differently than regular tissue, it is often not as malleable. So a pressure change in an area where tissue has been damaged might cause minor swelling where the tissue isn't as forgiving. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
253s93
|
why does the atmospheric pressure does not crushes our body?
|
I heard that the closest we are to the sea lvl, the amount of pressure we are holding over us is higher (don't remember the exact amount but is huge) why does this not crushes our bodies?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/253s93/eli5why_does_the_atmospheric_pressure_does_not/
|
{
"a_id": [
"chdf32u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Over millions of years, all organisms on earth have evolved within the environment they were in. The simple answer is that we have adapted to that pressure, just as we've adapted to the average temperature, oxygen levels, uv rays etc. There are deep sea fish that need higher pressure to survive. We are the product of our environment, that's how evolution works. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
151do9
|
sometimes people on tv say "is this a secure line?" is this a real thing?
|
Sometimes on TV or in movies people will be having sensitive conversations on the phone. They'll say at the beginning "is this a secure line?" or "this is a secure line".
I'm wondering if this is realistic. I mean, I know it's possible to have a secure phone conversation, but can you receive a phone call on your regular line and say "is this a secure line?" and it is? How?
Edit: also, CSS gods: the whole "ask a question" button changes style on hover, but only the actual text is a link. Probably worth fixing
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/151do9/eli5_sometimes_people_on_tv_say_is_this_a_secure/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c7idmmz",
"c7ihkrk"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"[Yes, they are a real thing.](_URL_0_)",
"Usually in movies it means \"Can you confirm the line you are calling from hasn't been tapped?\" and this is fairly easy to verify if you're using a phone no one would expect you to use, like a random payphone.\n\nAs several other redditors have pointed out, for a connection to be confirmed secure in the modern era (where calls are routed digitally and many are wireless), it's impossible to guarantee complete security without at least enabling encryption on both ends (and it must be on both ends so one can decrypt the other's data and vice versa) but there are plenty of free apps and VPN solutions that can do it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_telephone"
],
[]
] |
|
3sk0bl
|
what is the url _url_0_ ?
|
Sometimes I will click a link and I will be redirected to a different site, but i will see this URL appear as I'm being redirected. What is the process that is happening here?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sk0bl/eli5_what_is_the_url_bitly/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cwxvkhm"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Twitter only lets you put 140 characters in a tweet. That made it difficult to add links and describe them when URLs are routinely 50+ characters (the URL of this page is 86 characters, for instance). So a bunch of sites started popping up that let you make links that are only about 15 characters. _URL_0_ is one of those sites. You give it a long URL and it gives you a short URL that redirects to that long URL. "
]
}
|
[
"bit.ly"
] |
[] |
[
[
"Bit.ly"
]
] |
|
5csj7m
|
why did knights wear armour if they knew swords would pierce them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5csj7m/eli5_why_did_knights_wear_armour_if_they_knew/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d9z0t4d",
"d9z1i6z",
"d9z20t7",
"d9z2kcf",
"d9z6v8p"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
20,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"The sword could and can pierce armour, however it was most effective against joints and other weak places in the armour, or against less well armoured opponents. The sword also when it failed to completely get through the armour also did concussive or clubbing damage to an opponent, one of the reasons why an alternative weapon was the mace.",
"A good set of armor was way more effective than modern media would have you believe. If it was useless it wouldn't have been around for as long as it was.",
"The media would have you believe that every sword user was a highly trained combat expert, and every sword stroke was a killing blow, but the fact of the matter is far different. Melee combat is a hectic environment; people are moving rapidly around you, sweat impairs your vision, clothes and colors can cause you to lose focus on a target, etc. Most sword strikes were glancing blows (strikes that do not make proper contact with an opponent), and wearing good armor would nearly perfectly protect you from all of those glancing blows. Weapons also often bounce off of defender's shields/weapons, which would then be redirected up the arm, or to the shoulder, something armor protects against as well.\n\nSo yes, while it was certainly possible for a weapon to pierce armor, it was far less likely to do so than it was to bounce right off.",
"It's like...wearing a seatbelt. Sure, you can still die from a pretty tragic accident even if you have on. However, it lessens the injury from a lot of the slower and less powerful accidents that would kill you without it.",
"Swords were not very good at getting through armor. Similarly, most armor is not what you would see on TV.\n\nHowever, few people would be wealthy enough to wear full plate, and those who did, like the man at arms, rode on horseback because of the weight, and generally had an ancillary role to the rest of the force as heavy cavalry. It was actually things like the pollaxe that were developed to deal with heavily armored fighters.\n\nNext, swords weren't really a primary fighting weapon. Swords were really popular because they were a great sidearm. But generally your forces would want to use bows or spears first, they are better at hurting your enemies without you getting hurt yourself. \n\nSo when your line was broken and your bow or spear wasn't good any more, you would fight in the melee with a sword. Swords are good in war because you can strap them to your side and have them available for when your primary weapon stops being so good. \n\nStill, swords weren't that great against people in full plate armor. These were full steel plates, you can't just stick a sword through them. Now, if you had someone who had fallen off their horse, was wounded or exhausted, you could certainly finish them off, give a knight in full armor a metal pipe and have him face off against an unarmored guy with an arming sword, and the armored knight is going to come out on top. \n\nArmor was really good. A few people in armor could kill a whole lot of people unarmored. \n\nThere were certainly weak spots generally for flexibility and usability reasons, but it's not like not using armor would be better.\n\nHere's a good idea of what a common soldier (not a knight or man at arms) might wear in the 15th century: _URL_0_ He's got a lot of other good content. But even with the brigandine and hauberk you're going to be protected against sword blows. Obviously in that suit, your arms and legs are still vulnerable, but then you have a shield or buckler, and a sword that can keep your extremities safer. \n\nA knight, or a man at arms, is liable to have even more armor on the arms and legs, shoulders, etc, as well. Yeah, you get him on the ground and have a sword, you can stick it in his underarm or in his eyes, but when you're actively fighting him? Good luck. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-tnlH3ffw"
]
] |
||
21c3po
|
what is a deaf persons stream of consciousness like?
|
As an English speaker my train of thought and my personal stream of conscious is all in English. Would a deaf person think in sign language or a written language?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21c3po/eli5_what_is_a_deaf_persons_stream_of/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cgbmzgh",
"cgbn739",
"cgbpndn",
"cgbx7kl",
"cgbzb9u",
"cgc0wmi",
"cgcbc21"
],
"score": [
63,
24,
2,
5,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"My girlfriend is partially deaf, and she tells me that deaf people will commonly 'think' in sign language like you think in English.",
"Deaf people think in sign, if they were born completely deaf. If it comes later on, they think in a combination of sign and whichever language pieces they had learned and do have a partial \"inner voice\". \n\nThere are accounts of people who witnessed their spouse signing while asleep, dreaming.\n\nIt gets even more interesting when you get into deaf/blind. Depending on the writing format they use the most, a blind person might also visualize a word or its spelling in print. If the blind person uses braille too, they can \"visualize\" the braille in their heads, in the same way as print. Some blind people \"feel\" the braille under their fingers in the same way a sighted person \"sees\" a word in their mind.",
"I took ASL for a semester. My teacher told us of an experience she had with a deaf woman. The deaf woman would visualize hands signing and that was her way of \"thinking\" in her mind. ",
"I am profoundly deaf from birth (rubella baby) and don't think in sign language o̶r̶ ̶w̶r̶i̶t̶t̶e̶n̶ ̶l̶a̶n̶g̶u̶a̶g̶e̶. Why? Because I was trained to speak and read lips. I do wear digital hearing aids. So I do dream of voices speaking and I always \"hear\" the voices. As you would hear it as you read a juicy book. My deaf friends with ASL as a primary language tells me they do think in sign language. I often catch them talk to themselves with their finger flying.\n\nedit: written language crossed out, my mistake. ",
"I'm deaf and when I was younger (2-7 years oldish) I used to think as if I was having a signed conversation between myself and another person. This person changed all the time but were often fictional projections of the context being discussed. EG, school subjects would have the teacher as my conversation partner.\n\nHowever, as I grew up, my thinking shifted towards spoken English due to not having a whole lot of exposure to the deaf community and signing in general. This is because I was mainstreamed and had a Cochlear Implant (those were pretty controversial at the time I had the surgery) since two years old.\n\nI will admit that my habit of projecting multiple dialogical selves based on the subject matter has not gone away even now as I finish off my final semester at college. This habit has actually helped me tremendously in my learning of the subjects during school. Being able to project an image of Warren Buffet to discuss investing concepts, Immanuel Kant to discuss philosophy, and Cleisthenes to discuss ancient Athenian history.",
"If I think about talking to somebody or talking to myself, it's in sign language..\n\nIf im writing something I think like I'm typing in my head.. \n\nGeneral thinking.. Could be words, sign languages, numbers, writing like im typing, or like playing a video in my head",
" > my personal stream of conscious is all in English\n\nNo it isn't.\n\nYou don't think *ow my finger hurts* you are just aware of the pain. To have a sore finger doesn't mean that your internal monologue is an endless repetition of *ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts ow my finger hurts...*"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2sz584
|
how do car power inverters take 12volts and turn it into 110/120 volts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sz584/eli5_how_do_car_power_inverters_take_12volts_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cnu7di5",
"cnu9tdm"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It uses a transformer, which is kind of like a gearbox for electricity. It takes a voltage in on one side and can create a higher or lower voltage on the other side, based upon the ratios of wire coils on either side.\n\nBefore you ask, this does not generate power, just changes the voltage, which is only one component of electrical power.",
"As /u/Sand_Trout said, they use a transformer. But he left out a step. \n \nTransformers only work on alternating current (AC). This is where the voltage is constantly changing, high to low to high to low etc. Your car, however, puts out 12 volts DC (Direct Current) at the places you can normally access it. It doesn't change, the voltage is always 12V, more or less. (Your car actually generates AC, but that gets turned into 12V DC.) \n \nSo for the power inverter to run off your 12VDC lighter/outlet and generate 110V AC, it first must make it a voltage that changes with time. There are some different ways to do this. A lot of inverters do a very crude job. Instead of putting out a nice clean [sine wave](_URL_2_) like you get on your outlets at home, they might put out a [square wave](_URL_0_), or a \"[modified sine wave](_URL_1_)\". \n\n \nAfter the 12VDC has been changed into something that changes with time, then it can be run to a transformer to step-up the voltage to 110 V AC. \n \nThe fact that this isn't a clean sine wave *usually* doesn't matter, but it can. Because the waveform created from the 12VDC is crappy, the final high voltage output will be almost as crappy. Some devices can be sensitive to getting a lousy AC input like that. It can make their power supplies be less efficient (run hotter), and put out a lot of \"noise\" on their outputs. There can be other odd side effects, too. \n \n**TL;DR** - Not all power inverters are created equal. \n "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Square_wave.svg",
"http://powerelectronics.com/site-files/powerelectronics.com/files/archive/powerelectronics.com/images/608pet21-fig2.gif",
"http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Simple_sine_wave.svg"
]
] |
||
6evc10
|
how title ix works in college athletics
|
I get the main idea of equal opportunity...but what does that really mean? Same number of teams, roster spots, scholarships, funding etc.?
How do high-revenue sports come into the picture and affect things?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6evc10/eli5_how_title_ix_works_in_college_athletics/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dideeou"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Title IX does not require equal funds, teams or athletes for male and females. Rather, it needs to be proportionate. \n\nIn other words, if half the student body is female, half the athletes should be as well (proportionate). So if a college has too much male representation, it can do one of two things. It can either add more women's teams – which often require a lot of money. Or cut back on the number of men. \n\nInstead of adding a new women's sport - many colleges are just cutting out Olympic men's sports to justify their use of Title IX. Instead of just telling the truth that the smaller sport is being cut for budget issues - they say it's needed to comply with Title IX. \n\nLet's look at the revenue aspects of sports. \n\nMany argue that the football program at a university funds the other sports. This is not true. In fact, about half of FBS football programs actually cover their expenses. \n\nTitle IX does not require the same amount of money to be spent on male and female athletes. But Title IX does state scholarships must be given proportionally to participants in male and female sports. \n\nFor instance, Z University must give the same number of scholarships for men and women allowed. However, the football and baseball team might have more athletes on their team...than say the women's golf and tennis team. So the dollars won't be equal, but they are proportionate. \n\nThe same goes for other funding. If you buy the football team fancy new equipment, it is not okay to for the women's volleyball team to have 10-year-old hand-me-down equipment and uniforms. The men's basketball team can't use the main gym to practice in and only allow the women to use the old gym. It may appear on paper that the men's hockey team is receiving a lot more money than the women's tennis team. This is because of equipment. \n\nMost schools operate (but are not required by law) Title IX by giving equal number of TEAMS, but the actual number of athletes can drastically vary. For instance, if a school has football and baseball on the men's side and equals it out with golf and tennis on the women's side, numbers are obviously not equal. \n\nMany argue that schools keep pitting football and men's basketball against the smaller men's sports and the women's sports. They say it has worked, too, and \"it's no longer about men and women...but football versus everyone else.\" \n\nWhew. If you feel even more confused after all that, don't worry, you're not alone. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
cewpet
|
how is it possible that there are fish in isolated bodies of water? like in a lake in the crater of a volcano with no rivers going in or out. wow did they get there?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cewpet/eli5_how_is_it_possible_that_there_are_fish_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eu5fzk0",
"eu5g3zd",
"eu5glu7"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
29
],
"text": [
"Some lakes are stocked by local fish hatcheries. Humans will breed fish, then transport them to live in a lake.\n\nAlso, fish eggs sometimes get stuck to waterfowl (ducks, geese, etc.). When they land in a different body of water, the eggs come off and hatch in the new lake",
"There are a couple possible reasons for this, either the isolated body of water previously wasn't isolated, meaning then the connection was lost there was life existing in that lake/crater, or the life there is due to high tide/low tide movement, or the final one, which is also the least likely, is that the body of water was there long enough for life to develop and evolve with it's own ecosystem.",
"Eggs can hitch a ride on birds feet. People could have put them there. Freak weather has been known to suck up fish and frogs. only to drop them somewhere else. Some fish, like eels, can move quite a distance over land, especially if the ground is wet. Sometimes the \"isolated\" lake will be connected to other bodies of water because of heavy rain. And sometimes the lake wasnt always isolated. Oh and its possible that there are underground connections unseen from the surface.\n\nI think that exhaust the possibilities.. unless you want to include gods and aliens."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
kq0ra
|
why are there starving people in third world countries?
|
I'm not trying to be insensitive or anything, I'm just completely oblivious to the socio-economic situation in third world countries. But why are there starving people in third world countries? Can they not grow food? Is the soil not firtile? Do they not have seeds? Are there too many people to feed? Do other people keep stealing their food?
Can't they domesticate some sort of animal/livestock for food? If the land isn't fertile or doesn't have proper resources for growing food, why don't they relocate somewhere else?
Instead of air dropping food, why don't we air drop seeds everywhere so food will grow all over the place?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kq0ra/eli5_why_are_there_starving_people_in_third_world/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2m99xz",
"c2m9bzd",
"c2m9enq",
"c2m9hz0",
"c2m9ie2",
"c2m9vbk",
"c2m9vyu",
"c2m9wei",
"c2ma0l2",
"c2mao1y",
"c2mavy2",
"c2mb0mq",
"c2mcb0d",
"c2mec1e",
"c2m99xz",
"c2m9bzd",
"c2m9enq",
"c2m9hz0",
"c2m9ie2",
"c2m9vbk",
"c2m9vyu",
"c2m9wei",
"c2ma0l2",
"c2mao1y",
"c2mavy2",
"c2mb0mq",
"c2mcb0d",
"c2mec1e"
],
"score": [
38,
2,
205,
5,
24,
2,
3,
23,
8,
3,
11,
9,
3,
2,
38,
2,
205,
5,
24,
2,
3,
23,
8,
3,
11,
9,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Every solution you presented requires money to get it started. Many people in both third world and all other countries do not have enough money to buy land, or seeds, or livestock and its feed. Even if we did air drop seeds, soil has to be at least somewhat fertile to grow most food plants. Where I life, we have to amend the soil to grow vegetables, or they will either not grow, or be too small to be worth the effort.\n\nSometimes people get into a situation in which they cannot afford all the things they need, and they have to make choices. They might not be able to afford anything at all. Maybe they can buy food, but only a little, and not very nutritious food. Sometimes, there just aren't jobs for them to earn money in, and they have run out of money and options.",
"You might want to look up some recent wars in Africa: The continent has been marred by conflict and corruption, which isn't exactly helping creeping desertification and chronic poverty among the population. Obviously, this varies from country to country, and is worst in the sub-Saharan countries where desertification has hit the poor farmers hardest. Also unhelpful are food exports from subsidised farms in Europe, which are driving local farmers in southern Africa out of business.",
"A man named Amartya Sen studied what causes people to starve in 3rd world countries, and found that often the problem was a corrupt government. He stated that ''No famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.\" ",
"We are all born into this world naked, ignorant, and starving. The real questions is, why don't we all stay that way?\n\nBut to answer your question: In Somolia, it's about political / religious / military conflict. It started with droughts and loss of crops / livestock, but to make it worse, the 'people with the guns' won't let aid into the country because they think its part of a plan to take their 'power'. ",
"A couple of (bad) things after each other:\n\n* Very little rain\n* Civil wars/corrupt government\n* A lot of times, the little fertile land available is owned by rich farmers who export the products to the 1st/2nd world\n* Exploitation by big corporations\n",
"Many reasons.\n\nBad soil and climate, the majority of people are poor farmers who have very little land so they are barely able to feed themselves and their families. People have way to many children.\n\nThe governments in such countries are often corrupted. Also, there are wars between tribes inside the country, which harm civilians further.",
"First of all, there is a YSK that was both recent and informative, [here](_URL_0_).\n\nSecond. People starve because farmers sell food to people who can afford it. Starving people are starving because they can't afford it. Most of them don't produce their own food because all the useful land is already owned by farmers, and techniques that don't require fertile land are hard to teach with a pamphlet. The solution is education, but that's hard to come by when people work 16 hrs for just enough money to feed some of their kids. \n",
"The main reason might be surprising- 3rd World countries economies rely too heavily on agriculture (or other raw materials).\n\n10,000 years ago, virtually all humans depended on agriculture. Every now and again, droughts or other natural disasters would prevent people getting food and could lead to starvation. This was the case untill the industrial revolution in the early 1800's. The industrial revolution made it possible to mass produce with machinery. Unsurprisingly, the countries which had \"industrialised\" had a major advantage in producing things. They would later become the developed countries (the terms 1st world/ 3 world have a Cold War meaning so I'll describe them as developed/developping.) And they would use raw materials from their own land (if they had any) or take it from undeveloped nations to produce things. This created 2 things\n\n**1.** Industrial farming allowed for developed countries to feed themselves with less labour\n\n**2.** Developed countries had the money to buy food and other raw materials from undeveloped ones\n\nSo this created a situation in which being industrialised not only made it easier to feed themselves, but it was also able to buy food if there was bad weather for farming. In developping countries on the other hand, a vast majority of people are dependant on farming or taking raw materials. Whenever there is a problem with the weather, there is no money to buy needed food **(droughts and floods also affect 1st world countries but the difference is that they have the money to buy food.)** The solution would be for 3rd world nations to industrialize themselves so that they can farm more efficiently or be able to buy food incase of bad weather.However, they have a disadvantage as their economies were based on raw materials for a long time. Industrializing has happened in the past 50 years for developing countries (Korea, Singapore, Brazil, India, China are getting increasingly industrialised) but is difficult to happen to all of them as we live in a free market world economy. This means that if I tried opening a shoe factory in Ghana, I would probably go dead broke as I would be unable to compete with a company that produces its shoes in China. \n\nOTHER PROBLEMS FOR DEVELOPPING COUNTRIES\n\n1. Most trade rules are decided by rich countries who use them to their advantage\n\n2. Many developping countries have or have had a legacy of debt payments. This means that they have been forced to export their food for money instead of feeding their own citizens.\n",
"I feel like this is almost an offensive oversimplification (really, there are experts and college courses and entire fields dedicated to this sort of thing), but this is how I understand world hunger occurs:\n\n**War + unstable governments + no money to begin with + [possible corporate exploitation of the situation](_URL_0_) = hunger**\n\n**Hunger x natural disaster = widespread famine**",
"As others have mentioned there are starving people in all countries, including first world countries. Growing food crops requires a great deal of work/prevention/luck with weather and other conditions. But to better illustrate the answer to your question you should check out this little [game](_URL_0_) about being a third world farmer :)",
"Phil Hartman explained it well on SNL: \n\nBill Clinton: [ chews his McMuffin ] Mmm.. that's a good question. Yes, I do.. and let me tell you why. See, right now, we're sending in.. [ holds us McMuffin ] ..food.. [ puts McMuffin in front of Male Customer ] ..to Somalia.. but it's not getting to the people who need it because.. [ brings McMuffin back to himself ] ..it's being intercepted by the warlords.. [ chews McMuffin some more ] And it's not just us. It's other countries, too.. [ grabs a McNugget from another customer ] Your McNugget is aid from Great Britain.. [ takes it to other customer, then gibbles it down ] ..intercepted by warlords! [ grabs someone's Filet-o-Fish ] This man's Filet-o-Fish over here is relief from Italy.. [ pops it in his mouth ] ..warlords! And you can send all the food you want.. [ grabs different items ] ..a McDLT, hot apple pie.. it's just gonna end up with.. [ puts it all in his mouth ] ..the warlords! Now, with a broad-based international military force, we can make sure that the McRib sandwich.. [ grabs one and places it on someone's tray ] ..gets to the people who need it. [ picks it up and gobbles it anyway ] Can I get a Coke?",
"in case anybody is wondering, the original first, second, and third world definitions were:\n\nFirst: Capitalist (US Allies)\nSecond: Communist (USSR Allies)\nThird: Everybody else.",
"Part of the problem in a lot of countries is that the West encourages third world countries to all grow the same crop which will get them the highest price but which also leaves the soil with no time to recover. Also, people there don't get the chance to grow any other crop to feed themselves.",
"reading through the comments, I would like to share a recent TED talk about how the \"West\" has flourished, leaving the rest of the world behind. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt basically shows what the west did, and what other countries like China and India are doing, and what the starving people in low income countries should start doing.\n\nAnd since you are a five year old, please don't use the term \"third world\". It is quite irrelevant as it was coined in the Cold war era, separating the first world (large capitalist democracies like the Allies of WWII), second world(communist states Soviet Russia and co.) and other countries (neutral, colonies, not significant world powers). Hans Rosling (Swedish statistician, knows a lot about public health and stuff) recommends using a measurable label like income (low-income, middle-income, high-income countries). \n\nTL; DR: People starve because of institutions, or the lack of it. And call them low-income countries. We only have one world, you know.",
"Every solution you presented requires money to get it started. Many people in both third world and all other countries do not have enough money to buy land, or seeds, or livestock and its feed. Even if we did air drop seeds, soil has to be at least somewhat fertile to grow most food plants. Where I life, we have to amend the soil to grow vegetables, or they will either not grow, or be too small to be worth the effort.\n\nSometimes people get into a situation in which they cannot afford all the things they need, and they have to make choices. They might not be able to afford anything at all. Maybe they can buy food, but only a little, and not very nutritious food. Sometimes, there just aren't jobs for them to earn money in, and they have run out of money and options.",
"You might want to look up some recent wars in Africa: The continent has been marred by conflict and corruption, which isn't exactly helping creeping desertification and chronic poverty among the population. Obviously, this varies from country to country, and is worst in the sub-Saharan countries where desertification has hit the poor farmers hardest. Also unhelpful are food exports from subsidised farms in Europe, which are driving local farmers in southern Africa out of business.",
"A man named Amartya Sen studied what causes people to starve in 3rd world countries, and found that often the problem was a corrupt government. He stated that ''No famine has ever taken place in the history of the world in a functioning democracy.\" ",
"We are all born into this world naked, ignorant, and starving. The real questions is, why don't we all stay that way?\n\nBut to answer your question: In Somolia, it's about political / religious / military conflict. It started with droughts and loss of crops / livestock, but to make it worse, the 'people with the guns' won't let aid into the country because they think its part of a plan to take their 'power'. ",
"A couple of (bad) things after each other:\n\n* Very little rain\n* Civil wars/corrupt government\n* A lot of times, the little fertile land available is owned by rich farmers who export the products to the 1st/2nd world\n* Exploitation by big corporations\n",
"Many reasons.\n\nBad soil and climate, the majority of people are poor farmers who have very little land so they are barely able to feed themselves and their families. People have way to many children.\n\nThe governments in such countries are often corrupted. Also, there are wars between tribes inside the country, which harm civilians further.",
"First of all, there is a YSK that was both recent and informative, [here](_URL_0_).\n\nSecond. People starve because farmers sell food to people who can afford it. Starving people are starving because they can't afford it. Most of them don't produce their own food because all the useful land is already owned by farmers, and techniques that don't require fertile land are hard to teach with a pamphlet. The solution is education, but that's hard to come by when people work 16 hrs for just enough money to feed some of their kids. \n",
"The main reason might be surprising- 3rd World countries economies rely too heavily on agriculture (or other raw materials).\n\n10,000 years ago, virtually all humans depended on agriculture. Every now and again, droughts or other natural disasters would prevent people getting food and could lead to starvation. This was the case untill the industrial revolution in the early 1800's. The industrial revolution made it possible to mass produce with machinery. Unsurprisingly, the countries which had \"industrialised\" had a major advantage in producing things. They would later become the developed countries (the terms 1st world/ 3 world have a Cold War meaning so I'll describe them as developed/developping.) And they would use raw materials from their own land (if they had any) or take it from undeveloped nations to produce things. This created 2 things\n\n**1.** Industrial farming allowed for developed countries to feed themselves with less labour\n\n**2.** Developed countries had the money to buy food and other raw materials from undeveloped ones\n\nSo this created a situation in which being industrialised not only made it easier to feed themselves, but it was also able to buy food if there was bad weather for farming. In developping countries on the other hand, a vast majority of people are dependant on farming or taking raw materials. Whenever there is a problem with the weather, there is no money to buy needed food **(droughts and floods also affect 1st world countries but the difference is that they have the money to buy food.)** The solution would be for 3rd world nations to industrialize themselves so that they can farm more efficiently or be able to buy food incase of bad weather.However, they have a disadvantage as their economies were based on raw materials for a long time. Industrializing has happened in the past 50 years for developing countries (Korea, Singapore, Brazil, India, China are getting increasingly industrialised) but is difficult to happen to all of them as we live in a free market world economy. This means that if I tried opening a shoe factory in Ghana, I would probably go dead broke as I would be unable to compete with a company that produces its shoes in China. \n\nOTHER PROBLEMS FOR DEVELOPPING COUNTRIES\n\n1. Most trade rules are decided by rich countries who use them to their advantage\n\n2. Many developping countries have or have had a legacy of debt payments. This means that they have been forced to export their food for money instead of feeding their own citizens.\n",
"I feel like this is almost an offensive oversimplification (really, there are experts and college courses and entire fields dedicated to this sort of thing), but this is how I understand world hunger occurs:\n\n**War + unstable governments + no money to begin with + [possible corporate exploitation of the situation](_URL_0_) = hunger**\n\n**Hunger x natural disaster = widespread famine**",
"As others have mentioned there are starving people in all countries, including first world countries. Growing food crops requires a great deal of work/prevention/luck with weather and other conditions. But to better illustrate the answer to your question you should check out this little [game](_URL_0_) about being a third world farmer :)",
"Phil Hartman explained it well on SNL: \n\nBill Clinton: [ chews his McMuffin ] Mmm.. that's a good question. Yes, I do.. and let me tell you why. See, right now, we're sending in.. [ holds us McMuffin ] ..food.. [ puts McMuffin in front of Male Customer ] ..to Somalia.. but it's not getting to the people who need it because.. [ brings McMuffin back to himself ] ..it's being intercepted by the warlords.. [ chews McMuffin some more ] And it's not just us. It's other countries, too.. [ grabs a McNugget from another customer ] Your McNugget is aid from Great Britain.. [ takes it to other customer, then gibbles it down ] ..intercepted by warlords! [ grabs someone's Filet-o-Fish ] This man's Filet-o-Fish over here is relief from Italy.. [ pops it in his mouth ] ..warlords! And you can send all the food you want.. [ grabs different items ] ..a McDLT, hot apple pie.. it's just gonna end up with.. [ puts it all in his mouth ] ..the warlords! Now, with a broad-based international military force, we can make sure that the McRib sandwich.. [ grabs one and places it on someone's tray ] ..gets to the people who need it. [ picks it up and gobbles it anyway ] Can I get a Coke?",
"in case anybody is wondering, the original first, second, and third world definitions were:\n\nFirst: Capitalist (US Allies)\nSecond: Communist (USSR Allies)\nThird: Everybody else.",
"Part of the problem in a lot of countries is that the West encourages third world countries to all grow the same crop which will get them the highest price but which also leaves the soil with no time to recover. Also, people there don't get the chance to grow any other crop to feed themselves.",
"reading through the comments, I would like to share a recent TED talk about how the \"West\" has flourished, leaving the rest of the world behind. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nIt basically shows what the west did, and what other countries like China and India are doing, and what the starving people in low income countries should start doing.\n\nAnd since you are a five year old, please don't use the term \"third world\". It is quite irrelevant as it was coined in the Cold war era, separating the first world (large capitalist democracies like the Allies of WWII), second world(communist states Soviet Russia and co.) and other countries (neutral, colonies, not significant world powers). Hans Rosling (Swedish statistician, knows a lot about public health and stuff) recommends using a measurable label like income (low-income, middle-income, high-income countries). \n\nTL; DR: People starve because of institutions, or the lack of it. And call them low-income countries. We only have one world, you know."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/khrho/ysk_a_lot_of_things_about_africa/"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott"
],
[
"http://www.3rdworldfarmer.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpnFeyMGUs8"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/khrho/ysk_a_lot_of_things_about_africa/"
],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott"
],
[
"http://www.3rdworldfarmer.com/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpnFeyMGUs8"
]
] |
|
d5ifpz
|
how do animators make sure everything is timed correctly? how do they sync everything from the voice acting to other sounds or music and make sure the movements are natural looking?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d5ifpz/eli5_how_do_animators_make_sure_everything_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f0m03ju",
"f0m3fad",
"f0m3wsb",
"f0m7pfz",
"f0mnnmd",
"f0moq1k",
"f0n0yuy",
"f0nk0jo"
],
"score": [
2,
923,
14,
17,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of hard work and editing. Basically in addition to animators, lead animators, sound engineers, Foley artists, etc. is a group of people (though sometimes it is just one person) that makes sure everything lines up.",
"Usually, animation in larger studios is rigorously planned and very well coordinated. Usually a storyboard is created showing all the scenes as still images. When the storyboard is finished, voice acting is done, which is combined with the storyboard to create the \"animatic\", a kind of power point presentation with the still images with the voice acting in realtime running in the background. This is used to check the pacing of the movie\\episode, so there are no boring slow parts or scenes that are hard to follow because they move on too quickly. After that, animation work is done and the still images are replaced with the raw animated footage. While that is happening it's not uncommon that certain things are still subject to change: voicelines are getting re-recorded because they were too wordy or didnt quite fit, scenes changed or shots added\\removed. After that, everything is double checked and sound effects\\foley is done. Those are a lot easier to edit to fit the footage. Then the final movie is exported and the local Studios get a Version without voicelines for dubbing in their respective language. In that case, the voicelines are recorded within a margin so they just \"feel\" right when running to the video, and usually depends on resources the studio has left for post production and localization. Sometimes, idioms or sayings need to be changed because they don't exist in the country the movie is translated to. This is a Job for writers, which translate the text so it's meaning isnt \"lost in translation\".\nBack in the analog days there were timetables with marked frames which showed when certain key actions would start and end. Those were transferred to digital and that's where the Name \"keyframe\" comes from.\n\nEdit: thanks for the silver, kind stranger! This is propably the best i can hope for from my arts degree.",
"I used to work at a studio where we sent our materials to Korea to be animated. For that project, and many like it, there are two jobs called timers and track readers. \n\nTrack readers listen to the audio track and write down the phonetics of the track frame by frame at 24 frames per second (although it's usually 12 frames per second because that's the speed of classic animation). They then ascribe a mouth shape for the character. These are labelled A through H usually, and have no relation to the sound. A is closed mouth, B through D are open 'ahh' sounds. E is an oo sounds, f is actually ffff. And on. This way, animators who don't speak English know how to animate the mouths.\n\nA timer takes the storyboard, which is like a series of comic panels put together as a movie, and literally times out the movement. A character starts walking and their last walking pose is 48 frames later, well on something called an X-sheet, the timer indicates what frame each foot contacts the ground on, how fast the arms swing, whether and exactly when any variance in the wall cycle occur. For actions like a point, they will often indicate how the action is to occur and when. Is the hand down at frame one and hand pointing at frame 9 based on the boards? They might right large overshoot on frame 7 to give the gesture more force, or indicate an 'ease in\" (where the action gets progressively closer to the final pose) to indicate and slower move.\n\nThese two jobs are getting a lot less common as digital animation develops, but are still used on major TV shows that contract animation overseas.",
"I used to do stick-figure animation. It's actually quite simple. You have a timeline, a bar that represents every frame of animation.\nYou simply put the music in and you can literally match it per *frame*. You can add or remove frames, start music or sound effects at different times, whatever you want. Very simple.",
"I work as an animator in a small french studio and storyboarded for many productions. There are pretty in depth and interesting answers already, so I will just speak from the perspective of how we do it in france. \n\nWhen you have an animatic, it almost already looks like the final film but roughly animated. That's the key to the whole thing. Usually the storyboard artist will record a draft track for the voice acting to find the timings and emotional beats of the film. By this stage, you will be able to know whether or not the movements will look natural. When this part is done, the actual voice acting is made, maybe there will be some changes, but by the time the animator receives the shot, they will already have all the acting cues to match perfectly with the sound with good movements and timing.\n\nThe sound effects are usually done after the animation is out, and it's the sound designer who matches the sounds with the visuals. It's done afterwards so that it will be possible to be precise with the small details that make it sound natural; the rustle of cloth, contacts, etc. \n\nSo in short, all the work is already done beforehand by the storyboard/animatic artist to ensure that it is easy for the animator to match the voice acting in their shot, the music and sfx are done separately to match the visuals, and then there's a final round of tweaking at the end to make sure everything lines up.",
"Short answer: Lots of iteration and coordination.\n\nLonger answer: The final animation is usually the very last thing done in a cartoon. Before that rough-drafty approximations of each scene (called storyboards and animatics) are used to help convey what's happening to the director, the voice actors, and even sometimes the writers. These people, particularly the voice actors, can then match or tweak their work to fit the intended scene. Usually by the time the voice actors are brought in the animatic is very close to completion, but there's still some wiggle room (there are a lot of instances of a VO take being so great that the scene is then basically reformulated to take advantage of the performance).\n\nThese storyboards & animatics are much faster/easier to make and change, so they're used to tweak everything, iteration by iteration, until all the teams involved with the cartoon are satisfied that it looks/sounds good.",
"Voice is recorded and edited first. Then animators work with those selects to animate a whole. \n\nSound effects are typically added after the animations are set.\n\nMusic is done last and is not a consideration when animating.",
"This syncing isn’t limited to animation. Most movies will have the sound recording separate, and sound editors sit and sync it to the video."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
xmrph
|
why does germany have such population problems? it can't all be a result of wwii.
|
This much I know: Japan and Germany face similar population problems - a low birth rate and an ever-aging population. This means that social security will be hard to sustain, as the smaller number of young/middle-aged cannot fund the benefits being provided to the older generation. But what is this a result of? Why aren't other industrialized nations experiencing the same thing? (At least in Europe)
Edit: just did some research, apparently more people died in Germany in the year 2005 than were born. Wow.
Source: _URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/xmrph/eli5_why_does_germany_have_such_population/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c5nqijh",
"c5nry26",
"c5nsop2"
],
"score": [
8,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Most developed countries are heading this way. I don't think the problem is quite as extreme, but the UK is facing something similar.\n\nEducated, wealthy people tend to have fewer kids and have them later in life. This is essentially the root of the problem.\n\n50 years ago it wasn't uncommon to marry in your early 20's and start popping the babies out. Today neither the mother or father want to stay at home and become a full time parent, so they either put it off or have 1 and another several years down the line.\n\nThe more career/education focused a nations population is the fewer children they will have.\n\n---------------------------------------------\n\nIn the UK the age at which you can claim a state pension has been pushed back, and there is talk of pushing it back further. There are great concerns about how the health system will cope when almost half the entire population is not working and therefore not paying tax.\n",
"Germany has low birthrate (due to many factors, including WWII trauma: after the Lebensraum, pro-natality policies are much frowned upon than in France for instance). This is the case for every industrialized nations. Germans and Japaneses are just faster than the others.",
"As I like to put it, \"It's not that people in developed countries aren't fucking; it's that they aren't having enough fucking kids to keep the population steady.\""
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,2138258,00.html"
] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7alvh4
|
why does chicken take longer to cook on the bone?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7alvh4/eli5_why_does_chicken_take_longer_to_cook_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpazbse"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"1. The bones absorb some of the heat, so more total heat is required.\n2. When you remove the bones you've cut the piece, making it thinner, so heat can penetrate all the way through sooner."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
4irpg0
|
why does the size of a planet matter in terms of habitability?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4irpg0/eli5_why_does_the_size_of_a_planet_matter_in/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d30j6ok",
"d30jy7b",
"d30lqhk"
],
"score": [
2,
27,
4
],
"text": [
"I am not too sure about size but mass definitely plays a role in habitability (especially for humans). The mass of a planet is a significant factor in its strength of its gravitational pull. Massive planets have a strong gravitational pull and may not support human or plant life. ",
"HUMAN habitability, I assume? As in the ability to walk around outside of a very controlled station of some kind without a spacesuit and air supply?\n\nA planet that is too small will never get an atmosphere, so we have nothing to breathe, and temperature regulation becomes tough. It's likely to have direct stellar radiation exposure issues too, as there's no \"ozone layer\" or possibly a magnetic deflection layer (something we have on Earth called Van Allen belts) to help block the bad stuff that its star sends. \n\nA planet that's too large will have very strong gravity or be a gas giant, so we either don't have enough strength to live there comfortably or don't have anything to stand on. And getting in and out of the gravity well would be pretty tough too.\n\nIf there were such a thing as a stable gas giant, we could build a floating island held up by balloons or something and live on that. But those gas giants often have very severe weather patterns, not to mention toxic atmospheres, and so that would be tough. ",
"Lighter gasses escape from a planet's atmosphere more easily, and a planet needs more gravity (needs to be more massive) to hold onto them. Hydrogen and helium are the most abundant elements in a forming planetary system, but the Earth is small enough that most of the hydrogen and helium that were in the vicinity when the planet began forming escaped and were not held in the atmosphere. \n\nIf a planet is too much larger than Earth, it will be able to hold on to the helium and/or hydrogen and tend to become a gas giant. If a planet is too much smaller than Earth, its gravity will be low enough that oxygen can escape too easily, and the planet will not be able to retain an oxygen-rich atmosphere. Earth is large enough to hold onto oxygen (and nitrogen, which is the next lighter element and more abundant than oxygen), but not large enough to hold onto helium and hydrogen, so it's just the right size to form an atmosphere suitable for animal life as we know it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
713qk6
|
if autoplay video content is universally hated, why does it exist?
|
I'm actually avoiding websites which I used to frequent because they have created clever autoplay video that circumvents my autoplay blocker. Do they not want my traffic?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/713qk6/eli5if_autoplay_video_content_is_universally/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dn7uq4z"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's called imposed publicity. They force you to watch an ad.\n\n > I'm actually avoiding websites which I used to frequent\n\nMe too, and that's the way you and everybody should behave. I'm really against that type of publicity, specially in services that I pay like internet or mobile data.\n\nThis is getting out of hand. In my country there's a mobile operator that shows you an ad on the first call each day. There are reports of people wanting to call 911 and having to wait 30 seconds. You can disable this but you have to pay around 1$ just to call their support line"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
pnq7j
|
mardi gras
|
including beads, boobs and the origin..
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pnq7j/eli5_mardi_gras/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c3quglr"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Lent is a Christian tradition where you are supposed to be very pious the 40 days before Easter, there is a lot of fasting, giving up luxuries such as meat and alcohol, and generally being boring (It's a mainly Catholic tradition because Protestants are always supposed to be boring, on English Mardi Gras they eat pancakes and stay up until midnight but I don't think that's the one you care about).\n\n Because of this many Catholic cultures have a large celebration during the weeks before Lent to \"get it out of their system\", this time period is usually known as Carnival. Carnival traditions differ, but they usually involve parades, balls, feasts, and drinking and general bacchanalia. The last day of Carnival is the day before Ash Wednesday, and in French it is called Mardi Gras (Fat Tuesday), and it is the biggest day of Carnival and when the biggest celebrations tend to happen.\n\nThe beads and boobs is a New Orleans tradition that dates back to the 19th Century, I'm pretty sure that no one knows where it comes from. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
cvtfnw
|
how do checks work? i see people paying or receiving money by check in the movies and i just can't figure out how it works.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cvtfnw/eli5_how_do_checks_work_i_see_people_paying_or/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ey6a32r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"If you look at the bottom of a check, there are 2 numbers. A routing number, and an account number. The name of the bank is printed on the check. \n\nYou can then go to that bank, and they will give you cash out of that person's account.\n\nOr you can give it to your bank and they will go to that bank and take the money for you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
2dlmuk
|
why does reddit have default subs?
|
It can be argued that "all" would be a much better starting page than "front" and it would be even better without interference by artificial default traffic. Also it helps making it more obvious what Reddit really is. So why defaults?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2dlmuk/eli5_why_does_reddit_have_default_subs/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjqohh2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Are you sure new users should be exposed to /r/all?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
49up5z
|
why do we wake up feeling so weird/different towards someone after we dream about them?
|
I rarely remember my dreams, but when I do and they happen to involve a person I know I usually wake up feeling so differently towards them. Generally, if they are of the opposite sex, I feel attracted to them. Why do dreams have such a profound impact on perception?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/49up5z/eli5_why_do_we_wake_up_feeling_so_weirddifferent/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d0v29d6",
"d0v2uju",
"d0v4dju",
"d0vat93",
"d0vav22"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
3,
2,
14
],
"text": [
"interesting.....i always thought this just happened to me!\n\neven when i dont remember who the dream was about or what happened in it, randomly throughout the day i might think of a person and something about them wont feel right. something in my head makes me think differently than i did the day before. as if i knew i just had a dream about that person, but cant for the life of me remember what it was or why they were important to it. \n\ndefinitely heightens opinions of the opposite sex too. sometimes i wake up angrier at the person (depending on the events of the dream and if i remember them), but most times i wake up wanting the girl more than i thought possible. sometimes its even a girl ive never really thought sexually about...but i do when i wake up even if the dream was platonic. interesting how sleep works...",
"I think it has something to do with the unconscious. This is just me being a psychologist, but according to Freud, the dreams we have are manifestations of our innate desires, wants, needs, etc. that we filter out of our daily life. When we become aware of these things, it can be hard to process because they were on a subconscious level.\n",
"As an avid dreamer and enthusiast, an explanation can be as follows: Some interpreters think that we pick the wrong Face in the dream. So when you have interactions that bring up certain emotions, its to analyze the emotion and if its really something you are ignoring in real life. The brain is a hell of a machine, but due to how fast its making the dream , it is not always accurate that that Person in the dream is really whom its meant to be. I lean toward Jung descriptions of archetypes in my dreams. Helps touch upon the big picture.",
"I don't know why it happens, but I have had the same effect. I've had 3 long term girlfriends so far and actually my feelings for all of them started from a dream. I'm not sure if the infatuation starts the dream or the dream starts the infatuation, but it seems to be the case with me. ",
"Okay, time to break this down with what we actually know about dreams.\n\nDreams are, by and large, meaningless (I know, I'm fun at parties). Nobody really knows why we dream, let alone why we dream the way we do. There are a myriad of theories ranging from the fancifully speculative to the nihilistic: I tend to fall somewhere closer to the latter. \n\nOne prevailing idea is that, when we sleep, we are bombarded with scattered images (not the technical term) from memories which our sleeping brain tries its damnedest to organize into something coherent. This isn't an expression of the so called \"subconscious\" as much as it is a reflection on how our brain prioritizes/takes information, that is to say: if you have a dream where you have sex with your best friend, you don't have some latent/subconscious sexual tension with the woman/man so much as you had a cross-wiring between hormones and the present female/male personification. \n\nSo back to the meat of it. The question you need to be asking isn't \"Why do we wake up feeling so weird/different towards someone after we dream about them?,\" but \"Why do dreams have such impact on us?\" \n\nMost of us have had a good/bad/wet dream that's completely changed how we functioned the following day. The short answer here is, your mind makes it real. Your brain physically can't tell the difference between what it's experiencing right now as you read this and when you're dreaming about taking down the mob on the back of a velociraptor. At the time, your active memory doesn't find it \"weird\" or even question it, and most dreams you have in your life are never going to be carried into long term memory. But here's the rub: even if all dream images are random (or at least compiled from random memories), they don't exist in an emotional vacuum. \n\nIf you had a good dream, one where you were happy that just so happened to include somebody you know casually, well, you now have a positive memory of them that never happened. Likewise, if you had a dream where Sam from accounting killed your family, you might be apprehensive about Sam next time you see him in the break room. You might cognitively _know_ Sam didn't do anything wrong, and that he's a bang up guy, but you just had something your brain still interpreted as a real experience of him doing something horrible. This works in all directions. Have some fantastic dream sex with somebody who you regularly see on the metro and now you have a \"memory\" rationalizing them as a body of sexual desire. \n\nSo to bring it back to your original premise (warning: this next bit is highly speculative (even more than I've been already)). Let's say you have a dream where you go on a life changing adventure and somebody you know was in it at some point. You effectively just had a first date with them, better yet a fantastic first date. Even if they were only in the dream for 5 seconds, your brain just complies them into the whole dream experience and now you have a new found fondness. So now you act a little nicer to them. Maybe engage with them where you wouldn't have before. Congratulations, you've just made a self fulfilling prophecy. But this isn't the dreams doing, it's *your* doing. The dream didn't create infatuation, you got infatuated from the experience and emotion from the dream. Please don't take this to mean the infatuation is any less \"real.\" A causal reason behind an emotion doesn't make the emotion somehow illegitimate and few have placed upon emotions the burden to be reasonable. \n\nI guess to amend something I said earlier, the imagery of dreams are, by and large, meaningless, but that doesn't mean we can't/don't often generate meaning from them. But this any meaning taken from a dream is still a conclusion from hindsight. Take them with a grain of salt, but if you can generate something positive from a good dream, do it. Dreams are a horribly understood area of psychology (and incredibly subjective). It's just important to remember that, no matter how smart any one of us may be, our brains are stupid. There are dozens if not hundreds of factors which can influence the experience of our dreams and how we interpret them. Ultimately, we are a horribly unreliable source for what constitutes as significant in our lives. I could go on, but I'm barely keeping a cogent flow as is. Hope that tome of rambling answered some of what you were looking for. \n\nEdit: didn't like the last two paragraphs, so I cleaned them up a bit"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cgexom
|
why is some cheese always cut in squares and some in circles?
|
For example, provolone cheese slices always seem to be circles, whereas others are usually square
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cgexom/eli5_why_is_some_cheese_always_cut_in_squares_and/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eugmwmd",
"euhadsq"
],
"score": [
11,
2
],
"text": [
"This is the answer to a previous ELI5 asking the same question.\n\nWhen it comes to deli-style cheeses that are made to be sliced and used on sandwiches, the round shape of certain cheeses is strictly a perception/expectation thing.\nProvolone is traditionally made in a log shape, from small-ish 10 lb logs up to 80 lbs or more. It's entirely possible to make deli-style provolone in a square block, but it wouldn't sell very well because people expect their provolone to be round.\nI'm not entirely sure about the round deli-style gouda. Gouda is normally made in wheel form, and anywhere in size from a couple of pounds up to 25 lbs. It's typically cut in full-height wedges, so if I had to guess I'd say the round shape of the deli gouda is just to differentiate it from the square cheeses.\nDeli-style Swiss cheese is modeled after Swiss Emmenthaler, which is made in wheels up to 300 lbs in size. A wedge of cheese from a wheel this size isn't something most people would be willing to buy, so it's usually cut into large rectangular blocks for sale to retailers, who then cut it into smaller rectangular or square blocks for sale to the public. Because there's no real expectation of a particular shape with Swiss cheese, the most economical shape is square. Deli Swiss is made in the same format as mass-produced cheddar.\nCheddar, like most other aged cheeses, used to be made exclusively in wheel format. The round shape promotes even aging, ripening and moisture loss across the entire surface of the cheese. When factory cheesemaking hold in the U.S. in the late 19th century, the wheel format began to be abandoned in favor of large block format, which was easier to make in a mechanized assembly line system, took up less space in storage and shipping, and left almost no waste when dividing into smaller blocks for retail sale.",
"Nearly all of the cheddar family cheeses made in the US are made in large blocks, cut down to smaller blocks for distribution, sliced into squares for retail.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nMany cheeses (brie, camembert, Parmesan, pecorino, most blue cheeses, Gouda) are round wheels due to a combination of tradition, and regulation, actual necessity for proper aging. Copycat cheeses have to conform to sell. The rounds are usually sold cut in wedges.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nMost of the phony American cheeses are made as squishy glop and cast into slices."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
30d5cg
|
why is it so difficult to use numbers fluently in another language?
|
Or is it just me...?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30d5cg/eli5_why_is_it_so_difficult_to_use_numbers/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpra5y4",
"cprai7b"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Because you need to learn the arithmetic over again. I'm in Spanish and I understand your pain. ",
"Because not all languages treat numbers the same way. you have to translate the number \"ninety\" over to \"Níutíu [is][nine tens]\" \"Halv-Fems [dan] [Half Fifths]\" \"quatre vingt dix [Fra] [four twenty ten]\" e.t.c. each language has new words or even new systems of counting for each number, and you'll have to learn those words. as with any words you'll always pause and hesitate while you're looking up the correct word for that number in your internal dictionary. once you do know the correct words normal arithmetic will be easy....well, assuming the language in question counts in decimal, but that's another story. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2ybhpr
|
why can children legally gamble in an arcade, but not in a casino?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ybhpr/eli5_why_can_children_legally_gamble_in_an_arcade/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cp7zbzw"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Technically you're not gambling at an arcade because they give you tickets not cash those tickets also can't be exchanged for currency "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
57jjuo
|
if the us controls puerto rico/guam foreign policy, why aren't they allowed to vote on it?
|
If I'm completely wrong on this, just give me a slap and I'll go. Y'see, I'm Canadian so I don't know what the deal with American Territories is and only recently started reading on it.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57jjuo/eli5_if_the_us_controls_puerto_ricoguam_foreign/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8sisvf",
"d8sqr6i"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Puerto Rico has no Federal representation because it is considered a US territory, rather than a state. Territories in the US have a unique status where the choice as to whether or not they should remain a territory is largely in their hands. The first step to statehood would be for Puerto Rico to have a referendum on whether or not to become a state. They did hold such a referendum in 2012 - but it failed, 54% voted to remain a territory. There are a lot of internet arguments as to why Puerto Rico did or did not vote the way that it did in that referendum, but the simple fact is that without a convincing referendum in favor of statehood the process is not going to move forward.\n\nNow, as to why Puerto Rico would be ok with its current situation - the simple reason is taxes. As a Federal territory Puerto Rico is exempt from most Federal taxes, but receives a substantial amount of Federal spending. Because of this, the tax burden in Puerto Rico is < 4% (including state taxes). \n\nIf Puerto Rico became a state they would gain a trivial amount Congressmen and an insignificant vote in the Presidential race. The price they would pay for that is up to an additional ~36% in taxes. As of right now paying up to 36% less in taxes is more popular in Puerto Rico than getting that 1 Congressman, 2 Senators, and 3 Electoral college votes.\n\nThe same is true of Guam (though Guam is small enough that it might be merged with Hawaii if it became a state, which is another reason that Guam would not want statehood).",
"There comes a point when a territory is just too small to warrant representation. Guam has less than a third of the population of the smallest state.\n\nPuerto Rico is a different matter. Not being a state reduces their taxes and makes them eligible for additional federal aid. Many people there don't want to become a state for that reason. Other seek independence, and statehood would make the nearly impossible. So PR remains a territory because they want to."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
b7gzdu
|
how come lobsters are semi-immortal, while shrimp have short lives?
|
The two species have a strong resemblance to one another, and they also share the same ancestor if memory serves me correctly. If that's the case shouldn't the two species have similar lifespans?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b7gzdu/eli5_how_come_lobsters_are_semiimmortal_while/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ejrrhtn",
"ejssv7y"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Humans and chimp have a common ancestor and very much look alike.\n\nYet chimp are immune to Alzheimer and we are not. \nWhy ? We don't really know, but two different species even if they look very similar can have a completely different physiology.",
"Depends on the niche they're specialised to operate in.\n\nShrimp are smaller, free swimming, and feed on abundant plankton in the water. They live in energy rich systems, which can support more layers in the food web, and thus these little guys are basically food for everything larger than them. When you're near the bottom of the food web, there is little to no benefit in a longer lifespan. Instead, they see the most success collectively by just having a million offspring and living just long enough to do that.\n\nLobsters live in a different niche. They live on the relatively food-poor seafloor, where having a larger body to travel further and endure food shortages better is a massive boon. They are armed and armoured to enable longer survival. Lobsters exist right near the top of their food web.\n\nAlso, they're not *that* closely related. Another posted made the comparison between humans and chimps, which are two incredibly closely related species (both are intelligence-focussed socially-inclined apex omnivores). The difference here is more akin to humans and mice."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2gn0o1
|
my tooth paste claims it gives 12hr protection, does that i only have to brush twice a day?
|
i was always taught to brush 3 times a day, im just wondering if technology changed and now its only twice a day
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gn0o1/eli5_my_tooth_paste_claims_it_gives_12hr/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ckknogw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Brushing three times a day is nearly impossible on a modern work schedule. Twice is fine."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
522awq
|
how do dealerships work?
|
I recently bought a bike from a dealership, was given a loan from a bank for the $10k I spent.
So at this point, the dealership has their money completely right? And now I just pay off the bank. My question is, if I want to one day get another bike, am I shit out of luck until the 5 years expire and I pay it off?
Or are there some things I can do to basically get a different bike in a year?
I got a new bike for $10k, but now, a few months later I went back and saw they had something in stock that I like for 5k (probably similar price OOD). Is there no way for me to "trade" it, am I just stuck?
Sorry if the question is silly, I can't think of anywhere else to ask this because my dealership people are somewhat rude. I'm confused by the whole thing. Thank you so much in advance!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/522awq/eli5_how_do_dealerships_work/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d7grgxi"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Yes, if you used a bank loan, then the dealership has their money and it's all done from their point of view.\n\nNow if you want to trade in your bike to buy a different bike, you can -- but the loan agreement you signed might require you to immediately repay the bank (they don't like having a loan out on something that can't be repossessed if you stop paying). So you'll need a new, separate loan all over again for the new bike. (This hassle is why people who like to change vehicles every year or two typically *lease* the vehicle instead of buying it.)\n\nOr if you want to have *two* bikes you're free to buy another -- but the loan application papers require you to tell if you are currently paying another loan, and they'll check on your income to see if you earn enough to pay two loans at once.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
40qyjk
|
on older televisions, why was there a static feeling when it was shut off?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40qyjk/eli5_on_older_televisions_why_was_there_a_static/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyweoq8",
"cyweqv2",
"cywf2td",
"cywf6wt",
"cywg4t0",
"cywhhih",
"cywiupm",
"cywk83k",
"cywmeog",
"cywmf0t",
"cywo4u8",
"cywoigl",
"cywp8vn",
"cywpfmm",
"cywsfvp",
"cywui0a",
"cywuprt",
"cywwsqh",
"cywxmym",
"cywzo4r"
],
"score": [
2051,
191,
52,
9,
14,
231,
32,
9,
4,
3,
3,
9,
2,
15,
2,
5,
3,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Older televisions worked by firing a beam of electrons at the back of the television screen. Occasionally, this would have the side-effect of charging the glass. It is this static charge that you're feeling. ",
"A cathode ray tube television works by firing electrons at a screen. The screen is coated in a material that turns the energy from these electrons into light. Once they hit the screen, though, those electrons don't just disappear. They build up on the screen and the accumulated charge is what causes the static feeling.",
"Any other artists here ever use that static to hold paper on the TV screen while using the television as a light box?",
"Yea, i remember an old black and white tv we had, when we switched it off you could feel the static on the screen like a blanket.",
"Amazingly the electricity can be dangerous years after it was shut off.\n_URL_0_\n\nEdit: Obviously that is not the answer you are looking for. /u/Ashhel is of course correct.",
"Everytime I come near one of those TV's I hear a really sharp sound that no one else around can hear. ELI5 please. \nEdit: Thanks for the explanations, thank god we have flat-screens now.",
"TIL. I'm old that people have to ask this question when i grew up with this technology and used to put bit of wool on the screen to watch them move about like living things when poked with a finger due to the static fields.",
"There is a beam of electrons transmitted to the screen. A line output transformer moves the beam from left to right* and a field output transformer moves the beam up and down. When the beam hits the special coating on the inside of the screen, it produces a dot of light. The beam is modulated to give a visible picture.\n\nTo attract the beam, the inside of the screen is charged with approx 25,000 volts. This is what causes the static. \n\n*After the beam has gone from left to right, it returns much faster, the flyback, and this energy is transformed to approx 8,000v ac which is fed to what was commonly called 'a tripler' that turned the 8Kv ac into 25Kv dc.",
"I always used to be able to hear if a TV was on even if it was on mute and I wasn't in the room. They used to emit really high pitched screeches that I could hear and that was only 10 years or so ago, maybe it's related to that?",
"I loved the feeling. I would sometimes rub my face against the TV when it happened. Fun times indeed ",
"is the same reason for this effect the reason why you can kinda hear when an TV was turned on?",
"Ouh i remember swiping my tv screen so i would pick up all the static with my hand (thats how i saw it at age 10) and i would smell my hand and it had an awesome fried fresh watermelon smell, thats the best way i can describe the smell. No one else swpied their screen when it was charged like that?",
"With CRT type displays you have a ton of electrons bombarding the back of the screen (from the inside). So you'd end up with a charge built up on it after using it.",
"The good old days when the TV instantly came on and channels instantly changed. Can we work on this next? Each tv I have I'm waiting longer for it to come on and the delay between channels makes it impossible to \"see what's on\" ",
"Everyone keeps mentioning the electron beam.\nThe bigger effect was the high voltage applied to the CRT. The CRT itself was used as a big capacitor in order to accelerate the electrons to the face.\nIt's this high voltage (about 25,000 volts) that causes the static on the front of the TV.",
"The static feeling comes from a high positive voltage behind the glass. There is a coating on the inside of the crt TV screen called the Aquadag coating. The TV circuits make a high positive voltage for the Aquadag coating and stores it in a capacitor. The Aquadag coating eats waste electrons when the TV is making pictures. Turn off the TV and the picture making electrons stop flowing and the Aquadag has no more electrons to eat. Aquadag still has high voltage stored in a capacitor and this voltage can bite you even a week after the TV has been turned off. _URL_0_",
"Walked into the room while my cousin was staring at a screen full of static. He said he was \"watching the ant races\".\n\nI realized many years later that he must have been baked.",
"Oh my god, this whole time I thought I was crazy. Everytime I'd mention this as a kid and ask why, everyone would look at me like I'm crazy and deny feeling or hearing anything. Same with those little eye floaty things in your peripheral. I felt like I was going crazy and it frustrated the fuck out of me. I even thought the static and the eye floaty things were related somehow, developing my own guesstimated theories when no one could explain. Well, hope the answer is in this thread somewhere.",
"does anyone else remember the smell that the static discharge would make? I'm still in love with that smell and it was the first thing I thought of when I read the title.",
"Because of electricity Tommy. Electricity. \n\nAnd the tube TV's used a *lot* more of it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-take-apart-TV/step3/The-dangerous-part/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://electriciantraining.tpub.com/14178/css/14178_89.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
114xli
|
why are the majority of taxis yellow?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/114xli/eli5_why_are_the_majority_of_taxis_yellow/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c6jcfr5",
"c6jcg16",
"c6jd4lt",
"c6jd5tj",
"c6jdvc6",
"c6jf55w"
],
"score": [
11,
78,
5,
59,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"There are many Yellow Cabs taxicab operators around the world (some with common heritage, some without). The original Yellow Cab Company, based in Chicago, Illinois is one of the largest taxicab companies in the United States. \n\nIn 1907, car salesman John Hertz looked at his surplus of traded-in cars and decided to start a taxicab business. Since taxis need to stand out in a sea of cars, Hertz reportedly commissioned a study to determine which color was easiest to spot at a distance. The answer was yellow. \n\nHis Chicago Yellow Cab Company was the first taxicab service to use that now-familiar moniker. However, these days not all Yellow Cabs are yellow and not all yellow cabs are part of the Yellow Cab company. \n\nIn 1923, Hertz expanded his automobile empire by purchasing a car-rental business from Walter L. Jacobs. Although this particular company was acquired by General Motors a few years later, it was only the beginning for Hertz's rental cars and his affinity for yellow. When the entrepreneur established the Hertz Corporation in 1953, he used yellow in the new logo.\n\n",
"[Yellow is the easiest color to see from far away.](_URL_2_)\n\nAnother fun fact: \"Taxi\" is short for \"[taxicab](_URL_0_),\" which is short for \"[taximeter](_URL_3_) [cabriolet](_URL_1_).\"",
"All the taxi's I see are black",
"Man, I really hate to be that guy, but this is my favorite subreddit when the right type of questions are asked:\n\nELI5 is for asking questions with complicated answers that often use terminology that would be unintelligible for someone without experience in a particular field. If you're looking for an answer to an interesting non-complicated question, try r/answers or r/askreddit.\n\nThanks!",
"So, in America, are ALL taxis yellow? I mean, all (most) taxi companies have yellow cars?\n\nWhere I live, different taxi companies generally use different colours. We do have yellow, but we also have bright green, and blue and white (which ALWAYS makes me think it's a cop). That's in the city, but outside the city there's the dark red, navy, dark green ones. Those are three different companies as well.",
"In Iraq, they are white with orange fenders... And have a tendency to blow up..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/taxicab",
"http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cabriolet",
"http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/180/why-does-every-city-seem-to-have-a-yellow-cab-company",
"http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/taximeter"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
92gt5h
|
why are so many major corporations trying to merge with one another?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/92gt5h/eli5_why_are_so_many_major_corporations_trying_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"e35lp0g",
"e35m4l0"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Monopolization; if you are essentially controlling the product and how the product is made and distributed then you can self sustain so to speak.",
"Go to a convenient store, look at the shelves of soda. All of them are made by two companies.\n\nIt lets corporations control the price, and you can do nothing about it because there's no other cheaper soda to choose from. That's the only thing you can buy."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
30vn67
|
how does international law determine "war crimes"? why don't they just forbid all warfare, and require diplomacy to settle all disputes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/30vn67/eli5_how_does_international_law_determine_war/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpw7y1d",
"cpw7z3o",
"cpw8s4a",
"cpw97ih",
"cpwb0mz",
"cpwb9gi"
],
"score": [
4,
21,
3,
11,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Because sometimes diplomacy won't work. Try sitting down with a terrorist for some tea and talk about your problems, it will end with your head on the table and your body on the floor.",
"Because diplomacy, without force to back it up, is toothless.\n\nIf Country A builds a dam that prevents Country B from accessing water, they can simple talk about it diplomatically until Country B shrivels and dies, knowing that force will never be an option.",
"If you take a rather heartless perspective, warfare is a form of negotiation. The material and human cost of war is the price paid to accomplish certain goals of policy regarding foreign peoples. While it costs a great deal, the purpose between nations is that it costs your opponent's more than they are willing to spend. The price of freedom and democracy is spent with the same currency as the price of autocracy and oppression, namely the lives of the poor (but I digress).\n\nIn order to be governed by laws, a nation, or any group of people, must be unwilling to pay the cost of violating it, sitting at a table and talking costs a great deal less than a tank. Warfare cannot be outlawed because the only way to truly stop a nation from committing acts of war is to at least be able to counter with acts of war. (Of course, just because one nation has an asymmetric advantage over another does not mean that it has the ideological power to cease making war)",
"Calling some actions \"war crimes\" is still useful, even if it doesn't prevent war. If all warfare was forbidden, countries would still go to war, but they wouldn't have any reason to restrict their actions while at war because they would be punished if they lost anyway. However, by declaring some actions to be worse than others, it encourages warring nations to avoid certain destructive tactics.\n\nA good example of this is the ban on chemical weapons. After World War I, which saw use of poisonous gases that permanently injured soldiers, the Geneva Conventions determined that the use of those weapons was a war crime. That may not seem like much, but in World War II those weapons *were* held back by both sides as a last resort. Both sides knew that they would be held responsible for war crimes if they lost the war, so they focused on other methods of attack. Calling those methods war crimes *actually reduced* the amount of human suffering in the war.\n\nIt's not a perfect system, and it doesn't always work, but it's still more effective than trying to convince all nations to use diplomacy.",
"Um, how do they enforce this prohibition on warfare?",
" > Forbid all warfare\nHow the fuck would you enforce that? Are you actually five?"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1rjzpl
|
why does sweat evaporating not mean that a thin layer of water is boiling on my skin?
|
Don't the water molecules need to have X amount of kinetic energy, i.e. heat, before they can turn into a gaseous state?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1rjzpl/eli5_why_does_sweat_evaporating_not_mean_that_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdo1385"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"This is a definition thing. Evaporation is simply defined as the process of turning from liquid to vapor. Boiling is defined as bringing a liquid to a high energy state (vapor) through the addition of heat. So, when you're boiling a liquid, it's evaporating. Sure, you can describe it how you stated it, as a thin layer boiling away. But evaporation can be caused by different things, while boiling is a more visual and recognizable physical state caused by thermal addition.\n\nThink of it as the square/rectangle relationship. If you're a square (boiling) then your are by definition a rectangle (evaporating) but just because you're a rectangle (evaporating) does not mean you're a square (boiling)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3gqaq1
|
why does napoleon bonaparte goes around with a hand in his shirt?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gqaq1/eli5_why_does_napoleon_bonaparte_goes_around_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cu0ffb7"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"[It was a common pose at the time to indicate leadership in a calm and firm manner](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-in-waistcoat"
]
] |
||
5hi9j0
|
why is las vegas so small?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hi9j0/eli5_why_is_las_vegas_so_small/
|
{
"a_id": [
"db0fosj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Las Vegas, the city. Is actually fairly spread out. It's the 28th most populous city in the US and yet it doesn't crack the top 100 in terms of population density.\n\nIf you are referring to the mega casinos being grouped together, there are a number of different reasons, but I think you'd have to go back to the 50s and the vision of guys like Bugsy Siegel who were trying to create a tourist attraction in the desert. If you spread the casinos out all over the place, it wouldn't have the \"adult playground\" \\ separation from reality feel that it has. Look at other cities that have Indian Casinos nearby. There's not nearly as much allure to them as there is to the \"idea\" of Vegas, which is due in large part to the spectacle of the strip.\n\nPlus there are a few corporations that own most of the properties on the strip, so there are logistical advantages to keeping them close together. \n\nFinally, there are actually lots of casinos not on the strip, scattered across the city. There's downtown along Fremont Street, several near the strip, Red Rock in the far west of town, most of the Station properties, smaller gambling halls, etc. You just don't necessarily think of those when you think of Vegas because, well, they aren't all grouped together in a giant tourist spectacle; which kind of proves the point. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
e722bk
|
how can you juice an apple but not a banana?
|
[deleted]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e722bk/eli5_how_can_you_juice_an_apple_but_not_a_banana/
|
{
"a_id": [
"f9updau"
],
"score": [
9
],
"text": [
"Bananas (and avocados) are the two fruits which simply don't have juice.\n\nSo while they may feel wet/moist, they don't release any liquid when you squeeze them so therefore you can't make banana juice."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
3ocw1s
|
what happens if i keep my phone 'alive' over long periods of time
|
Alive meaning without shutting it down. Basically recharging the battery before it runs down for long periods of time.
For example, if you have an Android, you can go to settings and status. If you scroll down you'll see **Up time** (time alive or something similar) and a live counter.
My personal record was 4200+ hours on my old xperia e smartphone. 90% of the default apps were disabled, keeping the bare essentials needed for music playing and alarm clock. I used to charge it once every 3 weeks.
Back to the question: Is it bad or good? For the battery?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ocw1s/eli5_what_happens_if_i_keep_my_phone_alive_over/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvw2z0l"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"I guess for your battery is not that bad. Devices are made to run all the time. What can happen is that your software gets buggy. Normally if you have a software problem, you can shut the phone down and restart it and your problem is solved. \nBut it isn't a problem for the hardware if you never shut your phone down"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
50sdfn
|
why do microwave ovens have a rotating plate inside?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50sdfn/eli5why_do_microwave_ovens_have_a_rotating_plate/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d76k0c8",
"d76kft5",
"d76ko9l"
],
"score": [
18,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Any place you have waves in a chamber, you have self-interference by that wave. That means hotspots and cold spots in the microwave. Rotating the food helps the even out the exposure to microwaves, this more even heating.",
"The waves do something like [this](_URL_0_) in the microwave. The green and red waves are the ones coming from the sides of the microwave. They will add up to form the blue waves. This way there are some points, where the sum of the waves is constantly zero so that these parts would not be heated (at 0.5, 1, 1.5,... ) If you turn the plate these 'cold' positions will not be at the same position of your food at all times.",
"Hot/Cold spots, as everyone else said. However, recently reading about this phenomenon myself (after reading a [what if? question on microwaves](_URL_0_) ), the author linked to an amazing article showing the existence of hot and cold spots in microwaves, by using Indian food. [It was quite an interesting read!](_URL_1_)."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Stehende_Welle.gif"
],
[
"https://what-if.xkcd.com/131/",
"http://www.evilmadscientist.com/2011/microwave-oven-diagnostics-with-indian-snack-food/"
]
] |
||
3p6o8p
|
why doesn't youtube an option where you can pay a small amount of money monthly to get rid of the ads?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3p6o8p/eli5_why_doesnt_youtube_an_option_where_you_can/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cw3lpf8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Each ad is benefitting the person whose content you're watching. There is no one place you can pay to give the money lost to every channel you go and watch."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
6w59xk
|
how do scientists know that the moon has a core similar to earth's?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6w59xk/eli5_how_do_scientists_know_that_the_moon_has_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dm5fki4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The same method we use to understand the Earth's innermost secrets: Seismography!\n\nSeismography is the study of earthquakes. We can learn various things about the Earth by how sound and other vibrations pass through the various materials within the Earth, especially the density of these materials.\n\nInterestingly enough, our Moon has earthquakes, too! Well, moonquakes if you prefer. They're a lot weaker than we get here on Earth, but they're there! And because they're there, we can use the same seismographic ideas to gain information about our Moon's core. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
ax7o8z
|
why are we still antisemitic?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ax7o8z/eli5_why_are_we_still_antisemitic/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ehrn48t",
"ehrnl9g"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Frankly, it's because some people are morons who tend to irrationally hate anyone that doesn't fully agree with them on everything (including from a religious perspective). If someone isn't agreeing with everything we say and is low and behold opposing it, a rift forms that makes us not want to relate to them. ",
"People like to have an \"other\" that they can blame problems on so they can feel that the world is understandible and sensible. It doesn't really matter who it is, as long as it's somebody that's not them or anyone they know. It could be rural white people or inner city blacks or EU bureaucrats or the Chinese or whatever. For some people, that's the Jews. They don't have any rational reason for it, it's just comforting to have someone else take the blame for whatever problems exist that would otherwise be really complicated to explain and deal with."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
3gnp8f
|
if god is truly all knowing, then he must know the future. if he knows the future, then he knows everything i'll do before i'm even born. thus, i don't truly have a free will, and my fate was sealed before i was even born. how does religion deal with this issue?
|
I am an Atheist. Though this post isn't meant to be insulting towards any religion in any way. I respect all belief systems, I'm just looking for some clarification.
My issue is that, in many religions, God supposedly judges us based on our actions. But if God is truly omnipotent and all knowing, then God should already know all the actions everyone is going to make until the end of time. If that is true, then that means that free will doesn't matter, and God could judge us before we are even born (because he already knows exactly what I'm going to do with my life... after all, he knows EVERYTHING).
I feel like this produces a paradox. Either God is truly all knowing, in which case free will doesn't actually exist, OR God is not all knowing, and thus he is not the omnipotent being that religions make him out to be.
I'm assuming this is a question that is brought up a lot, so how is it dealt with within various religions?
Thanks for the help!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gnp8f/eli5_if_god_is_truly_all_knowing_then_he_must/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ctzsb5u",
"ctztuor",
"ctzvupt",
"ctzyijy",
"cu00gh8"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > I am an Atheist. Though this post isn't meant to be insulting towards any religion in any way. I respect all belief systems, I'm just looking for some clarification.\n\nTo start, christians have different views on this subject depending on sect or just average opinion.\n\n > My issue is that, in many religions, God supposedly judges us based on our actions. But if God is truly omnipotent and all knowing, then God should already know all the actions everyone is going to make until the end of time. \n\nLet's suppose I believe god knows all the actions everyone is going to make, I could name a few reasons on how someone could believe this:\n\n1. What if god has you go through your life for the ultimate goal of you learning and correcting your faults?\n\n2. What if god gives you options in life and judges you based on those decisions?\n\n3. What if judgement is not in the afterlife but during your life by the outcome of your decisions?\n\n4. What if god is testing humans by granting us freewill to see if we succumb to our intended faith?\n\n > God could judge us before we are even born (because he already knows exactly what I'm going to do with my life... after all, he knows EVERYTHING).\n\nThis used to be the common belief of Purtians in the late 1600s throughout 1700s. \"God had already choosen who is going to heaven and hell before you are born, thus we should all act as if we are going to heaven, so we wouldn't ruin our chances if we were selected\" was the mentality.\n\n > I feel like this produces a paradox. Either God is truly all knowing, in which case free will doesn't actually exist, \n\nHow is this a paradox? You are suggesting we believe humans have freewill, while we do not, correct? That seems more like us being unaware\n\n > God is not all knowing, and thus he is not the omnipotent being that religions make him out to be. \n\nGod is believed to be beyond human comprehension, that doesn't necessarily mean he knows everything or the future in all beliefs",
"You have valid points, but God is far from human. His thoughts are so much more complex then ours we can not began to believe. \nI truly believe God is all knowing and most certainly knows the future. Just because God knows the future and very action you make doesn't mean you don't still have a free will. God created the heavens and the earth you better believe he knows the future too.\n\nThink about it like this, If I have a son and he has complete free will and I watch him make every choices whether good or bad while he grows up. Then say I go into a time machine and go back into the past to day he is born, my son would still have free will but I know his complete future. Makes senses?\n\nFor me I think it is wonderful that my God knows my future because I am his child and he wants the best for me. I pray for wisdom and guidance because he knows my future/plan for life, but why would I want to pray to a god that is just as lost as I am about my future. This is topic is hard to understand but pretty much God is all knowing and knows every choices you will make be for you do it but he isn't controlling you in anyway. \n\nYou should except God into your heart and then when you pass you can ask him yourself in heaven. I'm praying for you buddy. ",
"Another thing to consider is why did God create Adam and Eve if he knew they were going to sin and thus bring about the curse of death on all of his descendants. Not an easy question to answer, but here is my understanding.\n\nGod knew Adam and Eve would sin but it was not what they would do but the journey afterwards. If God created a perfect man and woman from the start what glory would there be for God. For God the glory of his creation is that they are free to sin but follow him out of choice rather than obligation (I know this leads into your original question but keep reading). A perfect man and woman from the start would not learn from mistakes in order to give God the glory he deserves. Eve was created out of Adam's rib and being married (Just as any husband and wife is) they were considered one flesh. Which if you don't know makes divorce pointless as you are still married in God's eyes, no matter what that pompous pope says. No piece of paper can annul a marriage. So when Eve sinned after being deceived by the serpent Adam had two choices. God had said that anyone who ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil would die. So Adam knew that Eve would be given a death sentence. His choices (not really you will see in a second) were; leave her to die and continue to be immortal, or share her fate and eat the fruit as well. So strong was his faith in what God said that he also ate of the fruit knowing the consequences, he believed God from the bottom of his heart when he said he and Eve were one flesh that he ate of the fruit so he could share her fate as they were essentially one individual.\n\nThis is why every man, woman, and child is deserving of death from the moment they are born. The sentence has already been passed, there is no doubt about it you will die. The question is not whether you will die it is what will you do with your life. Also you cannot get your child into heaven by baptising them when they are born, this nonsense was created by the church to console families who had children die before they were baptised ensuring they will never be in the kingdom of God. Baptism is something that you have to decide on later and must be an informed choice. An infant baptism is no more effective than having a shower. You are doomed to die but God has provided a way for you to be in his future kingdom of God (There is no heaven or hell as this is again more Church nonsense). God provided a perfect sacrifice in his SON Jesus in order to provide a covering for your sins. Everyone sins and therefore everyone will die and as such it is not possible for you to earn your spot in the kingdom of God. It is only through his mercy that you can possibly obtain a place. Every day you will sin and every day you will deserve death, but you can ask for forgiveness. I don't just mean go to church as a chore or as lip service. You actually have to forgive others and truly feel repentant for what you have done and try and improve every day. You must put other people and God above yourself and show agape love (or selfless love). \n\nSo yes God may know what you are going to do but it is about the journey more than the destination. Those that do make will have been figuratively tried by fire and will be like gold. Remember you are undeserving of life to begin with and it is only through God's continued love that you continue to exist. If you die tomorrow every second of your insignificant life will have been a gift from God. \n\nDoes anyone actually read the bible or do you accept what the church/ pope says? The pope is nothing more than a fat old man who wears a pointy hat. There is no trinity. God is not Jesus and the holy spirit. Read your bible for more information.",
"OP, first let me thank you for being so tactful. As you can see from the comments not all people are as kind and for that I thank you.\n\n**OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER**\n\nI cannot speak to everyone's belief system but I can say what I believe.\n\nMay I preface my statement with the qualifier that I have done some research on this subject, I think that any logically minded individual who professes belief in any omnipotent deity (Christian or not) eventually asks this question.\n\nI did my research and came to my own conclusions, and I highly encourage you to do the same. I only ask that you keep an open mind during your research, so that the ideas and facts can inform you and that you do not reject certain things out-of-hand simply because they do not adhere to your world view.\n\nConsequently, this is the same warning I give to anyone I speak with concerning serious matters, and I wholeheartedly feel that a great many Christians could benefit from following this suggestion as well.\n\n**/OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER**\n\nFreewill has been hotly debated for as long as the idea has been around.\n\nBut lets narrow our conversation to the specific question you have put forth here which is quite nebulous in and of itself.\n\nA more succinct wording for your question could be: If God is omniscient does that also mean He pre-destines everything.\n\nThere are volumes written about this very question, and people still debate this in seminaries all over the world.\n\nHere is my informed opinion.\n\nForeknowledge does not necessitate causation.\n\nOr, more simply; simply knowing something does not make it happen.\n\nThere are a multitude of metaphors you can use here so if the one I pick is not to your taste please feel free to interject your own, the meaning will almost certainly be the same.\n\nSuppose you observe a person (the person does not know you are there) pick up a flat stone on the shore of a lake, examine it for a moment, heft it in their hand, and cock their arm back prepared to throw the stone side-arm. \n\nYou know the person's next move. \n\nThe person will throw the stone in an attempt to make it skip across the surface of the water.\n\nAnd they do.\n\nThe obvious question here is, \"Did your fore-knowledge actually have any effect on the situation?\"\n\nThe answer is a resounding, \"No\".\n\nThere is no mechanism that passed from you to the person to actually cause the event. You knew what was going to happen simply because of environmental conditioning. After having seen multiple people skip stones you are able to see the signs and you knew what was going to happen.\n\nHowever, like all metaphors this one has a point where it breaks down.\n\nThe astute reader (or overly pedantic reader) will notice that while you knew the person would ATTEMPT to skip the stone Christians would assert that God already knew EXACTLY what would happen while you only had an educated guess.\n\nSo, how do we solve this? \n\nFirst let us both acknowledge that metaphors are not a perfect tool for teaching and to expect perfection from them is to be willfully obtuse of their intended purpose.\n\nA flaw with this metaphor is that our mind immediately constructs the scene in the normal 4 dimensional spacetime we occupy every day.\n\nGod however is not constrained this way and exists eternally. Furthermore while we are constrained to what some physicists conceive of as the surface of a four dimensional bubble expanding in a higher dimensional space, God is not.\n\nGod knows what is going to happen simply because he has already observed it, and that information is present in all of his being which spans all of creation. By virtue of His omnipresence He is omnisciencent.\n\nThusly we have established God's foreknowledge, and we can see that simply possessing fore-knowledge does not automatically cause the action to come to pass.\n\nThis is how I have rationalized God's omniscience with man's free will.\n\nI hope it is helpful and I welcome any discussion you would like to have on the matter.\n",
"As a Christian this is something that has come to mind many times. Personally I believe (at least how I interpret it) that rather than knowing exactly what is going to happen He knows everything that could possibly happen.\n\nIf you think of your life and choices like a choose your own adventure book of sorts you can see that while you have free will to choose whatever you like, an outcome for each has been decided.\nKnowing this you truly have free will but at the same time every possible interaction has been accounted for.\n\nAnother idea is that even if there was a preset path we could have free will just because he said we could. Regardless of personal beliefs, if an omnipotent being decides to make 2+2=5 just because they wanted to they can easily do it. While it may not make any sense, they are all powerful and can do anything. Therefore if all else failed He could simply make our situation an exception to the rule and make it work somehow. Abstract as it is, if you can do anything; you can do anything.\n\nIn the end nobody knows for sure how it works because there's really no way for us to understand it. After all who are we to try and understand how he does things? He's God. All we have is the Bible and with as many teachings as it has you just can't explain something so big."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cdzpu6
|
how do we know where to mine for crystals, gold, etc?
|
There’s so much open space in the world, how do we know where to mine? Especially back in the day before they had a bunch of technology?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cdzpu6/eli5_how_do_we_know_where_to_mine_for_crystals/
|
{
"a_id": [
"etxcrky",
"etxgenk"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There is a whole field called \"geology\" that studies how the ground works. Looking at certain kinds of rock they could make predictions about where gold or other mineral deposits are likely to show up, then send teams out to test and check those predictions.",
"The lowest hanging fruit is found by exploring the land and finding raw chunks of gold in a stream bed. Follow the stream up to where you don't see chunks of gold anymore, backtrack a bit and start digging. \n\nWhile you're digging, pay attention to the types of rocks that are in the formation. What do they look like, what does the existing terrain look like? How deep is your gold vein? \n\nWith that data you can go out and look for rocks similar to those found around your gold vein. That formation may be hiding some gold in the hills. Start digging to find out. \n\nProspecting is a very high-risk-high-reward game. One good find can be the result of thousands of hours studying geology and formations and well educated decision making, or it can just be dumb luck because \"The Holy Spirit\" said there was gold in that particular hill, and that's all the research you needed to start pulling nuggets out. \n\nBoth approaches end up with a couple hundred million in digging costs to find out based on an educated guess that someone with a hundred million trusted.\n\nJust another fun fact for you: Most of earth's landmass has been surveyed for rare minerals. You'd be hard pressed to pull a surprise gold mine out your hat. However, [Robert Ballard](_URL_0_) has an excellent point that maybe 20% of the earth's ocean has been properly surveyed, and is keen to remind folks that there's very likely unclaimed gold in them thar depths."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/a16715/bob-ballard-oceanographer-titanic/"
]
] |
|
1uod5g
|
why are somali pirates capturing cargo ships still an issue?
|
I can understand how it started, but it seems as though the problem has persisted and isn't going anywhere. Why haven't these cargo companies place trained/armed professionals on the ship? Or hired escorts? I've heard that millions have been lost in ransom money, wouldn't the cost of something like that be worth it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1uod5g/eli5_why_are_somali_pirates_capturing_cargo_ships/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cek3iem"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Putting armed security guards on a ship opens a whole host of legal issues, not the least of which is the weapons they are armed with are potentially illegal in the ship's ports of call (when in a country's territorial waters you're under that country's jurisdiction). They're also expensive. As for hiring escort ships, same issues. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
ce82mw
|
why is heat bad for batteries?
|
I read a lot about how heat can reduce the lifespan of phone and laptop batteries. Why is this, and what mechanic is degrading the batteries at high temperatures?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ce82mw/eli5_why_is_heat_bad_for_batteries/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eu01oi7"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"This happens due to a variety of factors and depends heavily on the cell chemistry. One prominent factor is the increased rate of side reactions at high temperatures that lead to loss of conducting ions. There’s also a contribution of accelerated degradation of the material structure if exposed to higher temperatures for extended durations of time."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
a665qa
|
why does yellow condiment mustard relieve burns? i've worked professionally in kitchens for 15 years, all the burns i have ever used mustard on immediately stopped hurting & i was able to use the burned hand/what have you the later that shift. no other kitchen burn cream i've used can compare.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a665qa/eli5_why_does_yellow_condiment_mustard_relieve/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ebs8ye7",
"ebt4df5"
],
"score": [
12,
3
],
"text": [
"Wait... this is a thing? I don’t wanna burn myself, but I’m really curious now.... ",
"Don’t do this!!!!!! \n\nThe mustard is only helping because it’s cold, water will do the same thing, *BUT* mustard or any other food stuff will exponentially increase your risk of a serious infection if it’s anything more than a minor burn. DO NOT PUT FOOD ON ANY BURN! "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
2cxi4o
|
double jeopardy, can it be overturned if obvious evidence is produced?
|
A person cannot be tried for the same crime twice right? What if a murderer is found not guilty but police later finds some sort of video of the person committing the murder, what happens then?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2cxi4o/eli5double_jeopardy_can_it_be_overturned_if/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cjjzvjf",
"cjjzzrx",
"cjk2n80",
"cjk6n4p"
],
"score": [
10,
6,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Sorry, no take backs.",
"In America, no. You get one shot. If I'm accused of murder and get found not guilty, i can tap dance out of the court room laughing about how I got away with everything, and there's nothing to be done about it.\n\nYou can still go on to lose a civil case (a law suit) meaning you can lose some money, but you won't ever serve jail time. ",
"There are a few, very narrow exceptions, where a new trial is allowed even though the defendant was previously acquitted. The chief such exception is in cases where the judge or jury has been improperly influenced: you can't bribe the jury to acquit you and get away with it that way. The reasoning in such cases is, because you had illegally influenced the decision of the court, *you were never in jeopardy in the first place,* so a new trial won't be revisiting a valid trial outcome.",
"Not unless there is judicial misconduct involved, in which case the first trial is declared a mistrial.\n\nWhile it might seem unfair, society is in far more danger from an abuse gov't trying people over and over for the same crime until they get a conviction, than they are from the occasional murderer going free.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
l1xz9
|
why humour is different in other cultures?
|
I just mean the type of humour. It's all funny, but why does British humour involve fast/stop motion and crazy music? WHY is the humour in asia always involving sex? (strictly anime for me in this regard) Where do some of these weird tastes in humour come from?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/l1xz9/eli5_why_humour_is_different_in_other_cultures/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c2p45ab",
"c2p97l7",
"c2p45ab",
"c2p97l7"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"I would say that the best explanation is just that it's a matter of culture itself. Me, for example, living in America, find that there is little things better then a huge bacon cheeseburger. To another culture, India, per se, the concept of even eating a cow is a crime punishable by the highest form of religion. \n\nIt's also a matter of exposure. Take a look at a lot of television produced out of Japan: Notice, especially with anime, that even ones marketed toward children have some form of sexuality, and the entire concept of dressing up small children in explicit clothing is considered acceptable. On the other hand, the violence is kept VERY rare. On the other hand, in American television, speaking from what I'm familiar with, you'll find almost NO sexuality on television, the only kind you would being late-night television, but we produce shows like CSI, that show heavy violence and lots of blood/gore, which can be shown during the day time.\n\nIn conclusion; explaining the difference between humor is best explained like cultural taste in clothing, food, music, ect: It's just a matter of difference.",
"The best explanation I've ever heard for the purpose of humor is as a way of releasing tension and encouraging social bonds after a violation of expectation. Humor works by making you a little uncomfortable, setting um a juxtaposition, violating a taboo, creating an absurd situation, or similar 'problem'. The humor comes from the release of that tension not resulting in real harm. We're overstimulating the neural pathways that say 'oh good, I can relax now.'\n\nSo it makes sense that different cultures have different underlying assumptions about what constitutes a source of tension, a taboo, and what is a signal that this isn't really serious. Different cultures have different assumptions about how the world works, and therefore different ways of violating those assumptions in a way that results in humor.",
"I would say that the best explanation is just that it's a matter of culture itself. Me, for example, living in America, find that there is little things better then a huge bacon cheeseburger. To another culture, India, per se, the concept of even eating a cow is a crime punishable by the highest form of religion. \n\nIt's also a matter of exposure. Take a look at a lot of television produced out of Japan: Notice, especially with anime, that even ones marketed toward children have some form of sexuality, and the entire concept of dressing up small children in explicit clothing is considered acceptable. On the other hand, the violence is kept VERY rare. On the other hand, in American television, speaking from what I'm familiar with, you'll find almost NO sexuality on television, the only kind you would being late-night television, but we produce shows like CSI, that show heavy violence and lots of blood/gore, which can be shown during the day time.\n\nIn conclusion; explaining the difference between humor is best explained like cultural taste in clothing, food, music, ect: It's just a matter of difference.",
"The best explanation I've ever heard for the purpose of humor is as a way of releasing tension and encouraging social bonds after a violation of expectation. Humor works by making you a little uncomfortable, setting um a juxtaposition, violating a taboo, creating an absurd situation, or similar 'problem'. The humor comes from the release of that tension not resulting in real harm. We're overstimulating the neural pathways that say 'oh good, I can relax now.'\n\nSo it makes sense that different cultures have different underlying assumptions about what constitutes a source of tension, a taboo, and what is a signal that this isn't really serious. Different cultures have different assumptions about how the world works, and therefore different ways of violating those assumptions in a way that results in humor."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2zi9mj
|
how are video games able to see everything in the video game world? do they paint every frame for the every view possible? how do they make them?
|
Just trying to get a very basic understanding how how they make the pixels into an image wherever you look.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zi9mj/eli5_how_are_video_games_able_to_see_everything/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cpj56nq",
"cpj5ffx",
"cpj8ofz",
"cpjax1q"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For 3D rendered games, which is the vast majority, the game stores a 3D model of the game world. This is the shape and positions of the objects, the textures of their surfaces, light sources, and other information like that. There are 3D rendering libraries that can take this data and, when given the position and orientation of a camera in this game world, create in a fraction of a second an image of what it would look like (you may have heard of these: DirectX and OpenGL are the major ones).\n\nThe way that image is created is a lot of math. At a very high-level, you can imagine for every pixel on the screen sending a line out from the camera. When that line intersects with an object, you know that pixel should be the color of that object at the point that it intersects.",
" > Do they paint every frame for the every view possible?\n\nDefinitely not, at least not if you're able to move the camera around along with rotating.\n\nThe views are generated every frame (30-60 times a second), and what should be shown on the screen at that specific moment is determined by the current position of the camera (in a FPS, this might be behind the gun), and the current angle the camera is facing. Everything else is still in memory, and considered (you can get shot in your back of course) but it's not considered when things are drawn to the screen.\n\nThis is the same case for things which are obstructed. For example if you have an enemy behind a wall the game might be intelligent enough to not draw that enemy on your screen it would (on that same frame) get covered up by a wall.\n\nThat doesn't mean the game doesn't know that enemy is there, it just knows that it would be a waste to spend time drawing something you won't see.\n\nHave you ever played Minecraft and [saw one of the glitches where you can see through the earth](_URL_0_)? That's an example of this in action. In those cases, for whatever reason teh block you are looking at didn't get drawn, but the game knew that the face on the other side of that block shouldn't be drawn, since you shouldn't be able to see it, and the block behind it? That doesn't need to be drawn either, since it shouldn't be able to be seen. But caves can be seen because the far side of the cave has a block face that is open to the air, so it should be visible. That's an example of this at work, and thanks to a glitch you're able to see what's going on. If all of these things were drawn the game would crawl to a stop, so it's avoided.",
"The structure of objects in the game world are represented by meshes which are a collection of polygons(triangles in games). The polygons contain vertices and lines which define them. Given the cameras coordinates and the meshes data the 3d data can be projected onto a 2d pixel plane.\n\nTextures are images skewed and stretched to mold around the mesh. Lighting and shadow effects are more complicated and deal with individual pixel calculations.\n\nThe math surrounding rendering a games is complicated but also very parallel and therefore is hard wired into processors known as gpu or graphics cards.",
"Step number 1: Represent the 3D scene in some format. Pretty much all renderers use so called polygonal rendering where objects are represented by flat triangular planes defined by lists of points, called vertices. These triangles have a bunch of properties associated with them, such as them covering part of a 2D image, a so called texture.\n\nStep number 2: Use a whole lot of math to transform those 3D polygons, from their respective internal co-ordinate systems into the scene's co-ordinate system, and from there project them (more math) into a 2D image that represents what the camera can see, and the pixels on your screen.\n\nStep Number 3: Go through each of the polygons you have in your image and determine which pixels (elements in a regular grid covering the 2D image plane) the polygon covers. You then colour in each pixel in the polygon (except ones covered by polygons you've already handled) according to the polygon properties (get colour from the polygon's texture, add colour depending the pixel's distance to various light-sources in the scene, etc). Eventually you'll have coloured in all the pixels in your image and you have a image you can send to be displayed on a screen.\n\n\nSo, in short: Every 16 milliseconds your computer takes all of the hundreds of millions of vertices that make up your 3D scene figures out where they are relative to the camera, then moves them into a 2D plane and does the mother of all colouring book exercises with the shapes it has produced that way."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZG4zo2t9eYw/maxresdefault.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
35406i
|
are american transgender citizens exempt from the draft?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35406i/eli5_are_american_transgender_citizens_exempt/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cr0rojy",
"cr0s594"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Interesting question, especially considering the fluid nature of laws surrounding this topic currently. That said, you start off with an incorrect statement:\n\n > CIS males have to register for the Selective Service at 18 in the US.\n\nAlmost all male U.S. citizens, and male immigrants, who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. They define \"male\" as born biologically male.\n\nSpecifically, on their [page](_URL_0_) they even address your question:\n\n**SEX GENDER CHANGE / TRANSEXUAL**\n\nIndividuals who are born female and have a sex change are not required to register. U.S. citizens or immigrants who are born male and have a sex change are still required to register.",
"ELI5 is for explanations to concepts, not yes/no questions, so this post has been removed. That doesn't mean it's bad, it just belongs in another subreddit, like /r/Askreddit, /r/nostupidquestions, or /r/asktransgender. It is a *very good* question, as others have said. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://www.sss.gov/fswho.htm"
],
[]
] |
||
2lbmqp
|
why does it bother me so much when the tv volume is set at an odd number?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lbmqp/eli5why_does_it_bother_me_so_much_when_the_tv/
|
{
"a_id": [
"clt8n3k"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It could a symptom of obsessive-compulsive *personality* disorder, which is different from OCD and it basically amounts to wanting things to be just-so. OCD is about rituals and repetitious unwanted thoughts. \n\nBut everyone isn't bothered by it -- my TV volume is regularly set at 9 and I like it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
3nka0t
|
why do good leaders not last long, but bad leaders (dictators and cruel monarchs) seem to rule for decades?
|
For example: lots of vicious 20th Century African dictators, Stalin, Mao and other Asian strongmen
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3nka0t/eli5_why_do_good_leaders_not_last_long_but_bad/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cvosuh5",
"cvot2e7",
"cvotavh",
"cvougva",
"cvp02d5"
],
"score": [
6,
43,
6,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Well the good ones are overthrown by the bad ones, so that's why they don't last long, and the bad ones are harsh enough to stop anyone being able to easily overthrow them, so they rule as long as they like.",
"You either die a hero or live long enough to become a villain.\n\nOn more serious note: there are a lot of good leaders who lasted long, you don't hear about them, because, well, they are doing their job as supposed. ",
"Part of the answer is the political system that the leader is a part of. If you have a system that is full of corruption (like many African nations in the last century), the most merciless and strongest contenders will rise to the top and stay there. If they then develop a combination of a loyal contingent of generals and lieutenants, and a completely authoritarian reaction to disassembling ANY threat to their power, they'll stay in place for decades. \n\nPart of it is they're the ones that you read or hear about. The winners make history or become history. The longer and bigger the win, the more history they make, and the more they show up in 20th Century History or whatever school-type classes that sort of stuff shows up in. \n\nAnd part of it is because good political systems generally make for good leaders (sort of a variation of the first one above), and that political system often mandates that the best political leaders must step down from power after a certain duration. So they simply CAN'T be life-long leaders.",
"[Cincinnatus \\(NSFW - weiner statue\\)]( _URL_0_) is an example of a good leader. Good leaders don't seek power for itself, so are willing to give it up for the good of the nation. Bad leaders seek power for itself, so once they get power, their goal is to keep power.",
"There are good leaders who lasted long, but they can be depicted as bad leaders in other countries : De Gaulle (total of 16 years), Nasser (13 years), Ataturk (18 years), Napoleon (~17 years).\n\nAlso, since we have more and more democracies in the world, it's harder to good leaders to remain in power without going against their people will. De Gaulle left power when the French voted against him in a referendum on which he linked his future as President."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus"
],
[]
] |
|
1p4vyl
|
if a 3,500 calorie deficit is equivalent to a pound lost and my maintenance level is 2,000 calories, why can't (or can i) just skip eating for two random days per week (and eat 2,000 calories the other days) and lose over a pound per week?
|
I did an ELI5 search, and some people have danced around this question but haven't hit on it squarely.
Personally, I find it easier to just say, "I'm not eating today," rather than restricting my daily intake to, say, 1,500 calories every day. Many people have told me "you can't skip meals," "weight loss doesn't work that way," "your metabolism will slow down," etc. etc.
Edit: I meant that some ELI5 threads have danced around this question, so I did not think this question was a repost.
Edit 2: Thank you all for your insightful comments. I believe that the (mostly) uncontested answer to my original question is: "You can and will." The health-factor is more hotly debated and always comes back to the discussion of "intermittent fasting."
If you are reading this looking for answers about intermittent fasting, I found the following links quite helpful:
* [Beginner's Guide to Intermittent Fasting](_URL_1_) (thank you xtlou)
* [The Definitive Guide to Intermittent Fasting](_URL_0_) (thank you bogcheck)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p4vyl/eli5_if_a_3500_calorie_deficit_is_equivalent_to_a/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ccyrv92",
"ccys9fj",
"ccyuo63",
"ccyv1xb",
"ccyxage",
"ccyxcgn",
"ccyy99e",
"ccyzl9o",
"ccz09a5",
"ccz36v5",
"ccz37hm",
"ccz96pu",
"ccza05g",
"cczd4dt"
],
"score": [
21,
6,
11,
6,
4,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" What you're talking about is called *intermittent fasting.* With proper attention to diet and nutrition and with the proper planning (and presuming you are not diabetic, have blood sugar regulation issues or hypoglycemia) you can not just skip a meal but indeed go 24 hours without eating. \n\n_URL_0_",
"You can skip meals, most people don't know anything about nutrition, and your metabolism will not slow down until you have been under a sever calorie deficit far exceeding the levels you are talking about. It takes 24 hours to even get close to depleting your glycogen and that is before your body ever even taps into free-fatty acids in your blood.",
"ITT: Lots of people saying intermittent fasting is bad for you while presenting no evidence to support that claim. The facts show there are tremendous benefits (including weight loss) and if you search there are lots of scientific studies that back it up. Here is one article summarizing it and citing a boat load of legitimate studies. _URL_0_",
"You are describing the 5-2 fasting diet.",
"Would it work? Yes. You would absolutely lose weight. Is it a good idea? Try it and find out. If you get headaches, feel weak and tired, if you don't do the things you'd normally do because you're taking it easy on account of not having any fuel, then don't do it.\n\nIf you eat more than your calorie allotment the next day because you're hungry, then that doesn't work either.\n\nTry one day a week and see how you like it. If you like it, you can move to two (non-consecutive) days per week.\n\nMe, I fast every once in a while but it doesn't really work for me. It's easier for me to pick a low calorie and bland diet (like a few pieces of dry toast, and a LOT of water) so I don't feel hungry and weak, and still come in well under my calorie limit.\n\nYour body will get used to fasting one day a week, the whole metabolism and starvation mode stuff is much exaggerated.",
"There are posts on /r/loseit from time to time about this by people who have found it to work well, and people who don't like it. You can search over there (probably search 5-2 diet or intermittent fasting). It works. Most people pick say, a Sunday and a Thursday so that they're still eating calories around those days (rather than just not eating at all for 2 full days straight). Sometimes people will eat smoothies or juices to keep some calories in them. Everyone does it differently, but you can definitely find out more now that you have some terms to match what you're talking about!",
"A popular diet in Sweden is the 5:2.\rEat 5 days, dont during 2.\rWorks great if you are healthy. ",
"here in the UK the \"5-2\" diet is a massive fad at the moment, me and my parents are doing it. you just eat 500 calories at most on any 2 days a week, its really good, but ive heard mixed results. my dad has lost roughly a pound a week but its tapering off, ive not been checking but my clothes are definitely looser, whereas my mum hasnt lost any yet after 4 weeks. try it out, its not awful",
"The only real risk I see in the effectiveness here would be that during those two fasting days, due to natural lower energy levels from obviously not eating, you will not burn the same amount of calories that you would on a regular 1500 calorie day due to slugishness, etc.\n\nsource: I'm a personal trainer and lost 70lbs myself over a 9 month period prior to that.",
"Our bodies were not originally designed to have three meals a day. In the wild we ate what we could when it was necessary. I can't understand why people think that the stereotypical three meal diet is required for a healthy lifestyle.",
"Check out Brad Pilon's book Eat Stop Eat. It's a quick read and well sourced if your into the science behind it. \n\nIf not, then the gist of it is this. Eat normally on day one then on day two skip breakfast and lunch then eat a NORMAL dinner, repeat. It's also referred to alternate day fasting. Very similar to intermittent fasting as others have stated. \n\nThe idea is simple skipping meals eliminates calories. As long as you don't stuff yourself at dinner and do your best to eat healthy during your other meals you will lose weight. \n\nEdit: regarding metabolic slowdown that's just a myth. It doesn't occur until days after fasting. In fact the first 16hrs of fasting you'll see a metabolic increase as your body produces more adrenaline. The evolutionary reasoning behind this increase was to force you to get up and find food. It would make no sense if our bodies started to waste away after not eating for a few hours. That's the whole point of fat storage. ",
"Not an explanation, rather a question tagged onto OPs: Don't many dieticians say that fasting causes your body to go into a kind of \"fat-storage\" mode as it is used to having more regular food, and then when food actually arrives, it retains more of the fat, salt and sugar for the future as an evolutionary response to the possibility of you not having more food in the near future?",
"To answer your question with actual science: Set Point Theory. Your body will make minor adjustments to your metabolism on a daily basis to maintain your weight. This is why eating a whole cake one day doesn't mean you'll wake up a pound heavier. Your body is really good at maintaining the weight you're at, so long as it's one that can maintain all vital function.\n\nAs a recovering anorexic, I can also tell you that lowering your intake too drastically will lower your metabolism. I've had friends eating 600 calories a day and gaining weight because their bodies had already gone into starvation mode.\n\nSource: Nutrition student in ED recovery",
"[Relevant article](_URL_1_)\n\n[IAmA of a guy that did not eat for a year](_URL_0_)"
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://www.muscleforlife.com/the-definitive-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/",
"http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2013/08/06/a-beginners-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/"
] |
[
[
"http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2013/08/06/a-beginners-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/"
],
[],
[
"http://www.muscleforlife.com/the-definitive-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1o5ndh/iama_guy_who_went_from_430_pounds_to_170_pounds/",
"http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/07/24/3549931.htm"
]
] |
|
62hy9y
|
can the earth begin to weigh too much?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62hy9y/eli5_can_the_earth_begin_to_weigh_too_much/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dfmozes",
"dfmp0kd"
],
"score": [
7,
6
],
"text": [
"Not realistically, no.\n\nLet's take Ceres as an example. It has an estimated total mass of over 1/3 of all asteroids at 2.3 * 10^21 kg\n\nThat mass is about 0.04% of Earths mass. The Moon has the mass of 1.2% of Earth. So even if we mined the Moon and ALL the asteroids for EVERYTHING, we'd add less than 1.5% of mass on the Earth.",
"Even if we put the full effort of humanity into harvesting space material, and bringing all of it home, we could never hope to increase the mass of the Earth by any significant amount. The entire asteroid belt has a mass of about 4% of the Moon, which itself has 1.2% of the mass of the Earth. If we took every single asteroid and collected moonrocks until there was nothing left, and brought all of it home, we wouldn't even increase the mass of the Earth 2%. \n\n\nedit: Dangit /u/ThereIsAThingForThat you beat me.\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
40vplr
|
how/why did we previously think cigarettes were healthy?
|
I've seen a bunch of old ads that say things like "most recommended cigarettes by doctors everywhere" and heard that we thought they were healthy, but why? Were there any specific studies done on cigarettes that actually "proved" they were healthy? What did they test and was it a specific part of the cigarette (chemical or something) we believed to be healthy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40vplr/eli5_howwhy_did_we_previously_think_cigarettes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cyxi318",
"cyxi4ur",
"cyxlx4t"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"The tobacco industry pushed a lot of boundaries on advertising. There weren't a lot of laws in place to actually require substantiation for the claims made in an ad. Basically, the companies would hire a doctor to say \"yeah, these cigs are the best\" and they can put it in the ad. ",
"Basically it was advertising companies playing dirty pool. \n\nCigarette ads would have an actor dressed as a doctor, saying \"for a sore throat, prescribe our brand! “ this gives the impression a doctor recommends it without actually having a doctor recommend it. \n\nThen they'd send a doctor or research study a carton of their cigarettes and a carton of really bad ones and ask them to say which irritated the throat more, or if a patient was going to smoke, which was less bad, then they'd report that doctors recommended you should choose their brand! That sounds like a recommendation, but it's really just a rewording of doctors saying 'well I guess this one isn't as bad for you'\n\nBut the ad companies threw tons of money into this charade, and with images of doctors everywhere if you didn't look for hard proof you'd generally associate it with healthy images. ",
"The ads were just tobacco company bullshit, to fight the growing realization of just how bad smoking is.\n\nPeople have known smoking was bad for you all the way back to when the Native Americans started puffing on the stuff. They realized that people who smoked the most were also sick a lot and died a lot.\n\nBut nicotine is powerfully addictive, so nobody really did anything about it.\n\nWhen the Europeans took it up, they quickly realized the same thing. And again, did nothing.\n\nThe first solid medical evidence linking smoking to disease came after WWI. The tobacco companies had made a sweetheart deal with the US military to put smokes into GI ration kits, which got tens of thousands of new people hooked on the coffin nails. The soldiers who came home from the war hooked got the folks back home hooked,\n\nThen, doctors started noticing that diseases like emphysema and lung cancer, which had previously been exceedingly rare, started becoming common, and most of the people coming down with them were smokers.\n\nFor the next several decades, doctors hollered as loudly as they could that smoking kills, but they got steamrolled by tobacco companies, who had more money, better lawyers, and more paid Congresscritters. \n\nIt wasn't until the 70s or so that enough people started hollering about it that Congress had to get off its ass and do something about it.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2bqflt
|
what would the nutrition facts be on the average human? like the ones you find on food: calories, fat, sodium, fiber etc.
|
Edit: funny thing I thought I would add. I've been a a vegetarian for literally my whole life. I don't need this for any real purpose.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bqflt/eli5_what_would_the_nutrition_facts_be_on_the/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cj7wbsy",
"cj7xuc7",
"cj7xwi3",
"cj8b1p3"
],
"score": [
9,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Humans and pigs are fairly analogous in a lot of respect, so probably pretty similar to pork. Fat/protein can vary depending on which person and what part of them, probably not a lot of sodium and a negligible amount of fiber and carbohydrates.",
"Well, I suppose [a lot like this Dinosaur Comics T-shirt](_URL_0_). Here's the description from the site:\n\n > You're amazing. But how precisely amazing are you? This shirt lets everyone know.\n > \nWritten in consultation with my Actual Doctor friend, this shirt has fully-accurate information how how amazing you really are. We really did do all the research and calculate all the math. Did you know that if someone ate you they'd gain about 110,000 calories of awesome with over 73000% of their recommended daily intake of Vitamin A? Did you know you come complete with about 6L of air contained in a matching set of meaty carrying cases, 1000 different species of bacteria on your skin alone, one (1) SPOOKY SKELETON, and one (1) liver, uncooked? Because you do! Look, you're amazing. We all know it. NOW. ",
"I am deeply concerned about you're reasons for wanting to know this, but they, we, have very little fiber and are kind of like oily pig. [This](_URL_0_) is probably what you want to know, but I didn't link you down that rabbit hole.",
"Macros of an average healthy male will look like:\nProtein: 83%\nFat: 12%\nCarbohydrate: 5% \n\nThe carbohydrate in a human is glycogen \"animal starch\" in the muscles and liver.\nThere is no fiber as animals do not use cellulose in their cell walls.\n\nEDIT:\nA normal healthy female would look something like\n\nProtein 75%\nFat 22%\nCarbohydrate 3%\n\nEDIT 2: Math time (my result is higher than expected and I'm lolbad at math, so criticism welcome) Let's figure the calories of the average male I gave. Google searching gives me a median skeletal weight of 15% bodyweight. You would not be able to extract calories from bone, so we'll subtract that from lean bodymass. I will assume our victim is 150lbs. 150*0.15 = 22.5. 150-22.5= 127.5. So we have 127.5lbs of consumable flesh to work with. Now we break this down by macronutrient, adjusting the protein for skeletal weight:\n\n* Protein 127.5 * .83 = 105.8lbs \n* Fat 150 * .12 = 18lbs \n* Carbohydrate 150 * .05 = 7.5lbs\n\nNow we convert lbs to g at 453.6g/lb, and multiply by calories per macro:\n\n* Protein 47,990.9 * 4 = 191,963.6cal \n* Fat 8,164.8 * 9 = 73,483cal \n* Carbohydrate 3,402 * 4 = 13,608\n\nSo total calories from our human are: \n\n* P 191,963 \n* F 73,483 \n* C 13,608\n* T 297,054\n\nSo a 150lb male would have about 300,000 calories\n\nEDIT 3: as a basic nutrition fact I know a human male will only store about 1,500 calories of glycogen, so the carbohydrate number is way off for sure.\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"http://www.topatoco.com/graphics/qw-person-pic.jpg"
],
[
"http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/e-sermons/butcher.html"
],
[]
] |
|
6ppnx9
|
why are flies and other insects drawn to rotting/foul smelling things more than any other living thing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ppnx9/eli5_why_are_flies_and_other_insects_drawn_to/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dkr67q4",
"dkr757q"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"I challenge your premise. \n\nYou're ignoring some famous examples, like hyena and the multitude of carrion eating birds - crows and vultures being some of the most well-known. ",
"Yer not alone in askin', and kind strangers have explained:\n\n1. [ELI5: Why flies and other bugs are attracted to bad smells/foods rather than good ones. ](_URL_0_)\n1. [ELI5: how do flies sense rotting food from long distances? ](_URL_1_)\n1. [ELI5: Why are flies attracted to feces and other nasty things? ](_URL_2_)\n1. [ELI5: Why do flies seem to like disgusting things like rotten food and feces? ](_URL_3_)\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/l8sew/eli5_why_flies_and_other_bugs_are_attracted_to/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3u94fn/eli5_how_do_flies_sense_rotting_food_from_long/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g1lyh/eli5_why_are_flies_attracted_to_feces_and_other/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2f6eoy/eli5_why_do_flies_seem_to_like_disgusting_things/"
]
] |
||
189eat
|
why is eye contact so important?
|
Serious question!
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/189eat/eli5_why_is_eye_contact_so_important/
|
{
"a_id": [
"c8cs8kz",
"c8csuvy"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because it shows that you're interested and paying attention to what the other person is saying or doing. I bet you would feel bad if you were talking to me and I just kept masturbating without looking at you.",
"It's one of many ways we communicate. It means different things in different cultures. In the US, eye contact means confidence, respect and that you're listening. In Japan, it's avoided as insulting."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
66osya
|
how is your lifestyle related to diabetes?
|
Is it a correlation or is there a causality (e.g. obesity causing diabetes)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/66osya/eli5_how_is_your_lifestyle_related_to_diabetes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dgk3x63",
"dgk4m06"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"There are two types of diabetes:\n\nType I diabetes, called \"juvenile diabetes\" because it's usually apparent in children, is not clearly linked to any lifestyle factors. There's a genetic predisposition, and some possible viral or other causes.\n\nType II diabetes is probably what you're thinking of. It also has some strong genetic links, but is also associated with lifestyle factors, like obesity, diet, or lack of exercise. It's not necessarily caused by obesity, there are skinny people with type II diabetes, especially if they have an unhealthy diet or lifestyle.\n\nThe exact cause is still unknown. We know there's a few strong correlations, but the full etiology is a major research subject.",
"It's due to insulin resistance. It means that insulin is adequately secreted in response to high blood sugar, but the cells of your body don't respond by collecting/sucking up that sugar. This then results in a persistently high blood sugar.\n\nWe don't understand it completely, but there are genetic and environmental components that result in insulin resistance. Genetic components include things like insulin receptor mutations, and other genes that promotes things like high blood cholesterol. An interesting one is *where* you store your fat if you're obese. People who have a large amount of intra-abdominal fat (in your abdomen, not outside your body wall) are at increased risk of diabetes. \nEnvironmental factors like diet (high in fat), excessive caloric intake resulting in obesity, and a sedentary lifestyle without exercise, all contribute.\n\n\nBreakdown of glucose and insulin in a normal relationship:\nYour body needs nutrients, and the primary fuel is glucose (sugar). Cells need that sugar, and you're blood vessels are the highways that transport that sugar from your gut to all the cells in your body.\n\nBut who regulates how much sugar should be in the blood stream? Too much and too little sugar both cause a lot of problems, so it is important that it gets regulated. That's insulin's job!\n\nAfter eating, there is an increase in your blood sugar. Your pancreas notices this, and then it releases insulin to tells all the cells that \"dinners on the table, come and get it\". The cells see that insulin and respond by taking in a lot of glucose, and therefore lowers the blood sugar to a more reasonable level. There's another hormone called a glucagon that does the opposite (increases blood sugar) during periods of prolonged fasting.\n\n\n\n\n\n"
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
6nkwfu
|
how plastic bottles or metal cans get recycled if they are filled with other material?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6nkwfu/eli5how_plastic_bottles_or_metal_cans_get/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dka8jq0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Typically the containers are shredded, then washed, before being melted down for reuse. So if there was something inside, it won't stay there."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
||
56f4ay
|
how do antibiotics help if they are ingested vs applied directly to bacterial population?
|
Hi guys,
Just wondering how antibiotics help when you take a pill vs applying antibiotic medication to an area where bacteria is.
I have acute bronchitis and was just prescribed Azithromycin. Yay!
Obviously antibiotics that are ingested are effective, but how?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56f4ay/eli5_how_do_antibiotics_help_if_they_are_ingested/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8itc5b"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Bacteria don't always stay just on the surface of an infected area. There are still plenty of germs below the surface that don't come in contact with a topical antibiotic. Plus, you can't really \"apply\" an antibiotic directly to your lungs. Oral antibiotics are a kind of \"nuke it from orbit\" approach and basically make your entire body an uninhabitable place for any bacteria that are susceptible to them."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
4xj05m
|
do fish in schools communicate to stay together or is it pure instinct? do fish communicate at all?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4xj05m/eli5_do_fish_in_schools_communicate_to_stay/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d6fuaad",
"d6fvzra",
"d6g0f8j",
"d6g1kfc",
"d6g2ut6",
"d6g5w4u",
"d6g5zk7"
],
"score": [
90,
15,
13,
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is no leader. Basically when one fish moves, the surrounding fish move with it, which causes the fish surrounding them to move etc. etc. until the entire school changes direction. They don't communicate, and they instinctively group together because the ones that don't have the instinct get eaten and thus don't have offspring. ",
"I'm a scientist, but not a Marine Biologist. I'm a fan of Marine Biology like you. So I can't give you the absolute answer, but I can tell you what I know. But what I know might not be completely correct.\n\nI know fish communicate. And when they travel in schools there is definitely a level of communication and coordination. But it's not like a wolf pack where you have to have a leader and a whole hierarchy. \n\nI also know that scientists don't know as much as they would like to know about how fish communicate. So this is a very good question.\n\nAlso, fish have nerves that run from just behind the gills down their length and there is one on each side. They are different then normal nerves because they have more sensitivity and more electric current. \n\nSo they use these nerves to communicate. Like if a fish turns to the right, every fish knows it just turned to the right.\n\nThese nerves are so sensitive that if you hold a fish with your hand on both nerves, the fish becomes paralyzed by the over load of senses. So it's real. \n\nBut there is a lot more to it than that. And I don't think there is enough understanding to fish social behavior.\n\nI will tell you I know there is more. I was snorkeling and it wasn't my first time. But I was snorkeling and a school of fish decided that I was safe. My friends weren't safe, only I was safe. \n\nSo I see something curious and want to take a closer look. But I get the feeling I'm being watched. I look over to my left and about 4 inches from my head is a fish. It kind of looked like Dory. \n\nSo I freaked out a bit because why was a fish so close to my head, and how long has it been there.\n\nSo I look to the right. This was definitely time for me to freak out silently and quietly. And fish eye balls are so funny because they look right at you.\n\nIt turns out that I had several hundred fish that decided to follow me. They thought I was going to kill something and they would get to eat the scraps. \n\nAnother time it wasn't Dory! It was a school of Blue Fish! They would have chomped my nuts off! Still makes me nervous.\n\nBut to answer your question, a few hundred fish don't coordinate like that unless there is some sort of communication.",
"Swarm Behavior\n\nFish follow 3 simple rules \n\n 1 Move in the same direction as your neighbours\n 2 Remain close to your neighbours\n 3 Avoid collisions with your neighbours\n\nand sometimes a 4 rule : maintain a number of partners around you\n\n (this determines the density of the swarm. A swarm of sharks will only stand for a couple of sharks near them, while small fish will pack right into one another. )\n\nBy following these simple rules you cannot collide with your partners because they are ALSO following the same rules.\n\nWhenever a partner deviate from this rule (say to avoid a shark) all other partners compensate and the swarm moves as a whole. \n\nRipped off from _URL_0_ ",
"From what I remember of ichthyology, it's been theorized that fish use their coloration patterns to communicate. \n\nSource - am marine scientist (and poor student)\n\nAlso: fish can communicate by vocalizations\n\nEdit: Found some notes!\nFish also communicate through chemical and electrical communication for stuff like fear, mood, mating\n\nEdit 2: found my text book, linking some pages on schooling and communication, reproduced for educational purposes only\n\n_URL_0_",
"You've had some great explanations. I'd advise [this article](_URL_0_) to follow up. Swarm behavior is truly mind blowing.",
"We don't know much yet, but some fish use farting : _URL_0_\n\n Alternatively, many fish have what is known as a lateral line, a series of nerve channels on their body that is very sensitive to pressure changes nearby. This allows them to sense what's happening around them without visuals and change course as needed.\n\n I'm of the opinion that as we learn more we're going to uncover more methods that we simply wouldn't typically think of, such as the farting.\n\n David Brin's Uplift series borrows the smell based communication for a species, I believe he was inspired by fish for this.",
"Some fish communicate by farting... No joke. This research was worth of a Ig Nobel prize. \n\n_URL_0_ "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_behaviour"
],
[
"https://imgur.com/a/QLqzM"
],
[
"http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/07/swarms/miller-text"
],
[
"http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/11/1110_031110_herringfarts.html"
],
[
"http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040927/full/news040927-19.html"
]
] |
||
3d3873
|
-how do naval ships/subs know when a torpedo has locked on to them?
|
In TV and movies, during a fight scene, the people working on a ship or submarine say something along the lines of "Captain, a torpedo has locked on to us" and they can determine the distance, etc. How are they able to do that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d3873/eli5how_do_naval_shipssubs_know_when_a_torpedo/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ct1dvbo",
"ct1frr4",
"ct1fxpv",
"ct1lezx",
"ct1mkdj"
],
"score": [
66,
41,
12,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"A torpedo uses active sonar to find the target. It's basically blasting the party rock anthem to find you. It's hard not to know you're the target.\n\nA submarine navigates underwater using microphones listening to sounds. You're listening for things that sound like propellers. A torpedo has a really fast one.",
"It's actually more about the noise from the torpedo (usually propeller, but some newer ones use more exotic gas or pump-jet propulsion) being detected by passive sonar on board the target. Modern torpedoes don't default to the party rock anthem homing technique--they try to stay stealthy as long as possible before switching to active sonar.\n\nEither way, like any contact, you can plot the direction you hear the noise coming from. If that direction doesn't change, it's either coming directly toward you or going directly away from you (except in the extremely unlikely case that you are both sitting still). The Doppler effect on the frequency will tell you which it is.\n\nDistance is mostly estimated AFAIK because of the varying complexity of sound transmission through water. I think the movies make this seem a little more accurate than it would be IRL.",
"Despite the stereotypes, torpedoes do NOT have active sonar until they are very close to the enemy, and so its not used as a means to detect torpedoes reliably. The active sonar is kept off until its too close to avoid them, so its not something that can be used to detect if you are being fired on. Most torpedoes use guidance from the submarine that fired them, and many torpedoes have MILES of cable that run behind them, like a huge slow TOW missile. The sub detects the target and directs the torpedo to hit it. \n\nThe first torpedoes had passive sonar that would simply listen for a ships propellers with a directional microphones. This was effective until the Allies started towing noisemakers behind their ships, which would cause the torpedoes to become confused and hit the noisemaker. \n\nThe reason a ship would know a torpedo was fired is that it either heard the launch on its own passive sonar that listens for it, or they actually spotted the bubbles made by the Torpedo. Submarines can only listen, but ships can watch as well. Many torpedoes use hydrogen peroxide to power them, and others use batteries to avoid giving off bubbles. Hydrogen peroxide is used because it doesnt require air to power a motor. This is why rockets use hydrogen peroxide to power their turbopumps. Its not hydrogen peroxide like in your house, its so concentrated that it explodes in 1500 degree steam if it touches the wrong substance. Its VERY reactive in large concentrated quantities. \n\nIf the torpedo uses batteries, only sound can be used to tell if the torpedo was fired. This is done by listening for it being fired, and then listening to the propeller to tell where it currently is. \n\nSome ships and submarines carry a sonar receiver behind them, because the sound of their own propeller is too loud to hear anything behind them. So they tow a microphone in the water and use it to listen to the blind spot created by the noise of their own engines. \n\nHelicopters can do this as well. Some helicopters will drop a microphone into the water and listen while hovering above the water with a cable running down to the underwater microphone. Some helicopters and many anti-submarine aircraft have microphones they can drop into the water and which send back information by radio. The microphones are used to detect subs or listen for torpedoes. \n\nWhen a sub is found, the aircraft can attack them using torpedoes or dept charges. \n\nThere are also MINES that fire torpedoes, and so submarines have to listen for these mines as well. They sit on the floor of the ocean and fire at anything that goes over them. The same techniques used to detect a torpedo from a sub are used to detect the torpedo from the mines. ",
"Eli5: How do fighter jets do it?",
"First of, everything in the ocean makes a certain sound. We know what sounds torpedoes makes because every time the \"russians\" has training excercices we (NATO) drops a sonar buoy close to the area and record the sounds in extremely high quality. From this we can filter out all the individual sounds and we get files like \"russian torpedo type 57.wav\" this file is then passed around to all friendly ships and if SHTF and the sonar operator on uss washbucket detects a object moving towards the ship the sonar computer crosschecks this sound against known sounds and tells him that it is a russian torpedo type 57. \n\nLets say your sonar gives of one \"ping\" per second. This soundwave goes everywhere and some of it eccoes of the torpedo, the time for the ping started to the return ecco tells you how far away it is. One second later another ecco returns but now it took slighty less time (we are talking micro seconds here) you now know how many inches/feet/meters the torpedo has closed in on you. Based on this the computer figures out its speed and how long it will take to get to you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cf9k0p
|
collagen supplements
|
How do these work? Apparently it's good for your skin and bone health, but I'm wondering how scientifically. We make collagen naturally with essential amino acids, but does having more help speed up that process in some way? Just wondering before my girlfriend buys.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cf9k0p/eli5_collagen_supplements/
|
{
"a_id": [
"eu8rpc4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Due to aging or other reasons, sometimes the body doesn't manufacture enough of a certain thing (collagen in this question). Supplements can supply that thing and if the form of the supplement is available for the body to absorb and use, the thing will function as if the body had manufactured it."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2418v1
|
how does the bottom of this slinky (gif linked) appear to float while the top of it falls?
|
_URL_0_
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2418v1/eli5_how_does_the_bottom_of_this_slinky_gif/
|
{
"a_id": [
"ch2l7h9",
"ch2llf8"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"A slinky is literally a spring, and it exerts force on either end trying to bring them together.\n\nIn that gif, the force the upper end of the slinky exerts on the lower end is nearly enough to counteract the force of gravity (not totally; you can still see it falling very slowly). In the meantime, the lower end of the slinky is exerting force on the upper end *in addition* to the force of gravity, so it falls very quickly.",
"Basically the spring is being pulled together from both ends. The bottom appears to float as it is falling at the same rating it is being pulled back together so in the same sense the top appears to be doing all the work as it looks like its falling or pulling together at double speed."
]
}
|
[] |
[
"http://i.imgur.com/zlnXf.gif"
] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
2vyie3
|
what is american cheese?
|
Everyone knows that american cheese isn't exactly... cheese. But, what is it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vyie3/eli5_what_is_american_cheese/
|
{
"a_id": [
"com07ii",
"com0i1q",
"com1jvs"
],
"score": [
3,
19,
3
],
"text": [
"It's tastes like Freedom. That's all you need to know. _URL_0_",
" > [Today’s American cheese is generally manufactured from ingredients such as one or more cheeses, milk, whey, milkfat, milk protein concentrate, whey protein concentrate, saturated oil(s), emulsifiers, and salt.](_URL_0_).\n\nIt's mostly milk 'stuff'. There's a bunch of real cheese, some milk & stuff separated from milk (the proteins & fats). Then they add a bit of salt & oil. Finally, they blend it all together & add an emulsifier to make everything stick together.\n\nWhat's an emulsifier? Have you ever looked at a vinaigrette (or 'Italian' dressing) and seen how the oil and the vinegar separate? An emulsifier makes sure that oils & water *don't* separate. Mustard and egg-yolks are great examples - they make mayonnaise work. [Lecithins](_URL_1_) extracted from soy beans & other plants are commonly used in commercial food production.\n\nSo, is it real cheese?\n\nNope. But it's also not some mystery food made out plastic and scary chemicals.",
"It depends what specifically you are referring to?\n\nAre you referring to Kraft Singles? If that is what you are referring to, then, sorry, but that is not actually cheese.\n\nIf you are referring to say Boar's Head American Cheese, then that is a blend of various Cheddar and Colby Cheeses.\n\nVelveta, Kraft singles, and things of that sort are typically not cheese. \n\nTLDR: American Cheese is a blend of Cheddar and Colby."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"http://i.imgur.com/2ag98cg.jpg"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_cheese",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecithin"
],
[]
] |
|
57imzg
|
tokamak reactors
|
I know they're fusion reactors, and I know how they work, but how well do they work? If fusion power is such a (relatively) new field of energy, why are tokamak reactors so rarely talked about? Are they just built for science? And why is a lot of effort going towards building a stellarator when we have functional tokamaks?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57imzg/eli5_tokamak_reactors/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d8sag2h"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Stellarators are a special form of tokamaks. We've been using tokamaks for plasma research since the 50s.\n\nBasically, if you do high energy plasma research, you need some way to contain the plasma. This is harder than it sounds, because the plasma is a few dozen million degrees and it will instantly cool down if it touches anything. So you need to use some form of magnetic containment. The easiest way to make a magnetic containment is a donut shape, with magnetic windings around the donut's surface. That's all a tokamak is.\n\nThat's how most experimental fusion reactors are build. [JET](_URL_2_) was a tokamak, [ITER](_URL_0_) will be a tokamak and it is likely that future designs will also be tokamaks.\n\nSo why are we messing around with stellarators anyway? It's because tokamaks have a big problem with stability. The outer circumference of the torus is much bigger than the inner circumference, yet there are an equal number of magnetic loops moving over both. This means that the magnetic field is stronger towards the center of the donut. This is a problem because it makes the plasma inside the tokamak unstable. Particles have a tendency to spiral inward or outward, and the amount of control engineering to keep this unstable plasma under control is unbelievable.\n\nThe stellarator uses incredibly complex coils to create a naturally stable plasma. That's why the Wendelstein looks [so bizarre](_URL_1_). The reason we didn't do this before is that the computers couldn't handle the math. Only recently did our supercomputers become powerful enough to figure out how to build a stellarator. It remains to be seen if a stellarator can be scaled as easily as a tokamak. But if it works it removes one of the biggest hurdles for energy positive nuclear fusion."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER",
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/W7X-Spulen_Plasma_blau_gelb.jpg",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus"
]
] |
|
6gfasy
|
why do companies not include batteries with so many electronic devices that need them?
|
I mean I get that it saves money, but batteries are so cheap and it is quite frustrating to the customer when they buy something then realize they need batteries as well. I'd think it'd impact satisfaction a lot more so why isn't it done?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gfasy/eli5_why_do_companies_not_include_batteries_with/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dipta0m",
"dipzqvx"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Depends on the device, most seem to come with it. But I would say it's mostly price, and sometimes just the fact that batteries have a shelf life. And with things like toys, rechargeable batteries are very expensive (they'd need to include a charger), and it runs through batteries so fast you need a case of batteries anyways. Thus it's not worth including a set of batteries if they last one hour.",
"Batteries add extra shipping and shelf life considerations. The convenience and display bonuses (eg. allowing a toy to be demonstrated on the shelf if it's shipped with batteries) of the batteries must be weighed against how it affects transportation safety, import taxes, import/export safety laws, etc. Depending on the device and what countries it's going to be sold in, it's often easier not to add an extra step of also adding batteries before packaging. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
|
g19718
|
why is the sweetness of fruits healthy but the sweetness of desserts unhealthy and fattening?
|
If they contain different kinds of sugars, why can't we just use fruits to extract the sugars to make desserts
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g19718/eli5_why_is_the_sweetness_of_fruits_healthy_but/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fne5h6n",
"fne5msj",
"fne5y3w",
"fne6f7f",
"fne6ff8",
"fne6vdp",
"fne7hfj",
"fne7hxl",
"fne9195",
"fnec77g"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
9,
2,
2,
3,
7,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There's absolutely no difference. They contain the same sugars, and both will make you fat if you overeat them.",
"The difference is refined sugar vs natural sugar. Refined sugar (often found in products using high fructose corn syrup) is much worse for you than unrefined sugar. The additives make it worse. \n\nAlthough some fruit is good for you, overeating it can be bad too! Everything in moderation.",
"It's not that the sugar in fruits is healthy, but that fruits have a lot less sugar overall (In general) than many desserts do. \n\n\nThe average apple has about 15 grams of sugar. A bag of MnMs has 31 grams of sugar. So the bag of MnMs is twice as much sugar as an apple.",
"The biggest reason is that sweet desserts may be worse is that the amount of sugar you are taking in is so much higher than other nutrients. You may be able to take in significantly more sugar before you actually feel full.",
"Fruits are getting a lot less healthy due to all the selective breeding going on. Nowadays a banana has a lot more sugar in it than it had 20 years ago. And fruit sugars are just as unhealthy as all other sugar. Practicaly the same thing.",
"Fruit has vitamins and fiber, as well as the sugars. I love oranges, and can easily eat 3-4 in a day. The first one or two give me my needed vitamin c for the day, any after that are just high fiber candy.",
"Sugar is sugar, the biggest difference is in the supplemental nutrition you get around the sugar. Choosing a piece of fruit over a candy bar means your body has more nutrients and more fiber in order to function better. That is why fruits are suggested to replace candy or other sweets. By the time you are filled with fruit you have a lot of calories, but you also get some good, candy has no other upside once it leaves your mouth. Since juice is missing fiber and usually has more sugar added in, it is only a tiny bit better, or in some cases worse, than soda.",
"Haven't seen others mention metabolism yet so check out this quote from _URL_0_\n\n\"How the body metabolizes the sugar in fruit and milk differs from how it metabolizes the refined sugar added to processed foods. The body breaks down refined sugar rapidly, causing insulin and blood sugar levels to skyrocket. Because refined sugar is digested quickly, you don’t feel full after you’re done eating, no matter how many calories you consumed. The fiber in fruit slows down metabolism, as fruit in the gut expands to make you feel full. \n\nBut there’s a caveat. Once the sugar passes through the stomach and reaches the small intestine, it doesn’t matter if it came from an apple or a soft drink.\n\nHow much sugar is already in your blood will determine how the body uses the sugar,. If you already have a lot of sugar in your system, then what you just digested will form either fat or glycogen, the storage form of glucose that’s used for quick energy. It doesn’t matter if it’s junk food or fruit.\"",
"Diabetic here. The sugars in fruits are *not* healthy. The only things making them somewhat better than a candy bar are the vitamins and fiber.",
"One type of sugar is not more \"healthy\" than another. Fruits don't have as big an impact on your body because the sugar is locked into all the fiber of the fruit itself, your body has to work to break it down and so the sugar is released into your body more slowly. This makes it \"better\" for not spiking your BG and messing with your blood chemistry so much, but too much of either will be bad for you."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"cancercenter.com"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
7ckzkt
|
why does seeing someone puke or smell puke cause other people to puke
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ckzkt/eli5_why_does_seeing_someone_puke_or_smell_puke/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dpqqm9m",
"dpqqrie"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Probably stupid to post this without a source but I’ve always assumed it is a social reflex - if you’re around someone puking, you might have consumed the same bad stuff they did and your body says “nope.”",
"Humans are social animals. Our bodies react in sometimes uncontrollable ways based on cues from those in our \"tribe\". If someone gets sick and vomits, our bodies try expel the germ or ingested contagion that caused the first person to get sick. Its a preventative measure that's a biological and probably an evolutionary habit to prevent death or damage to the body from a foreign germ/contagion."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[]
] |
||
84j8cs
|
how come when you speed up sound it comes out really squeaky, but when you slow it down, it sounds very deep?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/84j8cs/eli5_how_come_when_you_speed_up_sound_it_comes/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dvq00w2",
"dvq0h7n",
"dvq0jmp",
"dvq3lxb",
"dvq4jgu",
"dvq4p8z",
"dvq506y",
"dvq5urg",
"dvq6p7t"
],
"score": [
266,
4,
83,
3,
5,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sounds are vibrations. The faster the vibration, the higher the pitch. (And the larger the vibration the louder the noise).\n\nSo speeding it up increases the vibration rate making a higher pitch and slowing it down decreases the vibration, lowing the pitch.\n\n",
"Low sounds are made by low frequencies, high sounds are made by high frequencies.\n\nImagine you're in a boat floating on the ocean. There are waves coming at a consistent rate, and you're bobbing up and down with them. You turn on your motor, and speed into the oncoming waves. Now you're bobbing up and down faster and faster because from your perspective, the waves are coming faster and faster. This is like speeding up sound. The waves come faster and faster, so you get a higher frequency.\n\nIf you turn your boat around and start going in the same direction as the waves, you start bobbing slower and slower, which is like slowing down the sound, giving a lower frequency and lower pitch. If you go at the same speed as the waves, you don't bob at all.",
"Every persons natural sound is a combination of one fundamental frequency, with a mess of harmonic frequencies that add to the timbre of their voice, but don’t define the note as it would be picked up by a guitar tuner. That note is all fundamental frequency.\n\nThe note is also just an ugly sine wave, and the frequency of that sine wave (which has the fundamental frequency) is measured by how many times the sine wave goes up and down every second.\n\nPeople with very high voices have sine waves that go up and down more times every second than people with very low voices.\n\nLet’s say you sing lalalalalalala, and that takes you 2 seconds. Welp, if you speed that up, and it only takes 1 second for the full string of ‘la’s to finish, then you had to have made all of the ups and downs happen in half the time. \n\nNow you have the same number of ups and downs in half the time, so the frequency of the speeded up version is doubled for every second that the sound goes on.\n\nSince higher frequencies sound higher to our ears, we hear that as a Mickey Mouse voice.\n\nThe reverse is true for slowwwed dowwwwn versions of the original Lalalalala.\n\nEdit: phones",
"Higher pitched sounds have waves that are closer together, and lower pitched farther apart.\n\nWhen you manipulate the speed of a recording you're literally changing those waves to be closer together or farther apart, thus making it higher or lower pitched.",
"It's all about frequencies(occurrences per second in the case of sound waves). Every sound you hear(between about 20-20,000 cycles per second, or Hertz) travels through the air as a wave. As the frequency(Hz) of something increases, it's perceived as in increase in pitch. The threshold of human hearing is roughly 20Hz-20,000Hz. So any sound wave that travels through air fewer than 20 times/second, will almost certainly be too low of a frequency for your ear to perceive, same for anything above 20,000, it'll be too high to hear(think of the \"silent\" dog whistles).",
"The same reason why an approaching car sounds different from when it passes and starts to move away. Sound is a wave and the crescents of those waves hit our ears at certain frequencies. We perceive higher frequency waves as higher pitch. When you speed up sound, it gets send out at a higher frequency, hence the chipmunk speak.",
"Sound is air waves hitting our ears. when we take a recorded sound and slow it down, the main way we do this is by 'stretching out' the wave. Longer 'waves' have a lower pitch, and shorter waves have a higher pitch. so the shift in pitch is actually a product of how sound is recorded and shifted. It is also possible to speed up/slow down sounds without messing with the pitch, but that uses a different, more complicated process. :)",
"When you zoom in and out on your tablet, the letters and spaces get bigger. Sound has waves (called amplitude) that get bigger gaps when you zoom in or slow down sound, or smaller gaps when you zoom out or speed up sound.",
"When we hear sound, what we're actually hearing is the air around us vibrating against the sound-sensing bones in our ear. Basically, the air taps on our ears, and our ears takes the pattern of taps and turns it into a sound that we can make sense of.\n\nThe type of sound we hear is based on certain properties of these taps. How loud a sound is based on the strength of the taps; the harder the tap, the louder the sound. The pitch, or type of sound is based on how often the taps tap; the faster the taps, the higher the sound. A deep, rumbly sound might tap 25 times per second, while a high whine might tap thousands or tens of thousands of times per second.\n\nWhen we play back a sound at a different speed, we end up changing how fast the tapping comes in. If we play back a sound twice as fast, that means that it's tapping twice as many times every second, which makes the sound squeakier and higher pitched. If we play it back half as fast, it taps half as often, which makes it sound deeper."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5lp600
|
when you have a good stare going on, what is actually happening and why does it feel so good to keep it going?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lp600/eli5_when_you_have_a_good_stare_going_on_what_is/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dbxhjh4",
"dbxmo38",
"dbxqjvl"
],
"score": [
10,
43,
3
],
"text": [
"Im no scientist but from what i know your body releases dopamine and activates natural opioid receptors in your brain when you \"zone out\".",
"I know exactly what you are talking about! \n\nSome people in past posts say its your brain entering [Default Network Mode](_URL_0_), yes its actually called that. \n\nBut if we are talking about the same thing, its almost like a trance, where you are staring and your mind is fully operational, but it just feels good to be fixated, and you are aware if you look away, that fleeting feeling will pass. \n\nThese moments often come when I haven't spoken in awhile, too, if that is any constellation. ",
"I have a l w a y s questioned why it felt \"good\" to stare at nothing. So glad I found this. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_mode_network"
],
[]
] |
||
4hallt
|
single camera vs multi camera setups for filming tv and movies
|
I get it, but don't at the same time.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hallt/eli5_single_camera_vs_multi_camera_setups_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"d2ooeky",
"d2oogei",
"d2oq74h"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"A single camera setup means you can only see the action from one point of view. A multi camera setup means the editor can jump at any time from one point of view to another -- typically one camera shows the broader scene, while other cameras show closer shots of specific characters.",
"Multi-camera is often used in sitcoms. It's a cheaper way to shoot the show because you have multiple cameras filming things.\n\nSingle camera is just what it sounds like -- just one camera. If you have a scene where you see three different camera perspectives, that means they re-positioned the camera for each perspective and redid the scene.\n\nSingle camera results in a better product, because you can adjust the lighting and everything to make each shot look perfect. With multicamera, you have to have the entire set lit up so that it looks adequate for all cameras. So, with single camera you can get a lot more depth and detail in the shots.\n\nOf course, single camera takes longer to shoot, and time is money, so it's far more expensive.",
"Good answers from my fellow industry members too!\n\nIts all situational. Depends on what you are doing, where, when, time, budget... etc. \n\nIn addition to the other great comments more cameras mean multiple more people usually. And more blocking/complexity of the shot. And more $$$.\n\nThat said if you are doing a big stunt (first thing comes to mind is a huge explosion) than you want a lotta cameras so you can get all the angles on the action as you wont get to blow that thing up twice or put people into danger twice.\n\nThose are just some more thoughts."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1sppvv
|
why does a hot pan put in a sink full of water make such a strange noise?
|
The noise I'm asking about is not the "pssssttt" as it cools, but rather the "woooaaaiiinnnggg" sound as it submerges.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1sppvv/why_does_a_hot_pan_put_in_a_sink_full_of_water/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cdzy9t5",
"cdzyb2m",
"cdzz443",
"cdzz9ql",
"cdzzc9x"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
4,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's because the metal is rapidly cooling and warping out of shape. That's how you get wobbly pans when there put on a flat surface. ",
"The metal is trying to shrink as it rapidly cools, which causes stress on the metal and makes that noise. You should let it cool a bit before immersing it in water...",
"That's the sound of a pan being ruined. Keep it up, and it'll be useless soon. ",
"This kills the pan.",
"Your windshield will do the same if you throw boiling water on it this time of the year."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6vnhcn
|
how do penguins conserve their calories for months?
|
Alongside maintaining their body temperature in the extreme cold it seems like they are close to being in the state of hibernation without needing to be asleep all the time.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6vnhcn/eli5_how_do_penguins_conserve_their_calories_for/
|
{
"a_id": [
"dm1lh7a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Lots and lots of fat, and very, very little moving will usually do it. "
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[]
] |
|
2vnyi3
|
what is it about printers that make them so prone to errors?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2vnyi3/eli5_what_is_it_about_printers_that_make_them_so/
|
{
"a_id": [
"cojconu",
"cojcqo4",
"cojga6v",
"cojgelc",
"cojhfhy",
"cojhgyl",
"cojhwua",
"cojkj4a",
"cojm84z",
"cojmyky",
"cojnq26",
"cojonkw",
"cojvoje",
"cok404s"
],
"score": [
22,
219,
2,
13,
2,
6,
16,
2,
8,
4,
4,
11,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Printers suck because they are engineered to a price target. A really good printer is a thing of beauty, and I've seen them spit out hundreds of documents a day, for weeks and months on end, needing only the paper tray filled and an occasional toner cartridge. But that kind ain't cheap. If you're buying printers for $59 at the office superstore, you're going to get rubbish, I'm afraid.",
"Unlike most things attached to computers, they have a lot of moving parts. Additionally, assuming you're talking about consumer printers like ink jets, there are nozzles that can get clogged, requiring constant automated maintenance.\n\nBecause printers rely on physical things like the paper being present (and thus requiring a way of detecting that it is), any small misalignment can halt the printing process. Printers live in the physical world, rather than the world of abstract electronic representation, so everything they do is messier and more prone to error.\n\nBeyond that, consumer inkjet printers are designed to rake in money by reporting theoretical problems even when none exist. For instance, saying that because the ink cartridge is old, it must be replaced--even if it still works.\n\nFurthermore, when buying printers, people usually focus of the physical aspects like speed, price, and printing resolution. Few people buy them based on having good drivers. As a result, printer drivers are often only good enough to ensure people don't ask for a refund. This means they tend to be poorly written and prone to errors.",
"Lots and lots of moving parts. Also, most issues I get called for are caused, or at least made far worse by users. ",
"On a related question, why is the print/print queue UI on my computer just as crappy as the ones I was using 20 years ago?\n\nTry to cancel job and it sits there and freezes. Try to close the program and it won't close. Try to cancel a repeat job and the entire thing crashes. Printer runs out of paper and the program freaks out, freezes, crashes, and makes you start a new print job manually beginning at page 17 or whatever.\n\nSeriously. The system has been garbage since at least windows 3.1\n\nWhy?",
"Also, the manufacturer will include an automatic update in the driver that can be unchecked, but nobody ever catches.\n\nIf you use a refilled cartridge, it WILL work in most printers and doesn't void the warranty. But some manufacturers make it so that after it updates the printer will keep giving you an error until you get a new cartridge.",
"Anything with moving parts is more likely to break down.",
"Consumer printing is not profitable unless the printers are built cheap and the ink cost is high. Your $100 printer is made for you to print off some photos here and there and maybe some large black and white documents. Many features that would make the printer more reliable would be too expensive to add into the printer making it a $700 printer that no one wants to buy. \n\nNow look on the commercial end of printing. You would be surprised to find out that the same print head that is in your $100 printer is in a lot of the printers that print all of the signs and billboards you see everyday. See those nifty car wraps that have a full color print all around them? Those are printed with the same print head you print your 7\"x 5\" photos with. The printers cost $10,000 to $100,000 though. So what is the difference? Commercial printers have many more features that keep the machine in top shape and are built using higher quality materials. But guess what, the ink cost is much lower! These guys are buying 4 liters+ of ink at a time. 1 liter goes for about $100. \n\nTL;DR - Consumer printers are meant to be consumed and replaced in order to be profitable. Commercial printers are built to be assets which brings reliability and lower costs per liter of ink. Your desktop printer is a VW Rabbit whereas a commercial printer is more like a BMW.",
"Two words for you: *Planned Obsolescence*\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThere are several documentaries in the topic and some of those touch base on the printers. How they LITERALLY have a counter that indicates when should they stop working. i.e. after X Prints, stop working...\n\nYeah, it sucks.",
"I once took my old inkjet apart and was surprised by how cheaply and badly it was put together. The whole thing is full of plastic gears, levers and half-baked plastic mechanisms whose sole purpose is to use as few motors as possible (on of the few actual expensive parts of the printer).\n\nFor example, when the main motor rotates one way, it advances the paper as you'd expect. When it rotates the other way, a special gear will prevent it from moving the paper, instead, it operates a pump that sucks ink out of the cartridge and simply pumps it into a sponge. Yes, there is a sponge in the printer that's full of old ink that you paid for. This is something the printer does every time you turn it on, or at least every once in a while to unclog the dry ink in the nozzles. Basically it wastes a huge portion of your expensive ink cartridge by spraying it onto a kitchen sponge.\n\nAlso, the part that tries to select ONE sheet of paper instead of 5 of them is really shit. It pretty much just punches the paper with a spring in hopes that one will fall into a slot. It keeps punching the paper stack until one of them falls. Of course there is no motor to do the punching, this is also done by the same poor motor that moves the paper and pumps the ink into the sponge. But how does it know that it has to punch the paper and not move it? It doesn't. It just does everything at the same time. That's why it makes so much noise even when nothing is happening: you're right, nothing IS happening. It's just trying to do everything in hopes of getting one specific thing done because it's too cheap to be able to select one task out of many.\n\nSo yeah, some of these bastards are very poorly built. Then you have the ink that's sticky and dries up. That causes most problems.",
"There are highly precise box of parts that have to work perfectly and the manufacturers are trying to produce these for $30. ",
"They are really complex, and largely mechanical, and they are also very very cheap. It's not an easy task to pick up a piece of paper and precisely fire ink at it. Inkjet cartridges are really cool bits of technology. They use tiny resistors to boil the ink and the pressure of the gas vapour pushes a jet of ink out of the cartridge and onto the paper.\n\nLaser printers are even more complicated using a negatively charged cylinder and a photo sensitive coating to use a laser to raster scan the image onto the roller, pick up toner and then bake it on with a heated roller. There's about 4 stepper motors, a 1 dimensional raster laser projector, a heater and a bunch of mechanical parts in a laser printer. I paid £40 for mine, which is nothing really. Considering replacement toner costs £60 I wouldn't be suprised if it was sold at a loss. You also need quite a big powersupply, several stepper motor drivers, which aren't cheap, and a microcontroller or ASIC of some sort to control everything and interface over USB.\n\nThere is an awful lot in a printer, and there are a lot of them made. They are made very very cheaply, and build quality suffers. By cheap laser printer often screws up bits of paper printing.",
"I'm a printer by trade and a big reason we are prone to errors is simply that the work is hard. \n\nMost people don't appreciate that a good printer operator must be a personnel manager (up to 10 people working on one machine), supply manager (do we have ink, plates, paper etc?), editor (we must verify that the press copy is identical to the proof and error free BEFORE we make 100,000 copies of garbage), chemist (we use many different chemicals to make a good printed sheet like ink, alcohol, gum arabic, and a whole host of others to ensure proper interaction of ink and water), plumber (water leaks are bad for paper), and mechanic ( a bungee cord and duck tape can repair many things until morning). \n\nEach printing unit for each color is a complicated machine where 100 things can go wrong. Now multiply that by oh many colors are being printed. Someone once said that running a 6 color press is like trying to\nmake 6 angry women happy at the same time. \n\nIt's a hard, dirty job that if done right no one notices and I love it. ",
"I know this question has been answered, however, I would like to also draw your attention to a post-modern phenomena called.\n\n###Planned Obsolescence.\n\nWith any product on the consumer market, it is within the manufacturer's best interest to make a product which has a limited life expectancy. This limiting of the products usability is known as **planned obsolescence**!\n\nIt could be as simple as manufacturing a battery which doesn't last a long time whilst also making the product unable to change the battery, for example: The iPod. Of course, making the battery changeable would mean that the product would actually last a long time, but then they would run out of customers.\n\n#Printers? Planned to fail!? Surely not!\n\nI am afraid so. Epson installs a microchip which makes their printer fail after so many prints and some HP laser printers will actually fail to print after a certain amount of pages. Even Brother has sensors that make the printer fail before the cartridge has run out.\n\nFortunately some very smart people, who know about the shenanigans have found 'work arounds' for these documented problems.\n\nCheck them out in [this link](_URL_0_), and I hope that answers your question.\n\n",
"Everyone ignores one of the main reasons. Price.\n\nA lot of people are going to say it's things like moving parts, planned obsolescence, etc. But the truth is. The average printer SHOULD cost a bit more than people generally want to pay for a printer. Most people pay around $50 for a printer, then wonder why it has problems. A good printer costs more than that.\n\nI bought $50-$75 printers for years. And they all worked relatively well, and broke sometimes, and had random issues, etc. But recently I started doing a lot of printing for a new at home company my wife and I started, and we researched and bought one of the top recommended home inkjet printers with the best reviews and the best specs for what we were doing. And it's been perfect. Sure, the ink is a rip-off. But it's worked flawlessly. It handles any time of paper we give it, and prints perfect looking prints, and runs for hours every day without stopping unless it runs out of ink or paper. I've never had a single problem with it.\n\nI don't expect it to last forever, but hopefully it lasts a long time at this level of quality..."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reportsfromearth.com/155/designed-to-fail-planned-obsolescence-in-printers-tricks-to-fix-them/"
],
[]
] |
||
f5axrm
|
where do birds go at night? where are they hiding when there is a storm and the weather is really bad?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/f5axrm/eli5_where_do_birds_go_at_night_where_are_they/
|
{
"a_id": [
"fhxkcfc",
"fhyaupd",
"fhyof6p",
"fhypppq",
"fhysagq",
"fhysk7t",
"fhyt07s",
"fhyte5a",
"fhytkan",
"fhyvktb",
"fhyvxjx",
"fhywyr6",
"fhyx2ja",
"fhyyrqn",
"fhyysnl",
"fhz058n",
"fhz0iiz",
"fhz2la5",
"fhz4jad",
"fhz5nq3",
"fhz86ir",
"fhz9n3h",
"fhzcnq4",
"fhzdb6c",
"fhzgfg6",
"fhzke5g",
"fhznkoi",
"fhzsgz7",
"fi008oe"
],
"score": [
5761,
734,
303,
43,
40,
14,
11,
52,
66,
13,
4,
4,
67,
3,
15,
140,
22,
5,
4,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It can vary by species, usually they hide in places like evergreen trees, tree hollows, bushes, etc. The more urban birds will find places in cracked buildings and such. \n \nThere's a bush right in front of my parking spot on the side of my apartment complex, and at night and in the winter I can see them huddled in there sometimes. \n \nEdit: I know the thread has been deleted, but if anyone sees this comment and happens to be curious, I took a quick video of the [birds](_URL_0_). It is sunny out, but it's just a few degrees above freezing.",
"In this year's BBC Winterwatch they had a little feature every night on a treecreeper roosting in an excavated hole in a sequoia tree, it flattens itself against the bark to gain warmth from the tree.\n\nThere's a little clip of it here: _URL_0_",
"I may have a little helpful knowledge here.\n\nCrows will roost overnight with a large number of other crows within a tree or multiple trees. Crows are the only birds I know for sure that do this, but I'm also sure that there are other species that roost (European Starlings come to mind, they certainly roost in large groups during the day). \n\nIn addition to sleeping, it's likely that the crows use roosts for protection from predators and gathering information on the surrounding area, other crows, sources of food, and so on. \n\nNot all crows will go to a roost overnight, however. Some will \"stay at home\" at their nest with their family unit. Crows that do go to roosts rarely go every night, and each crow is different in respect to how often they go to roosts or stay home.\n\nI know it's specific to crows, but I hope it was helpful or at least interesting :)\n\nSource: amateur birder of several years, Cornell lab's online course on crows, and several pieces of literature on crows",
"Local blackbirds are hiding under bushes and next door's monkey puzzle tree.\n\nCoal tits are hiding, goodness knows where, too, taking advantage of a quiet half hour to visit the feeders.\n\nMeanwhile, resident woodpigeon is looking increasingly pissed off and fluffy and can't work out why it's so difficult to sit on the edge of the bird bath or walk along the fence in 50mph gusts. Idiot bird.",
"Often in buildings, as an architect we have to be very aware that some birds can roost in eaves, and must not interrupt their seasonal nesting. As a child I remember watching the Starlings murmuration over The West Pier in Brighton. Truly beautiful and mesmerising.",
"German here. I wondered about that, too. Especially last week when we had lots of wind and just ... impossible weather. As I kept wondering, I looked outside and saw in the middle of a hailstorm the tail of a magpie sitting in an evergreen tree. So that answered my question.",
"One time I set off a firework that accidentally went up into and through a tree in the driveway where there were dozens of birds of all kinds roosting and they all flew away protesting loudly. Lots of fluttering noises. They tolerated the fireworks until one came right through their bedroom. I felt bad.\n\nI had no idea there were that many in a tree at night. I also saw them in the little bushes leading up to a department store where the lights were in the winter. That seemed like a really safe and warm place.\n\nThere are boxes you can get that have 3 closed sides and an open side. They are not very tall and there is on overhang in the open side. Apparently they can use these and crowd in for warmth and shelter. All different kinds of birds together.\n\nEdit: In Massachusetts in the summer (fireworks).",
"I started raising chickens a couple of years ago, and am still constantly amazed that, without fail, they will always go to their coop as the sun drops and just sleep until the sun comes up.",
"I have seen quite a few birds hanging out inside of Home Depot and Wal-Mart during storms. They just kick it up in the high ceilings and then fly out the nursery when the coast is clear.",
"I know a bunch roost for the night in the orange trees in my backyard, because sometimes when I go out there at night I startle them and they yell at me.",
"During a blizzard I once saw a northern flicker holding onto a tree for dear life, I think she survived",
"A-well-a don't you know about the bird?",
"Mod is working overtime removing all the \"birds are drones\" comments lol",
"My mom has a bird that’s been spending the winter perched in a corner of her porch. That’s the answer for just one.",
"The first part of your question has already been answered, so I'll try to answer the second one: Where are birds hiding when there is a storm and the weather is really bad?\n\nBirds, like many other large vertebrates, have a place where it rests during the night or where they lay and rest during the day, since being active during the whole day is something only humans do. Even pets and other domestic animals spend a great deal of the day resting. Animals, including birds, don't have a special place to hide during storms so they just endure them. Here's some videos of land animals enduring the rain:\n\n* [urban bird under pouring rain](_URL_0_)\n* [elephant family enjoying a casual rain](_URL_4_)\n* [monkeys covered under a tree's canopy during a rainstorm](_URL_3_)\n* [lions casually walking around during a storm](_URL_2_)\n\nAnimals just get wet and deal with it. If they can find shelter somewhere else, they'll certainly do so but most of the times they just... endure it.\n\nIf the storm is particularly bad, like a hurricane, [some researchers have found that birds go to the eye of the storm and fly around inside of it until the hurricane recedes.](_URL_1_)",
"A lot of birds find shelter to rest during night, which keeps them safe from predators while also keeping them sheltered from bad weather. These shelters can be things such as birdhouses or boxes, or trees and bushes. \n\nBecause birds are at their most vulnerable when they are asleep they have to choose carefully where they spend the night. They will tend to roost in large flocks. Sometimes birds will even find an abandoned building they can shelter in. \n\nMost birds are diurnal, which means they're most active during the day, especially early in the morning and late in the afternoon. Although many birds find shelter for the night there are birds such as sparrows, warblers and thrushes who avoid predators by flying at night when they migrate. \n\nThe feathers of most birds shed rain and trap air against their bodies to help keep them warm. But their feathers can't handle heavy rain which makes them seek shelter during harder storms.\n\nAt some point all birds are called back to the closest government charging station to charge up their batteries and switch out any lenses if need be.",
"The legend says this question is asked on the internet all the time, I never thought I'd find this question in the wild: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)",
"There's a Walmart parking lot that has a 'singing tree' during parts of the year- like the entire tree at night is just FILLED with birds... \n\nCan't even imagine what it looks like under that tree.",
"I have a pet lorikeet and she likes to sleep on the floor of her cage of a night and she occasionally has dreams where she chirps or repeats mimicked words",
"Additional info:\n\nSometimes they migrate [and it shows up on weather radar](_URL_0_).\n\nFollow [NWS Meteorologist William Churchill (@kudrios)](_URL_1_) (among others) for absolute mind blowingly cool weather radar stuff.",
"Where they usually are; cracks/overhangs in buildings, under bridges, in trees, bushes, hedges etc etc.\n\nThey're pretty hardy animals, i've never seen one seem bothered by bad weather. That said, an awful lot of wildlife don't survive the winter. Leaving out some bird seed or a box can really help them.",
"From my understanding, birds go to hide in military bases. Storms are the perfect excuse for the government to do maintenance on and recharge the birds. This is, of course, because [birds aren’t real](_URL_0_) and are government surveillance drones. \n \nRemember: bird watching goes both ways.",
"I worked in a hospital during a hurricane and saw the ducks just chilling in the grass next to the pond during the wind and rain. I thought it was kinda funny",
"Birds naturally just go motionless at night, or whenever it is dark. Its really weird. This excludes night hunters like owls, obviously, but all non-nocturnal birds roost, and roosts are typically their nests or any safe space in a tree or bush or such cavities to hide in. Sometimes during a solar eclipse it will seem eerily quiet because the birds all stop singing as they think it's nighttime. Just an interesting part of birds.",
"Similar yet darker question, where do all the bird die? I mean every day I see hundreds of birds but I hardly ever see any dead ones. The amount of pigeons I see in the city is staggering yet it's not like there's an equivalent number of corpses littering the streets or even close. Same thing outside the city, birds are everywhere yet I probably see maybe 5 dead ones a year if that which is such a tiny fraction of the number of alive ones I see on a daily basis.",
"My balcony becomes a refuge for cockatoos and rainbow lorikeets during a storm. It's gorgeous, and they are welcome, but it makes sitting outside and enjoying a storm a very overpopulated experience",
"Grew up in the middle of a big city, not the best neighborhood but we had a large garden. We had a rooster show up, we speculated that it escaped from some cockfighting place since it was quite the unit, and with the garden it just sorta hung around. It would hang around during the day but we couldn't find it in the evenings until one day we realized it would jump into our pear tree at night for shelter and hid itself really well up there.",
"I used to worry about this often when I was a kid. Before my parents divorced we lived on a farm. My mom and I built a bunch of bird houses because I worried about them. We had a few big trees and lots of smaller ones. I loved seeing them everywhere.",
"I live in one of the biggest cities in the world that also happens to have a huge population of birds and trees. \n\nIt is really beautiful to hear the birds just before sunset gathering on huge trees to sing and yell to each other about their day till they go invisible and quiet till next morning when they wake up and sang together to the sun."
]
}
|
[] |
[] |
[
[
"https://imgur.com/a/lFXDseJ"
],
[
"https://twitter.com/BBCSpringwatch/status/1222973612686225408?s=19"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/26RgA-kU-18",
"https://youtu.be/DNvJ4E3mw9Q",
"https://youtu.be/L1ibu6eM2c0",
"https://youtu.be/eRDcV9hkDg0",
"https://youtu.be/Tciu0fHjbHQ"
],
[],
[
"https://xkcd.com/1434/"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://twitter.com/NWSKeyWest/status/1229366284501913600",
"https://twitter.com/kudrios"
],
[],
[
"https://birdsarentreal.com/pages/who-are-we"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.