q_id
stringlengths 5
6
| title
stringlengths 3
296
| selftext
stringlengths 0
34k
| document
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | url
stringlengths 4
110
| answers
dict | title_urls
sequence | selftext_urls
sequence | answers_urls
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4402a7 | the logistics proposed by advocates for african american reparations | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4402a7/eli5_the_logistics_proposed_by_advocates_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"czmakj4",
"czmc36r"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"There is not really an advanced political movement in the United States that advocates for reparation. It is discussed as a general principle, but no specific plan has been put forward.",
"I'm not sure that anyone actually believes it is logistically feasible. \n\nI think the point most advocates of reparations are trying to make is that it would take a massive, near incomprehensible redistribution of wealth in order to reverse or mitigate the negative effects of close to [400 years](_URL_0_) of subjugation, systemic racism, and oppression. \n\nWhile it's very popular in some circles to say that racism is over because we have a black president, or that nobody alive today is responsible for slavery so everyone should get over it, keep in mind the Civil Rights movement is only about [50 years old](_URL_1_). That means that your parents probably (and your grandparents certainly) lived in an era where you still had places with signs that said \"No Coloreds Allowed\". In fact, some of the people who put up those signs are probably still alive. \n\nThat means that we've had \"equal rights\" (and I use the term loosely because discrimination still exists today) for around 1/10th of the time we had an institutionalized system to subjugate a race of people. That's not a very long time to take advantage of generational wealth building or the power of compounding interest, comparatively. \n\nAdvocates of reparations are generally providing a rebuttal to those that argue that black Americans should just \"get over it\" and \"pull themselves up by their bootstraps\" without providing an explanation as to how they are supposed to condense 400 years of missed progress into 50. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1954%E2%80%9368)"
]
] |
||
2bo7fn | why don't things like mugs and glass break in our hands when they fall from a distance that would normally break them? | If someone flung a mug off a tall building it would normally shatter, unless someone caught it - why doesn't it shatter in our hands? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bo7fn/eli5_why_dont_things_like_mugs_and_glass_break_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj794zu",
"cj7966i",
"cj7e867"
],
"score": [
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It is not the act of catching but the method of catching that prevents the break. Concrete does not give... A person's hands are much softer and by lowering your hands as you catch the item you can absorb the energy of the impact and reduce the risk of breaking. ",
"The reason that things break when they hit the ground is because they stop very suddenly and shatter. When someone catches it, our hands dont stop it as suddenly, due to our hands compressing a bit and typically, we move them with the thing so we slow them down before stopping.",
"There are many contributing factors. The physics term I suggest researching is \"impulse.\" It is simply force delivered over a certain amount of time.\n\nF = m • a\nF = m • Δv / t\n\nF • t = m • Δv = Impulse\n\nAt the time of impact, an object will have momentum (m • v). To change that velocity to zero, we must put a force on the object. We will deliver that force over a certain amount of time. To lower the amount of time needed to deliver the same amount of force increases the impulse (average force delivered per unit of time). This functionally related to the amount of stress the moving object is subjected to at any given instant.\n\nA concrete floor will slow the object in a very short amount of time. Impulse is large and stresses the object beyond its structural limits.\n\nOur muscles, bones, skin giving diffuses the delivered force over a greater amount of time and our hands dropping also increases the time over which the force is delivered, lowering the impulse placed on the glass.\n\nThink of a car braking (not breaking). The force delivered by the breaks will determine how long it will take to bring velocity to zero. To stop in a shorter time means greater average force place on the car (hard breaking). If the time needed to stop the car is very small (hundredths of second when hitting a barrier), the impulse will be large, and the car will fracture structurally.\n\nImpulse. Tell your friends."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4x0jnn | how does tilt photography trick our minds into thinking the subject of the photo is a miniature? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4x0jnn/eli5_how_does_tilt_photography_trick_our_minds/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6bg41g",
"d6bgj8k",
"d6bgqb8",
"d6bhm4n",
"d6br3gh",
"d6bvf1p"
],
"score": [
111,
3,
10,
13,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"When you lean in and look at a miniature or model, you're eyes are focused on what's right in front of them, and things in your peripheral vision are blurrier - Usually, in a photo everything is clear no matter what part you are focused on- but in tilt-shift photography the focal point is clear and draws your eye to it and the surrounding areas are blurry, recreating that 'miniature' look. ",
"Depth of field. Being very close to something gives you a very limited depth of field because your eyes are much closer. And because of this our eyes can only focus on to so much at once. Which leads to blurring. So when photographers take these photos they blur out the surrounding items to recreate what our eye does.",
"When we look at some something close up, things further or closer to you appear blurred. Try it right now with your thumb. Hold your thumb up to your eye and focus on it but notice how blurry the background is. Then hold your thumb at arms length and focus on it. The background is considerably clearer. \n\nWhen you're outside looking at the skyline or something, everything appears pretty clear because everything is far away from you. Your eyes basically go to maximum focus length and everything appears about the same clarity. \n\nTilt shift lenses result in a focal section of the frame, blurring the frame above and below it. This is able to mimic the effect of looking at something close up without actually needing anything close up to look at. This results in tricking our brain into thinking we are much closer to the subject of the image than the camera actually was. ",
"With most cameras, when you take pictures of minatures, they have a very shallow depth of field. That means that what's in the center is usually in focus, but objects in front of and behind that focus point get very blurry. [Here](_URL_0_) is a picture of a miniature as an example. You can see how the front of the table is very blurry, the characters are sharper and then the table gets blurry very quickly the farther from the camera you go.\n\nNow [here](_URL_1_) is an image using a tilt shift lens. You can see how the foreground is blurry, most of the trolley is in focus and then it gets blurry in the background again, very similar to a miniature. I don't know the exact mechanics of a tilt shift lens and how it produces this effect, but this is how it tricks our brains into thinking life-sized things are miniature. We're used to seeing miniature photos with blurry foreground and background, so when we see these things, we think miniature.",
"[Depth of field](_URL_0_) gets progressively shallower as you focus on things that are closer to you (doesn't matter if \"you\" is your eye or a camera). For example, at night you can look at a building 100 m away from you and see stars clearly at the same time, even though the closest star that isn't the sun is more like 40,000,000,000,000,000 m away. When you focus on something mere centimeters away (using glasses as needed; otherwise it's all blurry anyway), every cm of movement requires refocusing.\n\nIt's this effect that makes images with a shallow depth of field look like they're of small things close to the camera. A tilt lens can exaggerate the effect by rotating the plane that's in focus, so that it aligns less well with the content of the picture. [The image](_URL_1_) /u/super_ag linked to is a good example. Note how the part of the grass that's in focus is farther away than the part of the train that's in focus. That's the tilted plane in action.\n\nNote that this effect, used in a scene where depth of field wasn't shallow to begin with, really just blurs parts of the image that are farther away from a focus 'line'. Its dependence on distance is negligible, making it easy to emulate with a 2D digital filter (the linked image is actually an example of that). Only if depth of field was shallow to begin with does real tilt get more interesting, with some parts even getting sharper depending on distance.\n\nThere are other cues that can be used to change the apparent size of things. Often saturation is increased to offset the effect of atmospheric haze which normally indicates distance. Increased saturation also makes things look like colorful toys. This all helps if you're going for the miniature effect.",
"Even though this doesn't exactly answer your question, I thought I'd add in that this miniature effect is created when you use a tilt shift lens incorrectly (though stylistically on purpose.). You see, usually the tilt feature of the lens is used to tilt the plane of focus down and make a horizontal plane have more depth of field, like a landscape of a field. But if you tilt the plane the opposite way ymou can make a horizontal plane have less depth of field which results in the thin stripe of focus across the plane. Since we are used to seeing macro photography with shallow depth of field it tricks our brains. Also in video, photographers play with frame rates and saturation to make the objects seem like stop motion toys. \n\nEdit: tilt shift is often used in architecture photography. The tilt feature can make the plane of focus align with a buildings face, and the shift feature can be used to adjust the skew of looking up at a building from the ground so that it seems more straight on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://static.boredpanda.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/miniature-wedding-photography-ekkachai-saelow-17-578360a984a02-png__880.jpg",
"https://www.smashingmagazine.com/images/tilt-shift-photography/angusleonard.jpg"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field",
"https://www.smashingmagazine.com/images/tilt-shift-photography/angusleonard.jpg"
],
[]
] |
||
c9burx | why hasn't bluetooth been replaced by another technology such as infrared wireless, ultra wideband, induction wireless, etc.? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c9burx/eli5_why_hasnt_bluetooth_been_replaced_by_another/ | {
"a_id": [
"esvrf2p",
"esvry26",
"esvu0p4",
"esw040g"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
3,
8
],
"text": [
"Infrared requires line of sight. Bluetooth which uses radio waves does not. Bluetooth has a 20-30ft of range. Inductive has millimeters of range.",
"Bluetooth and wifi use uhf radio frequency on the em spectrum (2.45ghz) \n\nInfra red wireless was briefly tried but it requires line of sight to operate.\n\nThe shorter the wavelength the higher data capacity but also the higher chance of cooking yourself.",
"what we need to do is start usuing gamma rays they can penetrate any wall and everyone needs a healthy dose of radiation",
"It sounds weird, but bluetooth was replaced by bluetooth, which was then replaced by bluetooth, most of the cheap bluetooth kit you see will be v2 with some v3 because the modules for it are cheap and mass produced so anyone wanting to add bluetooth functionality can stick a cheap chip in without any development work.\n\nBluetooth 4 (low power bluetooth) is popular in higher end kit, Bluetooth 5 was released earlier this year with a lot of functionality designed for \"internet of things\" aka lets just stuff a computer into any random bit of junk and call it a new product.\n\nBut really it's about picking the right tech for the right job. Need an ultra low power ultra short range (i.e. touching) wireless transmission go for NFC (door passes, credit cards and similar) need a short range low power transmission that can go a yard or two, use bluetooth. Need to transmit a signal around a house or small building use wifi. Need to transmit a signal between fixed points a few miles apart go microwave link."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
67vg0o | why were the 1950s all about fitting in with society? | What exactly led to it? Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67vg0o/eli5_why_were_the_1950s_all_about_fitting_in_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgtinxf",
"dgtiozh"
],
"score": [
3,
8
],
"text": [
"In a nutshell, the aftermath of WW2. The roles of men and women had shifted out of necessity during wartime with many men overseas. More women worked out of the home to support the war effort and to support their families, but after the war, men wanted their jobs back and there was a strong desire for a return to what they considered normal. ",
"The 1950s in the US were a rather turbulant and uneasy time.\n The economy had to transition from wartime to peacetime production, nobody knew if the economic boom would hold or if the Great Depression 2.0 was around the corner. \n\nAdditionally, the threat of the nuclear arms race and war with the Soviet Union was looming. Due to the witch hunts of the Second Red Scare, especially well-off middle class people were wary to speak about unconventional topics.\n\nFurthermore, American citizens moved more than anytime before. Rural Americans moved to the cities. Urban Americans moved to the suburbs. Most of those movements involved leaving your familiar (often familial) background and finding yourself among complete strangers.\n\nSo in total, an uncertain future, many people in new situation who don't know how to act around their new neighbours, all the while fearing that they might be accused of being communists. This situation just begs for conformity. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2u3jk9 | why is there an anti-science movement in the united states? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u3jk9/eli5_why_is_there_an_antiscience_movement_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"co4ry01",
"co4se1l",
"co4sh8c",
"co4snhl",
"co4sp0g",
"co4sv9c",
"co4syzy",
"co4t0ro",
"co4t2zt",
"co4wzr7",
"co5df1r",
"co5g4ay",
"co5i777"
],
"score": [
19,
78,
9,
5,
4,
8,
3,
6,
3,
5,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It isn't unique to the US.\n\nThings like homeopathy and astrology are popular in Europe and Asia too.\n\nThat said, I think the biggest reason for it is intellectual laziness. It is easier to understand those things than to actually understand chemistry or astronomy. It is easier to look at the thermometer on your back porch than to understand environmental sciences.",
"Some view science as the antithesis of religion. And they do not believe a person can serve both.\n\nSome long held views are shown to be not true via scientific research. This offends people and they paint much of science as wrong as a result. \n\nMany people do not understand how modern science produces results and they further do not understand how it proceeds via research which may produce facts which sound to them like they are contrary.\n\nThere is a strong political movement in the US to scare people about things to make them vote for a party's platform. Some politicians use science and scientists as punching bags and make people distrust the field.\n\nThere are two major ways people approach life - one is more faith based (not religion per se - but rather - this is what I have come to believe and it is central to me and nothing can shake that) and the other is questioning (I wonder how that works and how does that info change how I think about X). Some people are very much locked into the faith side and thus can't countenance that which oppose what they believe.\n\nOne way to ward off any doubts about that what you believe in is to attack and ridicule those who question your beliefs.\n\nSome who dislike science feel like scientists and those with post graduate education look down on and belittle those with less education. Some are offended by this and react by finding a class of people and their concerns to be a threat and react to it by attacking them and it. \n\nThe United States is in a period of major change and many people in their hearts know change is happening and coming but they do not want it to happen. They see science as part of what is making their environment/life change and thus they dis-trust it. They want to not believe the changes that science say are real and coming because it means their ideas of how life should be on Earth might be wrong. And their ideas about how their future might be wrong as well. This is pretty scarey so people blame one of the providers of the news about changes in the world - science.\n\nEDIT - spelling",
"I think a lot of that has to do with the coalition that the leaders of the Republican party very consciously decided to pursue about 30-40 years ago.\n\nAfter the rise of the radical left in the late 1960s and early 70s and particularly after the Roe v Wade decision in 1973, the GOP made a very conscious decision to pursue social conservatives and fundamentalist, evangelical Christians by promising to reverse some of the gains the left had made that violated their beliefs and sensibilities. Operation Rescue openly recruited people to the Republican party in churches.\n\nAs the Republican party became more staunchly conservative, those who felt dogmatically opposed to certain branches of science (particularly evolutionary science) started to move into positions of leadership in the party as well as national elected office. Over time, their views became the mainstream view of the party as they proved to be the most passionate and consistent voting bloc - or \"base\" of the Republican party.",
"\nHistorian Richard Hofstadter has written a book on America's long history of anti-intellectualism. [Here is a review](_URL_0_)",
"The US has a large pious population within its borders. Modern science conflicts with many traditional religious beliefs and calls into question the bible and how it is understood. This is not easily accepted by people who have been raised their entire lives to believe one thing. It's like ripping the carpet out from underneath them, and then calling their family and social structure a lie. \n\nTo top it off, education in America is built off of multiple choice answers. Essay questions that make you spell out your understanding on paper are not the norm. In essence, tests are taught to students, and knowledge with understanding take the back burner. \n\nReligion on the other hand is discussed over and over. There are no multiple choice exams in church. You either understand what they are saying, or you go over it again. \n\nWhen the two collide, religion is often better understood than science, because religion did a better job teaching. That places science in the second row with a dunce hat when it challenges faith.\n",
"\n\nTo those saying that it's poor education or understanding of science, I disagree, I think it's much more complicated than that. Presented with perfect evidence, many Americans will still find a way to reject what has been proven to be true. Better facts and evidence can even lead to a \"backlash\" effect where the false belief is reinforced by adverse evidence.\n\nI think it has more to do with tribalism, religion, psychological worldview and people joining communities of people who are like them and creating an echo chamber.",
"FOX News and various other corrupted information outlets combined with crony capitalism.\n\nScientific understanding is (usually) associated with intellectualism and enlightenment - both of which are subjugated by the powerful wealthy through the influence of money in order for the wealthy to hoard even more wealth/power.\n\nTL;DR - control of information (as science is) is control of power.",
"You know the old rag about Australia being filled with the descendants of exiled criminals? The US is filled with the descendants of exiled religious crazy people. But that's really not the crux of it. \n\nIn the US, it stems from the integration of fundamental religion into politics. Before the 80's and the 'Moral Majority', religious extremism and politics wee seen as two things that couldn't (and shouldn't) mix. Give to God what is God's, give to Caesar what is Caesar's. When antiregulatory pro-business Republican ideals were mixed with religious fervor in order to elect the first President Bush, something magical happened. We set up Republicans as 'the party of religion', so the other party had to be the opposite: 'the party of Atheists'. \n\nThe Dem-run environmental movement in the 90's did nothing to dissuade voters from this view, nor did the Post-Modernist view that all truths were subjective truths. This opened the door to challenging science directly. They weren't facts, they were 'theories'. And in the interest of scientific flexibility (and not wanting to offend the religious), the science community let these groups in. After all, science and religion had coexisted pretty faithfully for centuries. \n\nBut once they were in the door, things like Intelligent Design came up, a way to speak of Creation in a vaguely scientific way. It wasn't long before they were demanding equal time. \n\nNow, in the post-Recession period, people tend to cling more to their religion than stolid institutions that didn't prevent the bad stuff from happening, and it even becomes a point of pride. ",
"A good part of it has to do with the Fairness Doctrine. Many issues are very one sided until you have to search for an opposing view and present both views as equally valid. It was the pebble in the water that created a title wave of yellow journalism and propaganda. Those last two were lessons learned too far back in history for people in the present to remember. Special interests never forgot them.",
"There are two major movements that are causing an anti-scientific sentiment right now, with one leading cause behind both of them. The reason science is rather unpopular in certain sects is that science necessitates absolute claims. The absolute claims that science makes about our world can be inconsistent with both Secular Humanist/Postmodern thought and with Religion. The former denies absolute claims are valid at all, while the latter denies the accuracy of absolute claims that contradict their religion.\n\n**1. Postmodernism/Secular Humanism.**\n\nNow, before everyone starts fussing, you can believe in science and still be a postmodernist or secular humanist. It's just harder to do so. For example, many postmodernists that I know believe that there **is truth,** but our bias makes that truth unknowable. Science, then, becomes the search for truth with as little bias as possible, instead of being completely objective. That definitely works.\n\n\nHowever, the anti-science movement comes into play when you have people who believe there literally is no absolute truth, and we have no hope of finding it whatsoever. With that view, what's the point of science? If we can't look at a wall and agree that it exists, because the fog of our bias is in the way, how can we accomplish anything? The point of science is to have an objective, non-biased way to learn about our world. Thus, if we cannot truly know our world, there is no point in studying facts--we need only have an opinion of reality. Granted, societies can agree on what is \"true for them,\" but this \"mob rule\" form of truth cares not for the actual reality that science can reveal to us. It only cares about what people think about reality, which can easily be flawed.\n\nThat's the problem with science--it's hard to argue with. If science can make supported, absolute claims, then how will we all believe whatever we want to, with no regard for reality? You can't. And that makes a lot of people dislike it. Granted, science cannot prove anything...it can only provide evidence to support a potentially biased claim. But it's mighty hard to argue with hard evidence.\n\n**2. Religion**\n\nAgain, before those of you who are religious get mad at me, I readily admit that you can be religious and believe in science. There are credible arguments and tested scientific methods that suggest evidence towards such a position, even if they are not popular. You can believe that science is the study of God's creation, and that all these natural processes we observe were crafted by intelligence, not chance. You're not the ones I'm speaking about here.\n\n\nThe religious anti-science movement is comprised of those see science as inherently worldly, not Godly. They don't see it as an opportunity to \"explore God's creation,\" they see it as the study of trying to disprove God. Thus, many religious people stay away from science--this leaves a majority of non-religious people in the field...which results in a majority of non-religious beliefs being held in the scientific community. This majority further propagates the stereotype that science and religion cannot coexist, causing religious people to fear science even more. They fear that their beliefs will be systematically disproven, or at least attacked. Thus, they oppose it, because science could potentially make a well-supported, absolute claim that contradicts their religion.\n\n",
"Conservative republicans found they could win elections by grafting on \"social issues\" to their agenda. Social issues are the concern of fundamentalist christians. Science conflicts with fundamentalist Christianity. Conservative republicans, therefore, suppress science research that offends the bàse.\n",
"Put simply its because Science is beginning to Fail us as a race. And to be more clear about that what im really talking about is Technological Expansion and Development.\n\nPeople absolutely loved science, and in the United States our rapid edge on technological development has put us in the chair of the world's Hyperpower (as in, above Superpower nation status).\n\nHowever the rapid technological progress we've seen steadily from the 1940s to the 1990s has stalled. At least as far as how it has applied to our Personal Lives.\n\nFor the past 15 Years technology hasn't really changed the way we've lived. And while we have seen various minor improvements and certain technologies have become more expanded since they were in the 90s... about the only thing that has been added to us since then is Smartphones.\n\nSure you could rattle off a list of things that have been a major improvment since say.... 1998.... as a child of the 80s I can personally say that a HELL of alot more changed from 1985-2000, than has changed since 2000-2015.\n\nWe even killed the Space Shuttle program.\n\nAnd since our rapid change of pace with Science has Stalled it has caused people to have to switch to other things to think about and that means more people focusing on religion, family, and domestic issues. And maybe pokemon.\n\nIts also compounded by the fact that it doesnt look like there's any end in sight to it either. It truly looks like we have hit some major plateau and nothing super huge is going to change for at least like another 30 or 50 or 100 years and in 2050 we're still going to be living our lives the same way we are now (or worse).\n\nPeople want to see major improvements, they want to see easy space flight, they want to see flying cars, cities being built out on the ocean (floating, not just building islands like those bastards in dubai).\n\nInstead they keep getting told how those things arent possible, and it lets them down, and they find other things to think about.",
"Science and technology are concerned with reality, and there will always be aspects of reality that are unpopular. In America, some people deny climate change science because it's difficult to shoulder the financial burden. Some people don't believe in evolution because it contradicts a religious belief they have a strong emotional attachment to. Some people don't support fluoridation because \"chemicals\" are scary. Science sometimes causes people to choose between emotions and consensus on what is actually happening, and many people choose emotions. You see this in other places, too. For example, European countries have irrational fears about GMOs and nuclear power.\n\nAlso, science and technology has led us astray in the past (often due to some commercial interests manipulating things). The most famous example involves early studies that linked fat consumption to heart disease. The massive influx of trans-fats and carbs to the American diet had the exact opposite effect, it resulted in much worse health, and trans-fat producers' lobbying was part of the reason this happened. People sometimes cite these situations when questioning science."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/09/richard-hofstadter-and-america-s-new-wave-of-anti-intellectualism.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5pt40k | if the gasses we breathe can expand and move around, why do we have to inhale and exhale? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5pt40k/eli5_if_the_gasses_we_breathe_can_expand_and_move/ | {
"a_id": [
"dctlcpn"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because they don't move around enough for us to get enough oxygen quickly enough. Many insects just passively let oxygen flow into their bodies. We, however, need so much oxygen that we'd suffocate if we just waited for it to passively flow into our lungs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2uoo5w | when isis asks for millions of dollars for a hostage....how do they expect to get that money? | In bills? Via bank accounts? Couldn't the accounts be used to track ISIS operatives? Do they expect the ransoms to be paid in certain commodities? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2uoo5w/eli5_when_isis_asks_for_millions_of_dollars_for_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"coa9ey5",
"coa9hkw"
],
"score": [
8,
4
],
"text": [
"A \"neutral\" or designated country would act as a middle-man for these type of transactions.\n\nA great example would be Switzerland. Switzerland has tend to be a neutral party in the world's affairs, which makes them a great candidate to be the mediator and means of communications between countries or organizations that don't have or choose to have diplomatic relations with.",
"They don't actually want to be paid, they want everyone to get upset and attack them so they can draw more people to their cause and increase their power. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2mgstz | what is time relativity? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mgstz/eli5_what_is_time_relativity/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm42ahv",
"cm42biz"
],
"score": [
3,
6
],
"text": [
"It starts with the saying that space and time are connected.\nThere are two main things that can cause a \"bend\" in space and time: gravity and speed (talking about big gravity such as black holes, and high speeds such as 90% of light speed or so, because otherwise it would be minor).\nthese bends in space and time cause length and time to be shifted. Let's say you're standing on the ground, and you see a train moving past you. According to the theory of relativity, the space and time in this train are different relative to you - both length is shorter, and time is slower.\nSame thing goes to black holes, the space bends near them, and so is time.\nTo understand this in depth you need years of study, but I hope my explanation was clear enough in this stage.",
"Time has to go quicker in some places because the speed of light is constant no matter how you measure it. The only way to keep the speed of light constant is to change the way distances and time are measured. \"Why is that?\" you ask?\n\nFirst you have to just believe that no matter how anyone measures it, the speed of light will always be the same. That means if two different people measure it, they will always agree on the speed of light. That should strike you as very weird... imagine throwing rocks from a moving car, to you on the car you only see the rock going at the speed you threw it, but to someone in front of you on the street they see the rock going at the speed you threw it PLUS the speed of the car.\n\nLight does not work that way... instead of rocks, if you were throwing out photons of light you both measure them as exactly the same, no matter how fast the car was going. The speed of the car adds nothing to the speed of light. The speed of light is always the same no matter who measures it. \n\nIt is hard to imagine right now, but that simple idea has wide ranging and profound implications for the way space and time must behave, and one of implications is that gravity must slow down time. Gravity must slow down time because gravity causes a red shift in light. A red shift is a decrease in frequency and a decrease in frequency of light is essentially a slowing down of how fast time is ticking.\n\nKeep in mind, there is some very high powered maths and physics going on and any overly simple explanation will have some gaps, but that is a very basic intuition for what is going on and it all flows from the accepted fact that the speed of light is constant for everyone no matter how they measure it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2aku8c | why do movie and video game classical music soundtracks sound so much better than the famous classics? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2aku8c/eli5_why_do_movie_and_video_game_classical_music/ | {
"a_id": [
"ciw5d6p",
"ciw6f7r"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"they dont sound better objectively, many people (the majority even) prefer traditional music\n\nas for why you prefer it, it's probably because of nostalgia, when you hear a traditional classical piece you hear a good song, but when you hear the zelda theme you hear a good song + all the awesome memories you have of being a child/teenager and getting lost in the world",
"I'm going to remove this, as it's not really an ELI5 question. \n\n > ELI5 is for requests for easy-to-follow explanations of complex concepts and subjects. That means no questions that are just looking for straightforward answers, **that are subjective**, a request for a guide/walkthrough, or that are objective but not asking for an explanation of an answer. ELI5 is absolutely not a repository for any question you have."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1qe2hn | why is lamb unpopular and expensive in the united states when compared to beef and pork? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qe2hn/eli5_why_is_lamb_unpopular_and_expensive_in_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdbwjm2",
"cdbybmm"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The price is because sheep reproduce slowly and require large amounts of land to graze. As far as I know, you cannot raise a sheep intensively. \n\nAs for the unpopularity, here in the UK lamb is fairly popular. So I assume it's a cultural thing. Lamb also has a fairly strong and distinctive taste.",
"One possible reason for the decline of consumption of lamb in the United States was returning GIs after World War II. Several of the canned meals provided to soldiers contained poor quality mutton. When the GIs came home, they, and their families, didn't eat it anymore because of the perception. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2u8ro9 | the lowest temperature ever recorded on earth is about -130f. what happens to the body at that point? | Is there even a shutting-down process or would we freeze instantly? Also, do we have the technology to survive that for an extended period of time (i.e. spend a couple of days outside in it)?
Edit: Also, do we know of any life that does live at that low a temperature? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2u8ro9/eli5_the_lowest_temperature_ever_recorded_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"co66g5s",
"co66hm8"
],
"score": [
16,
5
],
"text": [
"unprotected you would be dead in minutes.\n\nYour extremities would freeze, your eye lubricant would freeze, you would not be able to breath without freezing your throat and tongue.\n\nIt would be ugly. ",
"It always takes time for heat energy to dissipate. A human being can even survive the coldness of space long enough for plenty of other things to kill them before hypothermia.\n\nThat said, obviously the colder it is, the faster the process from \"normal\" to \"Dead of hypothermia\" happens.\n\nWe have plenty of technology to help people survive in situations where the human body would otherwise normally die, mostly in the form of shelter. Or if you know how to make a snow cave safely, a shovel. When it comes to survival, remember your threes: Three minutes without air, three hours without shelter, three days without water, and three weeks without food (these are general guidelines and I am by no means a survival expert)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6gcnpn | why do different explosive materials make different sounds when they explode? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6gcnpn/eli5_why_do_different_explosive_materials_make/ | {
"a_id": [
"dipbhuq"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"explosives explode at different velocities. some explosives explode slower than the speed of sound, while others are much faster. the higher the explosive, the faster the explosion, the \"sharper\" the sound. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3vyhsj | why does everyone hate millennials? have we done something wrong? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vyhsj/eli5_why_does_everyone_hate_millennials_have_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxrrjht",
"cxrrl1a",
"cxrrney",
"cxrrp1w",
"cxrrp7k",
"cxrs4yq",
"cxrs58q",
"cxrs6sg",
"cxrs8qg",
"cxrs8xa",
"cxrs94p",
"cxrsfed",
"cxrslt7",
"cxrslyo",
"cxrsmcz",
"cxrspjf",
"cxrsqh6",
"cxrsr7w",
"cxrsw1w",
"cxrsyrz",
"cxrt5j1",
"cxrt8yy",
"cxrtcmq",
"cxrtlr6",
"cxrtp0j",
"cxrtvcf",
"cxruk78",
"cxrulcv"
],
"score": [
6,
50,
23,
75,
2,
3,
4,
2,
22,
4,
2,
8,
2,
8,
4,
2,
2,
24,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's just a way to generalize people. When they see a really good kid they don't think millenial, they ignore them. Bad kid? Worthless millennial. We do the same thing to everyone. We ignore stereotypes who behave normally but point out people who play them.",
"Every generation holds some sort of disdain for the previous. Millennials are born in the technology age. Technology makes things a lot easier. Therefore millennials tend to not have the amount of work ethic/ personality, and people skills that previous generations had (or so the previous generations assume).\n\nMillennial generation is the lazy generation. Everything is available at our fingertips, but most of us don't take advantage of it. This pisses the older generation off. \"Well if I had technology in my day and age...I would have been rich!\" ",
"Every generation thinks that the following generation are fuckups. This has been a fact of human nature forever. ",
"Millenial here too. Just like any other generation, they don't understand our problems and we don't understand theirs.\nThey chastise us of not buying homes and not having jobs, but we are the generation with buckets of student debt and limited opportunities (partially due to the economy we are inheriting from them).\n\nBut the Baby Boomers are frustrated because they are ready to retire, but many can't because of the same economy. Added to that, they are frustrated because everything is changing too fast for them in terms of technology.\n\nGen X is stuck in between trying to raise kids they see as lazy because they are always on electronic devices that they bought because all their kids' friends have them.\nJust a few short stereotypical arguments, but those are a few reasons. \n\nHonestly no one is in the wrong, but our perceptions are often different, which leads to friction.",
"Your hate of the 1st and 2nd amendments are my personal gripes. See safe spaces, favoring censorship, and gun control. ",
"For the most part, millenials are *self-absorbed*. This creates all sorts of real problems, as well as all sorts of perceived problems by the older generations. In many cases, *it's accurate to call Millenials lazy, incompetent, and stupid*, because they are *intentionally* so. When you can just look everything up on the internet, why learn anything?\n\nThe answer is: for when you don't have the internet.\n\nMost people pre-millenial remember times when the internet wasn't at your fingertips. Millenials honestly just haven't had to suffer, at all, for anything, yet people will complain about their *relative* difficulties, so people see them whining about stupid shit when, just like when a 2 year old spills their chocolate milk, that \"stupid trivial problem\" is basically the worst thing the millenial has ever had to deal with. This makes people with real problems salty.",
"Millennials in the workplace training video\n\n_URL_0_",
"Gen-y yo... we copped it too. Tho we invented the cool shit millennials use on the net now.. *reprezent*",
"Millennial here too. I had an older communications professor who basically praised millennials for dealing with the shit that his generation created. Also, when we're constantly on our phones (or so the argument goes), we're not being anti-social, were being hyper social. \nDuring that lecture he finished up with the Socrates quote \"The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.\" Old people have always and will always harbor some sort of disdain toward young people... Probably out of envy. \n",
"You might want to visit\n\n_URL_0_\n > \nThis is a subreddit dedicated to satirically mocking those people who, blinded by their own nostalgia, believe certain things in the past to be unequivocally better than today. We place a special emphasis on music, because this subreddit was created after annoyance over \"born in the wrong generation\" attitude often expressed by fans of 60s/70s rock.\n",
"The millennials in my work life try to come across as experts after reading about a topic for 5 minutes. Once you scratch the surface on their particular knowledge base, it can be very superficially deep.",
"Who cares? Most of the bitching is coming from the baby boomers who are without a doubt the worst generation this country has seen. The greatest generation gave birth to the worst one.",
"People are retiring way later than they should because they thought everything was golden and got into debt. Then it turned out they have to keep working. Opening up less jobs for us. ",
"That happens with every single generation -- strive to be part of the group that disproves the stereotype. \n\nThere are things about the millennial generation that older people (even those of us who are just *barely* older than the millennials) find difficult. HOWEVER, one can, again, say that about how every generation feels about the next. Millennials, like all of the generations before them, have a perception problem. This is compounded by the fact that *everything* is now online -- there are no longer merely regional or neighborhood incidents; everything can (and does) immediately go viral -- giving the impression that incidences are wide-spread rather than localized. \n\nI don't see the image as being \"stupid\" or \"incompetent,\" rather, I see the image as millennials being:\n\n* fragile (difficulty taking criticism and in need of lots of back-patting. This, if true, seems to stem from the prevalence of the \"everybody is a winner\" environment that your parents created for you), \n* Impatient (easily distracted and easily bored. If true, this seems to stem from growing up bombarded with stimuli and having immediate access to media, entertainment, and information). \n* VERY self-involved. \n* Difficulty being independent and responsible. If true, this seems to stem from several places. Helicopter parents have stunted their child's abilities to stand up for themselves, to face controversy, to negotiate, to \"face the music\". Additionally, it's pretty hard to be independent and responsible when there is a significant lack of life-supportable jobs, right? \n\nBottom line? Yes, there are \"issues\" with this generation -- but there are ALWAYS issue. That's part of the job of the new generation -- you all have to help create the world in which you'll grow old, but you also have to work within the existing framework created by the people who are still here. ",
"Millenials haven't done anything wrong in the grand scheme of things. It's just how life works. Gen X-ers find Millenials whiny and annoying and unable to take care of themselves, just like Baby boomers found Gen X-ers whiny and annoying and unable to take care of themselves, just like the Silent Generation found the Baby Boomers whiny and annoying and unable to take care of themselves, etc...",
"I think it's called \"juvenoia\" or something along those lines. I recently watched a nice little Vsauce video that explains it pretty well _URL_0_",
"Different values, e.g., we value access over ownership. That one in particular can make us seem transient and flippant to older generations.",
"Millennials have got nothing on Generation Z. My 3 year old is a shifless, lazy bum who won't find a job and expects me to provide everything for her. Jesus, her mom even wipes her ass for her, how pathetic is that?",
"Entitlement. No one wants to actually work anymore. They want to cheat their way through by not thinking and jumping through preset hoops, paying for school and connections. And after they pay for it they expect the world to be just handed to them for the rest of their lives because they went to some random barely accredited college for 4 years of whatever. Instead of viewing life as something you need to keep working on, millenials are looking for THE lotto ticket to set them up for life. Just some observations from a millenial who grew up poor but went to an Ivy League and saw both ends of the spectrum... Seriously, no one is willing to work really hard and challenge themselves anymore. Working for long periods of time does not equal working hard. Taking forever to do a job because you can milk it more for hours and pay is not working hard. Most of the people I know stuck in an office for 60hrs a week are not actually working hard, just going through the motions to act like it for their paycheck... ",
"Millennials have the unfortunate distinction of being the same generation as the advent of social media. The truth is that millennials are just as selfish, petty and vain as every other generation, but now it's on display for the whole world to see.",
"Juvenoia.\n\nBasically, generations don't understand each other. Each generations grows up in vastly different cultures and because we all live so closely, those cultural differences lead to friction. Each generation thinks the one before it was to strict and is holding the world back while the one that is coming after it is going to be the one to ruin the world.\n\nAlong with the differences in culture, each generation sees different problems and have different ways to handle these problems. \n\nFor example, middle age people, the ones most critical of Millenials, don't get why Millenials are having such a hard time getting on their own feet. They weren't faced with a poor economy when they were your age and they have since been able to build themselves up and aren't being affected nearly as badly as Millenials are. They aren't able to truly understand just how rough it can be to get started today. Instead, they think Millenials are just lazy and would rather complain until someone else does something for them.",
"I work with a bunch of millenials, and I love their energy, passion, and desire to make a difference. Where some of the agnst from my peers comes in (I'm 40) is the noticeable lack of critical thinking ability. I can get pretty much anyone to do just what they are asked, but in my line of work, the ability to anticipate and critically determine options and lay them out for executive consumption is more often missing with millenials.",
"Because you are always on our lawns. And the playing of the loud EDM music. Also, pull up your pants. \n\nIn seriousness, it's primarily a media creation, and the older (boomer) generation expecting new workers to be like some (false) memory of them as youngster. ",
"Too many of you where raised by helicopter parents \n\nHelicopter parents stunt their kids ability to face adversity and give them a inflated sense of esteem and entitlement.\n\n[This](_URL_0_) is what messed with your generation). And of course every parent made these mistakes, but enough did. ",
"I was born in 1991, making me 24 years old. I make 46'000 a year and live in Canada. I have 9,200 dollars of debt from a degree i didn't finish because I couldn't afford too and had to get a job. I husled for what little I make, And I'm in sales.\n\nThis is No one's fault and everyone's at the same time. My dad was born in 1956 and is 59 years old. When he was young he was taught \"the government will take care of everything, put your 40 hours in a week to your company and they will take care of you and your retirement and the next generation(s) will have the same promise.\n\nIn the late 1990's the internet blew up, Going to school for anything not based in STEM became worthless because Google was faster and more effective. Thousands of students got Degrees in psychology/philosophy \"English\" etc. These students (my friends) now work a Tim's Serving coffee's or flipping burgers at Wendys.\n\nThe anger comes from the fact that our parents (mine included) PROMISED us if we did well in school and got are degrees we would do fine and get hired right away. This is because that was what they were told, What our highschool teachers told them/and us, and the media. This is not true, and now we have crippling debt, living in Daddy's basement and there PISSED.\n\nAre we annoying generation absolutely, Facebook disgusts me yet I have one, and I spent way to much time on Reddit. We listen to horrible Hip-hop music (I love it, but i can admit little skill) and we dont understand why we cant all work for buzz feed.\n\n\nTLDR, parents were mislead, we were mislead, They dont understand why hard work doesn't pay off, and we dont either.",
"There is an extent to which every young generation gets judged and condescended. It's the natural state of things for the old to be disappointed, confused, or judgmental about the choices and lifestyles of the young.\n\nMillennials are an especially easy target. You've grown up in the \"easiest\" time in our history. As a generation you've never wanted for anything and you haven't yet been asked to sacrifice anything. \n\nWe're not fighting any major world wars. The economy is reasonably strong. Taxes are low. Interest rates are low. You've been well educated and have grown up around all this new technology that opens so many possibilities. From the perspective of an older person it **seems** as though the millennial generation **should** be poised for wild success.\n\nBut...you're not very successful. You're in debt. You still live with your parents. You aren't getting married. You can't find good jobs, and when you do it seems like they only last a few years before you switch to something else. You also don't seem to have the same \"American\" pioneering or innovative spirit.\n\nFrom the outside the whole generation seems to have problems that older people don't really understand. Or equally likely is that the older generation doesn't want to accept that your problems may be a result of their actions.\n\nYou complain a lot. You have your feelings hurt very easily. You're lazy. Even your sexuality is different from ours. You're weird and we don't understand you.\n\nThe cultural gap between people that were born into a world with the internet and people that remember the world before it is HUGE.\n\nAnyway, the hatred isn't justified. Millennials are doing fine - life is just different today than it was 20 years ago. ",
"Here's my 2 cents. And I'll explain a little about who I am, so you know where it's coming from. \n\nI consider myself a bit of a generational orphan. I'm technically a very late Gen-Xer, but they mostly don't want me. I was also a (very) early adopter of the internet, so culturally it's hard to say I'm not a millennial. But while I was on the internet in those early days, none of my peers were. I was raised by Boomers and also spent a ton of time with my Greatest Generation grandparents and great aunts. All of this is probably not that rare, but worth noting. \n\nI like a lot of things about millennials. They're nicer than kids my age were. More accepting. They seem to work harder at school and care more about their grades and future, whereas you could get your ass kicked for getting good grades when I was in school. They got gay marriage accepted and legalized. They're getting marijuana legalized. They're closing the gender gap and doing some painful but important work on racial equality. \n\nAt the same time, however, I do have some problems with them. They disdain free speech. A lot of the niceness, once you get to a personal level, is revealed as very fake. There seems to be a real lack of historical knowledge in them that I didn't see in previous generations. They all have criticisms and solutions for our societal woes, while having no idea what the root of those woes are, and in many cases that their \"solutions\" have already been tried and didn't work. (Ex: the \"safe spaces\" that exclude white people and/or men are wrong for the same reasons that it was wrong for places to exclude black people prior to the civil rights movement, but many/most millennials think it's \"totally different.\" It's not and history will prove me right on that. Watch.)\n\nThey have communication issues with older generations, too. Especially Gen-X. We (I mostly consider myself an Xer, even though it's more complicated than that for reasons stated above) are very cynical, whereas millennials don't get cynicism at all. We talk shit to our friends and family to show our love, and millennials recoil in horror and say \"why would you say such a thing?!!\" We hated artists who \"sold out\"; that term isn't even in the millennial vocabulary. If a band we liked did an endorsement deal, we'd completely abandon them because we knew, deep down, that their art wasn't art anymore, it was a corporate product. Whereas if a millennial's favorite youtuber scores a Coke commercial, the millennial is thrilled that their person made it. \n\nI could go on and on with specifics all day, but basically it's our normal inability to communicate across generations. We learned about the world when it was a little harder to do so. Now you've learned new things and don't care about what we learned, and we both think what we know is more important. \n\nIn conclusion I'd like to just say that this is fun to talk about but very superficial. Whether you're a Boomer or an Xer or a Millennial or one of the Greatest still hanging on, judge people as individuals. All Boomers aren't bad. All Millennials aren't bad. All Xers are awesome, though. So fuck you guys, I'm out! (Kidding in those last two sentences.)",
"Gen Xer here. Personally, I think every generation simply forgets who and what they were in their 20's. Every single criticism being lobbed at Millennials was lobbed at Generation X. Just as Millennials are proud of their \"hipster\" status, Gen X embraced it's designation as the \"slacker\" generation. We marched to the beat of our own drum, yadda yadda yadda... just like Baby Boomers were the original hippies and rejected their parents. \n\nThese generations grow up. Their worldview changes... it goes from looking at the big picture of the world at large while your only responsibility is to yourself and becomes much smaller... getting married, having kids... it does that to you. \n\nYou had fun in your 20's but then you \"settled down.\" You got married, had kids and worked hard in your chosen profession. You work, work work and you see these KIDS with no clue about the ways of the world and how it truly works thinking they have all the answers... they don't know what REAL work is. \n\nthat's the cycle EVERY generation will go through.. .will see. I was SHOCKED when I read Millennials posting stuff about Gen X how we just don't understand, how we had stuff handed to us on a platter (hardly), how we have always had a sense of purpose and knew what we would be doing... PSHAW! The slacker generation had no idea what it would be doing well into their 20's. Hell, into our 30's. \n\nThere ARE generational differences, don't get me wrong. Technology, for one. It embarrasses me how many of my fellow Gen Xers are computer illiterate. The modern web was built on the backs of Gen X. Gen Xers pushed the further development of cell phone tech, of computer integration in daily life. We were the first to have computers with easy access in schools. And here some of my brethren shun technology like it's written in Egyptian hieroglyphics! But the actions of the generations, their attitudes towards the previous and the following ones, are way more exactly alike than anyone usually wants to acknowledge. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz0o9clVQu8"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.reddit.com/r/lewronggeneration/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/LD0x7ho_IYc"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://media.cagle.com/10/2013/07/30/135351_600.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dfr81c | what advantage does dual exhaust have over single exhaust? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dfr81c/eli5_what_advantage_does_dual_exhaust_have_over/ | {
"a_id": [
"f35bxgd",
"f35er5p",
"f35f2pv"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"One way to look at a car engine is as if it were a giant air pump. The engine creates an enormous amount of noise and pollution in the form of exhaust, so that exhaust is channeled through emissions gear and a a muffler to reduce pollution and noise. You still want a lot of airflow, too, despite the restrictions.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nAn *honest* dual exhaust might try to improve airflow by running a line from each bank of cylinders into its own pipe, with double catalytic converters and double mufflers. But carmakers know that the vast majority of people don't look under a car to check. So they will prominently display dual exhausts while running both lines through the same single catalytic converter, for example. Or, if you're a Corvette, you have a couple of fake pipes.",
"More exhaust pipes means more airflow. More airflow means you can burn more fuel fully which means more combustion and more power.",
"There is no advantage afaik, only disadvantages for actual dual exhaust.\n\nGiven backpressure between tailpipes which are split on a V8 engine (left and right manifolds) doesn't do much. Each handles 4 exhaust valves which are on each side of the engine. If you look at the firing order for a V8 you will see it's not symmetric, so sometimes the left and the right pipes would fire causing different exhaust pressure rates as cylinders fire. \n\nOn a properly tuned single or cross pipe exhaust (fake 2 barrel exhaust with a pipe between them) the pressure going out the tailpipe(s) create kind of a constant vacuum which helps pull exhaust out of the combustion chamber when the exhaust valve opens. When it closes, there is a slight additional vacuum in the cylinder, so when the exhaust valve closes and the intake valve opens, it's already sucking fresh air in before the piston starts goes down to pull in fresh air causing a very slight effect similar to a turbocharger putting more O2 in faster.\n\nIt creates more horsepower and torque simply by leveraging the existing airflow that's already leaving that causes a vacuum via the exhaust valves.\n\nThere are a square-billion different exhaust and engine combos. That's what dynos are for. Install and test. Compare to the others. Repeat and select based on what you are doing. (Quick line, top speed, acceleration, etc) there are tradeoffs for everything. \n\nDon't get me started on a ELI40 on fluid dynamics and pre-ignition."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5dzyjd | does global warming/climate change mean more snow? | My friend and I just started a discussion about global warming together and I told him that there will be harsher winters/more snow because of the hotter air, causing it to have more moisture. He, on the other hand, said that there will be no snow because of the high temperatures in general. Can someone end who is correct and who is wrong, or are we both correct? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dzyjd/eli5_does_global_warmingclimate_change_mean_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"da8kgri",
"da8kuwj",
"da8l6mj"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It is possible that it can lead to more snow high in the mountains if they are tall enough, and in extreme northern latitudes but it will also mean that places that normally got snow 10 years ago will get less or no snow now. So you are both correct. It should also be noted that given enough warming that it can eventually get warm enough that there will be no snow anywhere. ",
"You are correct that warmer temperatures will mean more moisture in the atmosphere. In many areas of the world, the temperature is so low, that an increase in temperature by a few degrees will still keep the place well below freezing, meaning that there will still be snow, even if the atmosphere is warmer. On the other hand, areas which are just bordering on the freezing level may see less snow because an increase of a few degrees *will* put the place above freezing.\n\nFor example, in Antarctica, the average temperature in November at the Vostok station is about -40°C. If the average temperature goes up even by 10°C (which is a ton), it will still be easily cold enough to freeze, but there will be more available moisture for it to make snow.\n\nOn the other hand, the average November temperature in Vancouver is around 5°C, and it only really snows occasionally if it gets really cold one day. So here, a 10°C increase in temperature would essentially mean it will never again snow in Vancouver.\n\nSame increase in temperature, both experience an increase in precipitation, it's just one is still cold enough to snow, and the other isn't anymore.\n\nEdit: One more thing about climate change in general: It's important to keep in mind that climate change doesn't just mean \"warming\". Climate change is the broad term for effects stemming from an *increase of available energy in the atmosphere*. This extra energy may be spent by making the atmosphere warmer, by increasing the amount of moisture in the air, by making storms stronger and more frequent, etc,",
"In Buffalo, NY much of the snow occurs earlier in the winter as WI SD blow across Lake Erie, picking up moisture as it goes, and then dumping that snow across western NY. At some point every year Lake Erie freezes over, and the ice covering drastically reduced snowfall. With climate change, Lake Erie's ice season is shortening, and may disappear altogether, leading to increased snowfall for the area."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
22mu1z | what's a "hadron"? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22mu1z/eli5_whats_a_hadron/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgoc8xc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's a particle made up of quarks. Which are one of the lowest level building blocks that make up all the \"stuff\" around you.\n\nProtons and Neutrons are hadrons. Electrons are not though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
374kwb | how can we estimate the likelihood of life existing on other planets if we are limited to a paradigm based on earth life? | Are there certain fundamental principles that determine whether life is possible? I've always found it strange that we look for planets with water, for instance, as a necessary precursor for life. Isn't is possible that life of a planet that couldn't support Earth life, evolved to be able to survive on that planet?
tl;dr Aren't we being very limited by defining planets that could support life as planets that could support *Earth*-life? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/374kwb/eli5how_can_we_estimate_the_likelihood_of_life/ | {
"a_id": [
"crjmngt",
"crjmoi2"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"The way I think about it, it has nothing to do with planets that can support life like ours, but has more to do with just raw probability.\n\nIn all the billions or trillions of galaxies, its pretty egotistical to think that we're the only ones out there. I firmly believe that alien life does exist, we just haven't identified any yet.",
"It's not a problem of imagination. Scientists acknowledge the idea that extraterrestrial life may come in forms that we have never seen for terrestrial life.\n\nHowever, if we proceed under that assumption that alien life could be ANYTHING, then it could exist anywhere. And that's not enough information to conduct a search on. If we are going to look for life, we simply cannot examine every planet in extreme detail. We have to eliminate some targets closer than others so that our limited time and resources are used efficiently. \n\nSo, we have closely examined exactly 9 (or 8) planets, plus several hundred other objects. Exactly one of them has contained life, and that life was carbon based and requires water. Therefore if we are going to try and limit the search for planets with life, we should use the only information that we have about life.\n\nSo we look for planets that are the right distance from the sun, and we look for water. There may be life that we miss, but we think we will be more likely to find life using this method because we will be eliminating a huge amount of work on planets that are likely to not contain life."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
5tzjyl | how can the government track gps devices? | If I understand correctly GPS works because my cellphone receives a signal from a few satelites that basically represents the time on the clock of that satelite, and by reading the different times my phone can work out the distances to the satelites and map my location.
Now I've been told that a government/foreing military can find me if I use GPS (this was a conversation within the context of a military unit still using compasses in certain context because the GPS could be tracked). I don't understand how this would work given the above process.
ELI5? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tzjyl/eli5_how_can_the_government_track_gps_devices/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddq6lby"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"You're correct about GPS. A pure GPS device is just a radio receiver, it can't be tracked; and GPS satellites are just broadcasters, they have no idea what devices are listening. Your phone, though, uses a map of WiFi network identifiers and triangulates by cell phone signal as well, and that's trackable - heck, the phone company has to know what tower your cell phone is closest to for the technology to even work.\n\nBoth kinds of devices may save a record of your movements, which could be viewed later."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2qbd8i | what is irc chat and how do i use? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2qbd8i/eli5_what_is_irc_chat_and_how_do_i_use/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn4jyig",
"cn4k47b",
"cn4kkv7"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"IRC is a protocol used for chatting online with other people on the net.\n\nYou download a program such as mIRC, choose a server to connect to and then choose a channel to join. ",
"IRC is multiplayer notepad\n\ndownload mIRC and pick a group you want to talk in. ",
"IRC stands for Internet Relay Chat. It is an old protocol for online chat and is still used because it's lightweight and it's quite simple to use scripts to do a lot of things with it. \n\nDo you have a particular group you are interested in joining? Because there are a lot of IRC servers and you'll need to know exactly which server the group you want to join is using. \n\nYou do not need to use a client to access IRC. Most servers have a webchat that you can access through webchat. < servername here > .net. Other clients besides mIRC are HexChat and HydraIRC."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4gbrh3 | why does salt disappear from sunflower seeds after the bag has been opened? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gbrh3/eli5_why_does_salt_disappear_from_sunflower_seeds/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2g6yq3",
"d2g79jd"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"Do they taste less salty or do you mean the salt is less visible?",
"Because salt is hygroscopic (attracts and holds water) the moisture in the air will be absorbed by the salt crystals and essentially melt the salt crystals. The salt should still be there but just not in a form as easy to see. I guess in this more diffuse form it will seem less salty at times. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2q4zni | how do we know if the premium fuel we pay extra for is actually premium | It could be all unleaded but sold at 3 different octain levels. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2q4zni/eli5_how_do_we_know_if_the_premium_fuel_we_pay/ | {
"a_id": [
"cn2xq93"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Well, I think you misunderstand premium.\n\n > It could be all unleaded but sold at 3 different octain(sic) levels\n\nThat's exactly the difference between unleaded, plus, and premium: the octane level.\n\nI'll go one step further: premium isn't necessarily better. The reason that a higher octane may be needed is that your engine may have a high enough compression ratio that it would autoignite the fuel. This is called \"knock\".\n\nWhen you squeeze air, it gets hot from the compression, according to the [ideal gas law](_URL_0_). If you squeeze it hard enough, you can get the air temperature up to the point that the gasoline ignites without waiting for the spark from the spark plug. This is bad, because your engine is timed very specifically to fire right when the cylinder is at the top of the stroke.\n\nWhy wouldn't we just make sure that all cars can't do this? Because engine efficiency is directly related to compression ratio: higher compression ratios mean a more efficient (and more powerful) engine.\n\nSo high-end cars may need fuel that burns at a hotter, hot enough that they don't autoignite at higher compression ratios. This is what higher octanes do to the fuel, they raise its flash point. The \"premium\" sort of comes from the association with \"premium cars\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law"
]
] |
|
557aua | why is the drinking age in the us 21, while most other developed countries have the drinking age a few years younger? what was the reason the us changed it from 18 to 21, and has that change had any significant impacts? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/557aua/eli5_why_is_the_drinking_age_in_the_us_21_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8853lr",
"d885isa",
"d885mt9",
"d885o5z",
"d885ui9",
"d886xs0",
"d887m8x",
"d888kmq",
"d888xp9",
"d88949x",
"d88a000",
"d88a6iq",
"d88ccwb",
"d88fd7n",
"d88ny88"
],
"score": [
3,
4,
3,
12,
125,
395,
8,
46,
8,
4,
18,
4,
10,
7,
7
],
"text": [
"Simply put in Europe and other countries it's not viewed as a party drink. Its ok to have beer in a restaurant with your kids or even for your teenager to have one. Its a cultural drink. ",
"The frontal cortex in the brain responsible for decision making doesn't fully develop until age 26. So from a medical standpoint it makes sense for the drinking age to be 26. \n\nI believe it all comes to down to responsibility. A 21 year old will make better decisions than a 18 year old. ",
"I think it's because of our car culture and lack of public transit options.\n\nYoung people get killed driving at a higher rate than other age groups and their habit of choosing to drive while drunk makes it worse.",
"A major motivation for this was to prevent drunk driving among teens.",
"America is a far more car-centric society than most European countries. The raising of the drinking age was specifically prompted by drunk driving deaths.",
"OK I know that LMGTFY is mega-patronising but apparently all the other answers on here are breaking the rule of not-knowing-the-answer-and-just-rambling\n\nthe law in question is this:\n_URL_0_\n\nthe primary reason is to reduce driving deaths. Drinking age was set to 21 in most states when prohibition ended; it was reduced to 18 later on (when the \"age of adulthood\" was seen as 18 not 21) and a spike in road deaths made them decide to bring it back up again. (the law actually means that states get less funding if the drinking age is less than 21, so it's not a federal law setting the drinking age, it's kind of a bribe)",
"Well, after the 26th amendment was passed, the amendment that allowed 18 year olds to vote, most states changed their laws to allow 18 year olds to purchase and consume alcohol legally.\nAn increase in accidents caused by drunk driving led some states to raise the age to 19 or 20.\nThese days, the reason all states keep it at 21 is because of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), who strongly influenced legislation that required all states to enforce a minimum legal drinking age of 21 or else risk losing 10% of all federal highway construction funds.",
"Wisconsin was one of the last states to switch from 18 to 21. At the time the Federal Highway Commission? told Wisconsin that if they wanted federal funding, the drinking age would have to be 21. At the time, there was a huge number of car accidents resulting from DUIs along the Wisconsin and Illinois border. 18 yr olds were driving up from the Chicago suburbs, getting trashed, and then driving home. ",
"In Norway it's 18 years old for beer and wine (anything under 22% alcohol), for anything harder (above 22%) you must be 20 years old. Not that teenagers have any issues with getting their hands on hard booze though.",
"Have you ever met an 18 yr old in America?",
" Mr. Reagan addressed this issue in his appearance at River Dell High School in Oradell, N.J..\n\n''Some may feel that my decision is at odds with my philosophical viewpoint that state problems should involve state solutions, and it isn't up to a big and overwhelming Government in Washington to tell the states what to do,'' he said. ''And you're partly right.''\n\nBut he added that the problem of drunken driving was ''a national tragedy involving transit across state borders,'' and that it was one of a few ''special cases in which overwhelming need can be dealt with by prudent and limited Federal action.'' ",
"I always felt that it was kind of bullshit you are deemed an adult that can vote, serve your country, but tobacco products, be legally tried for murder, etc. etc. at the age of 18..... but you can't buy alcohol. I'm a 47 year old dude with young kids, I'm not exactly a conformist but not an anarchist. I see this as a legally slippery slope but it has withstood the test of time. Beats me??",
"The lack of a reliable public transportation option in pretty much anywhere that is not a large city.\n\nEveryone has a car. Everyone drives everywhere. You have to pretty much.\n\nDumb Teenagers + cars + booze = death",
"The drinking age use to be 21 in a lot of states. In the 70s we would drive to New York from New Jersey to have drinks. The Feds decided that young drivers were involved in too many accidents and threatened to withhold highway funds to those states that didn't comply. States can still lower the age if they wanted to. The Feds did the same thing with forcing the speed limit to be lowered to 55. This was also the time when Drunk Driving was becoming a big hot button issue. MADD started not long after. IIRC before then the legal limit in NJ was around .006 before this.",
"Well amazingmikeyc answered why the drinking age was raised back to 21, but it only raises more questions, like \"why was there a spike in fatal accidents?\". Americans are never taught to drink responsibly. It's a cultural taboo in America to provide your under-18 children alcohol. As a result, they sneak behind their parents' back. Because there is no supervision and they are kids, they don't stop drinking until they can barely walk, nevermind drive. Because the behavior pattern is established, it continues into their 20's until they either mature and realize they are an idiot, or until they hurt themselves or someone else."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4u6br7 | what will happen now that there are leaked dnc emails showing corruption and collusion? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u6br7/eli5_what_will_happen_now_that_there_are_leaked/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5n7mlo",
"d5n7zfk"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Absolutely nothing. Corruption and collusion is the name of the game in politics. Having proof of it or not does not matter, as there is no method of actually holding people accountable for it. The people in power are the ones doing it, and knowing about doesn't take away or threaten their power in any way.",
"Keep in mind that the DNC is not a government institution. It is essentially a private organization. So it is unlikely that any \"corruption and collusion\" will result in any criminal charges, since it is unlikely that any laws were clearly broken. \n \nIf anyone is shown to have behaved totally inappropriately, the worst that will probably happen to them is that they will have to resign. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
120lyt | compression and tensile stresses | Writing a paper about arches, came across compression and tensile stresses. I don't need to explain these in said paper, so no rush, but I am very curious what these are. Everything I've seen online hurts my head. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/120lyt/eli5_compression_and_tensile_stresses/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6r5jsj"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"When you take a solid object and squeeze the molecules together tighter than they naturally prefer, you have applied \"compressive stress\", similar to when you take a coil spring and squeeze it. If you remove the forces that are compressing the object, it will try to return to its former shape and relieve the stress. Tensile stress is the opposite...instead of squeezing the molecules together, you are stretching them apart. \n \nIt is possible for one object to have compressive stress in some areas and tensile stress in some others, depending upon the forces that are acting on the entire object. This would be quite common in a bridge. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4ue7j7 | let's say a sailboat had a giant fan screwed onto the deck. would the boat move with the power of the fan? | Yes, everyone propably knows that it wont, but no matter how much i think about it, it doesnt make sense for it to not move. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ue7j7/eli5_lets_say_a_sailboat_had_a_giant_fan_screwed/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5oyeco",
"d5oyf1p",
"d5p263w"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
3
],
"text": [
"Boats with fans on the back definitely exist. Just have a look at _URL_0_",
"The fan push backwards on the boat with a greater force than the air pushes forwards on the sail (Because the air stream from the fan slows down a little before it hits the sail). So really, it ought to move in reverse and it'd move faster without the sail there at all.\n\nEqual and opposite reactions. If a fan pushes air in one direction, the fan itself is pushed in the opposite direction. Now normally you never notice because household fans don't have enough power to overcome friction and move themselves. A big industrial fan can though, and they're a menace when they get loose.",
"Think about what a fan is: It's basically a giant propeller, the same thing planes use to move through the air.\n\nIt's Newton's Third Law: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, as the fan forces the air into the sail, an equal and opposite force is pushing the fan (which is attached to the boat) in the opposite direction.\n\nAlso, because the sail wouldn't catch all the air from the fan, the force acting in the opposite direction would be slightly stronger.\n\nEasier (and better) solution would be to point the fan off the back of the boat...you know, like a fan boat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Air_boat.jpg"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
32elrs | how can we be tired all day, until we actually go to bed? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/32elrs/eli5_how_can_we_be_tired_all_day_until_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqahzik",
"cqau2db"
],
"score": [
8,
5
],
"text": [
"Having this problem right now.... Would love a reason why.",
"This is usually a mental issue. People who hates their job, life, chores, etc...is tired all day because they don't want to do it(I don't blame you since life these days feels like being a machine). Once bed time comes, you feel free because it's the end of the day. Basically, you have no real goals in life, hate your current situation and/or find it boring.\n\nI used to have this problem. Took 2 years to break the cycle. You just gotta find something you want to look forward to waking up for. Else, you may eventually end up in depression."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3b7q65 | how does the power-check technology work on aa/aaa batteries ? | I'm talking about [this](_URL_0_). How can it know how much power is left, and make a cool yellow bar appear ? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3b7q65/eli5_how_does_the_powercheck_technology_work_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"csjmlxn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I was Googling to find the answer (because I was curious too) when I came across this other ELI5 thread with what I presume is the right answer? _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/ZKwIpag.jpg"
] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11h5ev/how_does_duracell_powercheck_work/"
]
] |
|
4rolfl | how does the brain know where a nerve is in the body, especially when the nerve has been moved? | I had an Ulnar Nerve Transposition, which means that the nerve that runs through the notch in my elbow has been moved to run around my elbow instead. When I touch the place where the nerve runs now I can feel the pressure where it runs now instead of where it was originally located. How does my brain know where the nerve is at now? Why doesn't my brain think that the nerve is still in it's old location? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4rolfl/eli5how_does_the_brain_know_where_a_nerve_is_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d52xvkw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Other answers aren't really answering your question... You are pressing the skin over your nerve which isn't actually stimulating the nerve. The nerve only gets stimulated when the pressure receptor on its end gets stimulated. These pressure receptors are embedded in the skin so if you press above your nerve you are triggering these receptors that connect to your nerve. Your nerve is just a wire that connects these receptors to your brain and it doesn't matter where it is.\n\n\n\nIf you knock your nerve or it gets trapped then the nerve gets directly stimulated but this isn't \"normal\"."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
yp98x | why it doesn't matter how much you spend on a hdmi cable, and then how some retailers end up charging so much? | I'm asking this more so I can explain to my sister who can't understand why a $1,000 would even exist if it's no better than a $20 one.
Seriously, why does this market for overpriced cables even exist? It's not like like buying an overpriced watch, no-one will ever even see the cable to see how much you spent on it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/yp98x/eli5_why_it_doesnt_matter_how_much_you_spend_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"c5xllhs",
"c5xlnq9",
"c5xlreo",
"c5xlsmx",
"c5xlw3k",
"c5xml4g",
"c5xn4d7",
"c5xn73y",
"c5xnf4r",
"c5xnl9e",
"c5xp4nz",
"c5xpbj9",
"c5xqgp9",
"c5xr146",
"c5xs7j6",
"c5xs7qh",
"c5xtf0g",
"c5xtfq0",
"c5xttbs",
"c5xuyv3",
"c5xv0ao",
"c5xv1id",
"c5xva6y",
"c5xw3nu",
"c5xweib",
"c5xxg7i",
"c5xyesz",
"c5xz80d",
"c5y0odp",
"c5y1xf7",
"c5y26gg"
],
"score": [
15,
62,
173,
54,
4,
9,
5,
3,
11,
22,
4,
5,
2,
2,
12,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They did the same with \"Monster\" speaker cables. The reality is, some people will pay much more as long as they think they're getting a better product. It doesn't matter if they actually are.",
"Your sister is demonstrating the thought process that allows these companies to exist. \"This cable costs $1000, ergo it must be THE BEST cable and give me a superior audio experience, therefore I will buy it.\" If you have more money than sense, there is a company happily waiting to take it from you.",
"HDMI cables are digital, so they can't *kinda* work. Either the binary data is getting through consistently or it is not; in the first case the cable works perfectly, and in the second case it doesn't work at all.",
"It's because you make a $990 profit on a $1,000 cable, versus making $10 profit on a $20 cable. Would you rather have $990, or $10?\n\nIt's ego, it's placebo, it's any number of factors that drive people to waste money.\n\nNow, beware- you're going to get some knucklehead come in here and say \"it's a digital signal, they cable doesn't matter\". That's **wrong**. You need the proper impedance, the proper shielding, and the proper geometry to make a good digital cable. If you don't have that, you'll get a lot of errors and have a lot of problems. I've had a HDMI cable that would make flickering white lines across the screen, probably because it was cheaply built or had a bad connection or was damaged. However, there is nothing to gain going from an adequate cable to a perfect cable. Once it's good enough for the signal to get through, it's not going to get any better with a digital signal. Anyone who says a better cable will make the picture sharper or more colorful or anything like that is lying to you. And it turns out that an adequate hdmi cable is not very expensive. You shouldn't be paying more than $10 for a 6 footer, and you could be paying quite a bit less than that.",
"There are two different kinds of cables; analogue and digital.\n\nDigital cables are used to transmit digital signals; HDMI, DVI, etc.\nAnalogue cables transmit analogue signals; Composite (YRW), Coax, etc.\n\nDigital signals can be thought of as lights on or lights off.\nAnalogue is more of a dimmer switch.\n\nDigital cables are basically all the same, the signal is the same as long as the cable works. \nAnalogue cables can be different depending on the quality of the wire, shielding, resistance and interference.\n \nBasically cheap Digital cables are ok, but cheap analogue can some times suck depending on usage.",
"One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that people are generally willing to spend more money on an accessory for a product that they already paid a lot of money for.\n\nKeep in mind the people buying expensive, over-priced Monster cables probably just bought an expensive TV. Shelling out an extra $100, for what in their mind is the ultimate experience, is a pretty easy thing to rationalize.\n\nIt's like when you buy a new computer/laptop. Perhaps you might easily spend $20 here, $50 there, even $80 here for a fancy case - easier to justify since you just spend hundreds if not $1,000 on your new machine.",
"Many people are dumb. The smart people try to figure out how to take as much money away from the dumb people. ",
" > how some retailers end up charging so much?\n\nI've a pair of dirty socks, and I'm asking $100 for them. If someone, somewhere, is willing to pay that much, then why shouldn't I?",
"Side Story: I was at PC Richards getting a TV for my job when I saw them promoting Monster HDMI cables by showing the same movie on two TV's. The TV with the monster cable did look MUCH better than the other one, but that was only because the other TV was connected with composite cables.",
"I've been developing connectors for high-speed and power applications for 12 years so I have a little background.\n\nHDMI is the digitial alternative to existing RF(analog). Analog being classic coax or composite video cables with the RCA jacks.\n\nHDMI is more then just the connector interface. It governs the performance of the whole channel otherwise know as the cable. This standard is known as EIA/CEA-861.\n\nSo why does a $5 HDMI cable perform as well as the $1000 Monster? Think of the cable as being a highway, digital signal as a car, and EIA/CEA-861 as the NTSB. The highway has to meet or exceed a set of performance requirements. In very simplistic terms, Impedance, Cross-Talk, and mode conversion. For our road analogy lets use the terms pavement quality, traffic lane separation, and ample on/off ramps.\n\nHDMI was designed in 2002. So manufactures and engineers have had 10 years to refine the design and reduce the price to manufacture the cables.\n\nSo why a $1000 HDMI cable? I would venture to guess it is classic combination of ignorance and greed. Is the construction superior on the $1000 cable? I would certainly hope so but lets return to the highway analogy. Regardless of the highway(cable) your car(signal) is always the same. So while the $1000 highway may be paved in gold with lanes 12 feet wide your car only requires a asphalt road.\n\nI hope this helps you understand. ",
"It's about price sensitivity.\n\nMost people are very price sensitive about their TV. So they look at ads for the cheapest place to buy. This drives down margins on TVs.\n\nThen they get to the store, and oh, I need a cable and just grab one. Stores know this and jack up the margins on the cables. \n\nAs an educated consumer you can be price sensitive on both, and place your order at _URL_0_ for your cables.",
"Suuuuurrreeeeee...... your sister..........",
"In short, overpriced cables exist because people (myself included) think that if something costs more, it must be better.\n\nThe fact is that over short lengths it doesn't matter what quality HDMI cable you use, so long as all the contacts on one end are joined to the contacts on the other. It only matters on longer lengths when interference comes into play.",
"It's the audiophiles playing Emperor's New Clothes.\n\nThere is this very ardent group of music enthusiasts who are obsessed with getting the best sound possible. Their \"improvements\" get increasingly subtle that only someone with a supposedly trained ear can tell the difference.\n\nSo they play this little game, where everyone pretends to hear stuff that isn't there, because no one wants to admin they don't have the ear to hear it. All fueled by an industry that is more than willing to sell them they quackery they crave to one up their friends. After all, if you just shelled out $20K for your vacuum tube bidirectionally wired system with teak auto-dampening speaker cases, what is another grand on magic wires?\n\nThe reality is most audiophile can't tell the difference between $1000 cables and lamp cord. ",
"I grow tired of these discussions, because nobody ever touches on the actual issue here: simple markup.\n\nThere is nothing inherently wrong with making a $3000 diamond encrusted gold and platinum HDMI cable, as long as it still delivers the digital signal across its length. However, these items are way, way, way outside of the practical spectrum.\n\nSo, what is practical? Well, even the Monster cables can be practical, depending on your needs and usage.\n\nA Monster cable is a premium product. They are designed and manufactured differently than the grand majority of other OEM off the shelf HDMI cables. They put a lot of attention to detail in their products, including stress relief on the tips, higher quality shielding, and gold plated contacts.\n\nIn the digital realm this *will not affect the signal quality*, however, it **does** affect the robustness and life span of the cable under harsher conditions.\n\nA cheapo HDMI cable may be more likely to fray, or possibly end up with oxidized contacts over time. Whereas gold plating and stress relief will alleviate these issues.\n\nSo, why are Monster cables so much money when relatively similar cables are not?\n\nIt's a retail product environment slash markup issue.\n\nCase in Point:\n\nLet's say we have 2 cables: 10 ft cheapo monoprice for $15 vs a Monster 10 ft for $50.\n\nIn an online environment, where you pay drop ship or warehouse prices, you're going to pay typical 'street price'. So the Monster cable will be purchased from an authorized monster distributor, and will charge the warehouse let's say $40 for their $50 street price cable.\n\nThe cheapo cable may be purchased from a no-name chinese distributor, for probably $1-2 each in bulk. So the warehouse might pay $2 for their $15 'street price' cable.\n\nNow, let's examine the cost differences there: The cheapo cable only has to make up for manufacturing and distribution in their cost, so they can easily let it go for a couple dollars. The Monster cable has a slightly increased BOM (bill of materials), but also a well known *brand* associated with it. So that $40 goes towards the materials, the manufacturing, the distribution, AND the marketing and research and design that goes into them (yes, there are people that get paid to design Monster cables, and people who get paid to determine how to market them, etc).\n\nSo this explains why a Monster cable might be much more money street price vs a cheapo HDMI cable.\n\nNow, let's examine the issue of why Monster cables seem like a price gouge in a retail environment.\n\nTypically, retail markup is roughly 50% on products (based on my experience). Some items are known as *low margin* such as laptops or HDTVs, others are higher margin such as accessories. 50% however is still usually a good rough estimate to make sure the business is keeping enough incoming revenue to afford taxes, labor, benefits, insurance, rent, utilities, maintenance, etc.\n\nSo, standard markup then dictates that in a retail environment your $15 cheapo cable would be marked up to $30 and your Monster cable would be marked up to $100. Both of these products are marked up 50% (based on price) and therefore have the same relative margin.\n\nHowever, for one, the retail business most likely can go straight to a cheap distributor for their no-name cables, since specifics or model numbers don't matter, and they may be able to get a hold of that $15 10ft cable for $2.\n\nSo does the business then take that extra money they're saving and give it back to the customer? Not usually. If they were to stick to 50% markup the cable should sell for $4. However, there is a perceived value involved, and therefore the business may charge $15-20 for that cable. Now they're making up to 1000% markup.\n\nSo when things happen like the radio shack cost / price sheet getting leaked, and people see all the Monster cables that cost 40-50 dollars being sold for 90-100, they freak out (it was even on reddit a few years back).\n\nNobody stops to complain though about the 1000% markup on cheap cables. If you were to claim that a business was 'ripping you off' then you should be bitching about the massive markup on cheap, shitty products instead.\n\nSo it's best to compare Apples to Apples.\n\nNow, Best Buy is still going to push the Monster cables hard, since you may only need 1 HDMI cable for that TV's lifetime, and if you buy a shitty cheap cable that technically makes way more margin based on cost, it's still less total revenue (say 13$ vs $50 profit). So the BB rep is going to want to maximize *price* on your sale.\n\nWhereas if it's something that you're going to maybe need to buy again in the future (think Guitar Center and all of their audio/analog cables that are bound to get worn down and abused), they instead want you to buy the shitty cable, because they know it's gonna get torn to shit, and you'll be back to buy another. So with just a couple repeat visits, you've given them way more money than a Monster cable ever would have, and they barely had to invest anything in inventory to stock it!\n\nI've used cheapo cables, I've used and purchased Monster cables, and I can say that from a signal quality level both are identical in the digital realm. In the analog realm, a decent cheapo cable with gold plating should sound about the same as a Monster cable.\n\nHowever, the quality of a Monster cable really is extraordinary. I have a couple Monster guitar cables and a Monster stereo phono patch cable, and the shielding, the thickness, the stress relief, are all miles beyond any other cable you buy.\n\nI didn't pay retail, though. I bought them at street price or on closeout.\n\nSo my final recommendation is go with a cheap cable for HDMI, and go with Monster cables if you need robustness and reliability or analog signal integrity, and NEVER BUY A MONSTER CABLE IN RETAIL.",
"So imagine you're a DVD player, and your friend 10 miles away is the TV. You need to get a message (the signal) to your friend.\n\nAn analog cable would be kind of like a long chain of people playing \"telephone.\" You whisper it to one person, who whispers it to the next closest person, who whispers it to the next closest peson, etc. until it finally gets whispered to your friend. As you can imagine, it's very possible for your signal to get messed up along the way. Some of the words in your message might be mumbled and incoherent by the time the message gets all the way there, due to somebody not hearing or speaking correctly along the way. In this case, it would make sense to upgrade the cable to preserve the message. You might pay for more people so they can stand closer together, get them hearing aids, etc. That would be like upgrading an analog cable. It makes sense because it's very easy for little pieces of the message to become degraded along the way.\n\nA digital cable, like HDMI, would be more like typing out a letter and sending it through FedEx to your friend. The FedEx truck might break down, but as long as the message gets there you can be sure it was the right message. It's not like the words are going to get blurred out on the way there or anything. Now imagine putting gold rims on the FedEx truck and expecting the quality of the letter to improve. That's what upgrading a digital cable is like.",
"I work at an \"amazon showroom\" store *cough cough* and things like hdmi cables are expensive because thats where all the mark up is. Tvs and mac books have little to no mark up (no profit). So things like controllers, cables, accessories have a large mark up to compinsate. ",
"I bought a 24 foot hdmi cable for $6. I laugh at people who buy 6 foot monster cables for $50",
"The same reason Starbucks costs almost $5 now. People would rather pay $20 at the radioshack down the street than wait 4 days for it to be shipped to their house. $20 really isn't that much money if you want to get your new TV working today.\n\nIt's even more noticeable with batteries between stores. The same pack of 4 double A Engergizer batteries will either cost $0.50 or $8.00 depending on which store you go to.",
"Some HDMI cables are insulated so that they are more \"fit\" to be installed like inside a wall or something of the sort. Other than that, there isn't any difference.\n\nI used to work at Best-Buy, and accessories are where Best-Buy makes all their money. A 120 dollar 4 foot Monster Cable? Best-Buy paid around 3 dollars for it.",
"Wait, so you are saying Best Buy LIED TO ME?? Bastards!",
"Why do people sell homeopathy? Because rubes buy it. ",
"You can buy them from £1 shops/$1 stores. They honestly do the same job, and I mean exactly the same.",
"Because people lie, Susie. Because. People. Lie.",
"Cuz ppl r dum.",
"I buy my HDMI cables from \"$5 and below\" (a store where everything is $5.00 or below) and I have never had a problem. I couldnt imagine paying $20.00 for a HDMI cable, that's robbery!",
"I didn't see that anyone posted this but here's a great article about HDMI cables, they run through some fairly extensive tests. This may settle some of the arguments I've seen about HDMI and if signal quality can truly degrade. In a nutshell: Yes, but only when you're running fairly long distances.\n\n[The Truth about Monster Cable](_URL_0_)",
"I recently wrote a thing about this (well, about all sorts of audiovisual cables). [Here, let me spam it for you.](_URL_0_)",
"They're all made in China from the same factory. Probably. ",
"I'd expect that some cables are specially shielded to help filter noise, and as such are a higher quality, but unless you're in an area that is specifically susceptible to noise, then I imagine you'll be perfectly fine with a regular $20 cable.\n\nThe only reason you'd need a more expensive one would be if you noticed transmission issues of some kind.",
"With analog transmissions, the quality of the cable can make a difference in the sound the speakers emit.\n\nWith digital transmissions, as long as the digital signal can make it to the end of the cable, the sound will be perfectly reproduced by the digital device that gets the data(signal), [As perfectly as that device is capable of doing, and as perfectly as the sound was recorded in the first place] "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"monoprice.com"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://gizmodo.com/268788/the-truth-about-monster-cable-part-2-verdict-cheap-cables-keep-upusually?tag=gadgetshdmicablebattlemodo"
],
[
"http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/376468/is-it-worth-paying-for-premium-cables"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2gly05 | what exactly am i downloading/uploading on a speedtest? | How is speed measured, and what exactly am I downloading/uploading when doing a speedtest? Is it empty/junk info, or is it some standard file? Also, should I be worried that it might contain spyware/viruses?
Edit: Thank you for the explanations! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gly05/eli5_what_exactly_am_i_downloadinguploading_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckkcv04",
"ckkefka",
"ckkmvk5",
"ckkpbl4"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I've looked into this. I was not able to recognize a file format. Here's how I'd do it:\n\nDOWNLOAD TEST:\n\nI'd make sure the client pulls data and then deletes it quickly. You don't want to have a producer/consumer problem throw of speeds so it's not going to let the browser cache the file on the local dist. I'd guess it's just random bits, or...if not, it's treated as if it is. For this reason, i don't think you need to worry about viruses - the data is never re-constituted into a file and never persisted on your local computer.\n\nUPLOAD TEST\n\nI'd have the client generate data. I'm pretty sure that speedtest is doing this because it doesn't persist the download file (in memory and on disk would both be observable) so it doesn't have a big file to upload. So..it generates data. Plus, it can easily pace data generation without having to worry about file reading slowness, so it's better results regardless.",
"It's generally highly incompressible data, like MP3 audio or H.264 video.",
"it's essentially static. random or pseudo-random information is completely incompressible. ",
"Download\n\"Your computer downloads small binary files from the web server to the client, and we measure that download to estimate the connection speed.\"\n\nUpload\n\"A small amount of random data is generated in the client and sent to the web server to estimate the connection speed.\"\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://support.speedtest.net/entries/20862782-How-does-the-test-itself-work-How-is-the-result-calculated-"
]
] |
|
3mqizl | car breathalyzers. why not inflate a balloon before drinking and then use that to start the car? | What countermeasures are there to prevent this? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3mqizl/eli5_car_breathalyzers_why_not_inflate_a_balloon/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvh7i8u",
"cvh7nd7",
"cvh7td1",
"cvh7xs3"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
3,
5
],
"text": [
"Would not work. No pressure to move that air through the device. You must be an alcoholic haha.",
"Not enough pressure, you have to blow into those things pretty hard and for an unusually long amount of time. \n\nSource: grew up around alcoholics who weren't very good at hiding it. ",
"Having served a period of time with an interlock device, this exact example is in one of their instructional videos that you have to watch at the court-mandated class. And no, it would never work. You have to sustain a pretty strong exhale for a few seconds until you hear a 'click' inside the device which means it received the correct amount of air.",
"There are several things you have to do when breathing into a breathalyzer to make it work. One includes humming. The device will want you to hum. Here's a full list. \n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://carbreathalyzerhelp.com/car-breathalyzer-breathing-right-way-hum/"
]
] |
|
50yhqr | why does playing any two black piano keys sound nice while playing some 2 white piano keys doesn't? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50yhqr/eli5_why_does_playing_any_two_black_piano_keys/ | {
"a_id": [
"d77wkua",
"d77x33c",
"d77zyoq"
],
"score": [
7,
8,
4
],
"text": [
"Basically, black keys are always spaced apart. White keys are not always spaced.\nNotes that are next to each other \"battle each other\" which creates a uncomfortable sound. Notes that are spaced apart battle less.\nThere are some notable exceptions (Tritones, minors etc).\n",
"We hear certain intervals as dissonance. Intervals such as a 2nd, 7th and an augmented 4th (tritone) create this dissonance. The only real dissonance you can create by playing two black keys on a piano are a 2nd or a minor 7th (not as dissonant to us as a major 7th). So basically, black keys give you fewer opportunities to create dissonance.\n\nEdit: wanted to add \"tritone\" to augmented 4th (diminished 5th)",
"Just like you have a minor and a major scale, there are many other types of scales. The black keys make a pentatonic major scale (on F#/Gb), which is just a type of scale made up of 5 notes (instead of 7 like in the 'normal' major or minor scale). The reason these notes sound nice together is because of the way the actual sounds interact. \n\nA note is just a sound wave that is 'waving' at a certain frequency. However, when you hear a note from an instrument, you don't just hear one 'pure' sound wave, you hear a combination of certain other sound waves all compressed into one super wave (in a superposition). These other sound waves are called overtones (or harmonics). \n\nHow does this affect our pentatonic scale? Notes that are 'closer' on the overtone series to each other sound better, because they are more closely related (their overtones match up better than if they weren't so well matched, so there is less dissonance caused by there sound waves combining in 'weird' dissonant ways). The notes of a pentatonic scale all have overtones that match up relatively closely to each other, so no matter what combination of the black keys we play on the piano, they all sound not too bad."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2w9mvk | how is underage marriage handled when traveling to different countries? | For instance, in Mexico it would be legal for a 15 year old girl and a 30 year old man to marry. If said couple was traveling in the US would it constitute statutory rape or would their relationship be exempted somehow? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w9mvk/eli5_how_is_underage_marriage_handled_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"coow351"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"I believe by treaty the U.S. recognizes these marriages, at least for travelers. Also, some states allow marriages (with parental consent) that other states do not , yet are recognized by other states. I think. Perhaps if your example were more extreme...like a 9 year old married to a 30 year old? 15 is just one year difference from many states and many states allow under sixteen marriages."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
61l3g9 | when you're sleeping and quite lucid how do you feel tactile sensations without actual physical stimuli? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/61l3g9/eli5_when_youre_sleeping_and_quite_lucid_how_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"dffbevd"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Everything you experience in life - from tactile sensation, to emotion, taste, everything - is processed in your brain. Think of all the senses and chemicals that are produced as input, but your brain is where it's actually experienced. \n\nWhen you dream, it's like a program running on its own. You can experienced anything possible without the physical input. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4go614 | why does your face get red when you have a coughing fit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4go614/eli5_why_does_your_face_get_red_when_you_have_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2ja8nh"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When coughing, your body is expelling oxygen from your lungs. You will notice a similar effect when holding your breath until you choke, by the way.\n\nThe body closes arteries that lead to the rest of the body, and forces blood into the head to preserve the brain. The brain needs oxygen, so all oxygen-rich blood is moved to the brain to keep it alive as long as possible. \n\nWhen coughing, because your body is not taking in any oxygen, or is expelling more than it can take in, the brain protects itself by hoarding all the oxygen, and essentially would rather allow every other part of your body die before allowing itself to go.\n\nWhat a greedy little jerk."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1h7o12 | acceleration is (m/s^2)... what the hell is s^2? | So... what is a second squared? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1h7o12/acceleration_is_ms2_what_the_hell_is_s2/ | {
"a_id": [
"carmfmd",
"carmfv4",
"carmjf0"
],
"score": [
9,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"When you measure the rate of change of your position, you measure your velocity in meters travelled per second, right? \n \nSo when you want to measure the rate of change of your *velocity* (your acceleration), you measure your meters per second change, per second. Or m/s^2 .",
"what is distance? Meters (m)\n\nWhat is speed? Meters per second (number of meters moved per unit time m/s)\n\nWhat is accelleration? Meters per second per second (number of meters per second moved per second or change in the 'speed' per unit time)\n\nThis is m/s/s which simplifies to m/s^2.\n\nFor the simplification:\n\nThe fraction can be re written as (m/s)/(s/1) remembering how to work with fractions to divide you 'invert' one and multiply numerators and denominators.\n\nSo (m/s)/(s/1) = (m x 1)/(s x s) = m/s^2",
"Acceleration is the rate of change in velocity per time interval. Let's say we're measuring velocity in meters per second. To measure acceleration we're looking at the change in velocity (meters per second) every second. So the unit becomes meters per second per second. Or m/s^2."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4hbe1l | server virtualization. | Got a tour of a data center yesterday and this concept scrambled my brain a bit. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4hbe1l/eli5_server_virtualization/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2otocz",
"d2otywd",
"d2ou0pd",
"d2ovqp1",
"d2oykst",
"d2p9nx9"
],
"score": [
2,
42,
5,
2,
71,
2
],
"text": [
"Imagine that you took all the hardware on your computer and simulated it in a program. When you installed an operating system, the everything it asked for was there and everything it tried to do was done and it couldn't tell the difference.\n\nThat's virtualization.",
"Okay, so in the beginning you had the warehous sized vacuum tube computer......ok lets skip the beginning......\n\nIn the middle you had servers. You bought a server, which is just a computer that is used to serve a particular function in your network like serve a webpage, or sort and send email back and forth, or host a database. You had to buy the server, or rent somebody elses, and you had to host that physical server in a data center which provided it with power and network connections etc. \n\nWhen computers were slow enough, memory was expensive enough, hard drives expensive enough, etc etc this made sense to have dedicated machines. \n\nThen came the cloud and virtualization. Computers got so fast, and had so much memory so cheaply, that many servers sat around idling most of the time. So virtualization comes in and instead of the server or service running once, you logically divide the operating system up into virtual servers like a VMWare device and you have multiple virtual servers, on the same physical server hardware. This let you make sure that the server hardware was always doing something instead of just sitting idly. \n\nThe more virtual servers or services that the physical server hardware hosts, the more it's memory and CPU are utilized and the cheaper your operating costs because you buy 1 expensive server instead of several expensive servers. It also cuts down on your maintenance costs because there is only the one physical machine, which also cuts down on server room costs, power, cooling, etc. \n\nBut lets say that your server can handle 4 1/2 virtual servers and you have 4 servers total. You can't have 1/2 a server. But if you run those physical servers in a cluster and combine all of their resources, then those 1/2 servers add up and you get 18 virtual servers by combining them, instead of 16 servers and 4 half servers. \n\nTake this and scale it up to hundreds or thousands of servers, and you get 'the cloud'. Clouds are basically big server farms that operate together to host virtual servers. Because there are so many physical hardware devices involved, they always have computing resources to spare to handle surges in server demand or load. You also save money through scaling which lets you offer server hosting for pennies on the dollar what it would cost to buy a single server, host it, etc etc. \n\n\n- TLDR Virtualization tricks the computer hardware into running multiple copies of windows, or linux, or whatever you want all at the same time by emulating a computer bios, CPU, memory, disk etc. The virtual operating system thinks it's running on a whole computer, when in reality it's an emulated one running inside of a sofware program like VMware ESXI etc. This lets powerful servers with many CPU cores and lots of ram, run several emulated virtual servers all at the same time and share the load across them to maximize the amount of work the actual server hardware performs so it's never sitting idle wasting money. ",
"Instead of a single operating system running on a single machine, you can have many operating systems running on a single machine where the resources are shared or allocated on a per-instance basis. \n\nThink of it like pizza. When you buy a pizza from somewhere like < insert chain here > , they divide the whole pizza into slices, fit for what a single person needs at a time. Each slice represents a virtual instance of the physical unit with part of the overall resources (toppings) just allocated for that slice. One slice is reserved just for system operations and running the underlying software to facilitate each virtual instance.",
"Solid answers all around. Thanks, guys! ",
"You've already had a bunch of fairly technical answers, so I'll just give you my favorite analogy for this topic. It's like an apartment building where the physical server is the building and it's broken up in to apartments (the virtual servers). All of your resources, space, utilities, power, are physically attached to and come into through the building, but once there are divvied up in to the units. Each unit is its own household, the size may vary, the amount of the buildings resources it uses can be very different; but each unit is entirely separate from the others and even has its own address. You can continue with the apartment analogy with purpose and content for each unit, but that's basically it; physical server = big apartment building, virtual servers = apartments.",
"You turned on a single computer in the past running a Windows or Mac operating system, and then could launch multiple programs at once, right?\n\n\nNow you can turn on a single computer and it runs multiple operating systems at once."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4fochh | what are the properties that form the basis of making crystals special/mystical/powerful in lore/mythology/culture? what do people use them for in real life other than as decoration, and how/why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fochh/eli5_what_are_the_properties_that_form_the_basis/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2amhsw",
"d2aq7ip"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It probably has to do with the value of rare earth minerals/gems. In ancient times brick, granite, marble, Gold, Silver, Rubies, Opals etc all were used in architecture and decoration. Crystals, Gold Marble were used to create shrines, spiritual statues, adorn charms and totems to ward off spirits, increase vitality, bring luck, abundance to its subjects. Superstion and sophestry are the basis of the crystal pseudoscience.",
"In real life, crystals are used all the time by scientists for their unique photoelectric properties. For example, quartz crystals are used in watches, and some of the earliest lasers were made with rubies."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1mwqne | why haven't there been many musicians who could be known in hundreds of years? | I was watching TV with my 7-year-old niece when a commercial came on (I've forgotten what the commercial was about) that played Beethoven's 5th Symphony, just the part when it goes "bum bum bum buuuuum."
Anyway, niece said she likes that song and I told her it's by Beethoven and she confused him with the St. Bernard from the movies. I told her that he was a classical composer from the 1800s and she seemed unimpressed until I said "that was like 200 years ago!" My boyfriend said "Yeah, he's just that good. We're still listening to his music after all this time."
One of my favorite radio stations plays "4 in a row by the Fab 4 at 4" every weekday and I hear them from time to time on other oldies/classic rock stations, so they're still respected by a large enough audience. Aside from The Beatles and Michael Jackson, I can't think of any musicians that are still played on the radio daily decades after they've stopped making music.
How did the classical composers such as Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart make themselves relevant hundreds of years after making their music when most modern musicians (and especially their singles) are played out in a matter of just a few years? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mwqne/why_havent_there_been_many_musicians_who_could_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccdcb76",
"ccdefmx",
"ccdg3ce",
"ccdiyph"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Current popularity does not equal their popularity in 100 years.\n\nAt the time of those classical composers very few were respected highly or considered great. The same is true in visual arts where Van Gogh was considered crazy and Picasso was considered terrible.\n\nWhat becomes a classic has nothing to do with their popularity in their time period but rather cultural and social forces that occur hundreds of years later. \n\nPersonally I find Led Zeppelin to be one of the greatest bands of all time, perhaps even equal to Bach, but you don't hear them on the radio now and even when Whole Lotta Love came out in 1969, Sugar Sugar by the Archies was the number one hit that year. But today no one even remembers the Archies and thinks its a classic and we do have music courses taught about Led Zeppelin.\n\nIn 100 years I think it is very likely that students will study Led Zepplin, despite them not having a mass media presence as you seem to insist a classic needs.\n\nTLDR: Popularity =/= quality",
"Classical composers like the ones you listed were pioneers in music. They experimented with music changed the face of music. For example, Beethoven bridged classical music to romantic music, changing the popular style, and affecting what other composers created. Because these people had such an impact on music, they are remembered the most.",
"The radio doesn't play Beethoven either. Really, the radio isn't a good marker for what's memorable, because it generally tries to play \"pop\" music, which won't be remembered in a month or two but will draw a ton of listeners right now who will listen to the ads between songs and thus make the station a ton of money.\n\nIf we wait a few years, we'll have a better sense of what music \"right now\" is memorable, just by the fact that we're still talking about it.",
"The people who sell music need new music to sell all the time so they can charge a lot because people get more excited about and pay more for new things. They lock up the old music and don't sell it. Once the performer has died it is usually better for the music sellers if the old music was forgotten, and eventually it is.\n\nSome few pieces can last a long time, as the people who loved them when they were young get older still buy them over and over because they lost it or they need to change music players. This is called \"buying the White Album again\". But eventually they die and the music they were excited about as young people is forgotten forever."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2ahw0n | how can smoking companies continue to sell a product that is proven to harm the consumer? | I thought of this after seeing a government funded advertisement about how to quit smoking. So if tobacco companies are paying politicians (goes without saying I imagine) and the taxpayers money is being used for quit smoking campaigns. Aren't consumers getting the short end of the stick? They get a product that potentially kills them and then the government spends their tax money on assistance programs for quitting smoking. I understand this is America but not too long ago the company that makes four loko was mixed up in a lawsuit because some kids drank four of them and almost died or something. The result was they had to remove the caffeine from the drink. Why are the tobacco companies not treated the same? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ahw0n/eli5how_can_smoking_companies_continue_to_sell_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"civa9dt",
"civaak2"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"I work at a major gas station that employs 10,000 people. We make no money on gas, hardly any on drinks. Breakdown roughly is 30% tobacco 10% gas, 40% alcohol, 20% snacks Here's the catch, 70% of people who buy tobacco buy snacks and booze. So take away tobacco, nobody comes into my store, I get laid off and can't afford college. Don't make me not able to go to college. ",
"It's complicated. There are also anti-obesity campaigns, but you can't ban food. Personally I'm glad that cigarettes are tightly regulated and heavily taxed, but I don't think they should be banned. There are lots of legal things that are potentially harmful/lethal: driving in cars, skiing, etc. \n\nFour Loko was not forced to remove caffeine; the company did so voluntarily after several deaths. Doctors said the caffeine masked the effects of the alcohol in the drink.\n\nETA: \"The FTC had alleged that ads for Four Loko falsely claimed that a 23.5-ounce can contained the equivalent of one to two cans of beer. In fact, the FTC says, it's more like four to five beers. The agency had previously proposed changing Four Loko labels to express the alcohol content in terms of the equivalent number of regular beers.\n\nAs boozy as Four Loko is now, it used to be even more potent, thanks to an original formula that included caffeine. In November 2010, Phusion Projects decided to remove the caffeine, along with guarana and taurine, from the formula as the FTC was preparing a crackdown on drinks that blend stimulants and alcohol. As our friends at Shots have reported, psychologists have found that mixing alcohol and caffeine may impair judgment more than booze alone.\" From here: _URL_0_\n\nTobacco companies got in trouble in the past for allegedly manipulating nicotine in cigarettes to make them more addictive. So I don't think there's a double standard."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/02/13/171890650/four-loko-cans-will-now-make-clear-theyre-loaded-with-alcohol"
]
] |
|
4qakzn | why is it that burps don't taste/smell like throw-up? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4qakzn/eli5_why_is_it_that_burps_dont_tastesmell_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4rgu8u"
],
"score": [
14
],
"text": [
"Depending on when you burp (how far along the food has been digested). Some burps actually do smell like vomit. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6p5woz | if an ssd is better and faster than an hdd than why isn't it more common to see an ssd as the drive choice in computers? | The way it sounds is an SSD is like 4K resolution and an HDD is like 1080p, so why isn't SSD tech used more. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6p5woz/eli5_if_an_ssd_is_better_and_faster_than_an_hdd/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkmuoqp",
"dkmup5i",
"dkmzi88",
"dkn0tpd"
],
"score": [
15,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they are more expensive and harder to make. This is because they have TONS of itty bitty transistors that are hard to make. Although, over time, competition will bring down the price, that is why more and more PCs have SSDs in them. ",
"Price and storage capacity. SSD drives are much newer and expensive. That means that manufacturers cant tout about a 4 tb hard drive in the system, and a smaller drive will cost more.",
"The cost of an SSD vs. a HDD is a major factor. Most Average consumers that buy a PC off the shelf don't know the difference between the two, and the big PC companies use that as an advantage. They tout big storage capacites, and at the same time they save cost. Also, SSDs have a finite life cycle. They can only be overritten so many times, before they need replaced. ",
"SSDs aren't better in every respect.\n\nFor one thing they are much smaller in their capacity for another they are much more expensive.\n\nDepending on the exact way you want to use them they might also wear out faster.\n\nHDDs tend to big big and slow while SSDs tend to be small and fast.\n\nIf you want to have the best you have to choose one.\n\nIt is getting better nowadays with the price of SSDs coming down and their capacity going up, so that they have made up most of the disadvantages they have compared to HDDs and they are becoming much more common.\n\nHowever it should be kept in mind that man people don't actually need the extra speed or at least don't need it badly enough to spend extra money for it.\n\nThere is also the fact that pre-built computers don't always contain the best and most expensive parts. When non-computer experts buy computers they will compare mostly based on price and a short blurb containing a small selection of technical specs. Everything that doesn't fit into that blurb gets ignored and built with the cheapest parts. Disk drives are usually in the blurb but vendors often focus on advertising capacity over speed.\n\nSome vendors cheat a bit or at least used to be using stuff like hybrid drives and advertised them in such a confusing way as to trick buyers into thinking they would get a drive with the speed of an SSD and the capacity of an HDD at a low price. These usually where a combination of a normal HDD and a very small SSD. Unfortunately the SSD part was so small that it barely had enough room to hold the the swap-file and thus did not really speed things up as much as people thought it would.\n\nI would also like to mention that this is not an simple thing with HDDs on one ends and SSDs on the other. Traditionally there were different specs of HDDs with some being big and slow and others being small and fast. So choosing between them is not new.\n\nThere are also many different categories of SSDs. Not all SSDs are the same. Customers usually just see the label \"SSD\" and the capacity and often react surprised to see that there are differences in prices with comparable capacity that can be as big as 10 or 50 times as much.\n\nAnd that is only with normal SATA and SAS drives. If you really want speed at any cost there are much more expensive technologies out there, like putting your SSD directly into your PCI bus instead of the storage bus or in an extreme case I had seen for some server hardware plugging SSDs directly into the memory bus (which was both insanely fast and insanely expensive).\n\nMy point being that if your only consideration was speed you would get a much more expensive solution. You are making a compromise no matter what and for many the compromise still involves choosing HDDs, although having an SSD for laptops and for the boot drive in desktops is going to be the default in the short term."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
38ho41 | why are there nearly no government restrictions or regulations for people having children? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/38ho41/eli5_why_are_there_nearly_no_government/ | {
"a_id": [
"crv3vob",
"crv452m",
"crv460x",
"crv4g58",
"crv4neo"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Having a child is generally accepted as a universal human right. Whereas driving a car is a privilege that can be taken away.\n\nDo note that across the ocean, China will tax excess children mainly due to overpopulation.",
"I've always maintained there should be no negative consequences for having as many kids as you want. Indeed it is a human right. However, having lots of kids is a burden *to society* more than having just one or two kids. There should be positive incentives, such as tax breaks, for having fewer than three kids, for completing a parenting course, for waiting until 25 years of age or later to have kids, etc. this could give people the incentive to more closely monitor their family sizes. ",
"How would you enforce it? Sex police? Forced abortions?",
"Main question is how can you police it - how can you enforce it?\n\nPart of how a government works is having the ability to enforce the laws it creates.\n\nMany \"civilised\" governments have in fact attempted some form of controlled birth, but lacked the foresight to effectively police it; sometimes leading to civil unrest. So partly in response to this, many rights movements sought to enshrine autonomy over one's own body.\n\nSo now, \"the right to bear life\" has become an inalienable right.\n\n\nHowever, in some hypothetical future where one's reproductive system was not automatically set to \"on\", and that ultimately the government had control over that switch - the more than likely it *would* be heavily controlled.",
"Because it's not a good idea to discourage reproduction. Population growth is needed for an economy to grow and we are actually seeing a drop in population growth in the Western world with the US barely being able to keep growth even. Many countries in Europe have enacted social programs to encourage women to have kids. Ever wonder why Putin is so anti-gay? Yup, population is dropping there too. He wants everyone to reproduce. Japan? Same problem, only less anti-gay. If you tried to ask any of those governments to promote a eugenics program, they'd laugh at it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1mpw5v | if you're not supposed to eat raw cookie dough, what are those balls of dough in ice cream and as frozen yoghurt toppings? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mpw5v/eli5_if_youre_not_supposed_to_eat_raw_cookie/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccbhbyg",
"ccbhdmw",
"ccbkllh"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Most cookie dough has raw egg in it, which you aren't supposed to eat. I assume the cookie dough in ice cream doesn't have the egg which makes it okay.",
"Raw cookie dough and the \"dough\" in foods are two different things. Raw cookie dough contains components which are intended to be cooked, like raw eggs and yeast, both of which can get you sick if eaten uncooked. There is eatable cookie dough which is not intended to be cooked, and doesn't contain these components which can get you sick. You can make a very basic dough out of wheat/corn, flower, and water, it doesn't rise very well but you can eat it, and it won't get you sick if its cooked or raw, this is pretty much what the cookie dough in these foods are.",
"The cookie dough in stores use what's called \"pasteurized\" eggs. Meaning you won't get sick if you ate that raw. But try not to, because you will spoil your appetite. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4kdxwg | why is wine generally stored in glass bottles, but grain alchol is stored in metal or glass? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4kdxwg/eli5_why_is_wine_generally_stored_in_glass/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3e6603"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Tradition. \nTradition is a strong component to all alcohol production, marketing, and consumption. \nAs a few examples, screw top wine bottles are far more convenient, cheaper to produce, and keep just as good a seal as cork, if not better. A few wine producers experimented with this by putting half their bottles in stores with cork and half with screw tops assuming the screw tops would never sell. Contrary to their worries, they sold out faster than the cork. BUT, people still want the tradition of hearing that cork pop when you open them, so they are still sold. \nLast example, when you buy a bottle of wine at a fancy restaurant, you are given the cork to smell. Thats still around from the times when cork production wasnt consistent and corks could fail their seal, resulting in the wine getting oxidized and turning to vinegar, which you dont want to drink. Smelling the cork told you if the wine went bad, at which point you would return it and get a new bottle. Now, corks are very consistent and wont fail, but we still have to smell the cork and pretend like we are evaluating its quality. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
cgsjda | why light and the rest of electromagnetic waves don't interfere with each other? | As seen in any electromagnetic spectrum diagram, light and radio waves are basically the same phenomenon with the only difference in their frequency. Then how come they behave so differently?
\- Why visible light can't even penetrate thin layers of cardboard?
\- Can a super high frequency antena emit light?
\- Why light doesn't interfere with radio signals while microwaves do?
\- Why do they behave so differently in metals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cgsjda/eli5_why_light_and_the_rest_of_electromagnetic/ | {
"a_id": [
"eukietj",
"eulz3au"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"All your questions can be answered by understanding the concept of wavelength.\n\nBasically speaking, once you know what the wavelength of every radiation is, you can predict how it will interact with other things.\nI'll give you an example you probably didn't think about:\nWhy do car radios start to have bad reception in muntain tunnels? Well, the wavelength of radiosignals is pretty big, but the width of the mountain walls is bigger, therefore you start getting white noises and such.",
"This basically comes down to photons and energy, as well as diffraction. A photon is the smallest unit of energy that light of a certain frequency can carry. If light hits something, it does so with photons. This means that if light is absorbed by an object, only exactly one photon can be absorbed at a time (rarely, more than one are absorbed at a time). Now, imagine a photon of radio waves; it contains orders of magnitude less energy than a photon of visible light. This energy is too *small* to be absorbed by singular atoms, or even molecules, but can be absorbed by movement of valence electrons (electricity), and so things that are just slightly conductive of electricity tend to absorb radio waves well. Microwaves and infrared, meanwhile, usually carry roughly the right amount of energy to cause molecules to start jiggling in a specific way (I can't really describe it without pictures). This jiggling has a few different types, and its energy varies between molecules, which is why certain things heat up in a microwave while others don't. Visible light carries the right amount of energy to jiggle molecules, but only rarely. This is why most things look mostly white/gray/black. Now, scattering. Scattering is what makes things appear white. When light hits them, it gets scattered off in all directions. This tends to happen when the light wavelength is roughly similar to the size of particles, or when the particles bend light like glass does. This is why powders often appear whiter than their solid forms, and why glass powder looks white instead of transparent. As far as why waves of different frequencies don't interfere: Things like radios and phones are designed to use very specific frequencies, and so they only listen to those frequencies. Therefore, they don't pick up interference from other frequencies. Microwaves (as in the device - not the frequency of light) tend to emit a broad spectrum of radio frequencies that overlaps with radio and phone communication frequencies. The result is that microwaves can emit \"loud\" chaos over the frequency that your phone is trying to use."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6dy0gy | why are knuckleballs so hard to hit? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6dy0gy/eli5_why_are_knuckleballs_so_hard_to_hit/ | {
"a_id": [
"di689y3",
"di69gn0",
"di6gyha"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"As far as I am aware, it's because of how sporadically the ball moves. It goes considerably slower than other pitches, but it moves everywhere. \n\nCheck out [this slow motion video of Tim Wakefield tossing knuckleballs](_URL_0_)",
"The point of a knuckle ball is that the ball doesn't spin. An MLB knuckleball will have about 1/2 of a rotation on the way home. Because of that, the ball is acted heavily upon by drag and air resistance. That moves the ball different directions in an unpredictable manner.",
"I used to do advanced baseball scouting and pitch charting. Baseballs are affected by the Magnus force, which is a change in air pressure around a ball which causes it to move in the direction the lower pressure side. In other words, the spin causes the baseball to move in the specific way a pitcher wants it to go (eg a changeup moves arm side, a slider glove side, and most curveballs 12-6). \n\nNow a knuckleball is thrown with no spin and therefore the air pressure around the ball is constantly changing. Unlike other pitches, which have consistent and predictable movement or break, a knuckleball will move in random locations because of gravity, drag, wind and air deflecting through the seams of the ball. \n\nThis turbulence is what causes a knuckleball to appear to be floating on the way to the plate. \n\nBlue Jays pitcher RA Dickey, the only knuckleball pitcher to win a Cy Young award, says that he prefers domed stadiums to open air stadiums because elements such as humidity, rain, and even gentle breezes can flatten out the pitch or make the knuckleball too erratic to be thrown effectively because of the constantly changing air pressures. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://youtu.be/_npsLayG9s8"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
be7q71 | - why do airplanes (from the ground) sometimes sound like they are about to crash? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/be7q71/eli5_why_do_airplanes_from_the_ground_sometimes/ | {
"a_id": [
"el3kwpn",
"el3ompp"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Can you described what you mean by saying that they sound like they are about to crash?",
"Pilot here. It's hard to answer this because you haven't been too specific about what mean by sounding like they are about to crash.\n\nI suspect what you are referring to is the noise aircraft make when they are coming into land where the engine noise seems to rise in pitch. This is something called the \"Doppler effect\" in action and is more to do with how sound waves move through the air in relation to the observer and source rather anything the aircraft is doing. This Doppler effect can change the pitch and volume of a noise depending on where you are standing in relation to the source and is often the cause of that weird dramatic change in tone the engines make when you see an aircraft about to land, again depending on where you are standing in relation to the aircraft.\n\nWhen an aircraft comes into land, it's a process that is mainly controlled by the power output from the engine(s) rather than the pilot actively pointing the nose of the aircraft at the ground. Speed is flight essentially, and while this is a gross oversimplification of the physics of flight, it's easiest to say that going faster makes you ascend, going slower makes you descend so when an aircraft is coming into land, the engine or engines sound different as they are running at a lower power setting.\n\nHopefully that answers the question but if you where referring to something else, please explain and I will try to answer more appropriately."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4ts9ni | why do cameras sometimes have 29.97 fps rather than 30 fps? | 30 FPS is much easier to type into an editing program. So why do some cameras use 29.97 FPS? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ts9ni/eli5_why_do_cameras_sometimes_have_2997_fps/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5jt7v9"
],
"score": [
229
],
"text": [
"There are two main colour encoding standards used in video, PAL and NTSC. PAL is European and runs at 25 FPS, and NTSC is used in America/Canada and runs at 30 FPS (29.97).\n\n\nThe reason for these standards is based on how often we cycle electricity. In America and Canada, we cycle electricity at 60 times a second, so half that is 30 FPS. In Europe, it's cycled at 50 times a second, so half that is 25 FPS. Back when we had black and white television, these numbers were entirely correct, and we used the nice rounded 30 FPS instead of 29.97.\n\nBut that all changed when colour TV came out.\n\nThe color carrier signal was merging with with the sound carrier signal because they were very close in the spectrum. Basically, now that we had colour, colour was fucking with sound since they are so similar on the spectrum. This distorted the visuals and really messed with what you saw (To be clear, it was never released like this. Only the original engineers saw this effect, to which they fixed it before colour TV's were released). The fix they came up with was to reduce the framerate by a minor .03FPS. The reason was this was enough to move the signals out of phase to stop them from merging/being distorted, but was not nearly enough for it to actually affect the user experience in any way.\n\n\nOr, in math teams. We were 60/2/1 which is 30FPS, but now we are 60/2/1.001 to keep the signals from phasing, which is 29.97 FPS\n\n*Extreme ELI5 like I was asked to write:\nBecause the engineers making the colour TV's could not get the sound and video to play well together at 30 frames per second, so they offset it slightly until it played nice. This has become the standard ever since.*"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
fgzoy4 | how do electronics eventually break? do the connections on the motherboard get weaker or thinner over time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fgzoy4/eli5_how_do_electronics_eventually_break_do_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"fk7upea",
"fk7ury1",
"fk7v8gp",
"fk7zh1q",
"fk8rgjx"
],
"score": [
9,
11,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Electronics can suffer physic damage such as being dropped or banged which can damage the parts. One of the most common problems is damaging the power outlet connector because the adapter sticks out from the machine so it's more prone to breaking the connector.\n\nMany electronic devices have physical moving parts like fans and motors that wear out with time.\n\nThere's also environmental factors. Electronics do not like heat and the accumulation of dust will cause parts to overheat in time, which can cause solder joints and individual electronic components to wear out.\n\nOxidation is another problem. Rust can accumulate on the parts causing corrosion damage and an oxidation layer can block electrical contacts.",
"There can be different causes of failure. The circuit board will usually have exposed copper and tin which will over time corrode and wither away disconnecting the components from each other. Tin is also quite brittle so if the device is dropped the tin might develop cracks which after repeated drops can go clean through the connection. A similar thing can happen to the circuit board itself. If you drop it the force from the mountings to the components will go through the circuit board which can cause it to crack. These cracks can sever vital traces and prevent the electronics from working. But the chips themselves can also stop working for various reasons. They are made of different materials which can expand at different rates when the temperature changes. This may cause tiny cracks that eventually cuts a wire inside the chip. Transistors may also wear out with use. This is especially noticeable with the transistors used in flash memory as they can be permanently damaged after just a few thousand write operations.",
"Sometimes solder connections aren’t very strong, and they corrode slightly, which breaks a connection. Sometimes (if it’s an item that sees temperature or humidity fluctuations) the environmental fluctuations will cause problems. There may be corrosion in power connections, there might be physical failure of an electrical connection from expansion and contraction...\n\nSometimes individual components will fail. Electrolytic capacitors can fail, because they’re complex for their size (layers of foil, insulators, and liquid parts). \n\nAs electronics get smaller, their power demands decrease. The electrical paths (wiring, circuit board traces, and the internal traces in integrated circuits) are smaller by _a lot_ than in 1980s electronics. Older electronics were more robust, but required more power. \n\nThe delicate nature of more modern electronics can cause them to fail in ways that aren’t apparent, since variation in electronic components may happen inside an integrated circuit, or somewhere invisible to the user. \n\nTime, environment, and random chance make a difference. \n\nI have a GPS unit in my car that is actively dying, and the circuits that provide the information are fine. The display, however, is losing contact with the circuit board. The connections for those are often a conductive rubber strip, adhered to the contacts of the display. I can squeeze the sides of the GPS and the map displayed clears up, but it’s clear that the age of the GPS is there. It’s fallen off my windshield a lot, which seems to have loosened a lot of connections.",
"There are many different ways that electronics can fail. If the electronics experience a significant amount of shock or vibration, that can cause connections to weaken or break. Some components age and fail, such as electrolytic capacitors. Some components are sensitive to overheating, overvoltage, or just in general having the power be out of spec. Solder (especially lead free solder) can develop tin whiskers that cause short circuits. And there are numberous other ways.",
"Well, there's a lot of reasons they can break but the most common ones I've come across are bad capacitors. They're devices designed to temporarily store a charge or smooth out current. Many of them contain an electrolyte, a conductive, often acidic goo that can leak out overtime and cause corrosion that damages electrical connections on the board. Or sometimes they just pop and release the \"magic smoke\". Or in the case of a lot of really old components, they can degrade and internally short circuit, which cause cause a chain reaction that damages other components. Which is why you shouldn't turn on a vintage radio without checking the caps first, as these shorts can damage the vacuum tubes. Particularly the rectifier tubes used to convert AC to DC current. It's not always easy to replace those components versus just replacing old caps with modern ones. \n\nVacuum tubes go bad due to air leaks which cause internal components to rapidly oxidize and burn out. They can also die due to contaminants in the manufacturing process leaching out. Overheating and electrically overloading tends to kill transistors pretty quickly."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4zqau5 | when you jump in a plane why do you stay in the same spot inside the plane and not the same spot in the air? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zqau5/eli5_when_you_jump_in_a_plane_why_do_you_stay_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6xw7lz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Because you have the same forward momentum, as does all the air in the enclosed space you are in.\n\nEven if you were outside holding on to the plane and then let go and jumped you would still not stay \"in the same spot in the air\". You would still have forward momentum, except the plane would rush ahead of you as you would now be facing air resistance since you aren't in a container anymore.\n\nIf the situation you described was something that could happen you would need to ask why we don't immediately crash into a wall at the speed of the rotation of the earth every time we jump while on the ground."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
dl535k | how do sniffing salts work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dl535k/eli5_how_do_sniffing_salts_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"f4n7c07",
"f4n7jdz",
"f4nt377"
],
"score": [
24,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Smelling salts, like ones they use to bring you awake?\n\nthey have one of a few different types of ammonia in them (a very strong smelling chemical, with vapor that is poisonous in large doses).\n\nhaving someone sniff a very small dose of it makes the body react to protect itself. Usually by trying to breathe more clean air. So you'll gasp for a few clean breaths.\n\nthis is an automatic reaction that doesn't require you to think or be awake, and your body will wake you up because it senses danger. And breathing in a bunch of clean air after the ammonia will help you wake up because it'll make your heart beat faster.\n\nthis won't work if you're super injured or dying. But it does work on people who faint from low blood pressure or even on boxers who got hammered on the melon too much.",
"Smelling salts have as their active compound something called *ammonium carbonate,* which, when mixed with water, decomposes into ammonia gas.\n\nAmmonia is an irritant, and it triggers an inhalation reflex. This helps to supply more oxygen to the brain, helping to reverse a faint or near-faint.",
"simple cool elegant answer is that ammonia is a smell that we evolved to be in utter disgust of to the highest degree possible. \n\nWhen you smell that quantity of it that close to your nose, it instantly jolts you awake as a mechanism to stop you from eating rotten food. It's also very toxic on it's own anyway."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9alwld | when we are tired, why are our eyes more tired than our body? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9alwld/eli5_when_we_are_tired_why_are_our_eyes_more/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4wf3om"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"The muscles keeping the eyelids open are one of the smallest voluntary muscles in the body. They fatigue much earlier than say the huge muscles on our back. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
684krv | how is a fetus aborted? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/684krv/eli5_how_is_a_fetus_aborted/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgvokk7",
"dgvpnpq"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Just so we're clear on terms, \"abortion\" in the medical sense refers to any termination of pregnancy before a certain period. Miscarriage is \"spontaneous abortion,\" while what most people call abortion is clarified as \"induced abortion.\" I'm guessing this question refers to induced abortion.\n\nBasically, there's two approaches to ending pregnancy: Take medicine, or surgical removal. The most common medical option is to take mifepristone, which blocks the effect of progesterone and causes the lining of the uterus to degenerate, plus misoprostol which aids in uterine contractions to expel the fetus. Surgical abortion can involve suctioning out the contents of the uterus (suction aspiration or vacuum aspiration depending on the method), opening the cervix and scraping out the inside of the uterus (dilation and curettage), or opening the cervix and then suctioning (dilation and extraction.)\n\nUntil about 12 weeks of about pregnancy, medicine and suctioning/vacuuming are similarly safe and effective, so it's largely up to patient choice. Things get more complicated later on.",
"Since we're talking fetuses and no longer talking pills to terminate a pregnancy a quick breakdown can be described as follows:\n\nTowards the latter part of the first trimester at around 8-12 weeks the fetus has eyes, hair, plays with its tongue, heartbeat, etc but still looks kind of alien-like. It requires extraction. The most common method is to use a vacuum/aspiration extraction up to the 12/16th week. This means that the abortionist dilates the cervix and then inserts an extremely powerful suction tube. The job of the vacuum tube is to shred the fetus and placenta and suck it out hoping to get all of it to prevent infection.\n\nOnce you get to about 16 weeks the fetus looks and functions like a baby, but it's organs are not fully developed enough to survive outside the womb just yet. Chances of survival for a fetus born this early are low. It's too large at this point to be shredded by a high powered vacuum/suction instrument so the abortionist has to dilate the cervix and use metal tools to manually break apart the fetus and take it out of the womb limb by limb. This is generally referred to as dilation and evacuation (D & E). This procedure is legal in the US as an elective procedure and is considered to be typically safe for the mother. In most states the abortion clinic doesn't need to be able to fit a stretcher to the surgical room or have hospital admitting privileges because so few cases require it and many abortion clinics could not meet the same demands as other surgical clinics and would hinder local access to safe abortion. The Supreme Court ruled down the states making this a requirement (5-3), but some states have been trying to figure out ways around it which in all reality will also most likely get shut down as well. This is of course unless Ginsberg and/or Kennedy retire under the Trump administration, then all bets are off.\n\nOnce you get to about the 24 week period it's basically a fully grown baby just waiting for its lungs to develop a bit more. At 24 weeks the fetus, if born, would have a 50-70% chance of survival. At 25 weeks this can go upwards of 80%. By 26-27 weeks the chances of survival is roughly 90%. These numbers continue to improve as medical technology gets better. At this point you're getting into late term abortions which are generally regulated in the United States. The process here is often referred to as intact dilation and extraction because it's too dangerous to try to break the fetus up inside the womb as you can a smaller fetus. There's also ethical issues of doing so in regards to development and feeling too much pain. So instead they do what is often referred to as a \"partial-birth abortion\" which is where the abortionist induces labor, then while the fetus is still mostly inside the mother the abortionist will reach in to sever its spinal cord and then suck its brain out of its cranium with a vacuum causing its softened skull to collapse. At that point the dead fetus/child, whatever you want to call it, is removed whole.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
9e9iu7 | how do criminals get involved in the things they do? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9e9iu7/eli5_how_do_criminals_get_involved_in_the_things/ | {
"a_id": [
"e5n65zs",
"e5n96bi",
"e5nahzl",
"e5nav60",
"e5ndckz",
"e5nekb0"
],
"score": [
8,
15,
3,
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It depends a lot on the person and the crime, but usually, they started small and climbed the ranks. Think of it as a lot like any legit job where you get promotions and pay raises the longer you're there. There are CEOs now who started as mail clerks, and ones who are the son of the previous CEO. Same basic thing with organized crime.",
"Desperation, mostly.\n\nIf you don't have good job skills and are not able or willing to get any, you either have to flip burgers or take risks. And since you don't have much to lose, there is less to risk. So either you dream up crimes to commit or you are more receptive when someone asks you to help.\n\nFrom there it is a download spiral into increased illegality. You get caught, get a record, and now it is that much harder to get a legitimate job. And the legal system likely introduced you to some interesting new friends. You have even less to lose, so you are willing to take more risks, and just maybe you learned enough to get better at it.",
"starting small, making small connections, working their way up as they become other peoples connection, etc etc.. eventually finding their way to \"the\" guy and being many peoples connection till they get caught",
"It’s all about networking and being surrounded by certain people. Being able to sell yourself better than a used car salesman trying to sell a shitbox car.\n\n",
"Networking. Same as anywhere else. Lets talk small time. You wanna sell weed. You or I may not be able to, because we don't know anyone that sells large quantities of weed. People that do look for someone to sell to, though they might be pretty selective. Presumably you smoke weed, and meet people in that subculture community. So you find someone, that knows someone. They vouch for you, and you get your start. This is something that gets brought up about prison often leading to more crime. Jim Lahey would call it con-college. Just like college, it presents a prime opportunity to network with people. I image it's the same for more serious crimes. It's really not any different than how things work in \"the real world\". As with anything there's a bit of luck involved, however your social decisions will affect your chances.",
"People always say crime doesn't pay, but that is only true for the ones who actually get caught and the temptation is really easy to fall into, our government is the biggest organized crime committing gang in the world and look how many of them actually sit any time.\n\nFor some people it's because of lack of skills in a normal job setting but for most it has nothing to do with skills at all, its about money. Money is a really powerful thing, and if you took 10 people and offered them each a years salary to do 1 illegal job for you with a very minimal risk of being caught, even the most straight edged person would consider doing it, if not just do it. \n\nIt's not even just illegal things, people will do almost anything for money, take the straightest man in the world and offer him 10 million dollars to take it in the ass for 5 minutes and you better believe you just bought that man. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b28klo | what is one year if the earth orbits the sun and the sun spins itself? | How do we separate Earth orbiting the sun from the sun spinning around that same axis? For the Earth and Moon, you can use sun rise to figure out how fast the Earth is spinning, and from there figure out the Moon's orbital period... but if you couldn't see the sun, how do you split those two spins up?
& #x200B;
Do we pick a reference frame where the sun doesn't spin, so all of the speed is orbital speed? Is there some other bigger reference frame? Is rotation different from linear motion when it comes to relativity? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b28klo/eli5_what_is_one_year_if_the_earth_orbits_the_sun/ | {
"a_id": [
"eiqzfkk",
"eiqzg39",
"eir01v8"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There are two main methods used to calculate this:\n\nThe ~~Equinoxes~~ Solstices - when the sun is at its highest point, and lowest point in the sky, which is made possible by the Earth's tilt on its Axis.\n\nIf we couldn't see the Sun then we could measure the movement of the constellations. Which is what pseudoscience like Astrology is based on.",
"Correct me if im wrong but i believe our calender year is based on what position we are in, then come full circle to that position",
"The sun spinning has nothing to do with anything.\n\nPut something in the middle of a room at your eye level...that's the sun. Now look at the \"sun\" while you walk around it. What you'll notice is that the *background* behind the sun will change: at one point you'll see it in front of the door, then in front of the window, then the table, then the TV, and so on. Once you make a complete circle around the sun, it will be back in front of the door again.\n\nThat's a year. The real sun will appear to be in front of certain constellations depending on where we are in our orbit...first it's in Aries, then Taurus, then Gemini, etc. When it gets back to Aries, a year has gone by."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5a31sc | why do kleenex cool touch tissues always feel cool and why can't they make bed sheets that work the same way? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5a31sc/eli5_why_do_kleenex_cool_touch_tissues_always/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9datua",
"d9ddei7"
],
"score": [
20,
11
],
"text": [
"They are made with a blend of different moisturizers and aloe. Then, when the tissue comes in contact with your skin, the formula activates and releases to cool down your nose. Now, it doesn't actually cool anything, and the tissues aren't actually cool. It just feels cool. It tricks your skin.\n\nYes, bed sheets could be made with the chemicals on them, but they would probably be expensive and last only a day or so.\n\nIt's fine for tissues, since you use them, throw them out, and grab another from the box.\n\nIt would kind of suck to have to replace your bed sheets after every use.",
"There are bedsheets made with Outlast, a fiber created by NASA. They are not cheap! You can check them out at a sleep number store. Last time I heard they were over $200 for a set there. MUCH cheaper on Amazon, but be sure it says Outlast on them. I know there are a couple places that sell Outlast Sleep Systems - a mattress pad, too - and when I finally bite the bullet and order a set I think that's where I will get it. I tried ordering a couple different sets of \"cooling sheets\" but they were microfiber polyester and not Outlast.\n\nJockey also makes underwear with the stuff :) Again, not cheap, but far less money than the sheets! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2sruer | why are spaceships/centers always rotating in movies? | what function does this serve? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2sruer/eli5_why_are_spaceshipscenters_always_rotating_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnsaayj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Actual spacecraft, like the thing that took the Curiosity Rover to Mars, are spun too. It balances out minor effects like heat emissions from the space craft and stabilizes it so it keeps flying on course without needing constant corrections.\n\nAnd for space stations, if they're big enough and spin fast enough, it'll give you artificial gravity, with \"down\" being away from the centre.\n\nAnd in movies, spinning things look fancier."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2tgih4 | could light be trapped in a box made of mirrors? | If I have a box made of a completely reflective material, and I allow light to get inside the box then close the lid, wouldn't the photons just continue to bounce around until I reopen the lid? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tgih4/eli5_could_light_be_trapped_in_a_box_made_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnyu0h3",
"cnyu23f",
"cnyv5kl"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
11
],
"text": [
"That'd work if you had completely reflective material. But there's no such thing as *completely* reflective material in the real world. Even the best mirrors absorb some light.",
"Theoretically if the mirrors were perfect, it would work. However, even the best mirrors have imperfections that would absorb some of the energy (turning it into heat). With the speed that light travels and thus how many bounces it must make, it wouldn't take long for the imperfections to absorb them all.",
"Every time the light reflects off of a surface some percent will be reflected and some percent will be absorbed. For super fancy mirrors used in laser optics you might get 99.999% of the light to reflect while only 0.001% gets absorbed.\n\nHowever, that reflected light will then travel across the box and hit another side and lose another 99.999%. This process repeats *very* fast.\n\nSo let's say that you're using one of those crazy mirrors (which only work for a narrow range of light frequencies (i.e. colors)) and you have a box about that's 1 meter (slightly bigger; I'm going to assume that the light travels 1 meter on average between reflections off of walls). Light travels at 300,000,000 m/s, so this means that you have 300,000,000 reflections per second.\n\nBefore any reflections you have 100% of your light remaining. One reflection later you have 99.999%. After that you have 99.999% of 99.999%, which can be written as 0.99999^(2) (note that this is just representing percentages as a number between 0 and 1). After one second the light remaining in this box would be about 1.28\\*10^(-1303). So it would be 0.000... < 1301 zeroes in total > ...000128 % of the original light. You could not even *begin* to have enough photons at the start of that second for there to be a significant chance of even a single photon still bouncing around after a second.\n\nIf we make the mirrors even more perfect—99.99999%—then after one second we still have about 5% of the original light remaining. Such mirrors are not within the reach of science yet. If we instead use a larger box then we get fewer impacts per second. If we go to a box that is scaled up so that the light travels 100 meters between reflections and keep the more reasonable 99.999% reflectivity then we get about 0.00000000000936% of the original light after 1 second. High enough that any reasonable light source would have a few photons still surviving, but far too low for you to actually see.\n\nSo in principle your idea works, but in practice it's not going to be practical. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5qu1c6 | how can the potus place gag orders on people? politics | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qu1c6/eli5_how_can_the_potus_place_gag_orders_on_people/ | {
"a_id": [
"dd22p37"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The same way your boss can ban you from using the company Twitter handle. He is prohibiting them from speaking as representatives of the agency."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1ui87a | what does excessive masturbation really do to the body? | I don't wanna go blind I guess is what I am saying here | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ui87a/what_does_excessive_masturbation_really_do_to_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ceicv2p",
"ceiczoi",
"ceid5uk",
"ceik3xd"
],
"score": [
2,
9,
21,
4
],
"text": [
"The only drawback is that it can make ejaculation when having intercourse with a partner harder to achieve.",
"*A similar question was asked earlier today, and this was my response. The [original post](_URL_1_) seems to have been removed.*\n\nMasturbation is *physically* good for you, but can have strong *psychological* side-effects due to positive or negative attitudes.\n\nPhysically, masturbation is a small amount of exercise (good) which leads to an orgasm (may help prevent prostate cancer) which releases painkilling and stress-relieving chemicals into the brain (very good). This also occurs in most forms of sex. The only downside to this would be over-masturbation, which can happen if your body tires from the act (rawness, chafing, etc).\n\nPsychologically, masturbation can be good or can be bad. In many healthy adults and adolescents, the stress relief itself is held in high medical esteem (good). However, many religious and social taboos exist- people may feel pressured by a church or mosque to not masturbate. Similarly, people may feel that masturbation is an indication of an unhealthy social life, and both of these ways of thinking can produce strong feelings of guilt in both sexes about masturbation (bad). Medically, masturbation is deemed normal, incredibly widespread, and healthy (good). It is interesting to note that many animals including chimpanzees, dolphins, and (you probably know) dogs masturbate, which seems to indicate that it is natural and normal behavior.\n\nIn summary, masturbation itself seems to be a good thing, but if you have a negative attitude towards it, it can have bad effects on you psyche. The healthiest option is probably to come to terms with masturbation in whatever frame of mind you have, and then choose your level of comfort with the act.\n\n[Source 1](_URL_0_) \n[Source 2](_URL_2_)\n",
"I'm assuming that you're male, given that I don't think most women get the \"you'll go blind/grow hair on your palms\" speech from parents. \n\nWhat will happen is *potentially* desensitization. That is, depending on how you masturbate, your body may become used to a certain speed, sensation, force, etc., that wouldn't be present through sexual intercourse. That, in turn, *might* make orgasms more difficult, delayed, or impossible through typical sexual activity (\"typical\" defined as mutual masturbation, oral sex, penile-vaginal or penile-anal sex, frottage, etc.). If you use pornography as a masturbatory aid (...which would be pretty typical), you might find yourself less turned on through real, physical intimacy with another person.\n\nThat's the worst-case scenario.\n\nTo reduce the odds of those things happening, always use a lighter grip when masturbating, use condoms during masturbation, consider using a toy something like [this](_URL_0_) so you can't use excessive pressure (always always always use a water-based lubricant, **never** an oil-based lube, and condoms reduce the mess/cleaning), and stick with relatively mainstream or even amateur porn.",
"On the positive side, I can bench press 285 with my right arm..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.plannedparenthood.org/info-for-teens/sex-masturbation/myths-facts-about-masturbation-33824.htm",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ugpqa/eli5_is_masturbating_really_good_for_you_or_the/",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masturbation#Health_and_psychological_effects"
],
[
"http://www.fleshlight.com/classics/classic-pink-lady/"
],
[]
] |
|
apqu12 | how do people plant trees in the millions on such short notice e.g. like on environmental events? | Surely they don't manually plant each seed one by one?
| explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/apqu12/eli5_how_do_people_plant_trees_in_the_millions_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"egajvup",
"egak5ac",
"egan3rg"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
12
],
"text": [
"Here in Washington, we have a large logging company named Weyerhauser This company owns several thousand acres of woodland for the purpose of providing wood for the construction companies and other endeavors. Every year, this company sends out workers to harvest trees for the purpose of selling them. At the same time, they send out people to plant seedlings (small trees that have been grown in greenhouse) to replace the trees that were cut down. Said seedlings are given 60 years to grow before being harvested. ",
"Some use cutting from a plant, where as some plant be cutted, so they bring plants from nurseries, societies, and landscape farm houses. \n\nVegetables for shows are brought from farms, nurseries because they cant be grown just for the event from seeds. Nurseries and agriculture institutes have great variety of them for study and grow in general. \n\nFruit plants can be cutted to grow, when known prior to event a month, but dwarf variety mainly. Other than that are brought from farm houses, nurseries, and people who like to volunteer in plant exhibihitions. \n\n",
"In the forestry industry an experienced planter on fast ground (i.e. flat, soft soil, no logs/branches/brush in the way) can plant 3000+ trees per day. They nearly always get paid piece rate, hence they’re motivated to go quickly. \n\nIt’s hard work. \n\nI would think that for those enviro events they get huge numbers of people to plant a couple of hundred each. \n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
fcopw9 | why do electrons move away from each other? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fcopw9/eli5_why_do_electrons_move_away_from_each_other/ | {
"a_id": [
"fjc3q3h"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"All electrons are negatively charged, and like charges repel each other, in the same way that opposite charges (a positive and a negative charge) attract each other."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5qik5w | why can't game developers just take as much time as they want to make a good-quality game, and only announce it within a few months of launch? that way they don't have to worry about dealines/losing hype. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qik5w/eli5_why_cant_game_developers_just_take_as_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"dczi6ie",
"dczi80s",
"dczi9yo"
],
"score": [
2,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"Game developing is a part of a capitalist system in which the main goal is to make money. If a company spends too much time/resources on a game then they are unlikely to make a profit. The same is true of advertising, it has to be strong enough and long enough to get enough people to buy the game in order to make a profit. \n\nWe're we to live under another system (maybe a socialist one) or a system where UBI was available then your scenario might be more possible. ",
"Former game developer here,\n\nDevelopment is subject to budgets, not deadlines; budget constraints set the deadlines. You can only develop a game so long as there is money to pay for it, and after that, it has to go out and start making its own money, whether it's ready or not, and investors get paid first. Marketing will stress hype for a big initial sale that hopefully keeps a company from going belly up and is a sufficient return on investment that investors come back, especially if the game isn't ready, because if marketing trickles, word can spread the game actually sucks. The other part about hype is that a game is only going to turn profits for about 6 months before the market has bought all the units it will, and piracy has taken over the rest of the market.",
"It can take a lot of people a lot of time to develop an AAA game. These people all need to be getting paid while they're working, they need to pay rent on their offices and pay the bills while the work is being done. A company could spend millions developing a game and won't see any money until it's nearly ready. It would be great if the developers had an unlimited time frame, but the reality is that the game has to make money eventually and the longer it takes to finish, the more it costs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
j2ltr | can someone explain to me why determinism is discredited? | If every cause is the result of previous effects, then if someone was able to account for all variables, they would be able to successfully "predict" future outcomes.
(Also if someone could explain to me why empiricism is needed.) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j2ltr/can_someone_explain_to_me_why_determinism_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"c28mfaw",
"c28mo1y",
"c28mohr"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Quantum Mechanics, which is the way modern physics research is going nowadays, seems to contradict determinism at its most fundamental level. Randomness, unpredictability, etc. are not just an unlucky consequence, they are a vital part of the theories that scientists deal with every day (see Heisenberg uncertainty principle). In order for the theories to be sound, some things necessarily HAVE TO be that way.\n\nBack in Newton's time, the future was, in principle, \"computable\". If you could do the monstrous task of measuring every variable in the universe, and store it in a computer with stupidly powerful processing power, you could \"predict\" how things would turn out. This is no longer possible according to modern physics.\n\nAnd that's as much as my limited knowledge can tell you.",
"In addition to what demodawid said relating determinism to science, we think about this at a philosophical level too. Now, this is purely my own thinking, but I've spoken at length with philosophy professors about it, and it seems to be at least a decent rebuttal to hard determinism. \nImagine, for a moment, that hard determinism was a fact. We could, in essence, predict every action ever. That's pretty much a central tenant of determinism, AFAIK. Well, if that were the case, and we could predict every action ever, then all it would take is to simply deviate from that course. It seems, to me, to be logically silly. ",
"Let's break it down some.\n\n > if someone was able to account for all variables, they would be able to successfully \"predict\" future outcomes.\n\nIf. The problem is that you actually *can't* account for all variables. It's not just that humans can't with our current technology, but that it simply Cannot Be Done.\n\nThe Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle tells us, in five-year-old terms, that we can know exactly where something is, or exactly where it's going, but not both at once. If you want to know both, you get a bit of fuzziness, as you're always trading accuracy in one domain for accuracy in another.\n\nOne of the reasons for this is because the very act of \"observing\" anything changes it.\n\nLet's say we have one molecule floating in a vacuum (nothing). If you want to know where it is, you might think to shine some light on it. Well, that light is actually a stream of photons. When one hits the molecule, it's going to be deflected and bounce off. That photon can trigger a detector of some kind, essentially the same as your own eye, and we can use the information to know where the molecule was.\n\nImportant to note: we call the moment of the photon hitting that molecule 'observation'. Some people confuse observation with the act of a human mind observing something; that's not what is meant here. That's usually taken by kooks and pseudo-scientists to mean that we can change the world just by observing it, but that's not the case.\n\nAnyhow, did you notice that I said we knew where the molecule \"was\" - the photon hitting the molecule has now moved it, and so we don't know exactly what its new velocity is, or where it is now.\n\nSo that's one roadblock. The other is that, thanks to quantum physics, we've discovered that particles actually don't just have a single fixed location, but instead they have a certain probability of being there. They also have a probability of being nearby, which is lower, and a probability of being even further away, lower still.\n\nFor all intents and purposes, we can treat particles as though they are where we think they are, but once we get down to really small scales, it's all pretty chaotic. That act of 'observation' I mentioned earlier actually occurs any time an interaction happens between two particles. There are even particles that pop in and out of existence (virtual particles)... it's a pretty tricky world down there.\n\nNow, let's say none of that mattered. Pretend we live in a Newtonian world where you can know for certain where a molecule is, for example. Fair enough.\n\nGo ahead and try building a computer to calculate this. You're going to need quite a few bits to describe each particle, and because those bits are implemented in memory chips that are made out of particles themselves, you're going to be introducing a massive scaling factor here. \n\nAs far as we know right now, the minimum length of time is a Planck time, which is 10^−43 seconds, or 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 seconds (might have put an extra zero in there, you get the point).\n\nThe minimum length (can't get any smaller) is is about 0.000000000000000000001 of the diameter of a proton, and for a completely accurate simulation, you'd have to calculate the state for every single location at that ridiculously fine resolution.\n\nIn order to calculate the future, therefore, you'd have to run a step of your simulation at Planck resolution for each Planck time. If it takes you longer than a Planck time to calculate this on your gigantic computer (and it will, it would probably take years), you're actually always running behind.\n\nIn other words:\n\nSimulating every particle interaction in a space an inch cubed might take a computer the size of a skyscraper to calculate, and it wouldn't happen in realtime. \nEven if it *was* possible to compute enough to predict what might happen 'next', the 'next' would have moved on long before you got there yourself!\n\nI don't think it will ever be possible in the space of our universe to run a perfect simulation at faster than real-time. We'll never be able to predict the future with perfect accuracy. However, we can (and do) run simplified simulations which require far less computational power, so that's useful in its own way, as we can predict a lot of things without knowing every single interaction of matter. But, there's enough leeway left in that imperfect modeling that we're never completely sure if things will go that way!\n\nSo, with the two of these concepts together, determinism can be defeated pretty easily. You can't know everything, and you can't figure out exactly what it's going to do before it happens on its own."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5dmhw4 | how do software updates (smaller file sizes) work without having to download the whole updated program (massive file size)? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5dmhw4/eli5_how_do_software_updates_smaller_file_sizes/ | {
"a_id": [
"da5mlf0",
"da5o6i3",
"da7ps9u"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Updates are just an alteration (addition, subtraction, substitution) of code. So when an update is downloaded, all you are doing is altering the current code for the program (app, software, game, etc.). Many of these updates are meant to fix existing problems such as bugs that are very minute changes to the code which leads to a small file size to download. Others that include major additions to the software will have a much larger file size because there is much more code involved.",
"When you're updating a program, there's a lot of stuff that you don't need to touch.\n\nFor example: There are files in your game that deal with textures, or pictures, or music. There are other files that deal with the engine, other files that deal with controls, etc. \n\nA huge, huge, *huge* concept of software is the concept of encapsulation. This essentially means that when you build a tool to do something, the things that *use* that tool need to know absolutely *nothing* about how that tool works other than \"this is the input it needs, and this is the output it gives.\"\n\nAs a consequence of this, when you need to make a change, you typically only need to change the tool and not everything.\n\nSo say there's a bug in the controls of your game. When you press this button, nothing happens. An update that fixes that only needs to replace the one file or small group of files that deal with the controller. It doesn't need to touch the graphics or the music or the engine or the networking stuff, because none of that stuff actually directly accesses the inner workings of the controller file. All of the rest of the stuff still sends the correct information to the controller file; it's just that that file doesn't send the correct output. \n\nBy replacing this one tiny file, your update is now much smaller than the actual game is.\n\nThe same can be said of other updates. Maybe they do a patch that nerfs some characters and buffs some other ones. Say, ten characters total. In this case, all they need to do is send you ten updated settings files--one for each character--instead of updating the main game, because the program of the main game never actually has those old values hard-coded into it. It just asks the settings file, which has now been changed. In this way, your 20 gigabyte game has been updated with a patch that maybe took 10 megabytes of space.",
"The update isn't just the 'code' that's being replaced or changed in the existing software. Basically, the update you download is a piece of software that edits the software that's being updated.\n\nSo your game update is basically a program with a set of instructions that will say something like \"Open file X and replace line 20 with this new line, replace file x, y and z with file a, b and c\" etc, etc.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
20aa3d | why can't big airliners make the entire cabin of the aircraft have an ejection mechanism that separates the wings and tail of the aircraft from the cabin, and allows the cabin to parachute to the ground? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20aa3d/eli5_why_cant_big_airliners_make_the_entire_cabin/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg19nhy"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Large airliners fly too fast, too high, and weigh too much.\n\nThe parachute size required to gently land a 747 fuselage would be preposterous.\n\nOpening a parachute at 500mph would also be preposterous."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
31rmym | why aren't businesses like mary kay and avon considered pyramid schemes? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/31rmym/eli5_why_arent_businesses_like_mary_kay_and_avon/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq4ajl9",
"cq4bk5h",
"cq4bu0o",
"cq4g2rb",
"cq4gmlr",
"cq4j7vw",
"cq4lark",
"cq4mq3b",
"cq4pdt9",
"cq4pjx4",
"cq4q21z",
"cq4r6rw",
"cq4rg68",
"cq4s9ky",
"cq4sqat",
"cq4u48v",
"cq4udhk",
"cq4umzh",
"cq4uxe3",
"cq4v5sq",
"cq4vv05",
"cq4wfzx",
"cq4xegs",
"cq4xsdz",
"cq4xywq",
"cq4yvy8",
"cq4zb7p",
"cq4zmqq",
"cq501v0",
"cq502d3",
"cq505rr",
"cq50rc3",
"cq50wg8",
"cq513o9",
"cq514lb",
"cq51anf",
"cq51t55",
"cq521eo",
"cq52ylz",
"cq54brb",
"cq54zne",
"cq55n0l",
"cq56a1x",
"cq56gka",
"cq5832d",
"cq593ue",
"cq59hhn",
"cq5h06c"
],
"score": [
2937,
44,
1129,
74,
208,
9,
168,
11,
12,
5,
9,
9,
7,
56,
9,
5,
11,
3,
2,
22,
2,
6,
2,
4,
5,
3,
4,
2,
2,
14,
2,
71,
2,
7,
2,
8,
3,
7,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
5,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because you can make money selling the product without recruiting other people to do it.",
"There are, generally speaking, two different uses of the term \"pyramid scheme\". \n\nSome people use pyramid scheme to refer to a scam where you are taking money from new customers/suckers to pay old customers/suckers. You have promised an increased return on investment, so you must continually grow to fulfill the promise. This is unsustainable, and eventually must collapse under its own weight. This was the Bernie Madoff investment scam; he wasn't actually making profits for his investors, he was just paying old clients with the money he took from new clients. And it was illegal. \n\nOutfits like Avon and Safeway are \"pyramid schemes\" in that you can make a lot of money off of hiring people under you. You get a cut of everything they sell, and everything the people THEY hire sell, and the people THEY hire, and so on. So if you're good at hiring people, you can profit off of them and not have to sell anything yourself. The org chart would look like a pyramid. But there is nothing illegal about hiring people to sell for you, in and of itself.",
"They're multi-level marketing. A pyramid scheme has no product & just collects money from new members, sending it up the chain.\n\nThey're not, however, *deceptive* multi-level marketing. There's plenty of MLM schemes out there where the product is junk that nobody really wants to buy & the emphasis is on recruiting new 'associates' & using their 'initiation fees' to run a barely-legal pyramid scheme. MK & Avon are generally considered to have good products that people actually want to buy.",
"if you are good at sales you are not working in multi level marketing, let's put it that way.",
"a better, more timely company to ask this about would be Herbalife. it is a company with products that have questionable benefits, almost no one buys, and focuses on recruiting others and convincing them to open their own shops. \nThere is currently some crazy stock market antics (one guy is shorting the stock to go to $0 when the world finally sees it's a scam), and investigations into several key players. \nIf this ELI5 has you curious and looking for a great place to start digging further for explanation and how people walk the line of MLM and pyramid, try researching the Herbalife (scam). \n\nTL;DR try replacing Mary Kay and Avon with Herbalife, you'll get amazing, relevant, current information.",
"Every corporation is a pyramid. It's only a pyramid \"scheme\" if it doesn't actually make any money other than entry fees.",
"My Gramma was an Avon lady. She actually sold products and it was a nice bit of income for her after she retired.\n\nNothing nefarious about it, and she got me weird quirky things for Christmas and my birthday from it. It was pretty cool.",
"I setup some lights for a couple Mary Kay pep rallys where they award the top sales people from the region. It seems like a nice way for people to work from home on their own schedule (men and women, obviously fewer men). For many of them it's their career, and they all seemed really happy and into it. At the end of the event, even us vendors were given Mary Kay sample promo kits. I got three and gave them to my mom and sisters. They enjoyed the products very much. I was skeptical about the system too, but after doing the events I saw the value for the salespeople. ",
"Would beach body and 21 day fix be considered pyramid scheme? ",
"Pyramid schemes do not offer a service or product, the concept is basically \"you pay us money, and the more people you can get to give us money will make you money\". Network marketing, or pyramid organizations, work in the same kind of way, except there is actually a tangible thing that your investment is buying, and if done correctly and diligently, you can actually make money from them.",
"I work at the Avon distribution center. Definitely a real business with real product. ",
"Add Rodan + Fields to the list, it's a total skin scam. ",
"They sell an actual product and you don't have to recruit others to join in order to earn money. My mother used to sell Avon. She made some decent pocket money and got lots of free stuff. I don't know much about Mary Kay, but Avon actually makes a lot of good products. I have a few that I consider my cosmetic staples. ",
"I almost did Mary Kay. I still buy and use their products. The last year or so, the company has made a lot of effort to dismiss the grandma's cosmetics reputation they have. Their colors and catalogs are focused on younger trends, edgier looks, and they even were the official make up for project runway. \n\nTo be honest, there was really nothing shady about it at all. The only real investment i had to make was purchasing and stocking my own inventory...but even when that wasn't affordable, there were ways around it to get started. The reason i did not end up doing Mary Kay was simply about my own time and motivation to do it. The MK rep that got me into at first was really nice, and very laid back. There are no quotas and no real pressure to actually make sales. Yes, you do make more money by recruiting and having a team, but none of that extra is a cut of anyone's profits. \n\nAs a MK sales person, at ANY level, with any amount of sales, you keep 50% of what you sell. If you decide to get out for good, you can sell all your merchandise back to the company for like 90 cents on the dollar. The company writes the check on any of the \"bonuses\" you get for recruiting. \n\nIt's very straight forward and low risk. ",
"Does anyone on this thread know anything about BNI. I witnessed a conference of theirs recently, and it struck me as super creepy. It's like a pyramid scheme for business referrals?",
"What about that stupid 'Beach Body' thing I'm hearing about all over FB? It's from the p90x people, and some old friends of mine have recently become fanatical about it all, almost cultish. Is it a pyramid scheme, or does it just draw out weird people like cross fit does?",
"Mary Kay and Avon are set up to cater to women who can't or don't want to go out and buy make up. Think of Betty Draper from MAD MEN. Today they often make office calls to busy women, but the idea is the same. They're not JUST about selling starter packs to the next level of marketing. \nTL/DR: Because they actually sell stuff. ",
"In had people working under me in Avon. If I didn't make my personal sales goal, I wouldn't make the bonus for my down line making sales.\nSo you can't sit around and just recruit people to make all your money for you. You gotta work too!",
"My mom used to sell Avon. You can make money from it if you have a big enough client list. The customer pays face value but, depending on your sales total, you're paying Avon a fraction of that price to order the merchandise and pocketing the difference. ",
"Anyone have any experience with isagenix? My sister in law sells it to my wife. I feel like I'm just flushing money down the drain. Both say it works, personally I see no change in either. I'd love to find some evidence online that it is worthless but I can't find any. Isagenix must have a great seo team working to keep all the bad reviews hard to find. ",
"I feel like what made me consider Mary Kay a pyramid scheme for a while was when a friend's mother was hired in. Her facebook posts became nothing but MK products and product parties she would throw. It really turned me off (as a male who uses no makeup) to both her and Mary Kay. However, it's a couple years later and I don't think shes ever tried to hire anyone else, just sell her product. \n\nTo me it was the whiplash of seeing someone I didn't associate as a salesperson becoming a (potentially bad) one. \n\nEdit: Not sure why I was downvoted. I guess I should make it clear that I don't actually think MK is a pyramid scheme. ",
"Well, the multi-level marketing scheme is *technically different* from a pyramid scheme (and just for completion sake, both are completely different from a Ponzi scheme). \n\nDespite this *technical difference* many multi-level marketing schemes have been classified as pyramid schemes and therefore are illegal (depending on jurisdiction). \n\nBut let me explain the difference and you tell me if you think one should be legal and the other not (I'm only going to hit the highlights). \n\n* Pyramid Scheme\n\nA Pyramid Scheme is composed of subordinates paying a superior a membership fee in return for the opportunity to take a portion of the membership fees from new entrants. \n\n* Multi-Level Marketing\n\nA MLM scheme is composed of subordinates earning the right to sell intentionally overpriced products in exchange for a commission (of sorts) on new entrants' sales. \n\n----\nSo it is a difference of the incentives and sustainability. \n\nThe incentives for a pyramid scheme is *only* to get new entrants to pay the membership fee and the sustainability falls of SHARPLY as lower subordinates are no longer able to get new members (a one way cash funnel). \n\nFor MLM, however, the incentive is for superiors to encourage their subordinates to sell a product, for the superior also to sell the product, and it actually is sustainable so long as everyone is selling the product. \n\nIt is a very fine line and I personally think both should be illegal because they both rely on at least a shade of fraud (they do not promote the average yield of new entrants, they only promote the data regarding earlier entrants). \n\nThere is also an element of price-fixing involved, but because MLM's are distributors and not consumers, the line is even hazier. ",
"A pyramid scheme typically makes money purely by recruiting others.\n\nMulti level marketing typically involves selling real products, potentially while recruiting others to sell too.\n\nAvon, as far as I'm aware, barely even counts as multilevel marketing. Most Avon sales people I've known have simply been doing the hard sell on the products, there's never even the idea of recruiting others.\n\nAmway is closer to pyrmaid, although again, I've know Amway people who simply sell (and use) the cleaning products.\n\nIt's when you start getting into aeroplane games and stuff like that where the true pyramid schemes arise, often there isn't even a product, it's just recruiting others.",
"In the United States pyramid schemes are illegal while businesses like Mary Kay and Avon are legal and are classified as Multilevel Marketing or Direct Sales companies. Main difference is there is an actual product being sold. \n\nI actually currently work on the corporate side of a newer Multilevel Marketing company. I am a staff photographer/videographer producing videos and photos for their conventions, which are basically big recruiting parties. Most of our customer/distributor base is outside the U.S. so I've had the chance to travel quite a bit and see the world. \n\nIt has been really interesting working in the industry. There are some really great people who are really successful but at the same time the industry tends to attract the biggest sleaze-bags as well. Biggest lesson I've learned: If having lots of money makes me anything like some of the top distributors in our company, I don't want any part of it.",
"[From _URL_1_](_URL_0_)\n\n**[Top 10 Reasons to NOT Do Mary Kay](_URL_0_mary-kay-facts/top-10-reasons-to-not-do-mary-kay/)**\n\n\n10. The minute you sign your agreement, your recruiter and/or sales director is going to put the squeeze on you to buy an inventory package. They won’t shut up unless you buy $600 wholesale, and even if you agree to that much, they’re still going to try to get you to do one of the other packages ($1,800, $2,400, $3,000, $3,600, or $4,800)\n\n9. The prizes they dangle in front of you are mostly dollar-store items more appropriate for your five-year-old.\n\n8. You’re not really allowed to advertise your business or sell through modern outlets such as ebay. Do any of these, and you’ll risk having your consultancy terminated.\n\n7. The market is saturated. If they don’t already have a consultant, they got rid of their pesky consultant, they don’t want a consultant, they don’t like the products, or they don’t want to be harassed by the MK lady.\n\n6. The products are constantly changing. The company uses new packaging or “changes” to the products in order to get you to buy more. If you bought inventory, some of that is now outdated, and the company is hoping that you’ll spend your money on the newest things. (And if you’re really lucky, your sales director who placed your first order for you knew what was being discontinued, and ordered you LOTS of it. That way you’ll have to put in another order sooner to have current products on hand.)\n\n5. You’ll be expected to wear a skirt to all company events. Although Mary Kay Inc. has officially done away with the requirement to wear pantyhose and closed toe shoes, many directors are still requiring it. This dress code is made without regard to the weather, your other obligations, your health, or your preference. (If you don’t follow it, you’ll be ridiculed and asked to not come back.)\n\n4. You won’t really make any money unless you recruit, recruit, recruit. Do you really want to spend your time trying to convince people to try to sell the products you’ve barely been able to sell?\n\n3. Your family and friends will not respect you or your “business”.\n\n2. You will spend most nights and weekends away from your husband and children, attending events, looking for new victims, and trying to sell the products. (I thought Mary Kay was supposed to help you be at home with them?)\n\n1. People usually work to make money. In MK you’ll likely be one of the over 99% who lose money in the venture, and if you do make money, it’ll probably only amount to minimum wage.",
"The hell's with people trying to defend these multi-million dollar corporations? Whether they're scams or not, they don't need our help to maintain their reputation. ",
"They are a hybrid of pyramid with a real product.\n\nAmway is an interesting example. The real money there is extracted by a separate company, AMO, which sells sales training and motivational courses to Amway distributors. AMO has a strong pyramid aspect too. The cleaning products etc do actually exist and do change hands for money, but the real story is the motivational cult and the pyramid aspect.",
"easiest way to tell is to have TWO people in the same office selling Avon/Mary Kay. They snarl at each other. AS others have said, they're not looking to sign up everyone in the office to sell it. They're looking to sell TO everyone in the office. ",
"On a pyramid scheme, who is on top will always be on the top profiting from who is on the bottom and the levels are limitless, so the more people recruited, the more money to the ones on the top. \nWith companies like Avon, you have a choice to sell only or to recruit and sell. If you recruit, you can only earn a small % up to the third level. Whomever recruits also needs to maintain a minimum sale per campaign, and the more you sell, the higher is your seller status. With that being said, being a Rep is a lot of hard work. \nI hope this can clarify how to distinguish a MLM from a pyramid scheme. \nI have worked for Avon corporate office a long time ago and this company is truly invested in empowering women all over the world with its business model. They have real people working to offer quality products to consumers via it's Reps and that's why you will not find Avon at a retail store, and you can easily find information about the company and its products online or from a Rep (usually a friend, family or co-worker).\nNow, if someone offers you a \"once in a lifetime opportunity\", but they don't have a clear description of what the product is, and the only way to find out is by visiting their exclusive link to \"learn more\" about it, along with upfront fees to receive your first motivational kit. Think twice. This could be a pyramid scheme. \n",
"They aren't a pyramid scheme, they are a triangle opportunity.",
"Would It Works! body wraps be considered a pyramid scheme or MLM scheme? My friend keeps trying to get me to sign up under her. Sounds like a scam to me. ",
"They can't be as bad as those fucking wraps. Half of my Facebook apparently now make 100k a year working from home",
"Fun Fact: I live near the Amway HQ and still see Avon *much* more frequently.",
"My mom sold Avon for a while. For all the jokes people might make, it's still not as cult-like as Essential Oils",
"Why isn't the \"church of scientology\" also considered a pyramid scheme?",
"Simple: what makes it a \"scheme\" is that there is no product. Everyone in the pyramid invests, but they never see a physical return. But Avon and Mary Kay fall under a different category called Multi Level Marketing. With a pyramid scheme, you will never have a chance off seeing your money again, it's just gone. with MML, you can make very good money selling their products, but you're gonna work your ass off to do it. The flack these companies catch is how they tout themselves as \"get rich quick\" deals when really you're gonna have to rope in friends, family, and strangers as clients and sellers to see any decent return. And because most of the company's profit is in the form of support materials and seminars in how to succeed at business, rather than from the actual product. That's the true con. You make a bunch of money selling their stuff and then they get you to give it right back for all the basically mandatory self help shit they provide.",
"For a great example of a fake MLM look at WakeUpNow. They barely mention what their \"product\" is, which turns out to be a website with coupons on it that are available everywhere else on the internet. They push people really hard to recruit and have very creepy, cultish propaganda seminars. Their website looks like a recruitment page for Scientology. And if you google them it's clear that they invest heavily in astroturfing.\nSomeone should seriously shut that organization down, it's the most thinly veiled pyramid scheme I've ever seen.",
"For a multi level marketing company to be legitimate it has to have a product or service to be sold. \n\nPeople think pyramid schemes are people at the top that make all the money, but multi level marketing it is effort that pays. \n\nYou can say that your job is a pyramid,because the people above you make the most money. ",
"So is herbal life a pyramid scheme then?",
"My wife does something similar... she is her best customer...",
"Because with Avon for example; you pay for goods to then sell on yourself. Pyramids usually sell the promise of a return on investment over time - which can be dodgy. But when Avon says \"give us 100sheets and we'll send you 50 tubs of lippy to sell to your mates\" that can be construed as a straight up transaction, albeit they promise you the lifestyle of self employment, incentive to recruit, yadda yadda. ",
"Because it's actual work. My mom used to do Avon when I was in elementary and middle school. She would be out driving around leaving Avon books in people's mail houses and delivering products mon-fri and sometimes weekends hours each day. She was the top Avon seller in southwest Michigan for a couple years in a row, and had been there for 15 years before leaving (You got big gifts/bonuses every 5 years you were apart of it). My mom made a living off of it, without having to scam people into joining a business. \n\nEdit: To add to above, my mom left because clients got limited and Mary Kay became more popular in our area. She was planning to leave after 12 years but stayed the extra 3 for her 15 year bonus. \n\n",
"It is a pyramid scheme, but those arent illegal. You guys are all thinking of ponzi schemes, which are illegal.",
"It uses the pyramid model, but unlike a pyramid scheme they're actually providing a product that can turn a profit",
"Basically a pyramid scheme requires people to constantly being in new donations and new investors for a product that doesn't exist, or exists only on paper. Some Mary Kay, Avon and Cutco (to name a few) actually have a product they dodge that naming. That said they usually deliberately set up their programs to ensure you never really make any good money without recruiting and even when you do start it's usually rare to make anything significant or even something on par with a regular job. Put in a simple sense they take advantage of your lack of understanding of business to convince you there is huge potential where there just isn't. They love to say things like, \"recruit ten friends, then they recruit ten friends and they recruit ten friends and now you make commission off 1000 people!\" Even if you only make 2 dollars per person per month that's still a livable wage if around two thousand a month and they usually promise much higher numbers per person. That's great on paper but you really think your area has one thousand people willing and able to do this work for you? More than that does your area contain enough OTHER people for those one thousand to actually sell to? You need about twenty sales per month in most places to make what I would consider competitive wages, that's 20 times 1001 or over 20,000 people every month. And most people don't need a new knife set or expensive make up kit every month so a huge percent of those people are now off limits add sales for at least a few months if not more depending on the product. All this basically breaks down to the companies scamming you by promising great rewards in the long term but the long term rewards are basically impossible. They get sales for a month or two, get you to recruit more people, you write because you don't see profit but those people you recruited still give it another month before they give up, then the people THEY recruited give it a couple months...it's a huge painful cycle but because there is a product involved in the cycle it's legitimate. It's still a scam they hit people who don't understand business with but it's legit. Unless those companies are quoting as saying it's a scam they are safe because they pretend they believe it's a good product and a good business opportunity. It isn't exactly illegal to be stupid so as long as they keep playing the idiot savant who stumbled into this and doesn't understand why most of its \"employees\" quit within two months after being paid 40 bucks for their time they can keep on doing it.\n\nShort answer? Because there is a product and they play dumb about it.",
"There's a difference between multi-level marketing and a pyramid scheme. The main difference, is that you actually sell a product with multi-level marketing, vs a pyramid scheme where it's a \"steal from Peter to pay Paul\" type deal. [I think I remember Dave Ramsey talking about it one time, I hope this is the right link.](_URL_0_)",
"In the United States the FTC defines a pyramid scheme as any multilevel marketing scheme where revenue is genereted primarily from recruiting new sellers rather than the products sold. It's sort of a legal grey area in most cases. There is money to be made in companies like Avon and Mary Kay but only if you are the first seller or most popular seller in your area. ",
"My Aunt is into Avon amongst other MLM's. She has been doing this for over 20 years. She claims, when recruiting, that you will make tons of cash, you know, champagne and caviar lifestyle? She lives in a smaller 1970's home with no yard, it is an infill. They do not have any money really. It is all a show."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.pinktruth.com/",
"PinkTruth.com",
"http://www.pinktruth.com/mary-kay-facts/top-10-reasons-to-not-do-mary-kay/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7e-089JOLM"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4nid29 | how would a simple deep learning algorithm work (example in description)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4nid29/eli5_how_would_a_simple_deep_learning_algorithm/ | {
"a_id": [
"d445r6c",
"d447fzh"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you wanted to do that, the easiest way, as you suspected, would be to hard-code an algorithm that averaged out the values of each pixel and then chose the nearest colour.\n\nBut let's say, for the sake of the argument, that you specifically require to do this using a deep learning algorithm.\n\nWhat you need is some data to train your system with - thousands of pictures where we already know what colour they are. We train the system by showing it each of those pictures, and pairing the picture with the known colour.\n\nNow the computer is trained, we can show it a picture where we *don't* know the colour. The computer will look for features it shares with all its known pictures, and will work out which of the known colours is closest.\n\nThe place where this starts to have benefits over the hard-coded algorithm is if the computer gets it wrong, or if we show it a colour the computer hasn't seen before. Every time the computer sees a picture, it gets added to its database, and if we tell the computer it's wrong, the computer will add the correct answer to its database too. This means that, the longer we use the system, the more accurate it becomes.",
"The example you have used is not a good application of deep learning algorithms. Your problem is linear in nature , i.e a variable ( avg hex value ) can solve it.\n\nDeep learning algorithms are great when there isn't a simple relationship between thousands of data-points and those relationships need to be modeled through several layers, where each layer captures a component of that relationship. \n\nIf I were to truly ELI5 this for deep learning, I would change the problem a bit.\nLet's say there were 10 songs in 10 different genres and given a random song, one has to guess the genre.\n\n (Training) Line up 10 of your friends and you make them listen to each one of them in order, also tell them what genre it belongs to and make them write down why they feel it belongs to a particular genre ( forward propagation )\n\nNow make the 10th person explain why he thinks that this song belongs to the particular genre to the 9th person, who inturn would explain to the 8th person and so on. At each stage one can update their notes based on other's opinion. ( Back Propagation ). \n\nDo this for all the songs.\n\n(Prediction) After this exercise has been completed, present a random song without telling them a genre and the first person will pass on his opinion onto the next and so on, until the last person will give you an answer based on everybody's opinion. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
98k1bz | why does buying things in bulk cost less per product compared to individual items? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/98k1bz/eli5_why_does_buying_things_in_bulk_cost_less_per/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4gklj9",
"e4gmb78",
"e4gn5d9",
"e4grj8n"
],
"score": [
7,
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There's a few reasons, but one of the biggest is the individual units apply to the \"impulse buyer\". Chewing gum or chocolate bars at a checkout are a perfect example - people see it, think \"I want one of those\", and will pay a premium for it without worrying about an extra quarter or two. They don't impulse-buy 20 at a time though - that's more of a stategic decision where price is usually factored into the buying decision... so you have to sell the collection at a lower per-unit cost or people just won't buy it. \n\nAdd to this that a lot of customers simply do not impulse-buy. They want those chocolate bars, but they are not going to pay luxury prices for them, and this goes doubly so for a family that uses a lot of consumables. So to get those customers to buy you give them a 'mass deal' on larger quantities, and this gets their business when otherwise you'd lose it.\n\nEconomics of business also plays a part, and this applies both to the store where you're buying stuff and the businesses that sell stock to that store. There's immediate-revenue from a big bulk sale (both supplier-to-store, and store-to-customer), and there's longer-term profit from a bunch of individual small purchases that each have a higher mark-up. Most businesses need both, and have to cater to both types of customer, but can only get the second type of customer if the bulk buy is cheaper per-unit than the individual buy.\n\nFinally, the cost of dealing with the individual product is a LOT higher. Packing a truck with individual small cartons, handling those, stocking them in different areas in the store, making their displays continue to look nice, ringing them through, and so on and so on... it all takes time and money to do. So selling a bunch of different individual units is usually more expensive than selling bulk quantities that you can bring in by the pallet-load and handle all the same... and so the cost goes up.\n\n\n\n\n",
"You are out to buy a tin can of corn. Not particular expensive. Or heavy. When you get there, you notice that they are bundled in packages of three's. You get three for the price of two, as long as you buy the bundle.\n\nHow does that make sense?\n\nLook at the logistics side of it.\n\nEvery time you take a bundle in the store, someone else have to restock the shelves. Well, not immediately, but eventually. The cost for restocking, in terms of time required to do it, is pretty much the same for putting up one can as it is for putting up a bundle of three.\n\nIt's restocked from a pallet of such bundles out in the warehouse. A pallet that took the same effort to order as the pallet right next to it with the single-cans. And took about the same effort to ship to you. And took abut the same effort i the suppliers warehouse too. And the sales desk at the supplier spent as much time on that pallet as the other one.\n\nWhen it matters is in the store. Because that is where it has to be handled.\n\nAnd when you reach the checkout, the three cans can be checked out *faster* than two individual cans, which means that even though you get a lot more for your trouble, you save the store a tiny amount of money when you buy them.\n\nAnd that is what you are rewarded for.\n\nYou may have noticed that this type of bundles are very popular for cheap products that people tend to buy several of. Because every time the store handles them, they nibble a bit on the sales margin on them. By rewarding you for buying one single item that is more expensive than it's bundled contents, it's all of a sudden worth their trouble to sell it to you.",
"With food, packaging costs are a big cost in the overall cost of the product and sometimes cost more than the food inside.\nI can buy a 50lb bag of oatmeal for $23.00. Or I can buy 50 tubes of Quaker Oats at ($2.68 per tube) for a total of $134.00\n\nI could purchase a 1 tin super sack of oats for less than 40 bags of the 50lbs of oats\n\nThe only thing you need to keep in mind is:\nDo you have the space to store the bulk purchase \nCan you store the bulk purchase in such a way that it will not go stale before you can use it\n\n",
"I’m in manufacturing. Here’s our process to determine pricing:\n\nI have to buy raw materials for a job that is 1 piece, 100 pieces, or 1000 pieces. My raw material costs will vary based on how many pieces I buy much in the same way I will explain below as to why my sale price varies based on volume. Just know I can buy 1000 pieces of raw materials significantly lower than 100 or 1 piece. \n\nSo, say it’s a custom designed part just for you. I have to pay an engineer a few hours labor time to design it, no matter whether you buy 1 or a thousand it has to be designed. Same goes for designing fixturing to hold the part while I machine it. Maybe I need to buy special tools or a special tool holder, all just for these parts. More money out of my pocket. Then I have to pay a manufacturing engineer or programmer to write tool paths for the machines to make the part correctly. Doesn’t matter if it is one or 1000...same cost to write the programs. Then I have to set up each machine to actually make parts...usually measured in hours per setup. Then production runs the part or parts. Then I have to inspect the part(s) and program a machine to do that function. I have to buy packaging which also comes with bulk discount pricing, or through the nose if I buy one box. \n\nIn manufacturing you have a fixed cost per job which is all the non recoverable design, programming, and setup time. Say that is 20 hours at an average cost of $120/hour (includes the hourly or salary rate for the person, an overhead burden rate for the machine payment, rent, etc.). So that right there is $2,400 in costs that must be allocated to the job along with any special tooling or fixture costs. Let’s assume a realistic $600 for that. So we have an even $3000 in non recoverable fixed costs. \n\nLet’s say raw material is $10 per part, machining cost is $10, maybe we have to nitride finish for $10, and packaging is $5. So our actual cost to produce is $35. Here’s how the quote breaks down:\n\n1 pc - $3,000/1 + $35 + profit margin = $3,800ish\n\n\n100pc - $3,000/100 + $35 + profit margin = $100ish\n\n\n1000pc - $3,000/1000 + $35 + profit margin = $55ish\n\n\n\nYou can see how the fixed costs dominate the low volumes but become insignificant when quantities increase. It’s also why prototyping is massively expensive in some manufacturing methods. Cheers. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3d92rf | how are japanese prank shows able to get away with such ridiculous stunts without getting sued? | Just came across a clip from a Japanese television show where they basically trick an unsuspecting person into thinking he is going to die:
[Crazy Japanese Sniper Prank](_URL_0_)
I'm from America where businesses can get sued for serving their coffee too hot so, how are these shows in Japan able to pull some these stunts on people without fear of legal repercussions?
If this particular one turns out to be staged, I feel like I've seen dozens of others that people in America would say cause, "extreme emotional damages." | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3d92rf/eli5_how_are_japanese_prank_shows_able_to_get/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct2vto3"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"In Japan the fee to file a lawsuit is proportional to the damages, which makes speculative lawsuits costly. \n\nAlso, keep in mind that McDonald's was serving coffee hot enough to melt flesh nearly instantly, and doing so to reduce their coffee costs (because the hotter coffee meant it could be kept longer until it was too cold to serve--throwing out coffee in all their stores cost more than paying damages that result from melting people's skin when they inevitably, occasionally spill it). "
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozrdXdjlpz8"
] | [
[]
] |
|
cdgibq | why is it when people are watching tv they feel so sleepy and then go straight to bed and feel wide awake? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cdgibq/eli5_why_is_it_when_people_are_watching_tv_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"etttfrx"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Blue light drains your eyes making them dry and tired. Also lots of times the brains wiring when it comes to going to bed is slightly off simply bc most people now play on their phone in bed or watch TV in bed making the brain think \"okay you're in bed still at least two hours of other things going on before sleep\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2fxnmo | when i get a cold how does the virus get me sick? why do i get a runny nose and sore throat? | Playing Plague Inc, this question came up. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fxnmo/eli5_when_i_get_a_cold_how_does_the_virus_get_me/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckdp4lc"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"When you get a cold all the symptoms you experience are the body attempting to eliminate the virus. You create large amounts of mucus as one of the first lines of defence, the body tries to prevent any foreign organisms getting further into the body. Mucus and snot catch the viruses and it then pours out of your nose and gets coughed up in an attempt to expel it.\n\nA sore throat is caused by the next line of defence. Infected tissue in your throat becomes a battleground and as cells get destroyed in the crossfire the pain increases.\n\nFurther symptoms like headaches and temperatures are also the result of your body fighting the virus."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
20y8q0 | you are thirsty. your body needs water. how long does it take for the water you drink to "rehydrate" you? | I'm not talking about total hydration level. How quickly does consumed water start to act in your body to hydrate you? Does it have to digest first? Does it get absorbed by other parts of your body? Should you drink water even if you're not thirsty to maintain a hydrated body? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20y8q0/eli5_you_are_thirsty_your_body_needs_water_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg7uv1f",
"cg7uzn5",
"cg7v53o",
"cg7ypdk",
"cg80kcf",
"cg87q86"
],
"score": [
9,
6,
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"I'm not sure, but I figure if I put a slightly accurate answer in here, someone else will explain why I'm wrong in great detail and you'll get your answer that way. You're welcome in advance.\n\nI always notice that if I'm really thirsty, I'll feel a bit tired as well. If I drink water, I feel more awake in about 15 minutes.\n\nI've also heard that warm water absorbs faster than cold (cold temps make your body contract, so I suppose the theory is that the temp makes it harder for the water to go through membranes).",
"There are a lot of factors that come into play. When you drink water, it is not really digested. It is absorbed in the GI tract into your blood. The blood will then eventually reach the kidney. The kidney's job is to absorb, secrete, and filter the blood to create urine. Many factors, like blood pressure and volume (among others), are involved with the rate at which the kidney does this, called glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Basically, the kidney allows water and smaller solutes into the kidney to begin formulation of urine.\n\nIf you have a lot of water in your system, your blood will be more dilute. The GFR will increase, thus increasing your output of urine. This is why if you drink a lot of water over a shorter period of time, your urine becomes clear. If you do not have a lot of water in your body, the kidney needs to conserve water. The kidney will resorb solutes, which will in turn allow your body to retain water and excrete more concentrated (darker) urine. For these reasons, you should always be drinking water. ",
"There are better answers here that answer your first few questions, but I do have an answer for the last one.\n\n**Yes!**",
"iirc its like 10 minutes (source: ER doc treating me for dehydration)\n\nof course, these kinds of answers are very generalized because the human body doesn't work at a uniform pace. ",
"I was in a hospital for an injury in a remote location where I ended up severely dehydrated before getting to help. With IV fluids I went from severe dehydration to \"I have to pee now\" in about 30-40 minutes. ",
"If a hangover is dehydration and I drink a crapload of liquids for an hour or two, it still takes me all day to feel better?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3f7led | why the percentage sign (%) is 0 divided by 0. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3f7led/eli5_why_the_percentage_sign_is_0_divided_by_0/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctm29s5"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Cool question. \nSo prior to around 1425 AD \"*per cento*\" was used along with a number of symbols like the one in this image: \n[1339](_URL_2_) \n \nSometime around 1425-1435 a scribe changed it \"*pc*\" with a loop as in this image: \n[1425](_URL_1_) \n \nBy 1650 the loop had evolved into a horizontal fraction sign and sometime therafter lost the \"pc\" altogether like this pic: \n[1684](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Percent_sign_in_1648.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Percent_sign_in_1425.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Percent_sign_in_1339.png"
]
] |
||
268tyc | why truck lovers hate prius | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/268tyc/eli5_why_truck_lovers_hate_prius/ | {
"a_id": [
"choqrg7",
"choqt6g",
"choqtfg"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Other than looking like a wedge of cheese I do not like the drivers. They get it into their head that they always have to speed up and then slam on their brakes to keep the battery charged. So they ride your ass and then ride the brakes. Also it appears that the Prius does not have blinkers as standard equipment and no one wants to pay for the option. ",
"don't hate prius'. we hate the smug drivers.",
"its probably because they grew up with a mindset of having big cars and anything smaller is inferior. I personally drive a prius and hangout with others who drive lifted trucks. I asked them and they said that its just \"wimpy\" to be eco friendly and it looks wimpy.\n\nI suppose you could have a scenario where you own a large 60\" flat screen TV and you go to someone else's house to watch football who has a 18\" TV. It isn't acceptable because its inferior to what you have. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3fr3js | what is the difference between sexual assault, sexual harassment, and rape? | Title says it | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3fr3js/eli5_what_is_the_difference_between_sexual/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctr4rzc",
"ctr4s8j",
"ctr4sn7",
"ctr5zqs"
],
"score": [
7,
160,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"Sometimes the terms can overlap, although some finer definitions have rape specifically as a non-consensual/coerced sexual penetration, while sexual assault involves any sort of non-consensual/coerced sexual act. This would thus include rape as well as any non-penetrative act, such as groping. \n\nSexual harassment involves the coercion or threatening of someone in a sexual nature, but does not necessarily involve a sexual act in and of itself. Something such as threatening to fire a subordinate unless they agree to sexual relations, for instance. ",
"If you tell your co worker she has a fuckable ass every day, even when she tells you to stop, that's sexual harassment.\n\nIf you grab her ass and tell her she has a fuckable ass, that's sexual assault.\n\nIf you pin her down and fuck her ass, that's rape.",
"sexual assault is unwanted touching, sexual harassment is unwanted behavior(includes touching talking and gestures that are sexual),rape is any forced extreme sexual activity against the victims will.\nthe meaning very based on where you live and who you talk to.",
"Sexual assault is nonconsensual sexual violence, of which rape is a type. The exact point where sexual assault becomes rape varies with jurisdiction, but is usually defined by penetration. Sexual assault is always a crime.\n\nSexual harassment unwanted sexual advances, which can include any number of things that put the victim in a sexual explicit situation...speech, images, gestures, nonsexual contact, etc. Sexual harassment is usually a civil matter, but can be criminal in extreme cases."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
26bz9b | why all the hatred towards puffin memes all of sudden? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26bz9b/eli5_why_all_the_hatred_towards_puffin_memes_all/ | {
"a_id": [
"chpl6y5",
"chplcen",
"chpm0cv"
],
"score": [
5,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"It's an excuse for people to vent their blatant racism, sexism, classism etc, under the guise of \"just sayin\" ",
"All of a sudden? It's UNpopular opinion puffin, people post opinions they think are unique to them but actually aren't that unpopular. ",
"The initial goal of the meme was to be unpopular, but because people upvote things they actually like and agree with, only popular things get upvoted. As a result, people are frustrated that the more popular opinions get upvoted for what should be an unpopular meme, despite the fact it goes against the logic of voting. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
16gq83 | fake torrents with thousands of seeds and leeches | Often when browsing for torrents I come across files which are obviously fake or spam based on the comments and reviews but report having thousands of seeds and leeches.
Are there really that many people with the wrong file still uploading and downloading it? Is it some sort of spoof on the reporting? If so how does that work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16gq83/eli5_fake_torrents_with_thousands_of_seeds_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7vxz4n"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"People can purchase seeds for their torrents, which leads to many leechers thinking it's real. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2lontw | why is beef jerky so expensive? | Is the seasoning cocaine or something? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2lontw/eli5_why_is_beef_jerky_so_expensive/ | {
"a_id": [
"clwpm9y",
"clwpmch",
"clwpmcx",
"clwqm9j",
"clwr87o",
"clwrf5p",
"clwrt3i",
"clws02s",
"clws07w",
"clws447",
"clwt3hr",
"clwteh6",
"clwu0m1",
"clwuf0k",
"clwun8s",
"clwv1zp",
"clwv2e9",
"clwv7km",
"clwvf2g",
"clwvf88",
"clwvv3a",
"clwz7n7"
],
"score": [
3295,
28,
3,
888,
98,
392,
8,
7,
5,
8,
2,
14,
2,
4,
3,
2,
2,
56,
10,
6,
2,
21
],
"text": [
"Dehydrated meat loses a lot of size. A relatively small amount of jerky takes a lot of meat to make.",
"It's the amount of beef that goes into it. You'll see the same thing in the price of [dried fruit](_URL_0_). Then there's all the extra processing and time involved. ",
"It's made out of beef, which isn't cheap. Compare it to the price of the cuts of steak needed to make it.",
"[Here is a website that answers your exact question!](_URL_0_)\n\ntl;dr It's expensive to make. According to the website, 10 lbs of fresh beef = 3-4 lbs of jerky.",
"I always wondered this myself... until I made my own. The meat shrinks a lot when you dry it. I did save money making my own, but not nearly as much as I thought I would.",
"I can help here. Food scientist and I do a lot of private consulting for beef jerky companies.\n\nFirst and foremost its important to know how beef jerky is made. Beef jerky starts off as large cuts of meat. This meat is then marinated for roughly 24 hours (some longer and some shorter). \n\nThe next step is processing (ie smoke houses). The meat is taken from the marinates which usually consists of water/sugar/spices/flavors and an antimicrobial. The smoke houses are very expensive machines and they are basically dehydrating the meat and adding \"smoke\" flavor and color.\n\nAs the meat dehydrates (losing water) from its natural size, a LOT of weight is lost. This makes the 1# steak MUCH smaller. Because the company pays for the meat on its initial weight before losing all that water, the are basically shrinking their weight, thus having to charge more to even out their costs and processing.\n\nPackaging is also very expensive as are the machines that do MAP (modified atmosphere packaging) that sucks the normal air (nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide etc.) and replaces it with a low Oxygen air in order to keep rancidity from oxidation down. This means better flavor! Some beef jerky can last nearly a year in the packaging you would buy from Jack Links or Orberto (BEFORE opening!).\n\nEdit: Spelling\n",
"Jerky is made from large amounts of steak and energy from the dehydrating process. Two things that tend to be expensive.",
"Dried meat is for ballers only. Thus the monetary cost is high. As is the sodium.",
"My dad spent 5 years making his own beef jerky, built his own small smokehouse and everything for it.\n\nThe cuts of meat do start out much larger than what the end product becomes, like others have said, along with the pre-smoking marinading and actual smoking, it makes sense.\n\nBut honestly I think my dad had the right idea, he would purchase meat from a local business, and after having built his own, very small smokehouse (talking like 4x4 at max, 10 feet tall approx), he would create his own marinade in a tub and let it sit for about a day, and then purchase his own hickory(?) smoking chips to fuel the smoking process. \n\nStuff turned out great everytime he made it, would sell it at work, and had 4 different flavors through marinading. It definitely wasn't a crippling cost, but I believe it was also a hobby he enjoyed, so he was okay with spending a but more money to do the process himself.",
"I make my own beef jerky from time to time.\n\nBasically, you can take 16 dollars of London Broil and turn it into two, full sandwich bags of jerky. aka, it takes a lot of meat to make a little bit of jerky. \n\nWhat you're paying for is a little bit of convenience and a whole lot more meat than you actually are seeing in that little bag. ",
"It takes roughly four pounds of beef to make one pound of jerky.",
"I'll explain this since everyone wants to give you the whole \"It's all about the water thing man\" kind of answer.\n\nI assume you see the cost of beef in the store. Well most companies buy that in bulk, or just buy the cow in bulk (yes, the whole cow. It's cheap, and multiple parts can make the same type of jerky). This cost on top of the cost of labor, marinade ingredients, and any other business cost is **overhead cost**, or the cost to make the product.\n\nNow here is what everyone else says, so I'll say it one more time. It is all about the water LOSS. 10 pounds of meat will equate to about 2-3 pounds (maybe 3-4 pounds if your lucky) of dried meat in the end. The cost is still there, just not the meat.\n\nWhen you divide the amount of overhead by amount of product you have to sell, this is the cost at which you can sell it at minimum. (Say overhead is $100 USD, and you have 10 items to sell. You can sell them for a minimum of $10 USD). Sadly, you **NEED** to make a profit, so this is where you have a thing called **markup**, or the percentage of profit by which you plan to make off each item being sold. Usually this range is between 5-13% depending on the industry you are in. Some industries can reach 100-300% markup while others are as low as 1-3%. (So if our minimum price is $10 USD, and our markup is %5. Our new sale price is $10.50 USD. You make $0.50 off each item you sell).\n\nHope this explains it a lot better then others :)",
"Since we are on the subject and several people have said they make their own, I live in the city and specifically an apt building. Is there a really good dehydrator I can use to make my own?",
"Only thing I can provide is a way to make it yourself to save a few bucks.\n\n_URL_0_",
"It's not. There's a really damned large profit margin on beef jerky. I used to work for a company that produced it. They had an employee store where we could get it slightly above cost to make it. The big 1lbs bags would cost us around $2-3 for an employee to buy. So I'm guessing it's around $1.50ish to make. ",
"I worked 4 years in an old fashioned meat market. Jerky day was just that, an 8 hour day devoted to jerky. We used top and bottom round cuts of beef. I preferred to slice the top round since the grain of the meet was easier to follow. We would make about 50# of jerky. Some went into a tumbler with teriyaki spices for 20 minutes, some went into a salt brine for 3 hours. We then laid out all the pieces on 6'x6' wire screens and filled up a smoking rack, I think the rack held 10 screens. It rolled into a giant cooker thing but I can't remember how long it cooked. We then picked off all the jerky and stored it for that weeks sales. It was the nastiest, most labor intensive job I ever had and I miss it. \n\nTL;DR: I used to make beef jerky and it took a long time. That's why its so expensive.",
"we make our own beef jerky at home. we buy 5 lbs of flank steak for $10/lb. All the ingredients to marinade the meat in the fridge for 8-20hrs. Then about 8 hours in the 1kW dehydrator. This will last us about a month having a few pieces a day, for about $70 of food plus power and time costs. It surprised me the first time we did it too!",
"Shameless plug for /r/jerky \n\nWe are a very small group, but we enjoy making and sharing our jerky making process and recipes. Come on over and check us out and post some of your own!",
"Because beef is expensive and beef jerky is basically concentrated beef.",
"Honestly..it's not expensive. Buy a dehydrator to start and cheap flank attack from a butcher or grocery store that is on managers special. Then step it up to marinades rubs and buy a smoker.... You can even save more money by getting into hunting. Kill a large game animal like a deer or elk and u have 100+ pounds of jerky for the cost of a bullet. I also make duck goose and even pork jerky",
"Also beef prices have gone up 20% and it is not stopping. ",
"meat is expensive"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.vitacost.com/bobs-red-mill-dried-blueberries?csrc=GPF-PA-Food%20%26%20Beverages-039978001047&ci_gpa=pla&ci_kw=&ci_src=17588969&ci_sku=039978001047&gclid=CLzCvYO-68ECFSEV7Aodjx0Amg"
],
[],
[
"http://thenewprimal.com/why-is-jerky-so-expensive/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3JetOoEngs"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2fuec3 | why is buzzfeed 'click-bait'? | What makes Buzzfeed click-bait? I read some articles out of interest or boredom, but click-bait sounds sinister in some way. What does it mean and why is Buzzfeed hated for it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fuec3/eli5_why_is_buzzfeed_clickbait/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckctflk",
"ckctflm",
"ckcth2z",
"ckctht8",
"ckcti9u"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
6,
6,
3
],
"text": [
"It's headlines are purposefully designed to get people to click the link and thus increase traffic, often leaving out key information to get the user to wonder what it's talking about in the first place. The actual content may or may not be in line with the headline.",
"Sensational titles\n\nEach \"article\" takes up multiple pages for more page views and ad views. ",
"Click bait means article titles that tease you to click them, like \"you wouldn't believe what this dog did\", instead of an actual informative title. Sites that use these are hated exactly because they force to click the article to know what it's about. ",
"Their title are very intentionally created to raise questions without answering them in the hopes you'll click. They also use now-cliched hooks like \"the answer will shock you!\"\n\nBuzzfeed wants your clicks so they can make their money.\n\nHere's a headline and short description pulled from the BBC:\n\n > **Iraq swears in unity government**\nIraq swears in a new government with Sunni and Kurdish deputy prime ministers after weeks of deadlock, as the country struggles against Islamic State fighters.\n\nIt tells you what you need to know concisely. If you want details you're free to read the whole article, but what you're going to get in that article is made perfectly clear by that little headline and short follow-up.\n\nBuzzfeed, on the other hand, raises more questions than it answers with a click-bait article headline. It's anti-content.\n\nThat said Buzzfeed is hardly alone in click-baiting; plenty of news agencies have done it and do it today too. Even the BBC has made some dubious article headlines in the click-bait tradition.\n\nAlso I hear people complaining about Buzzfeed being abject plagiarists and inane much more than about click-bait titles. ",
"Sensationalist headlines that trigger curiosity out of mundane events. They don't necessarily have anything interesting but their dramatic usage of superlatives makes people click. The clicks count to ads, whether or not people read the article/ads. Then there will another, then more.. and so on. I got sick of it fast, but there still are a lot of people who aren't sick of it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4axq5k | why some cats can be domesticated and others can't if raised from birth | I understand the legal limitations, but it seems that many species of cats (especially big ones) can't be domesticated regardless of their upbringing, or at least that their domestication is extremely difficult and has a high failure rate.
tl;dr - I really want a pet Ocelot | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4axq5k/eli5_why_some_cats_can_be_domesticated_and_others/ | {
"a_id": [
"d14dbqp",
"d14meaa",
"d14q4w1"
],
"score": [
10,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"I think you mean tame, not domesticated. There is a big difference.\n\nA tame animal is used to humans but still has wild instincts. It's offspring will not be tame/domesticated. But the offspring can be taught to be tame also.\n\nA domesticated animal will have offspring that are also, basically, tame around humans.\n\nA wild animal can be hard to tame depending on a lot of things. I believe pack animals are easier to tame due to their instincts towards pack behavior, but I will let others expand on that.",
"Specifically in the case of the house cat (felis catus), they domesticated themselves after developing a symbiotic relationship with people (relationship with mutual benefit). The cat was attracted to human settlements due to the high concentration of vermin (rats and things). The vermin were drawn to humans because of our grain storage. And the humans liked having cats around to hunt the rats which would eat the grain or spread disease. \n\nWild cats, like Ocelots or larger felines like a lion don't have this kind of relationship with people.",
"[Domestication](_URL_0_) differs from taming. Taming is just a wild or feral animal that becomes used to the presence of humans (e.g. zoo animals). We basically just train the animal to be calm, we are changing the behaviour of the individual through training - nothing more. When we domesticate we are genetically changing a species's DNA by artificially selecting for specific desired traits - like say a spotted fur coat or docility. Domestication genetically changes a population, and over time the individuals genetically change. *You domesticate a species, you tame the individual.* Feral animals (e.g. horses, dogs, cats) are still domesticated animals - their genes have been altered through artificial selection by humans. They are not wild animals even though they live in the wild. They are domestic animals that have escaped, and now through circumstances that are usually beyond their control, now live and breed in the wild. \n\nUsing your example, an Ocelot is a wild animal that has not been domesticated. When kept in captivity it can be, through training, tamed. But being tamed is not the same thing as being domesticated.\n\nMost animals can be tamed, but only a few species can be domesticated. Here are a couple of traits that make a species more likely to be a successful candidate for domestication:\n\n* Flexible diet – Species that are willing to consume a wide variety of food sources and can live off less cumulative food from the food pyramid (such as corn or wheat), particularly food that is not utilized by humans (such as grass and forage) are less expensive to keep in captivity. Carnivores by definition feed primarily or only on flesh, which requires the domesticators to raise additional animals just to feed them, though they may exploit sources of meat not utilized by humans, such as scraps and vermin.\n\n* Reasonably fast growth rate – Fast maturity rate compared to the human life span allows breeding intervention and makes the animal useful within an acceptable duration of caretaking. Some large animals require many years before they reach a useful size.\n\n* Ability to be bred in captivity – Species that are reluctant to breed when kept in captivity do not produce useful offspring, and instead are limited to capture in their wild state. Species such as the panda, antelope and giant forest hog are territorial when breeding and cannot be maintained in crowded enclosures in captivity. Still others like the Indri have never been successfully kept or bred in captivity.\n\n* Pleasant disposition – Large creatures that are aggressive toward humans are dangerous to keep in captivity. The African buffalo has an unpredictable nature and is highly dangerous to humans; similarly, although the American bison is raised in enclosed ranges in the Western United States, it is much too dangerous to be regarded as truly domesticated. Although similar to the domesticated pig in many ways, Africa's warthog and bushpig are also dangerous in captivity.\n\n* Temperament which makes it unlikely to panic – A creature with a nervous disposition is difficult to keep in captivity as it may attempt to flee whenever startled. The gazelle is very flighty and it has a powerful leap that allows it to escape an enclosed pen. Some animals, such as the domestic sheep, still have a strong tendency to panic when their flight zone is encroached upon. However, most sheep also show a flocking instinct, whereby they stay close together when pressed. Livestock with such an instinct may be herded by people and dogs.\n\n* Modifiable social hierarchy – Social creatures whose herds occupy overlapping ranges and recognize a hierarchy of dominance can be raised to recognize a human as the pack leader."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication"
]
] |
|
6co2jy | what is the biological function of a coma? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6co2jy/eli5_what_is_the_biological_function_of_a_coma/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhw2ddx",
"dhw2qmw",
"dhw4eir",
"dhwc9fn",
"dhwial7"
],
"score": [
5,
10,
23,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"There isn't a biological function of a coma. Without medical intervention a coma leads to death. A coma state is just where a person isn't dead but isn't showing signs of consciousness as we would usually expect.",
"A coma suggests disruption or trauma to the brain, making wakefulness impossible. I'm not sure what you mean by 'biological function' but it is a result of something not working correctly. ",
"A coma is the body's equivalent of the Blue Screen of Death on a computer, or the engine stalling in your car. It doesn't have a purpose. It's an error state that means something has gone very wrong.",
"Coma happens when the top part of your brain stops working and only the bottom part is working. The top part is really big in humans and is in charge of complex math, reasoning, planning, and memorization. The bottom part of a human brain is in charge of telling the lung muscles and heart muscles when to work, and is just about the same in a human as it is in a cat, or alligator, or any other animal. ",
"The only biological benefit I could see (not being a biologist/doctor) is that operating all of the higher brain functions is rather expensive nutritionally. That's part of why you sleep when you're ill, to allow your body to focus its energy on fixing what's wrong.\n\nBut yeah, I think it's largely a case of your brain being broken. The other, most optimistic reasoning I can come up with would be if it were attempting to repair/reroute around the damaged sectors without signals being sent through, kind of like how you don't try to repair electrical systems with the power on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3j0r9c | why we humans have to workout and go to the gym to gain some serious muscle, however big animals such as bears and tigers don't workout despite being extremely strong? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3j0r9c/eli5_why_we_humans_have_to_workout_and_go_to_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"culaz6x"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Having a lot of muscle is not efficient, since your body consumes more resources to maintain it. That's why if you don't work out, your body senses that you're not using that muscle and gets rid of it. Animals do use all of the muscle that they have."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2eice5 | how do anti-lock brakes work in a car? and how are they safer than normal brakes | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2eice5/eli5_how_do_antilock_brakes_work_in_a_car_and_how/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjzrx4y",
"cjzs2sk",
"cjzs4lx",
"cjztxc5"
],
"score": [
2,
17,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I think they have computer chips that even though you push down on the pedal, they adjust how much the brakes are applied depending on conditions like speed and traction to stop the brakes from locking up.",
"Without ABS, the brakes apply steady force. If the stopping force exceeds the rolling force, then the wheel & tire lock up. Then the vehicle either stops or starts skidding. \n\nWhen the tires are skidding, you lose most of your ability to steer the vehicle and are thus more likely to crash. \n\nABS basically turns the brake force on and off several times a second. This makes it easier for the wheels to keep rolling, rather than locking up and skidding. \n\nSo the safety aspect of ABS, is that you are more likely to retain the ability to steer when under heavy braking. \n\nWithout ABS, we were taught to pump the brakes to prevent skidding. If your vehicle does have ABS, you are not supposed to pump the brakes, because the system is pumping them for you, faster than you could. ",
"There are wheel speed sensors on each wheel in the car, normally when brakes lock up one set will lock up first i.e. the rears will lock up while the front still rotates. A computer will detect that the front wheels are still turning while the rear wheels are locked up; it will then modulate a valve in your braking system (this is what causes the brake pedal to feel like it's vibrating) that will allow brakes to slip in a controlled manner. This allows the wheels to still rotate so you still have steering control of your car. If your wheels lock up you can no longer steer the car and it skids instead.",
"There are rotation sensors on each wheel that link up to a hub inside the engine compartment. The sensors let the system know when a wheel has (almost) stopped rotating, which prompts the system to release braking pressure to that wheel until it starts rotating again, when it starts braking it again.\n\nIf ABS is coupled with ESP, the system also ensures that the car brakes in a straight line, that is that this asymmetric modulation of the braking force does not determine the car to spin or otherwise lose balance. \n\nWith no ABS under heavy braking you are wholly unable to steer the car as steering wheel inputs have no impact on the direction of the car. And even though ABS performs poorer than normal brakes in certain occasions (see ice) the ability to steer is considered more important, i.e. it's better to avoid a tree than to smash into it at a slower speed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
dphyzp | how does an organization like the mlb enforce a lifetime ban placed on a fan? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dphyzp/eli5_how_does_an_organization_like_the_mlb/ | {
"a_id": [
"f5vmpnm",
"f5vne6p",
"f5vonlj",
"f5wckzv"
],
"score": [
30,
9,
101,
10
],
"text": [
"Basically... the don't really actively enforce it, because catching someone that really wants to get in can be near impossible. However, when you get kicked out and banned, if you try to come back and do get caught, you may face some serious legal issues, as part of getting kicked out you agree and sign paperwork that says if you do come back its not gonna turn out well. In practicality, it apparently works good enough for people not to attempt to sneak in it appears\n\nThere's lots of articles on this as well, it seems to come up ever once in a while when there is some notable ban, here's one below\n\n_URL_0_",
"I worked security at a few venues that enforced bans on some of the more colorful locals. Generally it just means that they've been made aware they are banned, and security has their picture. If they get caught in the venue again, they'll end up with a trespassing citation.\n\nMostly nobody tries *that* hard to keep people out. Troublemakers always make more trouble if they come back, and when you catch them again you can hand them off to the cops for a fat fine.",
"The primary purpose of bans like this, whether it is a sports league or your local liquor store, isn't to prevent someone from coming back. The purpose is to make it a crime to come back. All they really want to is for people not to make trouble...if you come back and behave, mission accomplished, they don't really care. But if they do make trouble, they are facing criminal charges just for being there, on top of anything else they might have been doing.",
"Also, MLB operate a large quantity of robotic mosquitoes that systematically sample the blood of every visitor and then form a DNA profile. They share this with NFL and NBA and between them they hold the largest such database in the US apart from the one the Illuminati have from all the microchips embedded in pumpkin-spiced latté cups."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/adam-jones-stadium-bans-fenway-park-cameras-security-050817"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
9qyz17 | how exactly does battery "give power" to a smartphone or laptop? what magic does electricity do to a battery? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9qyz17/eli5_how_exactly_does_battery_give_power_to_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8cr6x6",
"e8crg5z",
"e8cudpp",
"e8cz33i",
"e8d38i1",
"e8d7mx4"
],
"score": [
17,
5,
14,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A battery sort of burns some substance, very slowly, in a way that makes the energy come out in electricity, instead of heat.\n\nThe basic idea is that you make the chemical reactions happen in two steps, one of which happens at one side, and the other happens at the other side. One reaction needs an electron, which is a particle that has an electric charge, and the other reaction releases an electron. This means that the first step pulls electrons from the first side, leaving it with a positive charge, and the second step releases electrons to the other side, making for a negative charge. And if you have too many electrons in one place, and not enough in another, then you can connect a circuit, like a light bulb or a phone, between the two places, and electrons will be forced through the circuit - and we call this electricity.",
"Battery dislocate ions from A to B to produce electricity. \n\nWhen you charge it the electricity moves back most of the ions from B to A, this is a cycle\n\nRinse and repeat.\n\nWhen the ions can't move back the battery goes bad.",
"Power - electricity - electrical current is a flow of electrons along a wire. For electrons to flow, there needs to be a completed circuit - they need to be able to return where they started unless they were consumed by something along the way.\n\nIn a battery, the start and end points of this circuit (cathode and anode, the + and - poles) are immersed in a special material that contains lots of ions. An ion is an atom with a non-neutral charge - usually an atom with an extra electron. Because it's unstable, the ion is very happy to let go of the extra electron. So there are all these extra electrons floating around in a charged battery, attracted to the cathode and repelled by the anode.\n\nWhen the circuit is completed (the device is switched on), the electrons start flowing out through the cathode, along the wires, and back into the battery through the anode. Because electricity is consumed by the device, fewer electrons come back than went out, and eventually the battery runs out of free electrons to send - so it's discharged.\n\nWhen a battery is being recharged, the external source of electricity sends a flow of fresh electrons in through the anode and out of the cathode. The ionic material in the battery captures all the extra electrons it can, and stores them for the future.",
"chemical A has lots of electrons, chemical B wants them. chemical B pulls the electrons through the device to steal the electrons from A. \n\nin some cases, like with your car and phone, this process is reversible. that means that pushing electricity through it \"backwards\" will set the chemicals back to how they started. \n\n(in the case of disposables, the reverse process is either more complicated or generates too much heat) ",
"Think of electricity like a river of water. The water at the top of the hill is like the Anode of your battery that contains chemicals with a negative charge in them. The basin at the bottom of the hill is like the Cathode of your battery that contains chemicals with a positive charge in them. water will always flow downhill just like the negatively charged ions in your anode will always send their excess electrons to the cathode's positively charged ions. When you put a lightbulb, a laptop, or something in the middle of that circuit, it's like putting a water wheel in the river to produce work from the energy difference. \n\nWhen all of the extra electrons from you negative Anode have flowed into your positive cathode, the electrical circuit is now neutral and your battery is \"dead\", just like how if all the water from the hill flows away, your water wheel will stop moving. To recharge the battery, you need to put energy into the system to push all those electrons back into the anode, just like putting a pump to push all your water back uphill.\n\nTl;dr The battery \"gives\" power by storing 2 chemicals with a different charge and then the completed circuit allows that charge to flow and perform work.",
"The idea of “store energy to use later” has been part of human technology since before electricity, and it all works in essentially the same way, just with different details.\n\nThink of an old fashioned clock or watch. You had to wind up the spring or the counterweight to make it work. Doing so stored energy: the energy you spent winding up the clock was stored inside the spring or the counterweight.\n\nThen as the spring unwinds, or the counterweight is pulled down by gravity, you get that stored energy back, bit by bit, and can use it do do useful stuff like make the clock tick.\n\nOr even simpler, rolling a ball to the top of a hill so you can roll it back down. You put in energy by rolling it up. At the top of the hill, that energy is stored. And when the ball rolls down, you get the energy back as motion.\n\nStoring and using electricity is the same thing, only using chemicals or circuit components instead. The battery makers do some work to put the energy into the battery (or maybe nature already did the work by creating those chemicals), and when you plug it into your device that energy is slowly released again. Recharging the battery is just rolling the ball back up the hill, or winding up the clock."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
327wx4 | how do integrated circuits "know"? | If computers are just a bunch of transistors, how do they know how to interpret the instructions they're given, and vary their behaviour? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/327wx4/eli5_how_do_integrated_circuits_know/ | {
"a_id": [
"cq8prtn",
"cq8ps0z",
"cq8pvfs",
"cq8tawo",
"cq8y54n"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Because they're built that way! It's the same reason as a light switch \"knows\" to turn the light on - a bit more complicated, but in both cases, the wires are connected in such a way that they do what they're supposed to do.",
"They don't know, they're build that way. \n\nBasically, using a tiny bit of simple circuits, you can make a very complicated system. So complex in fact, that understanding it might no longer be obvious.",
"Maths basically. If the most basic element of a computer is a switch (transistor) it can either be on or off (or 1 or 0) from there you can teach a series of switched to compare two inputs (1's or 0\"s) and derive an output - i.e. make a decision. This means you can extend out to basic maths like addition and subtraction.\n\nIf you ramp this up by a factor of billions you then have a machine that can do apparently complex things using very simple maths.\n\nBut a computer cannot make decisions on its own; it can only respond to certain inputs in a finite number of ways, and these need to be programmed. Its responses may seem complex but every reaction has been programmed at some stage.\n\nSo the answer is they don't \"know\" - they are just returning programmed responses.",
"CPUs are basically built up of building blocks. At the bottom level they have one bit comparing or adding circuits. If you group a bunch of Thissen together you can end up with registers that hold data, math circuits that add (and subtract) integers and floating points. You get a memory management module and then the key to everything is microcode, which is instructions to the chip that tells it how to process the commands it is given by the operating system or the program. \n\nEach thing it does is very minutia in detail but become very fast when you do a couple billion of them a second. ",
" > If computers are just a bunch of transistors, how do they know how to interpret the instructions they're given, and vary their behaviour?\n\nIn a digital circuit (computers and basic machines), they use a basic type of math. It is called \"boolean algebra\". Using this math allows different outcomes based on the input by use of logic gates. This is how transistors work at a basic level inside a CPU."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
18xi2q | light years. | I'm always confused on what exactly light years are. I've heard they're to measure distance but that's all I've heard. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18xi2q/eli5_light_years/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8iv0x8",
"c8iv13c",
"c8iv6qo"
],
"score": [
8,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"A light year is the distance a ray of light will cover in a year. A year being a, well, *year.* You know.\n\nThe reason we use light to measure things is that it has the unique property of covering exactly the same distance through *space* as it covers through *time.* In one second of time, a ray of light traverses one second of space. For reasons of clarity, we call one second of space \"one light-second.\" We also call it 299,792,458 meters … because the meter is defined as exactly 1/299,792,468th of a second.\n\nSo yes, we use light to measure distance. A light-second is a long way, a light-year is a *very* long way … and a light-nanosecond is conveniently about a foot.",
"A light year is a measure of distance. It's equal to the distance that light travels in a vacuum in a year. Light travels at 299,792,458 meters per second. A light year is 9.4605284 x 10^12 km.",
"It's just a distance.\n\nIf you travel at the speed of light, in one year you travel 1 light year."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
9kafds | what are the qualifications for earning a michelin star for a restaurant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9kafds/eli5_what_are_the_qualifications_for_earning_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6xnzgp",
"e6xokl7"
],
"score": [
7,
5
],
"text": [
"You're not actually going to be able to get a solid answer. The decision itself is left to people who are not supposed to reveal their secrets. \n\n",
"I know when the three star system was initially made in 1936, one star was \"a very good restaurant in its category\", two stars was \"excellent cooking, worth a detour\", and three stars was \"exceptional cuisine, worth a special journey\", but the exact criteria are unknown.\n\nIt should be noted that Michelin only has guides for (and hence only reviews restaurants in) a certain cities/countries."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
m3uad | how does water get from its source to coming out of my taps? | I'm mainly wondering how water pressure is generated at the various stages. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/m3uad/eli5_how_does_water_get_from_its_source_to_coming/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2xv3l8",
"c2xwklz",
"c2xv3l8",
"c2xwklz"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
5,
5
],
"text": [
"Some communities use gravity to generate a lot of the pressure (that's why water towers are, well, towers, and often located on hills). Most of the time it is supplemented by pumps.",
"Here is how it is done where I'm from.\n\nPumps pull water from wells around the region, we have about 10 to serve a population of about 18k.\n\nAs the water comes out of the wells it is mixed with chlorine to help clean it.\n\nThe pressure from these pumps feeds the water to what's called a Lift Station. These lift stations are basically large pumps which pump the water uphill to tanks on higher ground than the rest of the region.\n\nBecause some of our wells have arsenic in them the lift stations pump that water to an arsenic treatment plant first. After getting treated for arsenic the water then makes it's way to the tanks.\n\nOnce the water is in the tanks gravity takes over. Pipes carry the water downhill to homes and businesses. This is the source of pressure people get when they open their tap.",
"Some communities use gravity to generate a lot of the pressure (that's why water towers are, well, towers, and often located on hills). Most of the time it is supplemented by pumps.",
"Here is how it is done where I'm from.\n\nPumps pull water from wells around the region, we have about 10 to serve a population of about 18k.\n\nAs the water comes out of the wells it is mixed with chlorine to help clean it.\n\nThe pressure from these pumps feeds the water to what's called a Lift Station. These lift stations are basically large pumps which pump the water uphill to tanks on higher ground than the rest of the region.\n\nBecause some of our wells have arsenic in them the lift stations pump that water to an arsenic treatment plant first. After getting treated for arsenic the water then makes it's way to the tanks.\n\nOnce the water is in the tanks gravity takes over. Pipes carry the water downhill to homes and businesses. This is the source of pressure people get when they open their tap."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
280z8m | why is it that when i cook fish, the meat flakes, but meat like beef or pork doesn't? | Can someone tell me, I'm genuinely curious as to why fish meat is like that as opposed to the way beef is. Has it something to do with the way fish swim? I have no clue what I'm talking about but that flakiness must have a reason! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/280z8m/eli5_why_is_it_that_when_i_cook_fish_the_meat/ | {
"a_id": [
"ci6capn"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The protein structure of marine animals are different to terrestrial ones, as animals like fish have a somewhat segmented (can't think of other words to describe it) structure, so they can move through water better; alternatively, land mammals have a striated (banded) structure, to better support their weight on land."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2g0z2q | why are women okay with showing off their body in a bikini, but when it comes to underwear, looking is just straight up creepy and perverted? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2g0z2q/eli5_why_are_women_okay_with_showing_off_their/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckel4fu",
"ckel58f",
"ckel58i",
"ckelacg",
"ckeme37",
"cker08f",
"ckeur8d",
"ckewiwv",
"ckf425h"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
5,
34,
9,
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's all public perception. Like nude beaches or nudity being okay in general in some places but not others. Besides theres the connotations of the bathing suit being for the beach and lingerie being for intimacy. Plus have you ever been in the room with a girl or a bunch of girls in a bathing suit indoors, especially a girl alone? They get very defensive like if they were in underwear. That's why they have towels for covering themselves, beach hoodies, and other clothes for covering up indoors. It's only when outdoors on the beach where its really comfortable, and even then its for the sun exposure and theres more freedom from being outdoors. Plus they always have the option to cover up wherever they are in a bathing suit. No girl goes to the beach from the house in just a two piece. ",
"Bikinis are designed to be seen. Underwear is not. ",
"The answer, as explained to me, is woman spend a lot of time finding the correct bikini to display their body in a way that is acceptable to them. Underwear on the other hand is normally chosen because of comfort.\n\nTo see a woman in a bikini is to she her dressed as she had deem acceptable, to see her in underwear is a state of unpreparedness. ",
"Underwear is private (not chosen with the intent to be seen by anyone not allowed by the wearer). Swimwear is public (worn with the intent of being seen in the garment). \n\nIn a public place, seeing someone's underwear usually comes as a result of strategic use of angles like those of stairs and the ground or a garment's riding up when seated or similar things, so the viewer is choosing a location because of the opportunity to see something meant to be hidden. Men who do this signal, \"I have no better opportunities to see underwear\", which suggests they aren't a good choice (creepy frequently requires unattractiveness). ",
"Women don't necessarily wear bikinis to \"show off\". It's beach gear. It wouldn't be fair to say every guy in trunks or a speedo is trying to show off, either.\n\nAnd one reason why underwear is worn *underneath* clothes is to conceal the parts they drape. If someone is going out of their way to look at someone's underwear, they're being creepy because they're disregarding that person's attempt at modesty. ",
"Different fabric, different intentions. ",
"Here's a video explanation: _URL_0_",
"It's about consent.",
"Underwear doesn't hide camel toe."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-Lx2ihpGbc"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
871a03 | why do organizations that receive lots of mail use a po box instead of a physical address? | Many government organizations (DMV, tax boards, labor department) use a PO box address for sending in common forms. Back when mail-in sweepstakes were a big thing on kids networks, the commercials always had you send your entry into a PO box. Why not use a physical address? Is there a benefit for having large volumes of mail go to the PO box? Is there a real PO box full of thousands of tax forms / sweepstakes entries / etc? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/871a03/eli5_why_do_organizations_that_receive_lots_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"dw9gajp"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"1) Sorting. POBOX 1234 ONLY gets sweepstake forms. There is a shit ton of them, but at least someone doesn't have to sort normal mail from them.\n\n2) There can be advantages to a company that wants a 'presence' in a certain place - but the presence is over rated. \n\n3) A company might not want the public to know there location. I don't know if this is still true, but before streaming Netflix was a big deal, before they split to _URL_0_ Netflix use to be insanely private and secret about where they had media mailed to.\n\nA PO Box is helpful for that sort of thing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"DVD.COM"
]
] |
|
26eedf | what's with japan's thing with making anime girls look clearly underage and sexualized? | To be honest it comes across so perverted it's hard to watch.
Is it a trend? Or some sort of weird fan service? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26eedf/eli5_whats_with_japans_thing_with_making_anime/ | {
"a_id": [
"chq8cx6",
"chq901e"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Because it sells",
"For one thing, a lot of anime is geared to attract high-school and middle-school aged viewers, who probably prefer that the sexualized characters in their favourite shows are close to their own age. I know that there are a lot of adult viewers of anime out there, but I suspect that the creators of anime mostly have a younger audience in mind when they're producing content."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
56dup4 | how do the hot pocket crisping sleeves increase my sandwich's crispiness | I'm utterly baffled | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/56dup4/eli5_how_do_the_hot_pocket_crisping_sleeves/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8ih9y6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"They absorb microwaves well, so they get hot, and effectively radiate the heat back at the food:\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susceptor"
]
] |
|
229b1b | if symmetry is closely associated with beauty, why are most/many hair styles non-symmetrical? | Symmetrical haircuts such as the bowl or Mohawk are seen as fringe and not especially stylish. Can anyone shed some light? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/229b1b/eli5_if_symmetry_is_closely_associated_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgklyfh",
"cgklz85"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Symmetry is the first step into the uncanny valley. Maybe in art symmetry is considered beauty, but on humans it feels disgusting and artificial to me.",
"IMO, it is because it is (in my case) seen as an extension of the body as opposed to a direct part of it. So it is no longer about symmetry, but about art and expression."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
cv1h9i | why do different homes have different water pressures? | I assume it is powered by pumps but how do they work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cv1h9i/eli5_why_do_different_homes_have_different_water/ | {
"a_id": [
"ey1aphs",
"ey1hrke"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Frequently rather than pumps you have water towers. Giant containers of water are filled at the top of these towers and connected to the water system. Since all that water is pressing down into the pipes, it creates pressure for any home that is below the level of the water tower.",
"Assuming both houses are getting their water from the same source. It is possible one has newer \"water saver\" taps which have restrictions built in that reduce the amount of water they can put out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1s0yvg | the difference between transsexual, transgender, and hermaphrodite, options those people have for reproduction, and what it means to "identify" as fe/male. | Serious, politically correct answers please. :3 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1s0yvg/eli5_the_difference_between_transsexual/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdsu58t",
"cdsuayl"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"A hermaphrodite is a person with a rare condition that causes them to be born with fully functional male AND female parts. Today, it is usually the case that parents will make a choice and have the other parts surgically removed.\n\nTransgender has to do with gender identity, specifically, identifying as the opposite gender from your physical sex.\n\nTranssexual is a person who has surgically become or is surgically becoming the opposite sex.\n\nAs to the latter part of your question, regarding gender identity, I refer you to a [more knowledgeable source](_URL_0_), but to sum up, sex is your physical equipment, and gender is what you feel yourself to be.",
"I think the wise thing to do would be to refer you to /r/asktransgender, but since this is ELI5...\n\n'Transgender' and 'transsexual' are terms that people don't like to agree on. At the very least, they mean \"this person is not comfortable with the reproductive parts they were born with\". People like to argue about what \"gender\" and \"sex\" really are, which is why it's hard to be correct when the answer is that vague.\n\nHermaphrodites are people who were born with both sets of genitals, and often face the same issues trans-people do, especially if a doctor or a parent \"chose\" their sex for them by removing one of the genitals at birth. \n\nImagine if you were born a boy, but your parents had the doctor operate to change you into a girl before you could even speak. Chances are, you'd have a hard time accepting it. In fact, an [experiment to do just that](_URL_0_) led to some pretty unhappy kids."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://chaoslife.findchaos.com/agender-agenda"
],
[
"http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/gender_reassignment.pdf"
]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.