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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
qh1zi | why are most asian people unable to handle alcohol? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/qh1zi/eli5_why_are_most_asian_people_unable_to_handle/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3xjoh7",
"c3xjoy1",
"c3xjphy",
"c3xjuj6",
"c3xkk0m"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
14,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"They lack an enzyme for breaking alcohol molecules apart",
"What are you to referring to specifically? The \"asian glow\" or alcohol tolerance?",
"When people drink alcohol, it goes through your stomach and eventually reaches your liver. There, it is converted to **acetaldehyde** - acetaldehyde is extremely harmful for our bodies, and can cause cancer. But it then gets converted into acetic acid, which is vinegar. \n\nThe problem Asians have is generally a mutation with the **enzyme** (enzymes speed up chemical reactions in your body) that converts the acetaldehyde to acetic acid. So, a lot of acetaldehyde accumulates in their liver, and acetaldehyde is a LOT more harmful than alcohol. So that's why they can't handle alcohol well, and their faces turn red, etc.",
"Try drinking Baijiu with a Chinese person and you'll change your mind about that. ",
"I went to my Korean friends wedding and the only things to drink were whiskey and Coors Light. No other alcohol, no juice, no soda, no water. \n\nHis dad was the drunkest human being I've ever seen. \n\nJust thought I'd share."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8cc7j4 | when you take pain medicine, how does your body know where the medicine should be applied? specifically for targeted pain or inflammation. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8cc7j4/eli5_when_you_take_pain_medicine_how_does_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxds7de",
"dxdscg4"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"To be blunt, it doesnt. Pain medications that target specific areas are snake oil, a marketing trick to make people buy the same stuff multiple times over thinking its different. Its only real benefit over the \"all purpose\" version would be the placebo effect (sorry for ruining that I guess).\n\n\n\n",
"If your body is a city and an arsonist is causing 'inflammation' the drug 'activates' firemen to put out the fire. Another drug can activate police to find the arsonist and stop him. Another drug can turn all lights green so the firemen can get there faster.\n\nDrugs alter or augment normal 'city functions'; the body doesn't choose where the drug works."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2o37b4 | what are corporate subsidies? | What are they? Where exactly does the money we give corporate subsidies go? I've been on google for like 30 minutes trying to figure it out and I can't find a straight-forward explanation. I can't even seem to find a clear explanation for why people are for or against them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o37b4/eli5_what_are_corporate_subsidies/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmjb3aw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Subsidizing is when someone pays for something on behalf of someone else. If you want to go to the movies and your friend doesn't want to spend the money to go but you pay for them you have subsidized their movie ticket. Your parents can subsidize your education by paying all or a portion. When the government pays for something for a group it's a subsidy. In some cases the government directly pays for things. Some local governments give tax breaks to individuals and businesses as a subsidy. \n\n\nGroups getting the subsidy love their subsidy. \n\nFarmers lobby to get crop subsidies (government buys a portion of the crop at a given price, or pays some farmers not to grow certain crops to prop up the price.) \n\nUnions, manufacturers, and corporations lobby to get subsidies to locate factories and offices in certain states and municipalities (typically they promise to create X jobs if they are given tax breaks, government grants, or government backed loans.) \n\n\nPeople are in favor of subsidies for many reasons, typically the money goes to politically connected individuals. As we live in a nation of laws, these subsidies are created through bills at the state and federal level and ordinances at the municipal level. Once those laws are created others see the benefits and lobby to get some of those benefits and/or get those benefits increased. \n\nPeople are against for three typical reason:\n\n1. Fiscal conservatives see subsidies as wasteful spending.\n\n2. Big government supporters see subsidies (typically the tax-breaks) as lost revenue. Money the government would have had if they didn't offer the subsidy. \n\n3. Good government/accountable government types see subsidies as a cronyism. Politically connected groups getting their politician friends to give them money. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
22fj1h | why do teeth need to have sensory functions? what evolutionary purpose does that ability have? | Why wouldn't teeth have evolved to be a simple extension of the jaw made of bone rather than their anatomical makeup now? I feel like it's a disadvantage to be able to lose teeth and develop different dental issues like nerve damage. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/22fj1h/eli5_why_do_teeth_need_to_have_sensory_functions/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgmb5nc",
"cgmb7o2",
"cgmb9e1"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If you bite a metal bar you can tell it's too tough to chew. Without nerves you wouldn't be able to tell and would end up breaking your teeth",
"Pain is actually a good thing, which is why it was one of the earliest sensory systems to develop evolutionary speaking. It tells you when to stop doing something and then prevents you from doing that same something in the future because you remember the associated pain. It is very important for letting you know that your body needs help.",
"It's an imperfect system, but pain is a damage sensor.\n\nTeeth are important, so even though it can cause problems of itself, having nerves in them means you can check how they are doing.\n\nBefore dentistry, if you had a tooth that hurt, it was a fairly obvious sign that it was a dud, and you had to get rid of it before it became infected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2gk3nj | in a non gay marrying state, if a married woman changed gender to a man would the marriage be nullified | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gk3nj/eli5_in_a_non_gay_marrying_state_if_a_married/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckjtutv",
"ckjtvjg",
"ckjw14a"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Gender is how you identify. Sex is your anatomy, specifically your chromosomal sex or your sex organs. I believe you may be talking about sex change.\n\nAnd yes, the marriage *could* be nullified. Some states doesn't even recognize homosexual marriages from other states.",
"It's iffy. A lot of places who are against gay marriage are also against Trans marriage and have a rule saying that ones gender is what it says on their birth certificates. So they really couldn't stop it, but you know they would try to.",
"I think some states don't recognize the transition so even though a person has gone through the process they are still legally the gender they were born as."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1ivgko | what does radiation do to organic beings, and is it possible to evolve resistance to radiation? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ivgko/eli5_what_does_radiation_do_to_organic_beings_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cb8ffnw"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It depends on the kind of radiation. What we call radioactive radiation basically consists of 3 kinds of radiation.\n\nAlpha rays: Relatively big charged particles with a positive electrical charge. The particles have a lot of mass and a lot of charge, so they do a lot of damage to our tissues and organs. But, as they are so large, they are likely two collide with anything else. So they do not get far from their source. You could shield from Alpha radiation with a plastic bag or even cling-foil. Still dangerous as fuck if you inhale or eat a source for this radiation.\n\nBeta - rays: These are electron rays. The same kind of rays that are used for creating the image on an old-fashioned TV set or monitor (a tube, that's where the word you_tube_ derives from). These electron rays can be a lot more energetic than one of those 'TV-rays', though. Electrons are a lot smaller and lighter than an alpha-ray-particle and also only have half the electrical charge. So on the one hand if you are hit by a beta-particle, not as much damage is done. On the other hand, beta-rays do not react as easily with their surroundings, as they are smaller and lighter. So it is not as easy to shield from beta-radiation. A glass-pane will do, though, as you can deduct from not being irradiated by your childhood TV set.\n\nGamma-Radiation: These rays are similar to X-Rays, only more energetic. Gamma-rays do not consist of ordinary particles, they are an electo-magnetic radiation that consists of photons, like light. If you are hit by a single one of those photons not much is likely to happen, it will just pass through you. The particles are so small and have no electrical charge so that they pass through nearly anything. There is a likelihood that a single particle will collide with a molecule of your body if you are in its way, however. And as this particle has so much energy, a lot of damage will be done. If you are exposed to really many of those particles, quite a lot are likely to harm you, even though most will just pass through you. This is the most dangerous kind of radiation. It is very difficult to shield from. You need thick panes of lead to stop most particles to pass through them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
58qgb4 | how do shotgun shells keep pressure? | How do shotgun shells fire multiple projectiles? What keeps the pressure from slipping through the gaps in projectiles and making a very weak blast? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58qgb4/eli5_how_do_shotgun_shells_keep_pressure/ | {
"a_id": [
"d92gvmz",
"d92h2nn"
],
"score": [
5,
9
],
"text": [
"There's usually a thing called a shot cup that holds the pellets together. Its not really a full cup but it provides a sort of piston that makes a seal with the barrel and pushes the shot out.",
"This cut away image will help\n_URL_1_\n\nOn top of the powder, what was traditionally paper or cloth wadding is now a bit of plastic. That wadding seals the hot expanding gases from escaping outwards. As the gases push the wadding out the barrel, the wading pushes all the pellets out with it. \n\nSometimes they even use a shot cup. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nYou can see pictures of the cups and wadding here."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://possibleshop.com/s-s-wads-shotgun.html",
"https://cdn.instructables.com/FIX/CRKY/I0R0YJ52/FIXCRKYI0R0YJ52.MEDIUM.jpg"
]
] |
|
facgfm | even after having a huge r & d and workforce, why luxury car makers cannot make cars that are as reliable as toyota corolla? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/facgfm/eli5_even_after_having_a_huge_r_d_and_workforce/ | {
"a_id": [
"fix4ii1",
"fix4k5v",
"fix7o8f",
"fix8jb7",
"fixa1ab",
"fixafrp",
"fixaxfj"
],
"score": [
17,
76,
24,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Reliability is not commercially beneficial to the car makers. There has been a shift, from selling a car at a huge profit that would last a long time...to selling a car at a lower profit that will require more maintenance and make more money from the servicing.",
"First off, Toyota’s R & D budget is huge. This is also reflected in the reliability of so many of their of products, such as their trucks and their luxury brand, Lexus. Second, simplicity and not pushing limits is often the key to reliability. Some luxury and performance cars push the limits of technology, and this will often come at a reliability cost. There are other examples of simple and super reliable cars out there. Classic Volvos are a good example.",
"Also, by the time a car has reached legendary reliability status (Honda Accord, Toyota Corolla), the cars that have proven reliability are no longer being made. \n\nIMO, the days of cheap Japanese cars being 100x better than the alternatives are over, and we're mid-reign of cheap Korean cars (Kia) paired with a warranty rather than reputation.",
"Creating new technologies comes at a cost. Typically you have luxury brands creating and applying new technologies in their cars. The bugs become known in real world applications. Overtime the economy lines can use or refine this technology cheaper.",
"They don't want to build reliable cars. \n\nThe money is in building cars that fail after a few years with a topping of brand loyalty. \n\nThey can, they just don't want to.",
"I heard, decades ago, as a broadly applied strategy, that Japanese makers decided to simply reduce tolerances on every component. This helps every component to perform as-designed and last a long time. It is expensive to implement.\n\nAt the same time, the strategy in the US was to more frequently redesign the appearance of cars to force them to become dated more quickly and hence increase demand for the newest looking car.",
"Luxury car manufacturers can and do make cars as reliable as a Corolla. The issue is that many people do not want to pay the associated maintenance costs or parts cost involved.\n\nDeferred maintenance is what kills many cars in general, and due to the depreciation of luxury cars it hits them hard. You have to remember that the point of a luxury car is to delivery a top tier experience. Suspensions are more complex, engines more powerful and smooth, and interiors made of premium materials that often times need conditioning that a spartan 4 cylinder econo-box does not.\n\nThe Lexus LS400 (albeit a Toyota product) is probably the gold standard of reliable luxury cars from the past 30 years. It can be beat on and abused in a similar manner to a comparable Corolla and keep kicking. I'd be willing to bet that there are more LS series cars with over 500k miles than there are Corollas. Definitely percentage wise.\n\nThe Mercedes SD series is another contender. From the late 70's to the 90's they were very pricey here in America but with minimal maintenance they routinely hit 400k and up on the original engine. They are used as Taxis and public service cars in Europe and elsewhere but here in the USA they were (and are) considered luxury cars. They were overbuilt and simply refuse to die in many cases.\n\nThe Lexus LX, Toyota Landcruiser (USA spec), Porsche 944/911, Cadillac Fleetwood, and several others are on my short list of reliable vehicles. You just have to remember that timing chains need to be handled on some, and that brakes may be $1200 on another. It is a hard battle to go against the Corolla as it has been a truly solid piece of engineering for decades, but some cars that are considerably more upmarket can survive on a similar level of maintenance for just as long."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5sf7xr | why we require license for alcohol but not for cigarettes (when in fact the latter has same bad effects)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5sf7xr/eli5_why_we_require_license_for_alcohol_but_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddekg1u",
"ddekii6",
"ddekuj5",
"ddemdjs"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Cigarettes certainly do not have the same bad effects alcohol does, though yes neither is good for your health.\n\nWhen a store, bar or restaurant starts selling liquor, it increases the odds there's going to be drunk people in the neighborhood. This can mean late night partying, it might mean people being stupid and peeing in a back alley or something... it might mean things the local residents probably aren't fans of. \n\nSo the liscencing is to keep the partying under control, and gives something to revoke if the situation gets nasty.",
"A licence to sell alcohol/cigarettes, or a license to purchase? Most places still require you to provide proof of age to purchase either. In my state at least, a license is required to sell alcohol, as well as [cigarettes and tobacco products.](_URL_0_)\n\nIf none of the above answers your question, could you please clarify?",
"I'm not sure. But in Portugal you need different permissions to sell both.\n\nTo buy it's a bit different. Usually people dont ask for ID's unless you are obviously younger. They are very strict with drunk people however.",
"Are you talking about a license to sell? Establishments that sell alcohol have an increased use of city services like police, and fire(paramedics), because their intoxicated customers do dumb things at abnormally high rates, or have medical issues from consuming to much alcohol in one setting. The license to sell is intended to recover these costs for the city. Establishments that cell ciggarretes don't have these issues."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.illinois.gov/ilcc/Education/Pages/Cigarette-and-Tobacco-Retailer-License.aspx"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
2fcko4 | why is 1 written as 1 and 2 as 2 etc. when was it 'made'. in short: why do we write them they way we do. | Hey guys,
I hope som1 can answer the title as an ELI5 answer :).
So in short, my question is: why is
1 written as 1
2 written as 2 etc up untill 9.
I found this video: _URL_0_ however im not sure if this is true. I think there is a way more complex thing behind than counting the angels.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2fcko4/eli5why_is_1_written_as_1_and_2_as_2_etc_when_was/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck7xovi",
"ck7ycpb"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The evolution of numbers has changed throughout the beginning. As time and languages evolved, so did letters and numbers. This picture illustrates just how that could be. There are many different theories on how we came up with the modern english 0-9, and this is just one of many.\n\n[Number Evolution](_URL_0_)\n\nSource: Math degree",
"The symbols were adopted by Europeans from Arab scholars in what is now modern day Spain (although they developed originally in other parts of the Arab empires and are partially Hindu influenced). The symbols themselves changed over time as scribes wrote them down differently. There's a good chart on Wikipedia that shows this evolution. _URL_0_ (on a phone so sorry for the poor writing and any mistakes)\n\n-PhD student in Middle Eastern history and politics. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPPAgcImJ3c"
] | [
[
"http://www.mallstuffs.com/Blogs/BlogImages/ScienceinHinduism-PlacevalueandDecimalnumbersystem4.png"
],
[
"http://goo.gl/UuXXue"
]
] |
|
8u7s00 | why do companies sometimes omit languages from their physical dvd/blu-ray releases? | As a European I'll often be checking out for the local regional release of a given TV-show/Movie and find that, even though I know a subtitled or dubbed version in my (and several other) languages exists, the DVD release only has "the big three" English/French/German releases on there. Why the omissions? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8u7s00/eli5_why_do_companies_sometimes_omit_languages/ | {
"a_id": [
"e1d91gw"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"There's only so much room on a DVD, and you want your local regional release to make the most of that space.\n\nSome marketing person probably looked at the box-office sales for the movie when it was in theatres and saw that it did well in the UK, France, and Germany, and so bundled the languages for those relatively close-together countries onto the DVD.\n\nIf they wanted more languages, they'd probably have to either bump off some bonus content, or in the case of a TV show have 1 less episode per disk and have another disk in the set, adding cost and potentially raising the price point past what someone else would want to pay."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
78iouj | is there a benefit to humans growing so slowly compared to other animals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/78iouj/eli5is_there_a_benefit_to_humans_growing_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"dou57ub",
"douf86s",
"dov7uog",
"dovaa7c"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is no benefit to us growing so slowly. Rather us growing so slowly is a side-effect of other traits (mainly walking upright and our big smart brains) that are a benefit and we selected for during our evolution.",
"Unlike most animals, human brains end up consuming up to 40% of the body's energy during childhood. So the brain is growing much faster, at the expense of the rest of the body. \n\nHowever, it is important to note that when compared to life expectancy, most mammals tend to reach sexual maturity and adulthood at very similar rates. ",
"There are two kinds of knowledge, instinct and learned.\n\nInstinct you know at birth and are usually faster for your brain to process, but they are inflexible and can get you into trouble in the wrong situation.\n\nLearned knowledge is more flexible and adaptable, but it needs to be, well, learned. \n\nMore intelligent animals tend to have more learned and less instinctive knowledge, and a slower maturation rate gives them the time they need to developed their learned knowledge.",
"Because large brains and the ability to talk upright were both evolving at the same time, there became an issue of childbirth - how do mother and child survive if the child has a large brain, but the mothers pelvic opening is narrow due to the adaptations needed to walk upright?\n\nSimple answer: Give birth to children with brains/heads that aren't fully developed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
23wqtu | why are cities that live near oceans reported as running out of drinking water? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/23wqtu/eli5_why_are_cities_that_live_near_oceans/ | {
"a_id": [
"ch1awux"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"You cannot drink ocean water. The concentration of salt in it is greater than that in your blood and you actually *lose* water from drinking it, leading to kidney failure and other issues. Barring sources of fresh water like rainfall, many coastal cities turn to desalination plants, which essentially squeeze out the water from the salts. These plants are expensive to run and can only produce so much water so fast. If people use more water than this, there is a shortage of drinking water."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3i24ot | why all semi-trucks look relatively the same. surely there are other practical designs (just like all the types of cars) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3i24ot/eli5_why_all_semitrucks_look_relatively_the_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"cucmuxf",
"cucmylu",
"cucnwy3",
"cucooyu",
"cucquoa",
"cuctckx"
],
"score": [
33,
26,
4,
6,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"Personal cars have to fit a fickle consumer market, just like fashion. Semi-trucks just have to get the job done as reliably and efficiently as possible.",
"I work at a truck stop, one thing I have notice in my time being there is that just like cars, once you get interested in them you notice the differences. If you are into bigger trucks, then you will be able to spot the differences, and know what brand they are just by giving it a quick glance.",
"You're limited in design options (as far as the body goes) due to the nature of the vehicle and the work you want it to do. As in, you want to be able to haul 60 tonnes of bricks up a hill, you're more than likely gonna need a massive engine, transmission and driveline to put the power to the ground. It's either gonna be a cab-over-engine design or a long bonnet. Unless all of a sudden someone figures out how to get comparative torque and power figures out of engines that are half the size of engines used in line haul trucks, 9, 12, 14, 16 litres. ",
"What do you mean by \"relatively the same\"? Although they all have to have the same type of back end (so they can fit standard trailers), I would argue that these semi-tractors look very different from one another:\n\n[one](_URL_5_)\n\n[two](_URL_3_)\n\n\n[three](_URL_4_)\n\n[four](_URL_1_)\n\n[five](_URL_0_)\n\n[six](_URL_2_)",
"In Europe vehicles have a [strict] maximum road length, having a flat nose on the truck truck thus leaves more 'length' to be used for carrying cargo. It also has the advantage of improving visibility for the driver, which is useful on the narrower roads (especially in the older neighbourhoods of the cities)",
"There have been some radical designs that never took hold. Take a look at these:\n\n[One](_URL_1_)\n\n[Two](_URL_7_)\n\n[Three](_URL_5_)\n\n[Four](_URL_3_)\n\n[Five](_URL_6_)\n\n[Six](_URL_4_)\n\n[Seven](_URL_2_) \n\n[And this video](_URL_0_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/7702/9357476_1.jpg?v=8CC9AFDD09BC470",
"http://www.bellinghamauction.com/photoalbum/2012auctions/9sep12album/sep12photoalbum/1985VolvoSemi.JPG",
"http://www2.gpmd.com/imagel/m/lmoes1301.jpg",
"http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wallpapers/2013/08/13/133207/2c3d0935125a0929327ddd8697f3b0a4.jpg",
"http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wallpapers/2013/06/23/107956/bb01510d7dd646ad79dc5164d87603b2.jpg",
"http://www.motorstown.com/images/volvo-semi-02.jpg"
],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn0OaxD3XuM",
"http://assets.blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2009/09/steinwinter_02_resized.jpg",
"http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k534/Doaline/Strick%20Cab%20Under/StrickCabUnder.jpg",
"http://static.commercialmotor.com/big-lorry-blog/Strick.jpg",
"http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/martin_phippard/2004/more_droms/file0005_sml.jpg",
"http://assets.blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2009/09/steinwinter_01_resized.jpg",
"http://assets.blog.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2009/09/Coloniacabunder_resized.jpg",
"http://static.commercialmotor.com/big-lorry-blog/Bussing.jpg"
]
] |
||
5lqeto | why is forming chords on guitar different from other instruments, and how does it work? | Why exactly are the first/third/fifth notes in a scale used to form a chord repeated on guitar? For example, one would use c-e-g-c-e-g on a c chord on guitar when a c chord is just c-e-g. How do you know which exact notes to use (ie use this c on this string instead of that c on the other string)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lqeto/eli5_why_is_forming_chords_on_guitar_different/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbxosjn",
"dbxq9wz"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"It depends on voicing. The simplest guitar chords are all different voicing-wise, because it's all about the difficulty of the chord's geographic dexterity.\n\n\nFor example, on guitar: G Major is root, 3rd, 5th, root, 3rd, root; whereas E Minor is root, 5th, root, 3rd, 5th, root. The two chords have different sequences of chord tones because the instrument's construction lends itself to played that way. Compare that to piano, for instance: most chords' easiest shapes are going to be root, 3rd, 5th; almost without exception. On guitar, 2nd inversions are often much easier than root position triads or chords because of the lower strings' harmonic difference of a perfect 4th.\n\n\nThe string in which each note is placed matters a great deal for its sound, hence why different voicings are often preferred. Hopefully that makes sense; lemme know if you have any questions! ",
"Guitar strings are tuned to intervals of IV (four) with the exception of the G and B strings (tuned to a III interval). \n\nAs you said open chords like a C chord (x-3-2-0-1-0) are not only constructed of three notes (in their most common voicing) but often double up on certain notes (eg. ^above example is C-E-G-C-E). \n\nIn a major chord 1-3-5 only 3 strings are needed to voice the chord. The use of more than three strings isn't necessary but adds to the harmonic quality of the chord because the repeated notes in the voicing are often different octaves. Basically it just sounds nice. \n\nKeep in mind there are multiple ways to voice a C chord on a guitar. Open chords are used primarily for their convenience but are quite a limiting way to play guitar, there are better ways to voice chords that don't use open strings. \nYour last question, how do I know which notes to use when constructing chords. That basically just comes down to learning common chord voicings. There are dozens of ways to voice chords on guitar but many of them are impractical due to the limitations of your biology (dexterity of hand and fingers). \nFor instance, a 13th chord cannot be played on a six-stringed guitar because a 13th chord is comprised of seven notes. Just like how a flute can't play chords, there are limitations to different instruments. \nStandard tuning is still the best tuning system for guitar. If you don't believe me try and play some jazz in open D tuning. Not an easy task :P\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
45j7eq | the comparison, to help me understand, the difference between werhmacht, ss soldiers, and regular german army during wwii and what their american counterparts would be? | From my understanding the Wehrmacht is like our Green Berets, the SS like our CIA/FBI, and the Regular German Army is like our US Army. Not sure if this is correct but I would love to know :) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/45j7eq/eli5_the_comparison_to_help_me_understand_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"czya3be",
"czya4ga",
"czybaq4"
],
"score": [
24,
7,
5
],
"text": [
"* Wehrmacht - Literally translates to \"Defense Force.\" It was the unified armed forces of Germany. It included the Heer (army), Kreigsmarine (navy), and Luftwaffe (air force).\n\n* Schutzstaffel (SS) - Translates to \"Protection Squad.\" The paramilitary armed forces of the Nazi party. The SS answered directly to the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler and not the Wehrmacht chain of command. The SS was composed of the Allgemeine SS (General SS), the Waffen-SS (Armed SS), and the SS-Totenkopfverbände. The Allgemeine SS concerned itself with police and racial matters within Nazi territory. The Waffen-SS consisted of combat units of troops within Nazi Germany's military. The SS-TV ran the concentration camps and extermination camps. The SS also contained the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), or \"Security Service\" which answered directly to Heinrich Himmler and served as the police and intelligence arm of the SS. \n* Abwehr - Literally \"Defence\" was the military intelligence organization of the German state. Similar to the American CIA or DIA. It was a government office that predated the Nazi party and often clashed with the SS on security and intelligence matters.\n\nThe US really has no equivalent to the SS. It was a purely political armed force dedicated to protecting the Nazi party and enforcing its policies. It was practically a parallel government. ",
"This is a bit complicated because Hitler A. believed that competition even within the military bred strength rather than just inspired weakness and B. feared anyone getting power to challenge his position. The Wehrmacht was the overarching military of Nazi Germany, including the Regular Army, Navy, and Airforce. Unified, however, was a bit overstated, as there were plenty of departmental conflict between the Army, Navy, and Airforce (for example, the airforce convinced Hitler that they could bring Britain to it's knees while the army stated a traditional land invasion would be needed). \n\nThe SS was part bodyguard, secret police, military police, and independent military. Not only did the SS have all it's \"horrific crimes against humanity\" units, but all the Waffen-SS, which was effectively a regular army, including both infantry and tank divisions. It fought along side the regular army, but wasn't formally a part of it. This led to all kinds of conflicts, as the only person both the Werhmacht and the SS answered to was Adolf Hitler himself (and Adolf Hitler spent much of the first half of the war lounging about, refusing to be contacted by anyone unless he felt like it). So, the best the regular army commanders could do was give the SS suggestions for actions, and hope the SS would follow through with the battle tactics (and the same was true vice versa).\n\nNazi Germany was **not** an efficiently run or administered nation.",
"Hitler is the emperor.\n\nThe SS is the regular sith lords, answering only to the emperor. \n\nThe regular German army, the infantry, airforce and navy are the clones.\n\nThe Werhmacht is the whole imperial army, clones and sith lords.\n\nThe US army doesn't have sith lords. So the regular US army, is the regular army, and our Werhmacht is just the same as our army."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
dcdqrn | how does color on a computer screen work? i always thought that color was a way that light reflects on different materials/objects. how does this work on a tv/computer screen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dcdqrn/eli5_how_does_color_on_a_computer_screen_work_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"f27igcj",
"f27iqi4",
"f27ix6p",
"f27kzfv",
"f27mmmw",
"f28wou9"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"They only use blue, green, and red. The saturation or amount of each, tricks your brain into thinking it is a particular color outside of that, but it's not. If you get really close to a screen you can see this. It is trickery and nothing more.",
"Your eye has three color detectors and uses their relative output to determine color.\n\nTVs take advantage of this by *only* emitting three wavelengths that exactly match those cells, and turning them up or down to make your brain interpret the signal as different colors.",
"Your definition of colour is true when the light is white light like sunlight which contains all the colours\n\nBut white light is nothing but a mixture of red, blue and green light, these are the primary colours. The other colours are obtained by mixing specific quantities of these colours\n\nOn a screen there are pixels and pixels has 3 colours red, green and blue. Suppose you want to get purple colour then the red light and blue light are on but the green light is off, so red and blue mix and give you purple colour.",
"color is determined by the light that enters your eyes. Since most objects don't glow (at least in the visible spectrum) and are mostly opaque, that light is typically reflected from another source. But sometimes the light is filtered through an object (as with tinted glass) or is emitted directly by the object (as with a red-hot piece of metal). Either way, your brain perceives a color based on the light that enters your eyes from that object. Computer screens are a combination of emission and filtering: a back light emits light that passes through a color filter that changes the light's color.\n\nThe interesting thing about computer screens is that they only have three colors. The way a computer screen can replicate most colors with only three is based on how the human eye works. The human eye doesn't actually have a way to say \"oh, this photon has x wavelength, so it is y color\". Instead, the color-sensing cells in your eye have three variants. Each variant responds a little to all visible light, but each variant also has a \"favorite\" wavelength. Light closest to the \"favorite\" wavelength make that cell respond more than light with a wavelength farther away. The favorite wavelengths for each type of cone are (more or less) red (really closer to yellow-green, but let's just say it's red), green, and blue. Then when light of a certain wavelength is shone into the eye, the eye and brain go \"oh, the Red cells are stimulated X amount, the Green cells are stimulated Y amount, and the Blue cells are stimulated Z amount, so the light must be *this* color\". The thing is, you can then cheat the system by having a red, green, and blue light next to each other, and setting the red light to shine with X brightness, the green light to shine with Y, and the blue light to shine with Z (again, it's a bit more complicated but that's the general idea). Since they stimulate the eye in the exact same way, the brain has no choice but to see it as the same color as before.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nThis general concept is also how things like paint mixing work.",
"Color is just a specific wavelength of light hitting your retina. For example, a light wave with a wavelength of 530nm will appear to look \"green\" to you.\n\nMost objects are *reflective*, in that they absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others - the wavelengths they reflect are the colors you see. When the sun shines, the tree leaves look green because they absorb all wavelengths except for green, which is reflected back to you.\n\nOther objects are emissive, in that they give off light waves. The color of light they emit will correspond to the wavelength of those waves. Older incandescent lightbulbs generally emit a yellowish-white light, which means that they emit all wavelengths but most of it in higher wavelengths, towards the red/infared portion of the visible spectrum.\n\nWith white light like this, you can filter out certain light waves with some translucent material. For example, you can make a flashlight shine red if you shine it through a red piece of glass. This red piece of glass filters out all the other wavelengths, leaving only red light to shine through.\n\nYour computer uses LEDs in a similar fashion to light up pixels using 3 different colors. Each pixel can emit Red, Green, and Blue light, and it uses a combination of these colors to make up the image you see on the screen.",
"None of the answers so far cover this in ELI5 level.\n\nThere are two ways of making color. The one you're taught in art class is pigment based. This is how light reflects from an object, including paint, clothes, crayons, etc. The primary colors are red, yellow, and blue. Red + yellow = orange, yellow + blue = green. You mix all the colors together you get brown/black (true black is hard to do).\n\nThen there's light-producing objects, not light-reflecting. This includes TV monitors, light bulbs, fire, and the sun and stars. For light-producing things, the primary colors are red, green and blue (RGB). Red + green = yellow, red + 1/2 green + 1/4 blue = orange. You mix all the colors together you get white. You can play around with mixing RGB colors here: [_URL_0_](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs101/image-rgb-explorer.html"
]
] |
||
2bsmyg | why can't i ever think of anything to say during small talk? | I'm not particularly shy or anything, but when forced to speak to someone I don't know my mind goes blank. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bsmyg/eli5_why_cant_i_ever_think_of_anything_to_say/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj8hsnr",
"cj8i909"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Ask questions of the person or people you are talking to. People love to talk about themselves.",
"A few basic things are talking about whatever situation you are both in.\n\nA good simple framework is this:\n\n**One. Learn about them**\n\n.a. Open ended - what are you interested in?\n\n.b. Closed - (wearing harley davidson teeshirt) - what do you ride?\n\n.c. 6 workhorses (Who, What, Where, When, Why, How)\n\n..c1. Why are you here?\n\n..c2. Who do you know here? Who are you professionally and personally (roles, like boss, student, mother, construction worker, brother, makeup artist, etc)\n\n..c3. What are you doing here?\n\n..c4. Where are you from?\n\n..c5. When did you get here/are you leaving?\n\n..c6. How did you get here? How are you doing? How do you do what you do (profession)\n\n\n**Two. Teach them about you**\n\n**Three. Explore Common Interests Together**\n\nThese two activities help you find places of common ground that you can then explore together. If you do this kind of search in a \"brute force\" way it will almost always fail. But if you can use stereotypes and other heuristics to make \"educated guesses\" about what a person might be interested based on how they look, talk, come across, etc, you can find the first area of common interest after just a few questions.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2r8cz2 | how does your cell phone know to automatically switch from cell data to wifi data when you arrive home? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2r8cz2/eli5_how_does_your_cell_phone_know_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnddv8h",
"cnde05h"
],
"score": [
14,
2
],
"text": [
"the wifi radio is constantly on and checking if it can connect to a wifi hotspot. \n\nif you turn off the wifi radio, your phone wouldn't know to switch",
"If you have the wi-fi turned on on your phone, your phone is doing a constant loop, checking for available wi-fi networks.\n\nIf there are none, the phone uses the cell network.\n\nIf there are wi-fi networks available, the phone connects to whichever one is your preferred network."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1hurwq | the pentagon papers and the history surrounding them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1hurwq/eli5_the_pentagon_papers_and_the_history/ | {
"a_id": [
"cay4mtp"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Back then we had a war in Vietnam known as well... the Vietnam War. One man called Mr. Robert McNamara who was our Secretary of Defence created the \"Pentagon Papers\" which were an encyclopedic history of the Vietnam War because he wanted to leave a record so historians would not make up fake and exaggerated stories/tales about the War."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5qcaxv | what is the u.s. state department? what does it do? why is it such a big deal that it's senior members just resigned? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qcaxv/eli5_what_is_the_us_state_department_what_does_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"dcy286x",
"dcy3d0k"
],
"score": [
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The state department is one of the oldest parts of the federal government. It is responsible for conducting the foreign affairs work of the United states, which covers everything from big time negotiations over war and peace to small scale stuff like making sure people can get visas. A big part of this is keeping embassies and consulates open overseas.\n\nThe resignations are a \"big deal,\" which I will take to mean newsworthy, because it's unusual. Although new administration's often replace these offices, since these are (mostly) the people who do non-\"policy\" work, the mundane stuff that keeps the place running, they usually stay on to continue working and are replaced piecemeal---and sometimes stay on for a while if the new people end up liking them. \n\nWhether this particular event is good or bad, or indicates some larger failing or issue is up in the air still, and may be a matter if opinion.",
"The United States has two main diplomatic components, the State Department and the Department of Defense. The State Department's job is to ensure that the Department of Defense doesn't have to be used. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4jve01 | why does the fuel gauge seem to drop faster when the tank is only quarter full? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4jve01/eli5why_does_the_fuel_gauge_seem_to_drop_faster/ | {
"a_id": [
"d39xjgz",
"d39y6ce"
],
"score": [
7,
3
],
"text": [
"It's dictated by the shape of the fuel tank. Most are tapered, so that the bottom holds less than the top. It's not your imagination.",
"The gas gauge works the same way as the water tank in the toilet. There's a float inside that goes up and down with the gas level. When gas tank is completely full the float is completely submerged, so it won't actually move until the level falls below the height of the float. When the tank is near empty the float will have trouble measuring the last bit of gas that's sloshing around."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6rct7x | why do we need to be in a state of sleep to feel rested? | Why are we not be able to relax and do nothing for 8 hours to get that same rest? What does the actual physical action of sleeping do that helps compared to just "resting" for 8 hours? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6rct7x/eli5_why_do_we_need_to_be_in_a_state_of_sleep_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dl41nxv",
"dl48wa3",
"dl4z05f"
],
"score": [
75,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Think of our minds as an oven.\n\nWhen we are awake, the oven is turned on and is used for baking. However, splatters and drips from baking will accumulate throughout the day. Even though we are relaxing, we are still awake. It's quite difficult to clean a hot oven!\n\nSleeping lets the oven shut off so we can scrub it down. However, stuck-on, caked grease doesn't immediately get removed. Each sleep cycle (roughly 90 minutes of sleep, ideally, we want 5 cycles per night) is a cleaning cycle that takes off only a layer of the grease. We need multiple sleep cycles to remove all the crud built up over the day. When we are well-rested, it means we have a sparkling clean oven to start out the day!",
"There are several theories regarding why need sleep to feel rested and not just 'inactivity'. The rejuvenating aspects of sleep are specific to the brain and cognitive function. While we are awake, neurons in the brain produce adenosine, a by-product of the cells' activities. The build-up of adenosine in the brain is considered to be one factor that leads to our perception of being tired. That is why when we drink coffee because of the caffeine that blocks the actions of adenosine in the brain, we stay a bit more alert. It is thought that this build-up of adenosine during wakefulness is what promotes the 'sleepiness'. As long as we are awake, adenosine accumulates and during sleep, the body has a chance to clear adenosine from the system and as a result, we feel more rested and alert when we wake up.",
"Although we sleep for around 7-9 hours there's a hell of a lot going on. Our brains and bodies need sleep for repair and maintenance. a simple answer is its pure biology, the maintenance and repair cant be done by our bodies while we are awake. Or can be done but at a far slower pace. while we know a fair amount, there is still a lot we don't know.\n\n\n\nheres a link to a graph showing a typical [sleep cycle](_URL_0_). First you need to understand there is REM sleep and NREM sleep(stages 1-4 in the graph). \n\n\nREM sleep is our first stage of sleep, also when we dream. first of all REM sleep allows our brains to simply cool off with far less information from our senses to analyse. Just your senses trigger massive cascades of information to be analysed. \n\n\nrelaxing watching Game of Thrones? - who is that? have i seen her before? when? how does it relate to the events now? Tens of thousands of neurons firing. \n\n\nThis is why a 15 min nap can be refreshing, a short break from the barrage of information. but our brain don't get to the deeper levels of sleep to deal with any underlying issues. \n\n\nREM sleep is also when, with everything else shut down, our brains can do some fancy stuff. short term memories are moved into long term storage. This involves your brain selecting what it thinks is the core information it will need in coming days and weeks, along with incidents that may have happened, and storing them. \n\n\nNREM is where the our bodies reaches that deep sleep where the brain activity is lowest and our bodies as a whole benefits more than the brain. kidneys working to clean blood, wounds healing, etc. Remember last week you cut your shin on the coffee table? your body does, its been at it nightly trying to heal it up like new.\n\n\nSo you may think you are relaxing. But to your brain it’s still being slammed with information, and your body still has repairs to work on. show your body some love, let it sleep.\n\n\n\nedit: alternative graph for clarity\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://pavelfatin.com/images/sleeptracker/sleeptracker-pro-sleep-cycle-large.gif"
]
] |
|
1xlotx | how does a criminal escape prosecution if they commit a crime in the usa, then escape to mexico? | It's always depicted in films, but I never understood how they escape prosecution all together. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xlotx/eli5_how_does_a_criminal_escape_prosecution_if/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfcgmga",
"cfcgnjv",
"cfcgzzi"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
8
],
"text": [
"Because contrary to many American's belief the laws of the US don't follow you around the world. If someone leaves the US and the US wants them back then the US needs to convince the government and/or court system of that country to arrest them and send them to the US.",
"Depending on your crimes you can be brought back to the US. Im guessing most rape and murder cases would be other than that they're probably not coming back.\n",
"Despite what you see in movies, USA in fact has an [extradition treaty with Mexico](_URL_0_). This means the countries agreed that if a US citizen commited a crime and fled to Mexico, the Mexican government should comply with a request from the US government to arrest this person and send them back to the US.\n\nEdit: If the person fled to a country which doesn't have an extradition treaty with the US, such as Russia, then the other country has no obligation to extradite them to the US. The US has no way of getting that person arrested, other than asking nicely (see: Edward Snowden)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.mcnabbassociates.com/Mexico%20International%20Extradition%20Treaty%20with%20the%20United%20States.pdf"
]
] |
|
4otfyi | how a company can trademark a single word and prevent the word being used in anything? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4otfyi/eli5_how_a_company_can_trademark_a_single_word/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4fdyu1",
"d4fe5ew"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Trademarks are not that broad. They can only prevent a word from being used in a similar product line close enough to the original to cause confusion. So the \"Sky TV\" trademark going against \"No Man's Sky\" videogame is not actually close enough to cause confusion so they will not win a case trying to go after them. ",
"You're a little confused about how trademark works.\n\nTrademarks protect the look and branding of a specific product or class of products. The protection they grant is limited in scope. Sky TV can't keep me from brewing a beer and calling it Sky Pale Ale. However, if I were to use their logo on the label, or something that looked very similar to it, then they would have a case.\n\nHowever, you can sue anyone for anything. Doesn't mean you'll win. In order for a company to prevail in a trademark lawsuit, they typically have to show that there exists either the likelihood of brand confusion (ie: a reasonable consumer believes the same company just happens to make TV shows and beer), or that the use of the trademarked term by another party devalues the trademark.\n\nIn reality, the practical application of trademark law means that many factors are taken into consideration: are the two parties selling product or competing in the same market? Are they selling a similar product (Suzuki motorcycles vs. Suzuki Japanese Grill)? Is the branding of the defendant physically or materially similar to that of the plaintiff ? How common is the term in question (a unique name like \"Incrediways\" is liable to have much more protection than \"Cloud\", \"Sky\", or \"Earth\")?\n\nGenerally, common English words are the hardest to protect in trademark, because they have a broader application beyond a brand name."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
efq1gg | the torque number on the car | Everytime I see car ads they talk about horsepower and torque. I get horsepower being how fast a car is but what is the torque and why does it matter? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/efq1gg/eli5_the_torque_number_on_the_car/ | {
"a_id": [
"fc1vr8t",
"fc24r26",
"fc26u96"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Torque measures the foot-lbs of force that the engine is capable of applying to the front of the transmission. How hard the engine can turn the drive shaft. \n\nHP describes the duration of time over which a certain amount of that force is applied.",
"So higher torque is faster car at accelerating? So if two cars have the same horsepower but one has more torque the one with more torque will accelerate faster? Which one will have higher top speed?",
"Horsepower is a calculated value based on torque and speed (engine RPM). \n\nHorsepower = (Torque in ft-lbs X Engine RPM) /5252. \n\nAt 5252 RPM, horsepower and torque will be equal.\n\nHigh strung race engines in Formula 1 make big power numbers by spinning to an absurd RPM...like 18000 rpms fee years ago. Their torque isn't super high, but they spin 3X as fast as regular engines (ultra exotic lightweight materials and components, strong enough to last a couple of races, maybe 1000 miles total).\n\n175 ft lbs X 18000 RPM / 5252 = 600 HP (not exact numbers, but in the ballpark).\n\nA large 15 liter diesel engine in a semi truck makes a lot of power by producing huge torque, but can't spin very fast (heavy, overbuilt components made to run millions of miles). \n\n1968 ft lbs X 1600 RPM / 5252 = 600 HP (again, estimates, but close to real specs).\n\nBoth engines make similar power but in different ways. You wouldn't put a 2000 lb diesel engine in a F1 car though...nor would you put an F1 engine in a semi truck pulling 80k lbs.\n\nYou can produce 200 ft lbs worth of torque on a long ratchet wrench without much trouble. But you can't spin it at 6000 RPM's like an engine. \n\nWind turbines produce immense power at very low RPMs...like 1.5 MW, or about 2000 horsepower worth of electricity at 20 RPMs. This works out to 525000 foot pounds of torque that the blades are applying to the center shaft. Nuts.\n\nSource: engineer working at a diesel engine manufacturer"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1y25f4 | why doesn't honey go off? on a documentary i watched they said that tutankhamun was buried with a jar of honey 2000 years old and it was still perfectly edible. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1y25f4/eli5_why_doesnt_honey_go_off_on_a_documentary_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfgo7vy",
"cfgp5s2",
"cfgsmy6",
"cfgsr4d",
"cfgsu9z",
"cfgva9w",
"cfgxrca",
"cfgy2it",
"cfgz1my",
"cfh7w2t"
],
"score": [
61,
68,
20,
6,
29,
7,
2,
3,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Honey that is not exposed to too much moisture does not deteriorate at any significant rate. It is very stable, does not readily ferment, and does not promote the growth of bacteria. It is important, if you wish your honey to keep for 2000 years :) to store it in a sealed, preferably full, container.\n\nHoney stored for long periods of time may crystallize and become almost solid. That does not necessarily make it unfit for consumption. Heating the honey will restore it to its thick liquid state.",
"I learned one reason, but I'm sure there are more. Honey is naturally antimicrobial because of it's low moisture content. Different honeys range between 16%-21% moisture, which is relatively low for a liquid substance. It's really hard for bacteria to survive, especially when concealed so that no new moisture is added, it's most likely that any microorganisms that land on the honey will die. If it were maple syrup, the chances would be much moreso in favor of the bacteria.",
"what is go off some other way of saying go bad?\n\nIve never heard that.",
"Sugar is Hydrophilic (loves water) and honey has a high sugar percentage. Therefore it has a low water activity (which can sort of be analogous to \"useable water\"). Without water microorganisms can't survive. Like u/srilm said, it needs to be stored in a sealed container because honey is also hygroscopic, meaning it can absorb water from the air. It does this at a rate related to the relative humidity of the air. Tuts tomb was probably pretty dry and the container probably fairly well sealed. ",
"Anything *too* sugary tends to be paradoxically antibiotic. When bacteria lands on something that is too \"hypertonic\" (in this case, \"sugary\"), the moisture from the bacteria is sucked out to equalize with the solute concentration outside it's \"body\". This then kills the bacteria. In fact, I've heard that in dire situations, pure sugar can be packed into a wound temporarily to stave off infection -- though don't try this without consulting a doctor first.\n\nThere are also some natural proteins and things in honey that add to the antimicrobial effect, but I imagine these break down after a while. \n\nThat being said, the reason you aren't supposed to give honey to really young children is because it does have a natural amount of botulinum bacteria (botulism), just not in amounts large enough to harm someone with a functioning immune system.",
"Moisture and oxygen are critical to bacterial growth. There is very little of either in honey. The same preservation concept is applied to meats and other vegetables with confit and rillettes. However there is a slight risk from botulism which is why it's not recommended to feed honey to small children(it has nothing to do with allergies).",
"Fun fact, mix honey with a little bit of peroxide to heal cuts and scrapes. Kills germs and minimizes scarring. ",
"Ask Burnie Burns ",
"For all of the reasons above it is very interesting to note that honey is starting to be used in a sterile setting in hospitals to help heal wounds. The microbial properties of the honey help to keep wounds clean while the relatively low moisture content and osmolarity of the honey helps to draw moisture through the would to promote wound healing. ",
"A follow up question to this, why does my honey that I buy have an expiration date? It's because of the government being dumb right?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
5upl74 | why can humans digest a whole variety of plants, but not grass? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5upl74/eli5_why_can_humans_digest_a_whole_variety_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddvv4rv",
"ddvw8o4"
],
"score": [
36,
3
],
"text": [
"Humans actually can't digest a wide variety of plants. Our stomachs cannot break down cellulose, which means that there is no plant we can truly digest. The edible ones are just plants that we happen to be able to get nutrients from without needing to break down cellulose. Grass would require cellulose digesting to get much out of.",
"i'd answer your question in two parts, as you also seem to have a mistaken understanding behind your question.\n\nhumans can only digest a very small proportion of a plant. your everyday cow/grass eating animal can't digest much of grass either, it relies on its gut bacteria to digest it for them, and then digest the sugars that the bacteria produce. we lack these gut bacteria. your poop is solid from all the undigested plant material. \n\nsecondly, humans cannot digest a wide variety of plants.\nthere are what over 30000 species of plants, and in your average supermarket no more than like 20-30 different plants, bred over many generations to become more palatable. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1oz82p | why are there still people living without fresh water? | Can't we use the airplanes that we built as a species for travel and build massive pipelines to transport water to these places? Or use vehicles to dig giant reservoirs to catch rainwater?
I grew up in a developed country, and I know how the world works for the most part, but it has always seemed like a gross violation of my common sense that I could go to a supermarket and buy food/water for virtually nothing (and be able to afford cigarettes and alcohol for fun) when there are places in the world that the populace finds it very difficult to fulfill their basic needs even with a willingness to work at any job full-time. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1oz82p/eli5_why_are_there_still_people_living_without/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccx3lye",
"ccx3yua",
"ccx4jin"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The issue isn't that people have no water, but that people don't have access to potable water that's safe to drink, and more usual that people don't have access to water to irrigate their land.\n\nIn most of these scenarios, the issue is actually with sanitization - the [Haiti Cholera Outbreak](_URL_0_) was spread by poor sanitization, where the rivers and aquifers used for drinking water were tainted by inadequate (if existent) sewage treatment.\n\n**tl/dr: getting water is easy, getting water without salt or poop in it is hard** ",
"Infrastructure development, regional stability, government corruption, regulatory overhead (sometimes stemming from government corruption), and lack of profit.\n\nAlso, what many people don't know is that many artificial lakes in the Southwestern regions of the United States are slowly drying up due to increasing population density served by them, as well as climate change to a lesser degree. \n\nFreshwater is a finite source. Purifying freshwater isn't cheap, transporting it over long distances is expensive, creating freshwater (from other types of water) can be downright cost prohibitive.\n\nThat being said, there have been many air condenser designs (they can pull water from the air) that run on air or solar power that are relatively cheap compared to possible numbers it can serve, but getting those devices to locals and training them to keep it running can be hard due to culture, local government corruption, and general distrust of outsiders.",
"It might seem like this is an easy problem to handle but its not. Technologically its really no problem, fiscally its a mountain seemingly insurmountable in size.\n\nSouthern California is practically a desert. I say practically because some will argue the actual deffinition of a desert, and if left to its own it wouldn't look like what the typical person would imagine a desert would look like, but it is effectively a desert, and certainly doesn't recieve enough rainfall to support more than a handful of humans. Water is piped and pumped over 400 miles from the seirra nevadas. The system cost billions and billions of dollars.\n\nWater treatment is no different. These are huge engineering projects costing many millions of dollars. From one of my links:\n\nConstruction of the Columbia Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant was completed in 1983 and required approximately 200 man-years of effort in moving 600,000 cubic yards of earth and rock (enough to fill Faurot Field to the top of the bleachers), placing 75,000 tons of concrete, installing 40,000 lineal feet of piping with 234 valves, and providing $3 million worth of equipment. The total construction cost for the Columbia Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant was $21 million. An additional $30 million was spent for construction of new interceptor sewer lines to convey wastewater to the new treatment plant.\n\nAs mentioned above handleing the waste is as important as the water itself. Huge population centers generate massive ammounts of waste which can quickly destroy the water supply if it isn't quickly moved away with a near 100% efficiency.\n\nThe social issues are just as large. Many of the areas where potable water is unavailable are sparsley populated to begin with, should billions be spent to get safe water to thousands? How will people migrate if we do spend those billions? Ultimately moving water one place removes water from another and the ecological impacts can be profound. The great lakes have 21% of the worlds fresh water, but should we fuel planes and tankers to get the water to where it is needed? In the US if we continue to use the Ogallala Aquifer the way we have been Americas bread basket will become a new desert.\n\nI know water security seems simple to those in developed countries, but that simplicity belies the complex infrastructure, centuries of development, and constant maintenece that underly it.\n\n_URL_0_\n_URL_3_\n_URL_2_\n_URL_1_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–13_Haiti_cholera_outbreak"
],
[],
[
"http://www.aquafornia.com/index.php/where-does-southern-californias-water-come-from/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogallala_Aquifer",
"http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/basicinfo.html",
"http://www.gocolumbiamo.com/PublicWorks/Sewer/wwtppg_4.php"
]
] |
|
fp1oh6 | how does a good immune system keep you healthy? | I know that stuff like mucus and skin can keep germs physically away from the body, but why does a good immune system keep you healthy?
Can a strong immune system make it so that you might not even feel symptoms of a disease in the first place, or is it just a matter of recovery and fighting off the illness? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fp1oh6/eli5_how_does_a_good_immune_system_keep_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"fliiva0",
"flij3ud",
"fliljsv",
"flim26o"
],
"score": [
2,
12,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"Disease symptoms are usually your body's way of fighting the pathogen (raising temperature to make your body a not hospitable environment, inflammation means cells are rushing to the problem to fight it off) \n\nAnd yes, a good immune system basically has the necessary number of immune cells in a healthy environment to fight the virus or bacteria easily enough before it multiplies and makes more trouble, thus the symptoms becoming more severe.",
"The immune system is one of the most complex parts of are body, it involves several organs and dozens of specialized cells all working together. There is an entire field of study on it, immunology. Over simplifying, white blood cells travel the body looking for invaders, if some are detected it will try to kill it. If that doesn't work, reinforcements will be called in. Killer T-cells and other types of cells will rush the area and try to kill the invaders. Here's a couple good [videos](_URL_1_) [explaining](_URL_0_) better than I ever could.\n\nAlso most symptoms are actually caused by your immune system fighting back. A fever, is your body trying to kill the germ with heat, inflammation is caused by the rush of blood to the area, etc.",
"Your immune system is the bouncer of your body. Its got a full staff of goons that look out for things that shouldn’t be in your body. When a troublemaker is discovered they call everybody in to fuck up their day. They attack in a multitude of ways but all geared toward identifying and rendering the troublemaker a non-threat. And they remember the trouble makers face for next time.",
"If your cells and organs are strong and healthy enough it will be easier for them to fight the disease because they are not already weak or damged themselves."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSypUV6QUNw",
"https://youtube.com/watch?v=zQGOcOUBi6s"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
9ivize | are thyroid problems a legitimate “excuse” to being overweight or is this just used by people who are uneducated on diet and exercise? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9ivize/eli5_are_thyroid_problems_a_legitimate_excuse_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"e6mp7gf",
"e6mpmsk",
"e6mq8yw",
"e6mqowi"
],
"score": [
7,
10,
7,
3
],
"text": [
"yes, legit.\n\ni was 20 and fat as fuck. rode a bike to my classes, ate salads and walked a shit ton.\n\nwent to a doc, he was like WHOA DUDE, YOUR SHIT IS SO NONFUNCTIONING THAT YOU ARE LEGIT GONNA BE BRAIN DEAD IN 15 YRS. HERE TAKE THESE\n\nwham bam, year later lost bunch a weight doibg my thing. then i got lazy, and got fat again, but atleadt i got fat bc of what i shoveled down my throat and not because my thyroid wasnt working.",
"Thyroids and other hormonal issues can for sure be legitimate, doctor-diagnosed problems that affect weight loss in a variety of ways. For instance, I had a friend who gained like 50 pounds over a few months because her thyroid pretty much shut off. Once she was able to get medication, she could lose weight again.\n\nI think the problem is that a lot of people just claim \"thyroid issue\" when they're either lazy or uneducated about weight loss. It can be a real thing, but I'm not sure it's as common as the internet leads us to believe.",
"Both are legitimate to a degree.\n\nLow thyroid function, hypothyroidism, slows your metabolism so you burn fewer calories. It also can decrease your energy levels to a point it makes it difficult to exercise.\n\nSo one the one hand, it is a very real thing. On the other, if you made a superhuman effort, you could likely exercise enough to compensate, but it will be much more difficult for you than for other people. On the other, other hand, it is the sort of thing you can turn into an excuse for not even trying.",
"I’m sure people use it as an excuse, but having an under active thyroid / hypothyroidism absolutely slows your metabolism making it extremely difficult to lose and / or maintain a healthy weight. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2bia6j | why does ukraine not take over the malaysia flight 17 crash site from the rebels? | I understand Russia taking Crimea and not wanting to start a war against their forces, but what about the crash site? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bia6j/eli5_why_does_ukraine_not_take_over_the_malaysia/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj5luad",
"cj5o7fx"
],
"score": [
9,
2
],
"text": [
"If Ukraine had the ability to walk into an area and force the rebels to bend to their will, then they wouldn't be in the war that they currently find themselves in.",
"Rebels have big guns too. And they're already there.\n\nMilitary strategy usually estimates you need at least double or even 5x more firepower to take over a defended position"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
96ihc8 | what causes cgi to look so markedly artificial? | I watched Black Panther and The Greatest Showman recently. The rhinos and elephants in each movie were shown only briefly, but they drew my eyes every time to their ridiculously unlifelike movements and textures.
It’s 2018--In anime, movies, and TV, what is stoppling us from getting this perfect? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/96ihc8/eli5_what_causes_cgi_to_look_so_markedly/ | {
"a_id": [
"e40oeap",
"e40oedn",
"e40oj8k",
"e40oks5",
"e40sk3y"
],
"score": [
7,
25,
5,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"CGI of organic objects is difficult. The texture of the skin and hair is very detailed and difficult to get just right. Hair needs to be chaotic but not too chaotic, it needs to move just right. CGI skin generally ends up looking just a bit too shiny and movements aren't *perfect*\n\nYou don't notice 99.9% of CGI used in movies. A CGI car looks dead on to you, a CGI person can be 99.999% accurate and your brain can spot the flaws because you have tens of thousands of years of human recognition circuits hardwired into your brain to allow you to spot the subtlest differences between people and within a person's expression.",
"Its mostly survivorship bias. You dont notice all the awesome super lifelike cgi, so you are left with just the stuff that doesn't look perfect. As for why every bit of CGI doesnt look perfect mainly comes down to CGI being super hard, and the human brain being super picky. Your brain takes in thousands of little details and will know if something is up even if you cant pinpoint it. Shadows not falling quite right, an object being slightly too reflective, An object not being reflective enough, Shadows looking perfect in a scene, but not moving properly in relation to the camera. All of this stuff can instantly give off a feeling of something being fake. ",
"Often, it's an effect called the \"Uncanny Valley\".\nBasically, when something looks kinda human, we tend to project human features onto it. When it's almost completly human, our brain stops telling us that, and starts asking *what's wrong with that person?* This makes it stand out, and is often unnerving.\n\nThat's only for humans though. For living creatures, it's usually the lighting that's off. While it's pretty simple to calculate lighting for things like metal, soft surfaces are extremely complicated. We've gotten pretty good at approximating it, which is why fully CG Films and games can look amazing, but when you mix it with real life, it can sometimes stand out.\n\nAnother thing which might affect it is animation. While we usually use mocap(motion capture) for humans, for animals it might be manually animated. If that's done wrong, it really shows. ",
"Short answer: Money.\n\nGiven enough time (and money) a lot of these effects could be made more realistic. But even huge Hollywood movies have budgets that they have to follow, and most of the time the budget is strained. Producer: \"We can spend 2 million on this one scene with all the animals, or we can spend $500,000 on it with less time for CG and we can save $1.5 M for the huge explosion scene at the end\". \n\nUltimately, they are rushed, and push the CGI guys to the limit of their abilities. Somewhere along the way someone has to cut corners, and the stuff that isn't in the forefront ends up looking like crap.\n\nI think Hollywood producers don't care as much about how a film looks, since they see the public paying for tickets anyway, so why improve?\n\nJust my humble opinion I was a grip and green screen gaffer for many years, and \"We'll fix it in post\" was often heard on set. They would seem to just shoot anything and hope that the poor CGI guys can do something with it.",
"Money and time is what's stopping us.\n\nIt would take you a while to photoshop an image to make it somewhat believable, and much longer to photoshop it so well that it's not detectable, and you're working with just an image (one frame).\n\nA movie has 30 frames per second.\n\nIt takes a whole team of graphics artists, and takes forever (1-3 years) to get it to be \"acceptable\". Would take 5 times as long to get it to be \"perfect\", because it's very very difficult to get certain things perfect: hair and clothes physics, minute facial expressions, etc. \n\nOur brains are so good at detecting the smallest of emotions on someone's face, and the smallest detail with faces, hair, clothes, skin, and organic movements (natural walking, running, etc.), that it takes a lot of effort to \"fake it\" from scratch."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
mwrm1 | the uk sanctions on iran. the iranian attack on the british embassy | can somebody explain the UK sanctions on Iran, and The Iranian attack on the British Embassy? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/mwrm1/eli5_the_uk_sanctions_on_iran_the_iranian_attack/ | {
"a_id": [
"c34ilm9",
"c34ilm9"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Well the UK is sanctioning Iran because pretty much everyone is due to the fact that they are pushing forward with a nuclear program which they say is for domestic energy but everyone else thinks is for developing nuclear weapons. In reaction, a mob of Iranian 'students', as Iran claimed, rushed the embassy and ransacked it. The opinion of the UK is that it was a government backed militant group and that if it was really a random mob the government would have tried to stop it. Iran has since said it was a regrettable incident, and no one is buying it.",
"Well the UK is sanctioning Iran because pretty much everyone is due to the fact that they are pushing forward with a nuclear program which they say is for domestic energy but everyone else thinks is for developing nuclear weapons. In reaction, a mob of Iranian 'students', as Iran claimed, rushed the embassy and ransacked it. The opinion of the UK is that it was a government backed militant group and that if it was really a random mob the government would have tried to stop it. Iran has since said it was a regrettable incident, and no one is buying it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
ozfyv | communism is supposed to create a "classless utopia" but how come most communist countries are terrible places to live? | Places like the former USSR, North Korea, China, Cuba, North Korea, etc. are for the most part, are oppressive societies with power and wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. Communist philosophy, from what I understand, talks a lot about the excesses and greed associated with capitalism. Yet these "communist" countries usually end up the exact opposite of what communism intended. How can they still call themselves communist? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ozfyv/eli5_communism_is_supposed_to_create_a_classless/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3l9qdr",
"c3l9uuq",
"c3l9w3r",
"c3la1mp",
"c3la4gt",
"c3laas3",
"c3lag4n",
"c3lag9b",
"c3lagdn",
"c3lb50b",
"c3lbev9",
"c3lbk70",
"c3lbkpt",
"c3lbv5t",
"c3lbyhg",
"c3lc0yu",
"c3lc9xj",
"c3lcgto",
"c3lcnpn",
"c3lcpvm",
"c3lcssf",
"c3ld4n8",
"c3ld8r7",
"c3ldajl",
"c3ldc7s",
"c3ldco3",
"c3ldfhw",
"c3ldk88",
"c3ldohy",
"c3ldrae",
"c3ldx3z",
"c3lechn",
"c3lege4",
"c3legib",
"c3lenap",
"c3lf6y3",
"c3lfadb",
"c3lflcp",
"c3lfpho",
"c3lfqz6",
"c3lfrta",
"c3lfssz",
"c3lg421",
"c3lgv37",
"c3lgxph",
"c3lh6u4",
"c3lie0e"
],
"score": [
78,
29,
3,
80,
28,
170,
20,
3,
582,
2,
18,
43,
17,
3,
3,
12,
8,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
4,
3,
21,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
6,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Communist countries just replaced a social hierarchy based on wealth with one based on power. It turns out that whether or not your country believes in communist ideological principles, people are still people.",
"You can call yourself whatever you want. \n\nIt's also worth pointing out that the horrors of Communist countries are played up in our media. The USSR and China were only *that* bad during the times of Stalin and Mao Zedong, and Cuba or Vietnam or Yugoslavia really weren't any worse than the capitalist dictatorships the USA fought to keep in place.\n\n(North Korea is legitimately really really horrible, but so was Germany for a bit. No social system prevents random crazies from existing.)",
"You forgot about North Korea.",
" > How can they still call themselves communist?\n\nThe U.S. stills calls itself capitalistic, and it's probably no closer to the ideal of capitalism than any of those countries are to communism.",
"According to communist theory, you have to go from a capitalist society to a pure communistic society by way of revolution. All of the countries you mentioned did this. Then power is handed over to a select few of the most ardent believers in communism or fervent supporters of the leader of the revolution. This is to shepherd the masses from their self-induced anarchy to a true, pure communist state. None of these revolutions got past this point. Once you give a select few people an inordinate amount of power, and no way to take it back, they keep it, and do anything to stay in their positions. That's just the way humans are.",
"The places that you mention utilized communist propaganda but nonetheless never implemented anything resembling communism, but more along the lines of [state capitalism](_URL_0_), especially in the cases of the USSR and China. Places like Cuba became authoritarian hierarchies that used some socialist ideals and discarded others, for example Cuba has some of the best health care in the world (at least in terms of infant mortality rate, life expectancy, etc which are all higher than the US, especially considering the amount of money available), but essentially no freedom.\n\nAs someone also mentioned, you can call yourself whatever you want. Does anybody here think that North Korea is democratic? I mean, the official name of the country says so.\n\n+1 to Amarkov's post mentioning that a lot of the regimes that preceded these \"communist\" countries were also horrible places to live. ",
"When I first learned about Communism I asked my parents (both raised in Communist Poland), why was it so bad if the idea of communism was so great?\nTheir answer was that most people just want power. Even though everyone in a communist regime is supposed to be equal, others are \"more equal.\" That fairness and equality that is supposed to make it work gets lost amongst human greed.",
"There are quite a few reasons: often there are not enough resources to go around. Although, ideally there should be true fairness in wealth, there isn't necessarily going to be equality in power. Greed is natural and unavoidable and comradely (a requirement for the system to work) is variable across the population. ",
"Say you are in a group of 100 people. Essentially, they all agree that you should be in charge of how much they eat and what they eat. Now, you could buy them all steaks, marinate that shit, grill it up amazing and BAM they all love you! Cost: $10 per person for a total of $1,000 (just for round numbers). \n\nOn the other hand, you could buy ONE steak, you have an awesome meal when they can't see you and buy for them a packet of Ramen noodles while saying \"these are tough times and we must all dig deep to give for our long term good!\" Cost: $10 for 1 steak, about $0.25 per packet of noodles for $249.75 for total of $259.75. As long as the rest of the group doesn't see you eating steak, you keep saving money for yourself. \n\nNow, the countries you mentioned have a history of social brainwashing to make sure everyone in the country KNOWS that this is the way things need to be for everyone's good. Unless the entire group finds out they are being lied to, it's very tough to break that kind of view. ",
"They never moved on to Marxism.",
"Hmm, a lot of people here are focusing on the corruption of the communist ideal, but there is another problem with communism, even if it were implemented by benevolent robots.\n\nThe problem is one of information. In capitalism, markets are how information is transferred from consumers to producers and vice versa. If consumers don't want something, they don't buy it, and producers lower the price to sell it, and if they can't produce it at a profit, they stop producing it.\n\nIt goes the other way too. How do you know if a producer is doing something good by taking raw materials and making them into something? If they are making a profit, that means that the sum of the prices of the raw materials and labor that went into a product is less than the revenue from selling the finished product. That means that they too some stuff worth X to consumers, and turned it into something worth Y. If X < Y, that's great! But if X > Y, then by manufacturing a product they are making the world a worse place, based on consumer preferences.\n\nAnd that's how a market decides how a particular batch of steel is used, for example. Maybe it's worth most made into cars, maybe into cans, maybe into railroad tracks. A market divides up all the steel so that it is allocated pretty well into things that people want. And not only that, but the allocation is constantly changing. Maybe people have started to eat more fresh food from farmers markets, so they don't need as many cans. Markets will soon transmit this information, via price signals, to the can producers, who will start buying less steel. If you didn't have prices, you'd have to guess.\n\nGo ahead, try it. Guess what percentage of steel is needed for each of these purposes:\n\n* Machinery and Equipment\n* Energy\n* Automotive\n* Appliances\n* Containers (cans, etc)\n* National Defense\n* Construction\n* Other\n\nAfter that, see how close you were: _URL_0_\n\nThat's what it's like being a central planner. You get some information -- mostly everybody saying they need more of everything. And then you have to try to allocate it in a way that makes people happy. And you have to do it not just for every factory producing every item, but for every store. And if you get it wrong in one place, the shortage or surplus affects lots of other things in a wave.\n\nIn a market economy, every transaction is like a signal being sent from one computer to another, in an enormous network, every bit of it trying to do the best it can to become prosperous. If there's a shortage, prices rise, sending the signal to consumers of that good to cut back, find a substitute, or try to become a producer of the good and alleviate the shortage (thus making a profit). There's an enormous amount of computation involved in the optimization problem of allocating goods in an economy.\n\nYou can see right now how rising oil prices are the market's way of reacting to something that hasn't even happened yet -- the world running out of oil. People who sell oil are predicting that it won't be around for ever, so they are raising their prices. And consumers are making lots of adjustments to their habits to avoid needing so much oil. Oil prices affect the price of EVERYTHING The market is smoothing out the process of running out of oil, giving companies plenty of time to research solar cells and other alternate energy sources.\n\nCentral planning's lack of ability to do what the market does is known as the \"Economic Calculation Problem\". Now, if you had a socialist society where the government allowed a market but simply took a chunk of taxes from the rich and redistributed them among the poor, as many western economies do, this avoids some of the calculation problem. There are other negative effects in addition to the obvious positive ones for the poor, but they're nowhere near as serious as the problems faced by complete central-planning.",
"The only answer here should be:\n\n\"None of those listed are or were ever Communes.\"\n\n\nYou can very easily have a \"communist party\" lead a fascist dictatorship. Doesn't make it a commune of course.",
"[CUZ THEY GOT NO CLASS!](_URL_0_)",
"The original root of the problem lies in the fact that Marx never outlined the exact terms of a communist government as it could be applied in the current world. Instead, he theorized different stages in the evolution of society that would, in his view, inevitably end up in the communist stage where the government no longer exists and instead goods are shared freely between people for the benefit of all. A common misconception is that the countries you list are communist. They are not. They are socialist nations and therefore rely on the government to manage the factors of production. Despite what US propaganda may suggest, COMMUNISM DOES NOT = SOCIALISM. The evolution of society which Marx foresaw was one where societies would progress from capitalist = > socialist = > communist. No country in existence has every achieved Marx's vision of communism. Many people fail to understand that Marx himself originally formulated communist theory as a way to negate capitalism and its flaws. Unfortunately, his theories never outlined the exact way in which a communist nation could function, ergo leading to many dysfunctional socialist regimes such as the USSR and China coming to power. I could go on for hours but I hope this helped a little.",
"The leaders of communist countries were no less corrupt and power-hungry than those of capitalist countries. Places like the Soviet Union were communist in name only.",
"Okay, pretend you're a factory worker or something. You work 16 hours a day, in dangerous environments, for little pay. You look and you see, the factory worker though, he is rich. He has a huge house, he eats 6 meals a day, he wears a jeweled ring. You have 8 kids and all live in the same room. And how is he rich? Because he owns the factory. That's it! You do all the work, and he gets all the money. How angry does that make you feel? Pretty darn angry! But what can you do? That's the way of the world. \n\nNow imagine a man comes to you and he says, hey buddy. You do all the work, but don't don't get the fruits of your labour! What's up with that? Do we even need this fat cat? They get rich on production, but you're the one doing all the producing! Yeah! You say. You're right. But what can we do?\n\nWell I'll tell you, let's take over. Get rid of the fat cats, and share the profits! Awesome idea right? Let's do it. Utopia created!\n\nBut here's where it goes wrong. That man that said he'd help you? He was lying. What he really wanted was the fat cat's stuff for himself. He couldn't just take it, so instead he used your anger to get it. And he continues to use that anger, while taking it all for himself, telling everyone how free you are.\n\nBut wait you say, that's not fair! You said we were going to sha-\n\nOh, you just got sent to Siberia, so sad.\n\nAnd that's why they weren't great places to live, because the people in charge weren't trying to create communist utopia's at all, they were just trying to take over. And then they continued to use propaganda and violence to convince everyone they really did create a utopia. ",
"honest to god, the person who did the eli5 for all totalitarian regimes was george orwell in *animal farm*. you'll read it in a day and it'll make everything really clear; you'll also be deeply moved.",
"It's hard to say something definitive about communist nations when there's only been a couple. For every concept that's \"destined to fail\", there are similar concepts in capitalist nations.\n\nFor example, most of what we criticize about China (poor working conditions, human rights violations) was a mirror image of the U.S. in the 19th century.",
"Because Communism was never supposed to be accomplished in the near future. It has to take place in a post-industrial society...",
"There has never been a truly communist country, only communist parties who are in power. True communism doesn't need a government.",
"Because they are actually totalitarian governments with command economies...\n\nIn other words, they aren't actually communist.",
"We've got to go back to what communist actually is. \n\nLet's pretend that the country is a family. Every has a different amount of money- the kids have less than the parents. Except the parents aren't helping the kids by giving them food and a place to sleep. One of the family members doesn't like doing it this way, so they suggest we collect up everyone's money. Then we'll given everyone back the same amount. So, if there are 4 people in the family and all their money adds up to $40, the mom gets $10 bucks, and so does the dad and each kid. So, if the mom had $20 before, she just lost money. But if the kid had $2 before, he just gained money.\n\nThe problem with countries like the USSR, NK, etc is that once it's all collected up, the person who's collecting it sees how rich he could be with the money and doesn't want to share. So, if the dad was collecting it up and sees that there's $40, he might keep $25 for himself and give everyone else $5. He says that there's only enough for everyone to have $5. This doesn't go very well because then almost everyone is hungry and doesn't have a nice place to sleep. Even if they work hard, they can't get better stuff, so they don't work as hard. Because everyone isn't working as hard, there ends up being less money and the country gets worse. If the greedy person doesn't keep calling it communism, the people might realize there's more than $5 for everyone and that he's taking more than he's supposed to. \n\nFeel free to poke holes in my analogy... It was a bit of a stretch to make it ELI5, but I believe it's fundamentally correct.",
"Both capitalism and communism are based around the concept of labor arbitrage.\n\nLabor arbitrage is the process by which someone employs another person to do task that produces something that can be sold for more than it takes to pay the person being employed for the task.\n\nIf labor arbitrage didn't exist, everyone would \"work for themselves\" and nobody would pay another person to do something for them.\n\nThe problem with everyone working for themselves is that there is no specialization or division of labor. As a consequence everyone would spend their time satisfying the bottom strata of Maslow's Pyramid. Thus labor arbitrage always exists in anything larger than tribal hunter-gather sized groupings of humans.\n\nLabor arbitrage can either exist as an emergent feature or be forced by power and state credibility (as in the case of slavery). Typically, the role of government has been to manage and focus labor arbitrage (don't let anyone tell you it's about providing security for all members of society... that might be a latent artifact, but primary purpose is *always* about the management of labor arbitrage).\n\nOne of the features of government is that it aims to concentrate power and credibility into the hands of the few and given the primary economic law that \"every person acts in their own perceived best self interest\", politicians work to concentrate power, wealth and control in the hands of the fewest as possible.\n\nIn this regard, your question is actually loaded and flawed. The same effect happens in both communism and capitalism bringing rise to the following popular humorous truism: \n\n Under communism, man exploits man; under capitalism, it's the other way around.\n\nThe difference the popular media (aka, the 5th estate) likes to point out is that communism in places like North Korea depends more heavily on state credibility (the ability of the state to arbitrarily punish its citizens), the the reality of the matter is that the same credibility exists under your government as well (consider no fly lists, black incarceration rates, wide spread taser use, destroying people's economic well being via reduced civil court standards of evidence, three strike laws, and literally thousands of other categories of wide spread systematic persecution of what are basically victimless \"crimes\")\n\nAt the end of the day, the same 1% that exists in one system of labor arbitrage management also exists in the other.",
"Because the countries you've listed aren't really communist or marxist. They're fascistic with populist propaganda. ",
"Actual communism hasn't been achieved in history, other than briefly in Spain (George Orwell wrote about this in Homage to Catalonia.) Karl Marx, the person who originally came up with the idea of Communism, said that it would be classless (everybody is equal) and stateless (no central government telling people what to do.) However, he thought that the jump from today's society to communism would be too big to make in one move, and thought we should instead work towards it in steps. The middle step between this \"classless and stateless\" communism would be what he called state socialism. In this society, everyone is supposedly equal, but there is a giant central government that is in control of all the food, housing, and everything else in the country. He thought that this government could act nicely towards the people, and treat them fairly and give people what they needed, and eventually go away when it wasn't needed anymore. If you've heard the old saying \"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely,\" You'll have an idea of what happened next. Those in the government who had so much power decided to use it only to further their own interests. They were also very afraid of losing all that power, so they killed lots of people, and did everything they could to stop any opposition. ",
"Okay imagine that you get paid 50 cookies to mow part of the school lawn. Now imagine that you get 50 cookies if you sit at home watching television and don't mow your part of the school lawn.\n\nWhich do you do?\n\nExplanation: At least in theory, to create a classless society the pay every citizen receives is uniform, hence it doesn't matter if you don't do jack shit or if you manufacture a rocket ship by yourself.\n\nNon-ELI5: I know the above example is extremely simplified. In most communist countries every business is state owned, because of this the state basically has a monopoly. This suddenly removes the main reason to develop new and cutting edge products, because no competitors exist. This coped with a policy that is is almost impossible to fire employees, means people have no real incentive to neither develop new products or optimize the current flow of the factory, because it simply wont affect their pay at all. \n\nIt can be explained as simple as this: In capitalistic cultures YOU are being rewarded for performing well, in communist countries, at least in theory, if you perform well you increase the overall prosperity of your country, but by such a marginal point that you don't feel it. This is why communism is utopian it assumes everyone is as productive as possible, in reality a large group of people wont do jack shit because there is no direct incentive for them to heighten their productivity. \n\nOkay this last part was pretty shitty, will probably edit it.",
"Like most of the comments say they aren't really Communists.\n\n\n\nBut the philosophy itself, in my opinion, is flawed because of human nature (lazy, selfish, inflated self worth and envy). Also, greed + capitalism actually create wealth",
"Here's a better question:\n\n > Q: If Democratic Republics are supposed to create free and just societies, how come the Democractic Republic of North Korea is a terrible place to live?\n\nA: Just because someone calls themselves something, doesn't mean they necessarily are.\n\nELI5: If I called myself a potato, would I be potato? No, I'd still be a person.\n\nCommunism is, by definition, stateless, so those states you listed aren't communist in the slightest.",
"Frank Zappa explained it well: \"Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff.\"",
"oppressive societies with power and wealth concentrated in the hands of a few.\n\nAsk the people occupying Wall street if it also describes the USA.\n\nIt seems to me that any system where the vast majority either don't bother to vote, or can't get their vote fairly counted end up in the same situation.\n\nMandatory voting, excluding corporations from the vote, and mandating a maximum salary and bonus structure which then returns the earnings of the corporation to the share holders instead of the pirates that hijacked the ship.",
"It would require non-corrupt people to run it. And they're few and far between apparently. ",
"Communism is sort of a blanket term that gets thrown around a lot, but there are many different types of communism. Marxism, which many would view as the most classic form of modern communism is drastically different from Maoism, for example. \n\nThe simplest answer as to why the USSR, NK, China, Cuba, etc. weren't communist utopias is that they aren't even really communist governments. They're more just despotic regimes. ",
"If you were guarenteed to get a C+ on your report card no matter what, how hard would you try to learn in your classes?",
"One of my teachers put it kind of like this:\n\nA communist state has basically three stages. The revolt/reform where the current government is kicked out. Then a new government (the \"communists\") step in and set everything up for the classes utopia. And the last step is when the new government steps down or a utopia is achieved and rule is not necessary. \n\nThe problem with all these \"communists\" countries is that the second step never ended. The new leaders took over and kept ruling. They brainwashed everyone into thinking that everything was as it should be but with no few outside countries helping them they grew poor and unstable like the end of the USSR and North Korea right now. They never actually achieve communism. It usually ends up as a dictatorship.",
"The reason the countries you names were/are such poor places to live is not because they were communist, but because they were led by authoritarian governments that placed power, the ability to exert your will for your interests, in the hands of few.\n\nThose in power call it communism because they have the power to do so. True communism is akin to village life (or *commun*ity) where everyone works for the village's benefit. Those at the bottom of authoritarian regimes suffer because they don't have the power to change their lives.",
"read: Animal Farm",
"Well the communist countries which have existed havnt had even close to \"real communism.\" Communism is easily corrupted. If everyone has the same goals and mindset, then it can work, but if one person, just one, wants power, he can take it easily.",
"First of all there's never been a purely communist country...",
"Because communism might sound great in theory but in reality human nature (greed) takes over",
"It's excellent in theory until you introduce the human variable. That's when the entire equation goes to shit. ",
"Because no matter what hey say people want to be better off then everyone else, its just our competitive nature. \n\nCommunism would be the best form of government if it ever worked, but mostly it only ever works on paper and not in practice. ",
"The countries listed are Authoritarian Socialist, with the exception of the USSR which I would argue was only authoritarian under Stalin. \n\nThe root of the problem lies in the transition from Capitalist to Socialist. Reference the USSR's [constitution](_URL_0_). If you sift through it you see that all of the former private land was seized by the state and declared their property. This is the case in all \"communist\" revolutions. The goal of this is for the state to facilitate a transition from capitalism, defined by Marx as \"dictatorship of the proletariat\". This is a delicate act for the state. It must be authoritarian yet work in accordance with the peoples will. No country has ever balanced those needs. ",
"Read Animal Farm",
"Your t-ball team has 10 players on the team. At the end of the game, everyone gets a snow cone, regardless of how well they play. You tried your absolute hardest and had a really great game. You really earned that snow cone. But the other 9 players on the team, well, they didn't try too hard... but they still got rewarded with that snow cone. So the next game, you don't try very hard either. No one on your team does. Your teams plays a TERRIBLE game, but you are still rewarded with the snow cone. Why would you want to try hard anymore when you know you don't have to?\n\nAlso, not so much ELI5 anymore, but there really hasn't ever been a true Communist nation. There really can't ever be. It isn't compatible with basic human survival instincts.",
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely.",
"Places like the United States and Western Europe are places with power and wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, too - that's an element of human societies in general, no matter the philosophies they're built on.",
"Communism, a 100% free market, market socialism, syndicalism, or some kind of gift economy could all work, but the state ruins everything."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.steel.org/en/About%20AISI/Statistics/Market%20Applications%20in%20Steel.aspx"
],
[],
[
"http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/terminal05/2012/1/11/14/bad-joke-eel-go-with-it-26140-1326310804-82.jpg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/constitution/1918/article1.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2rmmx8 | if most muslims disagree with the actions of violent fundamentalist extremists, why isn't there a stronger reaction against it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rmmx8/eli5_if_most_muslims_disagree_with_the_actions_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnh8tud",
"cnh8udo",
"cnh923q",
"cnh93j3",
"cnh97co",
"cnh9dsr",
"cnh9ojl",
"cnh9qlc",
"cnh9qqp",
"cnh9x8b",
"cnhdg82",
"cnhdgvp",
"cnhecgf",
"cnhei4c",
"cnhewv5",
"cnhf0e9",
"cnhf72e",
"cnhfhln",
"cnhfpqg",
"cnhg4lw",
"cnhgocf",
"cnhgvsa",
"cnhhak8",
"cnhhec5",
"cnhhgpr",
"cnhhi5p",
"cnhhz0r",
"cnhi2wt",
"cnhi8rr",
"cnhib0w",
"cnhic15",
"cnhiec4",
"cnhij6b",
"cnhizmg",
"cnhj97i",
"cnhjc35",
"cnhjc8j",
"cnhjibb",
"cnhjim9",
"cnhjknq",
"cnhjnkc",
"cnhjotb",
"cnhjpvl",
"cnhjrsh",
"cnhjsdu",
"cnhjtly",
"cnhjuhi",
"cnhjuvs",
"cnhjyyw",
"cnhjzgw",
"cnhjzxi",
"cnhk1xc",
"cnhk4vd",
"cnhkdwi",
"cnhkg5w",
"cnhkh3b",
"cnhkhb5",
"cnhkhzg",
"cnhkk0r",
"cnhkkfp",
"cnhkm32",
"cnhkmx7",
"cnhkn3d",
"cnhknkm",
"cnhkqeu",
"cnhksft",
"cnhkt0d",
"cnhkvin",
"cnhky1z",
"cnhl574",
"cnhl83z",
"cnhlfu0",
"cnhlkpc",
"cnhll50",
"cnhln54",
"cnhlo9z",
"cnhloiy",
"cnhlqg7",
"cnhlr93",
"cnhlsg3",
"cnhlu91",
"cnhlyxb",
"cnhm0jq",
"cnhm2a1",
"cnhm50v",
"cnhm5an",
"cnhm9xm",
"cnhmjs5",
"cnhmlll",
"cnhmluy",
"cnhmn0i",
"cnhmna4",
"cnhmwik",
"cnhmyt6",
"cnhmyuo",
"cnhmywf",
"cnhn0yq",
"cnhn2yd",
"cnhn3cd",
"cnhn831",
"cnhn88i",
"cnhn8et",
"cnhnc31",
"cnhneua",
"cnhnfyo",
"cnhnklz",
"cnhnmb7",
"cnhnpd6",
"cnhnquq",
"cnhnqvv",
"cnhnrfq",
"cnhnubo",
"cnhnw9s",
"cnhnxat",
"cnhnyut",
"cnhnz7v",
"cnhnzal",
"cnhnzg8",
"cnho14x",
"cnho1lg",
"cnho1oh",
"cnho2cm",
"cnho3xc",
"cnho3xx",
"cnho4n1",
"cnho5a1",
"cnho5f6",
"cnho5yh",
"cnho83n",
"cnhocvu",
"cnhogjq",
"cnhoiaq",
"cnhoimk",
"cnhok83",
"cnhokrj",
"cnhol5a",
"cnholl0",
"cnholvc",
"cnhomd7",
"cnhomoe",
"cnhon7r",
"cnhooio",
"cnhq228",
"cnhsqod"
],
"score": [
3,
13,
43,
325,
31,
3,
192,
11,
433,
1085,
2,
6,
3,
130,
87,
3148,
4,
4,
4,
179,
9,
12,
2,
5,
9,
7,
2,
8,
4,
2,
62,
142,
1079,
10,
2,
3,
15,
58,
3,
3,
7,
12,
2,
2,
6,
5,
2,
2,
5,
2,
6,
6,
28,
2,
2,
2,
9,
5,
2,
7,
2,
9,
7,
2,
12,
2,
7,
4,
7,
2,
30,
3,
2,
4,
3,
5,
3,
3,
2,
2,
15,
2,
2,
7,
7,
5,
311,
5,
492,
2,
12,
14,
7,
3,
12,
2,
480,
2,
2,
4,
2,
5,
2,
7,
27,
6,
2,
2,
2,
5,
2,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
10,
9,
2,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
14,
4,
2,
4,
2842,
2,
13,
3,
5,
3,
6,
10,
5,
10,
14,
70,
12,
6,
6,
40
],
"text": [
"I totally agree, that's what makes me very skeptical about Muslim world views. Maybe it's nost sympathy for the extremists but indifference or ignorance that keeps the muslim world from heavily objecting ISIS etc., but those traits aren't desirable either. It's a shame really because this is an issue the world could move closer together on and a lot of wind could be easily taken out of the extreme rightist's sails (anti-muslim demonstrations and the likes).",
"When you mean stronger reaction, do you mean shows of military force, or what? Many Muslim-majority countries are themselves on the frontlines of such effects of terrorism - for example just look at Syria, and also the antiterrorism efforts in many other parts of the world e.g. Indonesia. On average speaking, they are themselves more affected and involved in the fight against terrorism than perhaps, the USA. In these cases, their intelligence and policing communities are equally mobilised, sometimes also having military elements in the thick of it, so I can't really see what you mean when you suggest that the average Muslim isn't taking a stance as strongly as you would like.",
"Let's put it this way. You're out with your friends and a thief comes by to rob you. He takes out his gun and points out at one of your friends. He asks him to hand him his wallet. You and your other friends, who are witnessing this, know that it is wrong and something should've done about it, but you can't act, for the thief isn't there to argue with anyone and has a weapon on him. Apply the same logic to Islamic Fundamentalists. Just replace that one weapon with hundreds of AK-47's and people who aren't afraid to lose their lives in order to reach martyrdom and you've got a population which is scared to act.",
"There are two fundamental issues with this question from my perspective: \n\na. first of all, what do you mean by \"stronger reaction\"? Would you propose an OIC (Organization of Islamic Countries)-led invasion of Iraq, etc.? You need to define what \"stronger reaction\" is. And second,\n\nb. by \"most Muslims\", would you mean ordinary Muslim citizens living ordinary lives? Because if so, then the question is, \"why do we have to react against an atrocity committed by some dumbfuck thousands of miles away without our consent?\". I wouldn't ask a Catholic to protest against the child molestation scandal, or a Jew to take responsibility for any alleged wrongdoing of Israel, so why is this any different?",
"What would you have them do? Generally moderates don't want to hang around radicals, and trying to reason a radical out of their views (this goes for any topic, not just Islam) is damn near impossible. \n\nEverytime something like this happens, the moderate leaders in various communities speak out against the actions of the crazy people, and try to help police if they can.\n\nAs for supporting a power structure and culture that allow terrorism to flourish, that's more what happens when you have poor areas, with high levels of corruption, with an 'enemy' they can rally against. Happen in more places than the middle east, it's just they are the more well known ones in western media.",
"I understand where you are coming from, I wondered this myself, but after thinking it through, it makes a little more sense why we don't see much of it.\n\nFor one, what would their platform be? Currently, Muslims don't have much of a platform in their control to preach what they think. If you go to their Mosques, you might, because that's where they have a platform in the west. The guests in the media are hand picked by the studio, which whatever side, they have a narrative. Another factor, the extremists are screaming, the pacifists whisper (the beheadings and brutality drown out the rational* discussions in sight and memory on the world stage). \n\nYou also can't really expect a peaceful person to get up and start beating the violent person, their nature contradicts impulsive* and forceful action. For example, the moderate muslim preaching to his community for love and peace is preforming his role as a non-violent Muslim. What exactly is he expected to do? Stop everyone on the street and say \"I don't hate you, and I believe in non-violence\"? Take up arms? \n\nIt's their job to disprove a stereotype? How many Muslims do you actually *know*. I think we need to meet half way as a society. We can learn more about the Muslims in our community on a personal level. I don't know what to do about the mass media, it is sort of a train wreck as it is. I don't know how the message can get out there besides on a person to person level.\n\nI don't have the answer, but those are some ideas to think about, or what I have at least.\n\nEdit: You didn't specify, but I thought you meant in the West, not over seas. ",
"I'm from an Indonesian Muslim background and a lot of our family and friends are Muslim, really good spirited people. When things like this happen I try to defend the Islamic culture as much as I can, but it gets harder and harder everytime. I feel numb after seeing the videos from the incident in France. Trust me we are pissed off it makes our blood boil, but yes it is getting harder and harder to say Islam is a religion of peace when it is constantly on the news. \n\nedit: I'm atheist, a lover of science, so I don't give a fuck about the cartoon, it makes my blood boil to hear about these massacres/bombings. When I say I defend islam, I defend the family and friends I know who are good people.",
"From what I've read, western Muslim scholars and leaders see it as insulting that they should \"need\" to come to there own defense. Many of them see themselves as so *obviously* separated from the radical Islam we see on the news, that it should be common knowledge that they are not a part of that small percentage.",
"I think the biggest reason there is not more \"push back\" from non-violent groups is due to the inherent danger of opposing said violent groups. There are many more non-violent Muslims in the region, yes, but they risk death by opposing radical groups. We don't face that possibility in the U.S, I can strongly oppose a group very publicly,but don't have much to fear for my views, however this is not the case in the Middle East. It is the same reason that Democracy won't work for the most part in that region, their society is not conducive of free speech like we are in the states; in that respect they are still many decades behind the U.S. ",
"_URL_1_\n\n_URL_2_\n\n_URL_0_\n\nIn other words, they do.",
"I mean there's radical christians out there too but I don't go to the same church as them so I am just as clueless on how to oppose them as anyone else",
"You can't really tell someone who kills people that oppose them to \"Please stop\"",
"You're against it, right? Why aren't you pushing back?\n\nSame as most Muslims. They aren't committing these crimes, they aren't any more (or less) responsible for stopping the bad eggs than the rest of the world is.",
"Hello I am an American Muslim who is active in my local Muslim community and I guess if someone should speak about this it should be me? I don't generally like it when people speak for us so I hope you listen to this sincere response instead.\n\nThe answer is that non-violent Muslims DO condemn actions like those that happened today, the reason you don't hear about it is because its not covered. Here is a press release from CAIR : _URL_0_\n\nMuslim countries are not in their best spot in history to say the least, and there is obviously really shoddy leadership in most Muslim countries (which is why things like Arab spring happened). Don't look to these leaders to represent the interests of their constituents whatsoever. \n\nPersonally, I am really depressed that these things continue to happen, and if you want to blame Middle Eastern governments for this please do. Just remember that America hasn't necessarily helped the region in being peaceful.",
"Non violent people have things to do with their lives - work school family video games etc. \n\nThey then pay someone (the government) to make a reasonable effort to keep them safe. \n\nWhy aren't more Americans out demanding state health care or an end to gun violence? Well they do occasionally get fired up about it. But you can't spend everyday of your life fighting bad ideas and still have time and money for your own life. \n\nThe media makes a big press headline about Muslim terrorists, but Sept 11 was 19 guys, this attack appears to be 2 or 3. Millions of muslims in France or the US or Saudi have other things to do than spend every day getting outraged over a very small number of people who are a bit crazy. \n\nYou can't even get half the public to vote once every couple of years. Don't expect them to all magically find the time or interest to be involved in every problem that pops up in the world. ",
"Many Muslim leaders in the Middle East have spoken out against these extremists, even from the huge Islamic university in Cairo (the name escapes me at the moment). They have even said that those like ISIS can no longer even be considered Muslims. It's just not publicized much in the West.",
"The reaction you are looking for can only come from a government that represents us \"vast majority of muslim population\". Sadly our countries are mostly ruled by dictators so these governments do not exist. We are suffering here from extremism, poverty, ignorance, illiteracy, lack of basic rights and freedom, violence and harassment, and oppression.\n\nWhat happened in france today is honestly not concerning most people here, we have more problems that we can handle. However sadly the only party that loses the most in all this shit are moderate people like us, who will suffer from more hate and violence more than they already have.",
"That's like asking \"If most Americans disapprove of Congress, why don't they do anything about it?\" It's because we're too busy and/or don't care enough. Same goes for them.",
"I could ask why Christians aren't doing more to protest bombings/shootings on abortion clinics. It's just not how anyone looks at things. Non-violent people aren't morally obligated to protest on the street every time a fringe group does something crazy.",
"I couldn't really coherently put together what I thought about this, so here are some resources I thought were interesting and worth looking at. \n\nThe Stream on Al Jazeera recently did an [episode](_URL_1_) on this question, around the context of ISIL - definitely worth checking it out if you want to hear a very well reasoned debate around this attitude.\n\nI would also ask where are you getting the idea that Muslims don't denounce violence? Do Muslims really keep quiet on extremism, or do you just not hear or see them when they do?\n\nHere is the Arab League [condemning](_URL_4_) today's shooting.\n\nHere is a [piece](_URL_2_) from Global Research on Islam's reaction to ISIL.\n\nHere is a [blog](_URL_3_) about Muslims condemning things. \n\nHere is a MediaMatters [piece](_URL_0_) about how your question is portrayed in the media.\n\n\n\n",
"For the same reason that ordinary Germans didn't oppose the Nazis. Some don't take them seriously. Some think one day it'll just blow over. Some are sympathizers. Some are afraid. Some just don't care.",
"I do my absolute best to condemn the actions of terrorists who hijack my religion. Nobody ever hears me though, neither do they suddenly stop being xenophobic. ",
"For the same reason no Christians have burned down the Westboro Baptist Church (yet).",
"A) Because a much larger portion of Islam is radicalized than other religions.\n\nB) Because the moderates will get killed if they speak up.",
"Because 'most Muslims' in reality don't disagree with the actions of these terrorists. If they did, the Muslim nations of the world would function in greatly different ways than they do currently, and historically. Muslim factions have warred against other Muslim factions throughout the history of this 'religion of peace'. \n\nLook at the treatment of women and minorities in any Muslim nation today and you will see abuse, slavery, human rights violations, and brutal justice. This is how Muslims across the world do behave when they are in the majority. The only reason we have this concept of 'moderate' Islam is because Muslims are minorities in Western nations. If you want to see the real Islam, look to Syria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, and the like.",
"Honestly because we frikken sick of it. Everyday is something new somewhere else. I would spend my whole life apologizing for stuff that happens elsewhere is the world. Of course its a heinous crime and the word on the muslim streets is those guys are crazy.\n\nI can tell you without a shadow of doubt most muslims don't support the Middle East power structures, those kings and rulers are a bunch of incompetent idiots but you know what happens to people who try to stand up to those guys? ",
"There is far too much ignorant defending of Islam and its members. A huge portion of 'non-extremist' Muslims support absurd, barbaric, violent punishments for misdeeds, including stoning to death anyone who tries to leave Islam. Anyone who is a mature adult would have left Islam years ago.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Why are the peaceful members of a religion not more violent? Uhhh...\n\n",
"Because most Muslims secretly support extremism, ie taqiyya.",
"Fact is, most muslims support sharia... watch this short video, maybe it'll shed some light. _URL_0_",
"If Americans don't really support remote killing of civilians using drones, why isn't there more public outrage?",
"Credit to /u/47140\n\nMustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS – Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians: “The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an: ‘No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another’ (Surah al-Isra 17:15).” MSANews, September 14, 2001 (via _URL_0_). Arabic original in al-Quds al-Arabi (London), September 14, 2001, p. 2.\n\nShaykh Yusuf Qaradawi, Qatar; Tariq Bishri, Egypt; Muhammad S. Awwa, Egypt; Fahmi Huwaydi, Egypt; Haytham Khayyat, Syria; Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani, U.S.: “All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason. Islam has declared the spilling of blood and the destruction of property as absolute prohibitions until the Day of Judgment. … [It is] necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and [punished] appropriately. … [It is] a duty of Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means.” Statement of September 27, 2001.\n\nShaykh Muhammed Sayyid al-Tantawi, imam of al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, Egypt: “Attacking innocent people is not courageous, it is stupid and will be punished on the day of judgement. … It’s not courageous to attack innocent children, women and civilians. It is courageous to protect freedom, it is courageous to defend oneself and not to attack.” Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001\n\nAbdel-Mo’tei Bayyoumi, al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy, Cairo, Egypt: “There is no terrorism or a threat to civilians in jihad [religious struggle].” Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 20 – 26 September 2001 (via _URL_0_).\nMuslim Brotherhood, an opposition Islamist group in Egypt, said it was “horrified” by the attack and expressed “condolences and sadness”: “[We] strongly condemn such activities that are against all humanist and Islamic morals. … [We] condemn and oppose all aggression on human life, freedom and dignity anywhere in the world.” Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 13 – 19 September 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nShaykh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, spiritual guide of the Hizbullah movement in Lebanon, said he was “horrified” by these “barbaric … crimes”: “Beside the fact that they are forbidden by Islam, these acts do not serve those who carried them out but their victims, who will reap the sympathy of the whole world. … Islamists who live according to the human values of Islam could not commit such crimes.” Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001\n\n‘Abdulaziz bin ‘Abdallah Al-Ashaykh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia: “Firstly: the recent developments in the United States including hijacking planes, terrorizing innocent people and shedding blood, constitute a form of injustice that cannot be tolerated by Islam, which views them as gross crimes and sinful acts. Secondly: any Muslim who is aware of the teachings of his religion and who adheres to the directives of the Holy Qur’an and the sunnah (the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad) will never involve himself in such acts, because they will invoke the anger of God Almighty and lead to harm and corruption on earth.” Statement of September 15, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\n‘Abdulaziz bin ‘Abdallah Al-Ashaykh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia: “You must know Islam’s firm position against all these terrible crimes. The world must know that Islam is a religion of peace and mercy and goodness; it is a religion of justice and guidance…Islam has forbidden violence in all its forms. It forbids the hijacking airplanes, ships and other means of transport, and it forbids all acts that undermine the security of the innocent.” Hajj sermon of February 2, 2004, in “Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation,” May 2004, page 10 (via _URL_0_).\n\nShaikh Saleh Al-Luheidan, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, Saudi Arabia: “As a human community we must be vigilant and careful to oppose these pernicious and shameless evils, which are not justified by any sane logic, nor by the religion of Islam.” Statement of September 14, 2001, in “Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation,” May 2004, page 6 (via _URL_0_).\nShaikh Saleh Al-Luheidan, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, Saudi Arabia: “And I repeat once again: that this act that the United states was afflicted with, with this vulgarity and barbarism, and which is even more barbaric than terrorist acts, I say that these acts are from the depths of depravity and the worst of evils.” Televised statement of September 2001, in Muhammad ibn Hussin Al-Qahtani, editor, The Position of Saudi Muslim Scholars Regarding Terrorism in the Name of Islam (Saudi Arabia, 2004), pages 27-28.\n\nShaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abdallah al-Sabil, member of the Council of Senior Religious Scholars, Saudi Arabia: “Any attack on innocent people is unlawful and contrary to shari’a (Islamic law). … Muslims must safeguard the lives, honor and property of Christians and Jews. Attacking them contradicts shari’a.” Agence France Presse, December 4, 2001\n\nCouncil of Saudi ‘Ulama, fatwa of February 2003: “What is happening in some countries from the shedding of the innocent blood and the bombing of buildings and ships and the destruction of public and private installations is a criminal act against Islam. … Those who carry out such acts have the deviant beliefs and misleading ideologies and are responsible for the crime. Islam and Muslims should not be held responsible for such actions.” The Dawn newspaper, Karachi, Pakistan, February 8, 2003 (via _URL_0_); also in “Public Statements by Senior Saudi Officials Condemning Extremism and Promoting Moderation,” May 2004, page 10 (via _URL_0_).\n\nShaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, chairman of the Sunna and Sira Council, Qatar: “Our hearts bleed for the attacks that has targeted the World Trade Center [WTC], as well as other institutions in the United States despite our strong oppositions to the American biased policy towards Israel on the military, political and economic fronts. Islam, the religion of tolerance, holds the human soul in high esteem, and considers the attack against innocent human beings a grave sin, this is backed by the Qur’anic verse which reads: ‘Who so ever kills a human being [as punishment] for [crimes] other than manslaughter or [sowing] corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and who so ever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind’ (Al-Ma’idah:32).” Statement of September 13, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nDr. Agha Saeed, National Chair of the American Muslim Alliance: “These attacks are against both divine and human laws and we condemn them in the strongest terms. The Muslim Americans join the nation in calling for swift apprehension and stiff punishment of the perpetrators, and offer our sympathies to the victims and their families.” September 11, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nHamza Yusuf, American Muslim leader: “Religious zealots of any creed are defeated people who lash out in desperation, and they often do horrific things. And if these people [who committed murder on September 11] indeed are Arabs, Muslims, they’re obviously very sick people and I can’t even look at it in religious terms. It’s politics, tragic politics. There’s no Islamic justification for any of it. … You can’t kill innocent people. There’s no Islamic declaration of war against the United States. I think every Muslim country except Afghanistan has an embassy in this country. And in Islam, a country where you have embassies is not considered a belligerent country. In Islam, the only wars that are permitted are between armies and they should engage on battlefields and engage nobly. The Prophet Muhammad said, “Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or religious people,” and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, “Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.” The Hadith, the sayings of the Prophet, say that no one can punish with fire except the lord of fire. It’s prohibited to burn anyone in Islam as a punishment. No one can grant these attackers any legitimacy. It was evil.” San Jose Mercury News, September 15, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n",
"I know what you're getting at, which is \"why don't more Muslims close to Daesh/AN/AQ grab an AK and fight back?\"\n\nThey are. In Syria, many normal citizens have armed themselves in defense of their towns and families. It is a dangerous choice, since if you're identified as a fighter your entire family is subject to brutal death. Some are unwilling to stake the lives of their loved ones, and thus refrain from joining the fight. I can understand this 100%. \n\nMuslim translators in both Iraq and A-stan worked with US and Coalition units as interpreters under threat of death, both for them and their families. They saw that coalition forces were there to help eradicate the plague and help rebuild, and some gave their all to help in any way to further this cause. Imagine going to work for a foreign based company working to improve your countries roads, except that every day you risked being killed due to nothing more than your collaboration for this company. You might just be helping in an ancillary role, say as a part time bookkeeper, but that doesn't matter to the ones trying to kill you, only your minor involvement in what they see as ultimate sin. Oh, and you only get a flack jacket, a face mask, and *no gun*.\n\nIn Iraq, the Kurds are doing a phenomenal job of defending their homeland, taking the fight to Daesh strongpoints, and helping local Iraqis do the same as they remove the Daesh from their area. They are working with US and Coalition special forces to train locals, and distribute arms and ammo so that others may defend themselves too. The Kurdish people have suffered under Saddam's regime, and refuse to be forced under the thumb of another religious government bent on their destruction. There are entire units of ***female*** Kurds fighting and dying alongside their husbands, all in hopes that they can prevent their entire society being wiped off the face of the earth by the Daesh. I have enormous respect for these people, since they are literally looking into the maw of destruction and refusing to go before the last round is fired. Truly heroic.\n\nOne doesn't need to look long or hard to see those of the Muslim faith putting it all on the line to prevent a perversion of their belief from spreading further and killing even more of their neighbors, family, and countrymen. One might ask \"how can I help these people, instead of sitting back and assuming they're all watching this unfold with their thumbs up their asses?\"",
"Great question and one I've had recently. As a student in Abu Dhabi, I've felt the same way: extremists are highly, ridiculously, outnumbered so why shouldn't there be a proportionate response against ISIS for example? You would think that ISIS, an undeniably evil organization, would actually provide a common enemy and opportunity for the Muslim community to react and prove to the West that yes extremism is just that, extreme and hence against the teachings of the faith. Because the fact is that the media panders to the ignorant, creating and reinforcing stereotypes against Muslims. \n\nUnfortunately I think the short answer is politics and economics. More specifically the Middle East, North Africa, and the broader Muslim states of the world are unable and/or unwilling to work together, even behind universally beneficial policies. You can see this with recent actions of the UAE, Qatar, and Turkey for example. The UAE is becoming more politically active against extremism, unlike many, and has kicked Qatari diplomats out recently because Qatar and Turkey refuse to speak/act out against the Muslim Brotherhood. This failure to criticize the group is because of economic ties among both country upper classes. \n\nFurther, it has been a big story lately about Arab uneasiness joining/making known their activities in the anti-ISIS coalition. Turkey particularly has been unhelpful because of unwillingness to help the Kurds, especially in Kobani. I was in Istanbul while there were protests about this, and Turkey has still failed to step up its efforts. The enemy of your enemy is your friend, and ISIS is fighting the Kurds. \n\nFinally, there is always oil, economics, and ties to the West that are perpetually in shaky equilibrium. These countries have too many ethnic, political, economic, religious differences to work together on anything. People speak out, including the Indonesian leader, but broad action is tough. And yes, all these countries DO have wealthy/powerful proponents of extremists funneling money. Sometimes ignorance really is bliss, unfortunately. \n\nMost of these countries have been happy to stay politically inactive to maintain stability and wealth, but that trend may be changing. The UAE is becoming more active, attacks are becoming more widespread, and the impetus for broad action is needed more than ever.\n\nTL;dr\nPolitics",
"Because deep down they sympathize with terrorism. Ask \"moderates\" if Israel has the right to exist, if free speech should allow insulting Mohammad, or if sharia law is superior to state law, and you'll get a whole lot of dancing around the question. ",
"They are, there are just two factors that people need to understand about the situation:\n\n1. Their opposition to the groups isn't as publicized\n2. Many of them (not MOST, just many) do believe in a lot of the ideas that Islamists have, they just don't believe in the violence and the extremety that they've taken it to. Mohammad said \"The ink of a pen is stronger than the blood of a martyr\", most muslims understand this.",
"Most large Muslim institutions and governments do speak out against the actions of violent extremists, and are quite alarmed with these actions.\n\nHowever, in my experience (which I care not to qualify here), most large Muslim institutions, governments and, importantly, people, agree with the sentiments that motivated the extremists. That's the part that is politically incorrect to say, but patently obvious to anyone who's lived in the Muslim world.",
"The real reason is that while the vast majority of muslims would never commit a violent act, there are however a number of tenants to which many of them do agree with the extremists on:\n\n(Taken from another Reddit thread)\n\n• 78% of British Muslims support punishing the publishers of Muhammad cartoons. (NOP Research) _URL_2_ _URL_0_\n\n• One third of British Muslims believe anyone who leaves Islam should be killed. (Policy Exchange) _URL_3_\n\n• 11% of British Muslims find violence for religious or political ends acceptable. (ICM Poll) _URL_4_ _URL_1_\n\nExtremists don't live in vacuums. Most muslims will never harm another life but with these kinds of views, it makes things easier for the actual violent extremists to grow and prosper among them.\n",
"Islam is a religion of war, muslims usually dont disagree with terrorists actions they may just think now isnt the right time or they are going to fast",
"What the fuck do you want us to do? Write a letter asking for forgivness?",
"Because the acceptability (or at least normalization) of said extremism is more common and inherent in many Muslim cultures than they care to let on.",
"There actually is a lot. You just dont ever see it because its not really newsworthy. ",
"Well... what sort of response do you think would be appropriate? There are Christian groups (and mind you, I am only saying this as an example, not saying that it is comparable) that advocate violence towards abortion providers and their clinics. There have been bombings and shootings. What else can other Christians do about these groups other than say \"they don't represent what the majority of us believe\"?",
"When people who really have something they want to say about something, they'll take to the street and protest. This is common the world over, yet I have to see any kind of organized even on the behalf of moderate Muslims crying for peace worldwide, and to stop the killing of people who don't follow their belief system. \n\nPerhaps a peaceful protest like this would do wonders for relations all around the world. \n\n\n\n",
"'If most Americans disagree with the actions of the NSA/CIA and the torture program, why isn't there a stronger reaction against it?'",
"I'm not sure if this has been posted, but wanted to say that there are numerous examples of men and women in these same environments having a VERY strong reaction to terrorism, including giving up their lives. The 14yr old in Pakistan who jumped on an person wearing explosives to his own demise (saving his school), Malala Yusef, Numerous stories I would have to look up from Palestine, stories from Iran, Syria, Iraq, the list goes on and on. \n\nRather, I think that the question is why there is not a concerted / united voice against terrorism, and I think you have to consider that there are Muslim people from a lot of different cultures, traditions, and countries in general. Are you looking for some kind of joint statement from the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world? Or combined statements from all countries? ",
"It's because they don't stand out. Many Muslims disagree with it, so it's become common. ",
"For the same reason that so many unpopular political positions have power here in the U.S. For example, poll after poll shows Americans supporting strict gun control. However, it often fails because of the passion and single-mindedness (and industry support) by pro-gun extremists.\n\nThe people that want gun control do not vote on that issue alone or even primarily, but the gun lovers do, so they often win on that issue.\n\nMost Muslims are not extremist, of course. But you can't really dedicate your life, blood and passion to \"moderation\" in the way that you can to extremism. Extremists/fanatics, by definition, are more effective in the short term because they are doing EVERYTHING to realize their goals. They are acting in extreme fashion.",
"The same could be said about radical Christian beliefs. I'd imagine most church going Christians arent crazy fundamentalists who think that God hates gays, abortions is murder, and women are supposed to be obedient to men.\n\nBut it's the crazy ones who shout the loudest and do things to get your attention/drive the point home. ",
"Anyone else notice how friends with fuck-up, scumbag siblings will still stand by that sibling, sometimes even hide them away from justice, even if they agree that the sibling is an embarrassment and a nuisance?",
"They do its is just that western media doesn't portray it as so. ",
"Why don't more redditors denounce leading questions like this? \n\nAnswer, they do in the comments, but since the stupid question is the headline, you see it first and it sticks more in your memory. Not to mention, there will always be a subset of people who only see the question and don't click through to the comments ",
"Not muslim myself but I saw this on twitter:\n\n\"Note to Muslims: you are not collectively guilty of attack in Paris or any other attack, so please stop apologizing. You didn't do it!\"",
"To what extent should Christians living in France protest the actions of the Westborough Baptist church? If they don't, does it mean they condone the actions of that church? \nIt's interesting to me the degree to which so many people are willing to treat religion as some kind of cultural or social platform of commonality, when in truth, this is more than a billion people scattered over the whole of the planet.",
"If most white people are critical of bombing NAACP centers, then why isn't there a stronger reaction against it?",
"Idk, Egypt is apparently really pissed off about it. There certainly isn't ENOUGH backlash that's for sure.",
"because the onus shouldn't be on them; why should i, as a peaceful, law-abiding muslim be responsible for dealing with people who i don't even see as following the same religion as mine? do we expect christians to come out of the woodwork when there's a westboro baptist church protest or when someone's head gets cut off for witch-craft and deal with those people? \n\nno, we assume that the moderate christian is so far displaced from the extremist that they are not even considered to be in the same group; same should go for islam. a muslim living peacefully is just as responsible for islamic extremism as any other citizen living in the same society; not at all.",
"Because killing nonbelievers is encouraged in the Koran.\n\nEdit: Apparently there are people on the Internet who don't think it does. News to me. Here's the proof.\n\nQuran (2:216) - \"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.\"\n\nQuran (8:57) - \"If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.\"\n\nQuran (4:74) - \"Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.\"\n\nQuran (3:151) - \"Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority\"\n\nQuran (4:95) - \"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-\"\n\nQuran (8:12) - \"I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them\"\n\nQuran (48:29) - \"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves\"\n\nIslam is a shitty religion and people who follow it need to take a long hard look at reality.",
"Because they only claim to disagree when other people are around. It's in their religion. Like, it's part of their documentation.",
"I would say that the main reason is that there is primarily anger towards the west. They do not condone any violence, but understand anger against the war on terror, which indiscriminately kill Muslim people,mostly civilians. Why is there not a bigger voice condemning our violence?\n\nWe have become over-saturated with the language of terrorism, that it falls on deaf ears. Murder is usually classified as terrorism when the perpetrator is Muslim, but not vice versa. Our actions terrorising a whole generation are \"legal\" and never equated with terrorism. Obviously our bombing campaigns are supposed to only target terrorists, but civilian deaths are ignored with impunity for all. Our torturing records are constantly covered up, along with our history of coups. Until we can accept responsibility for our crimes, why should they? We are mostly peace loving, like most Muslims, but the war on terror only radicalises both parties",
"I hope I can offer some insight into this question, even if its not a clear-cut answer. Just something to keep in mind: \n\n\n1) It's always difficult to talk about a mass of people like they're 1 group. For example, if we were to ask: \"Why don't Americans condemn the Iraq war?\" You might have a difficult time formulating an answer, because 'Americans' are made up of different individuals, with differing opinions and different life circumstances. They're multi-faceted. Some americans spend their careers opposing the war. Some americans oppose it, but they're too busy with their day-to-day lives to dedicate time actively showing it. A few actually support the war's policies. Some americans are don't feel any connection to the war at all--to them, sure, war is bad, but they don't in any way feel affiliated or associated with it, so why should they answer for it? Muslims are the same way. They're human, and they carry on in their daily lives like you expect every American would. And the majority of them\nthat oppose violence--they have never asked to be associated with terrorists. They're just trying to live their lives and practice their religion as they understand it. \n",
"Someone else compiled this info but yeah, a few prominent figures in groups response after 9/11. The Western media just don't show this side too often \n\nShaykh Muhammed Sayyid al-Tantawi, imam of al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, Egypt: “Attacking innocent people is not courageous, it is stupid and will be punished on the day of judgement. … It’s not courageous to attack innocent children, women and civilians. It is courageous to protect freedom, it is courageous to defend oneself and not to attack.” Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001\n\nMuslim Brotherhood, an opposition Islamist group in Egypt, said it was “horrified” by the attack and expressed “condolences and sadness”: “[We] strongly condemn such activities that are against all humanist and Islamic morals. … [We] condemn and oppose all aggression on human life, freedom and dignity anywhere in the world.” Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 13 – 19 September 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nShaykh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, spiritual guide of the Hizbullah movement in Lebanon, said he was “horrified” by these “barbaric … crimes”: “Beside the fact that they are forbidden by Islam, these acts do not serve those who carried them out but their victims, who will reap the sympathy of the whole world. … Islamists who live according to the human values of Islam could not commit such crimes.” Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001\n\nPresident Muhammad Khatami of Iran: “[T]he September 11 terrorist blasts in America can only be the job of a group that have voluntarily severed their own ears and tongues, so that the only language with which they could communicate would be destroying and spreading death.” Address to the United Nations General Assembly, November 9, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nAbdal-Hakim Murad, British Muslim author: “Targeting civilians is a negation of every possible school of Sunni Islam. Suicide bombing is so foreign to the Quranic ethos that the Prophet Samson is entirely absent from our scriptures.” “The Hijackers Were Not Muslims After All: Recapturing Islam From the Terrorists” (via _URL_0_).\n\nSyed Mumtaz Ali, President of the Canadian Society of Muslims: “We condemn in the strongest terms possible what are apparently vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Canadians in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts.” Canadian Society of Muslims, Media Release, September 12, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\n15 American Muslim organizations: “We reiterate our unequivocal condemnation of the crime committed on September 11, 2001 and join our fellow Americans in mourning the loss of up to 6000 innocent civilians.” Muslim American Society (MAS), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), Muslim Student Association (MSA), Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), Solidarity International, American Muslims for Global Peace and Justice (AMGPJ), American Muslim Alliance (AMA), United Muslim Americans Association (UMAA), Islamic Media Foundation (IMF), American Muslim Foundation (AMF), Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO), American Muslims for Jerusalem (AMJ), Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA), October 22, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nYusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens), prominent British Muslim: “I wish to express my heartfelt horror at the indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed against innocent people of the United States yesterday. While it is still not clear who carried out the attack, it must be stated that no right thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action: the Qur’an equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity. We pray for the families of all those who lost their lives in this unthinkable act of violence as well as all those injured; I hope to reflect the feelings of all Muslims and people around the world whose sympathies go out to the victims at this sorrowful moment.” [On singing an a cappella version of \"Peace Train\" for the Concert for New York City:] “After the tragedy, my heart was heavy with sadness and shock, and I was determined to help in some way. Organizers asked me to take part in a message for tolerance and sing ‘Peace Train.’ Of course, I agreed. … As a Muslim from the West, it is important to me to let people know that these acts of mass murder have nothing to do with Islam and the beliefs of Muslims.” Press release of September 13, 2001 (via _URL_0_), and interview of October 22, 2001 (via _URL_0_).\n\nMuslims Against Terrorism, a U.S.-based organization: “As Muslims, we condemn terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. Ours is a religion of peace. We are sick and tired of extremists dictating the public face of Islam.” “About us” (via _URL_0_). This statement was replaced by a new statement in favor of peace by the group’s successor organization, Muslim Voices for Peace.\n\nAbdulaziz Sachedina, professor of religious studies, University of Virginia: “New York was grieving. Sorrow covered the horizons. The pain of separation and of missing family members, neighbors, citizens, humans could be felt in every corner of the country. That day was my personal day of “jihad” (“struggle”) — jihad with my pride and my identity as a Muslim. This is the true meaning of jihad — “struggle with one’s own ego and false pride.” I don’t ever recall that I had prayed so earnestly to God to spare attribution of such madness that was unleashed upon New York and Washington to the Muslims. I felt the pain and, perhaps for the first time in my entire life, I felt embarrassed at the thought that it could very well be my fellow Muslims who had committed this horrendous act of terrorism. How could these terrorists invoke God’s mercifulness and compassion when they had, through their evil act, put to shame the entire history of this great religion and its culture of toleration?” “Where Was God on September 11?” (via _URL_0_).\n\nShaykh Salih al-Suhaymi, religious scholar, Saudi Arabia: “Based upon what has preceded, then we say that that which we believe and hold as our religion concerning what happened to the World Trade Centre in America – and in Allaah lies success – that the terrorist attacks that took place and what occurred of general (mass) killing, then it is not permissible and Islaam does not allow it in any form whatsoever.” “Shaykh Saalih as-Suhaymee speaks about current affairs…,” October 18, 2001, translated by Abu ‘Iyaad.\n\nFatwa signed by more than 500 British Muslim scholars, clerics, and imams: “Islam strictly, strongly and severely condemns the use of violence and the destruction of innocent lives. There is neither place nor justification in Islam for extremism, fanaticism or terrorism. Suicide bombings, which killed and injured innocent people in London, are HARAAM – vehemently prohibited in Islam, and those who committed these barbaric acts in London [on July 7, 2005] are criminals not martyrs. Such acts, as perpetrated in London, are crimes against all of humanity and contrary to the teachings of Islam. … The Holy Quran declares: ‘Whoever kills a human being… then it is as though he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a human life, it is as though he had saved all mankind.’ (Quran, Surah al-Maidah (5), verse 32) Islam’s position is clear and unequivocal: Murder of one soul is the murder of the whole of humanity; he who shows no respect for human life is an enemy of humanity.” British Muslim Forum, press release of July 18, 2005 (via _URL_0_).\n\n",
"Remember when you read Harry Potter? When its explained how everyone was afraid of the death eaters & voldemort? You couldnt speak out because anyone who did had themselves or their family taken away and never seen again.\n\nEveryone is scared. You dont know who to trust. If you speak out or even bring it up, you dont know who could be part of the extremists (just like you didnt know who every death eater was) and they could tell on you, and you then put your family and yourself in danger. \n\nThe lack of a strong reaction is very similar to why people were afraid of voldemort and the death eaters. ",
"Most US Republicans say they're against racism and white supremacy, but the Republicans in the US House of Representatives just elected a member of majority leadership who has a history of courting white supremacist votes and money, so...",
"Credit to /u/oldie101\nHere are some statistics for you:\n\n**A non-Islamic state is over three times more likely to be democratic than an Islamic state. None of the 16 Arab states of the Middle East and North Africa is a democracy.**\n\n**There are 4 places in the world that still have beheading as a method of execution. Every single one is officially Islamic. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar and Yemen.**\n\n**There are 5 places in the world that still have amputation as a form of legal punishment. Every single one is officially Islamic. Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Islamic regions of Nigeria**\n\n**In 2012 there were 7 known countries in the world where the state could execute you for being atheist. Every single one was officially Islamic. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, the West African state of Mauritania, and the Maldives**\n\n**There are 9 places in the world that still have stoning as a form of legal punishment. Every single one is officially Islamic. [In addition to Iran] Stoning is also a legal punishment for adultery in Mauritania, a third of Nigeria's 36 states, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.**\n\n[Here](_URL_0_) is a whole list of these and other facts about Islam.\n\nSome excerpts about Europe.\n\n**UK**\n\"More than 60 percent of British Muslims want Shari'ah law in the UK\n\"32% of British Muslim students support killing for Islam; 40% want Shari'ah Law\"\n\n**Belgium**\n\n\"40% say that Islamic values are incompatible with Flemish values.\"\n\n**Germany**\n\n\"Even though they live in Europe, 56 percent declared that they should not adapt too much to Western ways, but should live by Islam. More than a third insisted that if it serves the Islamic community, they are ready to use violence against nonbelievers. Almost 40 percent said that Zionism, the European Union and the United States threaten Islam.\"\n\nIf you could show me any of this in Christianity or in any other religion other than Islam for that matter. I will believe you.\n\nHowever until now, I will believe that Islam and it's beliefs do not associate with the First World, and it's not just a \"small minority\" who feels this way.\n\nMore [FACTS](_URL_1_) about Sharia",
"What have you done to quell extremism? Why is the onus on me to try and do it? Hell I'm all for a good cause but what do you want me to do? I'm sorry I know this is eli5 but this thinly veiled loaded question annoyed me",
"It's a **myth** that Islam is infiltrated by a \"tiny minority of extremists\". A large proportion of muslims (perhaps a minority in Western countries, but nevertheless a *significant* minority) hold extremist views. A majority of muslims hold extremist views in Islam-dominated countries. \n\nIf you're not convinced, take a look at [these polls](_URL_0_) describing the opinions of muslims worldwide. \n\nBring the downvotes, apologists. \n\n-------\nSome examples:\n\n\n*MacDonald Laurier Institute*: 35% of Canadian Muslims would not repudiate al-Qaeda\n\n*ICM Poll*: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers\n\n*NOP Research*: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified\n\n*Populus Poll (2006)*: 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified. 1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops.",
"There are very strong reactions against it. They have basically excommunicated anyone who is a terrorist. They have said and done everything they can short of forming their own anti-terrorism terrorism group and killing them all.\n\nBut the \"main stream media\" wants to keep you scared of teh muslims. ",
"It's like saying all of you white people, go put an end to the KKK. ",
"I remember there was once a very broad poll and they found that ~25% of muslims actually agree with terrorist actions and jihad. There's got to be even more that are on the fence about it and/or indifferent.",
"I want to say a quick point, and this is part anecdotal and part experience. \n\nFull Disclosure: I am a Muslim from the US, see name. \n\n1) A small but vocal and sizable minority of Muslim do continue to believe the terrorists are actually doing the right thing. This is no small part due to uneducated imams continuing to press the righteousness of the terrorist cause onto relatively uneducated folks. In short an honest discussion needs to occur to explain why the actions that these terrorists are committing are both religiously and morally wrong. \n\n2) Similar to how many favelas in Rio continued to protect the criminal gangs that caused their communities so much harm or Pablo Escobar's popularity amongst a certain subsection of the Columbia population, these terrorists are seen as having broken the mold. They are in short heroes for their communities simply because of their ability to stand up to otherwise oppressive and destructive regimes. \n \n 3) Bear in mind that many places where terrorism occurs because these friendly Muslims literally have no say in the power-structures that they live in, if their leaders say they must wear the hijab, they are forced to comply. The culture of discussion and checks that we hold dear here is not there so even if Muslims wanted to prevent terrorism they have no way of doing so. \n\nHope this goes someway to answering your question.",
"Christianity is the same. Not a single Christian I've met in my 30+ years are what you hear about on reddit or see in the media. It's all love, no hate.\n\nWhat gets publicized is interesting stuff. \"Muslim bombs building\" is more interesting that \"Muslim conference claims extremist are not muslim\". ",
"Think of where you get your news? Think of the stories you read. It's to get you riled up. Sane people disagree with irrational violence, it doesn't matter your color or creed, it's a matter of intelligence. We get the spoon full of news the media wants us to be riled up about for the day. There is plenty out there happening that isn't readily covered. It's really easy to take the little info we have been spoon fed and make these generalizations about an entire group of people and not bat an eye. Take a breath and think on it. There are fucked up people in your own family, you know them, their fuck ups should not have you be categorized as a fuck up. For Muslims it's the same. Yea these guys are fucking up with Islam on their lips but crazy people do that kinda thing. Look at every domestic terrorist or serial killer out there, they all have delusions about why what they did was right. This is tragic stuff and easy to get emotional about. Really think on it though and I think you'll have a hard time lumping in every Muslim with the crazy extremists.",
"Violent or not, Islam is founded on the idea that if you aren't Muslim, you are a second-class citizen or \"infidel\". It preaches poor treatment and violence towards infidels.\n\nWhile many Muslims aren't extreme, all of them believe this foundation of the religion. If they didn't they wouldn't be Muslim.\n\nSo while many may not actively participate in Jihad (the war against infidels) they still agree and or are indifferent towards it.\n\nDenial of this is like a Christian claiming they do not believe in the 10 commandments. How can you identify as Christian if you reject the core beliefs?\n\n\nBoom, 5 year old synopsis",
"Probably the same reason why all the right-wing violence in America is conveniently ignored on Fox News. People have vested interest in things.",
"It's confirmation bias. There are a number of well-known Muslim intellectuals who have spoken out against these actions, but it is much harder to fit this dissonant idea into the current narrative.\n\nSimultaneously, these acts are committed by people` with no regard for human life. Speaking out isn't what stops them, it's not getting them into radicalization in the first place through community involvement and outreach. With that said, a large number of mosques practice these tenets, and imams actively tell people (At least in Toronto) to report suspicious radical behaviour of any individual to the imam himself. The RCMP in Canada have had this happen repeatedly.",
"What do you do in 'reaction' to crimes committed by athiests/white people/whatever category you can be placed in?\n\nExactly.",
"The problem is not exactly with Islam. The problem is the situation in Middle East. Whats happening now is the aftermath of the fall of the Ottoman Empire, colonization by the French, British, etc. WWII, the Balfour declaration. Of you really wanna know more about this please ask in /r/askhistorians they can explain better than I can ",
"There's an enormous pushback against Priests who molest children, but Catholics (or other Christians, or governments in general) haven't had much luck forcing the Catholic Church quell that, either. Problems like this are hardly limited to Muslim fundamentalists...",
"How many cops do you go up to daily to ensure they aren't corrupt?\n\nHow many financial institutions do you go to daily and rail against their bullshit bending and breaking of the law?\n\nHow many Christians ardently go after the fringe that uses violence as it's means (abortion doctors murdered)?\n\nHow much of your day is actually spent writing wrongs you are a part of? Probably not a lot, just like everyone else.\n\nThis ain't a muslim thang.",
"Why should regular people who got about they lives have to answer for anything besides their own lives? ",
"What are they supposed to do? They vocally condemn them. \nIt's similar to Westboro Baptist church. Almost everyone hates them but we can't actually do anything. ",
"Why should they have to? Why is it their responsibility?",
"If an extremist group claiming to be spokesmen of (your religion/atheism) suddenly blew up a school somewhere would you feel like you should apologize on their behalf or not because you had nothing to do with it?",
"TIL Americans have an Alice in Wonderland version of global politics. ",
"I have hundreds of muslim friends back home (Pakistan) and a few dozen in Dubai ( where I live) and a few in the US ( family members etc) I have yet to come across a single muslim I know that said anything positive about the whole thing. We are never taught this kinda violence and hate that you see in the media.....my personel belief is these people who perpetrate crimes in the name of religion, are the furthest from religion. ",
"The problem is that people love to act as if Muslims are some monolithic collective. They're not. \n\nMy mum is a muslim as is the rest of my family, and their reaction to todays news was \"Those poor people, God will punish those murderers\". What else can they say?! What do you want them to do? Are you suggesting that just because they share the ambiguous title of \"muslims\" that they're automatically connected? \n\nWhat utter tripe and sensational garbage. Muslims are as fucked off about this bullshit just as much as none-muslims, the only difference being that when this sort of thing happens there's an added thought in the muslim mind \"Yaaay I have to now justify why this isn't a central event in my life, otherwise I apparently agree with them.\"",
"It's... probably not ELI5, but [this guy here](_URL_0_) makes a pretty good argument that there is a pretty strong reaction, it's just that most media doesn't feel it fits the general narrative",
"A brief outline, for five-year-olds, about why we don’t hear about the Muslim community being outraged about Islamic extremism. Other comments have covered these topics extensively.\n\n1)\tIslam has no central authority. There is no one person or group in charge. There is no Pope or Dali Lama. Most teaching is done at the local (\"congregational\") level. Some teachers and leaders do rise to prominence, but their authority only comes from the size of their following.\n\n2)\tProminent leaders and educators in Islam are not well known in the Western world. When they do speak out we don't really know who they are, so we don't pay much attention.\n\n3)\tIn North America most people do not know many Muslims. If we do know a few of them we generally regard religious subjects as taboo, so we really don't know how they feel about these events. I'm sure many Muslims are just as embarrassed by these extremists as Christians are by Westboro Baptist Church, we just don't hear about it.\n\n4)\tMany Muslims living in Western nations are afraid to speak out because they are afraid of backlash from people knowing they are Muslim. They are just trying to lay low and get on with their lives.\n\n5)\tIslamic doctrine is not well understood in the West, for a variety of reasons. So we do not have a point of reference for understanding values and morality in Islamic cultures. When different factions talk about their positions we don't really know which ideas are \"mainstream\" and which are \"radical\". It doesn't help that the nature of Islamic Doctrine changes from region to region and from one teacher to the next.\n\n6)\tMany of the ideals of the extremists do have widespread support, even if the tactics are regarded as abhorrent. It's harder to speak out against people who are doing the wrong things, but for the right reasons. \n\n7)\tIslamic communities are fairly tight-knit. That means that expressing feelings one way or the other can get you in an argument with family, friends and neighbors.\n\n8)\tBeing outraged and speaking out against crazy, violent people can put you in the cross-hairs of those crazy, violent people.\n\nThis is meant to be a short, easy to understand answer. I'm sure there are many other factors, many of which are being discussed in other posts . \n",
"Because, just like Christianity, there are many different sects and denominations. Plenty of Muslim don't even consider those in ISIS to actually be Muslim. Collectively they have something in common on a very superficial level but at no point do these different sets of people actually agree with each other. Why should they be offended by someone (other than just as a human) they don't see as an equal?\n\nIt would be like Protestants having strong reaction to a decision the Pope made, or perhaps like being Chinese and having to have a strong reaction to someone else just because they are also Chinese.\n\nReligion isn't as organized as it seems, there is no real way to have a strong reaction except for those few (unknown to us) leaders who condemn these actions.\n\nI believe the reaction is appropriate enough.",
"As your average Joe muslim dude, here's how I feel when I heard that the terrorists that killed the cartoonists chanted that they'd \"avenged the prophet Mohammad\" or whatever:\n\nFind the sons of bitches, have them shoot them in the face, and chant that we've avenged the freedom of speech. ",
"Why did Irish Americans not react when the IRA were blowing civilians to bits?\n\nWorse still - they [FUNDED their terrorist activities](_URL_0_) from your very own country.\n\nFood for thought.",
"They do. You just haven't been paying attention.",
"Because that's not what the media wants you to see. Also, no one really cares about peaceful Muslims, its not on par with the status quo ",
"\n\nSome interesting content I found in here:\n\nICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers _URL_12_\n\nNOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified _URL_9_ _URL_0_\n\nPeople-Press: 31% of Turks support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq. _URL_4_\n\nYNet: One third of Palestinians (32%) supported the slaughter of a Jewish family, including the children: _URL_6_ _URL_8_\n\nWorld Public Opinion: 61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans 32% of Indonesians approve of attacks on Americans 41% of Pakistanis approve of attacks on Americans 38% of Moroccans approve of attacks on Americans 83% of Palestinians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (only 14% oppose) 62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose) 42% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (45% oppose) A minority of Muslims disagreed entirely with terror attacks on Americans: (Egypt 34%; Indonesia 45%; Pakistan 33%) About half of those opposed to attacking Americans were sympathetic with al-Qaeda’s attitude toward the U.S. _URL_1_\n\nPew Research (2010): 55% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hezbollah 30% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hezbollah 45% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hezbollah (26% negative) 43% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hezbollah (30% negative) _URL_13_\n\nPew Research (2010): 60% of Jordanians have a positive view of Hamas (34% negative). 49% of Egyptians have a positive view of Hamas (48% negative) 49% of Nigerian Muslims have a positive view of Hamas (25% negative) 39% of Indonesians have a positive view of Hamas (33% negative) _URL_13_\n\nPew Research (2010): 15% of Indonesians believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified. 34% of Nigerian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified. _URL_13_\n\nPopulus Poll (2006): 12% of young Muslims in Britain (and 12% overall) believe that suicide attacks against civilians in Britain can be justified. 1 in 4 support suicide attacks against British troops. _URL_2_ _URL_7_\n\nPew Research (2007): 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified. 35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall). 42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall). 22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall). 29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall). _URL_3_\n\nPew Research (2011): 8% of Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (81% never). 28% of Egyptian Muslims believe suicide bombings are often or sometimes justified (38% never). _URL_10_\n\nPew Research (2007): Muslim-Americans who identify more strongly with their religion are three times more likely to feel that suicide bombings are justified _URL_3_\n\nICM: 5% of Muslims in Britain tell pollsters they would not report a planned Islamic terror attack to authorities. 27% do not support the deportation of Islamic extremists preaching violence and hate. _URL_5_\n\nFederation of Student Islamic Societies: About 1 in 5 Muslim students in Britain (18%) would not report a fellow Muslim planning a terror attack. _URL_7_\n\nICM Poll: 25% of British Muslims disagree that a Muslim has an obligation to report terrorists to police. _URL_14_ _URL_7_\n\nPopulus Poll (2006): 16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified. 37% believe Jews in Britain are a \"legitimate target\". _URL_2_ _URL_7_\n\nPew Research (2013): At least 1 in 4 Muslims do not reject violence against civilians (study did not distinguish between those who believe it is partially justified and never justified). _URL_11_\n\nPew Research (2013): 15% of Muslims in Turkey support suicide bombings (also 11% in Kosovo, 26% in Malaysia and 26% in Bangladesh). _URL_11_\n\n",
"The world needs someone to hate, and the group of violent fundamentalist extremists is too small. They need to be generalized to Muslims so people can fear something that is much closer than the actual danger.",
"There's a related point that I haven't seen brought up yet. Muslims are much more likely to be victims of these groups than secular Western people. They're usually the innocent people being blow up every other day in car bombings and attacks. You just get numb to those news stories after a while because they're so prevalent, and the media doesn't make as big of a deal out of them.\n\nI did some work in Iraq and it was heart breaking to hear stories from innocent, well-educated people who had family members killed by extremists. I met an Iraqi who had to choose between work and walking his children to and from school so they didn't get kidnapped by terrorists. Trust me, the Muslim people living in these situations have stronger feelings against it than the pundits and some have an unreal amount of courage. They're just too threatened by daily life sometimes to push back as visibly as the comfortable secular voices you hear.",
"Which gets more attention - a millon people speaking out against violence, or one guy with a bomb? I don't deny that there is a deliberate effort to craft a certain narrative, but honestly, the narrative practically writes itself, because that's how the human mind is wired. ",
"People are scared and at times you will hear this opposition and then See the same person praising those actions on local or past broadcasts. So it's hard to know who is genuinely against it",
" > _URL_0_\n\n*\"A survey of 600 Islamic and 800 non-Islamic students at 30 universities found that 32 percent of the Muslims believed in religious killing, while only 2 percent of non-Muslim students felt religious murder was justified, the cable said, referring to a poll conducted by the Center for Social Cohesion.\"*\n\nMost Muslims do disagree with violent fundamentalist actions, but a large portion condone them according to most polls. 32% isn't a small fraction by any means.\n",
"The media doesn't cover their organized objections the same way it covers the bad guys atrocities probably. On top of that, I think a lot of objectors are just out there living their lives and not engaging in activism. Same can be said of many people who believe in a lot of things.",
"what do you want them to do?\njust make a statement?",
"[The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.](_URL_0_)",
"Not sure why they should have to. Somehow a lot of people feel if the community leaders say nothing then they are condoning terrorism, or are terrorists themselves. There is something fundamentally flawed with that logic (which only seems to apply to Muslims, any other faith and the terrorist is a loner/outcast who has nothing to do with their 'true' religion)",
"\"seems\" \"seems\" \"seems\" ... you have been fed an insinuation and digested it wholeheartedly. Not that I blame you necessarily. Watch Al Jazeera English and you'll get tired of how much they talk and condemn extremism in the Muslim world. Remember, the number one victim of Islamic Extremism are innocent Muslims. ",
"I've said this a million times and I'm always Nuked into down vote oblivion but we do react strongly against it - we just get ignored. /= ",
"Well, we've always have lectures on the topic at the local mosques after something like this happens... \n\nSo, while we may not be \"reaching out\", we are educating ourselves on our religion. ",
"what do want me to do ? 12 people got killed in cold blood, is it not obvious as a human first that i do not accept it and am saddened by it\n\n\n\n",
"You are asking why moderate people do not act in an extreme manner when extreme sect of their religion act that way? Don't you think if they were extreme, they would have joined the people who are also extreme like them? \n\n\nThink of it this way: Why do Christians not flip shit that the catholic church protects pedophiles? \n\nWhy do Indians not flip shit when someone a Japanese lady is gang raped? \n\nModerate actions come in the form of changing society and its rules and regulations. Hopefully, moderate muslims are teaching the next generation to also be moderate, just like I hope christians are teaching their kids to not be pedophiles, in the hopes that tomorrow is a brighter day. \n\nYou only focus on, largely because that is what society and media focuses on, the negative shit that these particular muslims do( which IMHO they are actually not following the Qu'ran Sura AL NISA 4:93 for just one taste and if they follow Hiditha whatsoever they are blasphemers IMHO but speaking as a non muslim myself) but do not see all the positive that muslims accomplish. It has done really good things for my brother and most Omanis I have met are wonderful people. Indonesia is a pretty fucking sick place with really nice people too( all mostly muslim) It is easy to focus on the shitty people that stick out. But remember that most of the Ummah is actually good people. \n\nYou hear about the villains because it sells. You do not hear about the saints because god forbid you have a positive example of an other. Do not let the media otherize people for you \n\n\n",
"because ironically, a lot of these non violent Muslims who aren't protesting (and many have) are busy trying to live and raise families in countries torn apart by Islamic extremism. They are as much victims of ISIS as people killed in the US or Europe. Jews should not be targeted by people who protest the actions of he Israeli government and we should not have to pay for or take responsibility for the actions of terrorists. I hope my answer helps though I think this is less a question and more an opportunity to express an opinion that you already feel strongly and dare people to defend it in light of recent tragedies.",
"There's a pretty strong response from non-violent muslims. You just aren't seeing it. Either because you're not looking in the right places, or the media isn't covering it.",
"Like the [vast majority of Muslim groups that have already denounced it?](_URL_1_) Or how [virtually every major Muslim group has condemned ISIS](_URL_0_)? \n\nIt happens all the time. It just isn't what brings in ratings, so it's not reported on. If you watch the news, you would think everything is about to erupt and kill us all any moment. In reality, we live in the safest time in the history of the planet.",
"What some people may not realize is that dominant religions are purely subjective. The jihad, and other texts in the bible and qu'ran condone violence in the first place, so what extremists are doing is excercising their religious beliefs in its purest form. Someone living in a western society will see the Westboro Baptist Church protests as hateful or peculiar oddities, but it couldn't be further from their religious interpretation which isn't to say more accurate than the reformed christian view, but it is no less truthful either. So why isn't their a stronger reaction to WBC in America? Because these people can't be reasoned with. Same with Islamic extremists, they are convinced they are doing the right thing.\n\n\nAlso, if you've ever seen *Homeland*, it's pretty obvious that some of the non-violent Muslims secretly sympathize with the extremists and finance them through off-shore bank accounts. < joking, but not really > ",
"Sadly, they are no more empowered than you and I were, against Dubya and Blair, the biggest shit stirrers since Hitler!",
"Where is the point where non-violent people should become violent to stop violence?",
"I posted this in another thread, but it applies here too. \n\nAs a moderate exmuslim, can I just say that although the claims against muslims and islam are greatly exaggerated. It is however true that even the moderate muslims believe in and support the majority of this behaviour.\n\nThey value and support authority rather than rational thinking and intellectual challenge. Any challenge must be put down one way or another.\n\nThere is no need to understand islam perfectly or imperfectly. Everytime you meet a muslim their claim will be that they understand it better than all others and somehow their version is the only true one that it isnt harmful.\n\nTherefore anything that justifies killing whether understood correctly from the correct verse with the best interpretation or incorrectly with a literal meaning, does not deserve to be held as a book of value. Nor does the religion, which like all religions are fairytales for children. Only difference is that children grow out of them. ",
"Demanding that \"normal\" Muslims distance themselves from extremist Muslims is inherently prejudiced and shows how we make them the \"other.\" Do we expect Christians to denounce the Westboro Baptist Church whenever they're in the news? Are we crying for white people to speak out against the NAACP bombing that happened earlier today? No. Because we recognize that there are good and bad people within those dominant groups. Let's recognize the same about Muslims, and assume that a Muslim does not support the bombings as a default.",
"I always chuckle at topics like this in ELI5, especially when in reaction to a current major news event. How could an issue so impossibly complex be explained so a 5-year-old could understand it? ",
"I wonder where OP has been looking for moderate Muslim reactions to Islamic terrorism. Honestly I think he is just trolling and rolling for a big thread to increase the size of his e-peen; the question was loaded, his initial post was brief and without reference to any blogs or news sources which might have represented a moderate Muslim point of view... OP might be 5.",
"Protip: Because deep in their hearts they don't disagree.\n\nIt's not about the \"leaders\" it's about the so-called moderate majority. Where are the isis-flag burning demonstrations? Where are the weeping women on the street? Where are the fist flying men, that condemn this act of senseless slaughtering? \n\nFuck the radicals, but as long the majority of muslims won't take a stand against these acts, the whole religion is at fault.",
"Why don't all the overwhelming number of good cops condemn all the bad cops?",
"because of the indifference to actual practice of religion that many in the Muslim community has translates into little action offered against the extremist.\n\nyou can identify with any religion you choose, it does not mean you feel responsibility for correcting how others in the same behave.",
"There are, the media just doesnt deem pacifism as newsworthy. Fear fear fear that's what sells. I can't stand theists trying to drag the world backwards but to say moderate muslims arn't out there disowning these runts is just ignorance of the facts",
"Reddits going full retard or we're still seeing the effects of a surge of storm fronters and racists. Muslims don't have an obligation to condemn attacks they or their beliefs had nothing to fucking do with...",
"im just an average muslim and i say FUCK ISIS,FUCK TERRORISTS,FUCK THOSE ANIMALS WHO DID THAT SICK TERRORIST ACT IN PARIS.\n\nif that what islam is i would have been converted to anything else. thats just anti human, anti life",
"The media shows the support for these groups by other rotten folks but fails to highlight the disdain from the majority of muslims. Many muslims speak out against these violent and malicious people.\n\nIf over a billion people subscribed to this type ideology there would be much more bloodshed.",
"Do you react when Christians kill? Atheists? Whatever you are?",
"so much ignorance and misinformation in this thread.",
"I think because many are so removed from the incident that reacting against it personally borders on ludicrousness. It's the same reason the vast majority of Christians in Ethiopia or all of Africa don't speak loudly against FGM.\n\nAs an American, it seems funny to have to apologize for the act of some idiot, who happens to American, doing some dangerous shit in another country. As a Christian, I am so far removed from the actions of the groups that blow up abortion clinics that in no way would I associate myself with them.\n\nMost Muslims don't want to validate such claims that they are in some way connected to these people by saying it. On the other hand, this question seems to them a little ridiculous that one would associate such acts with a 7 year old Muslim schoolgirl in Malaysia, or an Imam in Turkey. \n\nBut I can tell you for sure that there are many Muslims even on this thread that share your disgust for this despicable act, but they should not be made to apologize for it or justify their position more than you should.\n",
"I believe that your avarage moderate Muslim just feel shame and sadness and a lot of fear. Taking to the streets and protest is not on their agenda right now. ",
"You realize extremist Muslims have killed 500000000x more Muslims in the Middle East than they have killed Westerners?? Terrorism has no religion, I fail to understand why people don't see that. Remember the attack on the schoolchildren in Pakistan less than a month ago?? Killing hundreds of innocent kids? Oh right, Western media moved on from that ages ago.",
"There is, it's just there is not any serious effort on the part of the Western world to cover these denunciations. The majority of the top universities, religious clerics, social activists, and public figures do so but it's in a different language so who cares?",
"Probably for the same reason that media outlets reporting on this story blur out the offending comic strips. They're scared of reprisal.",
"3 parts to this:\n\n1. When people are afraid that you'll actually kill them, not surprisingly they tend to keep their head down and try to avoid your attention.\n\n2. A lot of these other Muslims also *agree* with the extremists at least to some degree, although they don't necessarily want murders and terror attacks over it. That is why these extremists are not brought to heel or made known to authorities ahead of time.\n\n3. They feel some solidarity with these extremists because they feel like they are under attack from other nations/cultures, particularly The United States but also factions within Islam itself. Nothing brings people together to overlook some of their differences like some kind of threat or adversity. So the most common thing you'll hear is \"No one wants terror attacks BUT...\"",
"I keep reading, over and over \"Well, what do you want me to do?\"\n\nIt's simple. Inform. Report what you see. This shit doesn't happen in a vacuum. You're trying to tell me these guys got AKs and planned a mass killing at a newspaper's offices and NOBODY knew? Bullshit. You frequent a mosque, right? You know who the crazy bastards are, right? The ones that might be just fucked up enough to do something like this? INFORM! Tell the cops! Crazy preacher extols the virtues of killing infidels? TELL SOMEBODY! If you don't, you are fucking COMPLICIT!!! THAT is how civilized society functions! If you don't agree, please explain to me why. If not, then you are indeed as guilty as the actors themselves...",
"A lot of the people are muzzled by their dictatorships. A lot of them are desensitized to that stuff and are like no big deal, we have had worse. A lot of them blame the west and even tho they are against violence they look at it as the west getting a taste of their own medicine, or reaping what they sowed. A lot of them also do speak out against it. A lot of people in the Middle East are not even Muslim. That is a lot of a lot of people. \n\nIt is a tiny minority in the Muslim world that actually are happy about terrorist attacks. The real extremists. It is only crazy people who actually take part in that stuff, mostly because they are desperate and have been manipulated into taking action by power hungry bastards.\n\nTerrorism is wrong but I feel like your question is kinda bias. I can easily ask you: If most Christians or Westerners are against bombing children in the Middle East or torturing Muslims, why isn't there a stronger reaction against it? ",
"Because our media doesn't cover it. Simple as that.",
"1 - Most Muslims who openly oppose the actions of the militant muslims are hunted down and killed. Their families are threatened and many flee or stay in hiding.\n\n2 - There is a significant minority that actually fully supports or sympathises with the terrorists among the Muslim population - countries like Egypt and Libya, a majority of the population is supportive of beheading those who leave Islam.\n\n3 - Too much \"Blame the West\" or \"Blame the Jews\" attitude among Muslims. Basically all attcks that have ever taken place was because somehow Israel or the US instigated the terrorists to terrorise",
"Did we turn the OKC bombings into a Christian thing? David Koresh? Did every Christian leader get interviewed by the news so as to specifically decry those aberrations of Christianity? No. ",
"For the purposes of the argument, I'm going to assume OP is American.\n\nIn the last 15 years, your country invaded two sovereign, oil-rich nations against the will of the international community. Your drone bombers have killed countless dozens of civilians; women and children. Your military intelligence agencies have taken prisoners in this phony war, transplanted them from their own countries without any authority to do so, locked them up without charge or trial, and subjected them to sleep deprivation and torture. You have admitted doing all of this, and continue to do so.\n\nMy point isn't meant to be anti-American. I'm British and you could say *exactly* the same thing to me. But let me ask you this question:\n\nIt seems like there's a very strong pushback against this extremist government from liberal sources, but why aren't non-violent Americans more eager to quell the violence as well? It seems like they support a culture and power structures in the West that are ultimately friendly environments for these extremist governments to form and grow.",
"Because most often, the \"peaceful majority\" is irrelevant. Ask the Germans in Nazi Germany, Cambodians under Pol Pot, Russians under Stalin, Spaniards under Francisco Franco, and scores of other examples. There is no uprising from within, because the Muslim majority are either spineless, powerless, cowardly, or secretly proud of what the \"extremists' are doing. Without pressure from within, extremists are free to retreat to the relative safety of circles less violent, but still safe little rocks for the most violent to hide behind. Claiming divine (or populist, in the case of communist) privilege, groups have long been able to advance extreme causes- even turning moderates into tools out of fear of themselves being targeted. \n\nMuslim extremism will not stop of its own accord. It must be stopped, either from within the Islamic faith, or from without. \n\nThe sad thing is, eventually, those \"peace-loving\" members of the faith are going to find themselves positioned between the extremists and those determined to stop them- and they will become collateral damage. ",
"Serious question: Why isn't there jihad had against these extremists especially if these terrorists misrepresent Islam? Could it be that fundamental Muslims or Muslims in general partially believe in what these terror factions are doing/stand for? ",
"This thread has been locked in light of repeated violations of [the Rules of the sub.] (_URL_0_) Please message the moderators if you have any questions, thanks.",
"muslims dont feel compelled to apologize for some lunatics that claim to be muslim. just like most christians aren't compelled to apologize for the westboro church. in addition to this, islam is not homogeneous, it has many sects and branches, many of which have conflicts with each other, and almost ALL have conflicts with these crazies. so in a way, welcome to the problem we've been dealing with for ages, now its also your problem. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/muslims-condemn-isis.html",
"http://o.canada.com/news/muslim-canadian-community-denounces-violence-braces-for-backlash-533632",
"https://www.journalism.co.uk/press-releases/uk-event-to-see-30-000-muslims-denounce-extremism-and-rally-for-peace-in-iraq-and-the-middle-east/s66/a562270/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/12797-american-muslims-condemn-paris-terror-attack-defend-free-speech.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/08/21/muslim-leaders-have-roundly-denounced-islamic-s/200498",
"http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201410152136-0024262",
"http://www.globalresearch.ca/muslim-leaders-worldwide-condemn-isis/5397364",
"http://muslimscondemningthings.tumblr.com/",
"http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/world/2015/01/07/World-leaders-condemn-Paris-shooting-attack-.html"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mO6PcFYXMo4"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpeIS25jhK4&index=2&list=FLy2zJM957pScmyJkpnn5btg"
],
[],
[
"archive.org"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.webcitation.org/5xkMGAEvY",
"http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist",
"http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06",
"http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf",
"http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Poll%20Nov%2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Nov04.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"archive.org"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Shariah",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country"
],
[],
[
"http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/opinion-polls.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/02/why-dont-more-moderate-muslims-denounce-extremism/?hpid=z10"
],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NORAID"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.webcitation.org/5xkMGAEvY",
"http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf",
"http://www.populuslimited.com/pdf/2006_02_07_times.pdf",
"http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf#page=60",
"http://people-press.org/report/206/a-year-after-iraq-war",
"http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist.html",
"http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/04/06/32-of-palestinians-support-infanticide/",
"http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist",
"http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4053251,00.html",
"http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06",
"http://www.people-press.org/2011/08/30/muslim-americans-no-signs-of-growth-in-alienation-or-support-for-extremism/",
"http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Religious_Affiliation/Muslim/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf",
"http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html",
"http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/",
"http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Poll%20Nov%2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Nov04.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/19/embassy-row-930120260/"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/08/21/muslim-leaders-have-roundly-denounced-islamic-s/200498",
"http://www.wsj.com/articles/muslim-leaders-condemn-attack-warn-on-anti-islamic-sentiment-in-europe-1420654885"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/rules"
],
[]
] |
||
94vp80 | why do some apps require fb to login when that just turns away potential users who avoid that platform? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/94vp80/eli5_why_do_some_apps_require_fb_to_login_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3o424b"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Rather than worry about hackers, who tend to be one step ahead of programmers, smaller publishers, or those who don’t think they can keep up with changing security processes, use Facebook or Google to login users. This pushes the onus for having secure login protocols onto the multibillion dollar corporations that dedicate large groups of staff to security and keeping up with defenses for the latest hacking methods. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3619hl | why did the earliest settlers decide to breed and form communities in third world countries where land is infertile and water is rare? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3619hl/eli5_why_did_the_earliest_settlers_decide_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr9s01f",
"cr9si44"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Uh...they didn't. The first civilizations were in the Fertile Crescent in Mesopotamia, and along the Nile in Egypt. Both extremely fertile lands.",
"One day Papa Settler was walking along and he spotted a river, so he went closer and thought to himself \"This is good land, i'd like to live here.\"\n\nAfter awhile he spotted a girl and thought \"That's a good woman, i'd like to breed with her\" and so he went closer and she said \"Well it's not really a sound idea to breed in this area as generations of conflict and a gradual shifting of climates will make this land rather inhospitable in a few thousand years.\"\n\nThe man didn't know what she was saying, so he hit her, and bred with her and thats how the pyramids were built Johnny.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
pcxor | what geological transition allowed for the oceans to form? | I'm reading in my Introduction to Geology textbook that Oceanic crust is about 180 million years old, whereas Continental crust is 4 billion years old. It also says that Oceanic crust is much thinner. What made that transition? Why is it so much thinner and newer? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/pcxor/what_geological_transition_allowed_for_the_oceans/ | {
"a_id": [
"c3oe0aq"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Oceanic crust is generally basalt, which is denser than the majority of continental crust (I forget the exact numbers, sorry). Once oceans get sufficiently wide, the cooler, denser edges \"break\" and start to subduct under the lighter, more buoyant continental crust.\n\nBecause of this, oceanic crust is destroyed, whereas the continental crust can float on top of it.\n\nAs for the thinness, it is thinner because it is being constantly extruded onto the Earth's surface (bottom of the ocean in this case). The upwelling under a mid-ocean ridge (MOR) pushes the rest of the crust away from the MOR. (This happens over continents too, where there is upwelling, for example the East African Rift.)\n\nIf you want to know more, look for something named the \"Wilson Cycle\" which is the cycle that oceanic crust goes through. :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
68972m | the business model behind those handwritten signs on the side of the road that offer to pay cash for your house. are they as much of a scam as they seem? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/68972m/eli5_the_business_model_behind_those_handwritten/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgwp29j",
"dgwp504"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Since they offer \"cash\", they are seeking people who want to sell fast and easily. Their plan is to offer far below market value, so they can resell and make a nice profit. It's possible once they show up at your door they don't offer cash for the entirety of the house, but only offer to cure (bring current) the loan and make the monthly loan payments, while they flip the house. However, the original homeowner remains legally obligated for the loan, so another scam is to let the house go to foreclosure where they can buy it cheap (this isn't guaranteed, there has to be significant equity for this to work).",
"Most of them are not a scam, they are legitimate businesses.\n\nHere is how they work. These signs are generally put up by handymen or people that flip houses for a living. They are looking for properties that are not in great shape, and would be hard to sell though a traditional realtor, and they want to buy the property and fix it up. Once it is fixed up they either sell it or turn it into a rental property.\n\nTo make the most amount of money they are looking to get property for as cheep as possible. They pretty much know anyone that is willing to call a sign on the road to sell their house is desperate. So they will give an extremely low cash offer to get the house.\n\nSo they are not scams, but they are very intentionally looking for people that desperate to sell a home and to buy that home as cheaply as possible. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1tv5yi | what is the healthcare system like in countries like america, canada, sweeden, denmark, austrailia, etc? and how does obamacare compare? | Living in America, our healthcare system is (from what I've read about) is vastly different from other countries (in the sense where it is strictly a ploy for money). Can somebody explain the similarities/differences? Why can't America have more affordable healthcare, especially when other countries have more affordable healthcare and delegate less money towards healthcare? What is ObamaCare aiming to do, and is it similar to the healthcare system of other countries? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1tv5yi/what_is_the_healthcare_system_like_in_countries/ | {
"a_id": [
"cebr1k7",
"cebsmxk",
"cebszsb",
"cebt44p",
"cebtctv",
"cebte27",
"cebto7h",
"cebtq5a",
"cebtykl",
"cebtz31",
"cebu0up",
"cebujv5",
"cebxktp",
"cebxugi",
"cebz2k7",
"cebzjcm",
"cec09es",
"cec1ox2"
],
"score": [
45,
26,
8,
55,
6,
10,
8,
16,
3,
5,
5,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Australia has both a public and a private health care system. All citizens and permanent residents get access to Medicare which is the public health care system. People who want can also pay for private health care. Private health care basically gets you quicker access to elective surgeries (non emergency surgeries) and while recovering from surgery you get your own room. \n\nIf you go to a GP the government pays about 80% of the cost with the patient paying about 20%. However, some/many GPs (depending on whether or not you're a new patient, etc) waive the patient's 20% and just eat that cost themselves. \n\nPer capita Australia pays about $US2000 a year in taxes and about $US1000 out of hand for health care. In the US that's $US3000 a year in taxes and $3000 a year out of hand. ",
"In Ontario, Canada all citizens are entitled to health insurance, which is called OHIP. (Ontario Health Insurance Policy.)\n\nIt doesn't matter how old, young, or sick you are, you get health insurance, and this means you can visit the doctor, or the hospital, or pharmacy, any time, and pay almost nothing out of pocket. No one can be denied. There are some fees, to curb costs, but pretty much anyone can afford it. You will never go bankrupt due to medical bills under this system.\n\nHospitals and large infrastucture are mostly government funded. Doctors have to rent their own offices, and such, but they still bill the government for patients they treat.\n\nBecause of this taxes all around are very high, and wait times can be longer than normal (but this is a matter of people making more use of the system.) The economy can also be quite rigid. Canada does not spend much on its military, since money has to be poured back into healthcare.\n\nHowever, this system has been going on for decades, so it is sustainable. It is an excellent way to reduce poverty for a nation. \n\nOh, and doctors don't get paid too bad either. On average they make nearly $330,000 a year. ",
"The UK has the NHS, which is in principle free at the point of service (though some erosion of this has occurred).\r\rEveryone pays in, based on earnings. Originally, it was through national insurance contributions, which were separate from income tax, but nowadays it's effectively one big pot and follows the broadly progressive (the more you earn, the larger the proportion of your earnings get taxed) system.\r\rIf you go to see a doctor, or go to the hospital, you will have to pay nothing other than an administration fee for any prescription medication (which is generally cheap, and can be free if you meet earnings criteria). \r\rThe system is a little slower than private medical care, but is generally of excellent standard. Top medical practitioners usually work part of their week for the NHS, alongside their private practice.",
"Denmark has a public health care system. We pay through our taxes and everyone can use ambulances, hospitals and doctors without paying anything but taxes.\nEveryone is entitled to help, not only the rich.",
"Belgian here.\n\nHealth care is fully nationalised. Which I'm thankful for, cause at 24 I've had 2 strokes, heart surgery, broke my wrist once, appendicitis... that's about it I think. Not an unhealthy guy (run 5 miles 3 times a week), just shit luck and a congenital heart disease.\n\nI'm sure that had I lived in the US I'd be bankrupt now. Thanks to our nationalised health care, i had to pay about €100 for every surgery combined.\n\n",
"I am an american living in Germany. This is how I understand it.\n\nGermans pay through taxes into the public system no matter what.\n\n1. You have the choice between public and private insurance but you NEED insurance.\n\n2. If I need to go to the doctor I call and make and appointment. If it is acute I can just show up and wait. I pay nothing.\n\n3. RX coverage is pretty great. Most things I have to pay 10% of the market cost up to €10. Which ever is less expensive. This gets a bit complex as some doctors have the ability to write RXs for specific meds and others not. For example: my endocrinologist writes my RX for metformin but it isn't a drug that can be covered under public insurance through her. So I pay €15. If my regular doctor would write that RX I would get it for free but my regular doctor has discretion over what she gives me. My blood pressure meds are given to me by the proper doctor and therefore are free!\n\n3. Trips to the ER cost €10 (public).\n\n4. Hospital trips cost €10 per night under public insurance. If you have an outpatient surgery and don't spent the night it is €0. That is, of course, assuming that your doctor referred you for the surgery. This doesn't apply for cosmetic surgeries like breast implants etc. Last time I was at the hospital I heard the private rate was €70 per night stayed and you get a \"nicer\" room.\n\n5. There are guidelines set by the government for how much time they can make you wait based upon what doctor you are seeing. I don't know the exact time frames as I've never waited longer than an hour.\n\n6. Work/sick days. If you miss two days of work it is required that you go to the doctor and get checked out. If the doctor wants you to stay home they provide you with a form you bring to work. You still get paid. Your work then submits this form to the insurance company and the business is paid back your sick day wages.\n\n6. Over the counter drugs are all sold at a pharmacy. It is encouraged to speak with a pharmacist about your symptoms before you buy medication as they can help locate the proper ones and you can ask any questions you need to. They will even tell you about how long you should wait (or if you should wait) before seeing a doctor. German medication tastes horrible and the over the counter stuff is crazy expensive. It is to keep people from taking medications they don't really need.\n\n(Keep in mind I've only been in Germany for almost 3 years. This is how things have been explained over time and my memory could be faulty)\n\nNow from what I understand Obamacare is half ass. It makes it so people need insurance but the process is so complex and the requirements for public aid are so stupid that most people are still lost. Also, businesses that are now required to provide insurance are picking plans way too expensive. Places that already offered insurance are changing them because the cost is more and now RXs aren't coveted. Sure, you can see a doctor for your type II diabetes but you can't afford your meds!\n\nMy friend works for wal-mart...they now have insurance but their deductible is $3,000. May as well not have insurance at all!\n\nThere is no way to have real socialized medicine in the USA without two things and these things will never happen:\n\n1. Higher taxes.\n\n2. Reforming the medical industry. An IV bag of salt water doesn't cost whatever their insane fee is.",
"ObamaCare is a system which is trying introduce a large inefficiency into a very inefficient \"market\". The plan won't work, not because it's a bad idea, but because the underlying problem isn't being treated. People's basic health isn't a market good to be bought at sold to the highest/lowest bidder. \n\nThe best you can hope for is that future administrations further adjust the American health care system until it's publicly funded and regulated, but privately delivered. Right now there is a massive amount of money being spent on things like hospital billing departments and insurance companies and not a penny of that money being used actually treats anyone.\n",
"Dutch citizen here. We have **private healthcare** here in the Netherlands, the trick is, these companies are highly regulated by the government in how they set their prices and how they treat their clients. \n\nEveryone is required by law to purchase healthcare and every healthcare company is obliged by law to take on anyone who wants to buy their insurance, no discrimination on medical background allowed. Actually, companies are encouraged to take on more ill patients, because they get more compensation for them from the government. \n\nAnyway, prices naturally vary per company, but on average for basic insurance, the prices are 90 euro's a month. Depending on your income, the government also gives you money to partially pay for it, for me, a student without income, this means I pay around 10-15 euro's a month. Then, there is a obligatory 'own risk' rate of 360 euro's a year. The first 360 euro's in medical costs, you have to pay yourself, all costs above that 360 euros are paid for by your insurance. GP visits are free though.\n\nThis means that if I get cancer (let's hope not), I will have to pay 360 euro's a year (+ insurance costs) and not a dime more for surgery, medication, specialist visits, MRI's etc etc.\n\nDownside? As it is a rather free market, insurance companies have made deals with hospitals to provided them with the best deals fur certain specialities. That means that if I need specialist medical aid, I probably need to go to a hospital that's not located in my hometown to have my costs covered. But then again, you can cross the whole lenght of our country in about a 3-3.5 hour car ride, so the hospital's never far away.\n\nEdit: also children (minors, under 18) are covered by their parents insurance at no extra costs and no own risk. So, if a child gets ill, the parants pay absolutely nothing. ",
"I'm in Alberta canada, we don't pay directly for healthcare premiums anymore, it used to be 30$ a month and that would cover you for anything you could possibly need excluding prescriptions, we don't have to pay them anymore. As far as prescriptions go you can get plans that will cover all or some of the cost of prescriptions a lot of these include some form of dental coverage, premiums are normally very reasonable, in the event that you need expensive very necissary meds such as anti convulsants or insulin and actually have no money to pay for it, you still still recieved the medication you need to stay alive/functioning. ",
"In the UK the NHS has been kind to me. If you need an ambulance, consult your GP, or childbirth etc, just walk in and walk out (hopefully!) I believe any civilized nation has a duty to care for and provide basic healthcare for anyone who is considered a citizen of that nation, yes its not perfect - but the alternative of denying healthcare to those who cant afford it is quite simply archaic.",
"In Italy we pay for a \"ticket\", a fixed price for basically all kind of services you may require from a hospital or practitioner. It is something around 10 Euros for standard procedures (surgery, specialistic visits, treatments) and 25 Euros for \"white code\" ER, the lowest urgency services requested (Doctor my head spins).\nIn the ER instead you don't pay the ticket if: \n- You got injured less than 24 hours ago\n- You got injured before 24 hours ago but you needed treatment\n- Poisoning\n- Work accident\n- Asma, bladder problems, something in the eye (i swear), something in the ear, blood from the nose\n- Something happens to you related to a previous surgery that happened less than 3 days ago\n- Pregnancy stuff (like pain or expelling a human from your genitals)\n\nAnd you don't pay if:\n- you have to stay at the ER for 6 hours or more to do your visit and treatment\n- your general practitioner sent you there\n- you are under 14\n- you are sent from there to the hospital\n- you earn less than something around 14000 eur a year\n- **if you are not Italian** so Americans come here and cure yourself\n\nWe get healthcare money (108 billions Euros) from income taxes, and of those money the 98% goes to hospitals budget and treatments. All initiatives and groups to help people with additions and with troubles are paid as well, and free for users. Paying the tickets made the state earn 4.4 billions euros, so just a supersmall fraction of the expenses. And rarely you pay the ticket as you saw before.\nAs far as i have understood lots of people will pay more for their healthcare in the US after Obamacare to support those who cannot pay for it. I am speaking in a uber easy lightweight way as I am an expert in US healthcare whatsoever but I like to state my opinion anyway.\nBasically in the US people will end up paying for healthcare, but in different shares, while in Italy we eat pasta and the state pays for our healthcare with tax money. \n\n**TL;DR** In italy we pay income taxes and part goes for healthcare, in the US people pay directly for healthcare if they can afford it even after Obamacare. \n\nmamma mia\n\nEDIT: a waterfall of grammar mistakes\nEDIT 2: We don't have insurance. Private insurances exist and are used to pay for fast treatment in fancy structures. Normally at the hospital you may die before reaching the day of the treatment, and it's sad and unfair but in Italy we have so many problems at the moment that we learnt how to deal with this, and people book like ages in advance. Private insurance also gets you money if you cannot work, walk or do what you want, allowing you a daily reimburse. Private insurance usually cost no more than 300 euros a year per family member.",
"Here in Sweden (jönköping) it's somewhere along these lines:\n\nUp to 20 years old everything is free (dental and healthcare).\n\n\nAfter 20 \n\n*Visit at the specialist/surgeon etc = $US46\n\n*Visit at the doctor = $US23\n\n*Visit at nurse etc = $US15\n \nHomevisits: (I think this is for the eldery or severely ill)\n\n*Home visit by doctor = $US46\n\n*Home visit by other = No charge\n\nStaying at the hospital:\n\n*$US12 per day\n\n*And after 10 days $US9\n\nThis can reach a maximum of $US168 per year and then it will be free for 12 months since the first visit I belive.\n\nI pay 27% taxes and 14% of that goes to healthcare.\n\nWe have a similar system for medication where the maximum amount you pay (per year) is $US337.\n\nWe do also have private healthcare but they are regulated by the state so the prices don't differ.",
"I cut my finger using a knife to take the string off a roast (next time I plan to use scissors). It was bleeding pretty bad and told my wife I was going to drive my self to the emergency room as it was later at night 10pm or so. I walked it got a number nurse looked at it then sent me to the triage nurse and then sent me into minor treatment. They froze my finger and gave me 3 stitches bandaged me up and sent me on my way. The whole ordeal cost me $7.50 for parking and my time. I live in Canada.\n\nI also pay higher taxes than I would in the US both income and sales on Gasoline, Liquor, Tobacco (I don't smoke but I know it's higher). They call them sin taxes but it beats paying thousands for treatment.",
"The main difference between healthcare for example in Sweden compared to USA is the bargaining power the government has. The reason why the healthcare system is such a big ploy for money in USA is because health has a very inelastic price elasticity of demand. Meaning even if it costs your entire wealth to save your life, you'd do it. Otherwise you'd die.\n\nIn Sweden, the government offers special contracts to companies that will supply them with the medicine or whatever is needed. The contracts basically states that the x-ray machine or medicine has to be cheap, safe, etc. And since the contract covers all hospitals in the country, a lot of firms fight for the contract, hence encouraging a better product. Even though private hospitals aren't required by law to follow these contracts, they do it anyways since the product the public hospital choses to use is 9/10 the best product.\n\nIn America every hospital choses its own supplier of medical supplies and machines. Since hospitals also gear towards making a profit, and due to the inelastic demand of your health, hospitals in America tend to chose the ones that brings the most profit, not necessarily the best product.\n\nMost civilized countries already have universal healthcare unlike USA. And with the bargaining power that the government has the healthcare costs tends to be very low compared to America.\n\nObama care wont drive the healthcare costs down or anything like that. Everyone is forced to buy healthcare and everyone is entitled to healthcare. If USA wants to drive down their healthcare costs, they need to radically change their system. Which, with their current state of government, probably will never happen in the coming 30 years.\n",
"Canadian here, fell on my back, many family doctor visits, 2 specialist visits, MRI, $0.00 ",
"I'm from the United Kingdom, and the health care is laid by our taxes.\nNo matter what treatment we need, operations, hospital visits, ambulance rides etc... We don't pay a penny.\n\nThough, you can pay for private healthcare if you want, because our hospitals/GPs are not very efficient.\n(Don't get me wrong, I love not having to pay for my wellbeing, as I've had a few operations that would nearly go into the millions if I was in the U.S. but I was once waiting to see someone in the hospital for around 8 hours while waiting for an initial check, to determine which ward I would go to.)",
"ObamaCare fixes nothing. And I'm tired of people too stupid to realuze it. Our healthcate system is being killed by inefficiencies. Sure people without insurance getting treated on tax payer dollars is a drain and a inefficiency of the larger system. However the much MUCH MUCH!!!! Larger drain is the fact that lobbyists and not government run our healthcare. The fact that any procedure costs 150-500% more than in any other developed nation, but really the hospitals charge whatever number they pull out of their ass as evidence by the fact that two procedures rarely cost the same at multiple nearby hospitals. We know what this is though, its hospitals charging the most they think you can afford to pay.\n\nHere's our problem. A small town has a grocer. He has lobbyied the mayor to ban the sale of groceries/food for all but himself, a nice monopoly. For a while he sells the food at 15% markup, everyone can afford enough food to be healty. One day he realizes he can charge whatever the fuck he wants and marksup all goods 1000%. People starve and try to revolt. He now drops the prices just a little until he hits a magic ratio. 60% Spend their last penny to survive day to day. 30% Slowly wither away as the food they can afford is not enough and they slowly die off. The rest don't give the grocer any money, they find some other means, but when they pass out from hunger the grocer feeds them with tax dolkars and eveyone complains this is horribly unfair.\n\nSo Obama comes along saying he will fix healthcare. Except all he does is make a back door deal with the grocer. \"Hey grocer, you want to capture the remaining 10% of the market but don't want to stop gouging the other 90%. I'll pass a law that requires everyone to buy from you. I will use tax dollars to secure your private wealth, and I will calculate how much those 10% can afford to pay you.\n\nIts not even a step in the right direction, its not better, its worse.",
"I believe a free market health care system is the only sustainable one that improves innovation, cost containment, and customer access, with *County Charity Hospitals* to make up for the indigent and those not wanting to buy insurance. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
cycxwv | - the voice giving directions on gps - how do they create it ? | ELI5 - My son and I have just driven back from south of France to Switzerland (we are English) and were chuckling about how ‘Emily’ (English voice) pronounces the Italian and French towns and roads. We are guessing that it’s not possible to have someone record all the directions, roads names, towns and cities etc. So came to conclusion its maybe based on syllables some how spliced together. So how do they do it ? And in so many languages ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cycxwv/eli5_the_voice_giving_directions_on_gps_how_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyr2xu3"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Essentially correct. Something called a Voice Bank is recorded, where some person, often a voice actor, is paid to simply say words and syllables in quite a neutral tone. Words are recorded for common phrases to make them easy to understand (which is why an entire phrase can sound continuous except for the number of meters before the turning - the phrase is recorded with a blank space, and the recorded distance inserted into that blank). Names are synthesised using text to speech, which looks at each syllable, and the context it's in, and tries to figure out the most likely pronunciation of the word. It then strings together the syllables necessary to reach the pronunciation it found, and applies some intonation to make it sound slightly less robotic, to varying degrees of success. \n\nVoice Banks have become pretty sophisticated things now too. We're at the point where manual control can almost perfectly replicate a human voice (in languages with simple syllables anyway), and I imagine it'll only be a few more years now before the algorithms can do a good job of that themselves.\n\nEach language has its own set of voice banks. Japanese even has voice backs designed specifically for use in songs, which is a weirdly booming industry."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2wwxhz | how do people edit gifs/video or things in motion? | If you look at this gif:
_URL_0_
Did they go frame by frame and like use the erase button and delete all the parts of the bike? How do they do that!? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wwxhz/eli5_how_do_people_edit_gifsvideo_or_things_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"couusdm",
"couuxp8"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"Yes you have to edit every single frame. Its usually done with adobe after effect or Sony Vegas. There are plenty tutorials around the web if you are interested in that yourself. ",
"Animated Gifs are old technology, so they are much simpler than the more complex html5 video. Html and flash video (or any video) uses algorithims to compress it. For the above gif as an example, if it was a video, the compression used would take all the dirt parts and mash them together. It sees it's the same color/picture in the next frame, so instead of having frame 1 switch to frame 2, it basically takes the grass from the first frame, and puts it in the second.\n\nAs for gifs, it's all frame by frame. Frame one the guy is on a bike, Frame 2 hes still on, but put his leg up, frame 3 his other leg is up and so on. This means a 30fps gif would have 30 full pictures in it per second. That's why gifs are usually smaller in size, and pay at lower frame rates, because the size of the the file would be massive. It has to store every single frame, vs videos that pretty much store most of the frame and borrow similarities (keep in mind, compression goes much further than that)\n\nFor editing gifs, the person went into photoshop and edited every single frame to remove the bike. Because the actual dimensions of the gif are small, the person had less pixels to work with so it was easy to guess what color was behind the bike.\n\nFor example, if I had 4 squares, 3 of them are blue, you can easily assume the 4th one also is blue.\n\nBut if you had 7000 squares, with all different shades of blue, you need to be more accurate what color is behind the bike. not saying it's impossible, but more difficult to get correctly.\n\n**Tl;dr, gifs are easy to edit, take every frame and edit out the bike**\n\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://i.imgur.com/TxOFmhY.gif"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4ifk4a | why do computers sometimes lag between opening a program and it actually running? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ifk4a/eli5why_do_computers_sometimes_lag_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2xmv1r"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The program is loading libraries into RAM for faster access when the program is in use. The more features the program has, the more libraries it needs read off the disc and load into RAM. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5vq9vo | how interruptive are the effects of wireless and electromagnetic waves on living organisms? | I recently had the wild realization that for the most part, the vast majority of the population lives in neighborhoods and houses surrounded to the brim with Power-lines and loads of gadgets inside.
Are living organisms (such as forests or animals) affected by these waves and if so what exactly is happening?
Have there been any experiments to show that Wi-Fi hampers plant growth? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5vq9vo/eli5_how_interruptive_are_the_effects_of_wireless/ | {
"a_id": [
"de3xhce"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's important to realize even without gadgets, powerlines, and wi-fi, you are *still* and *always* being bombarded by electromagnetic waves. Essentially every object in the universe is emitting electromagnetic radiation, including you, rocks, televisions, air molecules, toilets, corn (both harvested and unharvested), and Rex, your dog. 'Wireless' is simply a part of this spectrum, not some other thing.\n\nThis radiation is the non-ionizing kind. It can cause heating when absorbed, and if an organism absorbs enough (like grabbing hold of a radar or putting yourself in a microwave) cause burn damage.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2v8p1g | why do some animated shows look "better" after they have been on the air for a while? | For example, Family Guy's first couple of episodes were very rough. Lines didn't seem well defined and actions weren't as crisp and smooth as they are now. Suddenly though it improved? Is it that they just get better animators? or better software? What exactly happens on the first episodes from the most current that kept them from having that quality to begin with? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2v8p1g/eli5_why_do_some_animated_shows_look_better_after/ | {
"a_id": [
"coffa7d",
"coffaft",
"cofg1hf"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"If a show has been on the air for a while, that means it gets good ratings. A show with good ratings makes money, which they can use to increase the labor spent on producing the show.",
"The first season is usually a team of 10 American animators working furiously to meet deadlines. Once a show is a hit, they ship off all the animation work to Korea. And an army of 5000 Koreans work furiously to meet deadlines.",
"They made more money to spend on their budget and technology advanced to make the improvements easier. Trying to get the level of quality today back in 1990 wasn't as easy. \n \nBudgets are huge, The Legend of Korra had a budget of $1million an episode."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2rn9nf | will working with my laptop on my lap increase my chance of cancer? if so, why? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rn9nf/eli5_will_working_with_my_laptop_on_my_lap/ | {
"a_id": [
"cnhf2o9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"We have no reason to believe it has a non-trivial effect on your chance of getting cancer. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
mtyb2 | dimples on a golf ball, how do they work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/mtyb2/eli5_dimples_on_a_golf_ball_how_do_they_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"c33tsyf",
"c33uxxw",
"c33tsyf",
"c33uxxw"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
3,
7
],
"text": [
"There was a wonderful mythbusters on this, I can't quite remember the mechanics however. The dimples reduce drag, which is a force in opposition to the balls movement caused by the air around the ball. I believe, but I can not be certain, that the dimmples break up the 'profile' of the ball when it flies through the air. This causes less of a slipstream tail behind the ball, which is where much of the energy gets consumed by drag. But I would have to check my facts and I'm sadly on my phone.\n\nThe mythbusters episode was quite good though if you can find it, they covered a car in dimples by the end of the test to see if it would get better mileage",
"When a fluid (such as air) flows around an spherical object like a ping pong ball, it creates a lot of drag. This is due to a boundary layer of slower moving air really close to the surface of the ball. A ping pong ball will have have a smooth boundary layer. Eventually this layer seperates from the ball. A smooth layer \"peels\" off the ball quite early, creating a big wake of turbulent air, think of a wake behind a boat. The dimples on the golf ball force the boundary layer to transition from being laminar to turbulent. This increases the speed of a the air moving in the layer, so it's able to stick to the ball for longer, and peel off the ball later. This creates a thinner wake, which creates less drag. \n\nThis image sums it up pretty well:\n_URL_0_\n\nA similar effect would be achieved by roughening the ball at the very front that's flying through the air. As long as the little peaks created by the roughness exceed the height of this tiny boundary layer, it'll force it to go turblent, and will therefore fly further. But then there's no way to guarantee that this little patch of roughness will be at the very front of the ball, so it's much easier to put dimples over the entire ball to ensure that no matter what, the boundary layer will go turbulent.\n",
"There was a wonderful mythbusters on this, I can't quite remember the mechanics however. The dimples reduce drag, which is a force in opposition to the balls movement caused by the air around the ball. I believe, but I can not be certain, that the dimmples break up the 'profile' of the ball when it flies through the air. This causes less of a slipstream tail behind the ball, which is where much of the energy gets consumed by drag. But I would have to check my facts and I'm sadly on my phone.\n\nThe mythbusters episode was quite good though if you can find it, they covered a car in dimples by the end of the test to see if it would get better mileage",
"When a fluid (such as air) flows around an spherical object like a ping pong ball, it creates a lot of drag. This is due to a boundary layer of slower moving air really close to the surface of the ball. A ping pong ball will have have a smooth boundary layer. Eventually this layer seperates from the ball. A smooth layer \"peels\" off the ball quite early, creating a big wake of turbulent air, think of a wake behind a boat. The dimples on the golf ball force the boundary layer to transition from being laminar to turbulent. This increases the speed of a the air moving in the layer, so it's able to stick to the ball for longer, and peel off the ball later. This creates a thinner wake, which creates less drag. \n\nThis image sums it up pretty well:\n_URL_0_\n\nA similar effect would be achieved by roughening the ball at the very front that's flying through the air. As long as the little peaks created by the roughness exceed the height of this tiny boundary layer, it'll force it to go turblent, and will therefore fly further. But then there's no way to guarantee that this little patch of roughness will be at the very front of the ball, so it's much easier to put dimples over the entire ball to ensure that no matter what, the boundary layer will go turbulent.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/sports/sphere-flow-comparison.jpg"
],
[],
[
"http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/sports/sphere-flow-comparison.jpg"
]
] |
||
2ec9hv | the halting problem in computer science | I just watched a [video](_URL_0_) on the Halting problem and normally Computerphile is clear, but I jsut don't see it.
So, can someone explain the Halting problem thoroughly in an understandable manner? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ec9hv/eli5_the_halting_problem_in_computer_science/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjy3o53",
"cjy73zh"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"Can a single computer program determine if any other computer program will run forever? No",
"The halting problem is this: it is not possible to say in advance whether an arbitrary computer program will terminate.\n\nThe key point is *arbitrary*. There may well be many programs for which it is possible to determine whether they will terminate or not, but there is no program which works for *all* programs.\n\nThe proof of the halting problem is done by contradiction. In other words, we assume that there is a solution to the halting problem. If we can construct a logical contradiction from this assumption, then the assumption must be false, and thus there can be no solution to the halting problem.\n\nSo let's get started.\n\n1. Let us assume that there is a program Halt(P), that is always able to tell us whether an arbitrary program P will terminate.\n2. Let us define a second algorithm, HaltOrLoop(P), as follows:\n\n``\n\n define HaltOrLoop(P):\n if Halt(P): loop forever\n else: exit\n\n\nWe now have a program which will loop forever (i.e. not halt) if you feed it a program that will halt. And it will return if you feed it a program that doesn't. Note that this is not yet a contradiction - it's just a rather useless program that we have constructed.\n\n3. Let us feed that program to itself:\n\nHaltOrLoop(HaltOrLoop)\n\nWhat will it do? Will it halt or loop? There are now 2 possibilities:\n\na) if it halts, then Halt(HaltOrLoop) would be able to tell us that (this is our assumption). But if Halt returns true, the program will loop forever. Contradiction.\n\nb) if it doesn't halt, then Halt(HaltOrLoop) would return false, and HaltOrLoop will halt. Contradiction.\n\nThus, there cannot be a way to tell whether a program will halt in general."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=macM_MtS_w4&list=UU9-y-6csu5WGm29I7JiwpnA"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
agjye9 | why is depression more prevalent in richer countries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/agjye9/eli5_why_is_depression_more_prevalent_in_richer/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee6q4if",
"ee6q5c1",
"ee6q9j1",
"ee6qh8x",
"ee6rtaa",
"ee6sr08",
"ee6yl7i"
],
"score": [
22,
24,
5,
6,
4,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Poor countries also have high rates of depression, it's just it does not being reported. And many people there struggle with earning enough to live, so they can't take time to go to doctor, or doctors will srug it off ( in my - they will say that it's just because i'm not buisy enough. No one can have deppresion while they need stuff to do). And medication can make extra hole in pocket. And again you still need to function, no matter what. Or you and your fammily will die.",
"Because richer countries have the means to recognize, diagnose, and treat it. Someone without access to the medical care necessary wouldn't be considered to have it and would have to live with the way it affected their life. ",
"Because rich people actually label it depression while poorer countries it’s just their lives so they don’t think there is any problem because they already have a poor quality of life. ",
"I agree with the above explanations but I also firmly believe that they have bigger problems than us. We have the time to sit down and think about every little emotion at the end of the day whereas their problems are like \"Hmm. Will I be able to feed my family today?/will my usual route to work explode today?\" etc. Not \"why do these people I see on TV have it better than me?\" Not saying that they don't get depressed about how shitty they have it but they kinda have more pressing matters at hand regularly to even consider the fact that they're depressed.",
"Lots of people saying poor people get depressed too, which is true, however, fact remains that Europe has the highest suicide rate in the world, yet is also one of the richest. Africa, the poorest parts of the world, has the lowest rate of suicide. So its clear that it is more prevalent in richer countries. \n\nHOWEVER, it gets interesting again, because within those rich countries, poorer people are more likely to commit suicide than richer. \n\nThe same happens with anxiety. Higher income countries have higher rates, but within those countries, its the poorest who suffer most. Could it then be a side effect of wealth inequality? \n\nWe don't know. Its such a complex situation to study, that im not sure if we could ever find a single answer. More likely there are multiple factors. \n\nBut speaking anecdotally, our society and culture in the west strongly encourage behaviour that increases anxiety and depression. From eating poorly, to low physical activity, to believing that rich people are better than you. We also know that poverty isn't what causes problems, but relative poverty. That is, if everyone in a country is poor, you generally dont see the problems you do in the west, where inequality exists. Seeing people have everything while you have nothing is not good. Its a pretty big driver of crime too. If not the biggest!\n\nBut really the answer is, we don't know. All the answers people give are probably right a little bit. ",
"More comfort with less purpose. We don’t have to fight for our lives. We don’t have a clear purpose at all. We evolved to have one. When we don’t, it leads to mental illness. \n\nDepression doesn’t just happen. There are reasons for it. Modern comfort and purposelessness is a primary reason. ",
"People from richer countries can afford to get diagnosed and/or medicated. They're also more informed. People from poorer countries will just label it as being \"tired\" or \"sad,\" then move on."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
62li29 | when under anesthesia, do we actually experience pain but just unable to feel it because we are sedated, or does the "pain receptors" not send signals to the brain at all? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/62li29/eli5_when_under_anesthesia_do_we_actually/ | {
"a_id": [
"dfngeid",
"dfngek5"
],
"score": [
18,
2
],
"text": [
"It's important to remember that 'pain' is a subjective experience created by the brain. The nerves that detect 'pain' are actually just detecting potentially harmful stimuli. They send that information to the brain, which then decides what to do with that information. In high-stress situations, e.g. warfare, the brain will probably decide that pain isn't very useful because you need to run away. This is why in combat, soldiers may not feel pain even if they are shot. It's also why anticipation of pain makes the pain so much worse, because the brain is what decides whether or not something is painful, not the nerves that pick up painful stimuli. \n\nUnder general anaesthesia pain receptors will still pick up harmful stimuli and be activated. However, the brain is inhibited in many aspects by the anaesthesia and isn't responding to incoming stimuli. So while the nerves themselves are being activated, the brain never registers the signals as painful because it isn't responding to anything happening in the outside world.",
"Most types of anesthesia work by either blocking neurotransmitters or by hyperpolarizing neural cells. Both of these prevent pain entirely because there are no signals being sent to your brain telling you to be in pain at all (assuming the correct dosage is used)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
218ivi | prime numbers and cryptography | ELI5: Can someone explain how prime numbers are significant in cryptography? I know that a prime number is a number divisible only by itself and one and that the largest prime is very significant in cryptography. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/218ivi/eli5prime_numbers_and_cryptography/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgam6ve",
"cgam9w8",
"cgar1o4"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, for one there is no \"largest prime\", but *large primes* are extremely important. The math is a bit complicated, but many cryptographic algorithms are based on the fact that it is much much easier to multiply two numbers than it is to factor another number into it's primes.\n\nThe basic idea of RSA is you start with two huge prime numbers. One of them is your private key. You multiply them together to get an unimaginably huge number that is not prime, but only has two factors. This is your public key. The sender uses the public key to encrypt the data in such a way that it can only be decrypted using a similar algorithm with the private key. \n\nI'm sorry I can't be more discriptive, my high school calculus teacher taught me how it works, and I sent some messages using pencil and paper, but I've forgotten the mechanics of it since then.",
"One of the thing about numbers (any numbers, not just prime numbers) for the purpose of cryptography is that while it's very easy to multiply two numbers together to get a third number, it's an awful lot harder to start with the third number and work out what the original two were.\n\nAs a very simple example not involving prime numbers, if I asked you to multiply 10 x 10 you could give me the answer in an instant. However if I gave you the number \"100\" and said \"which two numbers did I multiply to get 100\" you couldn't necessarily tell me the correct answer straight away. It might have been 10 x 10, but it could have been 20 x 5, or 25 x 4, or even 100 x 1.\n\nAn important property of prime numbers is that when you multiply them together to get another number, the *only* numbers that you can divide the third number by is the original prime numbers. So 3 is prime, 7 is prime, and 3 x 7 = 21 -- the only numbers which you can divide 21 by are in fact 3 and 7. This always works with any two prime numbers you choose.\n\nSo, to finally answer your question!\n\nImagine your computer has two prime numbers. Both of these are very, very large numbers -- dozens of digits long if you were to write them out in decimal. Now multiply them together, this is something that computers are very good at. This gives you a third, extremely long number. Now, anyone who knows the initial two prime numbers can get the third number, but if you have the third number there is no known way to determine what the original prime numbers were, other than trying every possible number.\n\nThis is the basis of cryptographic techniques using prime numbers -- because there is an algorithm (i.e. a mathematical procedure) which is easy to do in one direction but very time-consuming to do in reverse, that algorithm can be used to produce secret codes and encrypt data.",
"Its worth sharing, Khan Academy has some excellent videos on the topic too.\n\n[fundamental theorem of arithmetic](_URL_0_)\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.khanacademy.org/math/applied-math/cryptography/modern-crypt/v/the-fundamental-theorem-of-arithmetic-1"
]
] |
|
2bs034 | how getty images owns the rights to so many pictures. | Do they take the pictures and retain ownership or do they purchase the rights to them? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2bs034/eli5how_getty_images_owns_the_rights_to_so_many/ | {
"a_id": [
"cj8bc4b",
"cj8djhk",
"cj8wt53"
],
"score": [
25,
13,
2
],
"text": [
"For myself they just sent me an email that basically 'we want to sell these, if we do we will send you wads of cash. Please sign this contract if you agree' ",
"Both, it depends on the picture. I actually worked for Getty once as a SA and then as a PA to the CEO of the company. There are RF pics, royalty free, and RM rights managed. RF photos can be used over and over but RM cannot and are more exclusive.Getty has thousands..millions of stock photos, many of which are RF.Magazines get charged specific rates based on size of image and relationship with Getty. The other photos, such as photos of celebrities are of course the property of the Getty photog who retains their ownership as well as Getty though since they are employed by them, these also fall under RM. If that makes sense? For the everyday person who has a photo they want, Getty buys your photo so that it may be licensed to others for usage, the original owner always retains the copyright to the photo though. I'm sorry this answer isn't better it was years ago that I worked for them and wondered this very thing. They have a lot of money and just dominate the field aside from AP.",
"One of the only ELI5 I wanted to find info on... get nothing"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4c4lef | why is it that one piece of paper will burn just fine, but, if i throw a big stack of papers into a fire, there will still be plenty of pages in the middle that never burn? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4c4lef/eli5_why_is_it_that_one_piece_of_paper_will_burn/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1ezs2s",
"d1ezt9x"
],
"score": [
5,
6
],
"text": [
"Because one piece of paper gets air easier. When there's a huge stack, there might not be enough air for those in the middle.\n",
"Their surfaces aren't exposed to the oxygen or fire. Same reason food cooks from the outside towards the center or a block of wood burns outside first then burns towards the inside."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
4ducnx | what do "it works" wraps do, and what "science" is behind them to help you lose weight. | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ducnx/eli5_what_do_it_works_wraps_do_and_what_science/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1uf1nl"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"They do nothing and there is no science.\n\nYou may experience temporary narrowing due to water loss and compression, but it's just another fake miracle product.\n\nIf you want to lose weight you need to eat less and move more."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4irvpv | when school busses are driving with no students in them, why do they have that sign in the back that says : "this bus is empty"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4irvpv/eli5when_school_busses_are_driving_with_no/ | {
"a_id": [
"d30lfuj",
"d30r73f",
"d30y8vo",
"d311xz3",
"d314dgn"
],
"score": [
197,
55,
26,
16,
2
],
"text": [
"Safety precaution. \n\nWhen you see the sign you know the bus driver went through the bus and checked to make sure that no children were on the bus. This way when they park for the night a child isn't left to die. ",
"This must be an American thing because I've never seen this. I presume it is to force the bus driver to walk to the back of the bus to check whether or not there are any students left after the last stop.",
"Because of kids like me. When I was in kindergarten, I fell asleep on the bus and missed my stop. I woke up in the bus yard ans just wandered around for a bit until someone found me. The idea is that the driver has to walk all the way to the back and look at the seats to make sure all the kids are off the bus.",
"School bus driver here. The school I work for uses these signs (rarely) to indicate when certain laws apply to us. For instance: with students on board the maximum speed limit is 55, but without kids on board it's whatever is posted. There are some other laws that change as well but it's late and I can't remember them. We usually don't use the signs and just drive as if we are always loaded since it becomes so habitual to drive at a slower speed anyways . \n\nEssentially in California, a school bus is only considered a school bus when it is loaded with students. ",
"In New York City the sign says \"This bus checked for sleeping children\". My question is why do I see buses with children and the sign up?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2gozbl | is there any reason for me to vote in national elections? | I'm sorry if this sounds stupid as I'm not very educated in the matter, but from what I've read, your vote means virtually nothing because of the electoral college. So what is actually the point of voting at all? And for that matter, can I actually make a difference in smaller elections by voting? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gozbl/eli5is_there_any_reason_for_me_to_vote_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckl5zzp",
"ckl61yd",
"ckl6eol",
"ckl7ntf",
"ckl99d9"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"the thing is, votes as a whole are still important. elections are still controlled by people who vote.",
"Because we vote to decide who will be in the electoral college.\n\nAlso, there are lots of down-ticket races that are direct election, like Congress, governor, state legislature, and county and local races.",
"Yes, there are a few reasons.\n\nFirst off, while the vote is controlled by the Electoral college and not the popular vote, the Electoral College votes are still largely controlled by the populace. Not only do you vote for the people in the Electoral College, but when they get there, they have to look at how many people voted for who and make a decision that at least partially reflects that. While personal opinion does come into play, they do largely differ to who the public wants.\n\nSecondly, national elections often have other things you vote on. In the 2012 Election, many states had other important things on the ballot, such as legalization of marijuana, reformation of certain laws, and votes for new projects, such as highway, parkways, etc.\n\nAnd lastly, if you don't vote, you have no right to complain. This isn't the same as abstaining. If you don't go in and put something down, then your opinion doesn't count. It is as if you never existed. But if you go in and write \"abstain\" or put down a name in the \"Other\" category, then it at least shows that you support any of the candidates, and while it doesn't seem like much, if everyone that didn't vote because they were choosing the shiniest of two turds, voted to abstain or wrote in an alternate candidate, the data would be there is show \"Hey, there's actually a few thousand people that don't agree with either candidate, maybe we should change\".",
"There have been faithless electors who have voted opposite of the popular vote, but they have never changed the expected outcome of an election. So in practice the electoral vote always reflects the intent of the popular vote in each state.\n\nIf one or more electors ever did alter the expected outcome of an election, someone should create a reality show to follow them around and film their eventual murder.",
"The electoral college system is LONG overdue for scrapping, but it would take a Constitutional amendment, which is non-trivial.\n\nAs a workaround, some states have been dumping their \"winner take all\" method, where the winner of the popular vote gets ALL the state's electoral votes, and replacing it with a proportional system, where the state's electors are required to mirror the proportions of the popular vote. This can be done at the state legislative level.\n\nBut even WITH a winner take all system, your vote matters, because the EC awards the votes based on that.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bnm4vt | why do all soda companies have the same size and shape of can/bottle? | Wouldn’t companies have variance between products? Or is there some sort of standard that causes all of these cans and bottles to be manufactured the exact same way? There are some other examples of this but soda is just the first that comes to mind. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bnm4vt/eli5_why_do_all_soda_companies_have_the_same_size/ | {
"a_id": [
"en6xs83",
"en6yomf",
"en700fv",
"en70g4a",
"en71f8c",
"en73rqt",
"en77zxv",
"en78xv6"
],
"score": [
4,
20,
2,
4,
2,
9,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"The soda companies only really make the drink that goes inside the bottle. A different company creates and sells them the packaging for their drinks.",
"While it is true that a different company takes care of the packaging, this doesn't stop them from requesting different sizes and shapes. Or even building their own packaging facilities.\n\nHowever most soda companies would try to stick to the standard. That's party because they don't want to lose potential sale from things like vending machines. Or stores that can't be bothered to handle logistics on storing and handling a specific container shape, while every other brand is easier because they're similar.",
"They adjust according to the price segment in which they are aiming for. \n\n\nexample\nPepsi/ Coke had 330ml cans selling for specific price supposedly 10 bucks, now after several years, they are selling 250 ml cans to combat inflation and to still retain the market for that 10 bucks.",
"vending machines. Storage. That's it. Cooler shelves and vending machines are designed to take a specific can/bottle size. At least here in the US.",
"Imagine you want to sell sodas. Imagine there are machines that people buy sodas from. Imagine that all the sodas in those machines are in the same size and shape container because making a machine that can handle any size and shaped bottle would cost a lot of money for no practical reason since almost every soda company uses the same size and shape bottle. Imagine trying to fit your weird ass shaped bottle into those machines. Imagine all the money you lose when you fail.",
"But there are different kinds of soda bottles? Like for example the 0,5l bottles for Fanta, Coca-Cola and Sprite are all [shaped differently](_URL_0_). Or maybe I'm misunderstanding your question.",
"They don't all have the same size and shape. For example you can see a list of available shapes/sizes for cans from one beverage packaging manufactuer [here](_URL_0_), no less than 25 different varieties of size/shape available.",
"It's in Pepsi and Coca-Cola's best interests that they are both able to bottle their drinks anywhere on the planet and that they bottles will both fit into common sized shelves and fridges, and will pack evenly into common sized trucks and pallets. They are kind of in on it together."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://previews.123rf.com/images/kornienko/kornienko1512/kornienko151200020/51774356-chisinau-moldova-november14-2015-coca-cola-fanta-and-sprite-bottles-isolated-on-white-the-three-drin.jpg"
],
[
"https://www.crowncork.com/beverage-packaging/beverage-cans"
],
[]
] |
|
2o2k4i | how does 10 degrees plus or minus on the oven make a difference? | When recipes specify that the oven should be heated to 190 or 210 instead of 200, I always scoff a little. How does this make such a big difference when cooking? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o2k4i/eli5_how_does_10_degrees_plus_or_minus_on_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmj3o14"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Why would you scoff? You would've scoff at the final step when it says \"caution: will be hot\"?\n\nThey're not rules, they are recipes and they are the ideal instructions to prepare the prepare that meal. If you want to increase the temperature by 10 degrees, that alters how long you are then preparing the dish and most people don't bother adjusting for that time (should they find the instructions that bothersome) and thus the meal is not prepared at it's optimal. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
43hq3v | what does it mean when it feels like your heart is pounding harder versus faster | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43hq3v/eli5what_does_it_mean_when_it_feels_like_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"czibyt6"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A heart pumping \"harder\" is filling with more blood and ejecting more of the blood out of it. Beating faster is controlled by electrical waves traveling through the heart muscle, causing the muscle contractions to speed up. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4t2nsm | a neutral explanation of jihadism. | Hey there;
What is jihadism, explained simply, without any biased opinion on the matter? Generally speaking, most people I know would refer to terrorism, martyr, etc.
What does it really mean? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4t2nsm/eli5_a_neutral_explanation_of_jihadism/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5e58wk",
"d5e5jpx",
"d5e5rgn"
],
"score": [
19,
2,
9
],
"text": [
"Jihad means struggle or battle. Some Muslims take this as a call to self improvement. Some take it as a call to change the world through nonviolent conflict. Some take it to mean changing the world through morally just warfare. Some take it as a call to change the world through any means necessary. Much like Christianity, there are as many interpretations of Islam as there are Muslims. ",
"That's a really tough task. Most Muslims would explain the concept as something akin to what Christian denominations loosely refer to as \"witnessing\" or \"evangalism\". That is, the practice of pro-actively talking to people about your beliefs, inviting them to church functions or social events, offering them copies of the Bible or other religious texts, offering prayer, offering study group sessions open to the public--that sort of thing. The term jihad is listed as best I can tell (I can't read Arabic) as simply dedicating some time in your month/week/life/etc to forwarding the interests of the organization as a whole.\n\nThe jihadists that make the news take the texts to mean literally going out and doing war-like activities, the bombings and kidnappings and so on are justified as forwarding the interests of the religion because...they are done by the religious??? And at the expense of those not in the religion? In the Bible there are passages where Jesus explains that families will fight about proper interpretation of scripture. In other passages He's depicted as a general of an army at war. Spiritual warfare (long story) is heavily bathed in imagery of actual war to drive home the idea that fighting Satan and his legions is a matter of (spiritual) life and death. And so on. The Spanish Inquisition and the various episodes around the Reformation were violent in part (not entirely) to these sort of references. The settling of California by the Missions (Catholic Church) was another consequence of taking such passages literally or near-literally.\n\nSimilar texts (again, as best I can tell) are included in the Q'uran and are taken in a similar way by some particularly zealous adherents--Al Qaeda and ISIS are perhaps the two most prominent groups internationally, at least right now. These groups preach not only that infidels (gentiles, unbelievers, whatever you call them) are compelled to convert or be killed, but that the highest form of religiosity is to actively fight that \"war\" in a literal way. Because of this, the actual literal battles are not against a government or a special interest group who will move on when their resource or political power shifts. They are against a group who believes that causing war and death is the duty placed on them by Allah (a divine being, an interpretation of the same concept Christians call God). \n\nWhile battles must be fought in the literal sense, the war is one of ideas and ideologies, not one of resources or political power.\n\nAs to your initial question--what is jihad? Well, it depends on who you ask.",
"What you are *almost certainly* thinking of is **Salafist** Islam, also called **Wahabbist** Islam.\n\nThis is a movement in Islam whose adherents believe that the prophecies of the End of the World as put forth in the Books of the Religions of Abraham are literally true, and who believe that these End Times are commanded by their deity, and that they should take every opportunity to bring them about, to fulfill those prophecies.\n\nThose prophecies involve a Caliphate doing Battle with The Great Satan on the Plains of Armageddon.\n\nThere is now a Caliph. He and his followers have seized control of land and are fighting to seize control of the land around and comprising the area they believe is the Plains of Armageddon. They believe that The West — explicitly, that the United States, Europe, and Jews — are The Great Satan.\n\nTheir prophecy is that when a Caliphate fights and defeats The Great Satan on the Plains of Armageddon, then the deity's will is fulfilled, the prophecy is fulfilled, they get rewarded, etcetera.\n\nThe process of bringing about this fulfillment of prophecy is what Wahabbists / Salafists are referring to when they speak of Jihad.\n\nThey also believe that something like 95% of the Muslims in the world are Muslims-In-Name-Only, that they're not truly submissive to their deity, and therefore they are corrupting the message of their deity — and are therefore fair game for Jihad.\n\nImagine if Kansas was not a state in the United States, but an independent country, and imagine that this poor country was run by the the Phelps family, and imagine they discovered trillions of gallons of oil under Kansas, and this made them fabulously wealthy, and then imagine that Fred Phelps was born, and instituted the Westboro Baptist Church, and the entire Phelps family integrated the WBC into Kansas' government and entire society.\n\nThat's Saudi Arabia and the Salafist movement.\n\nThey're trying very, very, very hard to bait the West — any of the West — to come fight them on the Plains of Armageddon.\n\nIf they can, it will be seen as the fulfillment of prophecy, before the battle is even begun."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
7yab5j | we know today that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor and that one does not derive from the other. do we know what this common ancestor is and why / why not? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7yab5j/eli5_we_know_today_that_humans_and_chimpanzees/ | {
"a_id": [
"dueszcu",
"duf6oan"
],
"score": [
3,
3
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nWe can't really pinpoint an *exact* moment when chimpanzees and humans would have diverged from each other back when we were the same species. But it was around six million years ago or so, and likely *fairly* resembled chimpanzees of today.",
"\nNot every species living in the past was lucky enough to have it's remains preserved. We likely haven't found all the fossils that are preserved.. and sadly.. until we realized what these were, we destroyed a lot of fossils that were found in the past. Apes and chimps lived in rain forests and fossils from those areas are not easily preserved as the soils are acidic.\n\nWorse still... a lot of fossil discoveries have ended up in the hands of \"collectors\" and have never even been seen by proper scientists.\n\nThis is very true of fossils found in the limestone quarries in South Africa in the 1900's. For example the now famous skull of the Taung Child (Australopithecus africanus) was in the hands of a collector until a guest to that person's house realized it's scientific importance."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee%E2%80%93human_last_common_ancestor"
],
[]
] |
||
3r9qjk | how do casinos have the "house advantage" when the player is the one who decides when to stop and walk away? | I get that statistically, in a given number of plays, the casino always sets the odds in its favor. So as an example I'll use 51% to 49% that the casino wins.
Wouldn't it be possible for someone to step up to the roulette table and bet $5 on red, then triple their bet every time they lose? So if they lose the first time, they bet $15 (currently at -$20) the second time. If they lose that time as well, they bet $45 (currently at -$65) the third time. We can repeat this process indefinitely, and as soon as the players wins he will be positive. Could he not simply walk away at this time, then rinse + repeat (starting with $5 again)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3r9qjk/eli5_how_do_casinos_have_the_house_advantage_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwm4n7e",
"cwm65ps"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The casino has a bigger bankroll. They never have to stop, plus people don't quit when they're ahead. ",
"Your proposed strategy will not work because in real life the players money is finite, and therefore you will still be at a disadvantage. Suppose you bet $1 initially, and you have a maximum of $1023 available. You can then only bet 10 times before you run out of money. That situation occurs if you lose 10 consecutive bets in a row, which would happen 0.51^10 ≈ 1/840. If you lose, you lose all $1023, whereas if you win, you only gain 1$ in total, even after 10 bets (the rest of your winnings goes to covering the losses from your earlier bets). 1 in 840 times, you lose $1023, the other 839 times you gain a dollar, so you would on average lose money. No matter how many bets you make, as long as it is a finite number your expected gain is negative.If the casino did not have an advantage (i.e the probability of winning was exactly 50/50), then your expected gain is zero - you wouldn't on average lose money but you won't have an advantage either.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
a9wme8 | why can tv antenna's reception be improved by adding a dish around it but the same won’t work for wifi antennas and cellphone antennas? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a9wme8/eli5_why_can_tv_antennas_reception_be_improved_by/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecn2kz6",
"ecn2s2o",
"ecn36e2"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Your premise is false. It *does* work for these other antennas, as long as you know the direction of the device you are communicating with.",
"They *can* be improved by adding a dish, provided of course you know which way to point your cell phone or other WiFi device in order to get reception. Usually that would be a huge burden for the use of such devices.",
"We use them for point to point where both units stay in the same place. If you don't mind having to aim, you can make a cantenna _URL_0_\n\nCell phones lose the benefits of the multiple towers unless you are way far out from them and unable to lock on a signal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantenna"
]
] |
||
2oda3t | how does an electric guitar works | I started playing acoustic last year, and I'm thinking about starting electric soon. But I have been wondering how an electric works? How does it make that sound? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oda3t/eli5_how_does_an_electric_guitar_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmm0oz2"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Some of my physics may be a bit rusty, but it's all to do with the generator effect, in which electricity is generated when a wire moves through a magnetic field.\n\nThe pickups are basically little magnetic poles wrapped in copper wire, and when a string is played, it moves through the magnetic field of the poles. A current is then induced and sent through the wire and then into an amp. Playing different frets on the guitar cause the string to vibrate at different frequencies, and hence different levels of current."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2ofuvc | why does nasa need to study the ability to go through through the van allen radiation belt with orion since that was accomplished during the apollo missions | _URL_0_
I am not a moon conspiracy person but this is one of the reasons the idea NASA never landed on the moon exist. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ofuvc/eli5why_does_nasa_need_to_study_the_ability_to_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmmr119"
],
"score": [
11
],
"text": [
"They tested the apollo capsule.\n\nThis is a completely different machine, with alot more tech on it and in it. "
]
} | [] | [
"http://youtu.be/gjglwMPvzVo?t=3m2s"
] | [
[]
] |
|
4wwz7r | dashes and semicolons | Whats the use and purposes of the two? I always seem to get them mixed up. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4wwz7r/eli5dashes_and_semicolons/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6ak84g",
"d6akvqh",
"d6awwhj"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Semicolons are used for separation. It can be used to combine two sentences that can stand on their own.\n\n\ne.g. I'm going out to eat; however, I'll be home by midnight.\n\n\nIt can be used to separate lists when it contains commas. \n\n\ne.g. I bought big, yellow bananas; tiny, green watermelons; and ripe avocados. \n\nDashes are for emphasis, or interrupting sentences. \n\n\ne.g. After winning a cooking show, her dream of visiting her parents at her native homeland - England - came true. \n\n",
"A semicolon can pull two sentences together to become one. If the phrase after a semicolon cannot be a complete sentence on its own, then the semicolon should not be there.\n\n***Example***\n\n**Correct**: I have a big test tomorrow; I can't go out tonight.\n\n**Incorrect**: I have a big test tomorrow; so I can't go out tonight.\n\nIn the second sentence, \"so I can't go out tonight\" is not a complete sentence, so the semicolon is wrong.\n\n\n\nA dash breaks away a part of a sentence for emphasis or as a modifier.\n\n***Example***\n\nThe students—they were each over the age of eighteen—lined up in the streets to vote for the presidential candidates.\n\n",
"Semicolons replace FANBOYS (for and nor but or yet so) and link sentences together. (non-ELI5: coordinating conjunctions)\n\n > He is dead**;** we will leave him.\n\n > He is dead, **so** we will leave him.\n\nSemicolons reduce the confusion caused by having commas in lists.\n\n > To be honest, my father was a cruel, harsh man**;** a devilish, handsome ladykiller**;** and an idiot. :)\n\n > To be honest, my father was a cruel, harsh man, a devilish, handsome ladykiller, and an idiot. :(\n\nDashes surround interrupting, clarifying thoughts in the middle of a sentence.\n\n > He is dead**--**killed by an apple**--**so we will leave him.\n\nSince you are probably also wondering about the difference between dashes and hyphens, just remember that hyphens link words, not thoughts.\n\nHyphen: \n\n > half**-**assed\n\nDash: \n\n > He is dead**--**killed by an apple**--**so we will leave him."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1nep7f | why does popularity (being popular) feels so good? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nep7f/eli5_why_does_popularity_being_popular_feels_so/ | {
"a_id": [
"cchw19u"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"It's other people telling that what we're doing and the way we are is okay. More popular = more people giving us a \"thumbs up\" on who we are. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
d696xh | what determines the portion of light spectrum that we can see ? | Human can only see a certain portion of the entire light spectrum (400nm-750nm I think), while some animals see less or more than us. What determines the range of perception of each species ?
Extra question: Would it be possible to make a pair of glasses that increases that range ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d696xh/eli5_what_determines_the_portion_of_light/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0qycy7",
"f0r1k82",
"f0roul9",
"f0s2e9j"
],
"score": [
5,
8,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Evolution. Every animal evolved to be able to see what is best for its sytle. That's why a lot of animals that hunt in the dark are able to see infrared.\n\nIf we could make glasses that increase the range. Probably not, depends on the technology we will have avaible. We could probably make eyes that are able to detect more wavelengths in the future though.",
"Cone cells, specialized nerve cells in the retina, contain pigments which absorb a small band of colored light, sending signals to the brain. Human eyes have three different kinds of cone cell with different pigments, so we see the combinatorial range of their absorption bands.\n\nSo, basically, eyes have reverse pixels, and we can only see some mix of those three colors. \n\nTo see a broader spectrum we would have to modify the eye, probably genetically, to include more kinds of cone cells with novel pigments sensitive to different bands. Then hope the brain would eventually be able to separate and use the new information.",
"First it must be a wavelength that can reach the retina, our eyes are not transparent to all wavelengths. Then we need a cell that is excited by the wavelength.",
"Because the sunlight spectrum mostly lies in that specific wavelength. [Look here.](_URL_1_) So evolution would optimize for that majority spectrum. If the sun produces mainly X-Ray, I would guess our eyes would see in x-ray\n\nEvolution drives the eye improvement from [simple light sensor organelle](_URL_4_) found in plankton into the advance eye of bird sand mammals. \n\nMany youtube explains how the evolution of eye\n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_2_)\n\n[_URL_3_](_URL_3_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrKZBh8BL\\_U",
"https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1204401",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrKZBh8BL_U",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygdE93SdBCY",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyespot_apparatus"
]
] |
|
3vz6dj | how and why does the us constitution apply to and/or protect non us citizens. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vz6dj/eli5_how_and_why_does_the_us_constitution_apply/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxrykpw",
"cxrz011"
],
"score": [
9,
3
],
"text": [
"The rights in the Constitution aren't things specifically for citizens -- they are *restrictions on the government*. That's a very important distinction.\n\nSo, for example, the First Amendment right of free speech isn't something that is specifically given to citizens, but rather it's a limitation on the government on being able to punish people for those things.\n\nSince it's a limitation on the government, and not a special right of a class of people, then those rights are available to anyone in the United States.",
"The vast majority of rights in the US Constitution apply to everyone within the jurisdiction of the US, regardless of citizenship. There are exceptions; non-citizens don't have the right to participate in the process of US government (like by being on a jury, voting, running for office, etc.), don't have the right to enter the US, can be restricted in their travel around the US, etc. But for the most part, the things the government can't do to citizens it can't do to noncitizens in the US. In fact, at the *state* level, the government is normally not even *allowed* to treat US citizens and (legally present) noncitizens differently, except when it directly affects democratic self-governance or when it passes the same test used for racial discrimination.\n\nAs for why, the philosophy of rights embodied in the US Constitution is the same as that in the Declaration of Independence before it: the rights aren't rights granted to you because the government feels generous, they're rights *all* humans have and which it's illegitimate for a government to deny to anyone. The fact that you're not a citizen doesn't mean you're any less entitled to freedom of religion, or to the privacy of your home against arbitrary government intrusion, or to due process before you're locked up (although it does mean you are generally not entitled to due process before being denied entry to the US, since the right to be present in the US is not something that anyone but a citizen has). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
37ticc | how can mass excape a black hole? | From what I understand, a black hole is an object that it so massive that its gravitation stops light from excaping. And light is a massless particle so it would require the least amount of energy to travel fast enough to break that gravitational pull. But I just read an article about some black holes expelling huge amounts of particles (and radiation) from their poles. I can only assume that the particles in question have at least some mass; wouldn't that make it exponentially more difficult to break past the event horizon? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37ticc/elif_how_can_mass_excape_a_black_hole/ | {
"a_id": [
"crpprbj",
"crppx8g",
"crpq5b3"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"I think you may be asking about Hawking Radiation. Simply put: if a particle/anti-particle pair form as a result of a random quantum fluctuation on the black hole's point of no return (known as the event horizon), then one may fall in and the other may escape. If you're interested in learning more, then the term you want to Google/Wikipedia is \"hawking radiation\".\n\nEdit: so sorry. I just re-read your question and see you were asking about particles coming from the poles (I missed that). That's not what I was describing. Here's an article discussing some theories:\n\n_URL_0_",
"They don't go past the event horizon. The jets originate from just outside the horizon; the exact mechanism that produces them isn't known.",
"From my limited understanding I present you this. \nA black hole has an event horizon, as you know. This is a line that, when crossed, there is no return - even for light. \n\nNow all around us there is empty space, a ridiculous amount of it. You are more empty space than you are atoms when it comes down to it. That empty space is theorized (within quantum mechanic and theory) to be bustling with energy. Little bits of energy are snapping into existence in pairs (one matter, one antimatter), arching away and then back to meet their counterpart and fizzling out.\n\nThe radiation a black hole emits is based on these principles combined. The theory is that when those bits of energy form on the event horizon one of them is pulled into the black hole, thus never meeting and negating it's counterpart - which then floats off into space and becomes theoretically detectable energy. This is known as Hawking Radiation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://m.space.com/261-twisted-physics-black-holes-spout.html"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
r4c01 | why do we avoid teaching young kids about sex? | Why not just tell them straight up what sex is?
Edit: To clarify, why do many parents avoid describing to their kids what sex actually is? They use all kind of strange allusions or made up stories to describe it. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/r4c01/eli5_why_do_we_avoid_teaching_young_kids_about_sex/ | {
"a_id": [
"c42srcw",
"c42su7d",
"c42tyrz",
"c42v8g2",
"c42vbyr",
"c42ve2z",
"c42vfiv",
"c42vlps",
"c42vlqt",
"c42vohc",
"c42vqh1",
"c42vrfi",
"c42vv2g",
"c42w1bd",
"c42w84h",
"c42wh8s",
"c42wkl4",
"c42wmdn",
"c42wnz9",
"c42wqqx",
"c42wtwq",
"c42x52n",
"c42x66e",
"c42xf8e",
"c42xsny",
"c42xy7r",
"c42y24r",
"c42y8rc",
"c42yy3h"
],
"score": [
44,
13,
12,
355,
180,
191,
50,
60,
2,
2,
16,
5,
2,
4,
8,
2,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
8,
2,
2,
2,
8,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I suppose the counter-argument would be something along the lines of \"If I tell you what sex is and how it works and etc, then what's to stop you from doing it?\"",
"Well, there is a certain balance to be struck. Some people take it way too far either way (explaining too much too soon to kids or not telling them at all). It's really not appropriate or necessary to teach your 3 year old about sex. They're not really old enough to understand it. However, you shouldn't wait till they're 15 to broach the subject. It's a difficult balance for many because their parents may have not taught them about it at the right age or in the right way.",
"Well, first how young are we talking, Like a five year old? What would be the point? They have no way of comprehending what it is, and they certainly aren't able to do it, so basically there's no need.\n ",
"Most adults can't comfortably talk about sex *with the people they're fucking*. If you can't talk to your partner, talking to you kids is even harder.",
"Nice try, five year old kid.",
"A. Parents don't think their kids _should_ be having sex so assume ignorance will keep them safe.\n\nB. Parents don't want their kids thinking they approve of any kind of sexual activity and assume that having an honest discussion (rather than a \"you'll go to hell\" or \"it's always evil and wrong\" shout fest) is the same thing as giving them the A-OK to bang their way up the interstate. \n\nC. Parents have issues with sex themselves so have difficulty treating it as anything but a dirty taboo. You don't talk about dirty things with your kids. Kids are pure and sweet. \n",
"Honestly? Most people find talking to a child about sex very awkward. There's a great disconnection between their questions or understanding and what the act actually is.\n\nThey grow to pre-teens and it's almost the same, but it's a slightly different feeling because they're starting to experience those same feelings, but don't understand them. It's incredibly hard to soothe them with just words about how they feel because THEY feel like nobody's ever felt like they have. A lot of parents also fear that their children will start getting involved with sex if taught about it at this stage.\n\nTeenagers are already prone to rebellion, so parents REALLY dread telling them about it during the teen years. A lot of time, they've also felt like they've missed their chance to connect to their kids about it, as oftentimes teenagers will see their parents as hard to relate to at this stage. It's also easy to not attempt it because the parent feels like they'll pick up the information by themselves.\n\nthey WILL eventually pick up the info by themselves, but it's a problem if they've given birth 3 times before they figure out the main parts\n\nnot teaching kids about sex is how you get teen mothers, ruined potential of kids, STDs at 13, and women giving birth that are flabbergasted that they could have gotten pregnant right after they ate peanuts, because Becky told them that you sooooooo couldn't omg",
"It sounds like the vast majority of people in this thread don't have kids. Cognition develops in different stages. It would be like someone asking: \"How come we don't teach Kantian philosophy in Kindergarden?\" ",
"Because sex is a taboo. A part of many people's minds consider it immoral in a sense...not intellectually thinking that, but emotionally. And nearly everyone hates it when kids do immoral things. It's kinda like swearing. We know it's not technically wrong, but many of us may cringe when we hear children swear. \n\nI would also imagine that some people are afraid that their kids will start doing sexual things if they know about sex. ",
"People are embarassed about sex in general and they think/hope that children aren't curious about it.\n\nMy goal in life is to never be embarassed about sex, and when I have kids, teach them whatever they will understand about sex at each age. Obviously 3-year olds might not be prepared to understand chromosomes and fallopian tubes, but I think a 3-year old should know BASICALLY how babies are made, and that people usually do it because it's a lot of fun for adults, not just because it makes babies. And that all people of all ages like to play with their body alone.\n\nI think that's a good way to also introduce the idea that if they want to masturbate, they need to do it in private... something a lot of parents don't know how to handle and end up just slapping their children's hands away from themselves because kids DO and WILL masturbate in public because they don't know better.\n\nIf you can get them to understand it's a private thing, they'll feel better about themselves, knowing they won't be punished and have \"safe places\" where it's fine to touch their own body.",
"I think it depends on the age of the kid, and what you mean by describing sex to them. I have a 5 year old, and I've already talked to her about uterus', and fallopian tubes, and eggs, etc. I'm not going to get into detail about how \"then daddy sticks his penis in mommy's vagina and pounds away until they both have amazing orgasms!\" but she knows the basics, just like she knows what causes hiccups or why she sneezes when she steps outside. I'm not about to tell her that babies come from happy wishes or that a stork drops them off. She first off wouldn't believe that shit, and second off.. why waste my time and hers with stories like that? ",
"It depends on what age group you're talking to. A younger child may try to imitate the act because they think it's \"funny\" or \"strange.\" However, as they grow older, they need to know how it works. Some parents do explain it to their young children (mine did), as many children are able to handle the information without acting out. I believe parents use analogies because sex is complex (more than sticking a wee wee into a hoo ha) and uncomfortable/embarrassing. I still don't talk to my parents about sex even though I'm in my mid twenties and married. ",
"Because parents are stupid and want to keep their children young and stupid until such time as they are thrust out into the world at the age of 18 so they can do ridiculously stupid things instead of teaching them to slowly become adults over a period of years.",
"when you explain things to kids they often like to learn more or talk about/share what they know with others, their friends or other adults. You show a kid Bill Nye, and they're all about molecules and whatnot for the next 15 minutes. You show kids about firemen and they want to pretend they're a fireman and put out fires, coooool! They see it mentioned elsewhere, and they think it's cool and okay to talk about and parents encourage it.\n\nYou teach them about sex, they don't realize it's a bad thing, they see women in magazines or whatever and think it's normal, so when they're caught playing it out or talking about it with their friends, suddenly they're in trouble, they get horrible looks, they're shamed and disciplined because suddenly something is bad and shouldn't ever be talked about. Think about it; to a kid who is still grasping logic, this makes *no sense.* and is confusing and probably damaging. Remember the 6 year old kid last year who will, when he turns 18, be placed on the sex offender list simply because the girl's father had the political/law sway to do so? If anything, a fascination of *why* this one particular thing out of everything else is a bad thing will make them more curious as to why it's never taught/mentioned/shown. If I never see it, is it true? Does it actually happen?? etc etc.\n\nThere are places where sex isn't really the gigantic taboo for children and is rather just something so blasé that nobody talks about it because it's a mutually accepted thing amongst everyone. You have comics in France and Belgium that play it off as a joke. They don't hide it from you or lie to you about it in schools, and once you're done that unit in health class, you're off to biology. These places have low teen pregnancy rates, they have lower instances of STD/STIs, and less need for abortions because of this. \nPlaces with high teen pregnancy rates, transmission of STDs, and issues with abortion are places where sex, especially as portrayed to children, either *isn't taught to them* and completely glazed over and ignored, or demonized and if you are interested in it you're a slutty whore or a sick perverted freak and you're a lost cause if you happen to get pregnant/an std/etc. I could very easily point fingers to places that do this, and the reasons why they don't, but they're obvious, so I won't. ",
"Lots of people have been talking about problems individual parents have with sex, but this issue is a greater cultural one. Whether you're religious or not, Western Culture has, in a lot of ways, been greatly influenced by Christianity. And if there is one thing that Christianity teaches us, it is that our body is disgusting and we should always feel guilty about having fun or feeling good.\n\n & #3232;\\_ & #3232;\n\nSex is hugely taboo in our culture. Increasingly less so, but it's still there. For a loong looong amount of time, people have taken a \"what you don't know can't hurt you\" attitude toward sex education, but from what we've learned from high pregnancy and STI rates, nothing could be further from the truth. People also think (because of the religious influence on our culture) that sex is something to be avoided, especially for young people, and that they should not do it ever ever. However, the nature of the teenage mind dictates that when an adult tells you to \"never ever under any circumstances do this\", many teenagers will completely disregard that warning and do exactly what they're being told not to. \n\nObviously, the best way to deal with sex ed is to warn children and teenagers about the risks of sex, and what precautions one must take, and then let them have at it if they promise to do it safely. Unfortunately, many people are still very uptight and prudish about the whole issue, and still take an extremely old-fashioned view of it all.\n\nEDIT: I should probably clarify that massive generalisation. *Catholicism* in particular, the strain of Christianity that has probably most influenced Western culture as a whole, fetishises guilt to the extent that anything that feels physically good should make you guilty at least a little bit, which has formed our views on sex more than any other single thing.",
"Because people think that taboo works to suppress ideas, despite that fact that all it does is heighten interest, and compound the problem of explaining the simple facts *and* why you tried to hide them later on.",
"Here's how I see it (definitely more of an ELI15):\n\nBasically, this goes back to the days of Christian morals and the notion that \"sex is an activity that happens between a consenting married man and woman for the purpose of procreation\". As society started becoming more and more progressive and the 60s and \"free love\" came around, some conservative parents objected and some liberal parents accepted teaching kids about sex at a younger and younger age. However, this had some consequences. Namely, kids repeat fucking everything if they think it's taboo. I think this is the perfect place for an example:\n\nI worked in a summer camp as a counselor all through high school and a head counselor my first year in college. There was this one kid, let's call him Jack. Jack had very liberal parents who took a \"straight up\" approach and taught him about sex at a very early age (fourth grade). This made Jack think he was the shit because society equates sexual knowledge with social maturity. One time, I was eating lunch with Jack and a couple of the other kids, when Jack finds that it is an appropriate time to say, \"Hey guys, I walked into my parents' room last night saw my mom giving my dad a blowjob.\" Obviously, most of the fourth graders did not know what a blowjob was, so after Jack left to go play, one of the most innocent little girls in the fourth grade group comes up and asks me, \"Daetharalar, what's a blowjob?\" Naturally, this put me in a very bad place. I responded, \"Don't worry about it\" and quickly changed the subject. She asked, \"why won't you tell us?\" I pretended not to hear her. Inevitably, this made things very bad. A parent comes up to me one day and asks \"Umm, Daetharalar, my daughter came home from camp the other day and asked me what a blowjob was. What can you tell me about that?\" I told her the entire story and, fortunately, she was cool about it and said I dealt with it as best I could (thank Zeus for chill parents).\n\nSo, this puts parents in a very awkward place and forces them to have to deal with something they may not be ready to deal with yet.\n\nTL;DR: Kids repeat everything. Parents hear everything the kids repeat. This puts them in an awkward position that goes against acceptable standards in society.",
"My mum did. She didn't go into graphic detail, but she did use the correct medical words for parts from an early age, (although girlparts are a bit more complex and so there was a bit more abbreviation there), and she did explain the basic mechanics, like you'd get in a sex ed class here in Australia. You know, penis goes into the vagina, sperm meets egg, some boys love other boys and so on.\n\nI was so grateful for it. Meant I wasn't nearly as shocked or embarrassed in primary school sex ed, and meant I understood what was happening every step of the 'wonderful journey' that is puberty.",
"I have no idea what you guys are even talking about. My parents talked to me about sex when I reached a reasonable age (probably like 12ish), and the same with my friends. Didn't you have sex ed like three times in school? Our first sex ed class was in 6th grade (USA), the second was in 8th, and the third was in 10th.\n\nIf you want to know why we don't teach kids younger than 10-11 what sex is, it's because there are a number of good reasons why they shouldn't be having it, and because they wouldn't even know HOW to have sex unless someone explained it to them in the first place.\n\nI guess I don't know how most parents deal with the internet, but I imagine that many if not most of them put restrictions on what they let their kids access. All of the parents I know do this in one form or another.",
"When my sister was about 6, she somehow heard the expression, and mum had to tell her what it was.\n\nShe cried.",
"What age are you thinking of?\nFor a 5 year old kid, you don't need to use any metaphors but you don't need to be graphic either; I don't think they are developmentally ready for the full explanation. By the time the kid is 10, you can explain to them exactly what sex is and the pros and cons of having sex. Ignoring the issue never educated anyone but you also don't want to scare little 5 year old kids for life.",
"Because parents hate their kids and want them to be miserable.",
"My daughter is almost 3.5 and she knows more than almost every other kid her age when it comes to babies. One reason is because we watched the movie \"Look who's talking\". The opening sequence features sperm swimming towards an egg. She asked what it was, so we told her. Daddy has sperm, mommy has eggs and when they meet, babby is formed. She knows roughly where the sperm and egg originate, though for a while she would tell people \"my daddy has sperm in his tummy\" which was a little embarrassing. My wife had a C-section, so daughter knows that is how baby comes out (she thinks that is the normal way and looked at us like we were crazy when we told her the \"other\" way). For a while after she learned all this, she would shoved things under her shirt, and walk around pretending it was a baby, then bring us one of her play kitchen utensils and make us \"cut the baby out\". What she doesn't know is exactly how the sperm and egg meet. That will be the conversation that comes several years down the road, I imagine. I think that it will be easier since she already knows the science behind it. It also helps that my wife and I are comfortable talking about sex, her because her mother is a nurse and she also learned all of this stuff at a young age (some kid in kindergarten came to school and told everyone he had sex with her [learned from big brothers], so she went home in tears, not knowing what it meant), and me because I am in the Navy and we talk about sex ALL THE TIME. \n\n\nSo yeah. ",
"My first lesson about sex was at age 11 in primary school.",
"Sex in general is oppressed in american culture. \n\nThis is why it is hard for parents to talk about sex with their children, but have no problem playing violent video games where people kill each other. Ironic, eh? 2 consenting adults making love to each other is \"evil\" and nasty, but people ending each others lives is fun and heroic. ",
"Sex is a fantastic thing in the short term that can have some pretty terrible LOOOOOOOOOOOOONG term consequences. \n\nChildren and even teens and early 20 somethings are absolutely terrible with managing LLLLLLLoOOOOOOOOOONNNNGGG term anything. Therefore, parents naturally struggle to communicate.\n\nP: \"...so remember, if you don't do it right it could traumatically ruin your life\" \n\nK: \"OH GOD WANT TO FUCK ANYTHING...ASAP\"\n\nP: \"right, but there's a time and place for it and you'll figure that out as you gain more experiences\" \n\nK: \"OH GOD WANT TO FUCK ANYTHING...ASAP\"\n\nP: \"So think in the long term\"\n\nK: \"OH GOD WANT TO FUCK ANYTHING...ASAP\"",
"Young children don't have a good self-control, don't know what is considered appropriate in society, and don't have required background information.\n\nSo if you explain sex directly there risk that\n\n * they will become confused, even scared of it\n * will then talk about it in public, ask people inappropriate questions. Why not ask a stranger how often he has sex?\n * will try to simulate sex with peers\n\nSo it needs to be done with great care, and a lot of people would rather avoid it.",
"because at a young age they are more likely to not really get it whatsoever and thus end up trying it to see what all the fuss is about. Once they have an actual sex drive or at the very least discover what porn is and what to do with it, its worthwhile to talk to them.\n\nIts the same reason you dont talk to them about abstract topics like ethics. They simply wont get it or they'll understand what you are saying but they wont understand what you MEAN by it. ",
"Kids know about sex without telling them \n\nAll we need to tell them is one big word: **Protection**\n\nThat's a hard pill to swallow, but it will make your pain more tolerable. \n\nWhen I have a kid (hopefully not a daughter), knowing they are safe/using condoms will at least give me some comfort--my kid will not have a kid...even if I have to feed birth control/condoms to him/her "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6cdgqv | how does the magnetic field work on a spherical magnet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6cdgqv/eli5_how_does_the_magnetic_field_work_on_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhtsgd0",
"dhttq0m"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"The same as any other magnet - spherical magnets still have north poles and south poles. Most often, they're just split roughly down the middle, like the equator dividing the earth into two halves. The top half acts like magnetic north and the bottom half acts like magnetic south.",
"At large distances (compared to the size of the magnet) the magnetic field will be indistinguishable from that of a normal bar magnet. \n\nClose to the sphere, the magnetic field will look slightly different than a bar magnet, but the field lines will still run south to north, and will point directly towards and away from the south and north poles, respectively."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
37gr9i | what causes that unmistakable and unique bin smell? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/37gr9i/eli5_what_causes_that_unmistakable_and_unique_bin/ | {
"a_id": [
"crmjk2p"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It's because it is the same bacteria breaking down the garbage, and what you are smelling is the result of that. Technically, it doesn't all smell the same, but when you are talking about a bin (we call those dumpsters or garbage cans here), you're probably always getting very similar food wastes, so the smell will be very similar. Similar enough your brain just classifies it as \"garbage - bad\" and doesn't distinguish beyond that. A bin of old diapers would have a different smell, as does a yard waste bin."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
3zfvsx | why do the heavier elements have so many 'un's in the name? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zfvsx/eli5_why_do_the_heavier_elements_have_so_many_uns/ | {
"a_id": [
"cylqoxl",
"cylqq0p"
],
"score": [
4,
3
],
"text": [
"\"Un\" means '1'. \nSo \"ununtrium\" is literally \"113\" \nThey name elements after their atomic number before they come up with a 'real' name.",
"It's just their literal number until they are officially named\n\nUnUnPentium = OneOneFiveium because it's atomic number is 115\n\nUnUnTrium = OneOneThreeium because it's atomic number is 113\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
alz5f6 | how are televisions in showroom in perfect sync ? | Upto 30+ televisions in showroom display the same video in perfect synchronisation. How do they do it ? Do they use a special device which can give output to so many monitors in Full HD ?
Asking this cause even my Surface Book with best specs can't power more than 2-3 monitors. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/alz5f6/eli5_how_are_televisions_in_showroom_in_perfect/ | {
"a_id": [
"efi3sci",
"efi441h",
"efi6tgb"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There is a huge difference between having multiple monitors on a computer with different output on each like if you use a computer compared to duplicate a signal to multiple display. \n\nThere are HDMI splitter boxes that take the input from one cable and send out the same signal to multiple monitors.\n\nA quick search on amazon resulted in 1 to 8 splitter for $50 and you would need 5 of those to drive 36 screens for a total of $25 .\n\n_URL_0_\n\nThe input to the TV will be in sync and as long as you disable any post processing often by using a game mode on the tv they will have as little delay as possible and all screens are in sync.",
"I used to work at Circuit City many years ago.\n\nWe just had special splitters running from a primary source.\n\nBasically it was one big output cable with daisy-chained splitters along the way.",
"There are several ways to do it. The cheapest way I can think of is to use an HD TV modulator. This takes an HD video signal and converts it to an over-the-air TV signal. Instead of broadcasting it from a tower, they can just run coax cable from the modulator straight to a TV and tune the TV to the channel they are modulating on. To sync it to many TVs they could use cheap coax splitters. The same kind you use at home to split your cable signal so it can go to your cable box and your cable modem at the same time. They can get splitters designed for dozens of outputs. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nAnother option is to use HDbaseT which takes cat5 network cable and uses it to transmit video. This could be split with relatively inexpensive splitters, but it would require a converter box at each TV. \n\n & #x200B;\n\nSource: I'm a professional video engineer. As part of my everyday job I take HD video signals and split them to many different screens all in sync. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.amazon.com/avedio-links-Certified-Splitter-Resolutions/dp/B01A6VELVQ/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1549003056&sr=8-4&keywords=1x8+HDMI+Splitter-Full+3D%2C+Ultra+HD%2C+4K"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
zbw0r | how come america can't just drill our way out of this oil crisis? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zbw0r/how_come_america_cant_just_drill_our_way_out_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"c638b4x",
"c638bci",
"c638d0v",
"c638oew",
"c638zxe",
"c639cwv"
],
"score": [
17,
11,
3,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"This is a chart from the U.S. Department of Energy showing how much oil the US produces per month: [About 200,000,000 barrels.](_URL_2_)\n\nAs you can see, this has increased slightly in recent years, but is still way down from its peak in the 1970s at 400,000,000 barrells **per month**. This is because while we still have lots of oil most of the stuff that's really easy to find and pump has already been found. \n\nThis is a chart from the CIA World Factbook showing how much oil different countries use **per day**. [United States: 19,150,000](_URL_1_). \n\nOil the US uses in a month, approximately: \n19,150,000 X 30 = 574,500,000\n\nHow much oil the US needs to import from other countries: \n\n574,500,000 - 200,000,000 = 374,500,000 barrells per month or 12,483,333 barrells per day\n\nBonus Chart: [Who we get the oil from](_URL_0_). Mostly it's Canada and Mexico, actually. But because oil is something that every country needs, disruptions in supply anywhere tend to raise prices everywhere. ",
"There is literally not enough oil in the ground in the WHOLE WORLD, let alone the U.S., to fuel the world's current consumption for the next 50 years. We have already extracted the easiest-to-get oil from the ground, so not only is the rest of it scarce, but much of it is so expensive to retrieve and process that it's barely worth it anyway.",
"An Oil crisis is something that has multiple implications. The USA has a very heavy investment in fossil fuels and oil infrastructure. If, for some reason, the amount of oil available decreases, the country suffers in terms of fulfilling it energy requirement. But if we start drilling wells left and right and have tonnes of oil and the amount of oil available increases, the amount of oil that will actually be used will be the same as what is required by the industry. New plants and new industries might increase the usage a little bit - but nowhere on the same scale as oil generation.\n\nBut now, not only do we have all the oil we need - we also have an assurance that there is more oil in excess at hand. This causes a decrease in oil prices. The major corporations and govt. agencies that benefit from sale of oil will suffer - as a result the general economy suffers (since these O & G companies pump a lot of money into the economy). So now, the economy suffers again.\n\nThe ideal solution, in this case, is to have a surplus supply of oil at hand all times - but it should be just of reach enough that the illusion of scarcity is mantained at all times - thus, the steady flow of oil will keep the industry running and the fear of oil depletion will keep the prices up - a goody goody solution all the way.\n\nThus the current oil crisis!",
"We have a crisis in the domestic scene because the greater part of the oil being produced in the Western Hemisphere is being put on takers and sold to the emerging nations of the Eastern Hemisphere. \n\n[**Here is a very intelligent look at the problem.**](_URL_0_)",
"Because the crisis is that you can't keep drilling forever. ",
"There is only a limited amount of oil in the US (and world), and as oil consumption grows what's left is used up faster and faster. You could drill more, but reserves will last for less and less time.\n\nHere's an [insightful video on the problem of exponential growth](_URL_0_), here's the quick TL;DNW version:\n\nimagine in science class you put some bacteria into a beaker and let it grow. The bacteria double in population every 1 minute. You start the experiment at 11:00am and by midday the beaker is full. \n\nWhat time was the beaker half full? 11:30? 11:45? The answer is the beaker was half full at 11:59, and was completely full by 12:00. The bacteria were living happily with plenty of space for 59 minutes, but then suddenly within 1 minute their beaker was full.\n\nHow does this apply to oil? If world annual oil growth is 3% then it means oil consumption doubles every 25 years. Once we've used half the world's oil reserves, it means there's literally only 25 years worth of oil left if growth continues at 3%."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm",
"https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2174rank.html",
"http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/leafhandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus1&f=m"
],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/06/oil-production-and-consumption"
],
[],
[
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umFnrvcS6AQ"
]
] |
||
1mmrup | please explain me how the string theory suggests the theoretical existence of the multiverse? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mmrup/eli5_please_explain_me_how_the_string_theory/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccaoy3j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's not so much string theory as it's about interpretations of how quantum mechanics works. \nIn QM the world we see is fundamentally based upon chance; the waveform determines the chance the particle can be found at that state, but once we've measured the position the whole waveform 'collapses' and the particle 'is' in that specific state. \nThis places an observer in a weird spot where observing what happens fundamentally changes the outcome. \nThis goes against our intuition and also slightly against what scientists would want, we'd like to be neutral observers an not interfere with our experiments.\n\nThe multi-verse comes in here and basically says: the observer is not anything special, everything happens, the particle is in every possible state, but in different universes. Which will mean that measuring simply tells you in 'what universe' you are in. \nRight now, however, there is no way to prove or disprove this theory, and I don't think anyone came up with even a theoretical way to test this."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
byquad | why does the zigzag pattern on packages (chip bags, chocolate bars,etc) make it easier to tear the plastic? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/byquad/eli5_why_does_the_zigzag_pattern_on_packages_chip/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqkqm8d"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It does two things. Plastic is made of very long stands of molecules called polymers, must like a fabric is made if long threads. It's just a lot smaller, and not really woven together (though there can be a grain to it).\n\nThe ridges first benefit is that it removes support from surrounding polymer fibers. On a flat edge the molecules that will eventually break is surrounded and supported better than one in the peak of the ridge. It disrupts what but if a grain there is.\n\nSecond is that it focuses the forces onto that point, sort of like how the top of a nail works. You'll notice in all sorts of material that when a cut v does need to be made into it, the end isn't just at the end of the cut. They instead drill a little circle right at the end. This creates a smooth edge rather than a sharp break xx spreading the force out again."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5uw6md | why are certain fruits, such as grapefruit and cranberries, dangerous to eat whilst taking blood thinning medication like warfarin? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5uw6md/eli5_why_are_certain_fruits_such_as_grapefruit/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddxbkq8",
"ddxbph5",
"ddxc1uo",
"ddxc72n",
"ddxfmix",
"ddxg0ij",
"ddxg5i5",
"ddxggxe",
"ddxi5cd",
"ddxjlmt",
"ddxk1ay",
"ddxk55z",
"ddxkp5r",
"ddxl6qm",
"ddxlytk",
"ddxmfdf",
"ddxn76x",
"ddxncgv",
"ddxng0m",
"ddxrerw",
"ddxtqhv",
"ddxvgzb",
"ddxwmbi",
"ddxxu4s"
],
"score": [
4276,
63,
111,
126,
3,
7,
9,
25,
5,
3,
2,
4,
2,
17,
6,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Warfarin and other drugs are metabolized (broken down) into active or inactive compounds by enzymes in your liver. Grapefruit and other foods contain substances that can inhibit the activity of these enzymes, stopping the metabolism of these drugs. It can either lead to dangerously high levels of the drugs remaining in your system, or in the case of drugs that need to be broken down before they're active, dangerously low levels as the pro-drug you've taken isn't getting metabolized properly. \nAlso, it can result in other enzymes acting on drugs that aren't usually active or sufficiently active, resulting in the wrong kind of metabolite forming, which can be harmful as well. ",
"Grapefruits contain furanocoumarins, which mess with a particular enzyme that decomposes a lot of drugs. On the one hand, that means if you eat a grapefruit, the drug can stick around in your system, and next time you take a pill you've actually got a double dose. On the other hand, some drugs are actually precursors of the active chemical, so no enzyme = no active drug.\n\nThe cranberry interaction is contested, and I'm not aware of any study that's shown how it actually interferes with drugs.\n\nAnd of course, vitamin K is the antidote to Warfarin, so you'd want to keep your dietary levels of that steady.",
"The enzymes in the liver that metabolizes drugs are specifically called cytochrome P450. Grapefruit juice will inhibit an isoform of P450, specifically CYP3A4, in your liver. If warfarin level in bloodstream is not being metabolized, it stays in your blood and your concentration may become toxic.",
"Medical Student. \n\nMany drugs are metabolized by a certain enzyme called CYP P450 (or other enzymes that are also within the CYP family). Warfarin is one of these drugs. CYP P450 is basically what is breaking down warfarin in your body. \n\nSo, anything that changes how CYP P450 does its job of breaking down warfarin will impact how warfarin works. Different drugs and other things (grapefruit juice, St. John's wort) either make CYP work better or inhibit CYP. \n\nIf CYP is made to work better, for instance by St John's wort (commonly used for over the counter mild depression), then CYP will be breaking down warfarin super fast. The warfarin can be broken down so fast that it does not reach the level needed to actually thin the persons blood. To say again, by inducing CYP to breakdown warfarin better, warfarin cannot reach therapeutic levels. \n\nAnother example is the CYP inhibitor cimetidine, which is commonly found in over the counter stomach medication (it's an antacid). Cimetidine is a CYP inhibitor, meaning CYP is not breaking down warfarin as well as usually. So, since warfarin is not being broken down, it causes warfarin to reach possibly toxic levels. Patients are at increased risk of bleeding. \n\nOverall, warfarin is not that great of drug, partially because it is dependent on CYP for breakdown and for a variety of other reasons. It also requires constant monitoring because it can be difficult to maintain within therapeutic range. Look up the list of things warfarin interacts with, and you'll be surprised that it's the most commonly prescribed drug thinner in the U.S. ",
"The enzymes that metabolize warfarin are from\nThe CYP family. Some fruits are also metabolized by the same exact enzyme. Consequently, if you're consuming said fruit and on a warfarin regimen, the enzyme being used will be breaking down the fruit whilst the warfarin levels elevate. If it elevates too much, takes a few days to reach the level, then there will be a toxic buildup of it requiring use of vitamin k as a reversal agent. ",
"I'm an emergency medicine physician assistant. Warfarin (coumadin) has perhaps the most interactions of drugs with both food and other drugs. Hence people need constant monitoring (blood draws) to make sure they're at therapeutic levels and the drug itself comes in nearly a thousand different tablets. Here is a small list of foods that interact with warfarin.\n\n_URL_0_",
"Warfarin is a finicky drug. There are a lot of foods that interact, and potentially interfere, with it. Anything with Vitamin K will alter the effectiveness because warfarin interacts with vitamin K to slow clotting in the blood. When you eat something with a high vitamin K content, like a big salad full of leafy greens or a bowl of guacamole, it prevents the warfarin from doing its job. \n\nGrapefruit and grapefruit juice, cranberries and cranberry juice decrease the body's ability to metabolize warfarin, so it has essentially the same effect as eating the big salad. It's generally thought to be fine to have a small amount (4 ounces or less) of cranberry juice, but anything over that should be avoided. \n\n\nGrapefruit interacts with a lot of medications. Grapefruit contains compounds known as furanocoumarins that block the CYP3A4 enzymes, which reduces the enzyme's ability to break down and metabolize medications, resulting in higher blood levels of the drug...which in turn can lead to new or worsening side effects. So, it's quite often recommended to avoid grapefruit or grapefruit juice when taking many medications. \n",
"I remember listening to Michael Savage around 2002ish and he started in on a rant about this. Something about since the doctors said not eat grape fruit with his medicine that meant he could just skip the medicine and eat the grapefruit for the same effect.\n\nThat's when I stopped listening to Michael Savage.",
"Since I dont see any simple answers and I was on coumadin for many years, I'll take a stab at it. \n\nMost medications are food-friendly. But food is also a mix of chemicals, just like medicine. Coumadin is special because it doesn't want to be friends with a lot of different foods. People that take coumadin have to be on strict diets so that the coumadin stays at happy levels in their system since its job is to make your blood thickness just right. ",
"Adding onto what others have said:\n\nIf you were consistently eating/drinking a certain amount of grapefruit or cranberry juice every day or every other day before being put on warfarin, you wouldn't have to stop. The dosage prescribed to you would be tailored to your specific intake of foods such as these and others containing vit K. If you did stop, however, you would need to consult your doctor and likely get a different prescription it's all relative with this drug. Consistency is key!",
"Just visited my grandparents-in-law. The grandpa eats grapefruit literally every single morning in a fruit salad and takes warfarin. Thanks Reddit. Eep!",
"Cranberries do not interfere with Warfarin, except possibly to cause some slight blood thinning like asparin could do. According to the cranberry institute, it is not included on medication warnings currently.\n\n_URL_0_\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_2_\n",
"The question has already been answered but I got a story you might appreciate. This summer I was in a lodge in the mountains a few weeks after having a pretty serious surgery. Was on hydro and some other stuff and unknowingly downed a few glasses of grapefruit juice. Can confirm was high as a butterfly.",
"Your question has been answered pretty well, but I thought I'd chime in... I've been on warfarin for almost 5 years. I have a genetic clotting disorder; about 1/3 of my extended family has the same thing. Which is all awful!\n\nBut I think others in the thread have made warfarin sound worse than it is. I barely even think about it anymore. Every day I have the same amount of vitamin K by measuring out some broccoli on a food scale. This is second nature to me now and takes no extra time. (It's also helpful for counting calories w/ other foods.) I know (roughly) the translation of that amount of broccoli to other common vitamin K greens like lettuce, and I know the foods to completely avoid (kale is ridiculously high in K).\n\nBlood draws are also not an issue. I have a home testing machine that involves just pricking your finger. You barely feel it and you get the results near-instantaneously. My levels have been A-OK for the last 5 years.",
"There is a lot of misinformation in the responses to your post.\n\nGrapefruit contains a substance that inhibits the enzyme CYP3A4. This is found in the liver, but also in the gut. Most of the effect of grapefruit juice is actually because it stops the drug from being destroyed in your gut before your body can take it in. Usually the CYP3A4 in the liver isn't affected by grapefruit unless you eat a very large amount of it, so drugs aren't broken down slower and drugs that are injected are fine.\n\nBut very little warfarin is broken down by CYP3A4, so you can drink three glasses a day of grapefruit juice and it won't matter.\n\nCranberries may affect warfarin by inhibiting a similar enzyme called CYP2C9 (which is much more important for breaking down warfarin). But this is mostly suggested by individual case reports of people who said they started drinking cranberry juice before their INR went up, and most actual clinical studies haven't shown any effect.",
"I am looking to start daily dosing CBD (Cannabidiol) for its numerous beneficial effects, however it is a potent Cytochrome P450 inhibitor for a number of CYP enzymes. There doesn't seem to be much literature online on long-term use of CBD and how having inhibited enzyme levels might affect one's health.\n\nAny med students/professionals in here have any insight on having inhibited CYP enzymes and its effect on health in the long-term? It seems that other medications intended to be used long-term are also CYP inhibitors.. \n",
"Also, Warfarin belongs to group known as \"Vitamin K antagonists\", meaning they counter the effect of vitamin K, which is necessary for proper formation of blood clotting agents. Adding more vitamin K in your diet than normally means you can lessen the effectivity of Warfarin, meaning you are at higher risk of whatever you use it against.",
"There are several things you should not eat while taking Warfarin. Green, leafy vegetables contain vitamin K, which promotes blood clotting - effectively neutralizing the Warfarin. Then at the next check, your blood is too thick, then you stop eating greens and you are now taking too much Warfarin.\n\nI looked up an article about warfarin and grapefruit. Although the article said there were interactions with warfarin, it did not say what they were (in any form I could understand). What it did say was that drinking 50 oz of grapefruit juice a day did cause problems, 24 oz daily did not.\n\nReally… 3 pints? Even 1.5 pints of grapefruit juice is ridiculous. So unless you are living on grapefruit juice, it seems you are OK.\n\nAnd cranberries are no longer considered a problem.\n",
"Actual ELI5: grapefruits and cranberries slow down how quickly warfarin is broken down. Too much warfarin leads to bleeding in your brain (and every where else).\n\nSide note: if you always eat the exact same amount of grapefruit when you are getting your levels checked, that should be fine.",
"An old pharmacy joke is \"If you take Viagra with grapefruit juice you could be up all night.\"\nPlease don't do this. The concept in this joke is that grapefruit blocks clearance of the drug. But it can lead to unpredictable effects. ",
"The long and short of it is imagine a drug is a tetris block floating around in your body, looking for other blocks to connect to. Our bodies release enzymes that search these blocks out and either break them apart so they don't fit anymore, or attach to the blocks to make them too large to fit. When you eat grapefruit or drink it's juice, it interferes with our bodies ability to break down or render safe these drugs. It slows down the rate at which we can break those tetris blocks down or grab onto them to make them too big to fit. So the drug stays in our body much longer than it should, leading to a higher overall dose of the drug. \n\n\n\nWhat happens to a drug once we take it? Why doesn't it just stay in our bodies forever and why does it wear off? The answer is that it is because our bodies metabolize and break the drug down into simpler and simpler chemicals and eventually the left overs are flushed from our bodies; usually by the kidneys. Most of the enzymes our body uses to do this come from the liver which you can think of as a kind of antidote dispense for any poison. Chocolate, Coffee, and Cigarettes all contain poisons that kill insects, yet when we imbibe them we don't get sick. It's all thanks to our liver giving us the enzyme antidote. \n\nWhen you eat or drink certain foods like grapefruit there are chemicals in it that interfere with the work the liver does. It greatly slows down the time it takes for a drug to be broken down and removed from the body. This in turn causes the serum levels of many subsequent drugs we take, to be much higher than normal because the body cannot break them down and expel them as fast as usual. ",
"Most xenobiotics (medicines) are broken down by a system of enzymes in the liver called cytochromes. There are many variations of cytochromes. These are responsible for breaking down medicines in to different parts, some of which are active or more active than the medicine taken. Others become inactive. Certain foods or drink can either inhibit or induce these cytochromes and this can lead to an increase in the medicines matabolism or a decrease. This can cause issues as most medicines have a therapeutic window in which the drug is clinically active and levels above can increase the incident of side effects and below the window the dose would be sub-teraputic. If the medicine is blocked from being broken down then dangerous levels can accumulate. ",
"One of my antidepressants can't be taken with grapefruit so I did some investigating (as it's one of my favourite fruits). I found this and thought it was really clear:\n\n_URL_0_",
"Be mindful of eating too much spinach! My mom was taking Warfarin for awhile and had too much iron in her blood, which the doctors attributed to her eating too much spinach (she would make these smoothies every morning with like 4 cups of spinach). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.ihtc.org/patient/blood-disorders/clotting-disorders/coumadin-interactions-with-food/"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cranberryinstitute.org/HCP/New%20The%20Evidence%20for%20the%20Safe%20Consumption%20of%20Cranberries%20with%20Warfarin%20TherapyF.pdf",
"http://www.livestrong.com/article/449375-why-can-you-not-take-cranberry-juice-when-taking-warfarin/",
"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17919554"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Nxne8QfIhM"
],
[]
] |
||
1z6g4o | how does covering your mouth and nose with simple cloth work as a filter? | i.e. pulling your shirt up over your nose. I would think most stuff you can breathe in would be too microscopic for it to work. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z6g4o/eli5_how_does_covering_your_mouth_and_nose_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfqx9ta",
"cfr1wm6"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"Think of the cloth like a maze. Yes the particles can get through, but it isn't a straight shot.",
"It will not stop actual pathogens (Bacteria and Viruses) but will stop droplets of mucus which are saturated with these pathogens from reaching other people. (however the biggest factor in pathogen transfer is touching a contaminated surface, which is why hand washing is critical)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2kqu3m | why are medical professionals so against being quarantined after possibly being exposed to ebola? | I understand that people don't want to be immediately shoved into a plastic cage upon returning from doing aid work in an infected country, but I don't see what the issue is with being quarantined in a dedicated hospital room or in their own home. Before you tell me that they don't need to be quarantined if they don't show symptoms because they're not contagious, I know that. However, the cases that have occurred in the US have been due to a failure in protocol, not some sort of unstoppable mutation, so I feel like it would make sense to make the safety measures more strict to remove the possibility of infection. There's just so much than can go wrong if you allow people to use their best judgement when it comes to interacting with society if there's the possibility of spreading the virus. (As it is, somebody that had the disease boarded an airplane.) As medical professionals, I would feel that they understand the benefit of a quarantine, and would respect it, so then it must be me who is missing something in their opposition to it.
Final clarifications: I'm not some paranoid fearmonger, and I'm not worried that I'm going to contract Ebola tomorrow. I do, however, feel like it's not going to magically disappear and we should be very strict about how we handle it until it's eradicated from the US (and ideally under control in the rest of the world as well). Additionally, I want to emphasize that I'm not supporting some sort of human-rights-infringing, you're-basically-going-to-jail-so-that-you-don't-move type of deal, just some sort of setup where people who may have Ebola have to remain in one location (ie: their home) for the required length of time. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kqu3m/eli5_why_are_medical_professionals_so_against/ | {
"a_id": [
"clnuk2h",
"clnv6pm",
"clnv947",
"clnwja5",
"clnxa3k"
],
"score": [
3,
6,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"The biggest problem for the current batch is that they weren't expecting the quarantine. Probably really throws a wrench in their scheduled plans.",
"A quarantine is a good idea for diseases that can be spread by someone who is not showing symptoms. When you don't know whether someone may be contagious, it makes sense to keep them away from other people. But Ebola can only be spread by a person who is showing symptoms, and the symptoms are not subtle.\n\nEvery single person who has developed Ebola symptoms in the United States caught the disease while caring for someone who was exhibiting the full symptoms. The original Dallas case was so problematic because when the patient first developed symptoms, the doctors who examined him did not know that he had been caring for an Ebola sufferer. A quarantine would not have prevented the subsequent infections because he would not have been quarantined, and more to the point because he was in practice confined to a bed anyway when the nurses were infected.",
"I think when free people lose autonomy, no matter the reason it sets off an instinct to fight even if reasonable. Who know maybe if it was worse and there was more spread they wouldn't mind as much. The thing that sucks is both arguments for the reasonable quarantine and the issue of not being a forced prisoner are right. Neither are wrong when it comes to the material. Too bad we can't just all be adults and find middle ground. :)",
"Most medical professional are fine following the quarantine standards set out by a expert medical organization, like the CDC.\n\nThey are objecting to politicians freaking out and passing laws without input from the medical community. ",
"There is no benefit to early quarantine. Ebola is easy to recognize before any virus leaves the host body. Ebola has non-contagious symptoms (flu like fever, feeling ill) prior to having contagious symptoms (bleeding, vomiting, diarrhea) and progressively becomes more contagious (releases more virus). This is unlike the flu which has is contagious **before** the first symptoms start and are **most** **contagious** 2-3 days after first symptoms ([wiki](_URL_0_)). Also, to infect another person Ebola must travel out of the infected cells into the surrounding environment. Ebola primarily produces more virus in [the liver, some types of immune cells, and the walls of blood vessels](_URL_1_). What do all of these have in common? They are truly inside the body (could not be accessed without breaking the skin or gut lining), unlike the flu which affects the lungs, MRSA which grows on the skin or in the nose, or e.coli which grows inside the intestines. Ebola's transmission route initially would likely be very similar to HIV or hepatitis, needles, mucous membrane contact/body fluid exchange, but not casual contact, making Ebola effectively a blood born virus for the pre-symptomatic period. \n\nQuarantine is effective for stopping a person who doesn't know they are shedding virus from spreading the virus. Ebola, on the other hand, gives early warning while the virus is still safely locked inside the body. Any possible benefit from quarantine is statistically insignificant, and medical personnel respect statistics not rhetoric. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza#Transmission",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease#Pathophysiology"
]
] |
|
2e223g | what is "latency" and how does it affect my internet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2e223g/eli5_what_is_latency_and_how_does_it_affect_my/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjvbb3n",
"cjvbbja",
"cjvfagm"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"latency is the speed that two parties can 'talk' to each other at, read in ms (milliseconds). The higher the latency, the less reactive your internet experience. Online gaming is the best example of this. \n",
"Latency is basically the amount of time it takes for you to send data & receive a response from whatever server you're trying to reach, typically measured in milliseconds. Ideally, you want as low latency as you can get, especially in online games like WoW.",
"Imagine having a conversation with a person. How long it takes to reply to a question is the latency. How fast they deliver the reply after the pause is the speed. \nSo if you have the question \"How are you?\" \nHigh Latency - Low Speed: ... ... .... \"I'm.. Fine\" \nHigh Latency - High speed: ... ... ... \"I'm fine\" \nLow Latency - Low Speed: \"I'm... Fine\" \nLow Latency - High Speed: \"I'm fine\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cunn05 | what is the end-game of a trade war? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cunn05/eli5_what_is_the_endgame_of_a_trade_war/ | {
"a_id": [
"exw7a8o"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"Countries have trade agreements with each other that dictate the terms under which they can do business with each other. In general, more open trade tends to be more beneficial for both parties, but you can have specific agreements which benefit one party over the over in some respects.\n\nA trade war is essentially a back and forth exchanges where two countries make their own trade policies worse for the other, usually also at their own expense to some extent, in hopes that the economic losses the other country sustains as a result will get them to agree to a deal that is more favorable to you than to them.\n\nThe trade war ends when one or both parties cave to the pressure of their economies being damaged and come to the negotiating table willing to work out a deal that is more beneficial to everyone than the current trade war.\n\nUp until that point, it’s mostly a giant game of chicken as each side tries to hold out longer than the other in the face of a worse economy in the hope that the end result will ultimately be a better economic situation than they started with."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4vvsjn | what is the "science" that is being shown in this xkcd comic? | [Here's the comic](_URL_0_). What is this referring to and what's being proven/demonstrated? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vvsjn/eli5_what_is_the_science_that_is_being_shown_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"d61tp18",
"d629l33",
"d62g1i5",
"d62hqfu"
],
"score": [
189,
130,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"It's the theoretical spectral graph of blackbody radiation of an object at around 2.7 K, as per Planck's Law. It's special because it was at around this temperature that the Universe had cooled sufficiently after the Big Bang to release photons, around 13.8ish billion years ago.\n\nLo and behold, when we found the Cosmic Background Radiation and graphed its energy density with respect to the frequency of its light, it aligned perfectly with what Planck's Law said it would for such an object, complete with the peak at 160.4 GHz.\n\nIn short, a simple physical law, together with observation of phenomenon, is used as substantial proof for something (in this case, the Big Bang occurring). This is the essence of Science.",
"There is this law of physics that says hot objects emit hot light, and that cold objects emit cold light.\n\n\nThis comic is a drawing which represents very very cold light. How cold ? 2.7 K / -270.45 °C /\n-454.81 °F . That's really cold! But where is this cold light coming from, and why is it so\ninteresting? Well, this cold light is the light that is coming from the night sky. Not the stars,\nbut the blackness inbetween the stars. In fact, it is because it is so cold that it seems black to \nour eyes. Our eyes can't really see light that is colder than 600°C/1000°F, so we need to build\nbig telescopes to help us see this cold light.\n\n\nYou might have heard that looking at light from very far is the same as looking at light that was emitted\nvery long ago : this is because light does not move instantly, but only very fast. This means that if you \nare looking very far into the universe, it will have taken light quite a while to reach us. Another thing \nthat happens to light on this trip is that it gets tired, and when light gets tired it becomes colder.\nThis means that when we look at light from very far, it is quite a bit colder than it was when it was emitted.\n\n\nNow, why is this light interesting, and where did it come from? Well, it is interesting because it relates\nto the theory of the big bang. The theory of the big bang says that the universe began very hot and small,\nand as time went on it became bigger and colder.\n\n\nNow what you need to know is that in a very hot universe, light can not easily move around and everything\nis very opaque. There is a very special temperature of about 4000 °C / 7000 °F at which the universe suddenly\nbecomes transparent, and light can move freely. When the universe cooled down to that temperature, a lot of light\ncould suddenly move around freely, so freely that it could travel for billions of years, all the way to us today!\n\n\nThis first light emitted after the universe became transparent is what scientists call the Cosmic Microwave Background,\nand it is the light depicted in the comic. But wait, the light in the comic is very cold, while this first light\nwas emitted at 4000°C / 7000°F! This is because this light has travelled very far to reach us: almost from the beginning\nof the universe, and it is very tired once it arrives to us.\n\n\nThe temperature of this light is important because before scientists were sure that the big bang theory was right,\nthey did some calculations and predicted that if the big bang theory was right,\n the light of the night sky should have exactly this temperature of 2.7 K. And when they measured it, it did, and that was \na big confirmation that the theory was good.",
"If you ever miss a reference or don't get what the comic is about, this site might help. [Here](_URL_0_) is an explanation for #54. \n\nAlso it transcribes hover text which doesn't work on my mobile device from the main site.",
"I might be wrong on this, but I was taught a different explanation in Physical Chemistry 2 years ago of this same image.\n\nIt had to do with the inability of classical physics to explain black body radiation because classical physics allows energy to be continuous. Under the assumption that energy transitions are continuous, there is no way to build an equation that accurately predicts the real-life collected data on blackbody radiation.\n\nAfter years of failure by the scientific community to build an equation that predicts blackbody radiation, Planck tried something radical, he made the assumption that energy is NOT CONTINUOUS. But is instead is QUANTIZED. Using the currently understood priciples of the relation of energy and heat of the time, in combination of his assumption that energy must be quantized and not continuous, he build Planck's law of blackbody radiation.\n\nThe individual dots you see in the graph is the collected observed data from a real blackbody source. The graphed line is the prediction given by Planck's equation, and you see that it matches the observed data set, thus Quantum physics was born.\n\nPlease don't down vote, this explanation I was given years ago while I was in undergrad, and I know that it doesn't match the explainxkcd page."
]
} | [] | [
"https://xkcd.com/54/"
] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/54:_Science"
],
[]
] |
|
33wwai | why can we not see the source code of a compiled program? | I've always wondered why we cannot see the source code of a program such as a compiled .exe file.
I mean, to make the program you need to write the code, so if the program runs the code how can we not see what is being run if the program knows what to do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/33wwai/eli5_why_can_we_not_see_the_source_code_of_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqp3y8b",
"cqp5tqq",
"cqpdtsd"
],
"score": [
13,
6,
2
],
"text": [
"There are two types of language, those that are interpreted and those that are compiled. The term *compiled* refers the turning the high-level human-readable programme language into a low-level computer-executable language at a point before the programme is executed. In the case of an interpreted language , this conversion is done in real time when the programme is executed. \n\nThus, for compiled programmes, you, the user, only sees the low level computer-executable language. The original programme might be in any number of high-level languages, in some cases several high-level languages at the same time. \n\nIt is possible to decompile a compile executable into a high-level language, but the results are often messy and hard to read. \n\nDoes this answer your question? ",
"Putting aside decompilion for a moment, of course you can see \"the code\". Not the source code, but the code as your computer sees it. It has to be there, and for the reason you touch on: the computer has to know what to do. It's not hidden or secret (it can't be), just in a format that is not easy for humans to read. You *can* read the code in its plain form though, if you learn the structure of executables and of machine code (since you mentioned .exe, most likely x86 or x64 machine code). That is hard, so there are tools that let you explore the structure of an executable and/or convert the machine code into more human-readable assembly code. For example CFF Explorer or PE Explorer. There are some more advanced tools that go deeper with their analysis and so \"help you more\", for example IDA.\n\nActual decompilation to a higher level language is not a very mature field. It can be done well for some languages that do not compile to machine code (for example Java or C#), but for native languages what you usually get is a great mess. It can be improved significantly I'm sure, but you will never get the actual source code, for reasons listed elsewhere in this thread.",
"You cannot, even in theory, get the *original* source code of an executable program. \n\nThe most obvious and significant reason for this is that most identifiers are not stored in the executable file (those that are stored are used for debugging and may not be present in the final build).\n\nIn addition, compilers apply numerous optimizations such as constant folding during the compilation process so code like:\n\n const int x=2+4;\n const int y=x*2;\n printf(\"%d\\n\",y);\n\nwould be expected to produce exactly the same machine code. In a similar vein, use of macros or other metaprogramming facilities may result in entire chunks of code not being represented in the final executable, because they are only seen at compile time.\n\nEven the task of finding *a* valid representation of the executable code in a high level language is a very difficult task, much harder than compilation, because the decompiler must rather than simply transforming high level constructs into equivalent machine code, the decompiler must infer what constructs could have led to the generation of a particular piece of code. Consider the task of attempting to determine the correct datatype for a given variable - all you see from the machine code is that this variable is so many bytes long, so if you want to know if it's a float or an int you need to go and find some code that operates on it and try to eliminate possibilities based on what you see being done with it. If you want to decompile a large program and get meaningful code out of it, you are probably going to have to do it by hand.\n\nFor *some* languages, very effective decompilers are available. This is usually because those languages do not compile to machine code, but to some intermediate representation which is usually high level and contains metadata which helps to reconstruct the original source code. I know that for .NET executables [ILSpy](_URL_0_) does a very good job of decompilation - even recovering identifiers if they have not been stripped/obfuscated."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://ilspy.net/"
]
] |
|
2henpw | what happened to ancient roman polytheism? | I know that before Christianity, we had Judaism and such, but what happened to completely phase out such a major religion like Polytheism? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2henpw/eli5what_happened_to_ancient_roman_polytheism/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckryu1u",
"cks09ej"
],
"score": [
2,
7
],
"text": [
"Sorry, not a complete answer, but a language correction: polytheism means \"more than one god\", and applies to many many different religions (Norse, Greek and Hindu are other examples). \n\n",
"It all went on remarkably fast.\n\nIn 311 Galerius issued the [Edict of Toleration](_URL_6_) basically saying that - well - Christianity was tolerated, i.e. wouldn't be persecuted.\n\nIn 313 Constantine issued the [Edit of Milan](_URL_4_), where he went a little bit further, saying that Christianity (and all other religions, btw) weren't simply \"tolerated\" but somehow had a RIGHT to worship their deities, have their temples/churches etc.\n\nThen, the problems arose: DIFFERENT CHRISTIANITIES. Arianism was a great success, against the Nicene Christianity. And boy, they hated each other! This even risked causing civil wars. \n\nEmperor [Julian](_URL_2_), for example, returned to Classical religion, declared himself an \"Hellene\", meaning \"a guy who observed the good old Roman - Hellenistic religion\". See _URL_5_ . (Greek and Roman religion was practically a single thing by then, as the two cultures were VERY intermixed and what we consider the \"Roman\" Empire was basically a bilingual empire) \n\nJulian was basically quite tolerant and syncretist, what he could not stand was the Christians' belief that their religion (actually their VARIANT of their religion) was the true and only religion, \n\n > But Julian’s religious open-mindedness did not extend to Christianity due to its belief that it had an exclusive perspective on religious truth. Seeing itself as the only true religion, Christianity was opposed to, and fundamentally incompatible with, the more inclusive syncretism of paganism ( _URL_1_ )\n\nThat's why he is fondly remembered as \"Julian the Apostate\" by Christians of later centuries ! \n\nHis attempt failed, and his successor went back to Christianity, immediately ordering things like burning libraries etc.\n\nWhen the [Edict of Thessalonica](_URL_3_) was issued in 382, where it was ordered the all Roman subjects to subject to Nicene Christianity, it was mainly intended to stifle inter-christian rivality\n\nThen, things went downhill for the Pagans, in good part for the influence of St. Ambrose, the powerful Bishop of Milan. A symbolic act was the removal of the Altar of Victory (Victory being a Pagan goddess) from the Roman Senate, removed under the influence of Ambrose. What followed is illuminating:\n\n > Pagan Senators responded by sending an appeal to Gratian, reminding him that he was still the Pontifex Maximus and that it was his duty to see that the Pagan rites were properly performed. They appealed to Gratian to restore the altar of Victory and the rights and privileges of the Vestal Virgins and priestly colleges. Gratian, at the urging of Ambrose, did not grant an audience to the Pagan Senators. In response to being reminded by the Pagans that he was still the head of the ancestral religion, Gratian renounced the title and office of Pontifex Maximus under the influence of Ambrose, declaring that it was unsuitable for a Christian to hold this office.\n\nTo make it clearer, being \"Pontifex Maximus\" was a very important title for the emperor, making him the highest priest, i.e. the head of Pagan Religion. The fact that the \"Imperator\" (commander-in-chief of the armies) was also \"Pontifex Maximus\" was symbolically very important for the ancient Romans.\n\nThe demise of Classical religion was almost complete. In 389-391Theodosius issued a series of [decrees](_URL_7_) practically outlawing Pagan worship (people were forbidden to go to temples, temples were closed etc.)\n\nSome parts of the Empire were still strongly Pagan, and this led to several riots and rebellions. One of them is particularly interesting, when [Eugenius](_URL_0_) was nominated emperor in the West, while Theodosius was emperor in the East (having two emperors at a time was quite common in those times) Eugenius, himself a Christian, expressely declared he would be tollerant of Paganism, and restored the Altar of Victory, in order to gain support from his subjects.\n\nTheodosius did not accept him as a co-emperor, defeated him and beheaded him. The persecutions of Paganism resumed everywhere.\n\nIn 393, the last Olympic games were held. Official Classical religion was dead.\n\nIt did survive for longer in \"underground\" forms, especially in the countryside (that's when it started being called \"Paganism\", as a Pagus is a small village), but then again it definitely can't be called the \"Roman\" or \"Classical\" religion any more.\n\n\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenius",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Greco-Roman_polytheism#Julian_the_Apostate",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_%28emperor%29",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Thessalonica",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great_and_Christianity#Edict_of_Milan",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_Greeks#Hellene_comes_to_mean_.22pagan.22",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Toleration_by_Galerius",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_persecution_of_paganism_under_Theodosius_I#Theodosian_decrees_.28389.E2.80.93391.29"
]
] |
|
3kasfp | why is the 3.5" floppy disk still being used as the save icon in programs? hasn't an entire generation now been raised that has never seen, used or had knowledge of a floppy disk? | Wouldn't an icon of a usb thumbdrive, SD card, external HD be more appropriate and culturally relevant? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3kasfp/eli5why_is_the_35_floppy_disk_still_being_used_as/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuw22oo",
"cuw22qr",
"cuw25d5",
"cuw27uv",
"cuw2ej4",
"cuw2flo",
"cuw2h63",
"cuw3rsq",
"cuwaeaa",
"cuwgo04",
"cuwkhej",
"cuwm9ah",
"cuwpb81"
],
"score": [
91,
5,
3,
22,
11,
42,
24,
5,
4,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"That same entire generation you speak of has been raised with the knowledge that a floppy disk icon = save. \n\nPlus if you intend to change universally accepted icons or practices for that matter you will likely run into a lot of resistance. Look what happened when Microsoft tried to \"update\" the start button.",
"An entire generation is coming up that has never actually seen a floppy drive, sure, but they've been raised associating that icon with saving. The association with the action is more important than the association with the physical object. We've been using that icon long after computers had more storage options than just a floppy, while floppies were still king, and there was no need to update the icon then to something more abstract... And if we change the icon now, everyone will have to learn a new association, and that means a lot of bitching about whether it's a good idea or not, why bother, what was wrong with the old icon, why this new icon or that new icon...",
"What does a usb thumbdrive look like? I have 27 of them and some share a vague shape, but not anything iconic. An SD card is a lot less prevalent, they get shoved inside a phone or a camera and you never see them again. An external HDD is just a small rectangle. \n\nThe 3.5 floppy as a save icon has been around forever. Millions of people now have no idea what it means, other than \"that's the button I hit to save.\" It's not \"broken\" so no one's \"fixed\" it yet. ",
"Yeah! And why do we still use arrows to point to things? Does anybody even *use* bows anymore, now that we have guns and stuff?",
"The iMac came out in 1998 without a floppy drive, Dell stopped including floppy disks as a standard in 2003. HP discontinued them as a standard option in 2009.\n\nSo not quite a generation yet.\n\n > Wouldn't an icon of a usb thumbdrive, SD card, external HD be more appropriate and culturally relevant?\n\nAnd what exactly does a USB thumbdrive look like? And how are they different than a bluetooth or wifi dongle?\n\nA 3.5 floppy might be obsoletely, but it is *distinctive*, and everyone knows what that icon means.",
"Copying from a previous post of mine:\n\nA floppy disk makes a perfect save icon. The fact that floppy disks are obsolete only increases the perfection. I get irrationally angry when people start calling for it to be modernized since that's a step to actively make the icon worse. \n\nThink about what you want in an icon: it should be simple, easily recognizable, and should be universal. As a distant fourth it should also evoke an imagery of the thing that the icon corresponds with. Take the standard buttons on music players—triangle for play, square for stop, two rectangles for a pause. Does a square look like stopping? NO! But it's a perfect icon because you've seen the same icon used repeatedly on every music player. It's a simple, easily recognizable, universal icon, and there's no reason to change it to an octagon to try to evoke imagery of a stop sign.\n\nThe save icon is in the same boat. It's a simple icon—blue floppy disk—which can easily be recognized in any program, and it's nearly universal. Some idiot designers are trying to fuck with this, though, so you're starting to see nonsense like a [down arrow pointing at a hard drive](_URL_1_). Now you've got an icon that is more complex—it's hard to draw a convincing hard drive when you've only got a few pixels to work with, so it becomes less recognizable. Also, it throws the whole icon into upheaval as people move away from the established standard, so you no longer have universal icons.\n\nBut what about the imagery being evoked? Saving is no longer done to 3.5\" floppies! Who cares? This just means there's less chance for confusion. You won't think that the button is doing something crazy with a floppy disk if you don't realize what floppy disks are. You just learn that the little blue square means save and you're done. The people who happen to know what a hard drive looks like will already know that a hard drive is *not* the proper icon for \"save.\" The people who don't know what a hard drive looks like will not get any more help from a hard drive icon than a floppy disk icon. Meanwhile, the downward-facing arrow is increasingly associated with downloading, so this particular icon is even worse.\n\nOpen Office played with the hard drive briefly but heard the voice of reason. Libre Office switched to the hard drive icon despite a lot of outcry from the community because some big-headed developer with a lot of power in that community pushed the decision through.\n\nTL;DR: Making a new save icon makes as much sense as if the first frame of [this](_URL_0_) xkcd started with \"there is one universally accepted standard.\" ",
"The thing OP fails to take into account is that the same generation that has never seen a floppy disk will recognize the icon as the Save icon. Were they to see an actual 3.5\" floppy dick they'll think that someone 3D printed the save icon.",
"Same could be asked about many icons. \n\nThe hourglass \"wait\" icon is my favorite example. Most kids don't know what an hourglass is. \n\nClipboard, speaker (volume), envelope (mail), \"slide\" (presentation page), file folder, even the camera.",
"As for why a thumbdrive, SD card, or external harddrive isn't used as an icon, all of those technologies are either too ambiguous or because hilariously outdated long before floppies did (length of time, not temporary space). Seriously. Who uses thumbdrives anymore except me when you can email or store large files using cloud services or other file exchanges? Who ever saved anything on a full sized SD card except when using a digital camera? And it took years for SD to win the war, only to be immediately pushed aside by Micro SD (which is even now losing ground) and then cloud storage. For an external drive, well, can you describe a universal shape for one? Nope. There is no standardization among the look of most external hardware, rendering any symbolic representation ineffective and confusing.\n\nBasically, floppies were around long enough to become cemented into popular consciousness, and children who've never seen them before know what the icon means. Like seeing a picture of a telephone or or a film strip, we just know what these things mean even though they've fallen out of use, and they've been around for so long that their knowledge and influence persists long after that technology became obsolete.",
"What about those people who save their files onto a ram-disk, tape, DVDs, CDs, or networked storage with indeterminate permanent backend storage. For that matter, if you had a picture of a single hard drive, but the user had a RAID setup, they would get mighty confused because they want that data mirrored across multiple hard drives, but the picture only indicates a single one.\n\nThe only sane solution is to come up with thousands of save icons, and display the correct one for every occasion.\n",
"More people are familiar with floppy disks than not. This probably isn't true of the younger generations, but it is of the rest of the population.",
"The same reason that a bug is still called a bug, although the name comes from the very first \"bug\", which was a bug (as in the insect) who found it's way into the computer, causing errors.",
" > entire generation\n\nI think this might be a little bit of an exaggeration. I'm 22, pretty young, and I still remember using floppy discs. Maybe 14-15 year olds don't know what they are (I feel like that's generous), but I do not think the concept of the floppy disk is as archaic as you think."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://xkcd.com/927/",
"http://www.iconattitude.com/icons/open_icon_library/actions/png/256/document-save-3.png"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3ggy62 | why do heavy elements, such as gold, appear to be concentrated in particular parts of the earth's crust and not distributed evenly throughout? | (I posted this a few days ago on AskScience but got nothing. Maybe someone here can help.)
As I understand it, the all the heavy elements that we see in the universe are created inside stars. The incredible pressures and temperatures within the core of a star enables elements to fuse together. The huge explosion that signals the end of a star's life releases the heavy elements into the universe. Some of it eventually coalesces to form planets such as Earth.
So, why then are the constituent parts of Earth not more uniformly distributed? The exploding stars would surely result in this, no? I understand that the Earth is about 4 billion years old and, in that time, plate tectonics have reshaped its crust. However, I don't understand why some elements appear to be more common in certain regions and less so in others. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ggy62/eli5_why_do_heavy_elements_such_as_gold_appear_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctxztgo",
"cty0bmu",
"cty6gon"
],
"score": [
2,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"A rocky planet doesn't coalesce from space dust, it takes a very long time but asteroids and planetoids keep colliding and jostling until a body with enough gravity to make it spherical forms. \n\nBecause of all this colliding, asteroids with different elemental makeups end up depositing different elements into different parts of the crust. ",
"I may be wrong, but I always thought it was due to the fact that most of the material in the crust was once molten. When materials melt, the differences in density would tend to separate them into layers, leaving it grouped by density when it cools.",
"If you compare it do diamonds, they are reasonably similar in how they reach the upper crust. Diamonds are largely found in the solidified magma upflows from hotspots or volcanoes. They form many miles below the surface, and the liquid magma that rises carries them toward the surface. Erosion usually provides the first hint of their location. \nGold is estimated to be 1% of the earth's central layers. It is also largely carried to the surface through magma flows. Because magma vents and volcano locations change over time as plates shift, the deposits of mineral-rich lava flows are dispersed in places that may not seem logical now, but at the time would appear obvious. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
42p2s2 | why society accepts women wearing trousers, while men can not wear skirts (unless they are traditional clothing) (also, no pun intended, i really would like to know the logic) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/42p2s2/eli5_why_society_accepts_women_wearing_trousers/ | {
"a_id": [
"czbz8s2",
"czbzujl",
"czbzw8u",
"czcmm6b"
],
"score": [
7,
45,
11,
4
],
"text": [
"theres no reason, its just culture, why dont you wear a skirt? \n\nno one would stop you, be a trend setter.",
"There is no special reason why men couldn't wear \"skirts\" or \"dresses\" - a kilt is basically a skirt, the traditional gear many ancient peoples wore into battle was basically a skirt, what we call \"robes\" are basically dresses. (And in some languages, a woman's dress is still called a \"robe\".) Men's kilts/robes would, of course, be in a different fashion, as men's fashions and women's fashions invariably are.\n\nThe ultimate reason why *women* wear trousers goes back to a deeper question: why do all *men* wear trousers? The answer is that trousers are a vast improvement over robes/skirts for two things. The first is riding horses. The second is heavy manual work in which a robe would likely get muddy or stuck on tools/machinery. To simplify a long story, you had a surprising alliance of enemies. Aristocrats wore pants, first, because they actually were riding a lot, either for hunting or war; second, because they had gotten used to it; third, because even if they weren't actually hunters or soldiers, they wanted to *imply* that they were. And rich people who wished they were aristocrats adopted their fashions. But at the same time, middle-class merchants who disliked aristocrats and hated vanity made a point of wearing simple, decent clothes, the same kind a workman would be able to afford. And that meant - even for a merchant who did not do much manual labor - wearing pants. (It also meant dark colors that don't stain, which we still wear to this day.) So if you wanted to be an aristocrat, you had to dress in pants; and if you wanted to be a proud member of the middle class, you had to dress in pants; and so soon enough, all men were wearing pants and it just became the normal thing for men.\n\nLater, at the time of the first suffragettes, part of what people found funny about the idea that men and women were equal was the crazy image of women doing the things men do in some sort of dress. That would, in fact, be impractical; but some of the suffragettes came back with the idea that they could wear a sort of pants, too. So some women started wearing pants as a political/fashion statement. Then, with more gender equality, they started wearing pants for jobs that required pants. It started to seem practical to dress little children in pants sometimes (whereas before, both boys and girls were often kept in dresses at a very young age). The next step was for pants-wearing to become increasingly common and casual.\n\nSo what happened wasn't the emergence of a special ban on men wearing skirts/dresses; rather, after an earlier period in which trousers became a particularly male form of dress, women started wearing them too, without there ever being any mirror-process which encouraged men to wear dresses (unless we count crossdressers, perhaps?).",
"Misogyny. It is considered admirable for a woman to be like a guy. Guys would be debasing themselves to become like a woman. The unspoken assumption being that men are better than women. \n\nIt's changing for the better right now, but society still clings to traditional values. ",
"It used to be unacceptable for women to wear trousers. Then that gradually changed over the years as a part of the greater struggle for gender equality. There hasn't been a similar movement for male rights, because men haven't had the same large historical disadvantages as women."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
8z69zz | why do retailers charge $2.99 instead of say, $3.00 flat? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8z69zz/eli5_why_do_retailers_charge_299_instead_of_say/ | {
"a_id": [
"e2ge6dv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A form of marketing since people would focus on the 2 instead of 3 and feel they got it for cheaper when in essence it is of relatively same value. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
24vt65 | how come i can stream hd video instantly, but if i want to look at an image or a gif from imgur, for example, i have time to raise a small family while i wait? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24vt65/eli5_how_come_i_can_stream_hd_video_instantly_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"chb4vqf",
"chb54fj"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"_URL_0_\n\nBecause GIFs aren't compressed.",
"Videos, even in HD, are vastly more space-efficient than GIFs in most cases. A typical GIF lasting for about 5 seconds is at least 2 MB - the same amount of space could hold about 1 minute of video at the same resolution, if not higher. This is because of more advanced (and computationally more complex) encoding and decoding methods used to compress video.\n\nIn addition, when you request a large video it gets fed to you in small chunks. So you're getting a tiny portion of the video at once, rather than the whole thing. But with GIFs the entire file is sent at once - and because of the space inefficiency, the 1 MB you get of a video stream has a lot more content than the 1 MB you get from a GIF. And this is assuming both sites are equally powerful - in actuality, I'm sure streaming sites have far more resources than Imgur."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=gif+slow&restrict_sr=on"
],
[]
] |
||
1qtvx6 | why can't aids be cured with a vaccine | Vaccines to my understanding are just weak viruses, so why can't we inject a weak HIV virus so our inmune system fights it back? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qtvx6/eli5why_cant_aids_be_cured_with_a_vaccine/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdgf2aj",
"cdgfs01"
],
"score": [
4,
4
],
"text": [
"In order to make a vaccine in the first place, it has to be something your body can fight if exposed to a weakened, dead, or chemically similar substance. The reason a flu vaccine works is because we can naturally fight the flu, and giving it a \"practice run\" with a vaccine \"teaches\" your body how to fight the flu virus so you can defend against the real thing. Our bodies simply don't have the systems in place to combat a weakened version of HIV, that's why, if you contract HIV, you're put on, basically, massive doses of antivirals (like antibiotics, but for viruses) and if you ever stop taking them, the HIV fires right back up.\n\nThey have found some people with a natural immunity to HIV, although exactly *why* they're immune (Is there immune system different? Is the places where the virus attacks the cell different? Are the inner workings of their cells different so the virus can't take over?) is still somewhat of a head-scratcher.\n",
"There's a lot of misinformation in this comment section, so be careful. Our bodies are actually quite good at fighting off HIV, which is why people can live so long with it without any symptoms. The thing we can't do it kill it off completely. HIV effectively \"hides\" by infecting cells but not causing them to produce more HIV right away. It can hide for a long time, allowing our immune system to drop its guard. Then at some random time in the future, those cells start spitting out more HIV. So even if our bodies can kill off all of the active HIV, we're still infected. After all the active HIV is gone, our bodies stop their immune response, so a vaccine would essentially wear off. Then, the next time a sleeper cell wakes up, we'd be infected again. Eventually, the HIV beats the body's immune response, and that's when it becomes AIDS.\n\nHIV isn't the only virus that works this way. There are several others, including the Herpes viruses. There's actually someone trying right now to use a modified version of one of these other viruses (a harmless one) to create an HIV vaccine. The idea is that the modified virus would cause an immune response that also kills HIV. We'd end up perpetually infected with this harmless virus, but its presence would keep our bodies prepared to fight off HIV all the time. If it works without serious side-effects (a big if) then this would effectively be a vaccine."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
8bsknq | why did a bunch of spit droplets squirt out of the bottom of my tongue? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8bsknq/eli5_why_did_a_bunch_of_spit_droplets_squirt_out/ | {
"a_id": [
"dx99vqo",
"dx99w2q",
"dx99xqr",
"dx9iz2a",
"dx9l7mv",
"dx9lobq",
"dx9mxi1",
"dx9te4k",
"dx9ui9p",
"dx9xq2j",
"dx9y9l1"
],
"score": [
624,
3410,
429,
35,
2,
175,
4,
3,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You squirted it from your salivary glands. This is a trick that boys learn in school called gleeking (or glicking) where you can curl your tongue up against your top teeth or the roof of your mouth and an itty bitty squirt happens.",
"One of your main saliva glands sits under your tongue. When you yawned, it squeezed the gland and expelled the saliva stored in it.",
"There was an actual gland in fact, the sublingual gland. It's positioned between muscles of the floor of the mouth, so when they contract they sort of milk it.",
"This is known as Wharton's duct, the exit for submandibular salivary glands. We also have Stenson's ducts on our cheeks which are the exit point for the Parotid glands. ",
"That is where one of your saliva glands spits out. You have 3 different types, submandibular, parotid, and sublingual. Each one has different properties and a different port in your mouth.",
"\"Gleeking (also gleeting, gleeping, glitting, gleaking, glicking, glanding, geezing) is the projection of saliva from the submandibular gland upon compression by the tongue.\n\nIn general, gleeking occurs when an accumulation of saliva in the submandibular gland is propelled out in a stream when the gland is compressed by the tongue. The stream of saliva is released in the general direction of the front of the mouth. If the mouth is open the jet may project several feet. Gleeking is more likely when the salivary gland has been recently stimulated, but even a residual amount of saliva in the gland may be released by gleeking.\n\nGleeking may occur spontaneously due to accidental tongue pressure on the sublingual gland while talking, eating, yawning, or cleaning the teeth. Gleeking can also be induced, for instance, by pressing the underside of the tongue against the palate, then pushing the tongue forward while simultaneously closing the lower jaw and moving it slightly forward; or by yawning deeply and pressing the tongue against the palate. Practice is usually required to induce gleeking consistently, and induction is more likely to be successful under conditions of salivary stimulation (e.g. by certain types of food or biting your tongue).\"\n\nI always heard it called *geezing* growing up.",
"You have your spit producing thing under your tongue. If you move your tongue in a specific way it will let out some spit under relatively high pressure resulting in a spit squirt ",
"You pushed saliva from your submandibular* salary gland. You have 3 glands to be exact, sublingual, submandibular and parotid, they release saliva for ease of mastication, and for initial breakdown of starches as the bolus (chewed up glob of food) travels down the esophagus after deglutition. \n\nEdit: submandibular not sublingual ",
"I’m a dentist, and I get squirted in the face at least once per day by a patient when I look under their tongue during oral cancer screenings. Thank god for eye protection and masks. That ballsack under your tongue is called the sub lingual caruncle. It is the site in the mouth where the submandibular salivary gland empties into the oral cavity.",
"Your sublingual (underneath the tongue) salivary glands basically went off. They usually only secrete salvia when you see, think, or taste food. ",
"Two things:\n\n1) A salivary gland is under your tongue, so when you yawn, it lifted up your tongue slightly and squeezed it, expelling saliva.\n\n2) If you have an excess of saliva in your mouth, the expulsion of air during a yawn will sometimes cause some of it to fly out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3rv1gd | slow charging. is there a legitimate reason for this or is it something phone companies design into the phones? | Edit: I should clarify. When I don't use the original charger for my phone, I get a popup saying that it's gonna take longer to charge unless I use the original charger. Why? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3rv1gd/eli5_slow_charging_is_there_a_legitimate_reason/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwrlvw2"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"If you've bought a cheap charger, the phone has no way of knowing if the charger will regulate the power to the phone. So, instead of just giving it a try and either exploding or not, the phone tends to limit the power input itself to avoid becoming a burning mass of melting battery and plastic. If it's a slightly more expensive charger, or one that's certified, it's basically saying to the phone 'don't worry, dude, I'm not going to melt you like ice cream in an open fire'."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4bj9zs | why does water give some people acid reflux? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4bj9zs/eli5_why_does_water_give_some_people_acid_reflux/ | {
"a_id": [
"d19ma8w"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Acid reflux is caused by the dysfunction of the o-shaped muscle that keeps stomach acid from getting into your esophagus. For some people, the physical act of swallowing when they drink water is enough to irritate that muscle, or cause it to seal improperly, resulting stomach acid entering the esophagus and irritating it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
83lz1j | how does android know/approximate how much battery is used by each individual app? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/83lz1j/eli5_how_does_android_knowapproximate_how_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"dvitten"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"There's a file in your phone provided by your phone's manufacturer that has a list of the battery drain rates for all sorts of components and states, such as display, radios, or various levels of processor activity. Each of these values are measured.\n\nAndroid uses these values, looks at how long an app uses each particular component, and estimates from there.\n\nFor example, watching YouTube videos means your screen and WiFi or LTE have to be on. Android looks at the file for your specific phone, and sees that the screen at this brightness uses about 10% of battery/hour, and WiFi 2%. The processor also ramps up, which increases power draw another 5%/hour, netting a total of 17%/hour.\n\n[You can read more here.](_URL_0_)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://source.android.com/devices/tech/power/values"
]
] |
||
6n8aia | how is ventilation handled in tunnels filled with running vehicles to prevent carbon monoxide build-up? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6n8aia/eli5_how_is_ventilation_handled_in_tunnels_filled/ | {
"a_id": [
"dk7h71j"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Tunnels usually have huge extraction fans. The size and configuration is dependent on the design of the tunnel. On most tunnels this is just fans in the tunnel ceiling forcing airflow though the tunnel in one direction. In longer tunnels there may be ventilation shafts to the surface where all the exhaust is forced out. During normal operation the fans are on quite a low setting so it is easy to miss them. However if there is a grid lock you can hear the fans spin up and feel the air flow. If there is a fire then the fans turn on full blast and there will be quite a lot of air going though the tunnel."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
473z2n | is there an actual method to find a number's square root? | I've never learned how to manually find a number's square root, just to recognize the common ones or use a calculator. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/473z2n/eli5_is_there_an_actual_method_to_find_a_numbers/ | {
"a_id": [
"d09zcib",
"d0a3uhr",
"d0a6kko",
"d0a6ty9",
"d0aa5te"
],
"score": [
172,
3,
3,
16,
4
],
"text": [
"Fit non infinite series you can try this:\nThe square root of a number is just the number which when multiplied by itself gives the first number. So 2 is the square root of 4 because 2 * 2 = 4.\n\nStart with the number you want to find the square root of. Let's use 12. There are three steps:\n\nGuess\nDivide\nAverage.\n... and then just keep repeating steps 2 and 3.\n\nFirst, start by guessing a square root value. It helps if your guess is a good one but it will work even if it is a terrible guess. We will guess that 2 is the square root of 12.\n\nIn step two, we divide 12 by our guess of 2 and we get 6.\n\nIn step three, we average 6 and 2: (6+2)/2 = 4\n\nNow we repeat step two with the new guess of 4. So 12/4 = 3\n\nNow average 4 and 3: (4+3)/2 = 3.5\n\nRepeat step two: 12/3.5 = 3.43\n\nAverage: (3.5 + 3.43)/2 = 3.465\n\nWe could keep going forever, getting a better and better approximation but let's stop here to see how we are doing.\n\n 3.465 * 3.465 = 12.006225\n\nThat is quite close to 12, so we are doing pretty well.",
"The National Institute of Standards and Technology has a \"Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures\", which contains, among other things, descriptions of how to manually extract Square Roots and Cube Roots. Paste \"_URL_0_\" (without the quotes) into your browser and take a look.\n\n",
"Piggybacking on this question, what's that extremely clever bit of coding which finds square roots very quickly and is useful in videogames for rendering 3D objects on screen?",
"Here is a long hand way of calculating a square root using division. I had a crunchy calc professor in college who didn't believe in calculators.\n_URL_0_\n\nThis describes a \"long hand\" or manual method of calculating or extracting square roots. Calculation of a square root by hand is a little like long-hand division.\n\nSuppose you need to find the square root of 66564. Set up a \"division\" with the number under the radical. Mark off pairs of digits, starting from the decimal point and working left. (Here the decimal point is a period (.) and commas (,) mark pairs of digits.)\n\n ___________\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n \nLook at the leftmost digit(s) (6 in this case). What is the largest number whose square is less than or equal to it? It is 2, whose square is 4. Write 2 above, write the square below and subtract.\n __2________\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n ----\t\t\n 2\t\t\n \nNow bring down the next two digits (65). The next \"divisor\" is double the number on top (2x2=4) and some other digit in the units position (4_).\n __2________\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n -----\t\t\n 4_ ) 265\t\t\n \nWhat is the largest number that we can put in the units and also multiply times the divisor such that the result is still be less than or equal to what we have? (Algebraically, what is d such that d × (40+d) ≤ 265?) It looks like 6 might work (since 6 × 40 = 240), but 6 is too big, since 6 × 46 = 276:\n __2__6_____\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n -----\t\t\n 46 ) 265\t\t\n -276 TOO BIG\t\n \nSo try 5 instead.\n __2__5_____\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n -----\t\t\n 45 ) 265\t\t\n -225\t\t\n -------\t\t\n 40\t\t\n \nRepeat: bring down the next two digits, and double the number on top (2 × 25 = 50) to make a \"divisor\", with another unit.\n __2__5_____\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n -----\t\t\n 45 ) 265\t\t\n -225\t\t\n -------\t\t\n 50_ ) 4064\t\t\n \nIt looks like 8 would work. Let's see.\n __2__5__8__\t\n \\/ 6,65,64.\t\n -4\t\t\n -----\t\t\n 45 ) 265\t\t\n -225\t\t\n -------\t\t\n 508 ) 4064\t\t\n -4064\t\t\n ------\t\t\n 0\t\t\n \nSo the square root of 66564 is 258. You can continue for as many decimal places as you need: just bring down more pairs of zeros.\n\n",
"If you don't care about being off by about 0.1 this method is pretty easy. \n1. Find the nearest perfect square without going over. So if our number is 122, we take 11^2, for 12322 we take 111^2. \n2. Subtract away the perfect square to find the remainder. In both cases I gave the remainder is 1. \n3. Divide the remainder by 2 times the square root we used before. I.e. 1/22 and 1/222. \n4. This will give a decimal, where we will take a number of digits equal to our previous divisor plus 1. 1/22=0.0454545... = > 0.045. \n5. An approximate root is then our previous root plus the decimal we just found. 11.045^2 =121.99~122. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads//"
],
[],
[
"https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads//HTML/squareRoot.html"
],
[]
] |
|
7m2tpr | how do the bets in the middle of a craps table work? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7m2tpr/eli5how_do_the_bets_in_the_middle_of_a_craps/ | {
"a_id": [
"drqxc5d",
"drrgua2"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"There are two basic bets in the center: the hard way and proposition bets. \n\nThe hard way bet is that the shooter will roll a certain combination of dice faces before rolling a 7 or any other combination. For example, the 5-5 hard way will win if 5-5 comes up, but will lose if 6-4 comes up or the shooter 7s out. \n\nProposition bets are that the next roll will be whatever you bet on. So if you bet on 6-6, you will win if 6-6 comes up and lose to anything else. Same with any 7. ",
"Always play odds from the pass line and any points you buy. If you can’t afford to play odds, don’t play. Best odds against the casino."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.