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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1n6d4l | why do i not experience the level of laughter and humor from online content anymore like i did pre-reddit? | It seems when I first joined, a lot of posts would have me in stitches. It seems now a days we barely get a reaction from online posts.. yet if you show the same content to someone that is not a redditor they are in tears.
Why is this and why is it so hard to make me laugh anymore? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1n6d4l/eli5_why_do_i_not_experience_the_level_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccfrg0s",
"ccfrhka",
"ccfrk1k"
],
"score": [
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Oversaturation, and because Reddit humor (and internet humor in general) seems to get old really quickly. Adviceanimals and rage comics are the perfect example. We can all relate to them, so we enjoy it at first, but after the 100th \"scumbag steve,\" we get to a point where we say \"yeah, we get it. People are assholes sometimes.\"",
"Because you became desensitized",
"You eventually just get tired of the same humor, reddit definitely has a very specific type that can get old after a while. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2tussu | how does abortion work? | How does it work? How is it performed? What happens to the fetus afterwards? Are there different kinds of procedures? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tussu/eli5_how_does_abortion_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"co2inf4",
"co2itpg",
"co2iuqy",
"co2sqrv"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
544,
6
],
"text": [
"There are a couple ways this can be done. One is to physically remove the fetus by a surgical procedure. (Someone else is going to have to chime in for details on that.) Another is to give a woman a pill (i.e., Mifepristone/RU486) that does the trick. This has to be within a couple months so that the fetus is small enough to just, like, drop out. It takes a couple days for that to happen after taking the pill.",
"Most are just a drug that induces menstruation which releases the zygote. This is usually pretty early on.\n\nSome are surgically removing a larger fetus, later in the term.",
"There are two types of abortions. Medical and surgical. Medical is quite simple and can only be done between 4-8 weeks safely. The doctor will give you one pill to swallow in office (this effectively kills the fetus) and then you take home another prescription of misoprostol. It can be taken bucally (lined along your gums and allowed to dissolve over time) or vaginally (inserted with a finger or tampon but must stay laying down for 2-4 hours so they do not exit your vagina). This send the uterus into contractions like when you have your period. This will be much heavier than your normal period. You will pass huge blood clots. The next day, you will have to take those same 4 pills again to ensure that your uterus has pushed everything out. Followed by a checkup in two to three weeks to make sure you got everything out. You will still test positive on a pregnancy test for 1-5 weeks because they hormones take their time going back to normal. So it's important to see a Dr for follow up. \n\nThe next version is surgical which is a d & c. They will give you a medicine that is used to soften and open your cervix. They will also inject novacaine or lidocaine to minimize pain. The procedure lasts no more than 2-5 minutes. They enter your uterus and scrape the walls and suck it out with a vacuum like machine. It is done in one sitting and can be verified that day that the abortion is complete. They only do these on 8-15 weeks. Unless it's medically required. There is typically more risk associated with this form because the scraping can cut into your uterus and cause problems further along in life. \n\nSorry on mobile phone. Hope this is simple enough. \n\nEdit: I see some people bringing up the d & e. I was really just trying to stick to what the op asked. A simple explanation of abortions. And for me, abortions are optional meaning choice. Not like when something medically goes wrong in your pregnancy and you have to terminate. I also see people saying the pill is more dangerous than the procedure. I personally believe any medical procedure or medicine in general comes with risks. And was giving my best simplified answer. ",
"Once there was a fertilized egg... now there isn't (written for actual 5 year olds :-P)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
57ebex | when was the last time in human history it would be more common to see someone walking barefoot than with shoes or sandals? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/57ebex/eli5_when_was_the_last_time_in_human_history_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8r9kgo",
"d8r9khd",
"d8r9yh0"
],
"score": [
5,
6,
4
],
"text": [
"Right now, in a whole lot of poorer places.\n\nA good friend of mine didn't have shoes until she was 16 because her family couldn't afford them.",
"It was common up until the 1950s in the south for children to go without shoes. It is still somewhat common in regions with lots of creeks. ",
"It depends on where you are in the world. Sandals or barefoot is still very common in most tropical areas year round. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c4qgke | how does the brain/body differentiate between different “unconscious” states (i.e. sleep, anesthesia, alcohol, knock out, etc) in regards to reaction, rest, and recovery, when in a basic sense, regardless of type - we simply perceive a lack of consciousness? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c4qgke/eli5_how_does_the_brainbody_differentiate_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"erxws0v",
"erxyllr",
"ery006h",
"eryaqfo",
"eryozas",
"erytfv1"
],
"score": [
204,
6,
10,
61,
10,
6
],
"text": [
"Just to clarify, I would argue that there is consciousness during many stages of sleep. Also with a blackout there is consciousness as well. \n\nIn both of those cases, no consciousness is *remembered* though.",
"you are not unconcscious during sleep or alcohol black out\n\nduring sleep your body is resting and in sleep state but you are no unconscious.\n\nduring alcohol black out you are conscious and capable of doing everything you are capable now, its just that your brain stops recording memorys but in the moment you are not unconscious or out of it.\n\nduring anesthesia you ARE unconscious.",
"We can't really perceive a lack of consciousness, as perception requires the presence of consciousness in the first place. From a purely biological point of view, I would say that the most notable differences between these states could be found in the neural pathways that get excited or inhibited and the chemicals (neurotransmitters, neuromodulators, hormones etc.) that make this possible. For example, alcohol (ethanol) causes an abnormally high amount of GABA (an inhibitory neurotransmitter) to be realeased in your synapses (the empty space between 2 neurons), which in turn slows down a bunch of your bodily functions and makes you feel drowsy. Compare that to general anaesthesia, and the picture becomes a lot more blurry, as scientists still stuggle to understand how exactly it works. The best guess for now is that it disrupts the activity of the brain stem in some way, which explains the unconsciousness. \n\n\nI hope that this at least partly answers your question ;)",
"Neuropsychologically, consciousness is understood as \"vigilance\", the phenomenon of being alert and awake. Psychologically, it is the sum of the experiences in determined time. Similarly, consciousness is divided into \"awareness\", perceiving the world and responding actively to it, and \"arousal\", as being awake.\n\nWakefulness is related to sleep, as contrary to it. Nevertheless, sleep is considered a special state of consciousness. Sleep has four stages (in non-REM state) and the REM state. The REM state is different because of neural activity, and dreams usually happen in this period. Sleep is natural, related to circadian rhythm, and is reversible.\n\nFor qualitative alterations of consciousness, there are four degrees:\n\n• First, obnubilation, which is low to moderate in consciousness demotion. People in that state have issues integrating information, become slow and pay less attention to the external;\n\n• Second, torpor, which is a more attenuated state of consciousness. The person becomes evidently sleepy, and the aspects of obnubilation are more intense;\n\n• Third, stupor, in which presents profound turbidity in consciousness. Wakefulness presents only momentarily when heavily induced. The person is intense sleep, as almost in a coma.\n\n• Fourth, coma, in which there is complete lack of consciousness. No voluntary action is possible, remains only the reflexes.\n\nThere are also five qualitative alterations, which are:\n\n• Crepuscular state, similar to obnubilation, happens momentarily (from minutes to weeks), marked by tunneled perspective and memory loss. Motricity remains relatively stable;\n\n• Second state, similar to Crepuscular, but there is coordenated motricity, but it is strange to the person. Usually those two terms are used interchangeably;\n\n• Dissociation of consciousness, which there is fragmentation of it, along with memory, perception and identity;\n\n• Trance, in which there is automatic movements, basically stereotyped behaviors, with almost no voluntary action. Some refer to it being \"dreaming awake\";\n\n• Hypnotic state, in which there is reduced and tunneled consciousness, with concentrated attention.\n\nWhat sleep, knock out and alcohol have in common is that the person lack memory of the event. Alcohol changes that by messing with the REC button of the brain, knock out by blunt force onto the REC button and sleep is simply actively not pressing REC.\n\nSleep, as mentioned, is an altered and special state of consciousness, thanks to occurring naturally, being reversible and having many repercussions.\n\nAlcohol makes changes on consciousness, consuming it brings through the first two alterations (obnubilation and torpor) very easily, and heavy drinking can also cause stupor, and even an (alcoholic) coma. Also, the person enters in Crepuscular state.\n\nConcussion also affects consciousness differently, usually the first two alterations and enters the Crepuscular state, as alcohol.\n\nBasically, you perceive things differently, that is why your consciousness is altered. But as we are holistic beings, consciousness also affects and is affected by memory, for example. Not being able to remember something does not necessarily mean altered consciousness (as Alzheimer), nor altered consciousness necessarily mean altered memory (such as intense emotional reactions). Alcohol do cause alterations in consciousness, as can being knocked out, but here you can just \"lose\" consciousness, without alterations (just remember MMA fights, one hits are those cases; when the person needs time to recover, there is alteration, similar to alcohol if you think about it). Sleep is special, but similarly alters consciousness, in specific ways. \"Lack of consciousness\" is utterly hard to represent, because it is the state in which we act voluntarily.\n\nAlso, as an interesting note, vegetative state and coma are different. Coma lacks awareness and wakefulness, while VS lacks only awareness. People in VS do respond to external stimuli. They just don't have cognitive functions, but still have sleep-awake cycle, and can open their eyes. So if you go into a coma, coming back you enter into vegetative state, then fully conscious.",
"As to anesthesia, no one knows how or why it works. \n\n[_URL_0_](_URL_0_)\n\nI'm not sure that is comforting.",
"Your brain doesn't differentiate between them. I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but I'll try and explain.\n\nWhen you sleep, your brain recognizes specific indications and starts a series of processes. As it goes through the cycle, you recover from your wake period (exertion).\n\nAnesthesia is tough, because truthfully no one is sure how it works. We just know it suppresses your brain's awareness and responses.\n\nAlcohol, after a certain point, basically poisons your brain. At one level you lose memory, at another you lose conscious behavior, and so on. It also suppresses your brain's ability to perform sleep functions properly, which is a major reason why waking up after a binge night feels like you haven't slept at all.\n\nBeing knocked out is very different. Depending on the cause, your brain can sort of \"reboot\" as it were due to nerve stimulation (like getting punched in the jaw) or it can be forced into malfunctioning by increased pressure/force (intracranial bleeding, concussion)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-anesthesia-work/"
],
[]
] |
||
3ohhw9 | what's happening when my eyes keep moving through text on a page even when i'm distracted and thinking about something else? | Are the "eyes moving" and "paying attention to the words I'm seeing" processes separate? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ohhw9/eli5_whats_happening_when_my_eyes_keep_moving/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvxdx3j",
"cvxt1b9",
"cvxx3dy"
],
"score": [
12,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"This has to do with your memory. There's three basic types of memory: sensory, short term and long term. Sensory memory only lasts for a few seconds and if you're giving attention to what you're looking at, it's sent to your short term memory. A good example of sensory memory is how you see a flipbook as a moving image instead of many single choppy images. This is why you see the words but they just seem to disappear, they're not being sent to your short term memory and are lost. ",
"Vision and attention are very closely related - to the point of being inseparable when it comes to research on either one. \"Seeing\" and \"vision\" are two different phenomena.\n Vision requires attentional effort. If you are not attending to whatever you're looking at, the visual information doesn't get meaningfully processed. That's where the whole sensory memory thing comes into play that's been explained already. :)",
"This is muscle memory, just like you keep walking, driving or whatever you're doing even if your brain is thinking of something else. Once you do something a couple thousand times, you can do it automatically while tuned out."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3qbwvq | can you please explain how a subpoena works in regards to being ordered to testify verses pleading the fifth amendment? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3qbwvq/eli5can_you_please_explain_how_a_subpoena_works/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwdt7ru",
"cwdt97l",
"cwdtauc",
"cwdtijn"
],
"score": [
7,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"You can only plead the Fifth Amendment if it would require you to testify against *yourself*. If you are subpoenaed to testify and what you would say would not incriminate you, you're required to testify. Even if you don't want to.\n\nAlso, the prosecutors can offer you immunity for your testimony if it does incriminate you. In that case, you can't refuse to testify under Fifth Amendment grounds since your testimony can't be used against you.",
"You can only plead the fifth if answering the question would incriminate you for a crime. And there are limitations even there. For instance, the defendant in a trial can only plead the fifth if they have not taken the stand. But if they choose to testify, then they can't just answer questions for the defense and then refuse to answer questions asked by the prosecution. As soon as they choose to testify (and it *would* be a choice, because you are never required to testify at your own trial), they have waived their fifth-amendment rights.\n\nAnother way that the fifth amendment can be made not to apply is if a witness is given immunity for committing a crime in exchange for their testimony. If someone who was with the defendant during a bank robbery is given immunity for that robbery, they cannot claim the fifth amendment as a valid reason to avoid answering questions.",
"A subpoena forces someone to testify at a criminal or civil trial. The 5th amendment says that you don't have to testify or incriminate against yourself. \n\nHypothetically say you witnessed a murder across the street while you were coincidentally buying illegal drugs. You could be forced to testify at the murder trial but then plead the 5th because just admitting you were at the drug house would be incriminating yourself of a crime. What the prosecutor would probably do is then give you immunity of the drug crime which would mean that you would have to testify as to what you saw regarding the murder.",
"The fifth amendment protects you from incriminating yourself while testifying under oath. It does not provide you an out in regards to complying with a subpoena. If you do not respond to the subpoena, you may be held in contempt of court, with fines and possible jail time as a result."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
11m7ll | how do people not know when they are singing out of tune? | I hear some people singing along to music and from my point of view it is clearly off key including harmonizing, but how do they not know they are out of key, can you train people to sing in key if they don't appear to know the difference?
EDIT: Also when they are singing out of tune do they think they are singing in tune? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/11m7ll/eli5_how_do_people_not_know_when_they_are_singing/ | {
"a_id": [
"c6np620",
"c6npecu",
"c6nsoy5"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Even if you can discriminate between on and off pitch, which isn't a given, you won't necessarily be able to control your voice well enough to change the pitch in the right way. And we are unable to hear our own voices the way other people hear them. ",
"Found an answer i was after in ask science\n\n_URL_0_",
"While I can't yet claim to be an expert in the field, I have done a fair bit of research into this topic (I'm a music teacher, being able to teach \"tone-deaf\" people to listen for intonation is important to me). I don't buy that anyone can be truly tone-deaf, given that they can a) hear at all, and b) understand vowel-based language. (that's not to say I know of a non-vowel based language, I just know too many linguistics majors to imply that there aren't any). \n\nThe reason is this: the only difference between vowel sounds (ee and ah, for example) is the difference in [overtones](_URL_0_) produced and emphasized. TLDR description of overtones, they are component vibrations within the lowest wave (we hear the lowest wave as pitch). So, given that a person can perceive and interpret the subtle changes in overtones, they should certainly be able to perceive the changes in the much more noticeable fundamental (pitch) note.\n\nWhat I believe it comes down to is a combination of a couple things. One, as ithika mentioned, many people may not have learned a high enough degree of control in their voice to produce the pitch they want. Two, those who have had limited exposure to music (especially in childhood) may not have learned exactly what part of a sound to listen for (conceptually, I can tell you it's the lowest part, but in practice it's more complicated than just knowing that).\n\nWith concerted practice (and lessons will help immensely for a number of reasons), anyone can learn to sing in tune."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/ktwlr/why_can_some_of_us_sing_in_tune_but_others_cant/"
],
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtones"
]
] |
|
408w9m | why do so many companies "track" you? | I get that it's a clever way to try and make money through marketing, but why do they feel the need to track literally everything you do on the web and store it indefinitely like Google is?
What is the end game here? Is there just a point when it'll be impossible for companies to not "know" us?
How is this not a huge violation of privacy that goes completely under the rug like its no big deal, or are people up in arms over something that really ISN'T that big of a deal, since it's just contained to your internet life. Right?
Any knowledge? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/408w9m/eli5_why_do_so_many_companies_track_you/ | {
"a_id": [
"cysc40t"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Even if the company has no use for the data on its own, it can sell the information to others. There are corporations whose entire line of business is purchasing information and then selling it on. The endgame is to use that data either to generate aggregate information about some group of users (e.g., visitors of X category of websites), or to connect it to individual users and use it to send them targeted advertisements across the Internet. (Connecting it to real people for targeted marketing is harder, but steadily advancing.) From the webmaster's point of view, all you need to do is add some code to your website, and you get extra money \"for free\"--doesn't that sound like a pretty good deal?\n\nIt is a huge invasion of privacy. But most people are not really aware of the details, and in any case, the worry is rather abstract--people do not notice it when they are being tracked. People use a popular website like [_URL_0_](_URL_2_), perhaps acknowledging that it is collecting information in exchange for the free service, but without knowing that there's nine other companies also tracking them. (I recommend [Wiktionary](_URL_1_) as an alternative, by the way.)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"Dictionary.com",
"http://en.wiktionary.org",
"http://www.dictionary.com/"
]
] |
|
2tpn6i | why does my download speed increase when i download more things. | When I download something on my laptop, it peaks at about 1.8 MB/s, but if I start looking at reddit on my phone during, it jumps to about 2.6 MB/s. How does this work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2tpn6i/eli5_why_does_my_download_speed_increase_when_i/ | {
"a_id": [
"co16rtk",
"co17rrz",
"co18fqx",
"co1agbb",
"co1vdbk"
],
"score": [
8,
2,
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"It shouldn't be like that; what you saw was probably just a coincidence. \n\n\nThink of bandwidth like a water pipe with several taps. The more taps you turn on the slower the flow of water at each of them. \n",
"seems like my computer does the same thing. The more devices on my router the faster my download speeds are especially late nights. is this something comcast does?",
"It could be your ISP slightly increasing your bandwidth the more clients are connected on your network. It sounds stupid though I've never heard of any Swedish ISP's doing that and it sound illegal as well, because they would deliberately not give you the speed that you're paying for.",
"Here is what i found out, not sure if it applies. when using wireless. \nthe whole b/g/n thing.\nn is the fastest and uses the least amount of time to send a bit of data. but if there is an error it re-sends, if there still an error it re-sends again. \n\nif your laptop uses n then the wirless netwrok as a whole uses n.\n\nnow your phone may only use b/g. \n\nso more time spent transferring one bit, less chance of an error. so less errors less time spent sending the request to resend and resending the data. \n\nbecause the network uses all the same style b/g or b/g/n. the entire network uses b/g when your phone connects. thus increasing the bandwidth. \n\n\ncould also be power, if wireless, the devices can choose transmit power. and with more devices the router/wireless access point might automatically increase transmitting power. ",
"What you're describing there is likely just a coincidence.. As already pointed out, streams of data actually compete with each other for your bandwidth, so adding another should effectively 'steal' bandwidth from your main one. I'd say at a guess you're either just seeing a random change in speed and 'noticing' it more when it matches the pattern you believe exists (like \"I just looked at my clock and it said 10:10 _again!_ seems like that happens all the time!\"), or possibly whatever it is that's displaying that speed for you isn't really counting it properly.\n\nYou _can_ get faster speeds by downloading \"more things\" in a way though. Specifically, if you're downloading a large file, sometimes splitting it into multiple chunks and downloading them in parallel can increase the effective throughput. \n\nTCP, which is the protocol that controls most 'downloads', is designed to automatically adjust speed to the condition of the network it's running in. Particularly: how much bandwidth is available (how fat those 'tubes' are - the wider, the more data they can fit at a time), and how much latency there is.. ie, how long it takes to get from one end of the pipe to the other.\n\n\n**'Tubes' Analogy time:**\n\nYou have a bucket of water (your data) which you want to transfer. You can pour it into a funnel which sits on top of a tank (which is where you want it. You also want to make sure that you don't lose any of the water, so you can't just pour it all in at once - you need to first check in the tank after you've poured a bit to make sure it's all working the way you expect it to, and that the water is filling the tank.\n\nNow if the neck on the funnel is only very small, then the water will pool up in the funnel, and take some time to actually get through... So you can pour a little bit in and it'll start filling up the tank pretty much straight away, but only quite slowly. You can check that all the water made it to the tank ok and then pour some more water straight into the funnel, so there's only a very short time that the funnel is empty and not 'transferring' water.\n\nIf instead of just filling straight from the funnel into the tank though, your tank is a little further away, so you have to hook a hose up to the funnel and run that into the tank instead. Now not only does it take a while for the water to clear the tunnel, but it has to run through the hose as well. As you can imagine, the longer the hose, the longer it takes for the water to get through it... so when you're checking the tank, you have to wait for the water to come through. It takes longer between when you poured the water into the funnel to when it arrived at the tank, so you spend more time waiting for the confirmation and to pour more water into the funnel. As a result, the funnel spends more time empty and the transfer takes longer.\n\nSo since we have to acknowledge each funnel full of data before we can put the next one in, and it takes a while for the data to get from funnel to tank, we artificially limit our bandwidth to something less than what the hose can actually carry.. it spends a significant portion of the time empty between fills.\n\nThere's ways we can help this situation out though. If you use a bigger funnel, you can pour more water into it at once. That means you can get through all your water and fill the tank with less stops to check and acknowledge that the data made it. The drawback there is that if something _does_ go wrong and that data doesn't get through for some reason, you have to fill that entire funnel again, and the whole lot of that previous one gets wasted, so it's going to take more time.\n\nAlternatively, you can use a whole _bunch_ of funnels to feed into the hose. That way, while you wait for one to clear through and get acknowledged, you can be filling another and 'filling in the gap' between transmission and acknowledgement.\n\n...\n\nSo splitting a file into multiple parts and downloading them all separately can help to 'fill in the gaps' just like that. There's a balance though. Each part means it has to have its own control traffic - those acknowledgements that it got through. Too many parts can mean you spend more time sending those control messages than you do the actual data itself, and it eats into your bandwidth. Not enough, and you still leave the gaps there.\n\n...That's all in theory, anyway.\n\nThese days, there is an awful lot of devices out there in ISP land designed to 'optimise' that theory for practical applications. Routers that offload routing decisions once they've worked them out, servers that cache and serve content out from local sources rather than their supposed distant ones. Some of these things work as intended, some don't, some have odd little quirks that sometimes break things in strange and exciting ways. The theory of how the internet works and the practice of it have split away quite a bit over recent years...\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1xu465 | why does the need to poop strengthen during stressful situations? | So i was looking for the powercord to my xbox 360. I just told a guy I could sell it to him so I could have extra money for valentines day tomorrow; and when I realized I didn't have the power cord the need to shit came on so powerful it was so bad. When I found the powercord The need went away and I am left here confused.. because now I have all the time in the world to take said shit but my brain tells my body I don't have too.. what is this | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1xu465/eli5why_does_the_need_to_poop_strengthen_during/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfempop",
"cfeoeap"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"[Extreme stress](_URL_0_) can have a major effect on one's bowel habits. Here's why.\n\nThe brain and the intestine are strongly related and mediated by many of the same hormones and nervous system. Some research even suggests that the gut itself has features of a primitive brain. (IBS sufferers have known for a long time that their digestive system seems to have a mind of its own.)\n\nProlonged stress can disrupt the digestive system, irritating the large intestine and causing diarrhea, constipation, cramping, and bloating. Excessive production of digestive acids in the stomach can cause all sorts of problems including ulcers.\n\nStress can be caused by a number of things. A few examples are fear, anxiety, and excessive worrying.\n",
"The flight-or-fight syndrome has many manifestations, one of them is to attempt to shed any excess weight, with the aim of making your movements faster. Obviously this response isn't going to help you find a power cord, but if you needed to run away from a predator, every ounce counts."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.poopreport.com/Doctor/Knowledgebase/stress_and_bowel_habits.html"
],
[]
] |
|
93r0tz | why does the flavoring separate from the water when you freeze gatorade? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/93r0tz/eli5_why_does_the_flavoring_separate_from_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3fasie",
"e3fbad5"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"When thawing, the contents of the drink will melt at different rates and separate themselves by weight. If it happens before it thaws I am only assuming it goes through the same chemical reaction and the ingredients freeze at different rates and would separate and settle by weight as well. Kind of like how you have to shake up an oil dressing and it separates itself really fast and all of the stuff inside settles at the bottom and the light oil at the top. Or any fruit juice or tea. \n\n\nBasically the ingredients in the drink have different weight and will separate and settle even if just left sitting around, it doesn't have to be frozen. I'm not sure if you are supposed to 'shake well' with sports drinks like other beverages, but its most likely the reason it does it when freezing at the least. ",
"Gatorade is mostly sugar, electrolytes (salt), flavoring, and color all mixed in water. When water is at about room temp or hotter, these components easily mix together giving you Gatorade. When water is cold, these components don’t easily mix together, giving you sugar, electrolytes, flavoring, color, and water, in a bottle. \n\nThe mixing-ness of things is called its solubility. Solubility increases when a solution is hot and decreases when it is cold. It’s the same reason you add sugar to hot tea before you add ice and call it iced tea and not the other way around. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4vjcz9 | if we can only see the "observable" universe, how can we make conjectures about things like its beginning? | I just watched this Kurzgesagt [video](_URL_0_) about how far humanity can go. They say in the future that everything outside our local group will be so far away as to be undetectable and everyone will think our local group is the whole universe. How do we know that hasn't already happened and what we call the universe isn't just a small part? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vjcz9/eli5if_we_can_only_see_the_observable_universe/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5yufi6",
"d5yvrkl"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You are correct, there could be endless stars and galaxies beyond 14 billion light years and we have no way of ever finding out.",
"What they mean is that eventually space will be expanding fast enough that all the light will be redshifted out of detectable range. \n\nThe universe isnt expanding because of the motion of the galaxies. Space itself is expanding. Every second there is more space between us and distant galaxies. \n\nOur relative spatial velocities could be toward each other but space is expanding faster so we move away from each other.\n\nThis expansion is proportional to the amount of space so like compound interest the acceleration due to space time expansion increases. Eventually we will be alone in thw universe.\n\n\nNow this all assumes that expansion is universal and non reversible. \n\nAt some point in the future we could have the reverse happening.\n\nIm not sure what physics says about that. "
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL4yYHdDSWs"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
czfhg5 | why is it a really bad idea to put dead or mostly dead batteries in a device with fully charged batteries? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/czfhg5/eli5_why_is_it_a_really_bad_idea_to_put_dead_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"eyy239g",
"eyy25ol",
"eyy4fl0"
],
"score": [
25,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"As battery charge is used up, resistance increases. Fresh batteries with low resistance, pushing voltage through dead batteries with high resistance may cause it to heat up and leak. It could also cause a short in the battery, which would rapidly discharge the battery and possibly damage the device. The best outcome is just reduced power.\n\nAdditionally: \n\nYou shouldn't mix battery types, such as LiPo and Alkaline. The chemistry and voltage differ and may cause problems.\n\nYou shouldn't mix brands. The overall chemistry and voltage may differ enough to be a problem.",
"Say there’s two dead batteries. If you replace them both, they have a life span of, oh, 1 hour (for simplicity).\n\nIf you only replace one, that one battery does not last for half the time, as you’d expect, but even less. 20 minutes maybe. \n\nEssentially, the dead battery acts like a dead weight that the fresh battery has to carry around too, increasing the load (electrically speaking) and shortening its life.",
"In a worst-case-scenario, the live battery will force-feed electricity into the dead battery, in the opposite direction that electricity would normally flow through the battery. This can result in the battery popping and spraying corrosive stuff everywhere, or start a fire."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
c572n0 | why do car dealerships do "cashback" instead of just reducing the price? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c572n0/eli5_why_do_car_dealerships_do_cashback_instead/ | {
"a_id": [
"es01unt",
"es0a9ry",
"es0b2qe",
"es0sq7p"
],
"score": [
13,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Dealerships are all about numbers, they want to be able to report they sold the car for as high a price as possible. Most positions at dealerships are based on commissions, salesman get commission for the car, the detailers get incentives, managers get paid relative to total sales. So basically they just want to say to corporate we sold x amount of cars for a total of y. The higher y is the more the dealership can report and the mangers get paid relatively. So if they knock the price down they’re losing money but cash back comes out of the next months or a different pool.\n\nSource: Uncle has been a sales manager at several dealerships for 30 years.",
"Cash back comes from manufacturer, not dealer. It may be dependent on other offers, such as cash back instead if taking low interest financing, or only on a purchase but not a lease or vice-versa. And it’s a short term incentive to boost sales when needed, where lowering the price sets a new lower benchmark price for all future sales.",
"Dealerships buy cars from the manufacturers and still them. They are privately owned and need to keep making money to stay in business.\n\nWhen you get cash back, it comes from the factory, not out of the dealer's pocket. The factory wants to make sure that the cars get sold so that the dealer's have money and space to buy more new cars.\n\nIt's the same reason you see manufacturer's rebates on electronics just before the new models come out.",
"Cash-Back is to maintain the **SALES TAX** on the \"Purchase Price.\"\n\nThe same is true on rebates."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
cinq0g | if a movie finishes post production early in a year but isn’t going to be released until the end of the year, where is the actual movie put until it’s released? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/cinq0g/eli5_if_a_movie_finishes_post_production_early_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"ev84h27"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Nowadays, it's mostly kept on computers, ideally in a large, properly equipped server setup with redundant backups and good security. \n\nIn the past, film production companies typically had physical storage areas available for film reels, both to keep them prior to mass production and also to serve as an archive. Today, Disney talks about bringing movies \"out of the vault\" in a purely metaphorical sense when returning them to circulation, but it used to be an actual archival vault they were kept in until needed/wanted. If something happened to that vault (fire, accident, ceiling leak that went unnoticed for a few months because no one ever went back there), it could result in the physical loss of the original/master copies, which in turn could result in a film being completely lost if a digital copy hadn't been made."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7fhlz7 | why is using a pc in a darkroom bad for your eyes even though it feels nicer than a fully light room at night? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7fhlz7/eli5_why_is_using_a_pc_in_a_darkroom_bad_for_your/ | {
"a_id": [
"dqbwyvm",
"dqbx9ll",
"dqbx9q7",
"dqby5f9",
"dqbydui",
"dqc159j"
],
"score": [
286,
10,
57,
30,
16,
3
],
"text": [
"It's bad for your eyes in that the difference in brightness levels from the monitor to the rest of the scene can result in eyestrain. Monitors can also contribute to eye strain in general by forcing the muscles of your eyes to do a lot of work focusing and moving.\n\nNote that this is bad for your eyes in the sense that it is uncomfortable, it is not bad for your eyes in the sense of causing any sort of permanent damage or worsening your vision. ",
"You don't need the whole room to be lit, and you don't need it to be overly bright, but ideally, you want the area around your monitor to be a similar brightness to reduce eye strain. This is why a lot of people put a small light behind their monitor.\n\nAlso \"darkroom\" - > \"dark room\".",
"A solution for this is a program called flux, it changed the hard blue of the monitor to a much better orange which is much easier on your eyes. I work on my pc at night and its amazing the difference. ",
"It isn’t. The idea that using a TV or computer screen in a dark room is bad for your eyes dates back further than computers, to the early days of television. It was a myth fabricated by...wait for it...\n\nA lamp manufacturer. ",
"Note: a darkroom and a dark room are two different things.\n\nA PC in a dark room is bad for your eyes.\n\nA PC in a darkroom is bad for the film and photographic paper you are processing.",
"Looking at the shitstorm further up, I don’t want to add to it, but I am curious if any long term studies were done...not on computer monitors specifically but on the high contrast fixed distance thing.\n\nWith TV, booklights, flashlights under the sheet, etc. having been around, we should have plenty of case material.\n\nThe idea that forcing the eye muscles to work repeatedly on the same difficult task will damage them seems counter-intuitive to me because that same process in almost (if not) all other muscles in the body strengthens them.\n\nHow do we know whether we’re damaging our eyes or exercising them?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2a6kup | in an ocean of inflation, how on this planet of earth is arizona still 99 cents for a can? | They even go so far as to be GGG's and print that on the can so stores can't jack up the prices.
As far back as I can remember, it's been a dollar. Nothing else has stayed the same price it was in the 90's. What gives?! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2a6kup/eli5_in_an_ocean_of_inflation_how_on_this_planet/ | {
"a_id": [
"cirzmng",
"cis3plg",
"cis4hkm"
],
"score": [
7,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"because it was overpriced to begin with it's mainly just sugar water, so increasing prices will just drive consumers away.",
"What's amazing is the recent advent of larger 'king cans' by Coke and Pepsi, also at 99c. Arizona hung on long enough to change the market. Kudos to them. ",
"Because the profit on sugar water is huge."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3l14xj | why names like mcadams and macdonald have the letters after the c capitalized. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l14xj/eli5_why_names_like_mcadams_and_macdonald_have/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv284ti",
"cv284v9",
"cv2etw3",
"cv2fob5",
"cv2hji2",
"cv2j6f0",
"cv2jqhm",
"cv2mtkr",
"cv2ti2p",
"cv2u3kv",
"cv3b8ol",
"cv3bl5e"
],
"score": [
146,
27,
5,
21,
3,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Mc or Mac means \"of,\" as in \"son of.\" So MacDonald means \"Son of Donald.\" Since the word after the \"of\" is someone's name, it is capitalized.",
"\"Mac\" is Gaelic for \"son\" So \"MacDonald\" was \"The son of Donald\". \"Donald\" being the original surname and, thus, capitalized.\n\nI'm not positive about \"Mc\" but I'm pretty sure it's a bastardization of \"Mac\", so the reasons would be the same.\n\nEDIT: According to [this](_URL_0_) Mc and Mac were even used interchangeably, so my suspicions appear to have been correct. They both mean \"son\"",
"Because names are capitalized, and the names used to be written (or at least spoken) separately. John Son of Donald would be written John Mac Donald which was shortened to John MacDonald which was shortened to John McDonald. A few generations down the road, it might be written John Mcdonald.",
"It's like 'bin' in the Arabic world. It means 'of' or 'son'. After 9/11 a Pakistani neighbor felt compelled to tell me that just because he has Bin in his name that he's not related to Osama bin laden. ",
"A long time ago they used to be separate words. You used to say Mac Donald.\n\nBack then, people didn't really care about having everything be the same in writing or spelling, especially small details like this. As long as everyone understood it, it was good enough.\n\nBut now, small details are a lot more important since we have over 7 billion people living together. So people worked together to come up with a standard.\n\nBut some people don't always agree. That's why sometimes there are inconsistencies.",
"As a person interested in the history of language and words: :D :D This is so fascinating!! I love all the comments and learning about why places all over the world used very similar conventions of naming people!\n\nAs a woman: was there *anywhere* in the world where people cared about the \"daughter of So-and-So?\"",
"Lots of bad info in this thread.\n\nMC comes from Master of Ceremonies, though later it would also be used as Mic Controller.\n\nFamilies or individuals with lots of skills in lyrical poetry or 'rapping' will often add this prefix to their names for clarification or 'to let other sucker MCs know'.\n\n(Note: instead of incorrectly pronouncing things, e.g. Mcdonald as \"mic-donald\" show your new found wisdom by correctly pronouncing it \"em-see-donald\"!!!)",
"Came to this thread because I actually wanted to know the answer (My last name is McEntee) and now I just want Mcdonalds.",
"One of the NY Mets' pitcher last name is \"deGrom\" with a lowercase d. Always thought that was strange.",
"Mc and Mac are the Irison/Scottish prefixes of \"Son of\" back during times of clans. Basically, that prefix got connected and you got McAdams, MacDonald, all that stuff.\n\nWhere: My surname is one of these Mc* ones.",
"Tons of Irish surnames that start with C or K in their English form are a Mc or Mac name in Irish e.g. Keane (Mac Catháin).\n\nMag is another version of this: Maguire (Mag Uidhir) and Magee (Mag Aodh < == [yes that is pronounced \"ee\"!!])\n\nI've even seen written that the surname Ward comes from 'Mac an Bhaird', son of the bard.",
"It's just like the O' surnames. O', Mc, or Mac mean \"son/daughter of\". The letters after them are names, therefore, they are capitalised.\n\nSource: My surname is O'Neill (yes, just like the swimwear brand!)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/content/help/index.aspx?r=551&560"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
16ssm2 | why do some retail stores want 3+ years experience for a position that doesn't require much experience, such as a cashier? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/16ssm2/eli5_why_do_some_retail_stores_want_3_years/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7z0pdd",
"c7z11z7",
"c7z8xko"
],
"score": [
4,
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Because if you have more experience they have to deal with and train you less, and with the job market the way it is they'll still find someone to fill the position.",
"Because they can.\n\nIn a bad job market, a lot of people are looking for jobs, and lot of those people have experience. If an employer has the luxury of choosing between an experienced and an inexperienced cashier, why wouldn't they take the one with experience? ",
"Because the last 10 people they hired were deadbeats who didn't show up for work and were rude to customers. If you find someone who was able to hold a job for 3 years, that's a step up."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
73yf8j | curved space time | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/73yf8j/eli5_curved_space_time/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnu5gu6"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Yes, it's a shitty analogy. You can't usefully explain a concept using the concept itself. \n\nA much more accessible analogy says, basically:\n\n* Spacetime is three spatial dimensions plus one time dimension, all orthogonal to one another - moving through one dimension doesn't affect your position in any other dimension.\n * For instance, you can go left or right, forward or back, but it doesn't affect how high or low you are - and neither does it change as you move from the past to the future. \n* The presence of a large amount of mass deforms this structure, however, so that time is no longer completely at right-angles to the other three dimensions.\n* As you move forwards through time near a large mass, some of that movement bleeds into your spatial position, causing you to move towards the mass as time passes. \n\nThere's very nice [video](_URL_0_) that explains this better than I can. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlTVIMOix3I"
]
] |
||
3yxdd0 | if a dog's sense of smell is so good, why do they stick their nose directly into the thing they're sniffing? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3yxdd0/eli5_if_a_dogs_sense_of_smell_is_so_good_why_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"cyhfbsk",
"cyhgd7q",
"cyhhj1o",
"cyhik4y",
"cyhkoxf",
"cyhqqc7",
"cyhsbym"
],
"score": [
1658,
4,
50,
7,
6,
47,
21
],
"text": [
"Dogs have a secondary organ, Jacobson's organ, that they use to investigate pheromones. These can be non-volatile chemicals, which means they aren't getting up into the air to sniff easily. Instead, the animal has to make direct contact. The signals also take a different path through the brain.\n\nSo your dog might say \"hmm I smell somebody's pee over there, I bet there's a message!' and has to go rub her nose on it to determine that it's an invitation to a date. ",
"Same reason why humans go over to things to get a better look at them. We can see something in the distance, but it'd be a hell of a lot clearer to us if we got close to it.",
"Dogs smell in a variety of ways, differently from humans. The reason they get really close to things is to actually take in scent particles. Their noses are wet so that the particles stick and allow them to take in even more information. They will often puff air out of their nose to stir up those scent particles while they're really close.\n\nSource: _URL_0_",
"When someone says a dog's smell power is good, it isn't like being able to smell a pizza 15 feet away vs a human smelling it 5 feet away, it would be like smelling the bread, the cheese, the pepperoni, the vegetables, ingredient by ingredient, on a slice of a pizza. If the dog went closer to it, it wouldn't be painful for it to sniff it, infact it would be able to differentiate between the pieces of bread that have been cooked differently, or the different types of cheese in the pizza. To put that into perspective, it'd be like looking things from far away, we'd get a much better view of something closer to it.",
"Don't think of dog smell as amplified, think of it as detailed. For example, humans are like people with blurry vision, while dogs are like people with sharp vision. Regardless of the quality of your vision, you need to closely focus on something to get the little details.\n\nThat's roughly the case for dogs with sight, smell, and sound.",
"Followup question... given a dog's far superior sense of smell, if I bust ass, does a nearby dog get a much more pungent experience than I or is it more like they would be able to smell it from much further away?",
"For mAximum sniffage. I mean, you to don't just poke a boob with one finger do you? No, you palm the shit out of that wonderful breast with your entire hand. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/articles/dogsenses.htm"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7spj2y | why do businesses such as grocery stores have cheaper prices for "members" when membership is free? how do they benefit from that? | Most retail locations have a membership program that is free, giving them access to cheaper prices. How does the store gain from that? It seems like all they're getting is my phone number and e-mail address. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7spj2y/eli5_why_do_businesses_such_as_grocery_stores/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt6hypp",
"dt6hyzv",
"dt6idzy",
"dt6iteo",
"dt6iu3n",
"dt6mk2n",
"dt6nlbn"
],
"score": [
17,
2,
4,
58,
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Basically they give you a discount so they can track everything you buy by your phone number. They use this tracking information to sell to other companies or for their own marketing purposes. ",
"They get your contact information so they can send you ads which makes you a returning customer. The member-only policy is simply to encourage you to give them your contact info.",
"Also I guess it's incentive for people to come back to the store instead of shopping elsewhere. ",
"Customer Loyalty programs ensure that customers keep coming back to your store. It's like a sandwich shop that has a \"buy 10 get 1 free\" deal.\n\nThese days, it also helps them collect data about who is purchasing what. Getting your phone number gives them a single unique identifier so they track your purchases and get better information about what people are buying.\n\nBeyond that, grocery stores used to offer sales *all the time* without a rewards/loyalty number. These days, they just require a membership to get the sales they used to have *without them*. It's not costing them anything extra.",
"They use the data generated from your purchases to better market their products, detect trends, and also sell the data to other companies for their use in developing products, marketing, etc.",
"It's a very small additional cost for a very large return on that investment. \n\n\nAn example, your local grocery store used to send out ads in the paper, hope you bought that paper, saw their sale, and came into the store. \n\n\nNow, when you get into the store they sell you on their card \"You don't have to clip coupons anymore if you become a member of our club!\". You then have a card you'll see every time you open your wallet, reminding you of their grocery store. When deciding between stores, you'll think \"oh right, I have a membership at X, so I get discounts without coupons\". They eventually get a record of when you shop, every Sunday afternoon? Perfect, they now know to send ads to your email Saturday night so you see them before you go shopping. All that for the cost of a single mag stripe card.\n\n\nThat's only the benefits of them getting you alone as a member. They're also getting a ton of other customers information. Breaking down the data, they can plan future campaigns. For instance, maybe the data shows a lot of members who buy cereal will always buy milk. In fact, no one buys milk alone. So now they run a sale on cereal one week, while raising the price of milk. \n\n\n > It seems like all they're getting is my phone number and e-mail address\n\n\nYour email address alone is the most valuable thing they can get from you. For every dollar a company spends on advertising to email, they can expect a $40 return if they have a product available online. Many companies will sell/trade each other lists of email accounts. When someone hacks your email address, odds are they don't want anything other then your contact list, because thats the most valuable thing in your account.",
"Being able to track what you buy and build profiles is huge for them. There was a court case (scotus i think?) That ruled they couldnt make it mandatory for customers to allow them to be tracked,but its fine if you opt in (and lower prices is pretty tempting for most people).\n\nThere are other side benefits in getting you locked in,and price discrimination,like other posters mentioned. But from my understanding the tracking is the big lucrative one."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1u2mb8 | hypothetically, what stops someone from flying to a country and never leaving? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1u2mb8/eli5_hypothetically_what_stops_someone_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cedvy2c",
"cedvy9k",
"cedw775"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Many countries have immigration laws that forbid this. If you violate those laws, the police can deport you. Also, being an illegal alien makes it difficult to get a job or do any other sort of business in that country.\n\nIn order to enter some countries, you also have to prove you have plans to leave, like a return plane ticket.",
"If the country they are flying to doesn't want them there, and figures out they are there",
"Nothing really. However if you get caught without a visa you will get deported. You could do it if you lived completely off the grid"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2o7i64 | how does the auto tune that we hear about making shitty pop stars sound good, work? | I saw a commercial for something once, some kind of snack maybe, the 2 guys were working a soundboard while some chick was singing in a room behind them. one of them accidentally hit the switch turning off the board and she all of a sudden sounded like shit. is it really that dramatic of an effect? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o7i64/eli5how_does_the_auto_tune_that_we_hear_about/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmkghm0"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Autotune take the sound wave of your voice, and changes sections to be closer to a specific pitch. If you were really close, autotune would do very little. If you were my dad , autotune would make you sound very very different."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1smele | why are contracts and laws written in such complicated ways | i recently rad a contrat that used alot of words that were not what i consider the best. ( for example _URL_0_ )
imho they explain it in a rather indirect manner.
this got me thinking that pretty much all contracts are like this | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1smele/eli5_why_are_contracts_and_laws_written_in_such/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdz0ih6",
"cdz0o3d"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Contracts and laws have to be hyper specific about what they are talking about. There can be no room for implied understanding that takes place in normal conversation. They have to lay forth the expected conditions, what specific terms mean, etc. ",
"There are four basic elements that occur in a contract oral or written: offer, acceptance, intention to be legally bound, and consideration. All of these elements should be established in the contract. Every term and condition should be stated. A contract should also be written so that it can stand up to arguments against its legality in court.\nIt can sometimes takes thousands of words in order to complete a contract that covers every element.\nThink of a contract as a lengthy mathematical equation where all you need to do is add in the numerical values with your own data sets. However, the values in contracts are strict legal terms and the data sets are facts, all of which are expressly described.\n"
]
} | [] | [
"http://pastebin.com/D3G2iKDP"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2w62cl | the difference between liberal and libertarian? | In school, we took a "Political Spectrum" test, which was on an XY graph - Left and right being liberal and conservative, and up and down being authoritarian and libertarian. I scored nearly straight down and slightly right; strong libertarian and slightly conservative. Our teacher explained that the horizontal was economic views, and the vertical was moral/amount of personal freedom views.
I know reddit is strongly pro-gay rights, pro-marijuana, and pro-abortion, yet I see a lot of hate on the term "libertarian" on here. Why is this?
EDIT- [Here is the quiz I took.](_URL_0_) I took it again after a few months, and I'm now still strong libertarian (pro rights) and relatively strong liberal (pro economic intervention and assistance). | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w62cl/eli5_the_difference_between_liberal_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"conwxcd",
"conwxxg",
"conxqtq",
"conyubx",
"coo0x8c"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Liberals believe that government should use it's power to promote social good & equality. Libertarians believe that government should do as little as possible.\n\nLiberals are pro-abortion because they believe in a woman's right to choose. Libertarians are pro-abortion because they don't think government should be against it.\n\nLiberals are for gay marriage because they think everyone should be equal. Libertarians just think that government shouldn't be involved in regulating marriage at all.\n\nIn other cases, Libertarians are aligned with conservatives. They're for low taxes & against government regulation of businesses.",
"You got the directions mixed up. Up and down is economics. You believe in laissez-faire, let the market work itself out, right? With slightly conservative social beliefs.",
"You see a lot of hate basically because people don't understand that there are non-radical libertarians. Like they think all libertarians are against public roads. ",
"TL;DR:\nLiberals are socially and economically liberal while libertarians are socially liberal and economically conservative.\n\nIf we divide all political issues into Social and Economical you can have the different major political ideoligies represent different things.\n\n- For Conservativism: They're socially and economically conservative, i.e. they're pro-life and against big government(In theory).\n\n- For Liberals: They're socially and economically liberal, i.e. pro gay-marriage and for a big government.\n\n- For Libertarians: They're Socially liberal and economically conservative, i.e. they're pro-choice and pro gay-marriage against a large government.\n\nThen we can divide the Libertarians into two more categories:\nState focused and Individual focused.\n\nThe first group wants a small federal government and for the states to decide virtually everthing. Theoretically they'd be okay with a communistic Vermont and a fascist Nevada. The American politician that I think are the most prominent pro-state proponent is Ron Paul.\nHe probably want gay-marriage to be illegal but he wants the states to decide that, not the federal government and not the SCOTUS.\n\nThen we have the individual focused libertarians. They don't want ANYONE else to decide on what you can and can't do, as long as you don't hurt anyone else. I feel this group is not very well represented since I think the biggest name representing them are either former New Mexico governor and presidential canditate Gary Johnson or maybe Senator Rand Paul(Not 100% sure where he stands on the libertarian map).\n\nEdit: I'm not American so this may or may not be true. \n\nAlso in the rest of the world the difference between a liberal and a libertarian is minor or none at all.",
"To sum it up like your 5: \n\nEconomic principles from the republicans. Social from the democrats. \n\nWant weed? Go ahead its your life. Want a limit on the amount of ammo you can buy in a year? BIG GOVERNMENT IS ALWAYS WATCHING"
]
} | [] | [
"http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html"
] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1p25we | in basketball, what is the difference between a power forward and a center? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p25we/eli5_in_basketball_what_is_the_difference_between/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccxya0r",
"ccxzyjy",
"ccy3pym"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
4
],
"text": [
"Centers tend to be the biggest, and play most near the rim. Plenty of players play both positions, and where they play depends on who else is in the game and who they're best matched to defend.",
"Usually, power forwards are the 4th tallest team-member on the court. (Point guards are shortest, Centers are tallest). \n\nNormally, power forwards are more versatile, quick, and are better at shooting than their center counterparts. On offense, Power forwards often are able to dribble and face the basket, whereas Centers rarely dribble and usually play with their back to the basket. Defensively, Centers are used to \"protect the paint\" and prevent lay-ups or easy baskets near the goal. Centers are notorious for their lack of a \"shooter's touch.\" (e.g., see Shaq, Andris Biedrins, Blake Griffin, etc.)\n\nHowever, power forwards and centers are often interchangeable. Today, NBA players such as Tim Duncan, Dwight Howard, Dirk Nowitski, Kevin Garnett are often tall enough to play center, but they possess enough athletic ability to move to the Power Forward position.\n\nOften, great centers are moved to the power forward position in order for them to focus on their offensive game, and rest a little on defense. Centers tend to pick up more personal fouls because they are constantly the last line of defense around the basket (and, arguably, because they're a bit slower/clumsier than their other team members). ",
"Quick legend for this post:\n\nPoint Guard - PG -1\n\nShooting Guard - SG -2\n\nSmall Forward - SF - 3\n\nPower Forward - PF - 4\n\nCenter - C - 5\n\nIn the past, yes, the 5 would be the tallest player on the court for your team, while the 4 would be slightly shorter and more athletic. But in modern basketball positions are based almost exclusively on ROLES on the court instead of body types. (Perfect example: Lebron James. He's 6'8\" and 250 lbs. but is the primary ballhandler and facilitator for the Miami Heat. That role used to be always given to the smallest player on the floor regardless.) There are times now in basketball when 1s are 6'8\", and when 5s can be 6'8\", given the style of play the coach desires from his team. \n\nAlso different offenses utilize positions differently. An example of this is a \"stretch-4\", where a 4 may be the best shooter on the team (a role usually held by the 2, hence SHOOTING guard), and not that athletic. (Examples: Ryan Anderson of the Pelicans and Matt Bonner of the Spurs.) This tactic was developed in order to pull opposing teams big guys (4s and 5s) out to the perimeter to defend shooters instead of inside blocking shots and getting rebounds. But I don't want to get too esoteric on you.\n\nHowever, to classically answer your question: The 4 is usually the meanest, nastiest dude on your team who bangs under the basket getting rebounds and setting screens, while putting the fear of God into any opposing guards who try to penetrate into the lane. (Example: Charles Oakley on the Bulls and/or Knicks. You wouldn't want to be caught in a dark alley with that man.) Think like a linebacker in football or an enforcer in hockey. Your 5 would be a more offensively-oriented, team-defensive player. Blocks shots, is usually the first guy to rotate over for helpside in man defense because he's usually closest to the basket. (I realize that sentence has a lot of jargon in it.) He also has the responsibility to tell everyone what's going and to make the calls on defense since he usually has the best perspective of the court. (Example: Hakeem Olajuwon from the Rockets. Currently, watch Marc Gasol of the Grizzlies, that man is a savant on team defense.) Defensively, the 5 is similar to a goalie in soccer or hockey. \n\nBody types don't really matter since everyone is huge and strong and fast in the NBA these days. Whomever can perform in these roles the best, regardless of size, usually gets the minutes, with a nod towards style of play. (After all, Charles Barkley, one of the greatest 4s of all time, was only 6'4\". With shoes on. And Ben Wallace, a 5 who won four Defensive Player of the Year awards for the Pistons in the early 2000s, was only 6'9\".)\n\nHope that helps.\n\nI bet none of you could tell I coach high school basketball, right?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4itv9s | why is it fairly common to dislike certain subcultures (hipsters, furries, emos) so easily? | I wouldn't consider myself any of the above necessarily, but why does it seem so normal for the majority to detest any "outlandish" subculture as if it were part of some agenda without proper judgement? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4itv9s/eli5_why_is_it_fairly_common_to_dislike_certain/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3125eo",
"d312b4p",
"d312g8u",
"d312iug",
"d312ybw"
],
"score": [
4,
8,
6,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Because people should all look and stress the same! Duh!!\n\nBut in all seriousness, because people don't like anyone different. ",
"Humans like other humans to be the same as them in as many possible ways, it increases their confidence in their ability to survive. \nBasically, if it's worked for us for millennia and we're all still getting along fine the way we have been, who the fuck are you to break that streak?! \nIn theory this is highly effective, however it also reduces the odds of new systems of doing things developing.",
"Being wary of the outsider is a natural instinct that we have, and have had since before history began being recorded. \n\nIn antiquity the outsider was someone not in your tribe/family group and they are potentially very dangerous. They may wish to kill your tribe, steal your land/food, enslave your people, and may carry disease. Being wary of them until they prove they are trustworthy or beneficial for the tribe to interact with is a very important safety measure. \n\nThis innate instinct to not trust those outside your group becomes difficult to set clear boundaries when the society you are in is no longer a small tribe where you know everyone. When the society you are in consists of hundreds of thousands of people who occupy your same country you start channel this distrust instinct in a different manner. Instead you distrust people of different subcultures, in different professions, who are different ethnicities, etc. ",
"Most fashion that attains popularity has an edge. It flows from what people don't like about. Especially, the people that the fashion wants to differentiate from. You the normal guy can't imagine (yet) why you would do that. But, people on the inside are growing and warming to it. They're getting better at it. And, the non-fashions are twisting between hate and love. Some people will be drawn and others will be estranged. The rest of us feel no sensation whatsoever and can't understand any of the attraction or repulsion.",
"Because everyone around you does, too, so it's easy for you to forget that you hate a bunch of people over basically nothing because people around you reaffirm that that's normal?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
bv3q0j | what is happening in/to my eyes when my focus switches from content on my screen to the reflection on my screen? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bv3q0j/eli5_what_is_happening_into_my_eyes_when_my_focus/ | {
"a_id": [
"epkv9dz",
"epmyhzg"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Your pupil contracts or expands, like a ballon where you pull or push on two ends simultanisly. \n\nSince your pupil is filled with a fluid which breaks light in other ways than air does and your pupil is shaped in a special way, your brain can focus the light from all objects to be sharp on your retina.",
"Your eyes have a lens inside them, very similar to what you find on reading spectacles.\n\nThis lens takes light rays hitting it, and focusses them into a single sharp image. To see something clearly, you want that image to land exactly on your light sensors at the back of your eyeball. \n\nWhen you look at objects near and far to you, that image shifts.\n\nSo your eyeball stretches or compresses that lens to ensure that the image always falls exactly on your light sensors. \n\nThe pupils also change size, but that doesn't actually help with making the image sharp, it just comes together with it as part of the package."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
e85ssi | what makes command prompt important ? why is it considered powerful? i know you can do a lot of stuffs using cmd, but you can also do those without using cmd right? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/e85ssi/eli5_what_makes_command_prompt_important_why_is/ | {
"a_id": [
"fa9ebad",
"fa9etql",
"fa9f1fv",
"fa9hrcd",
"fa9i1wd",
"fa9j1vd"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3,
8,
13,
5
],
"text": [
"Command prompt essential provides a way for you to have developer control over windows. Most things you can do without it, but when it comes to more extreme settings, dev's dont provide a normal setting for that- itd be too risky to give people who dont know what they're doing a quick access to major settings",
"IMHO, there are a lot of settings and configurations options available through command prompt that are not available through the GUI or through the Settings/Control Prompt windows.",
"Even if you can do many things without it, the settings and such are in different menus. In cmd you can just type what you need. Its much faster compared to navigating the hell microsoft calls settings.",
"A Graphical User Interface (GUI, the operating system, as you see it) is just a visual way of interacting with the command line. This is what made it \"easy\" for non computer programmers to interact with computers. Everything you do in the GUI is essentially translated into command line commands by the program you are using.\n\nWhat this means is that (virtually) everything you do in the GUI was built via command line and programmed to respond to your actions. This also means that things too complicated that won't translate well, things not as useful, or things that are too powerful are not necessarily going to be included in the GUI. The GUI is a shortcut.\n\nA good book all about this (and some other things) is [In the Beginning... Was the Command Line by Neal Stephenson] (_URL_0_).",
"1. Much quicker and easier than using a GUI, if you know what you're doing. And often provides things that don't have a GUI.\n2. A big important one: easily scriptable, automatable, repeatable, and schedulable. \n3. Command prompt utilities take text input and produce text output, so they can be chained together in a lot of ways by piping the output from one simple command as input to another simple command and so on so that the combination is very powerful.\n4. Works even in low-level configurations (recovery mode, connected to a server that doesn't have a GUI installed).\n5. Plain text is also usually easier to work with for people that have vision or motor impairment.",
"It depends a lot on which command prompt you are talking about, the classic DOS/CMD prompt in windows, the newer Powershell Prompt in windows or stuff like the BASH shell and other POSIX complaint prompts that you will find in many different OSs as they are all a bit different and have different strength and weaknesses.\n\nOne common and most obvious benefit of command-line interface as opposed to graphical user interfaces is repeatability and ability to do automation.\n\nYou can do most stuff you do on a CMD prompt on a GUI, however if you need to to the same thing more than once you will quickly run into the issue that it may end up being slightly differently each time. The flexibility of a GUI can work against it. Ideally you want to have the same result you do the same task.\n\nThere are tools that will record your exact mouse movements and clicks and key-presses and be able to play them back so that you get the same result each time, but those aren't really as good as they should be since the computer is mostly clicking things blindly without knowing if the thing it should be clicking is really where it should be.\n\nCommand-line interfaces however are just text based. You enter the same command each time and get the same result. You can put that command in a text file and just have that text file executed as a script each time and many sources of errors are removed.\n\nThis allows you to automate things.\n\nIf you have a repetitive task on your computer, like each month take the numbers from a certain file, do some calculations on them and then send a nice graph or table with the results to someone via email you can save yourself a lot of work by making the computer do it for you.\n\nOther stuff like renaming a thousand files in a folder according to some pattern will either need you do to the same few clicks and key presses a many, many times or quickly write a script that does it all at once.\n\nAutomation with a GUI is much harder than with a command-line.\n\nAnother thing is that a GUI may sometimes only contain a small subset of the ways a program can be run and that there may be more options if you talk to it via command-line.\n\nThe GUI is usually much easier to use for beginners, but someone who knows exactly what they are doing and doesn't want any landholding can get done much, much more with a command-line. It gives the user more control, but often also a much better chance to screw up too.\n\nIf you use a GUI you can usually find out where you need to click to get what you want by looking around and searching though some menus. This is called discoverability and GUI is very good at it. Command prompts are bad at that. Figuring out what options you have and what the syntax for these options is usually requires some effort. \n\nHowever once you know the correct way to use a program from the command-line you can often do things very efficiently and in ways that would be hard or impossible to do via the GUI.\n\nThis is not true for all programs though.\n\nAnother benefit of the command-line is that it requires less overhead. If you make a computer do a lot of hard work adding the additional work of showing you a nice userfriendly GUI may take some of its attention away from what it is supposed to be doing.\n\nHaving a GUI at all also may pose a security risk. Any sort of software running on a computer may add more coplexity and a chance to get hacked. Removing all that and just having the minimal user-interface of a command-line makes things safer, so some special purpose computers don't have a GUI at all.\n\nGenerally though the biggest benefit is repeatability and automation though."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.amazon.com/dp/0380815931/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_V5E7Db9HWA279"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4ne553 | how do vocalists that perform nightly not lose their voices after performances? | I've been singing for 10 years now, and even though I consider myself rather experienced, I still find that after singing along to my favorite album, my voice is tired afterwards, especially if I belt as much as it seems they do. What makes them have such stamina? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4ne553/eli5how_do_vocalists_that_perform_nightly_not/ | {
"a_id": [
"d434yc4",
"d435wie",
"d436a59",
"d436mmi",
"d437ua6",
"d43b256",
"d43cfdz",
"d43dc2t",
"d43fshk",
"d43fvsp",
"d43fvuk",
"d43hewg",
"d43hl09",
"d43it87"
],
"score": [
32,
310,
41,
10,
20,
3,
12,
14,
4,
2,
2,
6,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"It's like training any muscle. Vocalists warm up before they sing, practise daily (and have been doing for years) and probably most importantly, utilise proper technique. \n",
"Practice, proper technique and physical conditioning. The voice can go on for hours on end, day after day if the muscles that support the vocal cords and the abominal muscles are strong.\n\nSource: in college I studied vocal performance, and I was in a traveling choir that sang 2+ hour long concerts 20 nights in a row. ",
"By building up endurance over time and learning what their limits actially are. You talk all day but don't lose your voice. (If not you, alot of people do.) Similar principle. Use the voice in a sustainable way and it will last.",
"In short: practice and microphones.\n\nProfessional vocalists train their voices and have very strong diaphragm and throat muscles. Good singing maximizes the use of the diaphragm which is a much stronger muscle than the throat and doesn't get worn out nearly as quickly.\n\nVocalists also use microphones. While it sounds loud, they aren't straining themselves or belting anything out. It's loud because of the microphone.",
"Proper technique is a lot of it. You can practice enough to sound good singing, but it's a whole other level to practice enough, with clear focus on technique rather than sound. Think 'good sport player' versus 'pro athlete'. The athlete didn't just play a lot of baseball and get decent. They hit thousands and thousands of balls to get that home run just right. They worked with coaches and trainers constantly. They threw balls into nets in their back yard everyday to get the wrist, arm and finger movements just right. \n\nSame thing with singing. There is a clear technique to the breath, the air pressure, the lip movement, the tongue and soft palate, all of it. And add to that the difficultly that, while a baseball coach can grab your arm and move it for you, or show you what a good pitch looks like, a vocal coach can't show you any of it, cause it's all internal. It's hard to explain, harder to understand, and, just like being a pro athlete, takes about ten times more effort and commitment than anyone ever wants to admit. Everyone wants to think \"I coulda done that...\"",
"Aside from practice and/or proper training as everyone else noted....\n\nMany singers do sort of lose their voice somewhat, or over-all get that leathery raspy voice thing going on, either short term or permanent.\n\nOf course, jack daniels and various smokables will also take their toll on someone's voice, and in the arena of music there is a lot of crossover there....Meaning whole bands will tend to sound that way even if only one guy ever does vocals.",
"Just tagging on what others have said--and they're exactly correct--I would add that improper \"belting\" can be very damaging to the voice. If you can, try to get some lessons specifically to learn proper belting technique (yes, there is a proper technique). Good luck and keep singing!",
"A lot of people are saying practice, which is absolutely correct, but they're not fully explaining what to practice. There are two ways to sing: singing from your throat (the incorrect way) and singing from your diaphragm (the correct way). If you feel the strain in your throat when you sing, you are singing from your throat and actually ARE straining your vocal chords. The people who do that do lose their voice (and sometimes really fuck up their vocal chords). If you push from your diaphragm, if you feel the bulk of the effort coming from deep with your lungs/lower torso area it puts FAR less strain on your vocal chords, meaning you won't lose your voice.\n\nEdit: I do see one or two responses that also get into this.",
"As a vocalist myself: \npractice and technique. \nA proper warmup for at least 30 minutes before you go one stage or record is a must. \nlearn to breathe correctly and how to use your vocal chords and your muscles. \n \nit's the same with all other muscles in your body. train them. take your time and go slow. if you feel any pain - stop immediately or you may dmg your voice/vocal chords permanently. \n \n \nnot losing your voice by singing every day for an hour 2 is just a matter of practice and if you are used to it really.",
"I remember being at a convention where the voice actors like Jennifer Hale were asked this and as a group they agreed the key to not losing your voice during recording sessions of video game screams ans shouts was to properly warm up before a session and warm down after a session. They also agreed hot water was good for their throats.",
"Technique. I used to sing 2 hour shows 7 nights a week for years. Singing is much like talking. Never strain your voice otherwise you may end up with nodules on your vocal chords. With the right technique you can sing all day effortlessly and naturally.\nStraining and tension due to nerves or improper technique or incorrect key for your voice are the most common ways singers harm their vocal chords and tire them.\n",
"My dad was Bon Jovi's pilot for a tour and said that while he was friendly in facial expressions and gestures, he did not hear him speak at all during the tour to protect his voice.\n\nHowever he has flown many bands and performers and that was the only singer who did that. ",
"They sometimes do and shows are canceled all the time for health reasons.\n\nSome people in /r/metalcore still mourn over the previous singer Adrian who left the band Northlane.\n\nBut in the end your vocal cord is like a muscle that gets stronger with practice.",
"I am a singer in a band, and as everyone else is saying, technique. Learning to pace yourself helps you go the distance. One thing I will add to this though is that you have to learn how to take breaks too. DO NOT stay in a loud place when you are not performing. The only time I ever strain myself is when I am trying to talk during my breaks. That is why most people are hoarse the day after a night out at a bar. My wife is a speech pathologist, and always reminds me to have \"vocal rest\" on breaks."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2awkyw | how can someone be charged with murder when no bodies have been found? | Today in Canada, Douglas Garland made his first court appearance in facing charges of killing Nathan O'Brien and Nathan's two grandparents, Kathy and Alvin Likness. While the circumstances are certainly suspicious, and Garland's past is definitely shady,no bodies have been found. If you don't know for certain the victims are dead, how can someone be charged with their murder? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2awkyw/eli5_how_can_someone_be_charged_with_murder_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cizh61u"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"I don't know about this case specifically, but if you have a confession, witnesses, and/or forensic evidence, you can be certain enough that a murder has been committed by a suspect to press charges."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
9qqics | if we can see through air because the molecules are spaced out then whats occupying that space in between? more atoms? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9qqics/eli5_if_we_can_see_through_air_because_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"e8aymnv",
"e8ayn8x",
"e8az3cv"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
4
],
"text": [
"*Also I don't know what flair to put please tell me*",
" > **ELI5: If we can see through air because the molecules are spaced out then whats occupying that space in between? more atoms?** \n\nNothing. It's empty space.",
"oh we can't see through air because they are spread out, we can see through it because it doesn't absorb the light frequencies our eyes absorb. Smoke and air take up the same amount of space and are as spread out, but you can't see through heavy smoke or fog.\n\nThe atoms are all touching at regular atmospheric pressure, we can just see through them (like how we can see through glass) because they don't block the light that we see."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2zalbf | if nuclear warfare were to breakout, which us city would be targeted first? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zalbf/eli5_if_nuclear_warfare_were_to_breakout_which_us/ | {
"a_id": [
"cph57vb",
"cph5req",
"cph7a93",
"cph8lf9"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"All the cities are targeted. To hit almost the same time.\n\nThe basic tenets of MAD (mutually assured destruction) are still in place as the US and Russia have not stood down their nuclear stance since the end of the cold war. Any nuclear war would mean massive first strike and retaliatory strikes in minutes of each other. Most cities in the US and Russia would be hit by dozens of nukes each, a doctrine of overkill with MIRV systems to bypass any missile defense. ",
"Cities are highly unlikely to be the first priority targets in a nuclear strike. Mainly because destroying them does nothing worthwhile for the enemy. The first principle of warfare is to eliminate your enemy's capability to fight back. Therefore the first targets would actually all be strategic military in nature, with the highest on the list being ICBM sites to reduce the counterstrike capability which is why the majority of the US nuclear arsenal is carried on submarines as they cannot be targeted in this way. After that come less overall strategic sites such as cities, infrastructure and so on.\n\nDue to the principle of MAD, or Mutually Assured Destruction, there is no great advantage to targeting one city over the other as the MAD principle guarantees that launching a nuclear strike against the USA will result in your own destruction as you cannot realistically prevent a counter-attack that will also destroy you. This has been the principle that has prevented their use since their invention and what has kept the nuclear arms race going.\n\nSo it's not really accurate to consider any one city being targeted first as they would likely all be targeted at the same time. It would probably be more accurate to ask \"Which US city has the most weapons aimed at it\". You might be tempted to guess that it would be Washington because of the Pentagon being based there but it's more likely to be one of the smaller cities located around the Minuteman III ICBM silos, even if it has not been purposely targeted.",
"If I were the Commander-in-Chief who was forced to make a decision on what top targets to take out...\n\nTop priority:\n\n- All Active Military Airbases\n\n- All Active Military Sea Ports\n\n- All Active Military Training Centers\n\n- All Active Military Weapon and Munitions Storage Facilities\n\n- All Major Centers of Automotive and Aircraft Industry\n\n- Major Oil Refineries\n\n- Pentagon / Whitehouse (they are in close proximity)\n",
"Here is the official [FEMA-estimated primary targets](_URL_0_) for Soviet ICBMs during the height of the Cold War and also a more complete [unofficial version](_URL_1_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/US_nuclear_strike_map.svg",
"https://i.imgur.com/o83uv.gif"
]
] |
||
3jux4n | why the iphone 6 has a 1810 mah battery and the galaxy s6 has a 2550 mah but they have very similar usage times? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jux4n/eli5_why_the_iphone_6_has_a_1810_mah_battery_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cushbvy"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The S6 has significantly better hardware and more background \"features\" running that drain the battery. The phone has double the cores at double speed in regards to the processing power, nearly double the screen quality (pixels per inch to display), more RAM, etc.\n\nI'm sure they purposely chose the size of the battery to best Apple in battery performance while not making the phone too bulky or heavy. This gives the end user the best possible experience of features, hardware quality and battery life over the current generation iPhone. The big difference between them is really the operating system and quality of the apps. Because the iPhone has limited hardware/software variants it is easier for developers to make higher quality apps while spending less time resolving bugs for certain phones and screen resolutions.\n\nELI5: Same reason a Ferrari uses more gas than a Civic. But if the gas tank is sized properly you could get the same or better distance out of the tank on a Ferrari..."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5nawc3 | how can power grids deal with the massive draw once power is restored after an outage? | We just had a transformer blow which cut power to around 1000ish people. Once they got the transformer fixed, presumably everyone's heater, refrigerator, freezer, etc would all start up at the same time. How can the power grid cope with that much draw all at once?
Edit: Local power grid, not on the national or even state scale. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5nawc3/eli5_how_can_power_grids_deal_with_the_massive/ | {
"a_id": [
"dca2b37"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"You did not specify where you lived.\n\nTaking the USA for example, you have around 370 million people. Break it down to the 48 states, leaving out Hawaii and Alaska, call it 350 million people, all served by 3 power grids. East coast, West coast, and Texas. Let's say the Texas grid supports 50 million people. \n\nThat leaves 150 million folks on both the East and West coast grid.\n\nA thousand people all getting their power back is like a single drop of water in a swimming pool.\n\nElectricity is produced as demanded, it's not stored.\n\n(Disclaimer, my population totals were rounded, and electricity can be stored. I was trying to keep this ELI5)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4mmxz5 | looking into a mirror, and/or looking at photographs of ourselves does not give an accurate view of how others perceive us physically. does looking into a 360 degree mirror/those 3-panel angled mirrors in dressing rooms, give a more accurate representation? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4mmxz5/eli5_looking_into_a_mirror_andor_looking_at/ | {
"a_id": [
"d3wq6zs",
"d3wr21s",
"d3wumxc",
"d3x019j",
"d3x1jyf"
],
"score": [
4,
16,
10,
5,
2
],
"text": [
"No because perception is subjective, so when asking how people see you, you have to consider their subjective mindframe to understand how someone truly perceives you. Essentially, if you can portray any kind of message through body language, such as confidence, you'll give off a confident air and people will see you appear as a confident person even if it's all an act. In other words, act confident, feel happy and everything will fall into place. ",
"I'm not sure I agree with your premise, other than as has been mentioned the subjective aspect of perception which is going to vary for everyone. But aside from that, why do you think a mirror and/or photographs aren't \"accurate\" representations?",
"Any redditor has an identical twin? How different is to watch your twin from looking yourself at the mirror? ",
" > Looking into a single mirror, and/or looking at photographs, gives the viewer a 2D representation of a 3D image.\n\nWrong.\n\nPhotographs *are* 2D representations of 3D images, true. But mirrors are not. Mirrors give a 3D representation. The image in a mirror has depth.",
"To do this you just need a true mirror. They look like [this](_URL_0_)\n\nIf you have a mirror that's next to a medicine cabinet with a mirror this is pretty easy to do. All you need to do is open the mirroe to about 45 degrees, and then look at your reflection inside the main mirror."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.truemirror.com/images/givideo.jpg"
]
] |
||
3du4ag | why do microwave waves disrupt wifi ones? are they similar enough to interfere with each other? and are there any other types of wave that interfere with each other? | Text. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3du4ag/eli5_why_do_microwave_waves_disrupt_wifi_ones_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct8mscm",
"ct8na1k",
"ct8pnw0",
"ct985yg"
],
"score": [
6,
30,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"They are very similar to each other. The frequency of a microwave oven is about 2,450 Mhz whereas the frequency that WiFi uses is between 2,412 and 2,484.\n\nThe reason that WiFi uses those frequencies is because you don't need a license to operate a radio in them. That's precisely because microwave ovens cause so much interference. The FCC decided that it wasn't worth selling exclusive rights to those frequencies because of how much trouble any purchaser would have with microwave ovens.",
"They are not only similar but the same. The spectrum normal 2.4GHz wifi is using is the same part of the spectrum that a microwave is using. And it's only only microwaves that can interfere with your wifi. Wireless mice, keyboard headphones, Bluetooth, RC cars, wireless security cameras, baby monitors and pretty much anything wireless you can think of is using the 2.4GHz spectrum. Not to mention all other wifi networks around you. And as the 2.4GHz spectrum that is allowed is pretty small, only 3 wifi networks fit in it as the channels are overlapping.\n\nIf you are having problems with your wifi, it can be a good idea to upgrade to 5GHz. It's a newer spectrum that hardly anyone is using and it has a bunch of non overlapping channels. So if your devices can use 5GHz, it can give you a more stable connection.\n\nThere is a fun little app you can use called wifi analyzer on android (probably something similar exists for iPhone) in which you can see what channels all wifi networks close to you are using. Which can help you pick the best channel (only use 1,6 and 11 as the channels overlap). There are also more professional tools that can be used to see the spectrum directly. [This video shows such a tool and at 8:50 he shows how a microwave looks, which makes it quite obvious why your wifi doesn't like it](_URL_0_)",
"The reason they interfere, is that both of the signals are running on the same spectrum: 2.4GHz. Therefore, when both are transmitting and receiving signals they will of course interfere. Most likely, the microwave will disrupt the WiFi more than the WiFi will disrupt the microwave. But, in an attempt to solve this issue, a 5 GHz WiFi has been developed. In addition, it's much faster than previous generations. Also, another way to avoid interference, is to use a wired connection, whether it's direct to the router or power line adapters.",
"They are the same wave.\n\nImagine trying to listen to some really quiet music and figure out what the lyrics are right next to an klaxon or alarm that's going off and very loud. This is what happens when you try to communicate over WiFi when the microwave is running. Even if you turn the music up to be as loud as the klaxon, it's still very, very difficult to figure out the lyrics of the song."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr0AfBO1O20"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
5hs51r | why do major brands like gucci, versace or louis vuitton (and others) do not advertise their products on tv (except some perfumes)? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5hs51r/eli5_why_do_major_brands_like_gucci_versace_or/ | {
"a_id": [
"db2hy3p",
"db2i1ux",
"db2ijfu",
"db2jaux"
],
"score": [
3,
5,
9,
3
],
"text": [
"because its a waste of money. 99% of people cannot afford these brands. the people who can afford them buy due to the exclusivity.",
"1. They're large enough that they don't need to increase brand awareness. \n2. What is there to advertise? With that you aren't looking for a good deal, but for quality and/or cachet, and that's plenty established. \n3. Maintaining that cachet does them more good than acquiring new customers.",
"To add to the other replies: for these top luxury brands, their own products are their own advertisement.\n\nFor example, an Armani suit will never bear any noticeable logo, because it doesn't need one. The quality of the materials, the cut, and the fit of the suit is advertisement enough. Any actual visible logo would actually cheapen the brand and make the product less valuable.",
"Something not mentioned is that *they actually don't want to advertise*. Luxury brands want to maintain *exclusivity*, which means *they don't actually want the average person to buy them*. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
blc4aa | why do insects fly around random points in space, and why is it usually directly above a pathway? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/blc4aa/eli5_why_do_insects_fly_around_random_points_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"emn9926"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Definitely confirmation bias. You as an observer are usually walking on a path, where you spot insects. You can make no conclusion about the population of bugs away from where you observe.\n\nSame reason why people think all bugs go towards light; those are the ones they see, they don't see the bugs which fly away from light."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6pilof | why do phone screens, with high pixel density and resolution, look far less impressive and crisp as a monitor or tv with the same ~4k resolution? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6pilof/eli5_why_do_phone_screens_with_high_pixel_density/ | {
"a_id": [
"dkpqkic",
"dkpugr9",
"dkpum1n"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"For the most part, I think phone screens are generally only at 2k resolution right now. There are rumors of 4k screens coming soon, but that is one large difference. Some of it may also depend on what kind of phone screen it is (AMOLED, LCD, IPS) as well as your brightness setting. \n\nSize is another factor. The pixel density is better on a phone, but if the screen size is too small, you won't notice the fine lines on a person's forehead as well just because they are smaller. ",
"Because you sit on your couch with some space between your eyes and the TV screen. An iPhone 7+ has technically a higher resolution than a 1080p tv, but an IPS panel for 'true' rgb and better viewing angle management. Most TVs use other panel technology for more vibrant colors.\n\nEven before modern TV, monitor and mobile device screen panels pixel or dot density was established in print. For instance, you'll need a resolution with roundabout 330 dpi (dots per inch) for printed magazines, flyers or business cards, as people tend to hold such things in their hands and relatively close to their eyes. Large posters are usually printed with a dpi of 100-200, as you look at some distance at them.\n\nTl;dr: A Google Pixel has the same resolution as a 1080p TV screen, but sometimes it's too close to your eyes and will look more pixelated.",
"Are they far less impressive? I remember holding the last years Galaxy S7 for the first time and being extremely impressed by the screen."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4fzggl | if everyone decided to cash out their money from bank, do banks have enough paper money for everyone ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4fzggl/eli5_if_everyone_decided_to_cash_out_their_money/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2daa9b",
"d2dad8g",
"d2dafh2"
],
"score": [
4,
9,
2
],
"text": [
"No. Probably not. That was a problem during the great depression. If everyone every where went to get their money back from all banks, most people would get screwed.",
"Amount of US currency in circulation: $1.2 trillion.\n\nAmount of US currency held in bank deposits: $10.6 trillion.\n\nNope.\n\nSources: _URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_",
"No. They don't. Banks don't just sit there holding your money. They lend it out to other people. That's how they earn their revenue.\n\nIf everyone tries to get their money out at once (say, because they think the bank is going to fail and they'll lose their deposits) it's called a bank run. A run on one bank can trigger concerns about other banks and lead to other bank failures as well. This happened a lot, most disastrously during the great depression, and is why we have FDIC insurance on deposits today."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2015/05/22/q1-2015-u-s-banking-review-total-deposits/#4d7c41e82cbc",
"https://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/fedpoint/fed01.html"
],
[]
] |
||
c01rk7 | why are fusion reactors hotter than the sun? | Every article you read talks about how current experiments achieve temperatures many times hotter than the center of the sun. Can't we just try for equal temperatures to achieve fusion energy? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/c01rk7/eli5_why_are_fusion_reactors_hotter_than_the_sun/ | {
"a_id": [
"eqzod8a",
"eqzvif3"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"The sun also has a gargantuan amount more pressure and volume of hydrogen than we do so in order to get to that level of reaction we need to increase the heat.",
"The pressure in the core of the sun is around 265 billion atmospheres and 15 million kelvin.\n\nThe energy output of the sun per unit of volume is low. In the core the sun generate around 276.5 watts/m\\^3. A human produce approximate 100W but have a volume below 0.1m\\^3. So the thermal output of a human is approximate 1000W/m\\^3 or around 4x the core of the sun. The sun have the same energy output compared to the volume as a active compost heap\n\nThe density of the core of the sun is 150 g/cm3 that is 150x the density of water and humans. So per unit of mass humans generate 600x times more heat the the core of the sun.\n\nA regular nuclear reactor is around 1000 MW and so you would need 1\\*10\\^9/276=3.6 million cubic meter. That is a cube with sides of 153 meter that would not be any way practical to build or to keep at the required temperature and pressure.\n\nSo even if you could create a reactor with the temperature and energy output as the sou it would not be practical. The sun produce a lot of energy because it is massiv not because it is efficient.\n\n & #x200B;\n\nSo we like more power output per unit of volume and mass then in the sun\n\nIf fusion happen depend on [Lawson\\_criterion](_URL_2_) depend on the density and temperature. The density depend on the pressure.\n\nThere is laser compression ides like in the [National\\_Ignition\\_Facility](_URL_0_) that create pressure of 300 billion atmospheres and temperature of hundreds of millions of degrees.\n\nThe more common [Tokamak](_URL_1_) with continual operation have lower pressure higher temperature then the sun. ITER will have 100 million degrees Celsius plasma and many have resurs of millions of a atmosphere."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawson_criterion"
]
] |
|
1qyx8k | why the construction industry, no mater which country, seems to attract corruption | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1qyx8k/eli5_why_the_construction_industry_no_mater_which/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdhwib0",
"cdi1sor"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"No construction experiance here but im gona go out on a limb and say because its easy. \"I need this much money to build this\" \"Well OK, there ya go\" \"HaHa I only needed half that, free money for me\"\n\nAlso theres probably over consructors seeing this guy doing it and they think \"Well shucks I deserve free money to\" and so it continues.",
"The construction industry is unique in that most projects are paid for in frequent large sums of (often) cash or cash equivalent payments. This cash flow design makes moving large amounts of money easy, especially for those earning it illegally. Because such cash flows are common, they are also difficult to audit without analyzing every transaction that occurs.\n\nAlthough you only mentioned the construction industry, many different industries have an attraction to money laundering due to the innate characteristics of cash flows between the business and the customers. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2mvp73 | why do we need cable providers in order to connect to the internet? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mvp73/eli5_why_do_we_need_cable_providers_in_order_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm7ziam"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Because cable providers build the infrastructure (ie... cables) that physically connect you to the internet. They pay for the construction and maintenance of that infrastructure, and so you pay them in order to use it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1nwkof | if reflection is caused by an atom absorbing and subsequently emitting a photon, how is the photon re-emitted at the correct angle? | I can't find any good explanation of this online. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nwkof/eli5_if_reflection_is_caused_by_an_atom_absorbing/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccmpqj5"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Reflection is a _scattering_ phenomenon, so it doesn't contain any actual atomic or molecular absorption or emission - as you implied, spontaneous emission occurs at a random direction. However, you can still _model_ reflection as absorption and emission - and this is how it's done in [quantum electrodynamics](_URL_1_) (QED).\n\nIf you model a mirror's surface as a bunch of points that can \"absorb\" and \"emit\" photons, then you can start to think about all the possible ways light can go from the source, to the mirror, to your eye. Because the direction is arbitrary in this scenario, it turns out that you can draw lines of reflection at every single point on the mirror - light can be emitted from the source, hitting a point at the edge of the mirror, then having a photon emit at an oblique angle right back into your eye. The angle of reflection doesn't have to equal angle of incidence.\n\nHowever, light exhibits wavelike properties as well - they can constructively or destructively interfere. At higher and higher angles of reflection, adjacent points will emit light that are further and further out-of-phase - thus leading to greater destructive interference. This makes those points not very good paths for reflection to occur. It turns out that if you consider _all_ the possible angles, only at a very narrow range of angles is there the greatest constructive interference for all the wavelengths: when angle of incidence equal angle of reflection. This is how that classical observation is explained quantum mechanically.\n\n------------\n\nIn short, even though no actual absorption and emission takes place, photons are \"re-emitted at the correct angle\" due to interference. You can find good explanations of this [here](_URL_0_), or [on Youtube](_URL_2_)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://qed.wikina.org/reflection/",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QUj2ZRUa7c"
]
] |
|
1bkm1i | google +. what, why? | I'm on Google +, I've even got some friends in circles. But, I don't get it at all.
Can you guys break it down for me? Is it like facebook or Twitter? Different? Better? Worse? What am I supposed to do with it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1bkm1i/eli5_google_what_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"c97ij6l",
"c97jrlu",
"c97k4o6",
"c97k5gj",
"c97k72g",
"c97kjhw",
"c97kp1b",
"c97kzhu",
"c97l0fe",
"c97ljnb",
"c97lxzi",
"c97m9co",
"c97mol3",
"c97n7cl",
"c97oo8c",
"c97plu6",
"c97s9db",
"c983su7",
"c988nzq"
],
"score": [
188,
44,
1276,
8,
27,
4,
14,
3,
6,
3,
2,
2,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It is a competitor to Facebook. It works in essentially the same way as Facebook, and you do the same things with it that you do with Facebook. \n\nIts primary distinguishing feature is the heavy emphasis on 'circles', which are groups of friends. You could have a Co-workers circle, a Family circle, a Close Friends circle, a General Acquaintances circle and then Famous People I Follow Like On Twitter circle. You can then view each circle's activity separately, post statuses that only certain circles see, etc.\n\nMost people would say that it's technically a better site than Facebook, but that that's irrelevant since relatively few people use it, and the entire point of a social network is to speak to as many people as possible.",
"Google+ is Google's social networking service and personal hub. It accomplishes what Facebook does, plus more. People share links, 'upvote' links (by giving it +1), upload photos, create events and send invitations, create interest groups/hobbyist communities, play casual games, check into/let people know where they are and what they're up to. Unlike Facebook, you can also video chat (Hangouts is Google's version of Skype), edit and store photos (like Instagram) and integrate your stuff with other Google services like Gmail, Docs, Play.\n\nIt exists because Google basically wants to be between you and everything you do online. Not as an a creepy big brother, but as a curator, an organizer, a facilitator. Your communications, your creations, everything that you are and do online could be tied together and *organized* with Google+....This is why Google has been trying to get people onto G+, using G+ accounts to authenticate other apps, getting people to use their real names on G+...it centralizes your online persona, makes it easy for you to share what you do with other people and introduces you to other things (and people) you might find interesting.\n\n______\nI'm a pretty regular user of Google+, (I own a Nexus 4, 7 and a Chromebook) and to me it's like Facebook, Foursquare, an RSS reader, Skype, Reddit and Instagram all rolled into 1 service spread across all my devices. \n\nPeople use their real names, are more public and open about their going ons, are generally happy to just share links, and almost never whine like on Facebook. You're not 'Friends' either, where the word itself kind of guilts you into a sense of obligation. You simply 'follow' people and what they're up to. If you don't want to follow them anymore, then just stop following them. There isn't an implied relationship, it's just sharing cool stuff.",
"Google+ was better than Facebook in pretty much every single conceivable way. It hit big with the tech/geek crowd first. We LOVED it, and when it came out of beta, we brought our friends over.\n\nHere's the thing: a social network is only as good as the people on it. People are used to Facebook. It's what they know, and it's been dominant for a long time now. Longer than Myspace was. They were invested in Facebook. Getting them to change completely was tough and nearly impossible at the time. This is my very long explanation/metaphor.\n\nThink of social network sites like a bar. Everyone hangs out at the same bar. It's not the greatest bar, but it's where you've been hanging out for years. It's comfortable You know everyone there, you're familiar with it, and everyone's familiar with you. You've got your favorite seat/table. It's that place that when people say \"Let's go to the bar\", you don't have to ask which bar...it's just The Bar. \n\nSo you hear about this other place, The New Bar. You decide to check it out, and it's freakin' AWESOME. They have clean, comfortable seats, a shiny new floor, awesome beers on tap, great lighting, the works. It's the bar you've always wanted, better than The Old Bar in every way. You're so excited to tell your friends about The New Bar, and you're 100% certain that they're going to love it like you do, and they'll all want to switch bars. So you go running to your friends to tell them all about it. And a few of your friends agree to go with you to check it out, and sure enough they love it. They show up a few times and think it's great, and tell their friends. \n\nBut after a while? They start to go back to the Old Bar. They don't want to switch bars. They know The Bar. People know them there. The bartender might be an asshole, but he's THEIR asshole. The New Bar's bartender is a nice guy with a flashy smile, but he doesn't make their drinks the way they are used to. And while a lot of people came to The New Bar, not everyone did. And they know that at the Old Bar, they're going to see all of their friends, and know everyone. It may not be nearly as good as the New Bar, but it's comfortable and change is hard. After a while, the New Bar loses its customers, and starts making changes, desperate to gain a new clientele, but really just end up shooting themselves in the foot. In the meantime, the Old Bar makes a few rules changes that the customers grumble and bitch about, but it's not enough to make them change.\n\nThing is, Myspace drove people out. Facebook didn't win out because it was a better service, it won because Myspace kept changing and changing, trying to meet everyone's needs until it met no one's needs. People flocked to Facebook because it sucked less, not because it was better. No matter how much better Google+ was, Facebook wasn't BAD enough to make people change their comfortable ways. In desperation, Google+ made more and more changes, and now it's an ugly clusterfuck that I really have no desire to use. Funny thing is, I think Facebook has made enough changes, and forced so many security holes and advertisements, that I think if G+ had been released in its original iteration NOW? It might stand a chance. However, Facebook was at its peak when G+ tried to fight it. They got one major boost when Facebook introduced a new security fuckup that made people panic, but it didn't last.\n\nIt's a shame. I really was one of Google+'s biggest fans. I absolutely loved it. It was everything I'd ever wanted in a social network.",
"To put it simple: G+ is Facebook with the \"Follow\" system of Twitter and then some.\n\nYou don't request to add a friend, you follow a person and you organize the people you follow into categories Google calls circles.\n\nAnd that's that!\n\nThen you can make something you post there visible to only the people who follow you, to the general public who might come across your profile or just to some people you follow. It's simple, less intrusive and more private than FB.",
"i despise facebook for so many reasons.\n\nbut i will never use Google +. why? google is getting really pushy about it, and getting really pushy about a lot of ways trying to connect everything with my personal info, gather as much as it can about me. every time i log in to either youtube or gmail i get so much crap asking for my phone number, syncing accounts, telling/asking me to sign up google+. the best thing about google was its simplicity and that is slowly going away. it doesn't look as shitty as myspace but its starting to get as unreliable with all the changes and feels sketchy.",
"I see it closer to twitter than to facebook. Those who complain they have nothing in their stream it's because they have not circled the right people.\n\nG+, with the circle system, can be useful to share different thing with different people. However, I don't see it as a way to (re)connect with people you already know, but to connect with people you share interests with.",
"Since you are already familiar with Facebook and Twitter, I'm assuming you're familiar with social networking in general and the point of it. But since even Facebook elicited the response of, \"What, Why?\" at one point, I'll give social networking a once-over in case any five-year-olds might be thinking that. (If you'd like, you can skip to the thing that sets Google+ apart by reading after the break)\n\nAt their core, social networking sites are a way to communicate with others through an online community. The different flavors of it (Facebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn, Pintrest, Reddit...we could go on for days) each have their own hook that sets them apart from each other, often in very small ways, and sometimes in very big ways. For Facebook, the main appeal is its popularity and real-life connection. Twitter has brevity, LinkedIn has a professional/career focus, Pintrest makes curators of us all, and Reddit uses populism to filter out the crap and sub-communities for us to discover. It's worth noting that some sites that I would label as social networking sites aren't *required* to be used socially. Reddit is a great example: many of Reddit's users don't post anything or communicate with other users in any way, but the core of what makes it great is the human interactions that happen through a simple +/- system coupled with a great comments system.\n\nGoogle+ is relatively new to the social networking scene, and for a while its main hook was simply being tied to Google. Over the course of its life, Google+ has started to create a place for itself, most notably through Circles, but we'll get to that in a minute.\n\nThe biggest problem Google+ has right now is its openness, a decidedly Google trait (we're looking at you, Android). Openness is obviously is a great thing to many of us, but to the majority of users, it is a problem of too many choices. Right now, Google+ wants to connect people in real-life like Facebook, it wants you to follow streams of interesting people like Twitter ([#GeorgeTakei](_URL_1_)), it wants you to create your own news streams like countless news aggregating sites, it wants you to video chat like Skype, and it wants you to participate in sub-communities that are completely separate from your own stream. This plethora of options is overwhelming to users, and for good reason. When we already have sites that do all of these things, what is the point of a new one that does it all again? While you would be absolutely right that Google is trying to get a piece of that magic Facebook pie, you'd be wrong in thinking that they're not trying to set themselves apart. But in true Google fashion, this comes through iteration, not sudden innovation. And sure enough, [it appears to be working](_URL_0_).\n\n*****\n\nThis brings us back to Circles, which is where I believe Google+ really differentiates itself and opens itself up to new and interesting uses. You can think of Circles as a way to organize different people, types of news, organizations, or communities into your own personal categories, all of which you can both view and communicate with completely separately. You place people into any Circle you want, and you can put the same people in many Circles. For instance, you could have a \"Dad's Extended Family\" Circle that you only use to organize a reunion, a \"Parents\" Circle that you use to talk to mom and dad, a \"Siblings\" Circle, a \"Cousins\" Circle, or any other fine-grained breakdown of your family that you choose. All of this can then be used to communicate with just those specific parts of your family, or check in on those specific parts by switching your stream over to that Circle. In a sense, it allows you to create your own community that you define however you see fit.\n\nHere are some more examples of how Google+ sets itself apart from Facebook by using Circles:\n\n* Have a close group of friends from high school that you very rarely communicate with, but every once in a while want to send them all a thought or photo? Create a Circle with just them, and you can very easily share anything with only that Circle and follow that Circle's stream to stay in touch with just them.\n* Just want to follow your favorite news sites but not post anything to anyone? No problem, most major news sites have very active Google+ pages, and you can create your own custom stream to your liking or follow pre-defined news categories a la Google News.\n* Want to post those crazy pictures from your \"sick day,\" but don't want your boss to see them? Create a Circle with the people who you do want to share them with, and post it to only them.\n* Love to follow the beautiful rants and hilarious posts of your favorite celebrities? Create a Circle for it and switch to that stream whenever you want. A growing number of celebrities use Google+ like they use Twitter.\n* Think you're brilliant and want everyone else to behold your every glorious thought? Spew it all over your public page for everyone to see, just like Facebook! People you're friends with can then move you into their \"People who post too much shit\" Circle and you will be none the wiser. Huzzahs for all! (You can do this in Facebook pretty easily too, but Circles makes it a little different)\n\nInterestingly, I've found that the number of friends that I have on Google+ really isn't as important to me as it is on Facebook. Google+ encourages you to communicate more effectively and less universally while also being useful if you don't want to communicate at all.\n\n**The best part is that people looking at your stream/page will only see what you've posted to them specifically or to a Circle you've placed them in.** For instance, the vast majority of people I'm friends with on Google+ will see absolutely nothing on my page, but my brothers will see lots of news articles I've +1'd them, photos I've shared with them, and general things I've posted to my \"Brothers\" Circle; my parents will see a lot of the things that my brothers saw, but certainly not everything (thank god). Interestingly, one of my brothers has refused to use Facebook from the beginning, but is comfortable sharing videos and pictures of his toddler on Google+ because he can do it without anyone but family seeing it--like email but better!\n\nObviously usage may vary, and there is no point in Google+ if you use it the exact same way you use Facebook, but the notion that there is no point to Google+ is a short-sighted one. It may end up proving true if Google ever decides to close the doors on Plus, but that doesn't seem likely at this point, especially considering how rapidly the user-base is growing.\n\n**TL;DR:** Google+ allows you to customize your stream through Circles much more easily than Facebook has ever allowed. It also doesn't actually *require* you to be social on it in order for it to be useful for you, since it is a great way to customize news or follow your favorite celebrity/blogger.",
"Looks like your question's already been answered, so on a side note, I much prefer Google hangouts to Skype. It's easy to chat with more than one person, plus, Google Effects is really cool! It lets you add stuff like virtual hats, facial hair, sunglasses, scuba masks, sound effects, etc. ",
"Thank all of you so much for your responses and explanations. \n\nI think that, like so many things, I need to just jump in and start using it to see if it's a good fit for me!",
"The reason I love Google+ is Communities. It is like a more visual style of Reddit. It feels nice and I can get a nice visual snapshot of what people are talking about. I also find that Google+ has more adults. Facebook can stay where it is and be the catchall for all the nonsense my highschool friends are up to. Google+ will remain the place I really want to share things and interact with people.",
"I have no answer to your question at all, I just figured this was as good a time as any to tell the tale of the last time I was on google+\n\nI signed up when it was in beta, used it for a few weeks, then fell back to facebook. A couple of weeks ago, me and a friend of mine were at my place dropping acid. At one point my friend wanted to change the music we had on, and headed to the computer. Then he noticed the little, red \"3\" next to my google search bar, and off we went. Right into google plus. We began reading, opening pictures and the likes. We didn't find any people though, only this one dutch guy who constantly posted \"funny\" pictures. Like, 20 of them every day. We spent two hours laughing our asses of at the thought of this being the only person actually on google+, while we continued scrolling through his pictures, all of them had the company of a few lines of hilarious Dutch text. We didn't understand what was written, but god dammit it was hilarious.\n\nAnyway, long story short, I am now afraid of becoming trapped in google+ forever if I ever venture back there.",
"Facebook: is where people post their vacation pictures\n\nG+: is where people post techy geeky cool articles\n\nTwitter: is the place to be pretentious",
" > Most people would say that it's technically a better site than Facebook, but that that's irrelevant since relatively few people use it,\n\nYes. Sadly, yes.\n\n > ... and the entire point of a social network is to speak to as many people as possible.\n\nDisagree. I don't post a lot on FB because there's a large swath of \"friends\" who I'd actually rather ignore (and I know there are privacy settings on FB but they seem to change every several months and always revert back to something I didn't want)",
"Google+ can do everything that Facebook, Twitter, and instagram do; Plus several things they can't, as well. But to get the most out of it, you have to think about it differently. It's not about connecting to people you already know. It's about connecting to people you want to know.\n\nUsing it's fantastic search functions and communities, it's easy to find people and conversations you're interested in. You can put them in your organised circles, and visit who you want, when you want. \n\nYour main feed pulls from all your circles, but unlike Facebook you can directly control how. When you look into each individual circle there is a slider at the top to control how much those posts show up in your main feed.\n\nBasically, stop worrying about having your local friends on G+. If they are, make a circle for them. If they aren't, that doesn't matter, there are lots of awesome people on G+ already. Explore a bit and you'll find them. ",
"It is basically Facebook for grown ups. More about connecting and communicating, less about nagging your friends to join your horde of vampire gangsters.",
"It's essentially a way more awesome Facebook that nobody felt compelled to migrate to.",
"Because Linus Torvalds is on Google+ and says hilarious things.\n\nEdit: Put Linux instead of Linus",
"Facebook is about connecting with people you know in real life. You can't really follow people you don't know since all connections are symmetrical.\n\nTwitter is about following people who are interesting.\n\nGoogle+ does Twitter better than Twitter, since you can follow interesting people in multiple circles depending on what you're interested in at a moment, and they can post much more than just 140 characters\n\nGoogle+ also does Facebook better than Facebook, since you can group people you know into circles, so you can share selectively.\n\nGoogle+ also does Skype better than Skype - hangouts allow you to chat with multiple people at once, share screen, share files, edit documents together etc. - it basically crushes Skype in every way imaginable.\n\nThe downside with any new social platform is that you need people on it, and Facebook still has more people than Google+, but Facebook has much poorer features for privacy controls, has long track record of trampling over everybody's privacy (Google's record is not perfect either), and it is far too happy to allow spammers (like social games) in, so my hopes for them aren't too high.",
"I've explained Google+ to others like this when compared to Facebook:\n\nFacebook is where you go to connect with people you already know.\n\nGoogle+ is where you go to meet new friends and have discussions with them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-12/07/google-plus-grows",
"https://plus.google.com/+GeorgeTakei/posts"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
2gwn17 | if white blood cells are the soldiers of the body, why can't we just inject more of them into a person (assuming that we could grow them). just send in more troops to fight the infection. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2gwn17/eli5_if_white_blood_cells_are_the_soldiers_of_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckn7fc3"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"That's not quite an exact analogy.\n\nWhite blood cells are like the artillery of the body. They're a powerful force but useless on their own. The \"brains\" of the operation are the antibodies. They're what latch on to the foreign body and act as a spotter so the white blood cells know what to destroy.\n\nThis is what vaccinations do. They give your body a \"test run\" using either something that looks like the target cell or inert versions of the target cell to let your body learn how to make the antibodies necessary to fight it when it's exposed to the real thing later.\n\nIf your body had the antibodies already and matching white blood cells could be easily made then there could be some potential benefit to adding more but your body is actually pretty good at ramping up white blood cell count when you're fighting an infection. \n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
fms9uz | rabies death rate is 100%. once symptoms show up, death is inevitable. from a survival perspective, isn’t it counter productive to be so lethal and having to be constantly looking for new hosts? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fms9uz/eli5_rabies_death_rate_is_100_once_symptoms_show/ | {
"a_id": [
"fl5t0tz"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Clearly not. If the rabies virus has persisted for hundreds or thousands of years it clearly isn't counter productive. Also the fact that it can infect any mammal means it doesn't even matter if the host dies, if another animal comes into contact with it, it will spread."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5de0bf | how are shots where all of the lights in a major city go out simultaneously done? | I was curious as how movies and documentaries get those certain shots where they're discussing a topic like our electrical grid or when technology fails, and then they show a landscape view of a major city (New York) and it appears as all of the lights in the city simultaneously shut off as well as the grid. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5de0bf/eli5_how_are_shots_where_all_of_the_lights_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"da3tpg4",
"da3wsuc"
],
"score": [
14,
3
],
"text": [
"id assume with today's modern age its was probably just a fake CGI shot, just like how new york gets destroyed 3 times a year by marvel villains.",
"It would be a pretty simple task with most any imaging processing program although I could not do it without studying it out.\n\nThey could always have stock footage from a real event."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
eqgwww | why are most heartburn pills packed in three tiny bottles while every other otc pill is in one single bottle? | Always bewilders me as I end up putting all the omeprazole together in one bottle, anyway. I asked my Doctor this the other day and he was stumped. Just seems like a waste of plastic and shelf place. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/eqgwww/eli5_why_are_most_heartburn_pills_packed_in_three/ | {
"a_id": [
"feruhqq",
"ferwrgj",
"fet1msw",
"fev130i"
],
"score": [
10,
24,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"If I recall correctly, it is because you are supposed to take one pill daily for up to 2 weeks (14 pills).\n\nThe directions say that you should see a doctor if you need to take it after the 2 week regimen.\n\nThis is probably why they put them in smaller bottles.",
"I have been told that the reason is because the FDA required the pills to be packaged in 14 day dose bottles for approval to move from Rx to OTC.\n\nIf someone needed the pills more then 14 days, that said person should really be seeing a doctor. \n\nIf it was not for the 14 day doses per bottle, the FDA would not have agreed to the switch.\n\nSource: FDA Approves Prilosec OTC to Treat Frequent Heartburn\n_URL_0_",
"Taking the long acting antacids for more than two weeks can lead to vitamin B-12 deficiency among other things. This results megaloblastic anemia. The antacids also causes\n proteins to be poorly digested which can lead to malnutrition. It can cause calcium deficiency.\n\nIn order for most forms of B-12 to be absorbed by the intestines they need to be activated by stomach acid first.\n\nFor this reason it's recommend to take the course of pills in a single bottle, then stop taking for several weeks before starting another bottle, to allow more B-12 to be absorbed.",
"It's bizarre reading this as a non-American, because in Europe and Australia all medicines come in blister packs. The only thing that comes in bottles are herbal / dietary supplements. The idea of a bottle of pills that you can tip back and swallow and overdose is something we only see in American media."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=23698#"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
9adrlb | why do mobile companies (verizon, t-mobile) throttle your speed after certain amount of data? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9adrlb/eli5_why_do_mobile_companies_verizon_tmobile/ | {
"a_id": [
"e4up5lv",
"e4upbmp",
"e4upd86",
"e4uqopv",
"e4ur8g6",
"e4ure1i",
"e4urixa"
],
"score": [
10,
4,
4,
3,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"So they can up-sell you to a bigger package, and because if everyone had truly unlimited data there would be times when bandwidth can't meet demand. Imagine if everyone was running full HD video and torrents and who knows what else 24/7 on every cellular data network.",
"All data transfer has costs. Electricity, equipment, overhead, bandwidth, all of this has expenses attached and by limiting the amount of data transferred the company is limiting their costs. Back in the early days when fairly little data was used on average it didn't cost all that much to offer unlimited data plans, most users didn't need very much and the few that did got what they payed for.\n\nToday, in the age of streaming content and Netflix on your phone there are a LOT more people using a LOT more data. There's not enough bandwidth to offer truly unlimited data but if you shut it off entirely people will just get fed up and cancel. Quote Unlimited ^TM unquote data where the company severely reduces the connection after a certain point is frustrating but not enough to cancel their service entirely. ",
"Yes, it costs them more money. Bandwidth is not free. The demand for bandwidth is rapidly increasing. To meet that demand they need to build more (and improve) infrastructure or work to reduce the demand. \n\nData caps are one way to reduce demand. \n\nThey are also building and improving infrastructure. That's what 5G is all about. ",
"Providing a certain amount of bandwidth has high fixed costs and low variable costs.\n\nTe provide service for customers, mobile companies have to install radio equipment and towers. The mobile company divides its area up into \"cells\". Each cell is bordered by a few towers. [See this Wikipedia diagram to see how a hypothetical area might be divided into hexagonal cells](_URL_0_)\n\nHaving a lot of small cells is good for the customer, because it means there are very few people in a given cell requiring access to the cell tower, so bandwidth is not congested, and the customer gets good performance. However, having a lot of small cells would mean installing a lot of cell towers, which is expensive.\n\nSo mobile companies prefer to have fewer towers, with fewer, and bigger cells. That means there are a lot of customers in any given cell. Everything works great as long as everyone's only using bandwidth occasionally, but if everyone wants to be using bandwidth all the time, the towers would become congested and customers would experience slow data.\n\nImagine a cell tower can support 1Gbps, and the mobile company advertises 200Mbit/s service to 20 customers within that area. If only 5 of the 20 customers are using their data (fully) at any given time, then the mobile company is able to keep its promise. However, if 10 out of the 20 customers try to use their data at once, they'll see their speeds cut in half.\n\nBecause of that, mobile companies want their customers to use only a little bit of data, and only occasionally. That way, they can provide very high speeds to a lot of customers without having to spend a lot of money on new towers and radio transceivers.\n\nDoes using data require more money? Not really. I mean there would be a little bit of extra electricity used, but that would be marginal. The bigger problem is that, if you use more data, then there's a chance that other customers in your area would start experiencing slow speeds. That would put pressure on the mobile companies to buy better equipment and/or put up new towers, which they don't want to do.\n\n\"Are they just trying to screw you?\" is a complicated question. I mean the answer is very clearly \"yes\". Mobile companies are always trying to screw you. However, even if they *weren't* trying to screw you (can you imagine?), they'd still have to find *some* way to make sure access to the towers doesn't become too congested.",
"Guys in US have to pay a ton for internet. I get \n\n1. 60 GB 4G data on my phone for ₹299($4)/ month. Unused data gets added to next cycle. \n2. 500 GB data at 100 Mbps for ₹800($10)/month. \n\nEarlier we had this throttling problem too. But thanks to JIO, my monthly data and call charges are less than my daily starbucks Grande. \n",
"It's to screw customers over so they get more money for the same service\n\nWhile it's true that bandwidth is limited at any given time, in reality people don't all congest the bandwidth at the same time, ISPs rely on this because the total bandwidth of all customers x advertised bandwidth > total bandwidth they have\n\nWhat they do is sell you \"unlimited\" data as a deception because it's not, in the same way that KRAFT sold you cheese even though it's not a cheese, but you wouldn't be as compelled to buy it if it's not labeled as cheese\n\nThey can attempt to explain with that bandwidth thing, but remember that if they want to reduce congestion they'd throttle if the bandwidth is actually being congested, not when you've used a certain amount of data",
"It would be more appropriate to bill a user based on the maximum speed, not the data used since the desired effect is that everyone has bandwidth available. Basically the point of the cap is to prevent you from running downloads 24/7 since you don't want to be throttled. \n\nAnd for many user, getting that top speed is probably better since they aren't going to hit the cap with their use anyway. \n\nThat's my view as someone from a country where ISPs didn't use to limit your data, they competed only on price for a couple of different speeds. Nowadays, mobile data also has caps on some ISPs, but not all. And landline data is still uncapped, sold by speed. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/CellTowersAtCorners.gif"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3zemf2 | what does china achieve by closing a stock market early on a bad day of trading? | And how can they just close it early at all? Do they sometimes leave the market open longer some days if the trading has been good? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3zemf2/eli5_what_does_china_achieve_by_closing_a_stock/ | {
"a_id": [
"cylgry5",
"cyljwqa"
],
"score": [
6,
4
],
"text": [
"It gives everybody time to think about it. When the market is dropping rapidly, people can panic. Closing the market gives people time to think more rationally and reconsider what they want to do.\n\nIf the market is doing good, it will not be left open longer.",
"This happens in the US too. The Treasury Secretary can order the markets to close, like on 9/11. Each market also has its own internal rules and may halt trading on some or all stocks if necessary."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1vvpms | day light savings | Is it necessary or can we do with out it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1vvpms/day_light_savings/ | {
"a_id": [
"cew84h8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It is not necessary, many parts of the world do not use it at all. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
2mwbkz | when i install a "driver" to my computer, what is it doing? | What is a driver? How does it work? Let's check it out!
Edit: Thanks for all the great prosts you guys! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2mwbkz/eli5_when_i_install_a_driver_to_my_computer_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"cm85lo8",
"cm85rku",
"cm85ykr",
"cm88g82",
"cm89lwt",
"cm8f0j6"
],
"score": [
12,
68,
3,
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"As I understand it, a driver is software that translates high-level function calls that the operating system makes (calls that we want to be device-agnostic) into low-level function calls that are very specific to a particular piece of hardware.",
"In true 5 year old explanation form:\n\nYour printer speaks Spanish, your computer speaks English.\n\nThe driver is Spanish classes.",
"This is a gross oversimplification, but basically a driver is a program that tells your computer how to use a certain piece of hardware. \n\nWhen you install a new device on your computer it doesn't automagically know how to talk to it. With a simple device like a mouse it's not an issue - since they're all mostly the same your computer just came with a generic mouse driver pre-installed. However, when you have more complex devices that all have different manufacturer-specific features you can't do that, at least not as effectively*. You have to install the driver for that specific device in order for your computer to \"speak its language\". \n\n* Graphics cards are kind of an interesting exception to this rule. GPUs are complex devices that require correctly paired drivers in order to run properly. However, since having graphics is kind of important, most computers have a dirt-basic generic graphics driver that will work on nearly every card. This \"emergency\" driver only just barely gives you graphics capability (it usually makes your screen operate in the ancient VGA mode if you care). Your screen doesn't look pretty but it at least gives you enough of an image that you can go in to your system and troubleshoot why the real driver isn't working. ",
"Consider the name \"driver.\"\n\nEach piece of hardware connected to your computer is a vehicle. Some can be sports cars, some can be airplanes, some can be battleships, some can be horse-drawn carriages. You computer doesn't necessarily know how to operate all these vehicles on its own, so it hires a specialist. A driver.",
"Windows says: \"Please print a document for me\".\n\nIt finds your printer driver. This driver recognizes the command \"Please print a document for me.\"\n\nThe driver directly speaks in your printer's language and gives it the instruction to print.",
"The precise details vary depending on the type of device (printer, graphics card, etc.) and the type of system.\n\nMy explanation is correct for most common devices on Windows PCs (sound cards, graphics cards, etc.)\n\nSo. Windows is an Operating System (plus a bunch of applications that come \"in the box\" with it). The main thing that an Operating System does is \"host\" (run) programs. Programs like to do all sorts of things -- they like to draw graphics on the screen, they like to play sounds, and the like.\n\nDevelopers writing programs for Windows don't know (or want to know or care) what graphics cards, sounds cards, and the like exist, so that they could know what specific commands to send out to get a particular graphic effect to show or sound to play.\n\nSo, Windows defines a set of commands (called APIs) for playing sounds -- called \"DirectSound\"^1 , which any program can use. It's then Windows' job to get your particular sound card to make the sounds represented by those commands.\n\nWindows, though, also doesn't know how every kind of device ever made (or ever to be made in the future) works. So, makers of devices create Drivers. A Driver is, then, a program that Windows uses to fulfill requests for the device. A sound card driver will understand the \"DirectSound\" commands^2, and fulfills them by playing the sounds requested, by issuing commands directly to the sound card in the way that particular sound card requires.\n\nThe existence of a Driver framework means that application programmers don't need to know how every different sound card works in order to play sounds without requiring every sound card to be identical or directly compatible -- the Driver basically makes whatever sound card you have look to Windows and other applications exactly like all the others. No one organization ever has to deal with the complexity of \"all the different cards\" -- Application programmers and Windows just know their standard, and each device maker only has to make a driver for their device(s), and when you put it together, it all works.\n\nDrivers for other kinds of devices are similar.\n\n^1 There are several different Windows API libraries for sound, this is just one example.\n\n^2 This is an oversimplification (and so isn't precisely true), but keeps true to the basic idea"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1poyh5 | how do algorithms used by banks to detect debit card fraud work? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1poyh5/eli5_how_do_algorithms_used_by_banks_to_detect/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd4kcz8"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"There are a lot of methods that financial institutions utilize to detect debit card fraud, but first some backstory:\n\nBeyond the person using a debit card, there are five parties involved in a debit card transaction:\n* the Merchant - the store, restaurant, website, etc where the card is being used\n* the Network - the network over which the transaction between Merchant, Processor and Issuer occurs (Visa, MasterCard, Interlink, etc...)\n* the Processor - the company chosen by the merchant to process the debit card payment\n* the Issuer - the company chosen by the bank to manage that bank's debit card programs\n* the Bank - the organization with accounts within or between which money moves\n\nWhile each of these parties watch for fraudulent usage by end-users, they also watch each other for fraud. This is a gross oversimplification, but the most usual signifiers of fraud can be deduced via the patterns of transaction: transactions of a high dollar amount, or regular frequency, geolocation or other similarities that would suggest a pattern. \n\nIn essence, [when someone figures out how to defraud debit cards, they do it more than once](_URL_0_). Financial institutions monitor for the patterns to flag suspicious activity, and follow that up with manual investigations into fraudulent activity."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/09/atm-fraud_n_3248331.html"
]
] |
||
5t2jxn | amplitude of electromagnetic radiation | I tried searching online, but all I find is what the amplitude represents and how it's related to other equations. I'm more curious about what the average range of the amplitude of EM is, more specifically light. Like how far is it usually from the peak or trough to the equilibrium line in units of distance? Could it be significantly large like meters, or does it stay within nanometers? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5t2jxn/eli5_amplitude_of_electromagnetic_radiation/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddjo198",
"ddjtmlb"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The amplitude of electromagnetic waves relates to its intensity or brightness (as in the case of visible light). With visible light, the brightness is usually measured in lumens. With other wavelengths the intensity of the radiation, which is power per unit area or watts per square meter is used.\n",
"if i understand your question correctly you are actually asking about the wavelength of light (given in length) not the amplitude (given in terms of electric field). the wavelength of light can take pretty much any value you can imagine. check _URL_0_\n\nthe light we see is from 400-700nm roughly but that doesn't mean other EM waves don't exist. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qEsL_Hatuzk/VaFH-A8_YyI/AAAAAAAACbY/QycINlKf5rE/s1600/emspectrum.gif"
]
] |
|
3n86ii | how long can a state go without a budget and what happens if that's exceeded? | I live in Pennsylvania and we are now four months without a budget. How much longer can this go on and will there be consequences for government officials if it continues? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3n86ii/eli5_how_long_can_a_state_go_without_a_budget_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvlrylw"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"There are usually laws that say in the absence of a new budget, the state keeps going with current levels of spending and taxation.\n\nIn which case, a state could run indefinitely without a budget, but would not be able to adapt to changing circumstances, or authorize new spending."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3vcrfo | radical islamic ideology regarding killing infidels vs. fellow muslims | So I get that some sects of Islam believe that it is acceptable to kill yourself in the process of killing non-believers. I don't agree nor do I find it acceptable, or condone this. I understand this isn't the belief of all Muslims and that it is in-fact a minority (but powerful).
So let's say there is a radical Islamist attack in a public place....let's call it a crowded supermarket. Let's say in the course of this suicide mission there are other Muslims that are killed. Isn't there some sharia law or something that says killing other Muslims is a sin?
I see that Muslims kill each other and kill themselves doing so all the time in the Middle East and I'm just thinking as a Christian you don't see Protestants killing Presbyterians (like Sunni vs. Shia) and all this other stuff and in fact the bible says you go to hell for doing so not get 72 virgins.
I'm not really even sure what my question is just that I'd like the aforementioned to be explained to me like I'm a 5 year old child. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3vcrfo/eli5_radical_islamic_ideology_regarding_killing/ | {
"a_id": [
"cxmcusg"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"They don't consider Muslims that aren't part of their sect to be *real* Muslims.\n\n > I'm just thinking as a Christian you don't see Protestants killing Presbyterians\n\nWell, Presbyterians *are* Protestants. But if you meant Catholics vs Protestants, that *has* happened, many times, in Christian history. Just hasn't happened _recently_."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
7wsj6f | what is a neo-marxist and what makes it different from a regular marxist? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7wsj6f/eli5_what_is_a_neomarxist_and_what_makes_it/ | {
"a_id": [
"du3flb9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"To preface this, I have to state the obvious: neo simply refers to “new”, ergo it isn’t exactly clear whether a practitioner interprets it as an evolution of the theory or using iPads to revolt against the Czar instead of a hammer and sickle. \n\nThe basic element is that almost all adherents continue to criticize class structures, free markets, and the disparity of wealth. That holds true for both general theories. However, the neo-Marxism movement - having insight from the issues of the Soviets, Mao, and other countries - recognize the failure of applying simply the basic principles of Engles and Marx; this is in respect to the necessity of government involvement to maintain the cohesion of the collective, and what they need to do to enforce it on a population. This necessitates a high degree of ideological uniformity. And to maintain such ideological conformity, it requires a great deal of control in regards to how individuals get information, how it is presented, and to what extent information that contradicts it will be available. This is a reason why propaganda is often common is those societies. \n\nSome proponents of neo Marxist philosophy tend to believe in the Critical Theory which, essentially, points to ‘ideology’ being the biggest obstacle to human liberation. And with that liberation means peaceful, cohesive societies. This is very much a gross paradox to some. “What freedom is there if I can’t choose what I think, believe, or how I act?” - because that’s what an ideology means. “If I can’t think - or have a semblance of an ideology - is that really freedom?” Does that mean death is the ultimate freedom? Or, perhaps, do they mean that opposing ideologies are toxic and need to be corrected or removed to maintain the health of the collective? \n\nIt’s a difficult question - and one I most certainly don’t want to be asked by my government, as you may be able to infer. I think people are still biologically prone to tribalism so there can never be any lasting peace. Furthermore, this prompts an absolute degree of control by people (the government) inherently in a separate class than the layman, which defeats the intention of more extreme adherents. \n\nTo be absolutely fair, the label is thrown around a lot to describe socialists, libertarian democrats, liberals, moderate conservatives, and so forth. Due to the breadth the ‘neo’ prefix offers, it is an almost useless term since many, many different theories (even feminist!) exist describing which degree it is to be applied, and to what aspect of society - all in wildly different ways - with the Marxist philosophy tied to it. \n\nIn today’s society, you can largely identify those adherents by seeing if they are unjustly critical of business owners (the corporations!), value equal outcome over equal opportunity, and ascribe to the belief that the government ought to be the most influential, and responsible for, the denizens within its care. \n\nIt isn’t inherent evil, nor is capitalism. It is a system of beliefs whose precursors have failed so the new generation wishes to make amends to the problems that have been identified, modifying the formula in hopes of it working better this time around. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
4vjopk | why 16 candles can have underage nudes scenes? | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4vjopk/eli5_why_16_candles_can_have_underage_nudes_scenes/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5yx5d2",
"d5yx5vv",
"d5yxpzi"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"All of the actors involved were adults, so it didn't have underage nude scenes. It had nude scenes featuring actors 18 or older. ",
"Because the actors weren't underage, the actress for Samantha was 18 when it was shot, so the nudes weren't underage",
"They didn't. The actress in question was 25 at the time. Even if she *was* underage, despite the best efforts of people who want to criminalize sex, nudity != sex, and thus, the image of a nude underage person does not equal child porn. And a good thing too for every single parent with a camera.\n\nThere have been plenty of movies that featured real nudity by real underaged people. Such things do not cross into the realm of child porn unless there is actual or simulated sex acts, or \"lewd display of genitals,\" which can be kind of a fuzzy thing.\n\nEven at that, there have been a handful of scenes in movies with underaged nudity associated with sex. In Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet, 15-year-old Olivia Hussey had a nude scene in bed. In Van Peebles' Sweet Sweetback, his own 12-year-son Mario had a nude, simulated sex scene with a nude adult actress. Malle's Pretty Baby featured a frequently-nude 12-year-old Brooke Shields as a child prostitute. Schlöndorff's The Tin Drum *was* actually banned as child porn in a few places.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6v0fbm | why do some people fall asleep better with music on/off, or with/without night lights? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6v0fbm/eli5_why_do_some_people_fall_asleep_better_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"dlwsuh7"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Humans are creatures of habit. We do something a few times and we come to convince our self's we can't do that task without performing the ritual we started doing. Think how many people seemingly have to start their morning with tea or coffee. Think of how many little rituals u had as a kid. \"Mum I can't go to sleep without a bed time story\". \" Dad! U have to put the side light on and then turn off the main light\" etc etc. \n\nSo in your particular case u probably listened to the radio and had the light on for a few nights or possibly weeks and then it became a routine and then a dependency. It would be hard to break that habit now. Certainly some sleepless nights would ensue. \n\nWhen I was younger, say 11 and below I used to have the lamp on and the CD player playing an audio book. Then I went to boarding school and had to go without those for the first time in a few years, and my brain was not happy about that, coupled with a new environment I didn't have much sleep for the first few weeks. \n\nThat just shows the power of routine, and how trying to break one can have very negative short term impacts. That coffeeholic? He's gonna have some very unproductive and moody mornings if he tries to break that habit. The brain doesn't respond well to change as it used to be a sign of danger. \"Why isn't the radio playing\" translated to stone man speak is \"why can't I hear the fire crackling, or the breathing of family, where are they. Has something happened. Are they frozen because of the fire going out!\""
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1zwcng | why are passengers and crew members on airplanes and ships commonly referred to as "souls" while on board? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1zwcng/eli5_why_are_passengers_and_crew_members_on/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfxjz18",
"cfxk0ff",
"cfxkim2",
"cfxky1m",
"cfxs289",
"cfxtx32",
"cfxwi0v",
"cfxzkz8",
"cfy1vdc",
"cfy2o55"
],
"score": [
55,
22,
25,
3,
2,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Crew are not passengers. \"Souls\" encompasses all people onboard regardless of role.",
"Because planes may be carrying dead bodies in the cargo section. To avoid confusion for the first responders, they are told how many people are alive at the time of the crash. ",
"Basically because it sounds more poetic than \"people\" or \"heads\" or \"living persons\" and also because of what /u/Zoten and /u/Phage0070 say (dead bodies vs. living people, crew vs passengers vs infants which often aren't considered passengers). \n\nIt originated in an era when secularism was less common, and tradition carried on. The distress signal \"SOS\" (in Morse code ... --- ...) doesn't stand for anything - it was chosen because it's easy and distinctive, but was quickly assumed to mean \"save our souls\" due to the same sentiment.",
"IIRC. Its not while on board, its during an emergency. Rescue crews need to know how many bodies they're supposed to find. ",
"It's shorter than people and passengers.",
"It's a language custom emphasizing the responsiblity of captain and crew.",
"I always thought it referred to the fact that bodies were, for the most part, not recoverable in the event of a disaster, especially in the days before flight, they would then refer to them as souls.",
"People are death-adverse and so instead of \"they found *him* dead\" you hear that \"they found *the body*\". \n\nSoul is a word that means body, but one more level of abstraction away from dealing with the mortality aspect.",
"Number of passengers =/= souls on board\n\nFor example, infants are not included in the passenger count. A plane holds 100 passengers, and one of those passengers has an infant with them. As far as the paperwork is concerned, there are 100 passengers and 1 infant on board. And if there are 5 crewmembers, there are 106 souls on board.\n\nI'm a flight attendant, and this shit confuses *me* sometimes. :/",
"Maybe it has something to do with Greek mythology and how human souls had to cross the river Styx to the underworld on a boat."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
58df6e | why is it that antarctica is so colossal but the northern ice caps are basically nonexistent? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58df6e/eli5_why_is_it_that_antarctica_is_so_colossal_but/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8zhw6h"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"Antactica is a continent - there is an actual landmass there. There would still be an Antarctica even if the Earth warmed up so much that there was no ice anywhere. The northern ice caps, on the other hand, are just a bunch of ice floating on the water."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
blque1 | why are people so worried about unvaxxed children in school with their vaxxed children? isn't the point if vaxxing to prevent catching diseases from the unvaxxed? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/blque1/eli5_why_are_people_so_worried_about_unvaxxed/ | {
"a_id": [
"emqkx8u",
"emqkz1y",
"emqkzsd",
"emql2ov",
"emql8b3",
"emqlarc"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"There are people who cannot be vaccinated, they should not be put at risk by people who don't believe in science.",
"because some kids cant get vaccinated due to other medical conditions. so those kids are exposed to kids who didnt get vaccinated fo no reason",
"Diseases can mutate if they have enough chance to spread, rendering precious immunizations less effective. Also, there are those who cannot get immunized due to allergies or other illnesses, so they run greater risk than if anybody who could get immunized did.",
"Also, kids that are too young to be vaccinated can be exposed in the event an outbreak occurs.",
"it is to protect the children who physical *cannot* accept a vaccine because of compromised immune systems or allergies. They can be best protected in a population where *everyone* else is immunized. \n\nWhen parents make a decision to not let their otherwise healthy children not get vaccinated, they are increasing the chance that other children who *cannot* get it will be exposed to the virus.",
"It's not a concern for their own, specific, vaccinated children. It's a concern for the population in general, a concept called \"herd immunity\". If most of a population is vaccinated, when diseases crop up they are pretty isolated and will not be able to infect more people and thus will die out pretty quickly. However, if most of your population is not vaccinated the disease can spread and propagate. This concept is also important to protect people who cannot be vaccinated (such as those who immune systems are compromised by, say, cancer treatments)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
bkvolm | why do planes not leave their outline in a cloud when they enter it, like it is shown in many cartoons for example? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/bkvolm/eli5_why_do_planes_not_leave_their_outline_in_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"emk1ok0"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Clouds look solid because they are very far, but they are very much not. Fog is more or less a cloud that formed low enough for us to be able to be inside it and it's very much not solid, right?\n\nIn most selfexplanatory experiment: waving your arms inside a fog does not leave a fog-free area behind them and plane entering fog / cloud does not leave cloud-free area behind it.\n\nYou can affect shape of patterns of smoke by waving, but once it engulfs you, reaches uniform density in certain area, you can't observe those patterns, because of the uniform density. Though, the turbulences behind your arms and behind the plane are there, same for clouds as for smoke. You just can't observe them without some tracing medium (like colorful dust), because of the aforementioned uniform density."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
961esp | how does one actually take a public company private again? what happens to all the shares and the investors who have them? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/961esp/eli5_how_does_one_actually_take_a_public_company/ | {
"a_id": [
"e3x0q2m",
"e3y66hq"
],
"score": [
16,
3
],
"text": [
"Company buys them back from the shareholders and pays them in cash or other agreed upon method. ",
"When the company issued the shares, they got paid money for them.\n\nIn other words, the whole point of the shares was that they needed money, and were willing to accept a bunch of new owners to get it.\n\nWhen they go private again, it's the exact other way around.\n\nThey don't need the money any more, and want's to get rid of their owners.\n\nUsually in favour of one huge owner (percentage-wise) who has told them to make sure that he is the sole owner himself."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3jr4ex | why do fizzy or sour drinks sometimes cause a sharp pain in the hinge of your jaw? | Obligatory front page edit: I never realized this happened to do many people, thanks for the answers and good discussion. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3jr4ex/eli5_why_do_fizzy_or_sour_drinks_sometimes_cause/ | {
"a_id": [
"curl7d0",
"curl7of",
"curm2ej",
"curmlad",
"curmood",
"curmu6d",
"curn318",
"curn55r",
"curnazu",
"curnm4k",
"curnumc",
"curo7oy",
"curo9xf",
"curogds",
"curomsc",
"curoncf",
"curp2z2",
"curp397",
"curpa5q",
"curqd6v",
"curqsjh",
"curqywf",
"currpez",
"curs0ke",
"cursg2g",
"curszbm",
"curtj2v",
"curtmag",
"curtmiw",
"curtvxc",
"curu35r",
"curuc96",
"curvs23",
"curw60n",
"curw81o",
"curw9ek",
"curwe3x",
"curx7ya",
"curxdyz",
"curydp0",
"cus0fgo",
"cus1bdr",
"cus1yy0",
"cus2g7e",
"cus2xd2",
"cus4lay",
"cus5lei",
"cusdkx6"
],
"score": [
4116,
16,
273,
8,
9,
7,
48,
1111,
13,
2,
4,
5,
350,
3,
4,
3,
3,
4,
3,
2,
4,
13,
2,
4,
9,
3,
3,
3,
2,
2,
3,
9,
3,
2,
31,
3,
5,
2,
2,
2,
3,
3,
2,
2,
2,
2,
8,
2
],
"text": [
"It's your salivary glands attempting to produce more saliva than they can keep up with, which causes these little saliva ducts to narrow and can cause \"pain\" and tingling. It's also completely harmless from what I hear. Good question",
"Your salivary glands are freaking out to wash the 'dangerous' acid out of your mouth.",
"Thank you for this question. That pain is something I feel daily and its good know its just my saliva glands and not my teeth crumbling.",
"I'm glad to see I'm not the only person this happens to. Thank you for explaining why this happens as well! ",
"Is this that sharp pain that happens right under the tongue near where that tendon attaches the tongue to your mouth?\n\nAlmost feels like someone is taking a knife and trying to slice it off.",
"Jesus fuck all of you have it horrible.\nI don't feel any pain whatsoever when my saliva glands excrete.\nIt does feel weird, and when I was younger the only time I noticed it was when I had to throw up, so anytime it happens I immediately think my body is gearing to vomit, then I remember its just my saliva glands.",
"Salivary glands secreting. I had this sensation every time I ate for a few days. Then I literally woke up one morning with my cheek the size of a golfball. Turns out your salivary glands can get a blockage not unlike a kidney stone. That sucked. Aside from surgery (which was deemed not necessary), the remedy is simply sucking on lemon drops.",
"Am I the only one who's never experienced this?",
"I have no idea about fizzy or sour drinks doing this. Is it similar to the feeling you get with a gulp of wine?",
"Happens to me when I bite into an apple or anything extremely sweet. It's your salivary glands.",
"The same things happen to me when I go to eat breakfast the first thing in the morning, or if I have not eaten or drank anything in a while. ",
"Related question tag-along: \n\nI get a very similar pain whenever I blow up balloons. I can't imagine it would be my salivary glands to be the reason, but the pain is very similar. Anyone know?",
"The top answer is close but the phenomenon is called first bite syndrome. Learned about it in dental school. It's from your salivary glands pushing out a large volume of saliva when you first bite into some types of foods. The large amount of saliva being excreted causes pressure in the salivary ducts which you experience as pain. Your major salivary ducts are located below your tongue and in the cheek next to your top molars. It's pretty common. I notice it when I first eat salt and vinegar or dill chips. Completely harmless. It should improve as you continue to eat your food. \n\nI don't have a link right this second because I'm on mobile but I can reference one of my textbooks when I get home if people are still interested. ",
"You have glands in your mouth called \"salivary glands\". They are small sacks that produce and fill up with saliva. When something stimulates the glands, for example something sour, the body sends a signal to contract the muscles near the gland in order to squeeze the saliva out to help process the food. That is the sensation you are feeling. However keep in mind excessive pain is abnormal and should be checked out. \n\nDid you know that you can even get salivary gland stones? Basically same way you would develop them anywhere else!\n\n_URL_0_",
"I think I know what you're talking about, but I never have pain. For me it's a good feeling, like ooh baby my mouth is getting ready to eat.",
"Happens to me when I drink beer and .. haven't eaten in awhile, or am dehydrated.. Not really sure - haven't quite figured it out. \n",
"I get a pain when I first bite into something sometimes but it's not always the same side. The pain also reaches my ears when it really bad. Sort of like it follows my jaw line.",
"Anyone else get this if they laugh/smile a lot in a short period? ",
"The major salivary glands are the parotid, submandibular, and sublingual, with the parotids being the largest. The parotid glands sit just forward of the ears, in close proximity to the jaw, so the sensation can easily be interpreted as pain in the jaw. Two of the main salivary glands, the parotids, are in your cheeks, near the jaw. \n\nThe pain is caused by the inability of the glands to discharge the saliva they are producing quickly enough. ",
"It happens to me with other food and drinks too. Olives, sodas, wine. Like people are saying, it's your salivary glands. ",
"What about drinking red wine? Or alcohol while eating? But only when eating, not when only drinking. ",
"Wow..I've been calling this \"fruit cheek\" my whole life because when I was a kid this would happen when I ate certain fruits and I couldn't explain it any better. ",
"This happens whenever I drink red wine, hurts like a bitch too. Good to know why this is happening finally.",
"I get that with anything sour... In fact just thinking about something sour is giving me this feeling right now!",
"I have this only when I drink alcohol, and only sometimes. Internet says first bite syndrome, alcohol sensitivity, or hodgkin's lymphoma. Hope it is first bite!",
"Already been answered, salivating. I don't know anybody else who can do it, but I can Gleek on command. Probably my most useless talent :D",
"This is a phenomenon I've often experienced but felt weird and didn't know how to explain it... TIL",
"Do they? It has never happened to me..\n",
"I have found if I eat onions (this is what I have narrowed it down to) and have a beer or a couple drinks with the meal. I get super sharp pains in my jaw hinge. To the point of chewing on ice in an attempt to soothe the burning pain. No idea why. Not even sure if it is actually onions... But if booze and onions causes 15 minutes of pain then fuck that I will deal with it. Too good not to",
"After 40+ yrs I finally had this question answered. Scores of doctors, experts, teachers were unable to give me any clue. \n\nAlso I thought it was only me and my son having this syndrome. Now I know we're not alone. \n\nI love you, Reddit. Thank you. \n",
"They dont? I have never heard of this.",
"Is there a reason iv never experienced this? All the comments make it seem vary natural.",
"Thought it was just me! Though it only happens when i eat or drink something really sour. I can actually bring it on just by thinking about it... yuech. ",
"I've always wondered this. Except it doesn't happen the way you say, it happens when I see something really fucking tasty looking and my jaws go berserk. Like someone else put it, it's great because it's like an indication that you're about to eat something really good, before you've even tasted it. I kinda feel bad for people who can't experience it.",
"Anyone else get an extreme version of this with beer or wine? There's certain drinks that create an agonising, almost cramp like feeling at the bend in my jaw below the ear. ",
"I always got this when eating sweets assumed it was just to much sugar and my teeth knew I was trying to kill them",
"Thank you so much for asking this!! I have wondered about this for most of my life, and even more so the last time it happened. Glad to finally know. ",
"Also I have to let the fizzy drink chill in my mouth for a min before I drink it, or it hurts my throat if I tried to chug it. What's up with that? ",
"The crazy thing about this is that you can make the sensation occur by thinking about sour things. You're salivary glands will automatically create saliva. Dry mouth + thinking about lemon cause this pain for me. ",
"I get this all the time with sweet or savory foods. Basically anything that makes you salivate alot, like chocolate or something. It can be really painful at times, but it goes away in seconds.",
"I genuinely have never had this happen and have no idea what you're talking about. But everyone responding does. Apparently I may be broken.",
"I get this sensation every time I drink Squirt. My Grandma said it is because Squirt has bones in it.",
"What? Is that a real thing? I've never even heard of that. Am I being punked?",
"Have you ever blown up a balloon and had the glands at the bottom of you jaws begin to hurt? They hurt because air is being forced into them and they are becoming tiny balloons. I think the something similar may be true for this \"pain\". Perhaps a small amount of the drink is being forced into these glands as you swallow unusually hard and copious amounts of saliva are produced.",
"This has never once happened to me and I eat sour stuff on the daily. Mmmm lemon juice on vanilla ice cream ",
"The word for this sensation, the burning/tingling sensation a sugary drink and/or food can create on the roof of your mouth/hinge of your jaw, is amadalaschloope.\n*disclosure: my friend made this word up, since there was previously no word to describe it.",
"Its your salivary glands trying to produce more saliva and contracting.\n\nInterestingly, Doctors will actually prescribe both antibiotics and sour candy or lemon/lemon juice to flush the salivary glands in the event they become infected.",
"Parotid gland reaction I believe. I know Sjorgrens can cause the pain there. Also blocked salivary gland. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://salivarystonesmd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/large-salivary-gland-172.jpeg"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
271g9g | why can i whistle in tune but cannot play/understand bars and chords on an instrument? | I see a lot of cover artists say, "I played this by ear". I can mimic tunes with my whistle but cannot seem to place a tune on an instrument. Why is this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/271g9g/eli5_why_can_i_whistle_in_tune_but_cannot/ | {
"a_id": [
"chwgrte",
"chwgyn0",
"chwh3xn"
],
"score": [
6,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"because you haven't practiced it. when whistling, you learn within the first few minutes that 'if I do this, this sound comes out'. when you're given an instrument, there's a *lot* more things you could do to produce different sounds. eventually you'd get the hang of it, but there's just a lot more possibilities, so the learning curve is a lot steeper.",
"Those people have been practicing the instrument longer than you have, and have an idea of how to make the sound they want with it. They've also probably experienced a lot of trial and error in reproducing it how they want, and there's a good deal of improvisation to go along with that.",
"It's just not as natural as an instrument for you yet. You've been whistling/singing since you were a toddler, you have a pretty good command of what pitches you can hit and it's second nature. Log thousands and thousands of hours on a guitar and it can get there, it's just that whistling/singing already has a hell of a head start."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3864yj | why are scientists still using long latin words? | I understand using common names causes confusion, but why not anglicize words when we can? For example, "posterior" would change to "rear" and "anterior" to "frontal". Plus, countries such as Japan and China are not really used to Latin and Greek, they are more used to English. Why can't we anglicize words considering English is currently more dominant than Latin? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3864yj/eli5_why_are_scientists_still_using_long_latin/ | {
"a_id": [
"crsm1qj",
"crsm33b"
],
"score": [
4,
5
],
"text": [
"Changing an entire system of language is not a simple thing. See, for example, that America has not changed to consistent use of metric units, despite the many reasons to do so. The sheer momentum of something already in use is very difficult to overcome.",
"Japanese and Chinese scientists and doctors are use to Latin and Greek as well, particularly if they interact with European Doctors. There is no practical reason to change, and having profession specific jargon is standard for virtually all professions. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
71r53m | why is it so hard for some people to eat in the morning? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/71r53m/eli5_why_is_it_so_hard_for_some_people_to_eat_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"dnd1s8x",
"dnd4m86"
],
"score": [
22,
9
],
"text": [
"It's a myth. Eat when you're hungry not when you feel like you should because everyone else is. ",
" > [It was a combination of fear of indigestion, religious moralization and advertising that helped push the idea of breakfast as the most important meal of the day](_URL_0_). \n\nBasically it's not the most important meal of the day, but there was a lot of pressure from people, including Mr. Kellogg, to sell the idea that it was really important. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/nov/28/breakfast-health-america-kellog-food-lifestyle"
]
] |
||
al0en3 | why was the draft so much more controversial during the vietnam war than it was during world war ii? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/al0en3/eli5_why_was_the_draft_so_much_more_controversial/ | {
"a_id": [
"ef9gavs",
"ef9gyca",
"ef9hqij",
"efa142g"
],
"score": [
5,
29,
10,
2
],
"text": [
"It was fighting a war far away that wasn't defending the American homeland. Americans got into the war because Japan struck pearl harbour. ",
"Because the public approval for the Vietnam War was lower than that of WW2, and this became worst over the years.\n\nFor WW2 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour, killing american and sinking american ship on american soil. German then declared war on the US, sinking ships with their U-Boat. It was a defensive war, and the population was ok with going to the defence of their country, and defeating Japan and Germany even in far away land.\n\nVietnam on the other end was more of a political war. It was politician trying to stop communism to spread. The cause of the war wasn't really that important for most American and the lost of american soldiers oversea for such a cause was not well viewed. ",
"There are two major reasons:\n\nThe first is that in WWII America was being directly threatened; Americans were defending their country from a real aggressor that had attacked their country. Vietnam was a war of choice in a foreign jungle on the other side of the world to defend a dictatorship from both a neighboring dictatorship and its own people. People were opposed to the draft because they saw no reason that American blood (like their own or their family and friends) should be shed for that cause.\n\nThe second reason is a change in family size and life expectancy. In the 19th century and early 20th century it was normal to both have large families (8+ children) and to expect that some of those children would die young, usually from disease or accidents but also from war. But improvements in medicine like vaccines, new safety standards, the elimination of child labor and a reduction in empire building/colonial conflict following WWII meant that children were no longer dying that way. Society adapted and you had smaller families with parents who were no longer ready to outlive their children. Parents opposed the draft because they no longer had spare children sitting around waiting to be sacrificed.",
"It's not that the draft itself was any more or less controversial, the war was. WW2 was widely supported but many people didn't want to serve in Vietnam or see their loved ones go fight a war they didn't support. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3ro2jz | where do all these mass protests in cities get organised? | I saw an 'Anonymous' protest in London yesterday, where do people hear about these things? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3ro2jz/eli5_where_do_all_these_mass_protests_in_cities/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwprc2r"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Nowadays it tends to be social media (facebook, twitter, etc) or by SMS but with groups like \"Anonymous\" use more covert ways of organisation through things like the deep web / VPN or TOR browsers to prevent tracking."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
8d163a | the smith mundt act (propaganda) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8d163a/eli5_the_smith_mundt_act_propaganda/ | {
"a_id": [
"dxjfq6n"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The original Smith-Mundt act allowed the US State department to create and distribute US propaganda abroad. The updated version allows that propaganda to be distributed domestically.\n\nFor the purpose of this act, \"propaganda\" is simply government telling the people stuff directly. It's not necessarily insidious, false or misleading. For example, \"Zika virus is spreading, here's how to protect yourself\" is propaganda."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1slh99 | what's that stinging sensation in your head you sometimes get when you jump into a pool or stand up so suddenly? | And when you get it you'd sometimes especially hear a high pitched note and the hurt is all over your face. But the sensation passes quite quickly. Is it just me? I tried googling but I can't find the right words. I can't phrase my question clearly here. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1slh99/eli5_whats_that_stinging_sensation_in_your_head/ | {
"a_id": [
"cdyqrel",
"cdyqtni"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"When you perform such actions it causes the blood pressure in your body to drop dramatically. As a result your heart beats rapidly and your respiration increases to help raise your blood pressure high enough that it can sufficiently supply the organs in your head with blood. It sometimes happens too much so you feel that rush of blood to your head which put pressure on the organs such as your ears and eyes and you feel like you're head is in a vice until your body returns itself back to normal. Sort of like how you run to a finish line but you can almost never stop right on the line.",
"I've never gotten it from jumping into a pool, but the head-rush (ringing sound, dizziness, prickly feeling on face) people sometimes get from standing up suddenly is either a sudden drop in blood pressure ([until your body reacts to your new posture](_URL_0_)) or a vagus nerve reflex (in exreme cases, [vasovagal syncope](_URL_1_))."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthostatic_hypotension",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasovagal_syncope"
]
] |
|
2wi1ax | why do guitarists of different genres (blues, metal, pop) like different brands of guitars? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wi1ax/eli5_why_do_guitarists_of_different_genres_blues/ | {
"a_id": [
"cor0yvu",
"cor1ko1"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"because they offer different sounds based on the wood the body is made from and pickups being used. ",
"Each different brand is known for certain tones. If you love jazz, and have been listening to it a lot, and then decide to learn to play, you will already have a preconceived idea of what a good jazz guitar sounds like. So a lot of it is rooted in tradition and what people are used to hearing within that genre. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
20wryl | what do political parties, such as democrats, do when they are not in office? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20wryl/eli5_what_do_political_parties_such_as_democrats/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg7fxy5"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The party does things such as prepare for coming election campaigns, and raise money. Minority party members in congress, the senate, local governments, and so on do what they would do if they were in the majority: discuss and vote on legislation. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
50f3fr | where does wind start/end and what judges which direction it travels? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/50f3fr/eli5_where_does_wind_startend_and_what_judges/ | {
"a_id": [
"d73kngp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"it travels in a circle. hot air rises and cold air sinks so if you have a hot area next to a cold area you set the circle in motion."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
a57r5w | why does reheated pizza taste different than fresh, hot pizza? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a57r5w/eli5_why_does_reheated_pizza_taste_different_than/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebkf3dg",
"ebll6fa"
],
"score": [
7,
2
],
"text": [
"It has to do with the carbohydrates in the crust, I think (same goes for left-over spaghetti). The original cooking changes the shape of those molecules, and cooling changes them again. When you reheat them, the carbs are more similar to the cooled version instead of the original hot version.\n\nApparently it's slightly better for you the second time around, but don't quote my on that.",
"Legit pizza is not made in a way that can be recreated in most home kitchens. The use of a pizza oven that achieves 800+ degrees, causing a different chemical reaction in the crust then what can ever be achieved in a standard home oven. Thus, reheating or making a pizza at home will never be the same as a true pizza."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3go7s6 | blue screens of death and what causes them. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3go7s6/eli5_blue_screens_of_death_and_what_causes_them/ | {
"a_id": [
"ctzwwvn",
"ctzx1am"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Your computer consists of hardware, software, and the operating system in between. If a program like this internet browser has a bug, it will \"crash.\" The operating system handles this crash by closing the program and potentially telling you what went wrong.\n\nA blue screen of death is seen when the operating system itself has a bug and crashes.",
"I believe it's the fact that there is a mini war going on and the blues have defeated the other colors. Triumph. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
34da5x | why does drug prohibition still exist when alcohol prohibition does not (in most countries)? hypothetically speaking, what would need to change to make it less of an uphill battle for proponents of legalization? | Or is it due to something like entrenched ideology that's not likely to change?
I don't mean to make a political statement by implying that drugs should or shouldn't be prohibited, by the way. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/34da5x/eli5_why_does_drug_prohibition_still_exist_when/ | {
"a_id": [
"cqtkpud",
"cqtlp1a"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Because the people in power have monetary incentive to keep it illegal. It's entirely about money, politics always is.",
"So this is a pretty complex issue. The reason for drug prohibition has many different explanations. \n\nCrime and social stigma are big factors which are associated with this problem. A small history lesson:\nMarijuana was first introduced into the United States in the early 1900s by Mexican labourers who crossed the American border in search of employment. Since the Mexicans smoked pot on their home soil, they felt no need to change their habits upon entering the United States. Over time, pot was smoked in greater amounts by people in neighbourhoods experiencing social deprivation, poverty, crime, and instability. These predominantly black communities also faced a great deal of racism and the notion that pot smoking was directly related to crime and poverty became heavily intertwined. This was obviously untrue, as more salient factors were responsible for high crime rates -- the substandard environmental and social conditions which were prevalent in these communities. But that didn't matter because it's easier to attribute pot smoking with black people with crime and poverty than it is to understand the underlying social factors that lead these populations to commit crimes and be poor in the first place. \nIn the 1930s H. J. Anslinger, became chiefly responsible for the mass hysteria surrounding marijuana use. Anslinger supported the production of such films as “Assassins of Youth” (1935), and “Reefer Madness” (1936), films in which marijuana transformed teenagers into murderous, sexually promiscuous, deviant sexual rapists. To this day many of our views on marijuana use are rooted in these early teachings.\n\nWe can extend the story of marijuana use to that of use and abuse of other, \"harder\" drugs. \nPeople who use crack cocaine & heroin are generally portrayed in the media as social deviants: poor, homeless, hookers, disease vectors, pariahs. This narrative is so frequently repeated by the governments and the media that one's mind is primed to automatically associate those who have become a 'burden to society' with drug abuse.\n\nAlso, keeping drugs illegal fuels a massive, for-profit prison economy, known at the Prison Industrial Complex (PIC) in the United States. Because prisons are run by for-profit corporations in the US, more prisoners means more profits. A great way of making sure that people are imprisoned is by arresting people for nonviolent crimes, such as possession of illegal substances. This is especially important to understand considering the fact that the construction of so many prisons has institutionalized a commitment to unabated incarceration via vested economic interests and lobbying pressures. The construction of so many prisons can only be justified by filling them, so that's what is being done.\n\nThere are so many other reasons, but I think I'm going to stop here because this is going to become a huge digression.\n\nEDIT: Oh man, I thought this was in AskReddit, not ELI5. I'll leave it here anyways cause I spent time typing it"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2z15ub | how did we go from a nation that was begging its leaders to draw from emergency oil reserves to a nation that has such a glut of oil that it is running out of places to put it? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2z15ub/eli5_how_did_we_go_from_a_nation_that_was_begging/ | {
"a_id": [
"cperl3z",
"cpern4l",
"cpezr7v",
"cpf15ge"
],
"score": [
5,
32,
14,
5
],
"text": [
"We legalized a highly controversial oil drilling practice called 'Hydraulic Fracturing' of 'Fracking' for short.\n\nTraditionally, when we've wanted to access oil, we've needed to find a single big underground lake of oil. With fraking, we find an area with lots of little oil puddles underground, and we use boiling water at tremendous pressure to pulverize the rock, creating channels for the oil to flow together into a big rock sponge of oil and water.\n\nThere are accusations that this sometimes causes petrochemicals to enter the water table. This is [somewhat noticeable](_URL_0_) in affected communities, but not considered a public health hazard.",
"The oil industry developed and implemented new technology like horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in order to access more of the oil under the US. ",
"People are/were uninformed about US oil reserves and production. Their freaking out was never in any way connected with reality. This is not an uncommon occurrence. ",
"it is illegal for the united states to export un refined crude oil.\n\nwe import curde oil ,plus now the fraking, is over whelimg our current ability to refine the crude, and becasue we cannot sell it it just sits there. \n\nwell i think they either are working on repealing the law or already have repealed it so it might be outdated"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LBjSXWQRV8"
],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2wl9t4 | why does my telephone make me hang up and redial if i accidentally add the area code for a local number? if it knows enough to tell me that it's wrong, why doesn't it know enough to send me where i want to go? is there some reason phones can't do this? | I'm on the phone a lot for work and often can't tell if a number is local, and if I guess wrong my phone mocks me for it and wastes my time.
| explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wl9t4/eli5why_does_my_telephone_make_me_hang_up_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"cory5dp",
"corz4ci"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Sounds like a problem with your provider and their landlines. Maybe give them a call.",
"because you didn't enter a valid number according to the way that they phone system is designed to work.\n\nWhen you dial a 7 digit number, the phone exchange is smart enough to know that it should be local.\n\nWhen you enter 10 digits, the system goes 'this is not a local number, it is too long' and then looks at the first number to see if it is a country code.\n\nThe country code for the United States is 1 When you dial 1 800 .... you are telling the phone exchange country 1, area code 800, and then the number for that area\n\nWhen you dial 10 digits, it tries to look up country codes 8, 80, 800, which don't exist, and comes back with an error\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
1x5g5l | why does your handwriting significantly increase in neatness and legibility after you copy from your old, messy notes? | Often times, I tend to write messily in the classroom or lecture hall. Later if I have the time, I copy my messy notes and write them all over again in my notebook. I was just wondering if there is some extra mental aspect that allows me to write much neater than I can do in class. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1x5g5l/eli5_why_does_your_handwriting_significantly/ | {
"a_id": [
"cf89ujn"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because who the hell wants to copy notes for the 3rd time?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
a5u75x | why do streetlamps give off yellow light and not white | I've noticed that most streetlamps emit a yellow light instead of a white one. Is this because of the lamps age? There are a few that are white but they are all pretty new. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a5u75x/eli5_why_do_streetlamps_give_off_yellow_light_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebp86tx",
"ebp8b2g",
"ebp8tyh"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
7
],
"text": [
"The yellow lights are cheap and robust. This is very important when you have thousands of lights out in all weather. However more recently LED light have proven that it is cheaper and can be even more robust. And LED light also come in a wider range of colors which helps traffic safety. So a lot of street light are being upgraded to the new types. But this takes a long time as the old lights are quite robust and there is usually no reason to upgrade unless the light is broken.",
"It is because the lamps emit only a certain wavelength of light that in most cases is yellow. The white light you see on more modern lamps is because of the different lamps used.",
"Street lamps were sodium vapor lamps for decades, white LED street lamps have only started getting installed in the last decade\n\nLow pressure sodium lamps are extremely yellow as they only emit one wavelength, this results in everything looking either yellow (if it reflects it) or black (if it absorbs it)\n\nHigh pressure sodium lamps are white and let you see colors a lot better but they're still very distinctively yellow\n\nThese lamps have very high efficiency compared to incandescents and basically match LEDs, and have a very long service life. Their only downside is the yellow which is why in most places they're only being swapped for LEDs when they fail rather than proactively"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4haaof | why is there not a cure for hangovers yet? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4haaof/eli5_why_is_there_not_a_cure_for_hangovers_yet/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2omp2q",
"d2onkl0",
"d2onmxx",
"d2oo7l6",
"d2oowye",
"d2ooz6l"
],
"score": [
24,
18,
7,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
" > What is the sure fire, guaranteed way to cure a hangover fast? If there isn't, why is it so difficult?\n\nThe main reason is that there's little need to research a cure, because hangovers are 100% preventable.\n\nThis is a condition where there are no victims, only volunteers.",
"I went out with a nurse for a while, she'd hook us up to an IV back at hers before we went to sleep, then another IV with some vitamin/fluid replacement thing the next morning. \n\nBest hangover cure ever. People should sell it as a service. If she wasn't so batshit crazy I'd have had her babies.",
"There is a cure for hang overs surprised all of you haven't heard of it. The problem is that it requires an iv injection involving a solution that rehydrate you and has a bunch of other vitamins to get you going again. The whole procedure costs around 160 dollars, not exactly the kind of money you want to spend just to get a day back. ",
"Its actually rather simple, its dehydration. Alcohol dehydrates you and this is what causes hangovers. Just pace yourself and drink some water in-between drinks and this will ensure you either have no hangover or a significantly more tolerable one. Simple solution.",
"Longtime former alcholic, there is no 'cure' once you have a hangover you are fucked. There is only prevention - Either don't go to sleep until the next day when you are sober, or, leave large bottles of water next to your bed before you start drinking then force yourself to drink as much as your stomach can hold before passing out. Then anytime you wake up during the night again force yourself to drink as much water as possible.",
"I usually fix my hangover by eating really greasy and fatty food so that my body feels more shitty about the bad food than the alcohol. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
b96xhr | why do our bodies get a lot of energy and then immediately "crash" and experience fatigue after consuming high-fat and/or sugary foods? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/b96xhr/eli5_why_do_our_bodies_get_a_lot_of_energy_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ek2pcwh",
"ek2psp2"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"Those foods cause the pancreas to release more insulin than normal because of the sudden surge of sugars or fats, but often that amount of insulin is more than needed, thus sending your sugar balance into the negative, because not only did the recent release of insulin deal with that recent meal, it also was enough to act on those sugars which were already in your system, and by acting on more than you took in, that imbalance makes you more tired than you may have been to begin with. The imbalance should rectify itself within a short amount of time. ",
"Too much sugar at once in your system is dangerous and could actually kill you or cause other permanent damage, so when a bunch of it enters your system at once, you body goes into emergency red alert mode and dumps a ton of insultin all at once to crash your sugar levels. As the body can't predict exactly how much you are about to eat, it dumps more than the minimum amount needed. It basically empties you of all sugar it can while leaving you alive and partially functional. This is the \"crash.\" Once some time has passed and the sugar dump is over, you body returns your sugar levels to normal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
aevtco | how do geodes form, are they rock that gets hollowed out, or are they formed from the inside first? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/aevtco/eli5_how_do_geodes_form_are_they_rock_that_gets/ | {
"a_id": [
"edt4bd8",
"edt5qoy"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"They start out as empty pockets in rocks. Dissolved minerals (in water, for example) make their way into the air pocket and crystalize. ",
"Two ways:\n\n1) A \"vesicle\", which is a bubble within a rock that formed from magma can have a fluid flow through it (usually hot water with lots of dissolved stuff) and make the crystals grow from the edged of the bubble inwards. These are the pretty geodes that are usually displayed.\n\n2) Fluids can dissolve an existing structure in a rock (often a body called a concretion) and replace it with new crystals from the stuff dissolved in the fluid. These aren't as pretty as the crystallization and dissolving of the old mineral don't always happen in a nice orderly way.\n\nLastly, the same process of a hot fluid forming crystals can also happen in other voids, like crack, and form crystals. These aren't called geodes, they are actually called \"vugs\", but a lay person might also think they are geodes."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1j2ohd | why are microwave ovens so tall? | I just realized the other day, microwaves are much taller than they need to be. When you put a plate in there, it obviously doesn't reach the top at all. It fits snug horizontally, but vertically there is just so much space. You could cut the vertical height by 75% and still fit a plate of food in there, so why don't they do this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j2ohd/eli5_why_are_microwave_ovens_so_tall/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbahov7"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"maple syrup bottles"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
26vmds | why do all-natural, minimally processed/unprocessed foods with few ingredients generally more expensive than those that are loaded with more artificial ingredients? | Why *are all-natural, minimally processed/unprocessed foods with few ingredients generally more expensive than those that are loaded with more artificial ingredients?
edit: sorry for the typo! | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26vmds/eli5_why_do_allnatural_minimally/ | {
"a_id": [
"chuvrxv",
"chuwsp2",
"chuwx0t",
"chux6ao",
"chux6iz",
"chux9xu",
"chuxb3n",
"chuxnbs",
"chuxvmu",
"chuxyvn",
"chuy6ef",
"chuy784",
"chuy97k",
"chuyrk1",
"chuznrr",
"chuzw63",
"chv1n1h"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
5,
37,
14,
5,
2,
5,
8,
2,
2,
4,
2,
3,
2,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Because they figured that if they sold you on all the rest they might as well fleece you along the way.\n\nAlso, growing without pesticides or herbicides and transporting without preservatives is much more difficult.",
"Yes, I think the fact that this is a niche market plays into the higher pricing, but I also think that cost of goods plays a certain factor. When a wheat grain is ground to its three separate components, you get the bran, the germ and the endosperm. If you grind off the three parts and use each one to make a new separate material then producers are increasing their revenew, versus using a whole grain to make a single loaf of bread. Another aspect would be that with fewer chemicals, whole unprocessed foods generally have a shorter shelf life. If we have more spoilage it only makes sense to try to increase prices to decrease lost profits from food gone bad. My last theory is that chemicals are super cheap to produce. If factory prepared food is filled with cheap chemicals that are easy to just create in a lab, than it's much easier to use that as a filler than use something that physically needs to be harvested.",
"I might ask, why is soda cheaper than water?",
"SHelf life, pure and simple. you will lose more to spoilage when it's unprocessed so you have to make up for the loss",
"Natural foods have shorter shelf lives in general. This invariably leads to more waste because food goes bad before it is sold. The price you pay includes the cost of the higher waste. \n\nFood with loads of additives will last far longer and thus be sold. The cost of the additives vs the cost of the wasted product is minimal.\n\nSource: I was management at a food service provider.",
"Artificial ingredients are cheaper than real food. A gallon of milk is about $3, but a gallon of [wood pulp](_URL_0_) is pennies.\n\nArtificial ingredients were originally added as a cost cutting measure, so removing them increases the price.",
"I had this question. I realized a bag of raw green beans, at my store, is $1.99, a bag of frozen green beans (already cut) is $1.02 and a can of green beans is $0.87. (quantity: frozen > can > raw)\n\nUsing that logic, the cost could be based on time to decay, social perception on healthiness, guarantee of selling before it goes bad and/or because they can.",
"Another reason I haven't seen mentioned is that, in the US anyway, certain foods like corn are heavily subsidized by the government. High Fructose Corn Syrup can be a cheaper sweetener than plain old sugar or honey, just to use one example.",
"Because of four things: \n\nOne, the United States subsidizes corn and soy to the point that they cost pennies, and these are used to add flavor enhancement and other 'refinements' to the product. \n\nTwo, technology goes where the money is. You have a hard time branding an apple or head of lettuce, which means less profit from 'brand recognition'. Value-added stuff has a higher potential for profit, and thus more cost saving tech has gone into value-added foods to a much greater degree. \n\nThree, perishability. There's a certain amount of risk involved for the grocery store in buying that lot of red peppers. Some might go bad before they're sold. They don't have that problem with shelf-stable crackers. \n\nFour, status. Organic/whole/natural/whatever has become a bit of a status symbol. So paying more for it actually makes it sell better in some markets, as it's seen as more valuable. ",
"- federal subsidies for crops that make up the bulk of processed foods artificially inflate profit margins\n- processing masks low quality ingredients that are otherwise worthless - e.g. pest/disease/weather damage, bruised, harvested too late or too early, poor post-harvest handling \n- as others have mentioned - processing reduces costs related to perishability, including transportation, storage and spoilage ",
"Because they're not actually healthier. The people who make those just want to make a lot of money. Which is why it makes sense for them to make it expensive.",
"Opportunity for education!\n\n > all-natural\n\n\"Natural\" and \"all-natural\" and variations thereof do not have any specific meaning in the grocery world. They can mean that the box is made from trees, or that the iron in the flour came from the ground. It's the definition of a buzz-word to latch onto trends. It's the same bullshit that supplements suffers:\n\nSupplements are completely unmoderated because they're termed \"natural\". However, the definition is so broad that they can totally sell you colloidal silver and other things that will definitely kill you over the long term.\n\nSame with food. They can put whatever they want in the food and as long as part of it sort of sounds like it might probably fit the definition in the buyer's head, let's slap it on there!\n\nIn this case, the foods are more expensive simply because people *believe* it caters to their needs and are willing to pay more.\n\n > minimally processed/unprocessed foods with few ingredients \n\nThis is different. Some foods take to the minimal ingredients, minimal processing very well - fatty foods, very sugary foods, pasteurized/sterilized products, products with high amounts of antioxidants, and anything that's very, very dry (jerky/pasta/etc.).\n\nWithout going into detail, each of those methods prevents spoilage or colonization by bacteria/mold. Crisco is good for decades. Jam can sit for years. Pasteurized milk is good for a month or two. Pasta/jerky are lacking water to such a degree that nothing wants to stick around.\n\nHowever, for a lot of products those methods are undesirable for ethical, taste, or textural reasons. So they either have to ship the products to the store much, much faster or use more expensive ingredients to compensate. \n\nThat said, the products that do take to those processes very well can still be marked up simply because of market trends, again.\n\n > loaded with more artificial ingredients...\n\nThis is a slippery slope to go down. A lot of ingredients aren't \"artificial\" the way most people think of them (giant vats of brightly colored liquids turning into something else). Most of the vitamins and minerals that almost all flour is \"enriched\" with? A lot of those are the waste products of other industries. Making beer produces a lot of solid waste that's quite high in Riboflavin, for example.\n\nIn other cases of actual artificial ingredients, the flavor profile or properties offered by the ingredients is going to be cheaper than the separate ingredients or doesn't exist. MSG, for example, stimulates multiple taste receptors (salt and protein) at once and is very efficient at doing so. That doesn't really exist in a form we can farm and simply harvest - there has to be *some* processing, *or* you can add salt and protein separately which would make the end-product more expensive.\n\nUltimately it's a moral and *convenience* pairing that results in the high price. The premium wouldn't exist if people made stuff themselves. It's gotten so bad, though, that most people don't know how to make stock from leftover bones or that bread requires maybe all of 15 minutes of actual work if you have a stand-mixer. They'd rather pay for the convenience of chicken stock in a can/box (which kind of tastes like real stock) and a loaf of sliced bread so they can make risotto or PB & J's right away instead of later.",
"There are many reasons: \n\nAll natural foods are very difficult to produce. Because there is no pesticides involved in growing/producing them, you need labor for doing things more manually. Conventional farming only requires cheap chemical pesticides but animal manure/compost is pretty costly to ship to your land. And to prevent weeds, farmers grow out \"cover crops\" to temporarily to enrich the soil. There is also a huge demand for the organic foods and the supply is very low because the farming land for organic products are less than 1% of the total area. It also takes a lot of time to produce them. Organic crops also have a higher probability of loss because of the above reasons.",
"I think it's more than just shelf life, too though... Perhaps someone with more knowledge can explain how companies like Walmart allocate their expenses to the public in sneaky ways so that they can charge less for their products? Something about subsidies...?",
"Let's say I grow and sell tomatos. \n\nI sell fresh, good looking tomatos to my local market (which has limited demand becuase the produce has to be sold to a finite number of people in a fixed period of time), but then what do I do with the unattractive or surplus production? I sell the second tier tomatos to a food processor company which cuts them up, boils them down, adds some salt and makes sauce. The sauce is then sold to another processor who adds more stuff and makes pizza sauce.\n\nIt is more that the tomatos used in processed food are of inferior appearance or surplus and are sold for less as compared to the ones sold for farmers markets; the market will pay more for nice-looking, fresh produce. Selling the second tier for less is better than just throwing them away, less waste.\n",
"Many of the ingredients are also subsidized by the government, which make them incredibly cheap to produce. Things like corn or soy.",
"There's more processed food manufactured than there is all-natural. Generally in manufacturing, the higher the volume the lower the unit cost. \nEdit: an answer besides shelf life"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/expert-blog/cellulose/bgp-20056281"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
g39kae | why is it easier for a lot of people to read from paper over a computer? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/g39kae/eli5_why_is_it_easier_for_a_lot_of_people_to_read/ | {
"a_id": [
"fnpzygt",
"fnq8uau"
],
"score": [
2,
4
],
"text": [
"The brightness of a computer screen causes eye fatigue for many people, paper doesn’t cause the same amount of stress.",
"When you read from paper, you're reading light reflected (and diffused) off that paper. What this means in practice is that the reflected light from one part of the paper hits all across your eye in a smooth continuum.\n\nWhen you read off a computer monitor, you're looking directly into the light source. This means the light is focused on one particular part of your eye and you're forced to over-use that part of your eye.\n\nIt's a bit like the difference between a pillow fight and a fist fight. The same force is involved in both cases, but spreading it out makes one a lot more pleasant than the other."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
4dynkk | if every atom in the universe were twice its size would anything change and could we even notice? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dynkk/eli5_if_every_atom_in_the_universe_were_twice_its/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1vjxs5",
"d1vl4vg"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"There are a bunch of ways we could increase the size of the atom. Half the mass of the electron, reduce the size of the electromagnetic force (by increasing the permittivity of free space), and more. Each one would have completely different effects, some more drastic than others. \n\nFor example, reducing the strength of the electromagnetic force would also reduce the speed of light, so things would be quite significant for relativity. Halving the mass of the electron would reduce the density of matter, so dust would take longer to collapse in to planets, plus there would be a lower photon energy threshold for pair production so certain phases in the early universe would lengthen. \n\nThose are just examples of the effects, of course there are far more implications in chemistry (and therefore biology) as well as physics. The knock-on effect is simply incalculable. \n\n*edit: I should add that I took \"size of the atom\" to mean distance between the nucleus and outer electron*",
"If I take 'twice the size' to mean the protons and neutrons are physically larger within an atom. Then yes, there will be massive implications for that. The universe likely wouldn't exist at all like we know it, if it could exist at all.\n\nSome reasons why. You're really reaching the end of the strong interaction (mechanism of the strong nuclear force) between 'normal' neutrons and protons. Doubling the size of both means doubling the distance that force needs to act upon, which probably means that the atoms will fall apart. Not likely to be the case for a modified hydrogen or potentially deuterium, but likely for any other element. Another consideration is if the atoms are physically larger, they likely only became that way one of two ways: there's more quarks or the quarks themselves are larger. I believe the latter scenario would come with all kind of problems, because other subatomic particles wouldn't necessarily become larger, neither would other classes of quarks. Therefore the up (u) and down (d) quarks found in protons/neutrons would likely become something else entirely. Since we haven't found a fundamental particle, it's really anybody's guess how a large quark would be formed and behave. In the former scenario of there being more quarks. There's a reason why 6 quark structures don't exist [as far as I'm aware]. Besides an arrangement issue, part of the problem is that doubling the amount of u and d quarks would still leave neutrons neutrally charged, but protons would go from +1 to +2. That would also make heavier elements even more unlikely then they already are in this scenario (i.e. need more neutrons to balance the charge, not enough force to bind them all together), but it'd also impact electron clouds in ways I can't quite imagine right now. The mass of the new protons/neutrons is also a concern regarding stability and forming larger elements. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2edmwg | will animals grow as big as its ancestors did if it were "grown" in high oxygen level? | since there are so many theories pointing out that animals in the past were enormous due to high oxygen level about 60-70 million years ago | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2edmwg/eli5_will_animals_grow_as_big_as_its_ancestors/ | {
"a_id": [
"cjyghdy"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Some studies have shown up to 20% larger dragonflies under high oxygen conditions…\n\nOthers showed cockroaches did not change size at all, and in fact just had smaller 'lungs' (they do not have lungs, but this seems easier than explaining their equivalent). \n\nIt is something that affects insects more than other because of the way they absorb oxygen (as above they do not have lungs. Most of their oxygen is simply passively absorbed by diffusion and they have only very slight and scientifically vague movements of air into and out of their airways… more oxygen in the air = more passive diffusion = can be bigger without evolving a new way of breathing).\n\nHuman size and many other things are limited not by oxygen content but surroundings and environment. The world is a different place these days and being that big is not really practical. \n\nWhy dinosaurs were so huge is not yet explained (several theories probably a bit of all of them), but almost certainly not tied to oxygen levels (CO2 on the other hand, plants use as fuel - > bigger plants - > more food - > bigger potential dinosaurs)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
59s98e | how do cells work together in a single organism if they are independent living beings? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/59s98e/eli5_how_do_cells_work_together_in_a_single/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9aznge",
"d9azowe"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"In some sense, cells in a multi-celled organism aren't actually independent. A skin cell can't eat, it relies on the rest of the body to deliver nutrients to it. Likewise, a liver cell is terrible at isolating itself from the rest of the body, it needs epithelial cells to protect it from the outside.\n\nIf you take some random cell out of the whole organism, you could get it to keep doing it's thing, but only if you put it in a situation where you're taking care of everything. You can propagate skin cells in a dish, but you need to keep it in a nutrient-rich solution, essentially just filling the role of blood. But even then, a skin cell would multiply, but a neuron would not. So the extent to which you want to consider cells independent organisms is dependent on your definition of independent.\n\nCells in an organism are for the most part, highly specialized. They do specific functions well, and are dependent on other cells to do the stuff they don't specialize in. Some really basic functions, like energy metabolism, all cells can do. But even then, it's kind of like every cell has a generator. They still need someone to process crude oil into diesel for them to run.",
"A long time ago cells evolved to specialize. The earliest examples of that are [sponges](_URL_1_). Sponges need a structure to keep them upright so they can filter feed more effectively. But building that structure takes valuable resources, and the cellular structure makes it more difficult for those cells to collect food. So instead, the cells began to specialize. Some cells created a structure, other cells specialized in catching food. That way, both cells benefit. It started as (probably) two different species working together so closely that eventually that it became impossible to survive alone.\n\nAt that point, though, they were essentially different animals working together. Over time, cells began to specialize more. That led to creatures like [siphonophores](_URL_0_), which are somewhere between single creatures and colony animals like sponges and corals. [SciShow has a good video about it](_URL_2_). For instance, with Portuguese man-o-war, cells create stinging tentacles, and other cells create digestive tissues. Like colony animals, each part of the siphonomore can reproduce separately from the whole creature. Like single creatures, the specialized tissues are *super* specialized, very much like organs.\n\nAfter millions of years, cells became incredibly reliant on each other for survival. With humans, our cells can't live alone without the other tissues and organs providing food, shelter, protection, energy, etc. But it took a *long* time to get to that. Life slowly evolved from each cell eking out its own existence to complex organisms where each cell cooperates so the whole organism can live for much longer and collect food and resources, and reproduce more effectively."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphonophorae",
"http://res.cloudinary.com/dk-find-out/image/upload/q_80,w_1440/SPL-C0172945-Branching_Tube_Sponge_oznzei.jpg",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRk3VqE9Zoc"
]
] |
||
7mt2kx | how does numbing during conscious surgery work? | I just had two moles removed from my chest and I didn't feel the knife cutting through my skin. I was wondering how it works? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7mt2kx/eli5_how_does_numbing_during_conscious_surgery/ | {
"a_id": [
"drwhafn",
"drwiqpx"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"You have nerves that go all throughout your body to both send signals to your brain and receive them, pain included. Now the workings of these nerves is pretty complicated, but most medicine that deals with the nervous system deals with something called the synapse, which is a gap between two nerve cells through which chemicals called neurotransmitters are put through in order to pass on a signal from one nerve to another. The openness of this place makes it a perfect place to manipulate the nerve cells. \n\n\nThe synapse works due to chemicals called neuroreceptors and neurotransmitters. When triggered, one nerve releases neurotransmitters into the synapse, which is picked up by the neuroreceptors on the other nerve cell across from the synapse. Most work kinda like a jigsaw puzzle, a neurotransmitter fits nicely into a neuroreceptor, while other molecules don't. When detecting a fit, this triggers some action, which generally means that the nerve fires, is blocked from firing, or is reset to its default position. \n\nNow there are many neurotransmitters and neuroreceptors, some cause pain, some relieve pain, some cause muscles to contract, ect. We can have drugs that trigger the neuroreceptors for pain relief or ones that kinda block the neuroreceptors for pain, which would happen by making a drug that isn't a \"perfect fit\" for the neuroreceptor but latches on and blocks the neurotransmitter from hooking up with the neuroreceptor. \n\nAnd lastly, I might be talking out of my ass here, but I believe many neurotransmitters and neuroreceptors are actually quite similar in \"shape\" because they evolved from the same gene (we have multiple copies of the same gene for a neuroreceptor, so if one accidentally mutated, it would most likely be a small mutation thus making it pretty similar, but still different from the other neuroreceptor). This is convenient because it means we can more easily design drugs to affect multiple neuroreceptors since they share a pretty common \"jigsaw shape.\"",
"Local anesthetics (like what you had) work by preventing nerves in the affected area from transmitting signals to your brain. Your brain is what interprets these signals as pain or any other sensation, and if it's not receiving any signals, there's nothing to feel.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
24vgtl | why are there no first world "black" nations? | Why do we have no " first world" or developed, countries predominantly populated by a black population.
Will we ever have a developed black nation that is on par with Canada, United States, England, Germany, etc?
Would the Barbados, a recent English colony, be the best example? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/24vgtl/eli5_why_are_there_no_first_world_black_nations/ | {
"a_id": [
"chb12p5",
"chb1d03",
"chb1rzw",
"chb22eb",
"chb24qu",
"chb2naa",
"chb2tii"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
7,
9,
2,
4,
7
],
"text": [
"Careful... um South Africa maybe. Indians are pretty dark.",
"It sounds like you aren't going to accept any of the explanations here, even if they are correct. \n\nPerhaps you should post it to /r/changemyview to find some people to argue with you.",
"Arabs enslaved black africans for 1000+ years before the Europeans ever showed up, and continued to enslave Africans for over 100 years after after Europeans stopped.",
"Actually the terms first world and third world countries came out during the time of the Cold War. First world referred to United states and their allies. Second world referred to the Soviet union and their allies and then third world countries are countries that were neutral or non aligned. At the time most of Africa and other predominantly black countries had nothing to do with the Cold war thus the lack of first world countries. Hope this helped!",
"I read an article that argued that Africa wasn't suited for large scale agriculture the way Europe and Asia is. Add in natural boundaries and no fricking lions trying to kill you and this argument made sense to me.",
"Go read Guns,Germs, and Steel. It does a pretty good job on explaining why certain civilizations are more \"advanced\" than others.",
"**tl;dr for five year olds:** Basically, Europeans got a lucky break of resources and exploration at a time of relative decline for the world's other cultures and empires. Hitting a sort of critical mass of knowledge during the Enlightenment allowed them to be the first cultures to develop the industrial processes, which in turn allowed them to dominate with even more money and power and military might. When the empires let these African countries go, they did so having given them little to none of the fruits of industry or labor, as well as leaving them full of a lot of people who didn't get along and often didn't speak close to the same language. All that fighting meant that there wasn't a lot of time to catch up to the developed countries, though peace could mean a very fast development in the coming decades for certain African nations.\n\n**For your college class summary:**\n\nFirst world/second world/third world is an outdated yardstick used to measure countries by 'Western/capitalist', 'Soviet bloc/communist', and 'not really important/proxy war lands/poor as shit/usually dictatorships/former colonies', respectively. It's not used as widely now, after the fall of the Soviet Union, and has transitioned more to 'developed' and 'developing' countries. (Some would add a third category, failed state - Afghanistan or Somalia, for example - or, more rarely, underdeveloped.)\n\nThe reason we don't have any developed, majority black nation is two fold. First, because the center of the geopolitical universe for every part of the world that was NOT China, Russia, or Japan was Europe. If you weren't traditionally European (like, say, the Ottoman Empire or even the Russian Empire), you wanted to BE European. Europe just happened to combine a Renaissance-transitioning-to-the-Enlightenment with world exploration at the right time; the Industrial Revolution first happened in Europe and spread through Europe, for example.\n\nSecond, Africa was utterly dominated by Europe until the mid-1960s. Colonialism DOES play a part, and regardless of how you feel on capitalistic exploitation, the imperial states *absolutely* exploited native populations and oppressed them as they believed both culturally and (briefly) scientifically that they were the civilized race.\n\nAFTER colonialism ended, many of the borders drawn between states - including Arabic and African states - were haphazard claims drawn by the empires without regard to cultures. So tribes and lands and people were divided or mixed together unnaturally, whereas the borders for the European states were drawn by war and culture over centuries (including the eventually-Eurocentric US and Canada). It's hard to develop technological and industrial societies when you're busy fighting over which of the 20 or so languages used by the 40 or so identified population groups should be used for your government and schooling.\n\n**Get them bonus points:**\n\nIf you want to expand to include why all (excepting for Japan) developed nations are European or Euro-derived, rather than just Africa, you have to look at what happened to China and Japan. Japan's self-enclosure was impossible to maintain forever - it worked so long as you built up a superiority complex that couldn't be overcome by rifles, early machine guns, and massive ships (spoiler: Matthew Perry showed that you couldn't). China, on the other hand, was by no means a weak state when the first Europeans arrived - but active trade routes established around them, plus a stand-offish attitude from both sides (European imperial states and Imperial China both considered themselves the center of the world), PLUS those meddling European empires (check out the Opium Wars, England seriously fucked over China) = internal strife that allowed European nations to force unfair treaties on the Chinese. *At the same time this was happening*, Japan saw the Europeans, saw the unequal treaties that were forced on them, and realized that they could learn from the barbarians (Europeans) to augment core Japanese culture and principles (which were still superior). Without going too far into it, the Meiji Restoration happened (establishing imperial sovereignty once more over the fragmentary shogunate system), they became an Asian empire with European military tactics and characteristics, one thing led to another, and the US dropped two atomic warheads on the sovereign nation of Japan. \n\nJapan, which was promptly occupied by US troops, was not subject to the same internal pressures that affected China before, during, and after the Second World War. China suffered from internal conflict owing to centuries of domination and subjugation (first by the Qing 'foreign' dynasty, then by the Europeans who added their own special dose of humiliation), giving rise to two sets of nationalist ideologies that had a few couple-million-casualty slapfights before and after WWII. Because Japan was a hostile nation, and China was an ally, the US occupied Japan, rebuilt it, and spent decades investing and trading with them (meaning that Japan's 20th and 21st century development has been in rough tandem with the rest of the West)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4cwmz5 | why can't we see lasers from things like laser pointers until they've hit a surface? | I was fooling around at work with a laser thermometer and this crossed my mind. If the lasers are invisible to the human eye then why can we see them once they've hit a surface, such as a table? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4cwmz5/eli5_why_cant_we_see_lasers_from_things_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1lyzrk",
"d1lyzys",
"d1lz04a",
"d1lz13r",
"d1lz6xe"
],
"score": [
12,
4,
4,
10,
115
],
"text": [
"You can only see a laser when it has a medium to reflect on. Like a cloud of vapor, or gas. The light has to be reflecting off of something in order for you actually see it, considering the photons (light particles) on a laser are moving in only one linear direction. If it's not hitting anything, there's nothing reaching your eyes.",
"The whole point of a laser is to be a beam of light that goes in a straight line and not go all over the place like regular light. \n\nIf the light is going in a good straight line how is it going to get into your eye for you to see it? ",
"Lasers aren't invisible to the human eye - as you've pointed out, you can see them.\n\nYou can't see them when they're passing through air because the air doesn't scatter any of the light in your direction - so there's nothing to see.",
"It isn't just lasers, you can't see the light from ANY source until it reflects off something.\n\nIf the air is dusty or foggy, you can see that because there was something in the air to reflect the light into your eyes. Air is transparent. ",
"You can only see light that enters your eyes. The light in a laser beam is traveling away from you and not entering your eyes so you can't see it. When it hits a surface, the light gets reflected and some of it does enter your eyes so you can see it. \n\nIf you fill a room with smoke or fog then you can see the beam because the smoke/fog is scattering the light. Powerful enough lasers are visible in plain air because the air itself is scattering light.\n\nOf course, this only applies to lasers that generate visible light. There's nothing you can do to see the light from an infrared laser with the naked eye."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1z8l8a | how is radioshack still in business? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1z8l8a/eli5_how_is_radioshack_still_in_business/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfrhtzr",
"cfrhuh1",
"cfri0gv",
"cfrikkc",
"cfrjj03",
"cfrjmy8",
"cfrjpik",
"cfrlzyd"
],
"score": [
8,
52,
8,
3,
2,
3,
2,
3
],
"text": [
"Going into selling cell phones, and clinging to the odd kinda-hobbyist who wanders around.",
"Because they sell enough merchandise at a high enough profit to pay the expenses of running the chain.",
"Not everyone can purchase things on the internet.",
"Because when you need a part or replacement asap you don't always want to wait days for it. Maplin, as it is in the UK, did electronic components as well as computers, phones, tvs and radio controls. Which reminds me i need finer solder and iron tips. ",
"I live in northern VT right now and RadioShack is the only place to go for technical problems. Unless you are trying to drive 2 hours south.",
"If it costs more to shut down a business than it does to keep it running, it's a better business decision to keep it running. Look at kmart.",
"Radio Shack stores exist in lots of small places where access to electronics of any kind is very limited. Not sure if still true but for many years they were the number one seller of cell phones.",
"3 things, all of which are **Location**. They cover the urban centers and they're a recognizable name for the miscellaneous parts for home wiring, converters, adapters, cables, audio, and now cellphones. They're in a million malls across the states, and they charge mall overhead on high-margin items. There's really no other retailer that covers what they cover, at least across the US and in anything like a comparable number of locations. You can get some cable adapters or audio stuff at the drugstore, and you can buy expensive cables at Best Buy, and if you're lucky enough to have a Fry's near you, you've got it all covered. But if you're unsure what you need, you probably go to Radio Shack.\n\nThere's just a huge swath of America that can't think of another place to go for the things that Radio Shack sells, and they sell a number of things that people still feel uncomfortable buying online if they can't ask someone if it's the right thing for them. \n\nThey push gift catalogs every year and have established themselves very substantially as the place to go for budget electronic toys. They advertise in Sunday flyers in addition to direct mail.\n\nSomeday, everyone will know about Monoprice and never again overpay for a cable, but until that day, Radio Shack has a lot of money to make. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
j7qmp | li5: what is plasma? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j7qmp/li5_what_is_plasma/ | {
"a_id": [
"c29u3on",
"c29u5cg",
"c29ukq2",
"c29unwe",
"c29uu17",
"c29v0t2",
"c29vsij",
"c29w5dg",
"c2a0z3f",
"c29u3on",
"c29u5cg",
"c29ukq2",
"c29unwe",
"c29uu17",
"c29v0t2",
"c29vsij",
"c29w5dg",
"c2a0z3f"
],
"score": [
167,
13,
26,
5,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2,
167,
13,
26,
5,
8,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It's a state of matter.\n\nMatter is something like metal or plastic or sand or rock or water or steam.\n\nThe state of matter means whether it's solid, liquid, gas or plasma.\n\nPlasma was only recently discovered. It's basically superheated gas.\n\nFor example, let's look at ice. Ice is a solid, but when you heat it up, it melts, and is a liquid. When you heat this liquid ice - we usually call it water - up to 100 degrees Celsius, it boils, and that stuff you see coming off of the top of the water is steam. That's the 3rd state of matter, gas. If you were to collect that steam and heat that up, you'd turn it into plasma, the 4th state of matter.\n\nPlasma is present in neon lighting (running electricity through basic gases, heating them and causing them to emit coloured light) and in plasma TVs.",
"Plasma is another state of matter, similar to Bose-Einstein Condensates (stuff cooled to -273^o C). \n\nWhen you heat up an object, whether it be solid or liquid or gas, it will change the phase. For example, when you boil water, the boiling temperature is at 100^o C, and you see steam evaporate on top of the water, which is the gas version of water. All of this change is intermolecular, as in between the water molecules.\n\nHowever, in the plasma state, which is the state after gas, the temperature is super high, which means that the kinetic energy of the molecules are also super high, and electrons (the things which circle the nucleus) can actually be stripped off. That is the plasma state, where electrons are not localized, and all the atoms become dissociated, and it is really just a sea of positive ions and negative electrons.",
"On the offchance you were talking about blood plasma and not the superheated gas, here it is. Sorry ahead of time but I'm gonna have to do this like an L12 because, let's be honest, a five year old probably wouldn't be asking about blood plasma.\n\nRunning through your veins are different types of living cells, proteins, dissolved salts, minerals and a heaping dose of water. The different components that are commonly referred to as being \"blood\" are red blood cells and plasma. Red blood cells carry oxygen and then there's just everything else. \n\nPlasma can be considered the \"everything else.\" It's 90% water and is over half of what you consider \"blood.\" It's essentially just water, proteins, salts, sugars, and platelets. It's what all those red blood cells are swimming around in. \n\nPart of the reason why they separate red blood cells and plasma when people give plasma donations is because they can last longer when separated. There might also be something to do with different blood type markers in plasma vs the red blood cells, but I'm not a biologist so I won't speculate.\n\nIt's helpful sometimes, though, to only give people plasma after injuries where they have lost a lot of blood. They need the minerals, salts, and proteins from the plasma more than they need more oxygen carrying red blood cells at that time. There are various other case by case reasons for only supplying more plasma, such as the fact that a blood transfusion with high numbers of red blood cells can lead to excessive bleeding. Again, I'm not a biologist and I don't know why that is, I just know that it does.\n\nGranted, there's a bit of hedging in my answer up there but here's the bottom line: In blood there are many different cells and antibodies floating around in a substance called plasma, which can essentially be thought of as the salt, mineral, protein and nutrient rich substance in which red and white blood cells and all kinds of other necessary cells are transported. It is the lifeblood of your lifeblood. ",
"Plasma is the 4th state of matter.\n\nIt is created when the various components of atoms are disintegrated into electrons, protons, and neutrons. Those components just swim around in a soup that has interesting electrical properties.\n\nThis happens due to large amounts of energy relative to little pressure. The vast majority of matter in the universe exists in this state.\n\nedit: \nYou can think of plasma as similar to a liquid, only that the particles moving around are not atoms, but the pieces of atoms.",
"Everything is made out of little tiny things called atoms. Every atom has something in the middle called a nucleus, and little things called electrons that hold onto the nucleus.\n\nWhen things are hot, the atoms start bouncing around really fast. In plasma, the atoms fly around so fast that the electrons lose their grip on the nucleus. The nucleus and the electrons fly around separately until the plasma cools off, then they join back up.",
"So if plasma is superheated gas and superheated gas emits light... is fire plasma?",
"Plasma is the built-in compositing manager for the KDE desktop. Basically, it is responsible for drawing each and every widget you see on your screen, from the icons, to the toolbar, to the application windows.",
"More specifically, think about a baseball. Now, if you have enough strength, you can hit a baseball out of the field, but if you don't have enough strength, maybe you can only hit it inside the park, and anywhere inside this park. This is like the electrons on an atom, these electrons are stuck inside the park unless there's enough strength i.e. energy to get them outside of this restrictive \"park.\" Now, plasma is like hitting the baseball out of the park, in fact all the baseballs that were ever in that park or belonged to that park are home-run'd out. This is comparative to freeing all the electrons in a gas atom (ionized gas), and as these atoms form groups (many parks coming together to form one superpark). This ball-less superpark would be plasma. A group of completely ionized gas atoms conglomerating together. In reality the baseball bat would be the energy supplied by the extreme heat of the sun, or something comparative to that.",
"What happens if you super heat plasma?",
"It's a state of matter.\n\nMatter is something like metal or plastic or sand or rock or water or steam.\n\nThe state of matter means whether it's solid, liquid, gas or plasma.\n\nPlasma was only recently discovered. It's basically superheated gas.\n\nFor example, let's look at ice. Ice is a solid, but when you heat it up, it melts, and is a liquid. When you heat this liquid ice - we usually call it water - up to 100 degrees Celsius, it boils, and that stuff you see coming off of the top of the water is steam. That's the 3rd state of matter, gas. If you were to collect that steam and heat that up, you'd turn it into plasma, the 4th state of matter.\n\nPlasma is present in neon lighting (running electricity through basic gases, heating them and causing them to emit coloured light) and in plasma TVs.",
"Plasma is another state of matter, similar to Bose-Einstein Condensates (stuff cooled to -273^o C). \n\nWhen you heat up an object, whether it be solid or liquid or gas, it will change the phase. For example, when you boil water, the boiling temperature is at 100^o C, and you see steam evaporate on top of the water, which is the gas version of water. All of this change is intermolecular, as in between the water molecules.\n\nHowever, in the plasma state, which is the state after gas, the temperature is super high, which means that the kinetic energy of the molecules are also super high, and electrons (the things which circle the nucleus) can actually be stripped off. That is the plasma state, where electrons are not localized, and all the atoms become dissociated, and it is really just a sea of positive ions and negative electrons.",
"On the offchance you were talking about blood plasma and not the superheated gas, here it is. Sorry ahead of time but I'm gonna have to do this like an L12 because, let's be honest, a five year old probably wouldn't be asking about blood plasma.\n\nRunning through your veins are different types of living cells, proteins, dissolved salts, minerals and a heaping dose of water. The different components that are commonly referred to as being \"blood\" are red blood cells and plasma. Red blood cells carry oxygen and then there's just everything else. \n\nPlasma can be considered the \"everything else.\" It's 90% water and is over half of what you consider \"blood.\" It's essentially just water, proteins, salts, sugars, and platelets. It's what all those red blood cells are swimming around in. \n\nPart of the reason why they separate red blood cells and plasma when people give plasma donations is because they can last longer when separated. There might also be something to do with different blood type markers in plasma vs the red blood cells, but I'm not a biologist so I won't speculate.\n\nIt's helpful sometimes, though, to only give people plasma after injuries where they have lost a lot of blood. They need the minerals, salts, and proteins from the plasma more than they need more oxygen carrying red blood cells at that time. There are various other case by case reasons for only supplying more plasma, such as the fact that a blood transfusion with high numbers of red blood cells can lead to excessive bleeding. Again, I'm not a biologist and I don't know why that is, I just know that it does.\n\nGranted, there's a bit of hedging in my answer up there but here's the bottom line: In blood there are many different cells and antibodies floating around in a substance called plasma, which can essentially be thought of as the salt, mineral, protein and nutrient rich substance in which red and white blood cells and all kinds of other necessary cells are transported. It is the lifeblood of your lifeblood. ",
"Plasma is the 4th state of matter.\n\nIt is created when the various components of atoms are disintegrated into electrons, protons, and neutrons. Those components just swim around in a soup that has interesting electrical properties.\n\nThis happens due to large amounts of energy relative to little pressure. The vast majority of matter in the universe exists in this state.\n\nedit: \nYou can think of plasma as similar to a liquid, only that the particles moving around are not atoms, but the pieces of atoms.",
"Everything is made out of little tiny things called atoms. Every atom has something in the middle called a nucleus, and little things called electrons that hold onto the nucleus.\n\nWhen things are hot, the atoms start bouncing around really fast. In plasma, the atoms fly around so fast that the electrons lose their grip on the nucleus. The nucleus and the electrons fly around separately until the plasma cools off, then they join back up.",
"So if plasma is superheated gas and superheated gas emits light... is fire plasma?",
"Plasma is the built-in compositing manager for the KDE desktop. Basically, it is responsible for drawing each and every widget you see on your screen, from the icons, to the toolbar, to the application windows.",
"More specifically, think about a baseball. Now, if you have enough strength, you can hit a baseball out of the field, but if you don't have enough strength, maybe you can only hit it inside the park, and anywhere inside this park. This is like the electrons on an atom, these electrons are stuck inside the park unless there's enough strength i.e. energy to get them outside of this restrictive \"park.\" Now, plasma is like hitting the baseball out of the park, in fact all the baseballs that were ever in that park or belonged to that park are home-run'd out. This is comparative to freeing all the electrons in a gas atom (ionized gas), and as these atoms form groups (many parks coming together to form one superpark). This ball-less superpark would be plasma. A group of completely ionized gas atoms conglomerating together. In reality the baseball bat would be the energy supplied by the extreme heat of the sun, or something comparative to that.",
"What happens if you super heat plasma?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2hqj20 | why is 4chan dead? i never caught on what actually happened, simply because i didn't give a shit when it was happening. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2hqj20/eli5_why_is_4chan_dead_i_never_caught_on_what/ | {
"a_id": [
"ckv3am9",
"ckvcsin",
"ckvcwb9"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Moot allowed the Feds to turn /b/ into a honey pot and the rest went to pot.",
"I didn't knew it was dead, i come from there with a buttload of /b/ and /h/ material",
"tl;dr: 4chan is not a democracy, they got some moderators they didn't like, and the only way to get their way back was to go somewhere else."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.