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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
55g3ur | what are free trade agreements | How come we still have to pay large tariffs and duty on countries where we have free trade? I went to France and bought a wheel of eppoisses cheese for like 4 euro. But if I want to buy it where I am in Canada now it's around 20 dollars. How can average people benefit from these agreements because I really don't think they do. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/55g3ur/eli5_what_are_free_trade_agreements/ | {
"a_id": [
"d8a99mk",
"d8a9f77",
"d8akpqr",
"d8apotz",
"d8bhnrw"
],
"score": [
22,
2,
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Free trade agreements are contracts between countries that allow goods to be imported without tarrifs or with reduced tarrifs. In the case of two countries with similar economies they allow goods to be imported cheaper and the cost savings are theoretically passed onto the consumer increasing purchasing power and economic output. With developing countries it tends to be a mechanism to lower manufacturing costs then import the goods back without penalties. CETA, Canada and Europe's potential trade deal has not been finalized so you are still paying for the cost of the tarrifs. That's why it's more in Canada.",
"Trade agreements between Canada and the EU (like CETA) might reduce tariffs on things like French cheese and increase quotas. This means importers/wholesalers can bring more French cheese into Canada and pay less for it. \n\nThat's good for importers and wholesalers. It doesn't necessarily mean they are going to pass the savings on to the retail customers. \n\nYou might find that once tariffs are reduced and quotas increased there is more French cheese to be found at the markets in Canada, and a greater variety. So in that regard it might be seen as beneficial to the average customer. However the retailer is going to charge whatever the market will bear.",
"Free trade agreements are when two or more nations pledge to not tax the shit out of each others imports. Why is this a good thing? why does this matter? well, first you need to [understand producer and consumer surplus.](_URL_2_)\n\nthe blue line is the \"demand curve\". As the price of a good decreases, more people will buy it, and in larger quantity. If i find 1,000 AA batteries at costco for $5, i'm gonna buy them, even if i don't need batteries.\n\nThe red line is the \"supply curve\". As the price of a good increases, more producers will want to produces and sell it. If someone offers me $10,000 for my $500 laptop, i'm going to sell it. \n\nThese two curves combined describe \"supply and demand\". the point where they meet is the \"market clearing price\". this is the equilibrium where ever unit sold finds a buyer.\n\nNow, to surplus!\n\nIf I *would be willing to pay* up to $10 for a bagel, but bagels *only cost* $5, i have a **consumer surplus** of (10-5)= $5.\nThis is the \"added value\" that i, due to my particular tastes or whatever, get from this transaction.\n\nProducer surplus works the same way. if i can *sell* a bagel for $5, but they only cost me $2 to make, i have (5-2)=$3 **producer surplus**. The sum of producer and consumer surplus in a market is called **total surplus**\n\n**What does any of this have to do with tariffs, though?**\nNow, lets say Canada's market price for a pound of shrimp, is say, $20. That's awfully expensive shrimp, probably because you'd have to farm them in climate controlled indoor farms.\n\nOn the other hand, vietnam is drowning in shrimp, and it costs $5 for a pound of shrimp in vietnam. What happens if Canada decides to start importing shrimp instead?\n\n[This graph](_URL_3_) Shows total surplus when importing a good.\nSince world price is below Canada's market price, consumers can benefit from cheaper prices from trading. however, since the price is lowered, Canada's indoor shrimp farmers take a loss, as many of them can't compete with cheaper imported shrimp.\n\n**Does this mean importing is bad?**\n\nAbsolutely not! notice that, while producers lose surplus, **consumers gain more surplus than producers lose**, meaning **Canada's Total economic surplus rises**.\n\n**Okay, but, what the $%@# does that have to do with TARIFFS?**\n\n[This graph](_URL_0_) shows the effects of a tariff on an imported good. The effect of a tariff is to *artificially inflate the price*. this makes domestic consumers more competitive (relatively speaking), and the government gets to collect a tax! Does this mean tariffs are a good thing? **HELL NO**.\n\nNotice in the graph above that, while the govt. is collecting a tax (tax rate * quantity imported), **the total economic surplus decreases**\n\nThis is due to two main factors.\n\n* Consumers who would buy shrimp for $5 might not want to buy ANY shrimp at $20. \n\n* Producers whose *cost to produce exceeds world price* are suddenly able to produce at a profit. this inefficiency in production is also a loss in total surplus.\n\n**Why do we even HAVE tariffs, then?**\n\nTariffs are objectively harmful when examined in the vacuum of economics, but they often have merit for other political or social reasons.\n\nFor example, If i buy beef raised in Canada, i know for a fact it was raised with no hormones, steroids or excessive antibiotics. i know that i am buying a higher quality product and i understand that this will cost more. in this situation, i am totally happy with a tariff on say, American beef, that makes Canadian beef competitive with factory farmed, roid-raging American imports.\n\nIf i were American, i would say an import tariff on [Canadian Softwood lumber](_URL_1_) is a good thing, because us filthy Canadians, with our rich and plentiful forests, can undercut American forestry significantly.\n\nA free trade agreement, then, is two countries agreeing to an even playing field, in one or more markets that they trade in. Each country is allowed to play to the strengths of their economy, knowing the other country will not create artificial barriers between them and their customers.\n\nTariffs and Trade are very, very complex issues where context is key. Depending on your personal values, you may agree or disagree with any particular tariff (lumber and beef, for example). They should be viewed as a tool, and not as inherently good or bad.",
"ELI5. \n\nAll businesses biggest expense is personnel. If you can move production of an item to a country with cheaper Labour costs you decrease your overheads. Tariffs artificially increase the cost of goods imported from countries where production is cheaper. This then protects jobs in the higher wage economy. Free trade agreements remove these tariffs. Goods and services then can move between the two countries freely. \n\nWorks really well within blocks of countries with similar sized economies. Is disastrous in blocks with massive wealth disparity. See Europe and the difference between Germany and Greece. ",
"You seem to have a lot of responses from people who think free trade is pretty good and tariffs are pretty bad I think you deserve to hear the opposing viewpoint as well.\n\n\"Free Trade\" as has been explained elsewhere, is when countries agree not to excessively tax imports from certain other countries. In theory this allows the consumers to buy products at a cheaper price, which is supposedly beneficial.\n\nThe problem is that free trade rewards countries for using slave labor. Products can be purchased produced very cheaply of you pay the workers 10 cents an hour and kill them when the try to unionize. If we eliminate all tariffs we end up buying products produced by what is essentially slave labor, and at the same time putting all American manufacturers out of business, because they can't compete with slave labor prices.\n\nIn the 1950s you could make a lot of money by working in a factory. An American factory worker could provide for a family of 4 on a single income. Those days ended (in part) because of Free Trade.\n\nAs a liberal socialist, I strongly support having tariffs on imports that are produced by slave labor. Tariffs are the best way to encourage other countries to adopt basic workers rights and protections, and also protect American jobs."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4d/EffectOfTariff.svg/2000px-EffectOfTariff.svg.png",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_softwood_lumber_dispute",
"http://thismatter.com/economics/images/total-surplus.gif",
"http://thismatter.com/economics/images/trade-consumer-surplus.png"
],
[],
[]
] |
|
7piuie | how does egg cholesterol not translate to dietary cholesterol? | I have read that the original medical belief was that the cholesterol in eggs translates to dietary cholesterol, which is awful for your heart.
However, as I continue to read articles in modern biology, this original claim appears to be completely false. Liver regulation prevents eggs from causing this issue.
Can someone clarify and shed light on the notion of eggs, cholesterol, and whether or not they are "bad" for your health? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7piuie/eli5how_does_egg_cholesterol_not_translate_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"dshn16k",
"dshz3b8",
"dsj14ln"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Egg cholesterol is dietary cholesterol, it just doesn't translate to serum cholesterol because serum cholesterol has more to do with consumption of saturated fats",
"Dietary cholesterol is a minor player in the cholesterol cycles. You probably eat about 200-300 mg of CL a day, the body releases another 1000 mg from the liver (via the bile) into the intestines. It then reabsorbs about half which goes back to he liver. In this way it can regulate the store of the cholesterol. If you eat less cholesterol then it will also make more in the liver to compensate and vice versa. The body makes up to 800 mg a day by itself.\n\nThe HDL and LDL particles are a separate issue. They are made in the liver and contain fat and cholesterol to be transported to other cells for storage and processing, or vice versa (e.g HDL often transports cholesterol from cells back to the liver). You should note that cholesterol is very important for cells, it provides structure for cell walls and you would die without it.\n\nTake home message - chloesterol metabolism is complicated and dietary cholesterol seems to have little to do with heart disease",
"Your body can manufacture as much or little cholesterol as it wants, provided it has the correct building blocks. A diet high in cholesterol or fats provides more of these building blocks, but does not necessarily lead to higher cholesterol or heart disease.\n\nIn the mid 20th century, an increase in heart attacks led to finger pointing as to the cause. Unfortunately, some of the science behind this search was affected by corporate interests, leading to obscured results. \n\nAround this time period, two major changes were happening to the American diet: increased sugar consumption, and trans-fats. Both of these substances are used in processed foods, and can be produced from cheaply available materials for a high profit margin. Both of these have been proven to cause a host of health issues, including heart disease. This article from the New York Times covers the scandal by which the spotlight was directed away from sugars and toward fats:\n_URL_1_\n\nA similar process followed for trans-fats. Trans-saturated fat is a component of hydrogenated oils, which are made by an industrial process which turns liquid oil like soybean oil, into a solid form like Crisco. As animal fats were looked at as the culprit for disease, these industrially produced alternatives were touted as a healthy option:\n_URL_0_\n\nAs we came to understand the dangers of trans-saturated fats, they were very prevalent in the American diet. For a time, any saturated fats were seen as being very harmful, an attitude which is only now being relaxed. Many who grew up in the 1950s may recall their household going from using butter, to margarine, to other non-margarine \"spreads\", potentially to no butter, and finally back to regular butter.\n\nThe result of this, is that millions switched their diets to foods containing more sugar, more carbohydrates, more trans-fats, and fewer fats that the body actually requires to function. This was all done in the interest of health. Moreover, many scientists, doctors, and health educators were brought up into this ideology, which is now taking huge amounts of work to shift. The result of this high carbohydrate diet was people who craved sugars more often, suffered weight gain, diabetes, and inflammation. \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/11/when-trans-fats-were-healthy/281274/",
"https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html"
]
] |
|
acui1f | what happens to your mouth and eyes overnight that causes them to feel dirty in the morning? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/acui1f/eli5_what_happens_to_your_mouth_and_eyes/ | {
"a_id": [
"edbasb8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Bacteria growth. During the day you're constantly salivating and cleaning your teeth with your tongue. When you sleep you don't do that (and many people sleep with their mouth open.) So that dirty feeling you feel.... yeah that's bacteria. Hence why it's extremely important to brush before bed and in the morning at some point (hopefully after you eat.) \n\nAs for eyes, I personally don't experience that, but it's likely due to the fact that during the day blinking constantly removes stuff from your eye but at night it all just kinda \"oozes\" out the corner. Hence the eye boogies you get. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2rqj9f | when congress passes a bill on something, why is it legal for "riders" completely off the topic of that bill to be added to it rather than requiring them to be voted on separately? | I'm satisfied with this answer:
> Because in our system of government, everything is allowed until a law specifically prohibits it.
Ok, maybe I'm not satisfied with it, but I am satisfied that it answers my question. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2rqj9f/eli5_when_congress_passes_a_bill_on_something_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"cniarem",
"cnib8vk"
],
"score": [
11,
6
],
"text": [
"I'm a former legislative assistant, and I still work in politics. Most states (if not all to my knowledge) include some sort of rule requiring riders/amendments to be 'germane' to the legislation. The reason Congress doesn't have to abide by that rule is simply because Congress, neither the House nor the Senate, have adopted a rule requiring that they do so.\n\nHowever, it isn't unusual for the leadership to restrict riders on certain specific legislation but that is done on a bill-by-bill basis.",
"Because in our system of government, everything is allowed until a law specifically prohibits it.\n\nThere is currently no law or 'rule' (in Congress) that Prohibits it.\n\nAs Congress writes the laws, they would have to adopt it.\n\nThe ability to add riders actually speeds up the legislative process in many ways. When you are dealing with what is essentially 100~ work days a year, you can only pass so many laws. That means only the most essential even make it before the entire Congress Houses for a vote. so.. If you didn't have 'Riders' you wouldn't be able to get 'little but important' things passed."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7ldsfz | how do flares stop missiles? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ldsfz/eli5_how_do_flares_stop_missiles/ | {
"a_id": [
"drlhplb",
"drlhvn3",
"drlkvcc",
"drlpqew",
"drluktw",
"drlvioh"
],
"score": [
2,
184,
15,
13,
7,
16
],
"text": [
"Well, my understanding is that those missiles use infrared to track targets, so the flares are used to create a bunch of thermal \"noise\" to confuse the missile's guidance system. Flares go up, missile can't distinguish the target from the noise, pilot flies to safety. I think.\n\nI suppose either one of use could just Google it though!",
"Heat-seeking missiles home in on the heat being generated by the jet's engine. Countermeasure flares are launched out of an aircraft and immediately ignite in a *very* hot flame. Now instead of seeing only one big hot target the missiles sees a dozen targets, and has to choose one. \n\nThere is a constant battle between missile engineers and countermeasure engineers to design better and better systems. Missiles that can more accurately discriminate between an engine and a flare, and flares that can more accurately simulate the heat of an engine.",
"ELI5: Flares only work against missiles that are heat-seeking. The flares burn intensely and create a lot of heat which intends to trick the missile into guiding on the flare itself. If the missile stops guiding onto the target aircraft and instead guides on the flare, then the target aircraft survives and the flare served its purpose.",
"Radar-guided missiles are not distracted by flares. For radar-guided missiles, the target will deploy *chaff* - aluminium coated mylar strips which form a cloud that reflects and confuses the radar on the missile so that the missile misses the target.",
"Other replies have already answered the question, but one thing that gets missed by many is that people who design missiles are continuously developing counter-countermeasures. If the bad guys are able to design a flare that actually works, the missile guys are going to work on software that ignores them or defeats the flare in some other way, or develop a new missile that isn't affected by the flare. Many modern IR missles aren't just seeking hot spots like older systems, they have imaging sensors and flare rejection logic - flares just don't look like a plane. On top of that, it's all about probabilities. It's not like a video game where launching flares causes a missile to miss every time, nor is a missile going to hit the target every time even in good circumstances. There's a never ending cycle of weapon and defense development that goes back to antiquity. ",
"Cookie Monster is coming to steal your last chocolate chip cookie, but you're not a sucker. You throw out 20 oatmeal raisen cookies. The chances of him picking the right cookie just went way down. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2kx7m3 | why are too many solar panels illegal? (story inside) | I was coming home when my father told me our family friend was facing a fine.
His name is Kurt. He retired out in Colorado. He lives a simple life. Barely uses his cell phone, TV, or any other technology. He doesn't spend much electricity.
He built his own house out in Colorado. To save money, and the environment, he bought a bunch of solar panels for his house. Apparently this is illegal, or something, because he's facing a fine for producing too much electricity. Apparently he produced enough electricity to run a town. Probably an exaggeration, but the point is he produces a lot of electricity. The town said he either needs to start using all that electricity, or face a fine.
My question is, how is this illegal? I'm no scientist, but isn't the point of solar panels using energy from the sun? So, who cares if he's producing so much electricity, right? He spent his own money on these solar panels. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2kx7m3/eli5_why_are_too_many_solar_panels_illegal_story/ | {
"a_id": [
"clpibtd",
"clpigzu",
"clpkv5n"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"A lot of these problems come not from having the panels, but wanting them to be connected to the general power grid. If it was a self contained system, he could probably do whatever he wants.\n\nHowever, when you connect your in-home power generation to the public power grid, you can easily cause problems. if he's really producing that much energy, I could easily see it overloading other components in the grid, posing a danger to the linemen who maintain electrical lines, etc.\n\nAlternately, there could be a law in place essentially to protect the electrical provider... Either in the shallow \"They don't want to adapt so lets enforce the status quo\" way, or in the more serious, \"We don't want a bunch of unregulated utilities popping up\" way.",
"When you hook up solar to your house that's on the electrical grid, there are times when your solar panels generate more electricity than the house needs at that moment, and pushes that power back onto the grid. This is how the grid is designed to work; when this happens, the electric meter at the house runs backwards.\n\nMost states have a limit as to how much an individual user can push back on to the grid, and it's likely that the family friend was pushing too much electricity back into the grid.",
"There was a great article at _URL_1_ about 2 months ago that described why producing too much electricity is one of the [\"5 Insane Things That Will Destroy Our Power Grid\"](_URL_0_).\n\nI'll just copy/paste the relevant section(s). if you can, read the whole thing, it's very insightful:\n\n\"#3. Green Energy Is Completely Unpredictable\n\nThe critical thing you need to understand about our electrical grid is that it falls apart unless the demand for energy matches the supply of energy. When there is too little energy being produced and too much demand for it, the grid breaks, the PlayStations turn off, and within minutes people are out on the streets eating cats.\n\nThings like solar panels and wind power are called \"green\" because they have the potential to save our environment from the current smog-farting generation of engines. But people who work in electric utilities call them \"variable generation sources,\" because their energy output fluctuates so heavily that they're about as reliable as the lifeguard at that swimming pool behind the Walmart. If it's an especially cloudy or windless day, the electrical grid won't have enough power to supply the demanded energy, and the entire grid will shit its pants.\n\nRemember when I said the supplied energy has to exactly match the demanded energy? That goes both ways -- solar and wind power also run the risk of producing too much energy. If it's too sunny and windy, because of some brilliant shining tornado or something, the electrical grid gets overwhelmed and can fry itself. We've seen it come close to happening when big storms go blasting through wind farms.\n\nThis seemingly contradictory idea of \"too much energy\" is the same reason why charging your electric car is free at night in Texas. Utilities generally have a surplus of electricity at night, and in order to keep the grid running, all that shit must go. The price of electricity can range anywhere from hideously expensive to so dirty cheap that utilities will actually pay you to use it. That is not a joke.\n\n'Why don't we just store the extra energy at night, so that it's there when demand goes up?'\n\nWell ...\n\n#2. Energy Is Impossibly Difficult to Store\n\nThis here is the real root of the problem when it comes to green energy: storing it. See, there's a reason we don't just Frankenstein the hell out of the electrical grid and collect infinite amounts of energy from lightning strikes. Batteries that can store enough electrical energy to power a town are both insanely expensive and complete garbage, which as you may have noticed are not two superlatives that go well together. Storing five kilowatts of energy in lithium-ion batteries (roughly the average monthly amount it takes to power a hair dryer) literally costs thousands of dollars.\n\nA battery the size of a football field can store 40 million watts of power, which sounds like a lot but can sustain a small town only as a backup, if nobody is watching Netflix. For most utilities, storing energy just isn't a feasible option. It's an expensive fantasy that isn't worth the cost, which is what makes us so dependent on fossil fuels.\n\nIt is possible that the future solution to our energy woes will be to literally fill the foundations and basements of every house in the nation with linked batteries. However, that day is a long way off. That football-field-sized battery we mentioned is the largest battery in the world, and it sits in Fairbanks, Alaska. Weighing 1,300 metric tons, it can provide power to 12,000 of the city's 100,000 residents ... for seven minutes. Granted, it's still useful -- it prevents blackouts as a battery backup when the main grid has issues -- but at that relatively small scale, you can see the problem with attempting to convert the entire grid.\n\n'But what if everyone just gets their own solar panels? Then the grid isn't affected either way!'\n\nWell, an environmentally friendly family with solar panels installed in every square inch of their house still has to reconnect to the grid if they want to have power when it's cloudy or raining, because, again, green energy is a harsh mistress and big batteries are an unreliable nightmare. We might not be ready for a sudden spike in demand, and if too many off-grid people are plugging back in at once it could cause a blackout. Of course, this isn't an issue if you install a special meter to monitor these people's power use and generation, but the unfortunate problem we face is that many of the wonderfully self-sufficient people who generate their own power are also fucking insane.\n\nThat's because many of them right now are the \"buying solar panels due to the impending apocalypse\" type who are convinced that we are trying to spy on them or (no bullshit) give them cancer, because I guess they think we're trying to rub them out to retain our hold on the free world's energy. Electricians have literally had guns pulled on them while installing meters, because information on your preferred A/C settings is apparently the kind of thing you take to the grave.\" *(Source: R.Evans & F.Ramirez, Sept. 2, 2014)*\n\n.\n\nSeems legit.\n\n**EDIT - Including more info from article. Sorry about the text-wall, but i'm too damn lazy to paraphrase, etc.**"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.cracked.com/article_21355_5-stupid-reasons-your-electricity-could-go-away-tomorrow.html",
"Cracked.com"
]
] |
|
5tsg6p | how can jocks be so good at physical exercise? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5tsg6p/eli5_how_can_jocks_be_so_good_at_physical_exercise/ | {
"a_id": [
"ddonbb0",
"ddoncb8",
"ddonz67",
"ddonzm7",
"ddoosoi"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2,
2,
6
],
"text": [
"Because they exercise and are physically fit. And yes, it *is* possible to be both fit and get good grades if you have a balanced lifestyle and don't neglect any one thing for another. ",
"It's just what they do. They train for the sports they love, and getting the grades is a must if they want to stay on the teams. It's all about drive for their sport.",
"One of my old friends played baseball basketball and football. His schedule was wake up and go to school and from school go to whatever sport he was in depending on what time of the year it was. He would come home and spend 2 hours on the computer playing whatever and then after that he did his homework and went to bed. \n\nHe was in much better physical state than I was and probably smarter too. I kicked his ass in whatever game we played though. ✔",
"I don't know why you are getting down voted. I think that's a fine question. I guess its because they derive esteem from being good at sport, and certainly they get some respect for it. I am not that into team sports but I was a champion rower, then became competitive in running after leaving school. I love running because it isn't really about beating anyone else, it's about beating your own times",
"This is interesting. Like you when I grew up I found myself easily pushed around and on the weaker side of things. But I already had good grades and always considered jocks to be rather stupid. Once I reached college I realized a few things, grades and intelligence are sort of determined by the individual and the same goes for physical condition. Sure, there can be cases where someone is just naturally more fit or scores higher on tests, but for the most part it's determined by the individual. Once in college I began to workout more and became more 'jock like' and still had good grades. Join a gym, or talk to one of these jocks and just mention you wanna get into the working out and stuff, takes some time to see noticeable gains but you gotta start. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1b1uvy | colonialism, post-colonialism, and neo-colonialism | I just... cannot compute. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1b1uvy/eli5_colonialism_postcolonialism_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"c92ssog"
],
"score": [
10
],
"text": [
"Colonialism is the process by which one nation actually takes over political control of another nation, turning it into a colony.\n\nPostcolonialism is a philosophical/academic theory that analyses the legacy left by colonialism after the colonized nation has become (politically) independent again. Very broadly, this examines how being colonized has changed the culture of the people living in the former colony.\n\nNeocolonialism is the process by which powerful nations use economic or cultural imperialism to control other nations, instead of direct military or political force."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
13tnwj | why buying lottery tickets is considered dumb, when someone has to win. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/13tnwj/elif_why_buying_lottery_tickets_is_considered/ | {
"a_id": [
"c772dxv",
"c772e30",
"c772ija",
"c772j4j",
"c772k2l",
"c773ciz",
"c773hz0"
],
"score": [
11,
28,
5,
19,
6,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"No one has to win in many lotteries.\n\nSimilarly, even if someone were obligated to win, it's *still* very, very, VERY unlikely to be you, so the chances that you won't just lose money are very small.",
"Someone doesn't HAVE to win. That's one of the reasons that the jackpot keeps going up. If nobody wins, they increase the jackpot. Also, the reason it is dumb is because the chances of winning are so astronomically low. You'd be much more likely to strike it rich by investing in Chinese penny stocks.",
"Firstly, someone doesn't HAVE to win - if no one matches all the numbers, nobody wins the jackpot and this is added to the jackpot of the next draw. This is called a [Rollover](_URL_2_).\nAs for it being considered dumb, this is probably because the odds of winning, [1 in about 14 million in the UK](_URL_1_), are very low - much lower than [the odds of being struck by lightning](_URL_0_)! I even read somewhere that you have more chance of dying on your way to get a lottery ticket from the shop than you do of actually winning! Many people will choose not to buy a ticket as they feel they are wasting their money and will not win.",
"First, nobody has to win.\n\nSecond, in mathematical terms, your expected value of playing the lottery is negative. What that means is that the more money you put in, the more money you're likely to lose. Someone occasionally winning big, doesn't change that.",
"It really depends on why you're buying lottery tickets in the first place. If you're buying a ticket every now and then for pure entertainment purposes, then that's fine. If you're buying dozens of tickets every week in an attempt to be a millionaire, then you're essentially throwing money away.\n\nThink of it as being a slot machine. If you go to a casino and spend a few bucks on slots for fun, good for you. If you drop $5000 into the slot machine over the course of a weekend because you're going to win the jackpot \"any minute now\", you should probably reevaluate the situation.",
"Lets say I get every person you know to play a game where they give me a whole five dollars, and I promise that out of all the people who gave me five dollars, I'll choose one randomly to give half the money to, and I'll keep half for myself.\n\nIf a hundred people play, then every week I get five hundred dollars from them. I take half of it for myself, then give the other half back to some of them.\n\nThat doesn't make much sense does it? A bunch of people give me their money so that I can give them back half of it. Why would they give me their money if all I'm going to do is take half of it and give it back? \n\nIf we did this for a whole year, the hundred people who were playing my game would give me thirteen thousand dollars just for returning the other half of the twenty six thousand dollars they gave me over the year. The hundred people gave me twenty six thousand dollars, but now they only have thirteen thousand dollars.\n\nIf they kept the money, they would have twenty six thousand dollars instead of thirteen thousand dollars.\n\nIf they put the money in a bank, they could even have more than twenty six thousand dollars.\n\nIt's really silly that they just give me half of the money.",
"Expected value is negative.\n\nLet's take a simple example. Say you and I are playing a game where we flip a coin. If it is heads, I give you $1. If it is tails, you give me $1. Fair, right? That's because the expected value of one flip is 0. There is a 1/2 chance you make a dollar and a 1/2 chance you lose a dollar, so neither of us make or lose any money on average.\n\nNow say if it's heads, I give you $1, and if it's tails, you give me $5. Do you want to play this game with me? Of course not. In the long run, we will each win 1/2 of the time. So for 10 flips, I am expected to win 5 times, which is $25, and you expect to win 5 times and make $5. So if this happens, you have lost $20 over 10 flips, meaning the expected value of each flip (the amount you expect to make on average each flip) is -$2.\n\nThe same logic applies to the lottery, except the numbers are different. Say your chance of winning is 1 in a million. If you play a million times, you would expect to win once. If it is $1 a ticket, you will have spent $1 million and won once. Is the prize you win more than a million dollars? Most likely not. Therefore, if everything goes as you expect, you will have lost money and it is not worth playing."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm",
"http://lottery.merseyworld.com/Info/Chances.html",
"http://www.lottery.co.uk/info/lottery-rollovers.asp"
],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3hrc23 | how do peer to peer networks work? | I've always wondered how it worked. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3hrc23/eli5_how_do_peer_to_peer_networks_work/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu9w4vi",
"cu9w7gy"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Your \"nomal\" model is a client-server one: you have a client that requests content and a server that has all the answers (tm) and sends the client what he wants to know.\n\nPeer to Peer works differently: each client has \"part of the truth\". Lets say you have a lexicon that is peer-to-peer based: each peer knows a certain amount of words (eg. you have all words starting with A, I have all with B, someone else has C, and so on). If you want to look up a word, you just shout into the network \"hey, does someone have an entry on 'bla'?\" and if someone has an entry for that they will respond to you \"here ya go, it means [something]\". At the same time you listen to people asking questions to the network that you might be able to answer.\n\nNow that I wrote this, I am somewhat thinking of how ELI5 should work ;)\n\nEDIT: another example: lets say you and your family want to share holiday photos (or whatever). You could either all dump your files in one huge storage (client/server model) and only what is there counts, or you could exchange the files directly via thumb drives or similar (peer to peer) with nobody having the \"master copy\".",
"Perhaps the most confusing part is how do the peers know to talk to each other if it's decentralized? This can be negotiated offline as in \"Hey, here's my public ip address\" and another plugs it in and now two peers are connected. If the program agrees to listen on a specific port, then these programs can quickly scan your local network via your router to find other peers. This can be taken further where a single peer can get connected to another single peer and then this information is passed around to all peers.\n\nThis can also be negotiated online with a centralized server for the initial connection. Essentially, the centralized server maintains an initial list everyone agrees to download and use to connect and the network is built up from there.\n\nThe distribution of data from multiple peers due to a single peers request can happen in many ways, but generally (as is the case with torrents) the file's content is split up into pieces and then those pieces are then requested in parallel from multiple different peers, piecing together the file until it's had in its entirety.\n\nedit: An example of this, let's say the data in question is the number sequence [1 ... 20]. The program will reserve the space on your hard drive, 20 empty spaces effectively, and then in parallel request to fill out those spaces. It may ask one peer for the data that fills [1 ... 5], another for [6 ... 10], and so on. A peer may very well say \"I don't have [6 ... 10]\" and so another peer if available will be asked. Eventually all the data is received and written to the reserved disk space, completing the sequence locally. This also means that you begin uploading data to other peers even though you do not have all the data. If you've downloaded [1 ... 5] but nothing else, and a peer asks you for [1 ... 5], then you will send it to them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2paxci | pre-computer animation, how did cartoon artists paint inside the lines with solid colors? | I guess I just don't understand. I've always seen credits for background painters and such, but seriously the fill on foreground elements looks just as good back in 95 as it does with using the fill tool in any computer graphics program. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2paxci/eli5_precomputer_animation_how_did_cartoon/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmuybyo",
"cmuywsb"
],
"score": [
6,
6
],
"text": [
"Well, The animations were traced onto cells ( clear sheets of celluloid ). The tracing was done with special polyester ink. Now, they did the inking on the front of the cell. Afterwards, the colors were applied on the back of the cell. Each cartoon character had a pre determined color scheme ( sorta like painting with numbers ) and those were applied on the back. The ink on the front would cover up small smudges. Usually these jobs were done by women, because they posses greater motor control than men.\n\nEDIT: Article here:\n\n_URL_1_\n\n_URL_0_",
"There used to be this thing called 'skill' that people in pre computer eras had. The idea was that you practiced a lot and got really, really good at something, then that became your job. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://www.waltdisney.org/storyboard/look-closer-women-disney-ink-and-paint-department",
"http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2010/03/disney-animation-girls-201003"
],
[]
] |
|
4enpez | how the formula: e=mc^2 works and the experiment which demonstrated this. | I guess the title says it all. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4enpez/eli5_how_the_formula_emc2_works_and_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"d21pegg",
"d21tfmb",
"d21u5cp"
],
"score": [
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Where there is mass, there is energy, and where there is energy, there is mass, it means that mass = energy. One kilogram of mass is equal to about 90000000000000000 (c^2, or the speed of light squared) units if energy called Joules. E = energy, M = mass, and c = speed of light.\n\nOne example of an experiment is that higher element atoms have more mass than the parts that make the atom up. This is because the binding of those atoms stores energy within them.",
"The equation is incomplete as written, being only the portion that deals with rest mass. The complete equation is:\n\nE^2 = p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4\n\nWhere E is energy, p is momentum, c is the speed of light in vacuum, and m is rest mass.",
"As someone said, its not the full equation. However when you plug in p = 0 (meaning no momentum/kinetic energy in the system), it reduced down to E=mc^2.\n\nUltimately it means the quantity we call mass IS the energy of the system when it is at rest. In fact if we use unita in which c = 1, you simply have E = m.\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
5qizlb | why does a 16oz bottle soda cost $1.79 while a 32oz fountain soda costs $.99? | Also, the same 32oz fountain soda is $3+ at fast food restaurants. What gives? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5qizlb/eli5_why_does_a_16oz_bottle_soda_cost_179_while_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"dczm95u",
"dczm9p9",
"dczo0t3"
],
"score": [
3,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"Because that's what people will pay. The price of everything depends partially on cost but that's not the whole story. Shipping and packaging is a cost for bottled products. When you buy bottled water you are paying for bottling, shipping, and store profits. The water itself is < $0.01 .",
"The cost of soda vs the price charged are separate things entirely.\n\nThe reason a 16 bottle is more expensive than a fountain soda has to do the materials and the way it is sold. They bottle of soda has to be shipped in a plastic bottle (more expensive than a cup) and then refrigerated and take up shelf/floor space where more profitable items could be sold. So the 16 bottle would be more expensive.\n\nWhy you are talking about fountain sodas you are looking at a 10-15 cent cup and syrup that is mixed with filtered tap water. The restaurant purchases a \"bag in a box\" for a low price that can be mixed with water to create a large amount of soda for pennies per serving. So the fountain soda costs a lot less for the restaurant to sell.\n\nThe reason some restaurants charge a lot more for fountain soda is simply because they can. By charging more for soda they can charge less for food. Soda is a high margin product for them so it helps their bottom line. A higher price on soda may also help the restaurant upsell you to a specialty drink that may be more profitable, etc.\n\n\n\n\n\n",
"Either way, there is only 10 cents worth of soda in there. Seriously, soda is REALLY cheap. The markup is really insane. Go to a movie theatre and it will be even more expensive. The price is entirely arbitrary, and it is only determined by how much they think you are willing to pay. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4or4bo | why do people buy insurance, instead of just saving in a bank account? | (Probably a stupid question, but I still wanna know why)
This is my understanding of insurance:
If something bad happens, like an accident, the company that you've been paying insurance to will give you a compensation to your loss. But, as far as my knowledge goes, which is not very vast, you couldn't "refund" your money from an insurance company.
Why would people buy insurance, instead of just saving in a bank account? At least, in a bank account, an accident doesn't need to occur to be able to access your invested money, right? Or am I completely missing something? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4or4bo/eli5_why_do_people_buy_insurance_instead_of_just/ | {
"a_id": [
"d4ev6pn",
"d4evr58",
"d4ewrj6",
"d4ewz51"
],
"score": [
30,
2,
2,
15
],
"text": [
"Let's say you buy a car today & get insurance on it for $100/mo. If you get into an accident tomorrow, your insurance will still pay out the $100k in medical bills you cause to that pedestrian you hit. If you were trying to save the money, you'd only have $100 and be out of luck.\n\n",
"Because it's more affordable for the average person.\n\nLet's say Bob earns 700 a week.\n\nIn that week, Bob has to spend money on food, rent/mortgage, petrol, recreation and it leaves Bob with 100 for a rainy day.\n\nIf Bob gets insurance for say 200 a month, then it cost's Bob 50 a week for full coverage incase he gets into an accident.\n\nIf Bob decided to instead just save up (let's pretend that laws don't force you to have it), then it would take Bob x100 weeks (two years) just to have 50k saved just by putting in 50 a week. \nSo Bob can't drive for two years 'just incase' he hits an expensive car.\n\n > At least, in a bank account, an accident doesn't need to occur to be able to access your invested money, right? \n\nTechnically you can, but then you can't get into an accident until you replace that money. Can you be 100% sure you won't cause an accident?!\n\nAlso, if you hit a Lamboghini.... Be prepared to sell your house.\n\n-edit-\nx1000 weeks. ",
"Or Among states that allow alternatives to car insurance, most accept a certificate showing that you have deposited a minimum amount with a specified state agency, such as the state comptroller's office or the state's office of insurance. think thats like $100,000 and prove financial responsibility Or a Surety bond purchased from a licensed surety company. And I believe thats a 1,000,000 bond the judgment from a single accident could wipe out your entire fund how much do you have in a saving account?",
"When you save in a bank account, the only money you have available is what you have saved. When you buy insurance, the money available is (in principle) all of the money all customers have paid to that insurance company. That's a much larger pool.\n\nThe economic magic of insurance is in managing catastrophic risk - something expensive to recover from but which happens relatively rarely. If everyone had to save up enough money to replace their entire house in one go, then no one would have spare money to spend on anything else, which would kill the economy. Everyone would have all of their money stacked in the bank for an emergency that will actually happen to very few people.\n\nInstead, we have everyone pay a smaller amount of money to the insurance company, which creates a large pool of funds to pay to the few who have that catastrophe happen to them."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
8an81s | what is magical thinking? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8an81s/eli5_what_is_magical_thinking/ | {
"a_id": [
"dwzyxtx",
"dwzz5ip"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"In short is the belief that your thoughts have a direct, physical impact on the external world. Basically, mind over matter. If you believe something enough, it will come to be.",
"\"magical thinking\" is when a person forms a belief that is not rooted in science or rationale, and sometimes is directly contradicted by direct observation. Examples can include lucky trinkets, ritual healing, and the placebo effect."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
7uuah2 | how are goods efficiently taken out of iso containers at ports and put into semi-trucks? | I hear a lot about how ISO containers have revolutionized international transportation of goods, allowing goods to stay in one container for many legs of journey. Why do semi-trucks in the USA use their own containers instead of hauling ISO containers?
It seems really inefficient to have to unload hundreds of boxes from an ISO container into the back of a semi truck for every ISO container reaching the US. How are goods cheaply taken out of ISO containers at the ports to be packed into the back of a semi-truck? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7uuah2/eli5_how_are_goods_efficiently_taken_out_of_iso/ | {
"a_id": [
"dtn7bet",
"dtn7igd",
"dtn9byw"
],
"score": [
5,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"The ISO containers are not unpacked at the ports. They are sent by rail or semi with a chassis trailer to the purchasers warehouse. The purchaser then unloads the container at their warehouse and adds the contents to their inventory. This inventory is then dispersed to the local retail outlet or other warehouses by the typical semi you see on the street.",
"ISO containers are also known as \"intermodal containers\". Intermodal containers are *designed* to be moved from ships to trucks and trains - that's literally what the name means.\n\nThey're not unloaded at the ports onto trucks.",
"They aren't unloaded in the ports... the shipping containers fit onto a flat frame connected to the semi tractor, turning it into a semi trailer. [LIKE THIS](_URL_0_).\n\nThey are then driven to warehouses or distribution centers away from the port for unloading and warehousing or distribution."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[
"http://c8.alamy.com/comp/BDF7N2/a-semi-trailer-truck-hauls-a-container-from-a-port-container-depotthe-BDF7N2.jpg"
]
] |
|
2enuow | how do beef and chicken farmers keep up with the daily demand for meat? | Literally a burger is sold every second, grocery stores sell chicken and beef, restaurants every day just in one town alone thousands of kilos of meat is consumed. How are they able to breed this many animals on a daily basis to keep up with this? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2enuow/eli5_how_do_beef_and_chicken_farmers_keep_up_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"ck18syl",
"ck1a2n4"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"You are failing to grasp the scale of the the US Poultry economy, let alone the world Poultry economy.\n\nIn the US alone, 8.6 BILLION chickens are killed every year. That's approximately 273 chickens every second. ",
"It is not like there are 5 ranches in the US. There are thousands of ranches across the US. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
j49sh | computer data storage. | I understand (or think i do) that it's all stored in binary electrical signals. What i have trouble grasping is how it remembers that, especially after the computer is completely disconnected from electricity for an extended period of time. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j49sh/eli5_computer_data_storage/ | {
"a_id": [
"c290i2v",
"c290ijl"
],
"score": [
5,
2
],
"text": [
"The sort of storage that stays valid after losing electrical power is called \"non-volatile storage\". That means things like hard drives, CD-ROMs and flash drives. Storage that requires electricity to maintain data is called \"volatile storage\" and is computer memory, or RAM.\n\nHard drives maintain data because a hard drive is like a series of little magnets. Magnetic polarity can either be \"north\" or \"south\" and this polarity is maintained without the need for electrical current.\n\nCD-ROMs maintain data by writing a series of dark and light coloured areas that can be read by a laser.\n\nFlash drives work by having individual cells that are left with an electrical charge by depositing extra electrons (and thus negative charge) that is maintained even after power is removed. It's almost like a tiny series of microscopic batteries that is either set positive/negative or negative/positive.\n\nThis is obviously a gross oversimplification. For some of the gory details as to why hard drive encoding isn't just as simple as \"north = 1, south = 0\", _URL_0_ is pretty interesting. It's very technical and fairly heady stuff.",
"In the case of hard drives, the data is stored on spinning metal platters as very, very tiny regions magnetized in one way (1) or the other (0). As long as the platters aren't demagnetized or destroyed, the tiny regions will stay magnetized and so the data will remain.\n\nFlash memory is more complicated, and I may be wrong about this, but it stores the data as electrons in tiny microscopic cells on the flash chip. I never looked into that as much so someone will have to clarify"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse-code_modulation"
],
[]
] |
|
3c5euz | what compels humans to want torture or pain fetishes or things like collars? | I visit places on the internet where some people wear collars for fun in a non-sexual way, or on a fetish bender. (I've even heard they're pretty comfortable) I've also always been curious about WHY people would subject themselves to pain/torture as a fetish? Does anyone know why this seems to be in human nature? It extends way back into the middle ages with unusual "vanity" and other extreme t, but this fascination with domination/sub and torture fetishes somehow seem rooted and interconnected in human nature.
**Summing up**: Why do humans subject themselves to pain or perceived "lower" items such as dog collars? What is it in human nature? Can it be explained? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3c5euz/eli5_what_compels_humans_to_want_torture_or_pain/ | {
"a_id": [
"cssdzld",
"csse54y"
],
"score": [
2,
5
],
"text": [
"Collars are comfy. They're like heavy, snug necklaces. A reassuring, constant weight that reminds you that someone wants you. In that way, theyre kinda similar to wedding or engagement rings in that there's a big emotional investment that they represent. ",
"Some people are mentally unable to be sexually aroused or achieve orgasm, usually — when they are humiliated, or feel pain, or {arbitrary sexual fetish here}, it changes their neurochemistry so that they can experience sexual arousal and/or achieve orgasm. \n\nFor some people it's the adrenaline thrill of the forbidden, or the adrenaline thrill that occurs when they experience pain, or adrenaline when they are humiliated. \n\nFor some people it's a way for them to feel safe, secure, and without responsibilities — it relieves them of the stress that prevents them from enjoying themselves. \n\nSome people feel guilty for enjoying sex, and their fetish relieves them of responsibility for their enjoyment of sex."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
6ajpw5 | what a shadow cabinet is in uk politics | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6ajpw5/eli5_what_a_shadow_cabinet_is_in_uk_politics/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhf13ti",
"dhf14lo"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Basically it is the oppositions version of the cabinet, where they question their opposite number on the policies of the government.\n\nThe government may have an education minister, in the opposition there would be a shadow cabinet member for education who would ask questions regarding the governments policy on schools, universities, funding etc.",
"The Cabinet is a set of ministers with responsibilities for specific areas of government, ie home affairs, foreign affairs, defence, transport etc. The shadow Cabinet is the same thing, but from the opposition party. They have no powers as such, they are just responsible for coming up with their party's policies in their particular purview."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1511ve | the low gas prices in the us? how is this even possible? is he economy improving or tanking again? thanks. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1511ve/eli5_the_low_gas_prices_in_the_us_how_is_this/ | {
"a_id": [
"c7ib49z"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"You really have Hurricane Sandy to blame.\n\nSee before Hurricane Sandy, most people on Wall Street thought Oil, and Gas in America would go up due to several large oil refineries, being in its projected land fall.\n\nWhile these refineries did shut down, only 1 of them produced gasoline. This left people with a large amount of oil and gas to sell off. \n\nCurrently Oil from Texas, Dakota's, and Canada are at relative all time lows cause by the slow sell off by reluctant investors losing money over speculation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
7syy69 | please explain the video game industry's shift to pre-order? why had this occurred? when did it start? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7syy69/eli5_please_explain_the_video_game_industrys/ | {
"a_id": [
"dt8ild4"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Preordering enables you to get money sooner, which is always nice. \n\nPeople also may PLAN to buy, but then forget when the game comes out, or they balk on buying if reviews aren't great. But if you get people to pre-order, then people will end up paying for the game unless they go out of their way for a refund. This results in more sales."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1mdbp6 | why do we have an urge to do things that could hurt/kill us? | e.g. jumping off a cliff | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1mdbp6/eli5_why_do_we_have_an_urge_to_do_things_that/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc84htc"
],
"score": [
7
],
"text": [
"The reason people jump off cliffs, climb a cliff, or put themselves in situations that might cause serious injury is because in these situations the mind is forced to focus on the moment. The past and future disappear. This is also the same reason people get drunk, take drugs, and another reason why sex is so nice, they quiet the mind and afford one a moment to just be in the moment. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
818isw | what do sovereign citizens argue? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/818isw/eli5what_do_sovereign_citizens_argue/ | {
"a_id": [
"dv19slz",
"dv1a3n1",
"dv1ath7"
],
"score": [
8,
5,
3
],
"text": [
"Here is a short description of what they basically believe from Wikipedia:\n\n > The benefits of U.S. citizenship are received by consent in exchange for freedom. State citizens consequently take steps to revoke and rescind their U.S. citizenship and reassert their de jure common-law state citizen status. This involves removing one's self from federal jurisdiction and relinquishing any evidence of consent to U.S. citizenship, such as a Social Security number, driver's license, car registration, use of ZIP codes, marriage license, voter registration, and birth certificate. Also included is refusal to pay state and federal income taxes because citizens not under U.S. jurisdiction are not required to pay them. Only residents (resident aliens) of the states, not its citizens, are income-taxable, state citizens argue. And as a state citizen land owner, one can bring forward the original land patent and file it with the county for absolute or allodial property rights. Such allodial ownership is held \"without recognizing any superior to whom any duty is due on account thereof\" (Black's Law Dictionary). Superiors include those who levy property taxes or who hold mortgages or liens against the property.\n\nBasically, they say that they are citizens of the states, not the US, so they can give up their US citizenship at any time and not be subject to its laws (reverting instead back to their primary state citizenship).\n\nAs you can imagine, the courts have said that this is not a thing.",
"It depends on the particular strain, but the general theme is that if you invoke the right magic legal incantations or secret code words, you can make it so the government has no power over you. That includes everything from not having to pay taxes to not being subject to arrest to, in some of the more fringe cases, the right to the contents of a secret account being held in your name by the country's central bank.",
"There are various degrees of what they believe. The hardcore SC's believe the US government takes a loan on you when you're born based on how much tax revenue you'll likely produce during your lifetime. There is a separate corporate you and an individual you. The corporate you has your name in all capitals (\"JOHN DOE\") and has the debt, while the individual doesn't (\"John Doe\"). You later agree to become one (creating \"joinder\") and the terms of the debt when you do such things as get a license, pay vehicle registrations, pay taxes, etc. By not agreeing to it, they believe they can live their lives without paying taxes and be sovereign from laws. \n\nThe lowest of SC believers keep it simple by spinning the right to travel as being a right to drive, without having a license or vehicle registration. \n\nForm your own opinion on these whacko beliefs, but a common trend is that SC's believers have a history of arrests or not paying taxes before becoming SC's. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7ewurn | what happens that makes beer taste terrible after warming up and then re-chilling? what makes beer 'skunky'? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7ewurn/eli5_what_happens_that_makes_beer_taste_terrible/ | {
"a_id": [
"dq80ztz",
"dq817we",
"dq84o7w",
"dq8dds3"
],
"score": [
174,
193,
15,
2
],
"text": [
"Warming and re-chilling beer does not make it \"skunky.\" Light interacting with the hop compounds causes the skunkiness. That's why it's prevalent in beers that use clear glass. And that is the reason Corona pushes the whole lime business. \n\nAs far as glass goes, clear is worst. Green offers some protection. Brown offers the most protection. Cans, however, are king. ",
"Skunking occurs when beer is exposed to certain wavelengths of light. This is why beer is typically bottled in brown bottles. Clear and green bottles protect the beer less, which is why popular brands in those color bottles often have the distinctive flavor. \n\nThe chemical responsible for the distinctive flavor is called MBT, and is produced when the energy in light causes the riboflavin (produced by yeast during fermentation) in beer to chemically react with the alpha acids from the hops. ",
"Thanks! I knew the container had an effect on taste but not to that degree. It's actually very neat information.",
"Basically a chemical reactiin caused by light makes beer skunky. Check this out. It's a little bit long but it's pretty informative. They talk about skunky beer 8 minutes into it. _URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://youtu.be/uxh4I9bfjSo"
]
] |
||
6adbis | how do dyes (hair, fabric, etc.) work? what makes one dye more "permanent" than another? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6adbis/how_do_dyes_hair_fabric_etc_work_what_makes_one/ | {
"a_id": [
"dhefrst"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"A dye is typically composed of a pigment molecule or a combination of pigment molecules. Pigments absorb light at some specific wavelength and therefore reflect other light that you see as color. (A white object is reflecting all wavelengths of light and scattering it, while a mirror is reflecting all wavelengths of light while maintaining the orientation of the incident beams) (Vantablack is absorbing essentially all of the light). Over time, pigment molecules either wash away from the place where you put them or break down into some non-pigment molecules due to a process called photobleaching (photo being a prefix for things related to light). Dyes that are more permanent more resistant to these effects."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
35yogz | why can't consoles/pcs read or play cds designed for other platforms? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/35yogz/eli5why_cant_consolespcs_read_or_play_cds/ | {
"a_id": [
"cr91h1v",
"cr91jfb",
"cr91s00"
],
"score": [
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Like your computer uses Windows/Linux/Apple OS/etc. as an operating system, consoles/dvd players/cd players/etc all have their own operating systems. If a CD is designed for the Xbox operating system, the Windows OS won't know what to do with it (unless you run an emulator).\n\nThink of each OS as a different language. Your Xbox speaks French, so if you put an Xbox disc into your Italian speaking PS4, the PS4 won't understand it. PC's are special because you can install a translator (emulator) that let's your Spanish speaking PC understand the Italian PS4 disc.",
"Well there are 2 roadblocks, 1st of all hardware, 2nd of all software. \n\n**Hardware**\n\nQuite simply some cd's can't be read because the readers aren't designed to read them. You can't stick a blue ray disk into a regular dvd player because they aren't designed to read that form of disk just like cd drives aren't designed to read casette tapes. \n\n**Software**\n\nWhile the hardware might be for the most part compatable (typical consoles vs pc nowadays), the software is not. The disks are programmed to only run on specific consoles and thus when a device without the necessary software tries to read it is just spits are nonsense because its like its trying to read French but in actuality its Russian.",
"They can read the data, but the data is meaningless to them, because the hardware is completely different.\n\nImagine that your friend has a small sports car with a manual transmission, and you have a large SUV with an automatic transmission. One day, you decide to borrow your friend's sports car because your SUV is in the shop.\n\nSo you get in the car, and pull out the owner's manual for your SUV and try to follow the instructions.\n\n1. Depress the brake, and turn the key to the \"start\" position.\n * You depress the brake, and turn the key to the \"start\" position, starting the car.\n\n2. With the brake still pressed, pull the shift lever on the steering column down into \"drive\".\n * You keep the brake pressed, grab thin air where the shift lever would have been on your SUV, and pull down on thin air.\n\n3. Release the brake, and gently press the accelerator.\n * You release the brake, and gently press the accelerator. The car begins revving in neutral.\n\n4. Adjust the accelerator as the SUV moves forward.\n * You continue to rev in neutral.\n\nAs you can see, if you try to follow your SUV operating instructions in a different kind of car, they simply won't work. In this example, the instruction manual is the program, and the car and SUV are a console and a PC.\n\nLikewise, the instructions in a program that tell a console what to do won't work for a PC, because they're designed completely differently. Even more differently than a car and an SUV. It would be more like trying to use the instructions for riding a horse to bake a cake: you wouldn't even be able to get past the first step."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
2oby76 | how come when i scratch my scrotum i get a tingling in my shoulder? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2oby76/eli5_how_come_when_i_scratch_my_scrotum_i_get_a/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmlpe1w"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because this is asking about a condition affecting you it qualifies as a personal problem according to the sidebar rules.\n\nI'm not sure what, if any, subreddit would be better for you, but if you find one that works for you, let me know and I'll edit it into this template so anyone in the future will know, too!\n\nAlternatively, *if* this really is a complex conceptual question about the human body and not a question about *you* specifically, you can rephrase and resubmit without reference to yourself and try again. (Body questions are pretty common though, so try a quick search!)\n\nGood luck! "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2anivs | is it possible all humans require the same proportion of vitamins and minerals? | For instance, a vitamin label will state that their product will provide (presumably) anyone with 50% of the daily requirement of vitamin x. I assume a five year old and a fifty year old require different amounts-- if that's the case, what age group (or size individual) are they referring to?
Or does this mean that different vitamins are not more necessary than others during different arcs in our lives and that the amount of iron men and women don't vary? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2anivs/eli5_is_it_possible_all_humans_require_the_same/ | {
"a_id": [
"cix0fwj"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"It's usually based on the recommended amount for a female aswell. ie calories say 2000, but for men it's 2500 and children obviously less.\n\nAlso some vitamins last better than others, studies have found buying mulipacks of pill and leaving them on a shelf will lead to some being useless after a month, others a week, some only days."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6tdidl | why do waterfalls form a staircase like structure? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6tdidl/eli5_why_do_waterfalls_form_a_staircase_like/ | {
"a_id": [
"dljxs2n"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The rocks themselves below the waterfall are shaped into a somewhat like a staircase. When the water from the river up top comes down, it hits the top rocks, then falls down to the other rocks and then to the other rocks and etc until it gets to the river down below. That's why it looks like a staircase."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
18on4q | why do americans spell their words differently to british english i.e colour - color and why don't they pronounce the h in herb. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/18on4q/eli5_why_do_americans_spell_their_words/ | {
"a_id": [
"c8glyg2"
],
"score": [
19
],
"text": [
"The reason for the difference in spelling is simple. The first American English dictionary was of course the one compiled by Noah Webster, and amongst his other talents Webster strongly believed that the British had corrupted the English language, and that the United States had an opportunity to claim the language as its own.\n\nSo when he compiled his dictionary he deliberately chose to simplify English spelling. The most noticeable changes were that he dropped the \"u\" in words like color and honor, he changed a final -re to -er in words like center and theater, and changed a final -ce to -se in words like defense and offense.\n\nAs well as this spelling being more logical, Webster was also -- as a strong American patriot -- deliberately giving the finger to the British and saying that the USA had not only politically and economically left the UK behind, but they didn't even need to conform to the same arbitrary spelling rules.\n\nAs for a silent \"h\" in \"herb\". Well nobody pronounces the \"h\" in \"honour\" or \"heir\". And although the pronounciation is changing today, if you listen to old British newsreels you'll hear presenters from the 1950s and 1960s saying \"an hotel\" (with a silent \"h\"). Some English words beginning with \"h\" have a silent \"h\", some don't. The Brits and the Americans just disagree on whether \"herb\" is one of them :)"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
4v2za3 | why do some people get nauseous while watching a 3d movie or hand held camera filmed movie? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4v2za3/eli5why_do_some_people_get_nauseous_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5v0rfu",
"d5v7pdi"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Our body is used to react to a combination of stimuli from our senses.\nWhen a person is immersed ( VR, 3D movies, etc..) in an environment That person is receiving only the visual and audio feedback, there is no physical feedback.\n1 of our sense is the balance ( of G-meter) sensor, which is located in the inner-ear. This sensor basically tells us if we are in balance or not ( meaning if we are leaning a certain way or not ). Since we don't get any feedback from it but get the visual info of falling, the brain is confused and run the \"Something is wrong\" mode which create nausea.",
"3d movies give people motion sickness, bodies experience the same feeling when we contract botulism so we purge, just in case.\n\nWe feel motion sickness because our brain is confused about the signals it receives from both our inner ear (the balance center) and our eyes. Botulism affects our inner ear, so when the 'error checking' doesn't work our between your eye and ears your body concludes _\"it's gotta be that ol' botulism at it again so we better tumble ye ol' groceries\"_.\n\nIn your example the body a person watching a 3d movie isn't moving so our inner ear tells the brain _\"hey brain, we're not moving\"_ however our eyes are experiencing something completely different which creates that conflict of information. The brain is like _\"what's up ear? You must be sick because Mr.Eyes said we're flying around\"._ So the brain calls up the stomach and says _\"hey tummy, you've got something nasty inside, you'd better send it back out.\"_ Tummy is all like _\"Whaaaat? That's gross. Okay I will get rid of this stuff in me, just for you brain.\"_ So that's why you get sick when you watch 3d movies.\n\nedit for clarification"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
dae8nn | what happens to a bullet from an ordinary pistol if it never reaches the target? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/dae8nn/eli5_what_happens_to_a_bullet_from_an_ordinary/ | {
"a_id": [
"f1oxzzs"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"All bullets lose energy the moment they leave the barrel, meaning they slow down and fall down. Any bullet fired from any gun that does not hit something will eventually hit the ground, just like when you throw a ball and it arcs down until it hits the ground. \n\nIt's impossible to answer what distance it can travel because there are far too many variables. The gun used, the cartridge used, the bullet itself, the angle and elevation it was fired at, and external conditions like wind. This is called external ballistics, and there a ton of calculations involved to get an answer for any specific scenario."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2wezfb | why do things look cooler in slow motion? | You know, like in music videos or explosions. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2wezfb/eli5_why_do_things_look_cooler_in_slow_motion/ | {
"a_id": [
"coq7pkp"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"In a way slow motion is an adrenaline moment for the brain.\n\nDenser memories are laid down during salient *(stands out relative to surroundings)* events, yielding more than the normal amount of detail when read back out. So one can speculate that slow motion video gives a proxy for this extra-dense memory. In other words it allows you to pull in so many more details than you would if we were experiencing heightened adrenaline.\n\nKeep in mind your brain has hard-wired its expectations of physics and how the world operates. Time-warped can hold our attention by violating those expectations. Think about throwing a rock into the water. As soon as you throw it you're already forming expectations and predictions about what will happen. Instead you throw the rock into the water but halfway it appears to hang in the air. Those expectations are going to feel violated and you'll put more attention on it."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
5cr73o | what is the cause of death from jumping off a building? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5cr73o/eli5_what_is_the_cause_of_death_from_jumping_off/ | {
"a_id": [
"d9yoat4"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Traumatic brain injury. Multiple organ failures from blunt force trauma. Blood loss, internal and external."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ddt280 | why change contact lenses? | Do the lenses deteriorate over time? Are chemical compounds altered? Do they start to be harmful to the eyes? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ddt280/eli5_why_change_contact_lenses/ | {
"a_id": [
"f2mtxee",
"f2y9loc"
],
"score": [
4,
2
],
"text": [
"Leaving contracts in allows bacteria to build up, and can cause severe damage to the eye. I got what was effectively an ulcer in my cornea because of this.",
"Yes, they deteriorate and can start causing small scratches to your cornea. Do this for long enough and it can harden permanently. Add to this the fact that a deteriorated lens can harbour a lot more bacteria or worse, amoeba, than a fresh lens. So please don't wear your monthly lenses for a year"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
3npzd5 | how to people build calculators in minecraft? | I've seen them all the time on videos. They have these huge contraptions that function as a calculator. But what's going on? How does a switch and a bunch of redstone somehow make a calculator? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3npzd5/eli5_how_to_people_build_calculators_in_minecraft/ | {
"a_id": [
"cvq79k9",
"cvq7ufy"
],
"score": [
18,
11
],
"text": [
"The behavior of redstone can be used to emulate the behavior of logic gates which are the fundamental components of computers (using electricity instead of redstone, obviously). Anything that can implement logic gates can do anything a computer can do (since all a computer is doing is implementing logic gates).",
"You can use redstone to build simple logic gates that can perform operations like AND, OR, XOR etc.\n\nAn AND logic gate takes two inputs and outputs a signal only if a signal is detected on both inputs. A NAND logic gate is the opposite (outputs a signal only if there is no signal on one or both of the inputs).\n\nAn OR logic gate takes two inputs and outputs a signal if a signal is detected on either or both inputs. A NOR gate is the opposite (outputs a signal only when there is no input signal on either input).\n\nAn XOR logic gate takes two inputs and outputs a signal only if a signal is detected on one input but not the other.\n\nThese are just some examples, there are also some other logic gates that exist.\n\nThe point is that Minecraft supports each of these logic gate types (using redstone) and fundamentally that is how a computer operates at the lowest level. Every operation your computer performs basically gets broken down into simple electrical signals passing through logic gates that then may modify or 'process' the signal in some way before passing the signal on to other logic gates in order to work toward a desired goal (e.g. to perform a given mathematical calculation).\n\nWhen you build circuits with thousands of logic gates, you can effectively build a functional computer with complex conditional logic that can perform practical calculations or other functions that are useful. It's also possible with Minecraft to build make-shift transistors that can help store and display bits of information and potentially later perform operations on those bits to execute a more complex calculation.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
67zz2n | the difference between probability and likelihood in academic probability theory (not in common usage). | [deleted] | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/67zz2n/eli5_the_difference_between_probability_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgvezlb"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Likelihood is a kind of probability: specifically, probability statements about model parameters are called likelihoods.\n\nIn probability theory and statistics we often have mathematical models of the world, and the models inform certain kinds of results. For example, say we have a (potentially weighted) coin. The model here is that our coin has some probability `p` to land on heads (and probability 1-p to land on tails). `p` is the parameter here.\n\nBased on this model, we might observe certain kinds of events, like \"the coin lands heads three times in a row\". We can ask questions like: \"If p = 0.7, what's the probability of seeing three heads in a row?\". But we can also flip that around: \"If we see three heads in a row, what's the probability that p = 0.7?\" That second question is asking about likelihood, because it's asking a question about a model's parameter, instead of an observation."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3l28zh | how do allergy meds make me feel less allergic to things? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3l28zh/eli5_how_do_allergy_meds_make_me_feel_less/ | {
"a_id": [
"cv2ionp"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"When the things in your body, you are allergic to appear, the police of your body thinks they are criminals. So they do their job and try to catch them. And the fighting hurts you: you have allergic reactions.\nAllergy meds are like judges and they tell the police that they are not evil and that they don't need to fight them. So the fighting stops and your reactions do to."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8kh2u1 | is there a difference between soda water and sparkling water and why are both apparently not good for you? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8kh2u1/eli5_is_there_a_difference_between_soda_water_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"dz7mdm9",
"dz7ocbv",
"dz7va2n"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
7
],
"text": [
"In the US, sparkling and soda water are the same thing. The carbonation can cause a bloating sensation, but it's far healthier and less acidic than flavored soda.",
"They're both the same thing! The thing that makes the water fizzy is sodium carbonate. When dissolved in water, it forms carbonic acid.\n\nCarbonic acid in itself isn't *bad* for you; in fact, it's naturally found in your body as a result of your metabolism and breathing! H2CO3 ➡ HCO3^- ➡CO3^2- ➡ CO2 is used in the bicarbonate cycle which keeps your blood at the right pH. Bicarbonate ions are great buffers; they keep your blood from becoming too acidic or too alkaline which is very dangerous!\n\nThe bicarbonate found in soda once opened (and not under pressure) will un-dissolve out of the soda and release into the air as CO2, which works a similar way in your lungs. This is why when you exhale, you breathe out carbon dioxide! It's a byproduct of your metabolism and you breathe out the excess.\n\nThe *main problem* with sodium carbonate and carbonic acid is *what it does to your teeth*. The acid in soda water reacts with the molecules in your teeth enamel and weaken it, which over time will lead to dental caries (tooth decay and cavities). The same thing happens when the bacteria in your mouth feed off the sugars in your mouth esp between your teeth after you eat; they produce acids that weaken your tooth enamel.\n\nThat's why toothpaste and tap water has fluoride in it. The fluoride ions go in your teeth and replace the missing ions that the acid stripped from your enamel. Because fluoride bonds really well, it makes it harder for acids to remove in the future!\n\nTldr; carbonation is created by carbonic acid/bicarbonate ions (same stuff found in your blood). Carbonic acid weakens tooth enamel which is why we use fluoride in toothpaste\n\nEDIT: so many typos, I shouldn't text while on the bus",
"In the U.S., they are NOT the same. Soda water, or club soda, has salt for flavor, but sparkling water, or seltzer, does not.\n\nEither can be a bladder irritant if you drink too much.\n\nSparkling water is genuinely hydrating, but soda water is not."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
4dnm75 | in python why are numpy operations so much faster than loops? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4dnm75/eli5_in_python_why_are_numpy_operations_so_much/ | {
"a_id": [
"d1snh3h"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Imagine you're a head chef and ordering your minions about.\n\nNow, you could hover over each minion and tell them exactly what steps to take. \"Now add salt\", \"Now stir\", \"Now put in oven\". That's how an interpreter works - it evaluates each statement independently without any real understanding of the overall scheme.\n\nYou could alternatively create highly efficient operations and just reference those - \"Now bake a cake\". That's why something like NumPy does. Instead of handling every step of the loop as individual steps, it's a low level routine that does a very specific set of things very efficiently."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
665spo | why does the strength of a persons radial pulse vary despite blood pressure? | I work as an EMT and frequently notice that a patient has weak radial pulses that can be very difficult to palpate, but their blood pressure may be very high (such as 148/94). By that same token, I've had patients with really strong radial pulses that are extremely easy to palpate have blood pressures that are fairly low (104/62). What causes that variance? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/665spo/eli5_why_does_the_strength_of_a_persons_radial/ | {
"a_id": [
"dgfuyye"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Your blood pressure is dictated by three things:\n\n1. Cardiac output. The more your heart pumps, the higher your blood pressure.\n\n2. Blood volume. How much blood is in your body. The more blood, the higher your blood pressure.\n\n3. Systemic vascular resistance. How much friction does your blood have to push past. The narrower your blood vessels, the more viscous your blood (honey is slower to pour than water), and the longer your blood vessels, the more resistance there is and the higher your blood pressure.\n\nSo lets look at your two circumstances:\n\n1. **High blood pressure and weak pulse.** My guess that in an emergency setting, this person would have high systemic vascular resistance normally (high blood pressure), and their heart finally gave out. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US.\n\n2. **Low blood pressure and high pulse.** This is common in hypovolemic shock. They have low blood volume in the body due to hemorrhage (blood loss), dehydration, or burns. Their blood pressure is low because there isn't enough fluid to keep the pressure high. Their heart has to pump like crazy to keep sending the little blood that is left to all the different organs so the heart rate/pulse is high. Also, the hemorrhage could be external, they are bleeding out of their skin, or internal, they are bleeding into their gut or thigh or something. If it's internal, you might not be able to tell just by looking at them.\n\nThere are other things that could cause this stuff, but those are the big ones to watch out for as an EMT."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
btz8d4 | how does the department of homeland security real id program work? i am traveling soon and don’t get it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/btz8d4/eli5_how_does_the_department_of_homeland_security/ | {
"a_id": [
"ep4tlce"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The federal government set out standards for real Id requirements. It is up to the states to incorporate those standards. \n\nGoogle your state id to see if they comply. In Wisconsin I was able to opt in with the real Id compliant driver license, when it was up for renewal.\n\nOtherwise get your passport, that is real id compliant and is required when flying to other countries. And to enter US embassies and consulates."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
ab5ans | why do women typically take hotter showers, while men take cooler ones? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ab5ans/eli5_why_do_women_typically_take_hotter_showers/ | {
"a_id": [
"ecxnnbk"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"for me it depends on the weather. but as a woman I am constantly in some sort of pain and, well the heat makes it go away for a while. ohh the joys of womanhood and all that crappie that people like to say. Having a uterus is a curse not a joy 🙃"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
agvkgu | how is it possible to skip a stone 88 times on water, according to the laws of physics? | The world record for stone skipping is 88 times
_URL_0_
Was it in the momentum of the throw or smooth texture of the stone? is there a theoretical limit to how many times it can skip? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/agvkgu/eli5_how_is_it_possible_to_skip_a_stone_88_times/ | {
"a_id": [
"ee9e8hc",
"ee9it2s"
],
"score": [
3,
7
],
"text": [
"\\ > is there a theoretical limit to how many times it can skip?\n\nthis makes me want to see a purpose built stone skipping machine try for this record",
"Water is incompressible, it can't be squeezed. In a high-speed impact it acts very much like a solid surface, which is why stones can be skipped off its surface. Water can't be pushed out of the way quickly. Even heavy objects such as bombs and battleship shells can skip if the impact angle is shallow.\n\n > is there a theoretical limit to how many times it can skip?\n\nThere are limits as the stone will lose momentum with every impact. A smooth stone will skip better as it is less likely to start tumbling on impact. A tumbling stone is more likely to dig in and lose more momentum. Spinning the stone also improves stability. The other factors at play are speed and impact angle, a shallow angle is required for good skipping.\n\nUltimately the number of skips is limited by the strength of the human arm. A throwing machine could do better but eventually you'd reach the point where the stone would disintegrate on impact."
]
} | [] | [
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1KfuErAcj0"
] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2jf6yl | how do social media notifications work for public figures and celebrities? | They are bombarded with mentions, tags, and comments. How do they sift through the thousands of notifications to get to what they want? Is there an separate system for them on each of the social media sites? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jf6yl/eli5_how_do_social_media_notifications_work_for/ | {
"a_id": [
"clb3qgr",
"clb5ni8"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Works the same. I had a Facebook page for a group with over 250k subscribers. It shows everything in one notification so if you're looking for something specific you have to go through a lot of news ",
"I know a couple of DJs and they both have their \"public\" account which is managed by someone other than then, and a personal account that they use themselves.\n\nEdit: just to clarify, the 2 accounts aren't really any different (except their \"work\" Twitter accounts are \"verified\"), I mean that they use one for their personal use and the other is used purely for marketing purposes. Hope that makes sense... it's been a long day and my brain is frazzled."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
20mcjo | what exactly is smoke and where does it go when it dissipates? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/20mcjo/eli5what_exactly_is_smoke_and_where_does_it_go/ | {
"a_id": [
"cg4nfgw",
"cg4rc31"
],
"score": [
9,
4
],
"text": [
"Smoke is tiny particulate produced from combustion. When it dissipates it goes everywhere, it just spreads out so much you don't see it anymore.",
"The tars in cigarette smoke adhere to surfaces. One of the more disgusting things I've seen is moisture condensation dripping down walls, turning brown as it collects the smoke residue."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
6j59rm | don't franchises suck the money out of local economies? say a small town with 13 of the same coffee shop franchises. also strangling local independent businesses? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6j59rm/eli5_dont_franchises_suck_the_money_out_of_local/ | {
"a_id": [
"djbmb8a"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Franchises are owned by the owner of the franchise, not the corporation. It is a locally owned business, just not \"independent\"\n\nBut its not really any different than an independent shop who buys their good to sell from outside the local area. Thats all a franchise is doing too, buying their good to sell from someone else.\n\nThis might surprise you, but actually a lot of franchise locations like to have a connection with their local communities are make an effort to buy goods they can locally, as well as doing what they can to align their stores to the local area. In fact some companies that people can franchise, as a condition of their franchise, the company mandates that they do get local goods and such.\n\nFranchise isn't some dirty word. It's just someone that saw a business model with proven success and said \"hey, I want to start a business, here's one that works, I'll do that\". Nothing wrong there, risk is low, reward is solid, its hard to argue with it not being a good business decision to open franchise you think will succeed. Independent businesses are crazy risky and hard. Franchises have way less risk and are well known how to run.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1ubaev | how do online tests produce accurate answers? | Things such as personality tests and such, especially if they have very few questions.
Or something like the akinator that guesses the character you're thinking of and stuff. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1ubaev/eli5how_do_online_tests_produce_accurate_answers/ | {
"a_id": [
"cegb7nl"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"The personality tests give broad answers that could apply to just about anyone. Virtually everyone will think the one they're given describes them accurately. \n\nIt's called [the Forer Effect](_URL_0_) because of a demonstration by psychologist Bertram R. Forer. He gave a personality tests to his students and had them rate the resulting personality description from 0 to 5, 5 being the most accurate. The average rating was 4.26, despite the fact that **every single student received exactly the same description**."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect"
]
] |
|
36ulcg | why do stories about women making false rape accusations and men being raped by women always make it to the front page, but stories about men making false rape accusations or women being raped by men never do? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/36ulcg/eli5_why_do_stories_about_women_making_false_rape/ | {
"a_id": [
"crh7ko3"
],
"score": [
6
],
"text": [
"Rule 7: Loaded questions are not allowed. A loaded question presumes a controversial opinion is fact, usually to provoke an argument. \"ELI5: Why is Obama the president when he wasn't born in the US?\" is loaded. \"ELI5: The controversy about where Obama was born\" is a non loaded way to ask about the same topic.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
6sm2gs | when listening to music from far away, why are the drums so prevalent whereas that's not the case when the source is near? | For example, the music is playing in some other room of the house and I can hear the drums very clearly, but the vocals and other instruments are inaudible. This is not the case when I am standing 4-5m from the source.
P.S. A detailed explanation involving nature of the sound wave and other in-depth stuff is welcomed, just post a link to the article.
P.P.S. If someone could rephrase the title to make it more understandable, I would really appreciate it. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6sm2gs/eli5_when_listening_to_music_from_far_away_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"dldr3f3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Basically you're mostly just hearing the bass or kick drum. The bass is a very slow moving and large sound wave, compared to vocals or a guitar which are faster and smaller sound waves. The bass noises can travel further than the others. However when you're nearby you're hearing the music as it was designed to be heard. Essentially guitar and vocals are the prominent or loudest components so they over power the bass drum when there's nothing blocking it.\n\nYou can think of high pitched notes as rabbits and low pitched notes as elephants. Put them both in your living room and then run to the other side of the house. Make them both run to you in a straight line, the rabbit will get stuck at the first wall it runs into, but the elephant even though it's slower will just plow right through."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
be7rg3 | why do some lightbulbs make white light and others yellow light? | Obviously, some bulbs use tinted glass for red or green, etc, but I can't see a difference in bulbs in my house that produce white 'outside' light and yellow light. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/be7rg3/eli5_why_do_some_lightbulbs_make_white_light_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"el3l44i",
"el3m2g0",
"el4t0yh"
],
"score": [
4,
11,
2
],
"text": [
"The answer is going to depend on how the light is generated by the bowl. For instance, old-timey incandescent light bulbs generate light by heating up a Tungsten filament, creating black body radiation. If the tungsten is sufficiently hot, the light will appear white, but if it is not quite that hot it will have a yellowish tinge to it do to under-representation of blue and purple in its Spectrum.\n\nOther lights run current through gases or liquids in order to excite the molecules of those gases, which causes their electrons to enter higher shell levels. When those electrons drop back down to a lower level, they emit light in specific frequencies that generally have a specific color, but by mixing together various gases you can mix the colors produced to get a white light.",
"Incandescent (filament) bulbs are generally on the warmer side, but the century old tech can't produce actual 'daylight' light which has a temperature color of around 5600 °K.\n\nFluorescent lights tend to be on the cold/blueish side and LEDs, which are fast replacing both Fluo and incandescent tech are available in color temperature ranging from very white/blueish to warm white. A good choice for home use is between 3000°K and 5300°K, with a nice, comfortable sweet spot at around 4300°K.\n\nSource: I'm a former Lutron lighting control system designer.",
"The temperature of light (in Kelvin) dictates what color the light will be. Hotter light (7500-10k Kelvin) produces bluer/greener, cool tones. Think back to grade school science class: red dwarfs were cold/dying starts, blue giants were new/hot stars."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
479e5h | why america has an economic depression/ recession roughly every 20 years? | Starting from 1785, it seems there has been a pattern of a recession every 20 or so years. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/479e5h/eli5_why_america_has_an_economic_depression/ | {
"a_id": [
"d0b81et",
"d0b92tx",
"d0b9cgq"
],
"score": [
6,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The business cycle. This is just how capitalism works--it goes from boom to bust and back. Actual hard answers are complicated bits of economics that are beyond an ELI5.",
"Everyone makes mistakes, right? Economies are like that too. They put too much resources into one thing, and it turns out to be a mistake, and suddenly there is an excess supply, or prices that people thought would be high for a long time coming - and planned around those higher prices - fall, and everyone who took out loans expecting high prices goes bust.\n\nIt happens in cycles because people are dumb and forget about the last time things collapsed. During and after a recession, people are cautious with their money. As the good times return, they get more relaxed. Things keep paying off, so they become willing to risk more money. And enough people collectively in the economy become more and more risky with their money that you end up back where you started - with excessively risky overinvestments that fall apart when prices drop. \n\nTLDR: We forget, and then repeat, the mistakes of the past - because of greed. ",
"The economic system is wild. You have many businesses, many countries, and 7 billion consumers. As a result, economic activity can be chaotic.\n\nThis also means that the economy will fluctuate, locally and globally. Sometimes the actual balance between production and consumption (buying) of goods and services is negatively affected and vice versa. Other aspects of the economy will also fluctuate (such as borrowing).\n\nWhen the economy is imbalanced for too long (e.g. the global economy produces too much when compared to demand), and governments or businesses do not intervene, a recession occurs. Governments and businesses often intervene at this point, and the economy recovers. This occurs in a cycle, making recessions occur every several years or so."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1p4rhm | why do we need a windows registry? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1p4rhm/eli5_why_do_we_need_a_windows_registry/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccyq0q8"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Because Windows has always eschewed something like the UNIX way of each application keeping its own .config / .cfg file. If you want everybody keep their settings info in one place, well the you need that one place. The registry is it.\n\nOn Linux, for example, you can trust the configuration info on your average application to exist in /etc/ with user-specific settings in ~/.config/, but Windows has no such guarentees about where an application or its files will be, so instead they opted to keep a fixed point of reference in the registry."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
8o03qj | why do countries in the tropics tend to be worse off economically than countries at higher latitudes? is it just a coincidence or are there other factors at play? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/8o03qj/eli5_why_do_countries_in_the_tropics_tend_to_be/ | {
"a_id": [
"dzzn7aj",
"dzzt4nu",
"dzzzpfi",
"dzzzq1w",
"e002mkb",
"e005qap",
"e0069gc",
"e006a3o",
"e009c7y",
"e009eld",
"e00aj7l",
"e00aw45",
"e00b4es",
"e00c7y5",
"e00ckus",
"e00cloo",
"e00cqea",
"e00dbua",
"e00dxer",
"e00egyg",
"e00epzq",
"e00fojg",
"e00g1ww",
"e00jdm3"
],
"score": [
461,
86,
12,
1004,
15,
6,
127,
3,
2,
3,
3,
5,
2,
4,
3,
3,
2,
3,
4,
6,
2,
6,
7,
2
],
"text": [
"There's the cold vs hot theory: cold climates demand planning for winter, which progresses to more infrastructure and organisation. Warm climates do not require planning for winter, so infrastructure is not necessary.",
"So first you need to understand that you’re asking a question about international macroeconomics and development. These are subjects that economists do not understand particularly well. Development economics is a field where a lot of smart people do a lot of good work, but it’s also a field where it’s basically impossible to prove anything. \n\n\nOne theory is the impact of climate on capital depreciation. If hurricanes or whatever are a regular problem, then buildings and roads are not going to last very long. The problem with this theory is that economists are not engineers or climate scientists, and it’s very difficult to measure levels of capital (which is a requirement for good studies). \n\n\nAnother theory is tropical diseases. If you take as a starting position that Europe is good and civilized and that Europeans make things develop, then you can compare countries where European colonists mostly died out, countries where European colonists took stuff but didn’t settle, and countries where Europeans successfully settled. There’s a not horrible correlation for this theory, but it’s basically impossible to prove. \n\n\nA related theory is “institutions,” in that poor countries are poor because they don’t have good “institutions”. Basically impossible to prove, disprove, or even really measure. \n\n\nAnother theory is that the international trade and monetary systems are bad for development. There are economists who have strong views that this isn’t true; however this is a theoretical argument and not an empirical argument.\n\n\nBasically, economists do not know.",
"There are dozens of theories and none of them are definitive or well supported. The eli5 is that no one really knows for sure but im sure that isnt satisfactory. Underdevelopment was my area of focus for undergrad. One theory I subscribe to at least partially is the Dutch curse, or the paradox of plenty, essentially starting at colonialism (how colonialism was possible is so complex its an entirely different subject.) countries rich in resources, especially tropical places able to grow sugar, were colonized and enslaved. This process, prevented the accumulation of wealth and made those areas poor despite an abundance of resources. ",
"There's really no one answer here, and far from any consistently agreed upon \"main cause\".\n\nBut I'll try to summarise/begin a few of the proposed ones I know so you can research them later and/or someone will comment with better explanations, probably reading way too deeply into whatever they think my opinion is and being angry about it (I'm going to try to keep my opinion out and list each proposition from its own viewpoint)\n\nSo one is that there's no real direct causality between Lattitude and economic development, but rather that colonialism forced those countries into an economic system and them kind of screwed them over in it, so when colonialism ended they started off poor. Examples commonly sighted are the European colonies in Africa where they taxed locals, but the locals didn't have money so they had to work in farms and mines the Europeans set up to make money to pay the taxes. Essentially forcing the locals to work for them.\n\nAnother is that the environment, particularly the weather, affects the culture and thus everything else. The northern countries have to deal with winter, which is a fairly regular issue. To the east China and Japan have monsoon season even in the more southern parts where winter isn't as big of an issue. This imposes a sense of regularity and a need for planning that a more temperate climate with year round hunting and plant harvesting doesn't. The theory goes on to state that this regularity and planning propogates into all areas of life, which ultimately causes a difference in cultural views about money. A common example here is Egypt, which has defined it's seasons by the Nile River, since the weather was relatively uniform year round. They had 3 seasons based on the flooding of the Nile which was very regular. This led to a very structured culture and a cyclical pattern in many of their myths as we know them.\n\nAnother which I don't know much about states that colder winters select for a different type of thinking, some say \"smarter\" but I see that as a subset of this larger theory. So this selection for a particular type of thinking would be better suited to economics and the like.\n\nA fourth states that it's, again, a cultural difference, but with a different cause. The \"ancient world\" of Europe and China more or less founded the modern idea of money, or at least a precursor to it. Not just in \"I have 3 coins, I can buy this thing\", because that has been shown to have developed all over the world, but many of the surrounding ideas. Lending someone money, enforcing the integrity of a currency, banks, etc. This way of thinking about money turns out to be rather good at long distance trade and long term investment. Who knew an economic system shaped by the need for those two things would be good at doing those? So as the 'world' expanded, particularly with colonialism setting up countries with that idea if money in their heads from the start, that style of money would become the world standard for trade. This meant that countries with other systems (like the Rai stones of Yap which depend on a shared oral history rather than physical possession) would have to adapt to this big, 'standard' system. Doing so for most countries would mean changing over their entire internal system as well, pushing everyone down to the bottom as they don't know the system as well as others and don't have the history and momentum that gives a starting value.\n\nYet another states that different climates support different sorts of technological advances. For example European metal working was far beyond any equivalent during the 'dark ages', while we're finding more and more evidence that people in the south if Africa had medical knowledge far beyond any contemporary cultures. These differences are the root of it. If I know something and I teach it to you, I still know it. Now we both know it. But if I make something and give it to you, I don't have it anymore. So I have a greater need for compensation in order to prosper. It also needs a more transferrable form of currency. This goes through some complicated explanations I don't fully understand and ends up with a difference in perception of value, which is then a claimed cause for why such nations aren't more economically developed right now.\n\nThere's a lot of others, but those are the ones I know enough to give an attempt at explaining. I personally think it's a combination of a lot of factors, but 2 large ones being the sudden shift to a new system and foreign exploitation.\n\nWe can see that countries that already had an economic system compatible with the one we now use near globally have a better starting place when this system is force upon them. Rather than starting with, say, a barter system and now needing to figure out currency (and starting with none) they have to figure out the exchange (already having currency the colonials will accept as a currency, even if their willingness to use it varied a lot), and then adapt to the new system and whatever the colonials are doing.\n\nThe second, colonial exploitation, refers to the locals inability to profit off its local resources. Europeans set up diamond and silver mines in Africa, but all the money from it got shipped back to Europe. The locals didn't profit from it, they just got forced into the bottom of a new heirachy and kept poor for a while. Only really being able to begin improving after the best resources were apparently depleted (some may know that some of the most valuable resources on the planet are currently being mined in Africa, although saying it's necessarily a better system today is debatable when you look at some examples), and the colonials leaving often made a mess of things too. Whether that was the colonials fault or not varies, but is still largely debatable.\n\nWould it have been right for them to refuse to immediately pull out of some of the countries they did so too? Which they did because they were asked/told to, even though it almost invariably led to economic a structural collapse. What about when the native is Papua New Guinea destroyed what would have been the most profitable sugar cane industry in the world because the colonials had built it? I can't and won't say, but the effects these things have had are undeniable",
"OK, my degree is in economics and geography, let me give this a try. \n\nYour basic answer has two parts, history and \"factor allocation.\" History is by far the bigger part of this answer. During colonization, the Europeans did not go around setting up other countries to succeed independently. In fact, they set up relationships of dependency, and frequently left behind cultures of corruption and authoritarianism. The typical post-colonial economy is built around one or more of the following: exporting resources; performing dirty or dangerous labor without regulations; preforming very cheap labor without regulations. Even when there is a degree of capitalization a post-colonial economy, it is often owned by someone else. A good case study for what this looks like in practice is the [disaster in Bhopal, India](_URL_0_). \n\n(Please note: The US is technically a post-colonial country, but it is also a colonizer itself, and is really just unique for a bunch of reasons. We were politically stable - Civil War notwithstanding - and had huge amounts of natural resources and because of the policy of depopulating Native civilizations, were able to take in massive numbers of immigrants from around the world.... Just different.)\n\nThe other variable is factor allocation. This is like, how many minerals do you have in the ground and do you have a good port or easy overland transportation to an economic hub? Also, how many people do you have? This is why, even though China got pretty screwed by colonialism just like most everybody, they are able to have a relatively balanced and thriving economy today. China has huge numbers of people, lots of mineral resources and great ports. Another, much smaller example is Brunei, which is basically a city-state that just happened to be sitting on a ton of oil. Once these countries were able to regain political stability and independence, their factor allocations allowed them to do pretty well. \n\nWhere we really see the interaction of these two variables is in places like Africa or Latin America, where there are several countries with really good factor allocation, but a hell of a post-colonial hangover. (I'm thinking of countries like Nigeria or Brazil, for example.) For these countries, political stability has been very difficult to develop, and so they have had a hard time capitalizing on their abundant resources. Corruption is probably the biggest obstacle here, but it is worth noting that when countries became post-colonial, it's not like the former colonial world just suddenly starts being really nice to you. There's a whole thing in development economics where the IMF went around and gave a bunch of developing countries big loans and then imposed harsh conditions on local governments as a part of repayment. So then what happens is that these countries can't invest in things like education because they're paying off massive loans. \n\nSo, to be clear, this is a pretty quick and dirty answer. There's a lot to this and informed parties may disagree with some of my points (I'm admittedly pretty far left in my POV on things like the IMF, for example). But TL;DR: The answer is colonialism.",
"How about mentioning that with colonization most infrastructure that was there previously was destroyed by the conquerors and then they used their power for profit rather than infrastructure for a place they really didn't care for. ",
"Enough people have given the answer of 'we don't know really' which is mostly true. However, I'd also like to point out the time bias in the question; colder climate domination is only the case _now_.\n\nA thousand years ago the centres of civilization were the Arabic, Mesoamerican and Chinese worlds. A thousand years before that the Roman Mediterranean (and probably the Chinese). A thousand years before that Egypt and India had the important civilizations etc etc.\n\nWe are not in an end point in history.",
"it has less to do with climate at all and more to do with impacts of colonialism... countries in the tropics are resource rich and were colonized and exploited by western europe. their economies were thrown into the global market and they were forced to produce and farm products unsustainably so when the colonizers left those countries r basically screwed bc their economies are so broken they are forced to rely on institutions like the imf which plunges them even further into debt. read “how europe underdeveloped africa” by walter rodney he does a better job at explaining this and also gets into colonial impacts in central/south america too! ",
"It's because these countries were industrialized wrong. Instead of building up agriculture, education and infrastructure, these guys were pushed to start factories and just pump out manufactured goods. So instead of making the quality of life better for its citizens it just forced them to stay poor and not break out of the poverty cycle. ",
"Latitude does matter in terms of heat and germs.\n\nThe closer you are to the equator, the hotter it is and germs like heat.\n\nAs all creatures do.\n\nI'd wager that disease is more rampant the closer you are to the equator.\n\nDuring the Civil War, the output of the south was equivalent to New York's output.\n\nIt's not easy to work in heat.\n\nAround the Arab world \\(mostly hot\\), economic development may be retarded due to religious view of money.",
"There is the Guns, Germs, and Steel argument which claims (off the top of my head) that geographic characteristics of Europe and north Asia like the presence of food plants like wheat, husbandry animals and easy east west trade allowed for the formation of cities which was essential for national development. \n\nThen Europe eventually overtook China because Europe’s geography, like mountain ranges and thick forests, prevented one country, like France, from taking over the whole region so there was constant competition between nation states which forced development whereas in China it was relatively easy for one central government to take over the region and become complacent. Eventually there was a series of incompetent Chinese emperors who closed China off from the rest of the world so the country stagnated while Europe surged ahead. \n\nThen once we get to colonization Europe is much more developed than the rest of the world and builds an exploitative global economic system that further enriches Europe at the expense of the colonies and other countries. \n\nObviously painting with a broad brush but I think that is roughly the story of the world. \n",
"Have you ever tried to be productive when it's 95 degrees and totally humid outside? Siesta time with mojitos is more like it, right? Whereas when it's cold, the only thing that will really warm you up is to keep moving - churn some butter, bake some beans, dig a latrine, build a house, whatever. Just a theory!",
"Tropical countries are usually rich in natural resources. Extracting these resources and exporting them to first- and second-world countries does not require neither educated, nor healthy individuals. While in first- and second-world countries the natural resources are either non-existent or already (close to) depleted. So these countries have to provide services to each other which needs educated individuals, which generates the need for better infrastructure, which provides a better living standard.\nCGP Grey has an awesome video about this phenomenon called \"Rules for rulers\".",
"Vikings were good at leaving and making shit because the weather sucked and they needed things. Peoples of the tropics had everything they needed, so they didn't need to be inventive or leave to get what they wanted. \n\nWith building things came failures , along with everything such as Waring, and death. Over time those people became more experienced in battle and building. \n\nThe battle people then found the countries that were easy to exploit, and keep the people down, so many generations later, there is inequity. ",
"I think you need to broaden the question to say \"higher or lower latitudes.\" Think... South Africa.... Chile.... Australia.... New Zealand....",
"I'm seeing lots of people pushing this notion that the climate led to decreased work ethic, which I find pretty preposterous. Seems like barely-concealed racism to me. \"Brown people learned they could get away with not doing much because of climate, so they have inherent defects of character/can't create their own infrastructure.\" Hogwash. ",
"because white people pillaged, destroyed the civilizations in the tropics. All developed countries are white countries. ",
"It is in part to isolationism, for most of history societies in the tropics tended to be more secluded. And societies need some level of interactions to develop, minimize the interactions you minimize the development. That’s why the old kingdoms in the Kongo River basin weren’t as developed as the kingdoms on the Islands of Java or Sumatra despite both being tropical. The people living in the tropical regions of Afro-Eurasia tended to be less developed with the exception of trading Hubs through South East Asia, East Africa. Countries like Thailand that developed along side other countries like India and China were able to trade and learn from them despite being tropical, but in Africa the kingdoms and societies that developed didn’t have as much interactions and with their treasures being hidden from most of the world and their land regarded as mysterious and it dangerous so not a lot of people wanted to travel their for commerce or any other reason. From central and South America the remote tropical regions were settled by European who were more advanced at the time. Before that hey had some notable city states and empires / societies but due to not being able to heard animals or livestock in most of the Americans advancement was slow. ",
"*cough* European Colonial empires both with literal colonies and economic control during the period of 1450-1950",
"Our economy is still rooted in the history of colonialism, in which a few European and Asian countries took advantage of foreign populations for their own economic benefit. Because people were so enriched while others were impoverished, the effects have sustained and grown in ways over the generations. ",
"I always thought of it like this... \n\n\nWhen the weather is great, there’s less need to build shit. When your ass is freezing off, you’re like, “Quick. Build something.”",
"It will be unpopular of me to write this but it needs to be said. \n\n1. If there is a correlation between latitude and prosperity it is weak and more likely it is confirmation bias. \n\nThe strongest correlation to prosperity is IQ. The higher the average IQ the more prosperous the country. \n\nRacial IQ is a controversial topic and many will simply refuse to discuss or even acknowledge this. This is a shame because if the findings are accurate (and they appear to be so) then ignoring it isn't going to make it go away. We are entering an increasingly technological period of history and people with high intelligence will dominate and those with low intelligence will struggle. \n\nWe need to think about how to improve IQ and until then we should work to provide meaningful and gainful employment for people with low IQ rather than blaming problems on racism or other factors that \"feel good\" but will solve nothing. \n\nAnyway, \nSub Saharan Africa has an average IQ of about 70. \n\nNorthern Europeans are a little higher than Eastern Europeans 97/95 respectively.\n\n East Asia is about 105. \n\nBoth links confirm this. \n\nHere is a link by country: _URL_1_\n\nHere is by race--_URL_0_\n\nIf you don't like the website then search for the research yourself and read it from the source. That's what I do. I never take anything at face value.\n\nSome more noticeable phenomenon is South Africa. It once had a vibrant economy and was very modern. But since the ANC has taken over and dominated politics the country has been slowing going down the tubes. Now the ANC wants to force White farmers off their land and out of homes and apartments for \"land redistribution\". They tried that in Zimbabwe and many people starved to death as a result. Those policies have already resulted in the murders of many White farmers and the remaining whites are arming themselves for Civil War. It's gonna get ugly.\n\nLook at the maps and you'll see that everywhere people are smart they are prosperous and the lower the IQ the worse the prosperity.",
"Colonialism is a doozy.\n\nBut if you look at a global map, most of the major cities in the old world are within a ten degree band in the northern hemisphere. I think",
"I think historically there have been plenty of successful tropical civilizations. Right now, we are on the tail end of imperialism of powerful northern hemisphere nation's. They basically pillaged and sucked up the \"power\" from the tropical nations."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://aristocratsofthesoul.com/average-iq-by-race-and-ethnicity/",
"https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4u5ej1 | how does aquatic mammal's blood clot while under water? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4u5ej1/eli5_how_does_aquatic_mammals_blood_clot_while/ | {
"a_id": [
"d5n401w"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"Clotting isn't caused by exposure to air. Our blood will clot underwater, too. If it didn't, *any* internal injury like a bruise would result in death by exsanguination.\n\nClotting has nothing to do with exposure to air, or blood \"drying out.\" Rather, it's a result of a fairly complex chemical process which is triggered by the presence of injury to blood vessels. Blood vessels have the ability to constrict, and when wounded they do this to reduce the flow of blood.\n\nThere are also chemicals present in the tissue around them which cause the platelets in blood to clump together, which is reinforced by stuff called fibrin, a tough connective tissue which forms the structure for a lot of organs including skin, and that forms the clot.\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2w9uch | why are so many international organizations based in geneva? | It seems that every major international organization has some link to Geneva. Everyone has heard of the Geneva Convention, but why are organizations like the Red Cross, ISO, WTO, WHO, CERN, Scouting, etc. based in a relatively small city? Whats the attraction? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2w9uch/eli5_why_are_so_many_international_organizations/ | {
"a_id": [
"coow0b1",
"coow6f4"
],
"score": [
4,
9
],
"text": [
"Switzerland has a policy of formal neutrality in all international disputes. That means that if there's a war between, say, France and Poland, Swizterland gets to sit it out.\n\nIf you're a peace-based NGO, not having you central office in a country that takes sides in wars is valuable. If you're in New York and Russia invades Alaska, it's going to be impossible to remain a neutral organization with no national attachment.",
"Switzerland has remained officially neutral (and protected) in the last two major World Wars, and is not considered the enemy of any country (or party, for that matter). When establishing and negotiating treaties, it's often been used quite literally as a neutral meeting ground, which led to it being one of the most important centers for first the League of Nations, and then the United Nations. Many NGOs are based out of the country as well, especially ISO, WTO, and the WHO which are (or were) divisions of the UN at one point, while all benefit from the neutrality and isolation from national politics that would arise if they were based out of, say the US - would a country allow the Red Cross in if they were US based and they were at war with the US? Similarly, if the Red Cross needed to support people in a nation that had US sanctions against it, as a US based NGO, they couldn't. Switzerland has perhaps the best currency for a truly global society: neutrality."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
2zvbmv | why is it illeagal for the cia to collect intellegence on us soil? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2zvbmv/eli5_why_is_it_illeagal_for_the_cia_to_collect/ | {
"a_id": [
"cpmm19u",
"cpmom72"
],
"score": [
8,
2
],
"text": [
"The Central Intelligence Agency is incharge of the gathering of Human intelligence on foreign soil. No intelligence agency is allowed to collect intel on US soil, or more specifically US citizens except for the FBI. ",
"That would be the job if the FBI. The CIA is for foreign intelligence gathering. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2o86xk | what causes that strange reflection in cats eyes when light hits it a certain way? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2o86xk/eli5_what_causes_that_strange_reflection_in_cats/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmkncw8",
"cmkp7bl"
],
"score": [
6,
2
],
"text": [
"It's caused by a layer in the eye called the [tapetum lucidum](_URL_0_).\n\nIt helps reflect more light onto the retina to give them better night vision.",
"Cats have a reflective layer in the back of their eyes, behind the cells that detect light. This helps them to see, because the light detecting cells have a second chance to catch the light as it is being reflected."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapetum_lucidum"
],
[]
] |
||
5zmmuy | what exactly is plaque? | Where does it come from? Why is it bad?
Edit: My original inquiry was about the plaque that forms on teeth, but if anyone would like to explain the plaque that forms in arteries, I would also to know about that
Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5zmmuy/eli5_what_exactly_is_plaque/ | {
"a_id": [
"dezbbm9"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Are you asking about plaque in your arteries, or plaque on your teeth? They're very different. Can't really answer without knowing what you're talking about."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
1lkwam | if the assad regime is secular, why do they support militant islamists like hezbollah | The reverse is also true, the Hezbollah is fighting for the regime, against more fundamental islamists. I understand that Alawites are historically Shia, but would wouldn't it be in Hezbollah's interest to have islamists in power? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1lkwam/eli5_if_the_assad_regime_is_secular_why_do_they/ | {
"a_id": [
"cc08uwy"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"I'm sure you've heard this before, but it is quite complicated. Alawites are actually technically their own sect, but officially they've aligned as Shia since at that level of conflict it is Shia vs. Sunni. Now measuring the the different conflicts gets very interesting because it's more like a bowl of spaghetti than a typical flow chart. Iran and Syria have allied since they're both Shia in a similar way that Baptists and Presbyterian are both protestant in the protestant/catholic side of the house. Kind of. Any way Iraq and Syria are both (*were* when Sadaam was in power) ran by Arab nationalist Parties, but the religious ties were stronger, so Syria allied with Iran instead of Iraq. Now Hezbollah is an Iranian organization, so they are going to support the Assad regime since most other sketchy Islamist organizations are Sunni. Hezbollah would rather have a Shia aligned secular leadership in power than a Sunni aligned Islamist gov't. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the two regional leaders vying power complete regional power, and Saudi Arabia is Sunni. That's a small part of where we fit in. Geopolitically and militarily Saudi Arabia is a strongest ally in the region and they supply us with around 8 or 9 % of our oil depending on the year. Now that may be less than a lot of people think, but it is still enough to influence our prices, and further more, they and OPEC supply enough of the whole globe with enough oil that they can pretty much set prices globally which will affect us here in the U.S. But I'm getting away from the question. So, here is the ***TL;DR*** Hezbollah would rather have a gov't in power that is anti Israel and anti West/U.S. than anything, and that is what the Assad regime agrees with them on (presently). "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
kv96h | hong kong | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/kv96h/eli5_hong_kong/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2nhzd4",
"c2nhzk1",
"c2nmcvg",
"c2nhzd4",
"c2nhzk1",
"c2nmcvg"
],
"score": [
14,
3,
3,
14,
3,
3
],
"text": [
"Once upon a time (or the late 18th, early 19th century to be precise), the British Empire used to make an awful lot of money by selling opium to the Chinese. Naturally, the Chinese weren't thrilled with having their nation all strung out on opium and in 1810 they banned the trade. Undetered, the British then started the First Opium War in 1839 and this resulted in a victory for them. Part of the English terms for peace was that they should get Hong Kong island and left with no other option, the Chinese had to agree. \n\nNot entirely satisfied with just having Hong Kong Island, the British then used their victory in the Second Opium War to grab the Kowloon Peninsula and then also managed to blag a 99 year lease on some other nearby isalands/territories in 1898.\n\nHong Kong remained a British colony until 1941 when it was captured by the Japanese but it was subsequently liberated in 1945 and was once again under British rule. During this time, it expanded and grew into a major commercial centre and one of the chief gateways for western trade into China.\n\nNow, remember when I said earlier that Britain had leased some of the areas for 99 years? Well those 99 years expired in 1997 and some years earlier (1994), Britain made a deal with China. Figuring that the colony wasn't viable without the leased territories, Britian agreed to give the whole lot back, provided it wasn't made into a part of China proper. Instead, it became a Special Administrative Region with it's own legislative assembly and it's own powers. The deal has been described as 'one country, two systems' and it effectively means that outside of foreign and defence policy, Hong Kong is largely free to do what it wants.\n\nAt present, this system seems to work as while it's quite possible that China would like to have full control over Hong Kong, they can't argue with the fact that it makes them an awful lot of money and also serves as a major financial centre.",
"A city on an island near Guangzhou (Gang Chow aka Canton), China. The British took it during a war in the 1800s and colonized it, and gave it back to China in the 1990s. It has both English and Chinese influence.",
"They love escalators.",
"Once upon a time (or the late 18th, early 19th century to be precise), the British Empire used to make an awful lot of money by selling opium to the Chinese. Naturally, the Chinese weren't thrilled with having their nation all strung out on opium and in 1810 they banned the trade. Undetered, the British then started the First Opium War in 1839 and this resulted in a victory for them. Part of the English terms for peace was that they should get Hong Kong island and left with no other option, the Chinese had to agree. \n\nNot entirely satisfied with just having Hong Kong Island, the British then used their victory in the Second Opium War to grab the Kowloon Peninsula and then also managed to blag a 99 year lease on some other nearby isalands/territories in 1898.\n\nHong Kong remained a British colony until 1941 when it was captured by the Japanese but it was subsequently liberated in 1945 and was once again under British rule. During this time, it expanded and grew into a major commercial centre and one of the chief gateways for western trade into China.\n\nNow, remember when I said earlier that Britain had leased some of the areas for 99 years? Well those 99 years expired in 1997 and some years earlier (1994), Britain made a deal with China. Figuring that the colony wasn't viable without the leased territories, Britian agreed to give the whole lot back, provided it wasn't made into a part of China proper. Instead, it became a Special Administrative Region with it's own legislative assembly and it's own powers. The deal has been described as 'one country, two systems' and it effectively means that outside of foreign and defence policy, Hong Kong is largely free to do what it wants.\n\nAt present, this system seems to work as while it's quite possible that China would like to have full control over Hong Kong, they can't argue with the fact that it makes them an awful lot of money and also serves as a major financial centre.",
"A city on an island near Guangzhou (Gang Chow aka Canton), China. The British took it during a war in the 1800s and colonized it, and gave it back to China in the 1990s. It has both English and Chinese influence.",
"They love escalators."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
7kc5xn | why does something that was once fun become less fun over time? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7kc5xn/eli5_why_does_something_that_was_once_fun_become/ | {
"a_id": [
"drd7tx3"
],
"score": [
5
],
"text": [
"We have what are called schemas. Schemas are how your mind groups together objects and events and such. We do this because there is so much information to process schemas make it easier for us to get through our day to day lives by seeing things as groups rather than as every individual event, which would drive us crazy. The longer you do something the more refined your schema is. The more refined it is, the less learning you are getting from it And humans are naturally curious creatures. Our brains give off certain chemicals to make learning enjoyable when we see new things. It's evolutionary to be curious. When you do things repetitively there's no need for your brain to release chemicals or really observe the situation, so rather it looks for something stimulating"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
5lxk5x | are drug flashbacks a real phenomenon? do they occur because of our brain tricking us, or is there more to it? | See title. Thanks! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/5lxk5x/eli5_are_drug_flashbacks_a_real_phenomenon_do/ | {
"a_id": [
"dbz9e8v"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"It is a legitamate psychiatric diagnosis. HPPD 292.89: Hallucinogen persisting perception disorder. I've personally only met one person with it and it was unfortunately a result of his first time taking MDMA. \n \nThere are discussion boards devoted to support for people with it. A lot of complaints of visual snow. It's real. What causes it is unknown. Some hypothesize that a drug like MDMA is neurotoxic. This theory came about from some slices of monkey brain showing before and after MDMA exposure (probably not the same monkey). But even if that is true why can some people roll semiregularly and have no problems. \n \nAnd since it's not specific to MDMA, users of LSD rand mushrooms report it as well, you have to question WTF is really going on.\n\n \n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
sksq3 | doctor masaru emoto's rice experiment | I understand what they did while conducting the experiment, but, it confuses me how the results are even possible. Can anyone with a science background explain how positive and negative energies can effect rice? Also, what does this mean? In terms of our understanding of the universe, a higher power..etc. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/sksq3/eli5_doctor_masaru_emotos_rice_experiment/ | {
"a_id": [
"c4eu4u4"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"The experiment did not follow scientific rigor, and the results were not reliable. Basically, the experiment is fake. It would be insanely easy for any decent laboratory to duplicate Emoto's experiments, if you really want I will duplicate his rice experiment this very week. In fact, there is a man who will give Emoto one million dollars if he (Emoto) can duplicate his results in a controlled, double blind, laboratory setting, under professional observation.\n\nEmoto makes a lot of money by selling his books, and special water. He has a conflict in interest. This is exactly why reputable studies are [double-blind.](_URL_0_) His were not.\n\nStudies do not usually show 'positive' or 'negative' thoughts to have any impact on anything, other than maybe social animals. Not on mold, not on crystallization, not on sunlight patterns.\n\nPeople like Emoto make a lot of money. When somebody is making a lot of money by convincing you of something, you need to be skeptical, and investigate what they are saying. If your mechanic kept telling you that your car needed expensive repairs every week, would you believe him?\n\nI'm not 'against' the idea that 'thoughts' could impact physical occurrences. If I had never heard of radiation, the idea would seem just as strange to me. But the thing is, you have to show good evidence to make such an idea seem likely. There has never been good, consistent evidence that the physical world is impacted by human 'positivity'."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_blind#Double-blind_trials"
]
] |
|
74rdbu | why are huge buildings concentrated in dense central areas of almost all major american cities and not more spread out? | They are almost always concentrated in a downtown sort of area. Why is that? Why aren't they more spread out? Wouldn't spacial competition and property taxes make more of a case to locate larger structures away from one another? Not to mention cause less congestion traffic and commuting wise since less people work in the same area. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/74rdbu/eli5_why_are_huge_buildings_concentrated_in_dense/ | {
"a_id": [
"do0j87a",
"do0jcdd",
"do0jhnt"
],
"score": [
2,
4,
6
],
"text": [
"Before easy travel with automobiles, businesses wanted to be closer to other businesses for convenience. The idea didn't go away when automobiles appeared, and as cities grew, people were accustomed to having everything in one place or nearby. ",
"High real estate prices are why those tall buildings exist. Land is very expensive in downtown cores so buildings have to go up rather than out. There's no reason to build a skyscraper on cheap land, because a lower and wider building is much less expensive to build.\n\nDowntown areas also offer convenient locations near public transit and prestigious addresses for the occupants of those buildings.",
"City planners divide the city into zones where specific types of buildings and other structures are allowed. They try to act in the best interest of the public and city. Having a sky scraper in the suburbs would likely mean increased traffic as that big ol' building likely employs many people. Suburb moms and dads often enjoy quiet roadways and little traffic. If you are curious about zoning laws you should look into how Houston basically let the housing industry go crazy and build wherever they want. This freedom for private industry to do what ever they makes them the most money made Houston one of the fastest growing cities in the country. It also resulted in builders throwing up housing units in known flood planes and spill ways. And hurricane Harvey just us why that's a bad idea. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3k0196 | when we say a word too much and the word begins to sound strange | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3k0196/eli5_when_we_say_a_word_too_much_and_the_word/ | {
"a_id": [
"cuto2br"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"The leading hypothesis for the phenomenon you are talking about is this: repeated stimulation over a very short time of the tiny part in your brain's cortex where that word's memory is stored causes the few neurons involved in that memory to become 'exhausted' and you sorta temporary loose the memory of that word."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
58r6p4 | how much worse is alcohol for your health than fructose/glucose? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58r6p4/eli5_how_much_worse_is_alcohol_for_your_health/ | {
"a_id": [
"d92myvu"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"Alcohol isn't bad for you in moderation. In fact, there are a number of health benefits to moderate drinking; improved liver, kidney, and heart function to name just a few. It's when drinking gets out of hand and we start getting drunk that the issues begin, which is a result of ethanol and methanol toxicity. \nSugar doesn't contain ethanol or methanol, which is why there aren't quite so many health risks with the consumption of sugar. Also, many alcohols don't contain sugar whatsoever, nor use sugar in any of their brewing process, it's when we mix those alcohols with other flavoring agents that introduces sugar to the mix."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
d2ml81 | what makes a collision elastic/inelastic? | I'm not asking for the definition. I'm curious what determines the kinetic energy loss during a collision, as in a way to calculate it beforehand. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d2ml81/eli5_what_makes_a_collision_elasticinelastic/ | {
"a_id": [
"ezvvlxw",
"ezvvo8a"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"most materials react to an appied force by deformation. if the force goes away they reach back to their original shape. Much like a spring.\nThose materials are called elastic. Microscopically during deformation, atoms will sit closer together. That takes energy, but it gets released in full when the atoms move back further apart.\nCollisions where energy is conserved is then called \"elastic\".\n\ninelastic collisions means the energy from deformations is not fully released. This can easily happen even with a spring when you overstretch it. You will permanently deform the spring.\nMicroscopically atoms will get shifted around to different places. that caused friction and heat. besides causing wear on the material (introducing fissures), part of the energy gets lost.",
"Inelastic means that if the object changes its shape due to the collision, it will not spring back into its original form at all. This means that the theoretical maximum amount of kinetic energy possible is lost as heat during the deformation.\n\nElastic means the exact opposite, that both objects will entirely spring back into their original shape, and also not heat up in the process. So in that case, all of the kinetic energy is preserved, and none turned into heat. Steel balls in newton's cradle are the closest real world example to this.\n\nThe property that determines how elastic a collision is is the ability of the material to take powerful forces without any permanent deformation. E.g. an air filled ball will quickly return to its original shape, so it bounces back. A sponge ball will take longer to return to its shape, so it bounces only a little. And a bit of warmed play-dough will not bounce one bit."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
fpxfe7 | during an economic recession, where does the money *go*? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/fpxfe7/eli5_during_an_economic_recession_where_does_the/ | {
"a_id": [
"flpbzpp",
"flpdl04",
"flpi3om",
"flpkjwk",
"flq0ev8",
"flq2hbl",
"flq2pwy",
"flq31s3",
"flq51g3",
"flq59gj",
"flqkjp1",
"flng4j9",
"flngbe0",
"flniiat",
"flnjbp2",
"flnk4px",
"flnmo7b",
"flnnrrh",
"flno7h3",
"flnoaez",
"flnonni",
"flnpr9z",
"flnpznc",
"flns2rh",
"flntkqv",
"flnvvcl",
"flo1pv2",
"flo3gg3",
"flo6s8l",
"flot6jq",
"flou6s5"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
6,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2,
23,
6319,
9,
55,
4,
29,
17,
3,
2,
6,
15,
310,
3,
5,
2,
98,
3,
2,
29636,
2
],
"text": [
"You and 5 friends are stuck on an island with $100 total going around. One day, you buy a coconut for $2. Then you clean a friend's tent and she gives you $1. Sometimes you have only $5 when noone wants their tent cleaned, and sometimes you have $40, when the tents are dirty and people want them cleaned a lot. Overall, you and your friends are happy. Then one day, the clouds get very dark and it starts raining harder than it ever has before. You and your friends are very scared about the storm that's about to hit the island. Will the tents be destroyed? Will the coconut trees fall over? All your friends want to make sure they have enough money to buy things during the storm, so they stop spending. Now, nobody wants their tent cleaned and are happy to sleep in filth, because they feel it's more important to have coconuts than clean tents. You also want coconuts and you're worried about how you'll pay for them. Your friend that collects coconuts is now selling them for $5 each instead of the usual $2. Now instead of there being enough money to buy $100/$2 = 50 coconuts, there is only enough for $100/$5 = 20 coconuts. The money became worth less (inflation) because of the changes in demand due to the upcoming storm. The overall demand for \"want to have\" products and services (which most of the economy is based on) goes down during a recession because people focus on the bare necessities. After the storm passes, your friends are still scared, but after a few years they feel confident enough to start asking for tent-cleaning services and all is back to the way it was. \n\n\nOne day, a boat arrives with a banker. The banker offers to lease the land under your tent to you for $1/month. You start paying him, and then he starts selling derivatives on your land to bankers on other islands in the form of a tent-mortgage-backed security known as a credit default swap. One day you might be able to own the land under your tent, he promises you. \"That would be exciting,\" you think. Then the clouds get dark again, like they did before. The same thing happens as last time, except everyone also stops paying the banker. The banker gets very upset and the price of his default swaps plummets. You and your friends get very scared because the banker threatens to evict you from your tents. However, the storm passes, and soon you are back to paying your $1/month and eating coconuts and cleaning tents.",
"All the comments about value are true, but dollars shifting hands is just as significant. OP asked a good question: where did all the money go when no one seems to have any? It’s in the hands of people with big savings accounts.",
"To start, when talking about money, we should distinguish between \"currency\" and \"value\". Intuitively, the amount of \"currency\" hasn't actually changed since the start of this. For all intents and purposes, the same amount of physical dollars that were circulating the globe two months ago are still circulating the globe, today. What people are concerned about when a recession hits is the destruction of \"value\". While we measure \"value\" in terms of dollars, it is important that you don't confuse $$ value with $$ currency.\n\n(Very) Simple Example-\nLet's say the Albert, Barry and Clark are the only three people in an economy. Albert starts each week with $1. Barry and Clark each start the week with $0. On Monday, Albert buys one banana from Barry for $1. On Wednesday, Barry buys cabbage from Clark for $1. In this instance he is using the dollar that Albert paid him on Monday. And then on Saturday, Clark uses that SAME $1 bill and buys a apple from Albert. \n\nOver the course of one week, the amount of \"Value\" (commonly referred to as Gross Domestic Product or \"GDP\") that was exchanged in the economy was $3.\n\n$1- banana;\n$1- cabbage;\n$1- apple;\n$3- total;\n\nThe amount of currency in this hypothetical economy is clearly only $1.\n\nNow it's next week. As per usual, Albert buys an banana on Monday for $1. But on Tuesday, Clark gets sick and cannot produce a cabbage. Wednesday comes and goes and Barry can't purchase a cabbage. So he just keeps his dollar. When Saturday rolls, since Clark never sold a cabbage, he doesn't have the money to buy a apple.\n\nTotal value exchanged in this economy is only $1 (instead of $3), because only the apple was purchased. But in this hypothetical recession, the amount of currency in the economy stayed the same.\n\nIn an actual recession, the same sort of thing begins to happen, but with many more people. \n\nThe value in an economy is reliant on the frequency of transactions between the people in an economy. That's why government stimulus bills are often written with the intent to increase consumer spending. If you get people buying more things, then you can increase the amount of \"value\" in the economy.\n\nYou might read this explanation and say to yourself, \"That's great mcmuffinsandstorm, but why does the stock market decline during recessions?\" \n\nTo explain this, we have to slightly tweak our previous example:\n\nSlightly Less-Simple Example:\n\nIn our new economy, we have five people: Albert, Barry, Clark, and Danny, and Eric. Same as before, Albert produces cabbage. Barry produces apples. And Clark produces bananas. But additionally, Danny has \"stock\" in Clark's cabbage production company. Let's assume that Danny share entitles him to 67% (or two-thirds) of every dollar that Clark makes. In other words, if Clark makes $3, he needs to give Danny $2. This is what we call Danny's dividend. In our new example, let's say that Albert starts the week off with $3. Barry, Clark, and Danny start the week off with no money. Also, after 11 weeks, everyone dies (and they all know that ahead of time).\n\nOn Monday, Albert buys a bananas from Barry for $1. On Wednesday, Barry buys his cabbage from Clark for $1. And on Thursday Albert uses his remaining $2 to buy two cabbages from Clark for $1 each. Come Saturday, Clark has $3. But wait, he has to give $2 to Danny because Danny has 67% \"stock\" in his cabbage company. So on Saturday, Clark gives $2 to Danny as a dividend. And then Clark uses his remaining $1 to buy an apple from Albert. On Sunday morning, Danny has $2 dividend and decides to use it to buy a blowjob from Albert for $2.\n\nHow much currency is in this economy?- at any point, only $3. \nHow much value was exchanged this week?- $7\n$1- banana (for Albert)\n$1- cabbage (for Barry)\n$2- cabbages (two for Albert)\n$1- apple (for Clark)\n$2- blowjob (for Danny)\n\nLet's say that next week, Eric wants to buy Danny's \"stock\" in the cabbage production company? How much would Danny require Eric to pay him? Well, Danny really wants his weekly blowjob from Albert. He will only be willing to sell his stock to Eric if he will end up with enough money to buy his weekly blowjob. In order words, Danny needs to make sure that he has $20 to buy the blowjob each week. Since there are only 10 more weeks left (before everyone dies), Danny would be willing to sell his stock for $20=$2 * 10 weeks. And in our example, (presuming he had the money) Eric should be willing to buy the stock for $20, because he expects get $2 each week in dividends from the cabbage company. \n\nBut let's say that before the week starts, Clark gets a fever and can only produce 2 cabbages per week (instead of 3 cabbages) for the rest of the game. How much would Danny's \"stock\" in the cabbage company be worth? Well, let's see how the week would play out.\n\nOn Monday, Albert, with $3, buys one banana from Barry as usual. On Wednesday, Barry buys a cabbage from Clark for $1. And on Thursday, when Albert goes to buy his TWO cabbages from Clark, he finds out that Clark only has ONE cabbage to sell. Albert buys the one cabbage for $1. Albert decides to keep his other $1. Clark has received $2 total this week. Clark owes Danny 67% of $2 = $1.33. So on Saturday, when Clark wants to buy an apple from Albert, he cannot is only left with 67 cents. Apples cost $1 each. And even worse, Danny cannot buy his blowjob because he only has $1.33. The only way that either Clark or Danny would be able to purchase an apple or blowjob, respectively is if Albert is willing to purchase. In our example, let's assume that Albert doesn't lower his price.\n\n\nKnowing this is how the week will play out, how much is Danny's stock worth? Well, it's tough to say... but it is definitely not worth $20 anymore. Eric won't be able to earn $20 during the ten weeks Clark won't be able to make him $2 per week in dividends. This week, the dividend is only $1.34. \n\nAt this point, you might be inclined to say \"Great!! Mcmuffinsandstorm, I think I understand. Danny's stock must be worth $1.33 x 10 weeks = $13.30.\" Great observation!! But incorrect!! During this week, Danny's stock is expected to make $1.33. But that might not happen next week...\n\nLet's finish playing out the 2nd week in our example.\n\nAlbert ends the week with $1. Barry ends the week with $0. Clark ends the week with $0.67. And Danny ends the week with $1.33.\n\nSide Note-- Total \"Value\" exchanged for 2nd week = $1 (banana) + $2 (cabbages for Albert and Barry) = $3.\n\nWeek 3 starts.\n\nOn Monday, Albert buys a banana from Barry for $1.\nOn Wednesday Barry buys a cabbage from Clark for $1.\nOn Thursday, Albert would like to buy a cabbage but has no money.\nBy Saturday, Clark has only sold ONE cabbage. Even though he has an additional cabbage to sell, no one has the money to buy it. Because Clark has only sold one cabbage, he has only collected $1. He has to give two-thirds to Danny (or 67 cents). So Clark keeps 33 cents. Now Clark has a total of $1.00 = 33 cents from this week + 67 cents from last week. Clark can buy an Albert for $1. Danny, who had to forgo the blowjob last week, now has $2.00 = $1.33 from last week and $0.67 from this week. Danny can finally purchase his blowjob from Albert for $2. At the end of the third week, Albert will have $3 again. Barry, Clark, and Danny will all end the week with $0. And the cycle will repeat for weeks 4-10. So you can see, Danny's cabbage stock will product $1.33 one week and then $0.67 the following. In this example, at the start of week 2, Danny's cabbage stock is only worth $10 = $1.33 x 5 weeks + $0.67 x 5 weeks. If Eric had $20 dollars to spend, he'd be better keeping the $20 to himself. He has more buying power with the $20 than he would have if he owned 67% of the cabbage company. Only at a price of $10 (or less) would Eric be inclined to purchase Danny's stock in the cabbage production company.\n\nIn this example, the recession caused by Clark's fever has not only reduced the amount of value (or GDP) in the economy each week (see side note above). But the fever has also reduced the worth of Danny's stock in the cabbage company.\n\nThis is analogous to what happens in the real economy when a recession occurs. Stock prices will decrease as companies are expected to earn less going forward.\n\nHope that these example helps explain a couple of important economic phenomena associated with recessions. And I apologize for using 67% (or two-thirds). I didn't realize exactly the direction I was going to take when I started this, and once I realized how inconvenient a number it was, I was in too deep.\n\nAlso, I would be remiss if I didn't stress how simplified my above examples are. There are several other factors in play that will impact not only the amount of GDP in a recession, but also will impact the stock prices. In a real economy, the price for apples, bananas, and blowjobs, would all likely fluctuate in response to the cabbage-fever crisis. This would undoubtedly impact the amount of GDP in the economy each week. Additionally, I have conveniently (but purposefully) disregarded the idea of business costs entirely. In a recession, typically business revenues decrease due to decreased sales, but business expenses (at least in the short term) do not always decrease proportionately. As such, companies will find themselves in desperate needs of additional cash on hand to cover those costs. Where do they get this cash? One way is by selling assets/stocks that the business owns. A business might own a stock that is truly worth $20. But if they need cash NOW, they might be willing to sell it at $18 if it means getting the cash immediately. This type of sell-off will also put downward pressure on stock prices.\n\nLet me know if you have any questions or think I messed up somewhere. Would be glad to expound on something or fix any errors.",
"In addition to the other great comments I just wanted to add that money is very much in flux. Think about the average person that has a mortgage, they don't technically own the house outright, the bank does. But you lose your job, and your source of income, how do you pay the mortgage? You could end up losing your house. Or similarly if you rent, you can't pay your rent, you get evicted. People who have money still have the money, but if dollars stop circulating through the machine of the economy then it hasn't gone anywhere, but that's exactly the problem, it needs to move, it needs to go through the economy. Otherwise those who actually have assets and cash are the only ones with any purchasing power left. But it's even in their best interest to keep the economy moving, because if things break down to where money and material wealth lose their power then your big house and your stack of cash become worthless.",
"Holy shit. These answers. So many are wrong. Just answer after answer of people not understanding how fractional reserve banking works. \n\nI’m going to give you a concrete example of how money can disappear. \n\nWhen you go to the bank you get a loan for $100. Now that $100 is actually money APPEARING. There was $1,000,000,000,000 in the world and you walked into the bank and now theres $1,000,000,000,100. When you pay back that loan, the money disappears!\n\nNow of course you have to pay interest. So you actually owe $110.. but they only created $100. So there’s a process of you need more loans by banks than paybacks. This keeps a positive amount of money in the world. \n\nAs others were saying about velocity and what not. When bad times happen people start focusing on paying back their loans rather than getting another loan for a home addition. As they pay back loans there’s less and less money in the world, it keeps disappearing. \n\nThis causes deflation which can suck pretty bad. Because it’s when tomorrow you’re dollar is worth more, so why buy today. Blah blah blah. \n\nBut the basics of it is when you get a loan the bank legally creates money. When you pay the loan back it uncreates money.",
"It all returns to the top. Money is always owned by the bank, you're just borrowing it to use as an IOU style bartering tool.\n\nThe capitalist economy is a fragile model and only serves those at the top end of it's pyramid scheme style hierarchy. For everyone else, it's self sustained enslavement. \nThe difficulty is in developing the psychosocial aspect of human development to a point of civility where we could collectively adopt a system without an ingrained concept of counterintuitive profiteering.",
"The short answer is… nowwhere. \nIt never leaves your pocket and no one else can use it after you’ve spent it.",
"If the past few weeks have taught me anything, it’s that the money goes to already rich people.",
" _URL_0_ \n\nthis explains it better than I ever could",
"An economy isn't really about how much money, it's about the flow-rate of money.\nIf money stops flowing, from people to businesses to salaries to people, it stops (recession)\nIf it flows TOO FAST, then you get Inflation. The trick is balancing the two",
"Economist here. DuncanBaxter and depressive\\_anxiety's responses are right on the real economy side - people spend less, so aggregate spending declines, and since my income is your spending, people make less. But in a recession, the total amount of money out there also shrinks, because most of it is made by banks, and they reel it back in: \n [_URL_0_](_URL_0_) \nBanks create money by making loans, and in a recession (or financial crisis, we have both right now) they make fewer loans and retract some short-term ones they've already made. That's why even though the Fed is pumping billions and billions of $ of hot money into the economy, we aren't seeing widespread inflation - the total money supply is contracting in spite of the Fed's actions because bank money supply is so much larger, so the Fed's moves are like trying to hold back the tide. \nSo the answer to your questions is - yes, it can disappear. We used to have more money because banks had lent people more money, which they created *through the act of lending it*. Now we have less of that.",
"It does just disappear to some extent. There’s not always a winner when there is a loser. \n\nLet’s take an example of a house that’s worth 100k. That’s what you bought it for. Now the market has collapsed the most you can get is 50k for your house. No one made 50k, maybe they will if the market comes back but as of right now that 50k disappeared. \n\nThe same thing applies to the stock market. A small percentage of people are betting the market will go down and yes they make money when things go down but by and large values disappear.",
"It absolutely *can* disappear. \n\nLet's say you bought an apple for $1. Then one day Celebrity Doctor Dingus announced that apples cure cancer and your apple is suddenly worth $100. You could make $99 profit! But you don't sell because you think the price will go higher. Then the next day literally every other doctor on the planet says \"Celebrity Doctor Dingus is a dingus and an idiot\" and suddenly apples are worth $.50, you've lost $.50!\n\nIn the span of these two hypothetical days your apple has been worth everything from $.50 to $100. But none of those numbers were real because you never sold. It is the same basic idea as when a reporter says that the stock market lost $100,000,000,000. Some of that might be actual money, but most of it is just the theoretical money that could have been made if people sold. \n\nSo in summary - the money never existed so it does just disappear into thin air.",
"There are a few kinds of money. \"Narrow money\", more or less means cash and deposits, and \"Broad money\" is a much wider definition, and includes credit. When you buy something on a credit card, that money is created. Money isn't taken elsewhere, its just snapped into existence. When you pay your bill, that credit disappears, and the amount of money declines. In a recession people spend less, which means there is less credit money being created.\n\nThe other big thing is that money on its own doesn't really matter. What matters is money getting spent. People spend their money more slowly during a recession, so the amount of money getting spent per year drops.",
"Its a good example of money as we know it doesn't really exist. Itonly exists because we say it does. a billionaire has \"2 billion dollars\" largely tied up in assets that are worth 2 billion dollars because we collectively say its worth 2 billion dollars. \n\nthat money exists in the abstract, he can't go the bank and withdraw the 2 billion dollars and store it under his mattress.",
"It goes away.\n\nSay you have a company with ten shares. Each share is worth $10. Your company has a value of $100. \n\nOne person decides in a panic to sell their share. The best someone offers for that share is $5. The original owner only loses $5, but this also changes the value of everyone else's shares. Without other transactions at a higher rate, the company is now determined to only be worth $50. \n\nEven though only a small amount of the company changed hands for a small amount of money, the rest just disappeared.",
"Gets hoarded in the bank accounts rather than spent in the economy. Example: I was prepared to buy a new recliner just before this happened. Instead, I’m holding that money in my bank account in case I need it later for something more serious.",
"Lets say you own a McDonald's restaurant. Your restaurant does a million dollars in profit each year. Your operating expenses are three million bucks a year in rent/salaries and another million bucks in food costs. You had a guy asking if he could buy your business and he was offering you six million bucks for it. That was six months ago.\n\nYesterday a huge scientific study came out. Its the main headline of every newspaper in every country of the world. It turns out that McDonald's burger patties have AIDS in them. FUCK!\n\nLiterally overnight people stop coming to your restaurant. They are so disgusted that they are not shifting to other places, they are just swearing off fast food and eating at home.\n\nYour million bucks in profits per year? Gone. In fact your restaurant is now a money pit, you have a five year lease that you owe 3 million bucks on over its life. You have fifty employees and you need 200K a month to pay them. You instantly have to dip into your savings to pay rent and employees and yourself.\n\nYou call up the guy who wanted to buy your business six months ago - he laughs in your face.\n\nThat's destroyed value. Its just gone. Poof.",
"Money doesn't go anywhere, there are still the same amount of dollar bills in circulation.\n\nWhat disappears is value, the potential to exchange a good or service for money. If I have a successful restaurant, the bank might say \"you restaurant is worth $1M, we are more the happy to lend you money to open a second one\". But if there is an economic downturn and no one is eating out anymore, you are making less from it, the bank values it less, and decides not to loan you that money.\n\nIn both cases, the same amount of money is involved, you have lost the *potential* to convert the value of your restaurant into money.",
"Also if people are not working, money is NOT given out. But people still spend to survive. No loop, no economy.",
"When people talk about an \"economy\" it usually means the amount of activity taking place within a certain period (usually) a year as measured in some currency. It is a measure of flow - ie how many things are happening not a measure of stock. \n\nNearly everything is given a value in terms of currency because it is somewhat \"easy\" to count. But this is the difference between saying that you earned $50K this year (this is counted in the economy) vs the house you own appreciating by $50K (this is not counted in the economy)\n\nIn the most simple explanation, the reason for bailouts and sending money to people is to keep the capacity for the economy to flow (ie economic activity) If too many companies shut down, even if the disease is eliminated, the economy might have lost the ability to produce goods and services. This results in what we call a recession. This reduces employment and total societal welfare. \n\nWhen people talk about falling stock markets etc, this is not a measure of the economy and value could be gained and lost without any actual \"money\" changing hands.",
"Yes it can, and it very much does. Stop thinking about 'money' as this little paper federal reserve note. While that is the physical manifestation of money, *money* is actually theoretical. In fact if you google it you will find lots of interesting reads about the theory of money. To keep it ELI, lets put it this way, the money we use is a representation of the total output of your economy. That dollar bill you have is a representation of a very small percentage of that economic activity. \n\nThe idea is if I invest $2500 in a company and that company goes up in value and I start getting dividends, then my capital is actually much higher than $2500. I don't see that as cash money but it gives me access to things like loans, I could sell the shares for a higher price and earn a profit, I can *do things* with the value of that investment. If that value plummets I am locked out of all that capital and that potential money literally disappeared. \n\nNo one is out burning dollar bills outside when this happens, the physical money supply is determined by the Fed and it is ALWAYS substantially lower than the amount of the value of the economy. Interestingly, this little mind trick we do to accept money (something that is essentially value-less but we all give it a value based on agreed upon criteria) is how we built modern society. The Chinese summarily rejected this (and there are really cool stories about Dutch traders and Chinese pirates getting around Chinese law) because they saw it as immoral. If you wonder how a dumpy island nation (the British) and a tiny European nation (the Netherlands) dominated the modern world - the answer is economic weaponry.",
"Also, a recession doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of money. Sometimes, it’s just the lack of spending and liquidity. \n\n\n\nWhen people are afraid, have low confidence in the economy, or are quarantined in their homes they tend to spend less money. The lack of spending decreases demand and lowers the profits for businesses. People start taking money out of banks, stocks, and other assets because they want cash on hand “just in case”. Businesses have a harder time getting loans and are less likely to take risks. These things all interact with each other in a vicious cycle that essentially stagnates the economy. \n\n\n\nWhat this looks like from the outside is high unemployment, low stock value, people spending less, businesses spending less, and just a lack of growth.",
"Money, and the economy in general, is essentially state-enforced long-term promises.\n\nYour money in the bank account is just promises that when you get to a restaurant, you will be able to obtain the food you want.\n\nThe whole concept is that peoples producing resources (or any kind of service) give them away in exchange of promises, and then expect to be able to use those promises to obtain the resources and service they want.\n\nBut promises only have value that peoples put into them. All the system is based on mutual trust. The more peoples trust the system, the more promises have high value, and the more the economy is thriving. As a very tough approximation, an economic recession is essentially peoples losing faith in those promises, which leads to those promises losing value.",
"No, it does. Banking produces what is referred to as 'imaginary money', a concept you'll learn about in any first year macroeconomics course.\n\nSuppose that you have $100, and you put it into the bank. Banks, as you know, take your savings, and they use it to make a loan, for something like a mortgage, or any number of other things. So, they take some of your money, and they lend it out to other people.\n\nSo, suppose that they lend out $90 of it. That money goes to a young couple, who buy a house. They pay a construction firm - for simplicity, we'll say that you own that construction firm. And that construction firm puts the money into the bank.\n\nNow you have another $90 in the bank, and the bank decides that they can safely lend out 90% of it again. They make an $81 loan to another couple, who also buys a house from you, and so on.\n\nEventually, if they're keeping a 10% 'reserve', you wind up with your original $100 being $1000 in the system. The imaginary money is generated by debt - 90 dollars, plus a 90 dollar debt, equals zero, but those 90 imaginary dollars are still in circulation throughout the debt.\n\nWhen a business goes under, or someone misses their mortgage, however, the loan disappears. The bank needs to recover the lost money to keep all the accounts going. So the imaginary money corresponding to the loan also disappears (into the bank's reserve).\n\nThe Federal Reserve's job is to manage how much imaginary money there is in society at any given time, by buying and selling extra debts, and by changing the interest rate that they charge banks who are below their threshold of deposits - letting the bank safely keep less of your money. It actually comes out to being that the amount of total money is equal to the amount of real money divided by the interest rate, with some weirdness as you approach zero.\n\nThat's where the money goes in a recession. The system that multiplies money breaks down.",
"Economies are *reciprocal*. The money you spend is the money I earn, and vice-versa. So, if I lose my job, I can't spend, and therefore you can't earn. So where does the money go? Well, one important thing to consider is that lots of businesses and economic activity are based on **borrowing**, relying on future income to meet that obligation. Borrowing *creates* money, when banks borrow from a central bank. This is why central banks regulate the prime interest rate, so as to be able to react to economic trends, and promote the behavior they want (which is low inflation but full employment).",
"WEALTH disappears. MONEY stays around but stops moving. Money is only a small fraction of the economy's net wealth. Personal wealth is usually a small amount of real money in the bank and a much larger portfolio of stock and real estate.\n\nStock and real estate lose value. That is a loss of wealth. You may have had \"a billion dollar company\" that folded, but it never had a billion dollars on hand. Its long-term income valuation said it was worth that much but due to economic collapse, that never happened. Billions of dollars in wealth exist as stock value and real estate value etc and that disappear into nothingness at any time.\n\nThe money stops circulating, that's part of the problem of recession. Banks do not want to issue mortgages to people with no jobs. New businesses cannot get loans. \n\nMoney breaks down into several definitions: [M0\tMB\tM1\tM2\tM3\tMZM](_URL_0_)\n\nSome can disappear, some cannot. You deposit $10K in the bank, they issue a mortgage and someone buys a house with it and a seller puts that $10K in his pocket. Well now you have $10K bank balance on paper and someone is walking around with $10K in banknotes in his pocket. The M2 supply is now $20K.\n\nIn prior times, before FDIC insurance, it was possible for the bank to go bust and you lose your $10K bank balance and that money would just disappear. That one is not really possible now.\n\nBut now, you have a $200K mortgage on a house that was previously worth $300K but now you could sell for only $100K, your $200K stock portfolio is worth $50K, but your $20K cash balance in the bank is still a real $20K. You have essentially lost everything, because money is only a small fraction of the total wealth.\n\nYou no longer have assets to sell, your wealth is gone. You've still got $20K in cash and $50K in stock and a $100K house, but overall worth is -$30K, and I presume you lost your job. Once the $20K runs out, you will be foreclosed on.\n\nYou'd think this is just inflation. The farmer who wanted $1 for a dozen eggs will now sell two dozen for $1, and his chicken feed vendor is also desperate and $1 will buy twice as much chicken feed. This should be acceptable to the chicken feed vendor as he can live off half-price eggs (and other half price things). But the $100K mortgage the farmer has does NOT become a $50K mortgage. He can no longer make payments and is foreclosed upon. The bank wants that farm, because in 10 yrs after recovery it will be very valuable. They will wait, the land unused or rented for whatever temporary use they can get. The chicken farmer cannot produce eggs and is homeless. The chicken feed vendor has no customer and similarly loses his home.",
"The big misconception is that money is immutable and can be neither created nor destroyed.\n\nAnother big misconception is that the change in value of something is the same as money being created or destroyed.\n\nThe value you lost by buying high and selling low is basically received by whoever you bought the item of value from. (Basically in the form of \"wow, I'm glad I sold when I did\".)\n\nThis is a fairly abstract concept which isn't addressed in other comments in this thread and my comment doesn't fully address the issue either. This is just to add a small point to the discussion.",
"It’s worth pointing out that the definition of a recession does not necessarily require money to disappear. It‘s simply two quarters of shrinking GDP. (Gross domestic product) GDP is a measure of output: the value of goods and services created. Money does not have to disappear for a factory or a business to have lower output - indeed they can potentially still stay profitable and be ‘making’ money, just not as much as they did in prior periods.",
"A lot of people in here talking about value, and what they're saying is true.\n\nBut a lot of the impacts of a recession are not about value, but about the velocity of money, and economic activity, and that disappearing.\n\nYou have $50. So you go and spend that $50 at the local barber. That barber goes to spend that $50 on a few bottles of wine from the local winery. And the vintner spends that $50 on groceries. And the grocer puts that money into savings because he's looking to buy a house.\n\nThat $50 creates $150 of economic activity (ie. our GDP = $150), and the velocity of money is 3.\n\nBut you are in shut down, and you google how to cut your hair yourself. You spend the money instead on groceries, and the grocer puts it into savings. The $50 is still the same $50. It never disappeared, but the velocity of money is only 1 this time. It's only created $50 on economic activity, our GDP is only $50.\n\nThis is an overly simplified example, but illustrates that how quickly we spend money actually has an impact on our GDP. The money never really disappears, it's just the economic activity it enables goes away.\n\n**Edit**: I'm not going to say thank you for the gold because /u/SrGrafo [told me not to](_URL_2_). But if anybody wants to read up more about the history of money they should [read](_URL_0_) or [watch](_URL_3_) the Ascent of Money but Neill Fergusson, watch [Jacob Clifford on youtube](_URL_4_); or listen to the [Planet Money podcast](_URL_1_). These are all very accessible ways of learning more about economic concepts.",
"A lot of it is made up in the first place. Let's look at the idea of market capitalization for example. \n\n\n\nCompany A has 10,000,000 shares of stock. Each share is worth $100. That means the company must be worth $1,000,000,000 right?\n\n\nWell, not exactly. Supply and demand curves have slopes. If everyone tried to dump their shares for $100, eventually they would run out of buyers. Then they would have to sell at $99, $98, $97...\n\n\n\nThe important thing to note here is that 1) the actual money doesn't go anywhere and 2) most people aren't holding actual money. They're holding assets that will naturally decline in price if sellers outnumber buyers. \n\n\nThey say \"my money is in stocks\" but really they don't have any money, they traded it all for stocks. And stocks are worth whatever you can sell them for. Money isn't being \"lost\" so much as investments are being re-evaluated to be worth less in light of declining economic developments. \n\n\n\nIn fact, one could even make a case that deflation is making your dollars worth more. Any way you slice it, $1 buys more oil today than it did 3 months ago."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmFo-LKHGY0"
],
[],
[
"https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply#Empirical_measures_in_the_United_States_Federal_Reserve_System"
],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2714607-the-ascent-of-money",
"https://www.npr.org/sections/money/",
"https://www.reddit.com/r/comics/comments/fob6ed/reddit_gold/",
"https://www.pbs.org/show/ascent-of-money/",
"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCQEbqDL8i40d83Au55lYMQ"
],
[]
] |
||
40g0da | why are screen resolutions always powers of 360? (720p, 1080p, 1440p, 2160p [4k]) | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/40g0da/eli5_why_are_screen_resolutions_always_powers_of/ | {
"a_id": [
"cytw37c",
"cytw3qw",
"cytw76v",
"cytwdj9"
],
"score": [
11,
2,
2,
5
],
"text": [
"They aren't powers of 360. They are multiples of 360. A power of 360 would be represented as 360⁷²⁰",
"It has less to do with \"360\" and more to do with the aspect ratio.\n\nHave a look at this page: _URL_0_ ",
"Modern Computer resolutions inherited their display sizes from a legacy of punch cards and the number of scan lines of cathode ray tubes.\n\nYou see the original graphics resolution for PCs was VGA with 640x480 and most of the ones that came later like like SVGA (800x600) were based upon that.\n\nThe VGA inherited the resolution from text based resolution where you did not display graphics but rather charters in for example an 80 by 25 or 80 by 60 grid.\n\nIf you have an 80x60 grid and use 8by8 pixels per character you arrive at the original VGA resolution.\n\nThe 80s characters per line is something far older that modern computer displays. IBM standardized on punch cards with 80 columns in 1928.\n\nSo the whole 80 characters was sort of inherited from those type of equipment (also 72 characters were often used with teletypes for practical reasons.)\n\nThis sort of gave you the horizontal resolution increments we still use to day.\n\nThe vertical ones from your question came thanks to the combination of wanting nice square characters that were 8x8 pixels in the beginning and the whole thing being compatible with American TV screens which were based on NTSC which had 480 scan-lines. Early home computers used TVs as their display. So that was the limit they could use.\n\nOriginally TVs were not digital like today but analogue. They did not have any pixels just a ray of electrons that wandered back and forth and down from the bottom across as specially made glass surface making it glow. Horizontally they theoretically did not have any resolution at all, but vertically it was divided into rows upon rows that they ray moved along. The original design used in the US had more than 480 of these, but not all of them were visible and in the end 480 were only used of what remained to get a nice round number.\n\nWe have long since moved away from all the thing these values originally came from, but the steps to go from where we started tow here we ended up were all small and all were taken in mind with the idea of staying compatible with what came before.",
"It makes scaling between them simpler. For some time, for the sake of backwards-compatibility, it's best to scale old content up rather than re-master it. \n\nThink of a tiny picture with 2x2 pixels. And two new displays with 3x3 pixels and 4x4 pixels. \nTo scale the image up to the 4x4 display is simple enough. Just repeat each pixel twice. \nBut the 3x3 will be a pain. If you repeat the first pixel, but not the second since you can't, the image will stay sharp but distort. If you count the average from neighboring pixels and fill the extra pixels with that, the image won't distort but won't be sharp either. Or you can keep the 2x2 image and fill the rest with black bars. \nA 5x5 display would similarly sucks but 6x6 would be sweet again. I'm only using small numbers to make up a worst-case scenario. It all kind of blends in the mass when the resolutions are in the thousands. But it's still noticeable.\n\nTo see what I mean in real-life, for a distorted image, try setting a 4:3 resolution in your 16:9 monitor. Everything will stretch wider. And for blurry image, try setting a resolution that's close to your display's native resolution but not exactly it. For example 1050p for 1080p display. Depending on how your monitor handles things, it may add the black bars or do the averaging thing. \nThese you are more likely to find in-OS. On third-party applications that allow custom resolutions, it's possible to find even better (or worse) examples.\n\nSo to scale up a 720p image to 1080p they have the option of repeating every other pixel. It's not optimal, but keeps the image similar enough. Same goes for 1080p to 1440p. from 1080p to 4k it's again repeating every pixel. From 720p to 1440p it's repeating every pixels. And of course, if the content is specially made for 1440p or 4k, it'll be pristine on those displays and to scale down to 1080p or 720p, they leave out pixels."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio"
],
[],
[]
] |
||
4zpfcu | what does a division by fraction mean conceptually? | 40/8 = 5 means that there are 40 things, divided amongst 8 people. Each would get 5.
But what does 40/0.5 means? Or even 0.5/0.5? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4zpfcu/eli5what_does_a_division_by_fraction_mean/ | {
"a_id": [
"d6xo4td",
"d6xob5y",
"d6xof9q",
"d6xr01k"
],
"score": [
4,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"40 things amongst each 8 people means each person would get 5. \n40 things divided amongst .5 people means that .5 of a person gets 40, which means each *whole person* gets 80.",
"It can help to think of it in terms of a sentence.\n\n40/8: I have 40 things, divided into 8 groups. Each group gets 5.\n\n40/0.5: I have 40 things, divided into half a group. Each (whole) group gets 80.",
"Division is an operation that determines how many times one number goes into another number. 40/8 = 5 because you can fit 8 into 40 five times. It just so happens that if you are thinking about dividing things into groups, division lines up very neatly with that and can be used to determine how much each group gets. That's not what the mathematical operation means, though.\n\nA fraction represents a numerical value. When you divide by a fraction, you are determining how many times the numerical value it represents goes into the number you are dividing. Since 1/2 goes into 40 eighty times, you end up with 40/(1/2) = 80.\n\nIf you really want to think of it conceptually as splitting up items among groups, you could try thinking of it like this: You have 40 apples for 1/2 of a group. You can divide to figure out how many apples you need for one whole group.",
"You have 40 gallons of water, and a bunch of jugs that hold 1/2 gallon each. How many bottles can you fill?"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
a62qaq | the kanye/drake thing happening. why is kanye calling out drake on stuff? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/a62qaq/eli5_the_kanyedrake_thing_happening_why_is_kanye/ | {
"a_id": [
"ebrar5c",
"ebrg34y",
"ebrjse3"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Why would you need this ELI5?",
"I think you might be making the mistake of assuming you have missed some sort of pop cultural feud that would provide context. You haven't. This is just Kanye.",
"Basically this initially started between Pusha-T & Drake. I'll spare you the details from way back, as you can find them online.\n\nMore recently though, Pusha-T dissed Drake when he released his new album Daytona, on the track \"Infrared\", where he accused Drake of using a ghost writer. Drake then released \"Duppy Freestyle\" going at both Pusha-T & Kanye (Pusha-T is signed to Kanye's label, G.O.O.D. MUSIC). Pusha-T then responded with \"The Story Of Adidon\" in which Pusha T alleges that the rumor that Drake had a child named Adonis with French model Sophie Brussaux is true, calling Drake a \"deadbeat\" who is \"hiding a child\". Pusha T also attacks Drake's alleged insecurities regarding his own race. The track was titled \"The Story of Adidon\" after Drake's rumored upcoming Adidas line, which would've publicly revealed Adonis to the world and use him heavily in promotion and advertising. Adidon is a portmanteau of Adidas and Adonis. If this is true, it messed up with Drake's business and it's understandable why he's pissed.\n\nNow, back to Kanye. Before Kanye released his latest album \"Ye\", Drake had spent time with Kanye in the studio in Wyoming and allegedly told Kanye about his son, Adonis. Drake immediately thought that Pusha-T knows about his son from Kanye. Kanye denies ever telling Pusha-T about this and claims Pusha-T had his own sources. Drake doesn't believe him. Beef keeps going on.\n\nAs for the recent events, Drake allegedly called Kanye or threatened him somehow and that's what got Kanye so fired up on Twitter."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1jk4ed | why do doctors not amputate the paralyzed limbs of paraplegics? | I watched a video of a paralyzed woman whose son takes her surfing. She lost the use of her legs after an accident. After watching how she gets around, I started wondering if it would not be easier for her to do so if she did not have to move the dead weight of her paralyzed legs. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1jk4ed/eli5_why_do_doctors_not_amputate_the_paralyzed/ | {
"a_id": [
"cbfg22l",
"cbfg5m9",
"cbfgc3j"
],
"score": [
2,
11,
5
],
"text": [
"There's a chance that the nerves can be repaired with future surgery. Even if this weren't the case, it doesn't seem compelling to cut off a limb which is considered healthy,",
"I would think this mostly is the patients choice. I don't think I would like to chop off my legs even if they were useless.\n\nOne tends to get a little *attached* to them over the years... (:",
"A doctor is unlikely to risk a complicated surgery if that doesn't actually improve the situation much.\n\nA few pounds of dead weight are not much of a problem.\nTo most people, the loss of a limb - whether functional or not - would be a huge problem."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
43hi1l | charge vs. debit | Seems like a silly question but I've never understood the difference. Say I have a debit MasterCard from my bank... Why, when I purchase anything, would someone ask me credit or debit? I've never seen any difference in cost? Unless by saying "credit", you're implying you have no funds to back it up and you're pretty much over drafting??? Plz clarify! | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43hi1l/eli5_charge_vs_debit/ | {
"a_id": [
"czi8maq"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"If you use debit it is processed by the bank and usually processes quicker. If you use credit then the credit card company processes the transaction and it may take a little longer and in some cases may cost the retailer a fee from the credit company. Credit card companies typically give you zero liability for unauthorized purchases, which may not be true of your bank, so credit is better for online purchases. Also you can use credit if you are somewhere you do not feel comfortable entering your pin. It doesn't imply anything about the amount of funds you have just the way you want the transaction processed. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
6jzrtz | i just purchased a home with a loan... please explain to me how interest rate works. | So my interest rate is 4.5% and I did a conventional 30 year loan with a 31,000 down payment on a 160,000 dollar home.
.
In 1 year... how much extra am I paying on top of that 160, 000? How exactly does an interest rate work? If I pay my bills on time and if I over pay my bills, will my interest rate go down over time? How long do I have to wait to do that if so?
.
Thank you. | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6jzrtz/eli5i_just_purchased_a_home_with_a_loan_please/ | {
"a_id": [
"dji6x1f",
"dji6zw8",
"dji73bb",
"dji7fcp",
"djia3uz",
"djif94a"
],
"score": [
2,
8,
5,
10,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Google has a free mortgage calculator, use that. Nobody can tell you if your rate will change without reading your contract.",
"I don't know how the system works in your country, but I am baffled that you didn't look it up before you bought the house. Because if it turns out that it puts you at a disadvantage of whatever sort, you could end up screwing yourself over bigtime...",
"I don't want to criticize you but that sounds like the sort of questions you may have wanted to research before committing to spending that much money.\n\nYour question is hard to answer without knowing the details of your mortgage.",
"For next time: figure out how loans work before you get into one.\n\nFurthermore, I don't know if you have a variable interest rate or a fixed one. I don't know if your monthly rate is constant or variable. I don't know if you can pay big sums in bulk ahead of time. We can't answer any of your questions without looking at your contract. Assuming your loan works in your country as it does in mine, you have a 4.5% interest per year and probably a fixed rate. In order to pay back in 30 years that rate is about 600 dollars. \n\nFirst month you will pay in interests 130 000 x (4.5/100) /12 = 487.5 dollars and the rest until your agreed monthly rate in actually paying back the house. Let's assume your rate is 600 dollars. First month, you pay 487.5 in interest and only 112.5 for the house. \n\nSecond month month you owe the bank 130 000-112.5 = 129 887 dollars and 50 cents. You pay 129 887.50 x (4.5/100)/12 = 487.07 dollars in interest and, assuming your rate is constant, 600-487.07 = 113 for the house.\n\nBy the end of the second month you have payed 600 + 600 to the bank = 1200 dollars. For that, the bank has charged almost 1000 in interests and you have payed for the house a little over 200. \n\nWith time, assuming the rate is fixed at 600 for eternity (we need to read your contract to know), the amount of interest decreases (because it is calculated based on what's left to pay back) and the proportion of the rate that is meant to pay back the debt increases.\n\nIn the end you'll pay about 600 a month x 12 months x 30 years = 216 000 dollars for the house: 130 000 for the house, 86 000 in interests.\n\n\n\n\n\nI mean, really, you didn't look any of this up before deciding you owe now 130.000 dollars to the bank??",
"So let me get this straight.\n\n\nYou managed to put down $31,000 on a $160,000 house, and entered into a loan for $129,000, plus taxes, fees, etc... *without knowing how the literal definition of a loan works?*\n\nAre you insane? Have you been on Earth long?\n\nIt depends on a ton of different factors. The loan is likely *amortized* over its life, meaning payments *may* be equal (unless it's a variable rate), and each payment includes interest and principal. \n\n... I'm sorry, I cannot continue answering. This is just another level of stupid I have rarely visited.",
"So, paying just the interest and principle back is relatively simple. You have a 30 year loan and pay 4.5% interest on that annually. Your payments will be fixed at a certain rate, so as you move farther along the fraction of your payment that goes to interest decreases and the fraction that goes to paying off the principle increases.\n\n[The formula for payments](_URL_0_) is: Payment = (Loan Amount)x[ratex(1+rate)^payments ]/[((1+rate)^payments )-1]\n\nYou have a 30 year loan and you pay monthly, so that's 360 payments. And your interest rate is 4.5%, but that's annually and you pay monthly, so your monthly rate is 4.5/12=0.375% = 0.00375\n\nSo, you end up paying 160,000x[0.00375x(1+0.00375)^360 ]/[((1+0.00375)^360 )-1] = about $810 a month.\n\nBut, that's not all that you have to pay for in a mortgage. You also have to pay the yearly taxes and buy insurance on both your mortgage and your house. \n\nSo the actual payment is going to be much higher: Taxes in my area are about 1% of the value of the house, so $1,600/12 = $133/month. Mortgage insurance is pretty pricy, the last couple quotes I've seen are about 15% of the payment value, so $810x0.15 = $121 Then home insurance on top of that, which I've seen quoted around 0.66% of the house value, so $160,000x0.0066 = $1056/year or $88/month.\n\nSo your total payments are going to look something like $810 (loan) + $133 (taxes) + $121 (loan insurance) + $88 (home owner's insurance) = $1152/month\n\nOf course, this are *very* rough numbers based on my area. Your area might not require you to pay homeowner's insurance as part of your loan, and your tax and insurance rates will vary as well. But these are the likely categories of costs that will be included in your monthly payment.\n\nNow, the down payment. That reduces the amount of the loan you're taking out, instead of a $160,000 loan, you're taking out a $129,000 loan. Taxes and homeowner's insurance stay the same (it's still a $160,000 house) but the loan payment and mortgage insurance decrease:\n\n$129,000 @4.5% for 30 years = $654/month. 15% of that is $98. So your total payment should be around $654 (loan) + $98 (mortgage insurance) + $133 (taxes) + $88 (home owner's insurance) = $973/month"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://www.mtgprofessor.com/formulas.htm"
]
] |
|
9uzm65 | what are the basics of losing weight ? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/9uzm65/eli5_what_are_the_basics_of_losing_weight/ | {
"a_id": [
"e984noj",
"e984o3s",
"e984pp9",
"e984rsp",
"e986q94",
"e986zl1"
],
"score": [
8,
7,
6,
33,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"Be in caloric deficit, at a very basic level expend more calories than you consume. Of course it get slightly more complicated when you include macros etc\n\nEdit: Can't spell",
"Eat fewer calories than you burn\n\nThat's it, that's all there is to it. Calories in < Calories out will lead to weight loss\n\nVarious diets have different food plans to help you achieve that and stick with it(this is the hard part), but it doesn't matter what you're eating as long as you're eating less than you're burning",
"The basics? Burn more calories than you consume. Note that this is generally easier by consuming less calories, rather than burning more. It's easy to consume enough calories that burning them off becomes impractical. ",
"Burn more calories than you consume.\n\nExercise and a diet high in fresh vegetables with lean protein. Eat several small meals instead of large ones. Avoid processed food and sugar.\n\nIf anyone says anything else, they are selling something.",
"Simply eat less calories than your body needs. \n\nThere are many websites out there which calculate the amount of calories you need per day. Just eat less calories than the calculated amount and you should lose weight. ",
"Eat less calories then you burn. In general your base metabolism will be dominating so you can not lose weight through normal exercise alone. There is very wide consensus on this. The contradictions you get is the best way to do this. If you eat less then you burn then you will feel hungry. People do not like feeling hungry. There are different ways you can try to make it easier to lose weight by making you less hungry. Some foods can make you feel less hungry then other food. There is also drugs and activities that can help. However the feeling of hunger is a quite complex topic and it works differently in different people and can change over time. There are also lots of discussions as to what kind of diet is best regardless of if you are trying to lose weight or not. Humans can survive on lots of different food and we do not have lots of conclusive evidence for what types of diet is best over long periods of time. A lot of people combine trying to lose weight with eating healthier as it becomes more important to get the right amount of vitamins and minerals as you eat less."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
1q0r0u | typophobia (fear of many holes) | Why are many of us affected by typophobia even though we haven't had any trauma with them? Also, how come we get that tingly feeling (like we're cold) instead of having a feeling that makes us wanna throw up?
**Edit:** It's Trypophobia, sorry about that. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1q0r0u/eli5_typophobia_fear_of_many_holes/ | {
"a_id": [
"cd806e6",
"cd83pn1"
],
"score": [
2,
3
],
"text": [
" > Why are many of us affected by typophobia even though we haven't had any trauma with them?\n\nI am not aware of any scientific consensus that trypophobia is actually a real phobia. Instead it seems that people claim to be nervous around such \"triggers\" because they have been socially conditioned to be.",
"Tyrphobia doesn't exist, it was literally created by 4chan years ago. Humans have a natural aversion to patterns resembling infections and such, which is why almost everyone is put off by it. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
|
7oxpd5 | why is a sample size of 1,000 enough for a 3% margin of error in a group of any size? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7oxpd5/eli5_why_is_a_sample_size_of_1000_enough_for_a_3/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsd0ecs",
"dsdghib"
],
"score": [
13,
6
],
"text": [
"It depends on the assumption that your sample is a good random sample of the whole population. As long as you believe that assumption, the result sounds less surprising.\n\nIf you flipped a coin 1000 times and got 500 heads, how confident would you be that it's fair? Would you be happy that there's at least a 95% chance that the coin gives heads between 47% and 53% of the time? That's what the margin of error is saying. We picked 1000 people at random and found that x% believed a thing, so we're 95% confident that between (x-3)% and (x+3)% believe that thing.",
"Imagine you have a big jar of marbles, 90% white and 10% black, and you draw 10 of them. What is the likely result?\n\nSo long as there are a whole lot of marbles, you have about a 39% chance of getting 9 white marbles, 35% of getting 10, and 19% of getting 8. That makes a 93% chance of being within 1 marble of the \"right\" amount and you would have to get pretty unlucky to do worse than that. You could say you were 93% confident of getting 9 white marbles, +/- 1.\n\nNote that the total number of marbles doesn't really come into it, it is all about how lucky or unlucky you get in your drawing. 10,000 marbles, or 10 million, it doesn't make any difference. (Technically, there is a small difference, as once you remove a marble, there is now a slightly smaller chance of getting that color again, but with large numbers, this difference is insignificant.)\n\nThis is exactly how sampling works. For large populations, your \"luck\" in choosing your samples is far more important than total population size.\n\n\n"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
1o5z05 | why don't people at concerts just sit and listen during songs, and cheer at the end? | So, the title pretty much sums it up, but I've been wondering my whole life why people will go to concerts, lift their hands up, make noise, and generally distract themselves from the music. It all makes me feel very awkward, as I'd much rather just sit and listen. I paid good money to listen to the band, after all, not a bunch of random strangers.
I understand getting excited and cheering at the beginning and end of songs, but what's the allure of the hands above the head, cheering during the song, etc.? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1o5z05/eli5_why_dont_people_at_concerts_just_sit_and/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccp2i8r",
"ccp2kyp",
"ccp58gj",
"ccp6sve",
"ccpgolc",
"ccq1xxg"
],
"score": [
5,
2,
2,
2,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"The concert, for these people, is an experience. If they just wanted to listen to the music, they could do that at home or in their car. At a concert, the music is live (and *alive*), it is louder, and the whole experience is different. Many people cannot contain themselves. They are overcome with emotion and energy, and they react to it. Undoubtedly we have been conditioned to react to it a certain way, based on how we have seen other concertgoers react, but it's fairly universal that certain music makes many people want to *move*. This is more fun for many people. They didn't just listen to music. They danced. \n\nI usually prefer to just listen and \"dance\" while seated, but I'm in the minority. ",
"Some people enjoy feeling like they're a part of something. If all you want is to listen to the music, then a recording is probably a better choice for you. If you want the spectacle, and to join in the spectacle, then concerts will be more fun for you. \n\nAlso, booze/drugs.",
"Back in the day (early 60's, Paul Revere and the Raiders) we did remain seated and only stood and cheered at the end.\n\nBy the 80's (Springsteen) we stood the entire concert but by and large stayed quiet.\n\nNow (Gaga) you can no longer hear the nuances of the music from the screaming or even see your way through a field of hands waving phones attempting to record the show.\n\nAnd EDM shows are just one big dance party.\n\nSo the concert experience has evolved in my lifetime- I suspect the pendulum will soon swing the other way and folks will begin to eschew electronics and opt for a \"new\" quieter, more observational type experience.\n\nEverything old is new again.",
"Why don't they just sit at home and listen to there MP3 player?\n\nA concert is a communal experience, it is being the with a bunch of other people, all there for the same reason, and letting yourself go to the music. ",
"Watch a classical music concert; there will be no arm waving.",
"ITT: people tell a guy who goes to live shows to hear music he doesn't understand what live shows are for. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
loq3v | why console gamers and pc gamers cant play together in matchmaking? | I understand that the controls are different, but shouldn't they be arbitrary to skill and tactics? I mean I can plug an xbox controller into my computer, and a keyboard into my xbox.
/Edit2: **I was not referring to purely FPS more so interested in where the discussion would go. I like the cross platform turn based strategy idea... Marketplaces (sony and xbox) + steam allow for distribution, FPS dont matter on turns**
Edit: List of cross platform (playable together) games
Portal 2, Unreal Tournament 3, Halo 2 (for a short time), Shadow Run, Dungeon Defenders, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Star Legends: The Blackstar Chronicles, Phantasy Star Online, 4x4 Evolution, Quake III, Need for Speed: Underground | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/loq3v/eli5_why_console_gamers_and_pc_gamers_cant_play/ | {
"a_id": [
"c2udmc9",
"c2udpai",
"c2udqnj",
"c2udya7",
"c2udzaa",
"c2ueey8",
"c2uef3t",
"c2uepzt",
"c2ueq9q",
"c2uetev",
"c2ueywc",
"c2uez1a",
"c2ufevd",
"c2ugek3",
"c2uh143",
"c2udmc9",
"c2udpai",
"c2udqnj",
"c2udya7",
"c2udzaa",
"c2ueey8",
"c2uef3t",
"c2uepzt",
"c2ueq9q",
"c2uetev",
"c2ueywc",
"c2uez1a",
"c2ufevd",
"c2ugek3",
"c2uh143"
],
"score": [
12,
304,
8,
116,
27,
16,
2,
17,
2,
3,
3,
11,
3,
2,
2,
12,
304,
8,
116,
27,
16,
2,
17,
2,
3,
3,
11,
3,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"I believe this has been attempted once or twice (I can't remember the titles offhand), but PC gamers have an advantage over consoles in FPSs. \n",
"Simply, the console players would get crushed. The amount of finite control a mouse+keyboard offers over a controller is pretty apparent. \n\n\n\n",
"Simple.\n\nFor starters, a mouse will allow you to turn much faster and aim much more precisely than if you were to do the same with a controller.\n\nAs far as \"I can plug a keyboard into my Xbox\" goes, that doesn't necessarily mean everyone can or will do that. That, and a very, very small number of games supports the feature.",
"i agree with everyone when it comes to FPS but many other games have no excuse for not being cross platform. racing games and fighters come to mind.",
"Everyone that has posted in this discussion is correct. I'll just add this as a question to counter your question: If xbox/ps3 players can play as well as PC players, why do they have autoaim on public games?\n\nObviously, the answer is that they can't play as well. The control surfaces are simply too shitty and imprecise.\n\nAs a long-time PC FPS player, I could never make the leap to console FPS. It feels like someone cut off my fingers and told me to play using my stumps. I HAVE tried to play both ps3 and 360 (mw1/2/black ops), and while my K/D was decent, the game simply was not enjoyable.\n\nOnce you learn to play FPS on PC, you'll understand why.",
"Weird that no one has brought this up yet, but there was a retail product released that did this. It was called \"Shadowrun\". Don't remember it? I don't blame you. It was a an FPS developed by Microsoft that allowed PC and Xbox players to play on the same servers. From the IGN review: \n\n > Since this is a cross-platform game, the shooting is wildly imprecise when compared to games like Counter-Strike. If it were a matter of pinpoint reticule positioning, the PC gamers would undoubtedly dominate. As it's set up, the Xbox 360 gamers get an abundance of aim assists and sticky targeting and the weapons aren't particularly accurate... Weapon controls have been diluted to the point where PC and X360 gamers are on relatively the same footing, making the whole cross-platform competition more of a non-issue. \n\nbasically they gimped the game to try and make it a more level playing field. And it's such a mystery that the game didn't get received well. The review continues on to discuss network connectivity issues as well. It was a total failure. ",
"Thumbs are harder to use effectively than all ten of your fingers.",
"While there are balance issues between control methods and technical challenges with platform limitations, a major reason for lack of cross platform game is that platform owners don't want it to be.\n\nMicrosoft requires all multiplayer to go through XBox Live. With rare exceptions, they have not allowed PCs to connect to the same servers as their consoles.\n\nLike Microsoft Sony requires all multiplayer to go through PSN, though they have started to show some flexibility in allowing some third parties to do cross platform play. \n\ntl;dr: There are balancing and technical reasons, it is largely a business decision by platform owners.",
"In short, it is **EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE**, and hard to justify from a developer point of view. The end result of Cross Platform multiplayer is just more players in the same matchmaking pool, and the novelty of playing cross platform. However, the matchmaking pool is regular multiplayer is usually plenty large and diverse, making it hard to justify.\n\nFirst, it is hard to develop consistently across all three platforms (Xbox, PS3, PC). Each console has its own special abilities. For example, the difference between PS3 trophies and Xbox achievements may not seem like much, but extend that level of difference all the way down to how you draw a pixel onto the screen, and how you capture input from the controller. EVERYTHING is different. ELI5 Analogy: Imagine trying to build a robot to auto-pilot both an American fighter-jet, a Chinese passenger jet, and a Russian personal aircraft. Sure, they're all airplanes, but they have extremely different specifications, the buttons are labeled differently, and are in different locations in the cockpit, and the way that the internal components operate are vastly different.\n\nThis is why developing for all 3 platforms is kind of reserved for big companies with HUGE budgets. Making a game for all three platforms means you need to pay experts from all three consoles to get your game to work smoothly. This is where the second reason comes in. If you are spending obscene amounts of money to create a game, and your career as a game developer, or publisher DEPENDS on you making that money back, you want to make DAMN SURE that the game will sell. Taking risks is not something that you do with millions of dollars. \n\nCross-Platform multiplayer has not been proven to be commercially viable. The only real game to do it has been Shadowrun, which wasn't all that successful ([66 on Metacritic](_URL_0_)). When you are trying to convince the people holding the purse strings that your game will be successful, and your only example is a game that didn't sell very well, you'll have a hard time making the case to spend the time and money to do it right.\n\nWhen writing a multiplayer game, a very important part is writing the code that makes multiplayer possible (netcode) as fast and efficient as possible. The faster the code, the less lag there will be, and the more enjoyable the multiplayer experience. Writing good netcode for a single platform is hard enough. Imagine trying to write netcode that will quickly and efficiently translate from Xbox, PC and PS3 all at once. There really isn't any existing software that does this translation (Xbox and 360 are direct competitors after all, why would they need to communicate with each other quickly?), you have to write it yourself, which will be even more expensive.\n\nIn short, you have just tacked on a LOT of money to take a game from being just multiplayer, to multiplayer across all 3 platforms. It is now your responsibility to convince the businessman holding the purse strings that this feature will be worth the price tag.\n\nDesigning a game that is fun for all platforms is also just plain hard. You want to make sure that nobody feels hindered by the control scheme (hard enough with normal games), and that nobody has an unfair advantage over the other platform. Shadowrun was criticized for giving console players to autoaim, and yet PC still held an advantage. If the game doesn't feel \"Fair\" for everyone, the people on the unfair side won't play. You don't want to spend all that money hitting all 3 platforms, only to have nobody buy the Xbox version because they have a disadvantage. Unfortunately, the current \"best selling\" designs (FPS, RTS, Racing, etc) all have an obvious advantage on one control scheme. Coming up with a NEW design that fits well in all 3 platforms will fall in that \"risky\" category that the investors will be nervous about. Again, people giving away millions of dollars want to be SURE that they will get their money back. The want you to make Halo. Halo was popular. Halo Made money. Make something like that.\n\nTLDR: Catch 22. You have to be a big budget game to make a cross-platform multiplayer game, but if you have a big budget, you don't want to risk it on something that is unproven, guaranteed to be even more expensive, with only a marginal benefit.",
"You can play Dungeon Defenders with people on their iphone/android from PC. It all hooks into trendynet. \n\nXbox/PS people can't though.",
"They can, Portal 2 had cross platform co-op between PC and PS3. However if you talk competitive multi player the controls are very different, as is the hardware and PC players will have a massive edge. A mouse is simply far more accurate then a joystick. \n\nA game on Xbox did in fact do this but it just wasnt any good. ",
"The codebase must be kept consistent across platforms, otherwise the game becomes unfair. Microsoft and Sony control the patch release process for their respective platforms, while PC titles can be patched as and when by the developers. It's very difficult to keep all three platforms consistent when it can take weeks or months for a patch to roll out on one of the console platforms.",
"Because PC gamers would absolutely destroy console gamers in FPS.",
"Microsoft did a test on this some time ago. The technology is their it is just that they found that the PC gamers destroyed the console gamers. So they did not make their games cross platform.",
"The framework is there, recently portal 2 allows console players to solve puzzles alongside steam (PC) players. So we know cross platform is possible.\n\nAdditionally to address the argument that console players would get \"pwned\" due to the finite control that a mouse+keyboard offers is moot. Unreal Tournament for the PS3 allows keyboard and mouse support but unfortunately I know of no other PS3 game with this feature.\n\nPersonally I believe it simply is not worth Sony having their fan base become proficient with a Keyboard+Mouse. This could potentially make it easier for them to jump from PS3 to PC and thus reduce their customer base.",
"I believe this has been attempted once or twice (I can't remember the titles offhand), but PC gamers have an advantage over consoles in FPSs. \n",
"Simply, the console players would get crushed. The amount of finite control a mouse+keyboard offers over a controller is pretty apparent. \n\n\n\n",
"Simple.\n\nFor starters, a mouse will allow you to turn much faster and aim much more precisely than if you were to do the same with a controller.\n\nAs far as \"I can plug a keyboard into my Xbox\" goes, that doesn't necessarily mean everyone can or will do that. That, and a very, very small number of games supports the feature.",
"i agree with everyone when it comes to FPS but many other games have no excuse for not being cross platform. racing games and fighters come to mind.",
"Everyone that has posted in this discussion is correct. I'll just add this as a question to counter your question: If xbox/ps3 players can play as well as PC players, why do they have autoaim on public games?\n\nObviously, the answer is that they can't play as well. The control surfaces are simply too shitty and imprecise.\n\nAs a long-time PC FPS player, I could never make the leap to console FPS. It feels like someone cut off my fingers and told me to play using my stumps. I HAVE tried to play both ps3 and 360 (mw1/2/black ops), and while my K/D was decent, the game simply was not enjoyable.\n\nOnce you learn to play FPS on PC, you'll understand why.",
"Weird that no one has brought this up yet, but there was a retail product released that did this. It was called \"Shadowrun\". Don't remember it? I don't blame you. It was a an FPS developed by Microsoft that allowed PC and Xbox players to play on the same servers. From the IGN review: \n\n > Since this is a cross-platform game, the shooting is wildly imprecise when compared to games like Counter-Strike. If it were a matter of pinpoint reticule positioning, the PC gamers would undoubtedly dominate. As it's set up, the Xbox 360 gamers get an abundance of aim assists and sticky targeting and the weapons aren't particularly accurate... Weapon controls have been diluted to the point where PC and X360 gamers are on relatively the same footing, making the whole cross-platform competition more of a non-issue. \n\nbasically they gimped the game to try and make it a more level playing field. And it's such a mystery that the game didn't get received well. The review continues on to discuss network connectivity issues as well. It was a total failure. ",
"Thumbs are harder to use effectively than all ten of your fingers.",
"While there are balance issues between control methods and technical challenges with platform limitations, a major reason for lack of cross platform game is that platform owners don't want it to be.\n\nMicrosoft requires all multiplayer to go through XBox Live. With rare exceptions, they have not allowed PCs to connect to the same servers as their consoles.\n\nLike Microsoft Sony requires all multiplayer to go through PSN, though they have started to show some flexibility in allowing some third parties to do cross platform play. \n\ntl;dr: There are balancing and technical reasons, it is largely a business decision by platform owners.",
"In short, it is **EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE**, and hard to justify from a developer point of view. The end result of Cross Platform multiplayer is just more players in the same matchmaking pool, and the novelty of playing cross platform. However, the matchmaking pool is regular multiplayer is usually plenty large and diverse, making it hard to justify.\n\nFirst, it is hard to develop consistently across all three platforms (Xbox, PS3, PC). Each console has its own special abilities. For example, the difference between PS3 trophies and Xbox achievements may not seem like much, but extend that level of difference all the way down to how you draw a pixel onto the screen, and how you capture input from the controller. EVERYTHING is different. ELI5 Analogy: Imagine trying to build a robot to auto-pilot both an American fighter-jet, a Chinese passenger jet, and a Russian personal aircraft. Sure, they're all airplanes, but they have extremely different specifications, the buttons are labeled differently, and are in different locations in the cockpit, and the way that the internal components operate are vastly different.\n\nThis is why developing for all 3 platforms is kind of reserved for big companies with HUGE budgets. Making a game for all three platforms means you need to pay experts from all three consoles to get your game to work smoothly. This is where the second reason comes in. If you are spending obscene amounts of money to create a game, and your career as a game developer, or publisher DEPENDS on you making that money back, you want to make DAMN SURE that the game will sell. Taking risks is not something that you do with millions of dollars. \n\nCross-Platform multiplayer has not been proven to be commercially viable. The only real game to do it has been Shadowrun, which wasn't all that successful ([66 on Metacritic](_URL_0_)). When you are trying to convince the people holding the purse strings that your game will be successful, and your only example is a game that didn't sell very well, you'll have a hard time making the case to spend the time and money to do it right.\n\nWhen writing a multiplayer game, a very important part is writing the code that makes multiplayer possible (netcode) as fast and efficient as possible. The faster the code, the less lag there will be, and the more enjoyable the multiplayer experience. Writing good netcode for a single platform is hard enough. Imagine trying to write netcode that will quickly and efficiently translate from Xbox, PC and PS3 all at once. There really isn't any existing software that does this translation (Xbox and 360 are direct competitors after all, why would they need to communicate with each other quickly?), you have to write it yourself, which will be even more expensive.\n\nIn short, you have just tacked on a LOT of money to take a game from being just multiplayer, to multiplayer across all 3 platforms. It is now your responsibility to convince the businessman holding the purse strings that this feature will be worth the price tag.\n\nDesigning a game that is fun for all platforms is also just plain hard. You want to make sure that nobody feels hindered by the control scheme (hard enough with normal games), and that nobody has an unfair advantage over the other platform. Shadowrun was criticized for giving console players to autoaim, and yet PC still held an advantage. If the game doesn't feel \"Fair\" for everyone, the people on the unfair side won't play. You don't want to spend all that money hitting all 3 platforms, only to have nobody buy the Xbox version because they have a disadvantage. Unfortunately, the current \"best selling\" designs (FPS, RTS, Racing, etc) all have an obvious advantage on one control scheme. Coming up with a NEW design that fits well in all 3 platforms will fall in that \"risky\" category that the investors will be nervous about. Again, people giving away millions of dollars want to be SURE that they will get their money back. The want you to make Halo. Halo was popular. Halo Made money. Make something like that.\n\nTLDR: Catch 22. You have to be a big budget game to make a cross-platform multiplayer game, but if you have a big budget, you don't want to risk it on something that is unproven, guaranteed to be even more expensive, with only a marginal benefit.",
"You can play Dungeon Defenders with people on their iphone/android from PC. It all hooks into trendynet. \n\nXbox/PS people can't though.",
"They can, Portal 2 had cross platform co-op between PC and PS3. However if you talk competitive multi player the controls are very different, as is the hardware and PC players will have a massive edge. A mouse is simply far more accurate then a joystick. \n\nA game on Xbox did in fact do this but it just wasnt any good. ",
"The codebase must be kept consistent across platforms, otherwise the game becomes unfair. Microsoft and Sony control the patch release process for their respective platforms, while PC titles can be patched as and when by the developers. It's very difficult to keep all three platforms consistent when it can take weeks or months for a patch to roll out on one of the console platforms.",
"Because PC gamers would absolutely destroy console gamers in FPS.",
"Microsoft did a test on this some time ago. The technology is their it is just that they found that the PC gamers destroyed the console gamers. So they did not make their games cross platform.",
"The framework is there, recently portal 2 allows console players to solve puzzles alongside steam (PC) players. So we know cross platform is possible.\n\nAdditionally to address the argument that console players would get \"pwned\" due to the finite control that a mouse+keyboard offers is moot. Unreal Tournament for the PS3 allows keyboard and mouse support but unfortunately I know of no other PS3 game with this feature.\n\nPersonally I believe it simply is not worth Sony having their fan base become proficient with a Keyboard+Mouse. This could potentially make it easier for them to jump from PS3 to PC and thus reduce their customer base."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/shadowrun"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[
"http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/shadowrun"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
6f6fx7 | what causes sexual dimorphism in humans? | So, we know that men tend to be taller, have broader shoulders, deeper voices, more body hair, etc. than women.
From what I know about biology, when a zygote is forming it will have a random assortment of genes, half from the mother, and half from the father, in the form of 46 chromosomes. One of these will either be an X or Y from the father, if it's X it'll be a girl, if it's Y it'll be a boy.
Assuming this is correct, that should mean the Y chromosome is what creates the dimorphic traits between men and women.
What exactly do the genes on the Y chromosome do to cause this? And am I correct in assuming these genes exist only on the Y chromosome? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6f6fx7/eli5_what_causes_sexual_dimorphism_in_humans/ | {
"a_id": [
"difuaj8"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
" The Y chromosome contains the SRY (sex-determining region Y) gene. This gene's activation is what triggers a regulation of the embryo's genital formation; inhibiting certain anti-male genes while activating certain pro-male or possibly anti-female genes. Not too much, not too little, otherwise there are problems.\n\n All of this happens because like any other chromosome, Y gets 'read' and transcribed at about day 49 of the human's formation, which causes (when all goes well) the differentiation into male or female sex cords. There's a lot of back and forth going across the chromosomes however; in reality it's not as simple as \"have this or that and you'll be a man or a woman\", and there's a subtle balance required for either - you'll recall women have testosterone as well for example.\n\n A lot of malformations, errors and deficiencies in genital formations can be caused by as little as a single gene somewhere not expressing, leading to anything from reproductive problems to nonfunctional half-assed hackjobs midway through either sex (or lacking outright)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
21u0od | how can a pixel make so many colors? | Also, do some colors require more energy than others?
In a pc I mean. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/21u0od/eli5_how_can_a_pixel_make_so_many_colors/ | {
"a_id": [
"cgghbkp",
"cggiaum",
"cgglo5a"
],
"score": [
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Most modern monitors have a white backlight, and pixels composed of three smaller *subpixels* for red, blue, and green, which are tinted LCD rectangles that, when combined side-by-side-by-side, form a square.\n\nEach LCD subpixel can change its opacity from completely clear (which makes it the same color as the tint, so pure red, blue, or green), to completely opaque (which makes it black), and every shade in between.\n\nThe subpixels are so close together that you see them all combined as a single color, and a combination of red, blue, and green light can create practically every color our eyes are able to see.",
"Remember that a color is a human construct. A color is simply how the cones in your eyes react to a certain radiation. A pixel is simply a combination of three lights: red, green, and blue-violet placed very closely together. Because your eyes have three cones that perceive frequencies spaced in about that arrangement, a pixel can create just about every color that your eye can perceive. ",
"Color on your screen is illusioned by a set of 3 pixels. There are red, green, and blue. A different intensity of each sub color creates a different color. 000000000000000000000000, that's 24 zeros. That's black. Let's make it shorter by representing each 4 blocks of 0s as hex, 0-F. FFFFFF, or FF FF FF for readability. The first set of FFs has an intensity 00, 01, 02, ..., DF EF, FF and so do the second and third sets of FFs. Each RGB component has 255 different intensities to choose from. 255^3 = 16,581,375 different colors can be made with this system."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
3dgcdp | why can obama veto congress if they vote down the iran deal? | I thought that the veto allowed the president to reject a bill passed by congress. How can it allow him to pass a deal congress rejected? It seems backwards. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3dgcdp/eli5why_can_obama_veto_congress_if_they_vote_down/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct4v8dv"
],
"score": [
3
],
"text": [
"Congress has to pass a law to vote take down the Iran deal once it is done.\n\nThe president has the power to veto laws congress tries to put through if he needs/wants to.\n\nCongress can continue, but it needs a higher two thirds majority, which will probably mean his Republican enemies cannot shoot down the Iran deal."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
204ydy | why do we get headaches? moreover, why do we get then when we're hungry? | ELI5 | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/204ydy/eli5_why_do_we_get_headaches_moreover_why_do_we/ | {
"a_id": [
"cfztu0x",
"cfzzkin",
"cg00i53"
],
"score": [
3,
3,
2
],
"text": [
"I can't say I've ever noticed that I get headaches when I'm hungry.\n\nBut a headache occurs when we are dehydrated- the brain, which is made of between 60-70% water, shrinks as water is lost through urinating, sweating etc. This pulls on the membrane that holds the brain in the skull, causing the headache.",
"I notice this too. Especially after sleeping too long. I think its more dehydration than anything",
"I often get headaches when I don't drink enough water. Drink a pint of water and you'll be sorted"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
1nya8x | the rainbow planes on google maps/earth | How and why do planes show up like this from satellites?
[Rainbow Planes](_URL_0_) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1nya8x/eli5_the_rainbow_planes_on_google_mapsearth/ | {
"a_id": [
"ccn6b1e"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"I think it is because the satellite image is actually composed of 4 different pictures, a B/W image, and one red, green, and blue images, the plain is traveling in a pattern that is counter that of the satellite taking the images at such a speed that the individual images get broken up."
]
} | [] | [
"http://imgur.com/a/c5VkN"
] | [
[]
] |
|
3cyewh | how can batman possibly stand off with superman as an equal? | This is coming from someone who is basing his Superman and Batman knowledge on the movies. Either the last Superman was poorly done or Batman should die in about 0.084s when facing Superman. | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3cyewh/eli5_how_can_batman_possibly_stand_off_with/ | {
"a_id": [
"ct03lhb",
"ct04msj",
"ct04xow"
],
"score": [
5,
4,
3
],
"text": [
"This is why I never liked Superman. There are three basic plans to defeat superman:\n\n1) Be an evil Superman\n\n2) ridiculously suboptimal choices by Superman\n\n3) Kryptonite\n\nIt's really difficult to fashion multiple compelling stories out of those options. My guess would be that the Batman script calls for a little of 2 and 3.",
"Batman has plans to beat literally everyone and deal with literally everything. Superman is probably one of the more dangerous things in his universe. Therefore he has many many plans for dealing with superman in case something happens.\n\nBatman is the best strategist/greatest detective in that world. If you're asking, could batman take superman in a fist fight, obviously no. That is why batman would never straight up fist fight superman without a large plan depending on it, and the point of the fight would probably be to lose it.",
"The movie is inspired by \"The Dark Knight Returns\" comic and animated movie. Batman has a heavily armored suit, giving him superhero levels of strength (not Superman levels though of course) as well as increased defense. Kryptonite is then used to greatly weaken him. Superman doesn't like to kill, so that's another factor (though, neither does Batman)."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
d5f85l | if when you fall asleep you’re muscles are totally limp & relaxed, then why does falling asleep in an otherwise awkward position cause muscle cramps/kinks upon waking up? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/d5f85l/eli5_if_when_you_fall_asleep_youre_muscles_are/ | {
"a_id": [
"f0lmej5",
"f0lrxxi",
"f0ls3cq",
"f0m4gb3",
"f0m4gxu",
"f0m5gme",
"f0m7ijh",
"f0mb39s"
],
"score": [
11,
887,
86,
18,
6,
4,
9,
5
],
"text": [
"They may be relaxed but that doesnt mean they cant be stretched or bunched up in an unnatural state",
"When you fall asleep, your muscles are NOT totally limp and relaxed - specifically your breathing muscles. If you're a side sleeper for example, your neck, arms, and legs can also sometimes tense up in order to help keep you in a certain position so you don't stop breathing. \n\nSpine alignment is also important. If you sleep with a hunched back, or a crooked neck, you can cause muscle bunching/stretching, as said in another comment.",
"Muscle tension is what protects our muscles from being over extended / tweaked. \n\n\nWhen we fall to sleep in an awkward position, our natural tension in our muscles drops off, which would allow an already awkward position to lurch just a little bit more and cause stress to those muscles, meaning we wake up with cramps / pulled muscles. \n\n\nELI5: Muscles need sleep too, sleepy muscles do sleepy things, like bend themselves too far.",
"That’s because when you sleep in an awkward position, some of the muscles go under a certain amount of stress. \n\nExample: you fell asleep at your desk, your neck is completely flexed(looking down) so the muscles in the back of your neck(upper trapezius lev scap etc) are stretched for the period of time that you’re asleep and stay that way, while in the front of your neck(SCM) are in a way contracted because they’re shorten. So to recap this position, front of neck = tighter, back of neck = really stretched out. \n\nLook up wry neck, pretty nasty stuff.",
"I don't find they do relax, really. If I doze off holding something in my hands, chances are I'll still be holding it when I wake up.",
"Think of a partially deflated basketball that was left outside in the cold. If you take it inside and air it up, it will still take some effort to work out the sunk in part of the ball.",
"When my back starts to hurt or I get tired of standing too long or sitting down, I find it to helpful lay \n on my back on the flat ground",
"Your muscle is in a little sheath called a fascia. Within your fascia is your nerves and blood vessels. Basically blood flow provides useful materials to your muscles e.g oxygen (even when your not actively using them) and takes away harmful materials (co2 and lactic acid). \n\nWhen you lie in an awkward position, your put pressure on your fascia. Because blood vessels and nerves are smaller than your actual muscle, they can get compressed. Basically after sleeping for a long time in a weird position, your blood vessels and nerves go abit wonky.\n\nIt will take some time for you blood vessels and nerves to “decompress” after you stop putting pressure on them. This leads to cramps and odd sensations in the mean time."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
58j3w3 | how do people naturally cry without being taught to when they are sad? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/58j3w3/eli5how_do_people_naturally_cry_without_being/ | {
"a_id": [
"d90sze9",
"d90uh12"
],
"score": [
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Crying stimulates the production of endorphins, our body’s natural pain killer and “feel-good” hormones.” So it's our natural biological response to cry. Crying is also universal and people are attuned to it; when you cry, people want to help. Therefore you learn to cry in order to garner aid (or you learn that crying doesn't always ensure someone will help you.)\n\nSo it's both a natural response, and learned.",
"It's an instinct.\n\nWhile certain behaviors are learned, other behaviors occur because we've evolved to have those behaviors.\n\nInstead of the information required to perform these behaviors coming from observing and learning, the information is passed in DNA.\n\nCoded in that DNA is a blueprint to make the human body in such a way that certain states and stimuli automatically cause certain responses. \nMany animals exhibit behavior without learning it, because this too is instinct. \n\nWood Lice, for instance, are incapable of learning due to their tiny simple brain, but they still \"know\" to hide in the dark, because their DNA naturally builds them into wood lice that are attracted to dark damp areas.\n\nIn the case of crying, most people don't, and even can't will themselves to cry, they just do it without thinking. It is a subconscious behavior, and much of the subconscious is governed by instinctual behavior that is common to all humans regardless of upbringing.\n\nInstinctual behavior aren't learned then saved into DNA, they are a result of random changes (mutations) being made in our DNA blueprint, and selective forces pushing out all the changes that lead to negative impacts on our survival, and increased prevalence of changes that are beneficial, so when a random change makes an animal behave in a way that helps it to survive, it survives better and breeds better than it's non-mutant peers, and so the change perpetuates.\nOver time, changes add up, leading to overall quite complex instinctual behavior."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
97leer | what are the major challenges in creating synthetic or lab grown cartilage to help treat arthritis and back problems? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/97leer/eli5_what_are_the_major_challenges_in_creating/ | {
"a_id": [
"e493nso"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The first major challenge is making the cartilage itself. You could grow human cartilage in a lab, but the cost would be astronomical. The far easier route would be a synthetic alternative, which probably wouldn't be exceptionally difficult as far as these things go, though I imagine animal cartilage would be even easier.\n\nThe bigger challenge and the fundamental flaw in this approach is actually getting the cartilage where it needs to be. It would require extremely invasive surgery to separate the bones somehow attach new cartilage in each joint where arthritis is present. I don't know if that would be even possible, but undoubtedly the solution, in this case, would be much worse than the problem "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
1g7126 | how does the bank securitize the subprime debts that leads to financial crisis 2008? | I get part of the gist of this process but I am still very blur on how this happens. I've heard terms of "monetizing the debt" but how does that actually work? Will people buy securities in forms of poor people's mortgage? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1g7126/eli5_how_does_the_bank_securitize_the_subprime/ | {
"a_id": [
"cahejkv"
],
"score": [
2
],
"text": [
"The banks sliced up the risky mortgages and mixed them in with a bunch of slices from other mortgages and then sold slices of that hash."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
|
3sew3j | why is the british pound known as sterling? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3sew3j/eli5_why_is_the_british_pound_known_as_sterling/ | {
"a_id": [
"cwwkece",
"cwwkhrg"
],
"score": [
3,
2
],
"text": [
"The currency of the United Kingdom is called the [Pound Sterling](_URL_0_) though that is often shortened to just \"the pound\".\n\nThe story about how it got that name is in the wiki, but the short version is that it is derived from an old Saxon coin where 240 were made from a pound of silver, so large transactions would be done in \"pounds of sterling (silver)\".",
"Ok so my first comment was deleted by auto-mod. \n\nTo expand on the common term for \"sterling silver.\" Coins were minted in sterling silver. 240 coins were actually minted from a pound of sterling silver. The term was most likely shortened over time to \"a pound of sterlings.\" The exact etymology is not agreed upon, but this is a simple explanation.\n\n_URL_0_"
]
} | [] | [] | [
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sterling"
],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sterling"
]
] |
||
7xd75m | we produce enough food to feed everyone. why do ~25,000 people die of hunger each day? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7xd75m/eli5_we_produce_enough_food_to_feed_everyone_why/ | {
"a_id": [
"du7ct6k",
"du7cvmk",
"du7dkvk",
"du7drzd",
"du7dssh",
"du7e1ei",
"du7gicp",
"du7jhpb",
"du7msup",
"du7owlx",
"du8okmk"
],
"score": [
11,
34,
76,
17,
2,
2,
2,
5,
9,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"It'd be hard not to get political on this but I'll give it a go. \n\nThe thing with having people die from hunger\n- I'm not sure where you got that number, it doesn't sound valid- is that the majority of them have no physical or financial access to food meaning they either can't reach food sources or are too poor to obtain what they provide or even a combination of these two factors; for example a middle class fella can afford to import avocados but a poor one can't afford to import grains.\n\n Your question brings to question the way the economy and society are structured and functioning and this is where the answer gets political and I'm not sure if I want to go into those waters in this thread.",
"It's a bit misleading. They're not starving to death in a majority of the cases. They're contracting a disease that most people would shrug off, but because of the malnutrition there are complications which lead to death. The UN's World Food Program has criticized those numbers for exactly that reasoning.\n\n > \"But the truth is that the vast majority of those numbers that we're talking about, are children who, because they haven't had the right nutrition in the very earliest parts of their lives, are really very susceptible to infectious diseases, like measles.\n\n > \"A child that's had good nutrition would just shrug it off, but for a child that's really fragile and has a compromised immune system it becomes really life threatening.\"",
"Hunger problems are mostly problems with food *distribution.* Specifically, most starving people live in countries with poor transportation systems, or countries suffering from civil war or other internal problems that disrupt food distribution.",
"Because food is very perishable and difficult to transport to the remote locations where these people are dying. There is probably a lot of corruption involved too. And sometimes famines are [man made](_URL_0_)",
"Food isn't distributed equally. In the regions that see the most starvation, it's often due to politics. Those that control the infrastructure to distribute and transport supplies might disproportionately deliver to areas that support them, leaving others to starve. And without the support of government, foreign options are very limited.",
"The reason malnutrition exist is one financial and the other is access/logistical.\n\nSome people can't afford the food or having food shipped to them. Sure rice can sit for a long time but if I can't afford to have it shipped to me than it does no good.\n\nAccess/logistical a) food expires (I don't know if it's true or not but Americans waste 30%? Of their food) \n\nb) if I'm in the desert/wilderness/super rural village I don't have the same access to food as if I was in a major city.\n\nI think those are the major issues. The best thing to do would be to build up infrastructure in third world countries. They need investment, infrastructure and a way to prevent corruption.",
"Producing food doesn't mean it gets to people who need it.\n\nWe have lots of people who eat far more than they need, and we have other people who live in places where food is hard to get. We have grocery stores throwing away a lot of food rather than donating it to the food banks.\n\nAlso I must note some people are NOT dying of \"hunger\" they are dying of \"malnutrition\". They are eating.. but not getting enough nutrients.\n\nMalnutrition is an interesting thing - even if a person can grow food, if they keep growing the same food over and over eventually that food is less nutritious because the soil has been sucked dry of whatever it was the plant needed. Unless the soil is fertilized the plants that grow have lost nutritional value. Some people speculate that this was happening in Central America when Cortez arrived - the population had grown quickly but they were growing crops on the same land and didn't know about fertilizer so people were eating but they were eating crappy food.\n\nI note that in general food today is less healthy than even 20 years ago. We can grow huge strawberries but they are less tasty and have less nutritional value. Farmers are forced to cheat to produce more food, for more people, on less land and in less time - this is the result.",
"I. Production\n\nWe've got this covered, as you noted.\n\nII. Distribution.\n\nFood is produced and distributed to markets where the cost of production and distribution can be reimbursed.\n\nIII. Population.\n\nPopulation in poor and developing countries is tied to the availability of food. Population grows when food is abundant, and drops when food is not.\n\nThis can happen seasonally, due to drought, disease, and a number of other factors.\n\nIV. Infrastructure, education.\n\nDistribution is tied to infrastructure, in that better infrastructure provides a stable mechanism to ship and deliver food. As well as protection from theft, and provides for instance sanitation preventing food from rotting or becoming tainted.\n\nEducation is tied to both population (more educated populations grow at a slower rate) and distribution (more educated populations have capital to cover the cost of distribution and production).\n\nSo we can produce enough food, and using well organized first world Governments, we can temporarily deliver and distribute these foods at a cost that we pay for in our own countries.\n\nOften this food is stolen, becomes tainted, isn't distributed to people in need, and eventually leads to population growth, which in turn leads to more hunger and starvation down the line.\n\nThe real way to solve hunger permanently is to work on all of these issues equally.",
"Issues of starvation are a problem of distribution (food cannot get to where it needs to go) or due to economic issues (food is there, but people cannot afford it). Most of the time it is due to distribution. ",
"A bunch of places in the world are terrible for political reasons. Places like North Korea and Venezuela have food shortages because the governments there are socialist/communist and they don't respect people's rights. In other places, there are very weak or non-existent governments that can't protect people's rights. Those places are torn by war, either between countries or gangs/tribes of people. In both cases, you have countries where the governments are not doing what governments should do (protect people's rights). People don't starve to death in free or mostly free countries.",
"As everyone else is saying, distribution. \n\nWe do produce a lot, but think of how much we throw away. A single restaurant can fill up several 55 gallon garbage bags per day with food waste alone. People leave food on their plate to be thrown out, a worker drops food, something doesn't sell well enough and entire cases can he thrown out. \n\nEven if we didn't waste it, that wouldn't help to get the food to the people that need it, but the point is, we only produce that much because we waste it. If we didn't, we'd produce less because it would still be hard to ship, especially things that perish quickly. Even with preservatives and our currently available GMO's, it's a logistical nightmare. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[],
[
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor?wprov=sfla1"
],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[],
[]
] |
||
3pbpkm | what's so difficult about creating cross-console game servers? | I play on Xbox, and I've always wanted to play games with my friends who play on other consoles, (PC, PlayStation), but I can't do that because there are no games that I know of that have cross-console online servers. What are the main difficulties in making games that can have online servers that support more than one console? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3pbpkm/eli5_whats_so_difficult_about_creating/ | {
"a_id": [
"cw4xvrx",
"cw4y0xp",
"cw509ji"
],
"score": [
7,
2,
2
],
"text": [
"Well, both the Xbox and PlayStation have matchmaking built into them, which only works with other Xboxes and PlayStations. For a developer, it's much easier to just use that, than develop a separate server and then host those servers, because that takes a huge amount of computing power, and especially for something like call of duty, it's very difficult. \n\n > So what about PC? They have dedicated servers? \n\nYes, but those servers are very often hosted by a third party, whose job it is to host them, for their own profit. And even if the developer hosts them, there's a lot less power needed to host only PC servers than hosting PC, Xbox and PlayStation servers, because there's less people playing. \n\nAnd then you have the differences in controllers, where the PC might have an advantage over consoles or vice-versa, due to the game mechanics and controllers",
"It depends how you want to set up the online component.\n\nXbox Live, PlayStation Network and Steam all offer a bunch of features that developers can use with their games, such as account management, messaging and store. Using these features makes things much easier for developers and usually better for the players (only needing one account for example), however the systems can't communicate with each other (not all features are implemented in all of the systems, or even then in the same way).\n\nIf a developer wants a cross-platform game they need to write those features into their game essentially from scratch. Depending on the game this could be a lot of extra work.\n\nBeyond this, for games that aren't cross-platform it isn't uncommon for some patches or features to only apply to certain editions for whatever reason. To operate effectively as a cross-platform game the different versions need to be kept compatible, which can complicate things such as patches or DLC.",
"There's nothing difficult about it the console makers purposely prevent game makers from making games that work with the other system because they are competing platforms. They want you(and your friends) to buy their system and not the competition's and this is one of the major ways to make that happen. If you and your friends want to play together you'll have to buy the same console. \n\nThere are and have been special cases for cross platform play between console and pc and even console to console it's just rare."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[],
[]
] |
|
4gtwsl | why is there a mass fascination with charles manson? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4gtwsl/eli5_why_is_there_a_mass_fascination_with_charles/ | {
"a_id": [
"d2kn2ep",
"d2kn39q"
],
"score": [
13,
5
],
"text": [
"He had charisma. \n\nHe could influence people who otherwise would've had decent middle class lives into doing things for him. From what I remember learning about him he had a very rough upbringing and came from nothing but learned how to manipulate people early on. Having control over people when not in a formal established setting like the military intrigues a lot of people. ",
"He is a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a soft taco shell.\n\nMy wife is into true crime stuff, which means I must occasionally endure it. The short answer is people want to know what makes him tick. What specific set of screws and in what order were they loosened to make him this way? Does he believe himself? Furthermore, he implanted himself into pop culture by being affiliated (if only tangentially) with the Beach Boys, Beatles and Sharon Tate. He was the first rock star killer, who happened to have not directly killed anyone. \n\nModern news was just getting its first taste of sensationalist reporting at this time as well. It was well before CNN but feature and investigative reporting were already established. Now Manson comes along and he confirms the deepest fear of middle America."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
7q32nf | why aren't humans born nocturnal? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/7q32nf/eli5_why_arent_humans_born_nocturnal/ | {
"a_id": [
"dsm19ew"
],
"score": [
4
],
"text": [
"Why would we be? Humans don’t have senses particularly well-suited to functioning in the dark. We also have adaptations (like sweating and a lack of hair) that make us perform well during the day. All signs point to us working best as diurnal animals. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
||
2jaz4d | what is a parsec used for/why is it used? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2jaz4d/eli5_what_is_a_parsec_used_forwhy_is_it_used/ | {
"a_id": [
"cla055m",
"cla06ic"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"A parsec is simply a unit of distance, equal to approximately 3.3 light years, or 30 trillion kilometres.\n\nYou'd use it when measuring things at astronomical distances, such as the size of galaxies.",
"Okay, first we need to understand angles/trigonometry:\n\nAn arc-second is 1/360 of 1 degree (60 \"minutes\"/arc-minutes per degree, 60 \"seconds\"/arc-seconds per arc-minute). It's a very small angle.\n\nOne \"astronomical unit\" of distance is the average distance between the earth and sun.\n\nAnd parsec is a distance to a point where the angle between that point and the earth and sun (1 astro. unit) appears to be 1 arc-second.\n\nBut, if you really want it ELY5: A parsec is about 3.2 light years in length. It's used to make spacial distances easier to comprehend."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
3gttag | what is so difficult about growing food in space? | It's been a big deal recently that astronauts aboard the ISS are eating vegetables grown in space for the first time. Are there reasons why this couldn't have been done in the past? The ISS already has air, water and light, which is all plants need to grow, right? | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3gttag/eli5_what_is_so_difficult_about_growing_food_in/ | {
"a_id": [
"cu1e152",
"cu1e9bi",
"cu1ei3n"
],
"score": [
2,
3,
6
],
"text": [
"You are missing one thing that plants need: Space. \nSpace is very tight on the ISS, so modules for growing stuff was lower down on the priority list.",
" > air, water and light, which is all plants need to grow, right?\n\nNope. Life is unsurprisingly extremely fragile existance. IIRC a few experiments on creating closed ecosystem on Earth failed because scientists couldn't predict what's required to keep plants alive.\n\nYou can read more about it [here](_URL_0_)",
"People often underestimate how valuable gravity is. \nThe state of microgravity in the ISS makes growing stuff difficult. \nOn earth, plant shoots grow up, plant roots grow down, you pour water down on the earth to get it to the roots. \nOn the ISS, up and down don't have any real meaning. the plant can't really grow it shoots up, since there is no up, so the shoot might grow into the ground. There is no down for the roots to orient, so they grow in a tangled mess. You can't just turn on a garden hose because the water would just do [this](_URL_0_), which is cool but not very good for gardening. Also the soil is just going to float around the cabin and get smeared onto everything. \n \nSolving each of these problems was why it's kinda a big deal. \nBasically they had to manually align the seed so it grew in the right directions, and contained all the soil and fertilizer in a tightly packed bag, with a wick to introduce water."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2"
],
[
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s63JXdsL5LU&t=6s"
]
] |
|
4j0lja | why do we say "going to work" or "going to school" but not "going to home"? | explainlikeimfive | https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/4j0lja/eli5_why_do_we_say_going_to_work_or_going_to/ | {
"a_id": [
"d32mp2g",
"d32mpww"
],
"score": [
2,
6
],
"text": [
"One could argue that work and school started in this context as verbs. \"I'm going to work [at the office]\" was shortened to going to work. However, home is clearly not a verb, so going to home does not work. ",
"We say going to work because work is a Place. We do going to school because, like work, school is a Place, we can also go to the grocery store or to Bobby's house or even to Lisa's church. But we don't go to home because home is not a Place. Home is an idea. It's an idea that lives in a place but it could be a city or a neighbourhood or a street or a space or in the arms of somebody you care about. Or a puppy!\n\nI learned that one day when I was walking down St. Catherine's street in Montreal with a girl I loved and I didn't know about my future with my job or with her or even if I wanted to stay in the city. I had moved there years before and I was still saying I was new in town to people. And I said that to her and she said \"no you're not, you're home\" and she kissed me, which she wasn't big on doing in public. Me either. It was a nice moment and I stopped saying I was new in town. We broke up. I moved away. We don't speak. Like actively. I have long since run out of shit to say to her. But I'll be damned if that city isn't home. "
]
} | [] | [] | [
[],
[]
] |
||
2pjkng | where do installers get the files from? | Alright so I know that lots of people ask why you need the installer and I know why (get the latest version, download things you don't need if you are cheeky, etc.) but I have a different question. If the installer is 1mb, there is no way it contains all of the 13gb of data that program has. So where does it come from? My only idea is that it goes to that website and finds the data, then installs it but it seems like that would be impractical since if its on the website, why not just let you download it yourself? So I ask you this: Where do the files come from?
TL;DR: How do installers get their files to install (Like downloading Google Chrome needs the installer, but how does that get all the files it needs to download chrome?) | explainlikeimfive | http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2pjkng/eli5_where_do_installers_get_the_files_from/ | {
"a_id": [
"cmxa8s8"
],
"score": [
8
],
"text": [
"You've got your answer -- they grab the data from the website! Your next question is going to be: why on god's green earth would they do that?\n\nAnswer #1: to help stop people from cancelling out of the install. After the download (and the crappy anti-virus check most AV systems do these day) you have to answer a bunch of questions (including the \"files on the internet are scary! are you sure you want to proceed?\"). As far as we can tell, the longer the delay between starting a download and answering those questions, the more people will cancel out of the install. \n\nAnswer #2: to make it simpler to make update. Making an exe is painful (especially the 'getting it signed' part). By making a single installer once that just pulls down files, there's one less step to perform.\n\nSource: I used to write installers."
]
} | [] | [] | [
[]
] |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.