title
stringlengths 3
300
| subreddit
stringclasses 1
value | post_id
stringlengths 5
7
| score
int64 0
47.9k
| link_flair_text
stringlengths 0
63
| is_self
bool 1
class | over_18
bool 2
classes | upvote_ratio
float64 0
1
| post_content
stringlengths 0
29.7k
| C1
dict | C2
dict | C3
dict | C4
dict | C5
dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ELI5: how and why does a toaster in a bathtub kill a person?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ucnpu8
| 0
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.23
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i6bmc6m",
"comment_text": [
"A toaster has exposed wiring on the inside where it heats/toasts the bread. That exposed wiring can transfer current to the water and to you. Since the toaster is built to toast bread, it’s meant to draw a decent amount of current, so there are fewer/no safeguards in place to protect you."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i6bmjm3",
"comment_text": [
"The way a toaster works is by running a current through a piece of metal which is bad at conducting electricity (called a resistor). The excess electrical energy is convered to heat and the wires glow. This is why a toaster gets hot. You can see the glowing wires in the toaster while it is making your bread go all delicious.",
"So, putting a toaster, (which is on and connected to the mains), is effectively connecting the bathtub-enjoyer directly in to mains electricity. You may as well put them in the electric chair."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i6bmtdc",
"comment_text": [
"Note that depending on where you live and how old the building is, outlets in bathrooms should have GFCI protection, meaning if they detect a current leak, they'll stop functioning until reset. It should protect against this kind of electrocution."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i6bmqj4",
"comment_text": [
"The toaster doesn't, and if you threw an unplugged in toaster you would just make people cranky. ",
"It is the electricity that kills people. To simplify, remove the \"toaster\" from the situation an think of just the power cord with bare wires. If you threw that cord in the bath, the water would connect the circuit."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i6bmehk",
"comment_text": [
"Generally the heating elements are un-insulated wires. The electricity flows out of the heating element into the water, then often through the plumbing to ground. It also flows through the person in the bath tub, electrocuting them."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Resistors, Transistors, Capacitors (And Ohms)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
yfxqs
| 2
|
Answered
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5v6m9r",
"comment_text": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_analogy"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5v92hh",
"comment_text": [
"We're shooting for elementary-school age answers. But -- please, no arguments about what an \"actual five year old\" would know or ask! We're all about simple answers to complicated questions. Use your best judgment and stay within the spirit of the subreddit. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5v92hh",
"comment_text": [
"We're shooting for elementary-school age answers. But -- please, no arguments about what an \"actual five year old\" would know or ask! We're all about simple answers to complicated questions. Use your best judgment and stay within the spirit of the subreddit. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5vf0ov",
"comment_text": [
"you..you just solved the whole subreddits problem...",
"WIKI ALL THE POST!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5v6ny7",
"comment_text": [
"Electric current (I amps) flows through a part of a circuit (with resistance R ohms) driven by the potential difference (V volts) according to V = I R . ",
"Capacitors allow current through them only until they \"fill up\". This makes them mostly allow alternating current and pulses that follow immediately after changing a switch while not passing direct current. They have a unit of farads. ",
"Transistors use one terminal as an input to decide what to do with the current between the other terminals. This is useful for lots of things. ",
"Source: Physics degree ",
"http://www.forrestmims.com/"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Moles and their function in biology.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10ubgz
| 7
|
Answered
| true
| false
| 0.77
|
Hey guys. I'm a senior in high school, Bio 2. Not a difficult class when compared to college courses, but only chemistry and physics are harder than it during high school, aside from advanced math classes. I can't grasp the concept of moles. I just don't fucking get them. I read and read about them out of the book, but I just can't grasp them. Nor do I understand their purpose. Why the hell can't we just come up with a dilution percentage for glucose in distilled water? Percentages are easy. No, let's come up with a completely fucking different system of measurement just for this, make it complicated as fuck (or so it seems), and then pretend it's easy. I just don't get it guys. Can someone help? I know it's 180 g for one mole of glucose, and to get a mole is 6 X 10 the the 23rd of the... something. That's all I know. Help!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6gpom1",
"comment_text": [
"First, as a bit of advice, you shouldn't insult what you don't understand. The concept of a mole is one of the most important in all of chemistry. It wasn't randomly thought up solely to annoy high school students. It connects the macroscopic world (what scientists can measure, like mass) with the microscopic world (what scientists can't easily measure, like the number of individual atoms in a cup of sugar)",
"The short story is this... It's just a quantity like 10, 12, or 60. It's just really big, and it's a very special quantity, so it has its own name. Just like a dozen of anything is equal to 12 of that thing, a mole of anything is equal to 6.022 * 10",
" of that thing. If you had a dozen cookies, you'd have 12 cookies. If you had a mole of cookies, you'd have 6.022 * 10",
" cookies.",
"Now.. why is it interesting? In reality, a mole is defined as \"the number of carbon atoms in exactly 12 grams of carbon-12.\" This may seem weird, but it's easy once you understand it. You walk around one day, and you find a giant pile of carbon (it's just a black powder). You take a tiny amount, and you find it's mass. You keep adding more and more to your little collection, and the mass of the sample that you took keeps going up and up. Imagine that you take JUST ENOUGH carbon powder so that your little collection has a weight of EXACTLY 12 grams. Now... the question is... how many carbon atoms are in that sample?",
"Well... some brilliant souls have been thinking about this problem for a while, and current experiments say that there will be 6.022 * 10",
" (or 602200000000000000000000, it's the same number) carbon atoms in that sample."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6gptvd",
"comment_text": [
"This is significant for many reasons. One of which is this...",
"You run a business making a certain chemical. To make this chemical, you have to properly mix chemical A and chemical B in a 1:1 ratio. This means that for every molecule of A, and you need a single molecule of B. Well... we can't easily find the number of molecules of A and B just by looking at it.",
"As you've hinted at, the concept of a mole allows you to figure out how many molecules are in your sample just by finding its mass (which is really easy).",
"For example, you've stated that a mole of sugar masses out to 180 grams. This means that a can of coke (which has, say, 40 grams of sugar) has:\n(40 / 180) * 6.022 * 10",
" = 1.34 * 10",
" molecules of sugar in it. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6gq0bv",
"comment_text": [
"No worries! I just <3 chemistry too much =)",
"You're missing another important definition, that of \"molarity.\" Molarity is a measure of concentration of one thing, the solute, in another thing, the solvent. When you put a teaspoon of salt in water, the salt is the solute and the water is the solvent. The higher the molarity, the higher the concentration. For example, 18 molar sulfuric acid is so strong and concentrated that it will burn through paper. A less concentrated solution of sulfuric acid, say 0.001 molar, is pretty much harmless.",
"The definition of molarity is defined as this: the number of moles of solute divided by liters of solution.",
"So... for example... If I took 2 moles of salt and put it in 1 L of water, the molarity would be = 2 moles / 1 L = 2 M. A one molar solution is written as \"1 M\", by the way.",
"If you put 2 moles of salt in 500 mL of water, the molarity would be:\n2 moles / 0.5 L = 4 M. ",
"First, you have to figure out how many moles you're dealing with. 180 grams of sugar would have one mole:\n180 grams sugar * (1 mole / 180 grams) = 1 mole",
"360 grams of sugar would have 2 moles:\n360 grams of sugar * (1 mole / 180 grams) = 2 moles",
"In each case, you multiply the mass by a \"conversion factor,\" in this case, 1 mole sugar / 180 grams.",
"Feel free to ask more questions if I'm not being clear about something. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6gqe07",
"comment_text": [
"Not a problem!",
"Not everything has the same molecular weight. As I've said, 180 grams f glucose is one mole, but 180 grams of helium is about 45 moles! Pure carbon has a molecular weight of 12.011 grams / mol. Gold, on the other hand, has a molecular weight of 197 grams / mol. You can look up the molecular weights of pure elements on any periodic table:\n",
"http://www.ptable.com/Images/periodic%20table.png",
"Find carbon and gold and see how I came up with those numbers =P",
"Now... There is an easy formula for finding the molecular weights of compounds if you know their molecular formula. For example, the molecular formula of glucose is C6 H12 O6. Notice how\n6 * 12.011 g/mol + 12 * 1.0079 g/mol + 6 * 15.9994 g/mol equals about 180 grams / mol :) Hint: the 6, 12, and 6 comes from the molecular formula. Those odd numbers come from the periodic table. Figure where they're coming from, and you'll know how to calculate the molecular weight of anything!",
"To convert moles to a mass, you simply multiply by the molecular weight. This whole technique is called \"dimensional analysis,\" and you should understand it fully for your class! As an example, 2 moles of sugar weigh 360 grams:",
"2 moles * (180 grams / mole) = 360 grams.",
"You can do the same to figure out how much 0.001 moles of sugar weigh, etc."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6gq3u1",
"comment_text": [
"Oh.. and to add. The molecular weight of glucose is always 180 grams/mol. This has nothing to do with molarity or anything. It follows from the definition of sugar itself. ",
"Whether or not you're dealing with a thick syrup of glucose or a glass of water that has a single molecule of glucose in it, glucose will still have a molecular mass of 180 grams/mol. You're confusing two ideas. One is the concept of molecular weight, and the other is the concept of concentration."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5: What is up with this whole freshman, senior, etc stuff?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
jn9ty
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
The whole thing just seems unnecessarily complicated. For context, I am Canadian.
I'd like to know when it started, why it started, what the names mean, etc.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2di9g5",
"comment_text": [
"The four years of a four year school are: Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, and Senior. This is used in High Schools for 9th-12th grade, and four year programs at colleges and universities. For clarity, we usually append College or High School (e.g., a College Freshman is older then a High School Senior.)",
"No luck on finding an origin for you, though. Maybe somebody else will have a story."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dignh",
"comment_text": [
"As I understand it, Universities use it for the first four years. They also call those students \"undergrads\", as opposed to \"grad students\" who have already earned a four-year degree and are going for more."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dkcw8",
"comment_text": [
"In America, universities and colleges are ",
" the same thing. Universities are like \"collections\" of colleges.",
"So within Arizona State University you have the College of Arts and Sciences, you also have the School of Business, etc etc.",
"http://www.asu.edu/colleges/",
"But in the US, college and university are basically synonymous for most people."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dkdmk",
"comment_text": [
"A college is just an undergraduate school. It can be part of a university or it can be independent. This naming system of years is only for 4-year, undergraduate degree programs (Bachelor's), which are by definition offered by colleges."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dia9e",
"comment_text": [
"Ohhhh!",
"I was always confused because I wasn't sure if it was high school or college. Turns out it's for both!",
"Is it used in university, too, or just colleges?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: The plot of the Starcraft Series
|
explainlikeimfive
|
kxtym
| 25
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2o4qu5",
"comment_text": [
"Backstory",
"A long, long time ago, an ancient race called the Xel'Naga decide to create the perfect species, with both \"Purity of Form\" and \"Purity of Essence.\" ",
"First they find and uplift the tribal Protoss, who have psychic abilities and Purity of Form, but not Purity of Essence. The Protoss worship the Xel'Naga as gods, but eventually break out into religious wars and are abandoned by the Xel'Naga.",
"The Xel'Naga then find and uplift the Zerg, a race that can absorb and assimilate the genetic traits of other species. The Zerg have Purity of Essence but not Purity of Form, and their psychic abilities are much weaker. To prevent to Zerg from splitting up like the Protoss did, the Xel'Naga create the Overmind, a giant brain that telepathically controls all the Zerg. However, the Zerg Overmind eventually rebels against its creators and the Zerg Swarm drives the Xel'Naga away from the Known Galaxy.",
"Meanwhile, Earth has gone to shit. A world dictatorship is in full control. In an attempt to expand into space, they load up a bunch of huge spaceships with convicts and political dissidents in cryo storage and send them to colonize a nearby star system. However, the navigation computers malfunction and the spaceships end up overshooting until they run out of fuel and crash-land near Protoss and Zerg space. The survivors are cut off from Earth and create their own govenments, the largest of which is the Terran Conferderacy. They use their supplies to colonize dozens of planets and build up. It is discovered that some of the survivors carried genes that allow psychic abilities, and within a few generations many humans become psychic. The Terran Confederacy recruits them as children to become supersoldiers called Ghosts.",
"As Starcraft begins, the Zerg, Terran, and Protoss are closing in on each other's territory."
],
"score": 39
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2o4t8q",
"comment_text": [
"Starcraft 1 Terran Campaign",
"The Zerg start showing up on Terran colonies, and Protoss fleets follow, burning up any planet with a Zerg presence. The player is the governor of a Confederate Colony that the Zerg begin to appear on; working with Marshall Jim Raynor, they protect the colonists and destroy an infested Confederate command center. They then become wanted for \"Destroying Confederate Property\" and escape the planet with the help of the Sons of Korhal, a rebel group led by Arcturus Mensk and the former Confederate Ghost Sarah Kerrigan. ",
"The player helps the Sons of Korhal raid a Confederate base and discover the Zerg are attacking Terran colonies in search of psychic humans. They steal plans for a \"Psi Emitter\" that will attract the Zerg, and begin planting them on Confederate planets, although Jim Raynor finds this disturbing.",
"Eventually, the player ends up on the Confederate capital planet, fighting the Confederacy, the Zerg, and the Protoss almost simultaneously. Sarah Kerrigan's team plants a psi emitter on the planet and defends it long enough for the Zerg to begin to overrun the Protoss, but Arcturus Mensk leaves her for dead and crowns himself Emperor of the Terran Dominion. Jim Raynor and the Player defect from the Sons of Korhal, but are unable to save Kerrigan and barely escape with their lives."
],
"score": 33
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2o4u8f",
"comment_text": [
"Starcraft 1 Zerg Campaign",
"The Overmind finds Kerrigan, but instead of killing her, transforms her into a Zerg/Human hybrid. As a Zerg Cerebrate (basically a giant brain) the player helps Kerrigan and the Overmind invade the Protoss Homeworld, and the Overmind embeds itself into an ancient Xel'Naga temple."
],
"score": 31
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2o4v4o",
"comment_text": [
"Starcraft 1 Protoss Campaign",
"As a Protoss known as Artanis, the player commands the remnants of the Protoss on Aiur. After the exiled Dark Templar return to Aiur with knowledge of how to defeat the Zerg, disagreements between the Dark Templar and Protoss Leadership lead to a civil war between the two factions. Eventually, the Dark Templar suceed and untie the remaining Protoss to defeat the Overmind.",
"Shall I continue with Brood War/SC2?"
],
"score": 31
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2o58v2",
"comment_text": [
"Brood War: ",
"With the Overmind dead, the Zerg splinter into factions. Kerrigan convinces the Protoss to help her faction stop a new Overmind from being created and taking control of her again. Some Protoss disagree with this plan of action and another civil war occurs. Meanwhile, Earth finds out about the three-way (now six-way) war going on and sends a fleet to intervene, pissing off ",
" in the process (seven way war at this point). Eventually, Kerrigan unites the Protoss, Zerg, and Terrans against the Earth forces, but as soon as the Earth fleet is beaten back, she betrays everyone else. Basically, it's a massive ",
"Xanatos Gamit",
".",
"In a hidden subplot, the player can discover that a double agent named Samir Duran is trying to create Zerg/Protoss hybrids for some nefarious purpose."
],
"score": 27
}
|
|
ELI5: What is gaslighting? (Please cite examples related to your dumbed-down definition as well)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
hd9zik
| 3
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fvjuu1l",
"comment_text": [
"Haven’t you posted this question several times already?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fvnzed2",
"comment_text": [
"did i? my bad, my app glitches out often"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fvjv989",
"comment_text": [
"Gaslighting is when someone accuse you of something and you respond by trying to make them question their own feelings, instincts or sanity.",
"For example, your girlfriend is suspicious of you and think that you are cheating. She confront you and tell you that you come home late and stuff like that. Instead of trying to defend yourself you say stuff like :",
"- You are making stuff up, or",
"- It's all in your head, or",
"- Don't be so hysterical, it's probably your period.",
"The goal is for the person to doubt themselve and stop accusing you."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fvjvg1x",
"comment_text": [
"You've already asked this here. Why are you asking again? ",
"OP Response:",
"Huh? No I haven't... ",
"Response to that:",
"You know what, I'm getting real sick of this little game you play where you act all confused and upset when I ask you a simple question. It's not cute, it's not funny, it's fucking annoying and if I wasn't such a nice person you'd be out the goddamn door. But you know what? If you were ever on your own, not a single person out there would tolerate this bullshit and take you in. Not one. No would see past your annoyances and love you like I do. I'm the best you'll ever get and you'd be stupid to ever think otherwise. So you're welcome, and honestly a little gratitude once in a while for the patience I have while dealing with your crap would be appreciated. I'm going to bed and if you love me you won't bring this up again."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fvjvppw",
"comment_text": [
"Gaslighting is making someone doubt themselves by intentionally lying about something for personal gains. Example would be, \"Don't you remember you said you would give me $500 last night? You did have a bottle of wine but you said....\" . The phrase is from an old movie so Google it. It's making someone believe themselves crazy or so forgetful that they themselves are incompetent. Google the movie"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do headphones get so impossibly tangled when left in your pocket?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
c3q3qu
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ersgb3c",
"comment_text": [
"Here's what others have said",
"."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ersgxhg",
"comment_text": [
"Search ",
"headphones tangled ",
"in the search box."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ersfn4i",
"comment_text": [
"Because there are many ways for them to be tangled, but only one way for them to be untangled. Its all just statistics."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ersgq5l",
"comment_text": [
"Lol - wow! Quite an over-asked question! Thanks for providing that - I’ll have a look through. How did you collate all of that so quickly?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ersrsti",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"There are absolutely no exceptions to this rule. ",
"Users will either find a thread that meets their needs or find that their question might qualify for an exception to rule 7.",
"Please see this ",
"wiki entry",
" for more details (Rule 7).",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. If you still feel the removal should be reviewed, please ",
"message the moderators."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: What is this whole pickle and banana war about?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
osdzj
| 8
| true
| false
| 0.65
|
My friend is questioning me on what side I'm on, and I'm so confused.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3jnxmv",
"comment_text": [
"God damn it. BANANANAS!"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3jp86r",
"comment_text": [
"Welcome to the fold."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3jnvcs",
"comment_text": [
"Just choose a side. Questions come later."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3jq6ac",
"comment_text": [
"http://slacktory.com/2012/01/reddit-war-pickles-and-bananas/"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3jssy3",
"comment_text": [
"MIXEDGREENS?",
"There's a spy over here!"
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5 the Schrödinger's cat paradox
|
explainlikeimfive
|
oa4pl
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3g3hgq",
"comment_text": [
"I want you all to know that I read every one of your responses in Sheldon Cooper's voice, as though he were explaining it to Penny lol"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3fm4wg",
"comment_text": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/search?q=Schr%C3%B6dinger&restrict_sr=on"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3fll9d",
"comment_text": [
"Say I'm baking a cake; at some point the cake is going to be 'ready' but until then its still just cake mixture. If i'm not looking in the oven, and there is no timer on the cooker, there is no way of telling if the cake is ready or not. Therefore, the cake could be both ready and not ready and there is no way of telling until I look in the oven. So, the cake basically 'exists' as both outcomes until I physically look in the oven and decide \"yes, that cake looks ready/no, it's not yet\"....\nThat made more sense in my head..."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3fyv6l",
"comment_text": [
"The Schroedinger's cat thought experiment is intended as a critique of the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. If you check wikipedia, that is the second sentence in the article. Most people do not realize that, which results in one of the common misunderstandings. So, a certain amount of background is needed to explain the copenhagen interpretation and why it was proposed in the first place. ",
"In quantum mechanics, it's possible for a particle to exist as a mixture of two states (also known as a superposition). We can experimentally demonstrate that particles behave this way at the quantum level. However, no one ever sees this happening around them to say, a rock. Why? The quantum mechanics equations say that particles resolve themselves into both states from the superposition. That is ",
" not what we observe, we only EVER see the objects in one state or the other, and so an explanation is needed. ",
"The Copenhagen Interpretation says that one of the states goes away or collapses when you interact with the particle, so instead of being in a mixture of two states, it settles down into one state and the other state just goes away. It's not clear what exactly causes this, but definitely something causes it before humans ever see it. ",
"Schroedinger heard this interpretation and said \"What the flying fuck?\" He pointed out that it's easy to rig up a system which amplifies up a quantum mechanical superposition to affect that state of an entire cat (radioisotope -> geiger counter -> poison -> cat). The CI says that until you open the box and interact with the cat, the cat is in a superposition of alive and dead. That doesn't make ",
". It defies all our intuition about cats. Cats are either alive or dead, and they shouldn't abruptly become one or the other just because we opened a box! Not to mention the 'collapse' postulated by the CI doesn't look ANYTHING like any other laws of physics.",
"So, the point here is that the CI just doesn't make sense. ",
"The only interpretation which DOES make sense and looks like the rest of physics is that when a particles is in two different states, it goes into BOTH of those states, but we only ever see one because the universe splits at that point. So, the radioisotope both decays and doesn't decay; in the universe where it decays, that cat immediately dies. In the universe where it doesn't, the cat does not die. When we open the box, we discover which version of the world we happen to be in. ",
"This is the many worlds interpretation, which despite being very counter-intuitive to humans makes VASTLY more sense than the Copenhagen interpretation. It looks like all the rest of the laws of physics and doesn't require any additional rules to describe this not-very-well-explained 'collapse' thing that the Copenhagen Interpretation requires, all you need is the existing laws of quantum mechanics.",
"However, Many Worlds is essentially impossible to test since you never see the other worlds, and still fails to explain why we have the probabilities of finding the cat alive that we find in practice, so it is not widely accepted. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3fm3ea",
"comment_text": [
"I have no clue what I'm talking about, so this may be a stupid question.",
"the cake could be both ready and not ready",
"I would think it would be ",
" ready ",
" not ready. It can't be both."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Tachyons
|
explainlikeimfive
|
m32vb
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
Backwards in time wat?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2xpev9",
"comment_text": [
"That's not entirely true. A tachyon is any particle that travels faster than the speed of light; it's a category of particle, not a specific particle like a photon, electron or muon, and a category for which no actual examples have been except for possibly the neutrinos at CERN everyone's been on about.",
"Any particle going faster than light would have a negative time dilation factor relative to a stationary observer and thus would appear to travel \"backward in time;\" however, that's a claim purveyed primarily by amateur physicists that doesn't reflect a full understanding of general relativity; not only does having a speed faster than light produce negative time dilation, it requires that one take the square root of a negative number--produce imaginary answers, in other words, which may or may not have physical meaning. Whether or not tachyons (again tachyons are anything travelling faster than light; a particle is a tachyon if and only if it travels faster than light) are possible, or exactly what travelling faster than light would physically do, is still very unclear and thus it is at this point better to say that having a speed greater than the speed of light is not possible, rather than that makes you go back in time."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2xpl5k",
"comment_text": [
"Tachyons are any particle travelling faster than light; \"tachyon\" is a category of particle, not a specific particle. Tachyons are hypothetical; no particle that is a tachyon has ever been found.",
"As far as going back in time, there is a relationship to going back in time and going faster than light; that is, the mathematics of physics may sometimes show that a particle going faster than light would appear to travel back in time. That is partly an unconfirmed observation (again, no tachyons have ever been found) and partly an interpretation that is more a question of philosophy than science. The thing is, I don't want to say that it is NOT TRUE that going faster than light=going back in time, because it sort of is, but to say that it IS TRUE is an oversimplification usually made by people who only somewhat understand physics."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2xphhl",
"comment_text": [
"Whoa whoa whoa! ",
" Simpler, please."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2xrpcd",
"comment_text": [
"Well, it has been suggested that certain particles could be categorized as tachyons. These are particles that are spontaneously created in pairs comprising of positive and negative energy. The traditional and commonly accepted view is that these pairs are created, travel for a very short period of time, and then collide and annihilate themselves. However in an alternate view, it can be seen as a single particle that forms a closed loop in \"space-time\" (normal 3 dimensions+time), effectively doubling back on itself through the fourth dimension of time, which when viewed from our perspective of time, gives the appearance of these virtual particles. These are known as quantum fluctuations. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2xqotg",
"comment_text": [
"Tachyons: a theoretical group of particles which travel faster than light (which is usually considered an unbreakable rule). Travelling faster than light is popularly said to allow a particle to go backward in time - but this hasn't been seen by scientists, and the mathematics that indicate that this might be true are quite complex and nuanced - and subject to change, like all things in science."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: The riddle about one person always telling the truth, and other person always lying. Ask one question to find out who is which.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
mrec7
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c33b9y8",
"comment_text": [
"you can only ask one question. now that you know which one is the liar, you still dont know which of the doors to go through. You don't know if the liar is standing infront of the \"death\" door etc"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3390oh",
"comment_text": [
"Riddle: Two doors (A&B) protected by 2 guys, one lying, one telling the truth (both know abouts each others traits). One door leads to certain death. One question total, must choose a door.",
"Answer: you ask what door will the other person point to if i ask them where is the door to life. Then take the other door",
"Say door A is the correct door.",
"If the person in the liar: he will expect the person telling the truth to say \"door A\", however hes a liar, so he will say \"i expect him to answer door b\". So you go to the opposite door.",
"If the person is telling the truth: he will expect the other person to lie and say the direct opposite. So he will say \"the other will choose door b\". So you go to the opposite door."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c33d257",
"comment_text": [
"The trap is that most people will intuitively want to identify the liar, but that is not required. You actually need a question that will generate the same answer from both guys, and you do that by involving the other guy in a hypothetical scenario, as shown by henry82 here."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c33chag",
"comment_text": [
"that won't work, both people would leg it after they see the other guy brutally murdered."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c33d2lp",
"comment_text": [
"He means when you kill one guy, the other will flee -through one of the doors-, and you can then assume that door is the safe one."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Will air travel technology in the next 10-20 years improve to the point where even the lower class people would be able to travel with out a problem ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
eas8an
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fawj1n0",
"comment_text": [
"Define the problem with their travel now please?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fawj8hl",
"comment_text": [
"Well I didn’t mean problem per say. My bad , I meant that they’d be able to travel for example from America to Spain and back like the rich do. Basically asking if there are any technological advances on the way that would make air travel extremely extremely accessible."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fawkbvr",
"comment_text": [
"A flight from New York to Spain cost about 250-300 USD, you don't need to be rich to afford that. Flying have been slowly decreasing in price as aircraft became more efficient and better organization were created, and this will probably keep happening for the next 10-20 years, but I don't think there is one specific technological advance that will drastically drop the price."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fawjxko",
"comment_text": [
"Planes will not get cheaper. If anything, as fossil fuels become less viable, airplanes will become even more expensive."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fawkxmq",
"comment_text": [
"You can fly to Barcelona for 700 if you book now for March.",
"But the cost of air travel is not determined by technology. Not just, anyway. Labor is huge. Pilots, attendants, check staff, ticket staff, baggage handlers, ground crews, security, ATC costs, airport charges (it costs money to use the runways)...",
"It's not gonna change just by making jets cheaper or making solar powered planes, kwim?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
When I play a movie or a game on my 24'' monitor as opposed to my 17'' laptop monitor, the resolution is much better.... why?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
q5nz3
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I've recently learned about the 480/720/1080 framesizes (I know Im slow) but I still dont get why the resolution is better when I play something on actual monitor. It is the size of the monitor? Is it the mechanics of my monitor (my monitor is 4 years old, my laptop is brand new, I figured the laptop would be clearer).. Basically Im stupid and dont know how to phrase this into a question short enough for google, fill me in!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3uxpbw",
"comment_text": [
"There are a lot of things that go into a monitor that people don't think about.\nEverything that you see on your monitor is made up of pixels, which are basically little color blocks, and there are millions of these on your monitor. Pretty much everything else about monitors affects these little guys.\nThere is also something called a dynamic contrast ratio, which compares the whitest white to the blackest black, that your pixels can show you on a screen. With a greater ratio, comes a greater difference in colors your pixels can represent, which makes things look better on your screen.\nThere is also refresh rates, for how fast your pixels refresh on your screen, which helps a lot in movies and games, as pixels are constantly changing to show you new images and colors. \nResolution is also how many pixels you have on a screen. More pixels, better picture. 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels. \nHope this helped. Cheers. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3uzedi",
"comment_text": [
"it is grid of pixels 1920 is width and 1080 is hight "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3uxs1q",
"comment_text": [
"Awesome thanks."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3uz08y",
"comment_text": [
"Awesome! One thing though, why are there two numbers? Why not just say: 2,073,600 pixels?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3uzg68",
"comment_text": [
"The two numbers are horizontal pixels by vertical pixels. We do say 2,073,600 pixels, in a way: megapixels. But that's generally used to describe digital cameras."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
Would a Faraday Cage protect electronic devices from an EMP?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
s4gpl
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
Just a random thought. Let's say that there was an imminent danger of an EMP-attack. Would placing my car inside a Faraday Cage keep it safe and in working order, after the attack?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4b0ejj",
"comment_text": [
"Yes"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4b1gt9",
"comment_text": [
"With the slight caveat that it can't be wired up to anything outside the Faraday cage. The entire circuit has to be contained inside."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4b0xud",
"comment_text": [
"Though it depends on the strength of the pulse, the conductivity of the cage, and its ability to withstand a large current."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4b10x4",
"comment_text": [
"Well, it is \"like i'm five\". You could have asked \"If so, how does a faraday cage protect against EMP's\".",
"That question I don't have an answer to, sadly."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4b0lhn",
"comment_text": [
"Short and concise. Thank you. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
Why are countries really far from the equator so much more advanced than countries on/near it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
rrzjz
| 54
| true
| false
| 0.77
|
It seems like the most technologically advanced countries are really far from the equator and most countries on/near it are "third world." Is it because the climate is way colder/less consistent far from the equator and inhabitants had to make advancements to adapt/survive in it?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c486ld1",
"comment_text": [
"Jared Diamond guns germs and steel is a book which goes in to this. Boils down to availability of animals you can domesticate that are any bloody use. The Llama for example isn't very strong, the zebra is feisty and also not strong, elephants are a bugger to breed. We had horses, we lucked out, the industrial revolution couldn't have happened as fast as it did without them - they were a labour saving device the likes of which people living on the equator didn't have until they'd got them from us. If you doubt this theory, try mining with the aid of a kangaroo to pull your wagon load of metal ore. People power is always there, but people aren't very strong and they tend to rebel. "
],
"score": 68
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c489ajr",
"comment_text": [
"some essential points from jared diamond's ",
"...",
" come on, did you really think it would be?",
" nomadic societies don't do it unless they have to in order to survive. why bother cultivating land when you can just travel around and food is abundant? note that food grows like weeds in tropical climates.",
" a civilization that puts down roots (literally and figuratively) needs to till the soil and herd flocks, and that's easier when animals do the work.",
" over a long period of time, being around animals promotes immunity to disease within that population. this eventually allows those people with those immunities to conquer distant lands. most natives of the new world were wiped out by infectious disease, not war.",
" one hard to exploit resource is land. it's not enough to have animals, you need a plough. to make a plough, you need a harness, a yolk, forged steel, etc. you need other resources to make all this stuff, so the society over time grows to value technology that can harvest these resources and turn them into effort multipliers.",
" if you're a country that has an abundant supply of something everyone else wants and that resource is fairly easily extracted, it tends to be the case that a very small minority of the population will take over that resource and consolidate its power, leaving most of the population out in the cold.",
"we see this with oil-producing countries such as saudi arabia; a very few in the privileged class live in splendor while most everyone else lives in relative squalor.",
"this situation creates a societal imbalance where there is very small demand for anything that's not a basic need, and therefore no point in producing a lot of non-necessities. so, these societies tend to also have massive unemployment and a ruling class that only provides the underclass the minimum required to prevent revolution.",
"internationally, since this kind of country has something every other country needs, they don't have to worry too much about diplomacy; they can kind of throw their weight around and everyone will still buy what they have. this tends to economically isolate the country, however, and limit what the international market can provide in the way of import/export. so the underclass has no other market to interact with. (this is why oil-producing countries are typically muslim, a religion that puts a lot of emphasis on cultural loyalty and isolationism...this serves the ruling class very well.)",
" taiwan is a good example of this. with hardly any natural resources to speak of, the only way modern taiwan can survive is by providing a useful services and manufacturing industry to its neighbors. this requires taiwan to be on good terms with its neighbors. (this is why oil-producing countries in the middle east tend to be more warlike whereas taiwan generally wants to avoid war that would discourage international cooperation.)",
"since this situation calls for a wide array of skills, no one group can easily consolidate power over all the sources of growth. this leads to a lesser separation of classes, which results in a society that has large demand for a wide array of goods and services. this spurs a virtuous cycle of innovation that advances technology and disperses it over borders."
],
"score": 62
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c487w9c",
"comment_text": [
"Doesn't Diamond also mention that a harsher climate exerted much harsher selective pressure towards innovation and technological development for the people in the north?"
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c487sje",
"comment_text": [
"Lets be honest. If you lived in a place that was always warm and had awesome beachs and tons of plants to live off would you do hard work? I mean why not lay on the beach and enjoy a coconut."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c489kbw",
"comment_text": [
"...and yet you offer nothing as far as informative content?"
],
"score": 17
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is The Sun called The Sun?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
qfnqz
| 15
| true
| false
| 0.89
|
My actual five-year-old wants to know. We've checked a couple of science books (nothing) and wikipedia's etymology section (confusing) and was hoping for a clear-cut and easy to understand explanation, if possible.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3x8l5w",
"comment_text": [
"I'm assuming you mean the star and not the newspaper. Let's examine the ",
"Online Etymology Dictionary",
" : ",
"In English, we call it \"sun\". In Old English, it was \"sunne\". Old English came from a language we call 'Proto-Germanic', and in it, the sun was called \"sunnon\". The German language also came from P-G, so in it, the name is very similar: Sonne.",
"Now Proto-Germanic itself comes from a really, really, really ancient language called Proto-Indo-European. In it, the word was 's(u)wen'. Older than that? We really don't know. At some point of time though, it was just arbitrary. Like ottomanprime said, someone pointed and said \"swen\" and it stuck."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3x9eqt",
"comment_text": [
"It definitely was not a German astronomer, as we know the word is older than that. Proto-Indo-European was spoken around/before 3700 BC, by the Indo-European people who eventually split up into two, one half going to Europe and the other to Iran and India. This is why the Sanskrit and Persian languages are similar to Greek and Latin.",
"PIE is 'reconstructed language', which means that it was created by linguists based on the various links between languages (most notably, Indo-Iranian and European languages). The people who spoke it were most likely from the Middle-East, Central Asia, Caucasus, that kind of place - between Europe and South Asia.",
"Proto-Germanic was spoken by the many Germanic tribes, throughout Eastern, Central and Northern Europe (and later, parts of Western Europe, such as England).",
"There's really absolutely no telling who came up with the earliest word. Maybe it was a kid, maybe an elder. Maybe a tribal chieftain declared the Sun be named after him. Maybe it was a god everyone forgot. There's just no info about the ultimate source, it's something we'll have accept. If you want a date, yeah, roughly around or before 4000 BC they first started calling it something like 'suwen'."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3x8kjy",
"comment_text": [
"Essentially the etymology stems from old Germanic terms that personify the sun as a deity. The words eventually evolved into what we know as \"sun\"."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3xa3dm",
"comment_text": [
"I strongly suggest you use this to explain to your 5yo the concept of naming. \"Sun\", or the same word in other languages (which includes \"Sol\"), is an extremely old word. Ultimately, even if the very original naming moment was known, it would likely be unsatisfying because back that far you will not even recognise the word since it is so many steps removed from 'Sun'.",
"To try to answer this specific \"why\" question is to enter a very deep rabbit hole. Next will probably be \"why do we call dogs 'dogs'\". Such words cannot be explained in any way satisfying to a 5yo (unlike TV = TeleVision = Distance Viewing = television was originally all broadcast live so you were actually watching someone far away tell).",
"Instead, it may be better to explain that we humans love to give names to things. Often the names are completely arbitrary. Over time, language mutates names (\"nouns\" if you like) just like any other word."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3xf2zt",
"comment_text": [
"Because for most of history, the Sun and Moon were believe to be singular objects. We didn't know that stars were in fact suns or that there were bunches of other moons in our solar system.",
"As we saw them in the sky, Mars and Saturn were pretty much the same...then were just \"a\" planet. But the sun and moon were unique enough they were consider their own category. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
How do nuclear power plants work, and why don't we use Thorium instead?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
zdlm5
| 7
| true
| false
| 1
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63njol",
"comment_text": [
"Elements larger than Lead tend to be easy to break apart. Radioactivity is essentially the property that an atom will break easily into 2 smaller atoms, which are different elements than the original. This breaking apart is called fission. A chain reaction is when breaking one atom causes another 2 or more to break, which each cause 2 or more to break, and quickly you have lots and lots of atoms splitting all around. The reason this happens is because a product of fission is some really tiny fast particles, neutrons, which split nearby atoms easily.",
"Okay, so there's a type of Uranium that is very good at chain reacting. You start the process by bombarding the Uranium with something small, like a bunch of neutrons, and once you get enough going it continues on its own. Unfortunately, it will get out of control if left alone. So what you do is put something in there, control rods, that will slow the process by absorbing a lot of the neutrons that cause the chain reaction. Now you can precisely control the reaction, which is good.",
"Now Thorium reactors are good because you don't need control rods. These reactors don't chain react the same way and when left unpowered they shut themselves down, rather than going out of control like in Fukushima. That being said, I just want to make it clear that nuclear power is safer than most other types of power in terms of deaths per year. Anyway, the reason we haven't adopted it yet in the US is entirely cost related. In fact, we wouldn't need to build new reactors, there are ways to convert uranium reactors into thorium reactors. The problem is that all of it costs way too much money and isn't yet worth it. The big issue looming on the horizon is that thorium is far cheaper than uranium and isn't going to run out for a LOOOONG time. Eventually that will start mattering much more, but until then it is just cheaper to continue running the uranium reactors as they are.",
"Side note: you can turn uranium waste products into weapons, but you can't with thorium, so there is a military reason to keep the uranium around too, but that might not be as important these days, I just don't know."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63omsu",
"comment_text": [
"The reason we don't use thorium is because we never put much effort into researching it before. At the dawn of the atomic age it was discovered that thorium could not be weaponized, at least not as well as uranium. Thus, to gain dominance in WWII and the Cold War we researched the crap out of Uranium. However where we stand today the priorities have changed a bit, there is a new focus on green energy and we have begun to allot resources toward thorium research."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c649uyl",
"comment_text": [
"I'm nowhere near an expert on this but ",
"npr did a piece",
" where they interviewed a few scientists on what a thorium reactor is and what the pros and cons are."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c64gmzq",
"comment_text": [
"wow, that was great!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63nb5u",
"comment_text": [
"and why don't we use Thorium instead? ",
"We're working on it still as it's a fairly new technology and needs to be perfected, the first Thorium reactors are set to go into operation over the next 10-20 years, and some countries such as India are on track to have the majority of their power provided by Thorium reactors within around 35 years. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: If an bomb was dropped right in the eye of a catergory 5 cyclone/hurricane, would it immediately disperse the storm?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
zdva0
| 7
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63q0u2",
"comment_text": [
"God damn I hope Mythbusters tries this one."
],
"score": 21
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63sbet",
"comment_text": [
"The New York Times wrote about that. I can't find the exact article, but basically a hurricane has far more energy than even the most powerful nuclear bombs. All you would do by detonating a bomb in the middle of the hurricane is to spread radiation around with the storm."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63sqye",
"comment_text": [
"Couldn't many, non-nuclear bombs be dropped?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63ssgs",
"comment_text": [
"No - you could drop hundreds of massive non-nuclear bombs and it wouldn't even make a real dent in the storm."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c63wdm5",
"comment_text": [
"One of us just needs to become the absolutist ruler of the planet and they can make it happen! Peace out New Orleans!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: why do certain channels (HBO, Showtime, etc) have permission to swear, show nudity and violence?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10kbjb
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e6urt",
"comment_text": [
"Basic cable can swear as well, they just don't by convention and to keep advertisers happy.",
"See South Park episode \"It hits the fan\".",
"I don't know about adult content."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e7qje",
"comment_text": [
"The restrictions are self-imposed. ",
"The FCC says",
": \"With respect to cable and satellite services, Congress has charged the Commission with enforcing the statutory prohibition against airing indecent programming \"by means of radio communications.\" The Commission has historically interpreted this restriction to apply to radio and television broadcasters, and has never extended it to cover cable operators.\""
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e7qje",
"comment_text": [
"The restrictions are self-imposed. ",
"The FCC says",
": \"With respect to cable and satellite services, Congress has charged the Commission with enforcing the statutory prohibition against airing indecent programming \"by means of radio communications.\" The Commission has historically interpreted this restriction to apply to radio and television broadcasters, and has never extended it to cover cable operators.\""
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e992c",
"comment_text": [
"Neither are restricted by the FCC, as neither are broadcast. But basic cable channels generally don't have cursing/nudity/violence because ",
"1.) Parents buying a cable package don't want their children to be exposed to that ",
"2.) Shows are often mirrored on broadcast for some channels and it's easier not to make different versions of the same show ",
"3.) Advertisers don't often want to be connected to those elements.",
"Premium channels can get away with it because people are selectively choosing those channels, and they derive support from subscriptions and not advertisers."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6ea448",
"comment_text": [
"Which, if you think about it, is an uncharacteristically narrow interpretation of the powers of the executive branch. Both cable and satellite television very much deliver programming \"by means of radio communications.\" The FCC just interprets that clause as meaning terrestrial broadcasts only, not anything that transmits using electromagnetic radiation in the radio band."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5- Why does the air smell different during different seasons?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10k87t
| 352
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e6ufh",
"comment_text": [
"You know how on Wednesdays me and mommy cook spaghetti? Then the whole house smells like spaghetti? Then on Fridays we make tacos and the whole house smells like tacos? It's kind of like that. It's smells different because there's different stuff in the air.",
"Different when it's hotter outside, or more moisture, that's the wetness in the air, smells travel around differently than they would when it's really cold. Also, when the leaves are falling and dying, they make a different smell than when they're new and fresh.",
"Lets not forget all the new plants that are growing every spring and summer. They all add to the different smells we get every year."
],
"score": 364
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e786q",
"comment_text": [
"Great now I want taco spaghetti."
],
"score": 262
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e8o30",
"comment_text": [
"And now I don't want it."
],
"score": 128
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e7t7b",
"comment_text": [
"You're welcome."
],
"score": 56
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e6ttt",
"comment_text": [
"Because there are different things in the air. In spring there's tons of pollen and most likely cut grass while in the fall there is dead and decomposing leaves. In the summer it's usually hot and dry which means the ground and plant dry out. In the winter it either (depending in where you are) rains or snows making the ground wet (which also leads to more leaves decomposing.)"
],
"score": 41
}
|
||
ELI5: Why does breathing suddenly seem to become "voluntary" the moment we think about how involuntary it is?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
15dgqz
| 11
| true
| false
| 0.69
|
Sorry for making you have to think about breathing now.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7lh5na",
"comment_text": [
"The link between voluntary and automatic breathing isn't fully understood at the moment."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7llmjs",
"comment_text": [
"Your mind focuses on one thing at a time*. Breathing is something your body does by itself, without you having to think about it - like a heartbeat, or turning food you eat into something your body can use so you're not hungry any more. But unlike those things, when you think about breathing, you suddenly focus on that for a while. Since breathing is something that involves areas that you have a lot of feeling in - your mouth, your chest, and the feeling of air entering your body, you are temporarily made to think about what breathing is, and so, you have to do it by yourself - until your mind finds something else to focus on.",
"*Not totally true, but for simplicity's sake. Also, the above is just a hypothesis."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7lzrgd",
"comment_text": [
"I was taught in biology that there are three types of action: voluntary (such as rolling your eyes), involuntary (your iris adjusting for light), and actions which can be automatic or manually controlled. Unconscious breathing is controled by clusters in your brainstem, but it's not really understood how the switch works, nor exactly where the conscious breathing is controlled."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7ljpvd",
"comment_text": [
"Source? This isn't my field, so I don't know if what you say is true, but very often when people post \"Science doesn't know yet\" on a subject I am knowledgeable in, they are wrong."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7lmlgz",
"comment_text": [
"Source: ",
"http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/Breathing.html",
"Gallego and colleagues note that it is not fully understood how the behavioral and metabolic controls of respirations are linked."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How did we/animals evolve to experience sadness?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
148g9j
| 1
| true
| false
| 1
|
What evolutionary benefits are there for such a cognitively complex emotion? One that is retroactive, and must have developed later in the game. Outside of pain, and then complexly, anger, sadness takes a lot more understanding of our environment and possessions. How did it come to be? Inb4dopamine
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7asil5",
"comment_text": [
"Stop bringing up evolve, evolve, everywhere, everywhere i see theres evolve.",
"People need to understand what the word \"Evolution\" means first of all."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7ax2al",
"comment_text": [
"Enlighten us, oh wise one. What word would you sub for evolve in my title? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7azxn6",
"comment_text": [
"There is no \"evolutionary\" genefit of emotions, we have emotions to show people around us how we are, humans have had lions site the neanderthals. its nothing we have evolved."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7aw50h",
"comment_text": [
"Hmm. This one is harder to sort out than anger. ",
"It seems to me that sadness could have been developed once we had started forming social circles and communities. Let's imagine we're a member of one of these primitive \"tribes\".",
"Socializing promotes survival. The more social a group of humans is, the more likely they are to cooperate and share resources. A group that communicates effectively would probably be better at hunting than a group that didn't.",
"So say we are a part of this tribe, but for whatever reason, we aren't socializing with them. We're less likely to be able to partake in resource sharing with them. Since we don't communicate, we aren't included in hunting groups. This doesn't look good for our survival.",
"But if our brains developed a negative reaction to this situation (what we know today as loneliness), we would feel pressure to reverse the scenario and be more likely to try and integrate ourselves into a social group. Since we're now a part of this group, we're arguably more likely to survive.",
"We can extrapolate this. Say we're a member of this group and for some reason, we feel sad, so we cry. Other group members might recognize our discomfort and help us. So this evolutionary force works in two ways: groups that are more able to ",
" when someone is sad will be better able to help them, and the group as a whole will benefit (be more competitive), and the better we are at ",
" that we are sad, the more likely we are to be recognized and comforted.",
"This is a general overview, feel free to PM me.",
"Source: Biochem/Evolutionary Bio major.",
"EDIT: Spelling, syntax"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7aw98o",
"comment_text": [
"I read somewhere in an old nat geo that other animals also experience sadness. Elephants and many other animals mourn their dead. I don't really think it benefits us as humans at all, other than to prove bonds between individuals. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: The reason for Diablo's overwhelming popularity and gameplay
|
explainlikeimfive
|
to9ef
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4ob0m9",
"comment_text": [
"it's got a huge user base, it's been 12 years since Diablo II came out, 16 years since Diablo I",
"the gameplay was pretty simple, with fun spells",
"the story was pretty awesome",
"getting better gear is always fun",
"playing with other people was fun and easy",
"it's a game by Blizzard",
"Error 37 is the error people get trying to log into the game. Diablo III made people have a constant connection with Blizzard's severs, so people getting error 37 means they can't play the game at all, single player or multiplayer."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4obhzb",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of it has to do with \"soulstones\". There are the three Prime Evils: Diablo, Baal, and Mephisto. They each have soulstones that they're contained in.",
"In the end of Diablo I, you kill Diablo and shove the soulstone in your head, thinking you can contain him.",
"In Diablo II, you're following the wake of the character from Diablo I, seeing how he wasn't able to \"contain the demon within\", spreading destruction.",
"Have a look at the Diablo II cinematics",
", I think they're some of gaming's best, ",
"especially Act III"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4oc6fl",
"comment_text": [
"It is! Here's the ",
"Diablo I ending",
"."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4obnl4",
"comment_text": [
"I first bought Diablo when it came out and upgraded to II then got the expansion pack with the Baal missions. We still play it regularly. We meaning myself and my kids. It just never lost its fun. It is big fun to get one of each character and build them up, kill Baal, do the cow mission then retire it and start all over. Diablo really is the gold standard for RPG PC games. I don't think I will get III only because I bet the system requirements are too high for anything I own."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4obqav",
"comment_text": [
"I'm going to explain it like I'm five, instead of as though you're five and just say \"it's rad. i get to loot and set shit on fire. easily.\""
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
What do people mean when they refer to women as having "Daddy Issues"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
115ars
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6jgea8",
"comment_text": [
"A girl who was neglected by her father so she seeks the attention of other males through unhealthy means. I will not however explain those means to a five year old, sorry."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6jhlib",
"comment_text": [
"It's not necessarily this. This can be one scenario, but it's broader than that. Daddy issues can be any unhealthy way of coping with life (not just relationships) that was developed as a coping mechanism to deal with Dad as a child. For example, a girl who is discouraged from sharing her feelings as a child by her father may hold in emotions in other relationships as an adult. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6jhu5x",
"comment_text": [
"This is absoutely, true but not the first thing i think of when i hear the phrase used"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6jguls",
"comment_text": [
"Five years old, not five years of psychology. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6jgwqk",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. I plan on being a terrible parent to help future generations."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Fractals
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1bd8qc
| 32
| true
| false
| 0.79
|
So I was browsing the Wikipedia article on fractals and couldn't really follow it at all, how do fractals work?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c95tynz",
"comment_text": [
"Fractals are a strange thing. The easiest way to understand this would be to first take a look at this .gif.",
"http://24.media.tumblr.com/c36187d48440bc87295c31798105e3b0/tumblr_mkhga6niN61r3k73wo1_500.gif",
"Fractals are kind of a never-ending picture, where the entire picture is comprised of smaller and smaller versions of the larger picture. As you keep zooming in on the bigger Patrick, you get closer to the smaller Patrick. Then, as you keep zooming in, yet another even smaller Patrick appears in the already small Patrick. It is never ending."
],
"score": 21
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c95tm6o",
"comment_text": [
"Imagine a spiders web which has water droplets on it because it rained. \n",
"Like so.",
" Each water droplet has a reflection of the web and the other water droplets in it. So if you are looking into one of the droplets you are looking at the whole web and all droplets, which means you are looking at the whole web from a certain perspective. Imagine if you switched your perspective by looking closer (zooming you view in), even as you switched your perspective you would still see the same thing, which is the whole web and all the water droplets. Hope this helps."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c95zgau",
"comment_text": [
"/r/pictureswithpatrick",
" would enjoy this."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c95tpby",
"comment_text": [
"A fractal is like a pattern that repeats itself ",
" of itself. So if you zoom in, you'll eventually see the original pattern, which you can then zoom in on, and see the original pattern again. Technically, you could do this forever and still see the original."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c95twjg",
"comment_text": [
"Take a stick. Put a stick half it's length at the middle of the first, pointing out. Take a third stick half of the second stick's length, and do the same for the second stick.",
"Repeat forever.",
"When you zoom in and out, it will look the same the entire time. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Female Psychology
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wqnth
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fsocg",
"comment_text": [
"You didn't ask a question.",
"There is no such thing as Psychology specific to Women. There is Psychology as it pertains to people. There is culture that shapes the thoughts and behaviors of people. This culture, if it says Women are like X and Men are like Y will produce... women who are like X and men who are like Y. It'll also produce Women who are like Y and Men who are like X, but these people will be marginalized and pushed to the outer edges of society. Tolerated in some cases, attacked in others, but never really thought about.",
"This, naturally, is before we get into different hormone levels causing different behaviors.",
"The real problem is figuring out where society stops and biology begins when it comes to behavior patterns."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5gtdak",
"comment_text": [
"It was the only class that fit in my schedule. I'm thinking it's either going to be a bunch of neo-feminist bs or an actually intellectually stimulating discussion on gender roles in society."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5gtqwb",
"comment_text": [
"Very.",
"I'll suggest that if the course does seem to be neofeminist bullshit, to.. basically go ahead and approach it with the understanding that how you understand society may, in fact, be completely and utterly fucked up and wrong.",
"Because it might be. It might not be too! It's just always nice to consider alternative views and then carefully figuring out why you do not agree with them, rather than disagreeing with them outright because they run in opposition to everything you understand and were told.",
"I'm not saying agree with them, of course. I'm saying go ahead and consider the opposite thing and figure out why it's wrong.",
"Anyway, good luck. Keep and open mind... but keep your bullshit detector running too."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5grsyv",
"comment_text": [
"I'm taking a class next semester called \"Psychology of Women\". ",
"Apparently it's a thing. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5gtbh6",
"comment_text": [
"See, there's ways that could go well, tying in with Feminist Studies and the like.",
"It will probably be terrible, and use terrible Evolutionary Psychology bullshit to justify why women are good at ",
"finding the butter.*",
"*xkcd forum Thread there where \"Women can't use maps, Men cannot find butter\" became a joke mocking Evo-psych. Due to somebody mentioning it in a serious way due to Men having vision that works one way while Women have vision that works completely differently. Despite Men and Women being the same species and having essentially identical eyes and bits of grey matter that process visual imput. I'm also not trying to say that all of Evolutionary Psychology is terrible... just.. most of what I've encountered seems to be absolutely terrible. So.. y'all might want to look in to that, as it seems that it's only the Crazy that's getting out to the public.",
"... all of this goes back to the OP not actually asking any sort of question, leaving everyone else to determine just what the fuck they were trying to ask."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Triple DES encryption and how the Meet in The Middle attack affects it
|
explainlikeimfive
|
xfppn
| 1
| true
| false
| 1
|
So Triple DES encryption uses 3 keys 56 bits long each. From what I understand the first key encrypts the plaintext. The second key decrypts that and then the 3rd key encrypts that result. From what I've read key 1 and key 3 are the same because if you use unique keys for Key 1, 2 and 3, the Meet in The Middle attack (which I don't really understand) makes doing so just as secure as using only 2 unique keys. So in the end 3 unique keys just adds more computational time while not adding any extra security. Can anyone explain the Meet in the Middle attack to me in simple terminology and correct my understanding of Triple DES if any of the above is incorrect?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5lyba1",
"comment_text": [
"OP was asking about a meet-in-the-middle attack, not man-in-the-middle attack."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5lyebt",
"comment_text": [
"My bad. Meet attacks are more about math theory, but they aren't my specialty. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5lyoh7",
"comment_text": [
"Not really, but I'm not the best authority on DES. So my understanding is that the key config is independent of the encryption methodology. Rather, 3DES is basically DES but \"reshuffled\" some additional times so as to increase the amount of computational power needed to brute-force the ciphertext. Engineers did this because it was easier to do this with legacy systems (that is, run the same encryption multiple times for added security) than try to introduce a backwards-compatible encryption system.",
"From the wiki:",
"The standards define three keying options:*",
"*Keying option 1: All three keys are independent.",
"Keying option 1 is the strongest, with 3 × 56 = 168 independent key bits.",
"Keying option 2 provides less security, with 2 × 56 = 112 key bits. This option is stronger than simply DES encrypting twice, e.g. with K1 and K2, because it protects against meet-in-the-middle attacks.",
"Keying option 3 is equivalent to DES, with only 56 key bits. This option provides backward compatibility with DES, because the first and second DES operations cancel out. It is no longer recommended by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),[4] and is not supported by ISO/IEC 18033-3",
"Anyways, I've only dealt with option 3. We moved off DES to RSA/AES pretty fast though. DES is too vulnerable."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5lys56",
"comment_text": [
"Hmm, I've read over the wiki as well but my professor tells me that the part about Keying option 1 being the strongest is incorrect because due to the meet in the middle attack it offers the same security as Keying option 2 but adds extra overhead. ",
"Truthfully I don't quite understand that and would think 3 unique keys would provide better security but because I don't understand the meet in the middle attack I have no way of confirming or rejecting that belief."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5lzcvc",
"comment_text": [
"Okay here's the explanation. ",
"So DES has a 56bit key, so at a worst case that requires 2",
" operations to guess the key. ",
"So that's pretty bad and we want to improve it, why don't we just encrypt twice with two different keys? ",
"So our proposed DoubleDES is something like C = Ek2(Ek1(P) so if you wanted to break this you could do the following. For all 2",
" options of k1 calculate E(P) next for all 2",
" options of k1 do D(C) neither operation on its own cracks the encryption, but as they both approach from different 'ends' of the calculation when you hit the correct value of k1 and k2 they will return the same value. If the value matches we know k1 and k2 and can break any further encryption. So we've done 2* 2",
" operations which is only 2",
" ",
"Note that this is a known plaintext attack, you need to know at least 1 P and the corresponding C. ",
"Now what your professor says about Keying option 1 is true, due to this same effect it only offers around 112bits of security rather than 168 as you would expect, but what he neglected to mention was that keying option 2 is susceptible to some other attacks that make it only provide around 80bit of security, so it's still a good idea to use Option 1. (ofc you should really be using AES :-) ) ",
"If you want to learn more about all this I highly recommend Niels Ferguson and Bruce Schneier's 'Cryptography Engineering' (older editions called Practical Cryptography) "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5:Human Cloning
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wkoxs
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
So I have read a lot about the ethical reasons that cloning is wrong, and it makes me wonder, can this even be possible? Also, if so, how? I don't know if there is an answer a 5 year old could understand, but a simplified explanation of how cloning is done would be very much appreciated.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5e9art",
"comment_text": [
"Ok, it'd play out something like this (the ethical debate, that is):",
"But they're a ",
" human being! They have rights! You can't just cut them up for their body parts.",
"Ok, so we induce a kind of brain death upon them. Then they're just living tissue.",
"So you're going to do this just before you need the body part? And if you decide to do so at infancy, at what point do they stop being a sentient being?",
"One problem that can arise, is that with some more robust transplants - say an arm, or lungs for example - you'd have to wait for the clone to mature to a full growth. The effect of a brean-dead clone from infancy is unknown, possibly prone to atrophy, and leads to yet more ethical dilemmas.",
"Does this help?"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5e5foz",
"comment_text": [
"Inside every cell in your body, there are molecules called DNA. Those molecules contain all the information about what you are made of - from your hair to the tip of your toes. Scientists can easily get your DNA from one of your cells.",
"To create a new human, you need a sperm cell (from the guy) and a ovum cell (from the girl). When they combine they form a new cell called Zygote. This cell starts to divide and divide and makes a human baby after some time.",
"If however in the very beginning, you remove the DNA from the Zygote and replace it with the DNA that you extracted from a grown human being, you can trick the cell to make a copy of that grown person. It will divide and divide and make a baby one day, which will be like an identical twin to the grown person, only much younger.",
"We have done this with other mammals, including the famous Dolly sheep. So it is entirely plausible that it can be done with human beings too."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5e72h0",
"comment_text": [
"Wow that is amazing. I knew I should have paid more attention in science class. I'm going to guess that the reason we don't do this is because it basically disproves some religions, right?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5e75qp",
"comment_text": [
"Well... I don't think it \"disproves\" any religion. It's just considered morally questionable by many people, religious or otherwise."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5e8lw1",
"comment_text": [
"Agreed. One of the main issues is why you'd clone yourself, where one of the first answers to crop up, is organ transplants. Sure, the organs (or any other body part) may be genetically identical, but then, what rights does the clone have? Even if it's been medically braindead, how ethical is ",
" procedure?",
"Welcome to the rabbit hole."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What's the difference between an *actor* and a *character actor*?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
163t6k
| 7
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7siqos",
"comment_text": [
"A character actor is an actor who plays peculiar and unusual supporting roles, often because they lack the traditional attractiveness and charisma of a leading man. They often have an unusual appearance that lends itself to those kinds of roles.",
"Being a character actor can sometimes be a choice. It can be easier to get supporting roles, and they don't get blamed when a movie tanks. Many character actors, like Steve Buscemi, advance to leading roles, and many leading men, like Christopher Walken, take on more character actor type roles."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7sl7v6",
"comment_text": [
"A character actor is an actor who is skilled at portraying a specific kind of character. For example, an actor who is always cast as a generic mafia muscle. He will put on his resume that that is his speciality, and that if you need a guy to play a mafia tough guy, he's the guy to call. They purposely sell themselves as playing a specific type of character.",
"A regular actor goes for all sorts of roles.",
"EDIT: I apologize. There appears to be two meanings. The other guys have the original meaning down (an actor who plays weird roles), but apparently other people are starting to use the meaning I just said (i.e. a guy who specializes in a specific kind of role). I didn't realize that the meaning I had was the \"incorrect\" one. But yeah, that may be the source of your confusion. ",
"http://www.quora.com/Movies/What-is-a-character-actor",
" First answer here is pretty good."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7sh8s4",
"comment_text": [
"There's no formal distinction, but character actors are those who play mostly supporting roles instead of leads, and are given the distinction because they are quite adept at embodying a wide range of characters to the point of building a career on it. The kind of people you see on screen and go 'oh its that guy!', as opposed to A-listers like Brad Pitt, George Clooney etc. who while they are great actors in their own right, always play leads and can sell a film or TV show just by virtue of being in it. ",
"That's my understanding of it, anyway. Its not an official term."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7t2mia",
"comment_text": [
"See: Gary Oldman"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7sm4jk",
"comment_text": [
"In the old studio-system Hollywood days, the character actors were the ones you chose to fit a character. The initial producers' meeting would go \"Okay, I'm thinking we need a good crime story based on a true story. We've got Cary Grant on contract, we could cast him as a lovable rogue, and Ingrid Bergman's onboard, we'll cast her as his girlfriend. Jenkins, get started writing this movie, Cary Grant/Ingrid Bergman romantic crime thriller with a twist ending.\" The stars were chosen before the story, which was created with them in mind. Then, when the script was handed in and production was ramping up, they'd say \"Okay, we've got this character, the hero's brother, find an actor fit to play that character.\" So the ",
" were the ones who auditioned for an existing character, while the stars generally had characters created for them.",
"That's not usually how it works today, but the association of character actors being career actors who play the minor roles has stuck without a really clear meaning."
],
"score": 2
}
|
||
METAPOST: ELI5 should be renamed, or at least repurposed to Explain To A Layperson
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wqic4
| 25
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fl60u",
"comment_text": [
"I'm always shocked by how seriously some people take like I'm five part"
],
"score": 74
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fkyve",
"comment_text": [
"Interestingly enough, you're also in agreement with the original purpose of this subreddit. 'like I'm five' was never meant to be literal. No one is answering questions expecting a five year old to be on the other end. And this is why the sidebar says",
"\"** please, no arguments about what an \"actual five year old\" would know or ask!** We're all about simple answers to complicated questions. Use your best judgment and stay within the spirit of the subreddit.\""
],
"score": 25
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fmm6m",
"comment_text": [
"I think they're just angry that they didn't understand the dumbed-down version. "
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fkwsu",
"comment_text": [
"That's already what it is. No one really thinks explanations should be told like a Dr. Seuss story. "
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5fmkc3",
"comment_text": [
"I hate these analogies using lemonade stands to explain the stock market or cookies or any other stupid literal ELI5 answer."
],
"score": 15
}
|
|
After seeing the other ELI5 post today, what is the safest way to torrent files?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
16npa8
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
How do i ensure i am not downloading a virus? How do i know if a torrent is good? What is the best software to use? Pretty much can someone give a beginners guide to torrenting?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7xoari",
"comment_text": [
"Torrenting is in no way illegal. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7ynvyh",
"comment_text": [
"That is a good question. I do not know. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7ynvyh",
"comment_text": [
"That is a good question. I do not know. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7xo7bu",
"comment_text": [
"Yes but you can torrent files legally correct? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7xoqkz",
"comment_text": [
"Do legal torrents not contain virus's? I just assumed if anyone can upload a legal torrent then there could be legal torrents with virus's? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
How do companies get away with advertising that '90% of their customers preferred their product' when they only take a small sample of their total customer base?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
17fbl3
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
Just curious as I saw an advert claiming that exact thing when they only had a sample of just over 1000 people. Also, are the 1000 people they asked 'hand picked' as it were, to increase the percentage?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c84yn1v",
"comment_text": [
"You can use a kind of mathematical tool known as statistics to determine what the customers ",
" have said if you asked all of them. It turns out asking 1000 people lets you be pretty sure the true number is pretty close.",
"For this to work, the 1000 people need to be random. If they're not random, then that ",
" misleading, and could land the company in trouble."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8544ar",
"comment_text": [
"It's not really deceiving. It's accurate to within a few percentage points as long as the population is random and unbiased.",
"Statistics are in use all the time. Political polls only get responses from a around a thousand people. TV ratings that estimate the viewership and demographics that determine which shows stay on air only use about 25,000 people to define the activities of 110,000,000 American TV-viewing households."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c84ysd8",
"comment_text": [
"But how can it be accurate if they haven't asked ALL their customers? Surely it would just be an approximation.",
"Because they have fine print saying \"out of a sample of X\" which is them saying it's a statistical sample. EVen if they didn't have it someone would have to argue they were harmed and truly believed this company had surveyed millions of people, which seems like quite the claim."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c84yf7i",
"comment_text": [
"Because it's accurate, even if it is misleading."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c84ygib",
"comment_text": [
"But how can it be accurate if they haven't asked ALL their customers? Surely it would just be an approximation. Please explain if I'm missing something here... "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is there a ban on screenshots in most of the popular subreddits?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1dswek
| 18
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
Is the ban on memes in many subreddits related?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9tij18",
"comment_text": [
"The communities in those subreddits felt that the memes and other quick-to-read content was overcrowding the interesting articles and other text-based content.",
"If you click on a meme, you can look at it and vote on it in about five seconds. An in-depth article might take you two or three minutes to read and vote on. Therefore, memes will usually outpace articles (all over things equal)."
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9tiw61",
"comment_text": [
"Let's suppose that 70% of Reddit likes memes, and 30% don't.",
"Without these rules, the 70% would \"win\" every time.",
"Sub-reddits like these are presumably run by the 30%, for the 30%."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9tjoqz",
"comment_text": [
"This aint a democracy, if it was every goddamm subreddit would be r/funnyadviceanimalpolitics"
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9tiu4h",
"comment_text": [
"It is countered by everyone's ability to make a new subreddit and go there instead. "
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9tnd5d",
"comment_text": [
"Even if you suppose the opposite, this is problematic. If 30% like memes and 70% don't, if a meme-lover can upvote 2.3 memes in the time a non-lover upvotes more in-depth content (which they can, memes are very quickly processed), a lot more memes get upvoted. Even though they each get much fewer votes, there's still an overload of non-content"
],
"score": 9
}
|
|
ELI5: Economics question: if industrialised western nations demographics show aging populations with a decreasing working age proportion, shouldn't that mean greater employment prospects for the young?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1eb0l6
| 6
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Mostly i hear problems of aging demographics being greater burden on the working population supporting the elderly and non productive. But again shouldn't this be offset by the fewer people chasing jobs threfore pushing up wages?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9ygzzf",
"comment_text": [
"Assuming the number of jobs hasn't dropped and that the old folk are retiring at the right age."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9yhlio",
"comment_text": [
"For clarity - this hasn't happened. The population is aging, but they're also working longer and the number of jobs is not increasing at the same rate people are looking for them."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9yhtv0",
"comment_text": [
"Yes! But not in popular fields, jobs such as mechanics, welders, pipefitters etc. basically a lot of blue collar work is a great field for the youth to get into, unfortunately, most youth usually want to be more than that, so they go to business school, art school, law school and so on, which have low job prospects because of stiff competition from other youth, and more experienced workers returning to the field."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9yio7u",
"comment_text": [
"The number of jobs actually decreases per amount of work that needs done (over time) because of increases in efficiency.",
"We actually need to come up with new jobs, over time, to support this excess labor (imagine all of the farm hands that used to be used to support a city, now some of them are combine mechanics but most do something unrelated). "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9yl1vt",
"comment_text": [
"Well, there's a lot more forces at work than simple numbers. Here are some stats:",
"The life expectancy is constantly increasing, in fact on average, your life span has been increased by 5 hours each day due to medical advances.",
"The inflation rate for non-elastic goods are pretty high, meaning $1000 last year might be worth only $950 this year in terms of cost of utilities and food.",
"This causes another phenomenon: the age of retirement is increasing. Many elders are going back to work because their retirement savings simply isn't enough.",
"The global economy is increasingly fragile because the top 1% controls a ridiculous amount of wealth while commanding the majority of goods and services. This means that people who are not at the 1% has even less resources to share, and acquiring wealth from the 1% has been getting harder and harder.",
"The globalization of productivity means blue collar jobs are moved to other countries where people are willing to do more for less. Notice how your iPad or phone or PC is made of metal? somewhere in the world, people are going down to extremely dangerous places, trading their health and happiness for that piece of metal that will eventually become your device.",
"The truth is, there's no shortage of work, just a surplus of people in the wrong areas. There's no need for more lawyers, there's little need for more accountants or businessmen, even graphic designers and software developers. There's plenty of need for people who can take care of the elderly, in nursing for example. There's plenty of need for construction workers and engineers to maintain and improve civil infrastructure. There's plenty of need for healthcare workers in places around the world, especially the poorer areas.",
"But, why aren't those jobs getting filled? One argument is that it's really difficult to become an engineer or doctor. Fair enough, but nursing and construction working isn't as hard... but it doesn't pay well, and is hard work. Well, there's the crux of the problem. Who doesn't want to be a software developer who can create an app and live comfortably off the sales? Who doesn't want to be a lawyer who after a strong case, wins a prestigious settlement? Now here's the reality: most software developers do not end up making millions off their app. Most lawyers do not get good cases to work with, if they get a case at all.",
"The truth is, there's an illusion that going into certain fields will guarantee you success, but that is an illusion. Sure, the software industry is booming and you hear about legal cases going back and forth, surely there's a lot of money, and you wouldn't be wrong - there is, just also way more people doing it for all the wrong reasons.",
"I've kind of ranted off for a bit, so let me get back to the original point: why is it that we seem to have lower wages and fewer opportunities now than ever before? The answer: you're looking in the wrong direction. Not everyone is cut out to be a white collar worker, and there's no shame in being a blue collar worker. The fact that we have so many people trying to get white collar jobs without the necessary skills and aptitude is straining the workplaces that hired them, meanwhile the blue collar industry is having trouble finding people to do tasks. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
Why does everyone take the lower cash option on Powerball?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
13xoaj
| 14
| true
| false
| 0.76
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c78394n",
"comment_text": [
"Why not collect $17,000,000+ each year for the next 30 years?",
"Because you could die tomorrow."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c787hb1",
"comment_text": [
"Well with the amount of blow I would do with that cash; quite likely."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c787hb1",
"comment_text": [
"Well with the amount of blow I would do with that cash; quite likely."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c782b7c",
"comment_text": [
"Inflation makes that money worth less over time, you take it now and try to make it worth more overtime. Also, people always do this, they want as much now as possible and don't want to wait. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c7828lq",
"comment_text": [
"The current logic is that you can earn more money over that 30 years by taking the cash and investing in the market"
],
"score": 8
}
|
|
ELI5: Is it possible to detect fasting or dehydration with blood tests?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1mny6p
| 1
| true
| false
| 1
|
I was wondering if using mandatory blood tests anorexia among athletes could be eliminated. Is there a bulletproof way to catch someone that isn't eating normally?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccazidt",
"comment_text": [
"I appreciate the concern but I'm not asking as part of some twisted motive to game a heath test. Anorexia is the last disease I'll ever catch :). I'm just curious because eating disorders still happen to athletes and I'm surprised the medical community doesn't have some bullet proof magical blood test that sums up your nutritional intake for the last 6 months from a pin prick."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccaz4kz",
"comment_text": [
"A set of chemistries (Comprehensive Metabolic Panel/SMA-18) will show the body's electrolyte balance and see what is in and out of range: Magnesium, salts, Potassium, Phosphorus, as well as how hard the liver is working (ALT/AST) and how hard the kidneys are working (BUN, SerumCr); i.e. is the PT dehydrated? To what extent it will show malnutrition, I don't know. Aside from that, you could do a tracemetal test for some of the lesser known elements; zinc, chromium, etc. It would be for a doctor to interpret the results."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccaz85j",
"comment_text": [
"Could these results be gamed by say eating a dozen bananas the night before the blood draw? What about just eating a vitamin. I guess what I'm asking after is an \"gotcha\" chemical your body makes only when its not getting what it needs that lingers in the system for a while."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccazaue",
"comment_text": [
"Are bananas just a random example of food, or do you think you'd skew the potassium level by eating 12 bananas? You won't change the K (Potassium) that much by eating 12 bananas. Contrary to popular belief, you have to a lot of bananas to get the K to be abnormal. The K isn't something you want to play around with - you could have serious heart issues with it too high or too low."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccazm5j",
"comment_text": [
"I wish it were that easy. We can test for a lot of things, but a good set of blood results are only a smart part of what makes someone \"healthy\". Nutritional information can be gathered from blood tests, but there is no magic blood test there. A lot goes into it: liver function test, kidney use, cholesterol, thyroid...once that is interpreted by an MD or Nutritionist, they can make recommendations or guesses as to what's wrong. We're getting close to the limit of my knowledge here, but no, no magic test for nutritional intake. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: why does it sometimes make more sense to say "you are" instead of "you're"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1mri3q
| 1
| true
| false
| 1
|
This might turn out to be blatantly obvious, but right now I can't think why
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccbxsg6",
"comment_text": [
"\"You're\", as you know, is a short form of \"you are\".....",
"But what are you?",
"If the word is followed by what you are, then you can use the contraction: \"You're nice.\" \"You're here.\" \"I'm sorry to hear that you're not well.\"",
"Otherwise, you can't: \"I don't know where you are.\" (Not \"I don't know where you're\") \"There you are.\" (Not \"There you're.\")",
"I tried to confirm this online, but couldn't find anything. But it seems right to me.",
"Note also that sometimes you might not want to use the contraction. For example, you might want to emphasise one of the words: \"You ",
" addicted to reddit, you can deny it all you like.\""
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccbxuw1",
"comment_text": [
"OK this makes a lot of sense, thank you."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccbxos6",
"comment_text": [
"Example? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccbxr08",
"comment_text": [
"Like \"no, you're\" and \"no, you are\", saying the former just doesn't sound right"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccbycal",
"comment_text": [
"\"No, you're\" is ambiguous, especially when spoken. It leaves everyone hearing it thinking \" No, you're ... what?\" It also does not clear up whether the speaker meant You're or Your (No, your car is, No, your dog has). ",
"In this case, it isn't clear that the sentence is finished, and the hearer has to reparse it when they find out that the speaker has stopped speaking. We don't like doing this."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Functional Programming (today's XKCD)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1n8p43
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I tried reading the wikipedia article and got lost almost immediately. Could someone please ELI5 what functional programming and tail recursions are? Also link to the xkcd:
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccgctaz",
"comment_text": [
"Tail recursion is where a function calls itself when it ends. And example is the phrase \"Tail recursion is its own reward\"- it calls itself - \"own reward\" - at the end.",
"Solving problems using recursion - breaking them down into a function that can be used in a \"Do this until it's all done\" manner - can be a neat way to solve computer programming problems. It is usually less efficient than a more normal looping solution, but if the problem involves a lot of memory space and processor speed, but limited space for the program, recursion can beat other methods handsomely."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccge3wj",
"comment_text": [
"There's a lovely wiki called ",
"explainxkcd",
" which offers explanation for most of the xkcd comics so far.",
"Here's the explanation for the comic you asked about:",
"http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1270"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccgejq8",
"comment_text": [
"Here's the standard example: the factorial function. I'll use C#, which is a flexible language. Here it is in a \"procedural\" style:",
"int Factorial(int n)\n{\n int result = 1;\n for (int i = 2; i < n; i++)\n {\n result = result * i;\n }\n return result;\n}\n",
"Here it is in a \"functional\" style:",
"int Factorial(int n)\n{\n if (n < 2)\n {\n return 1;\n }\n else\n {\n return n * Factorial(n-1);\n }\n}\n",
"You will notice that this implementation calls itself. This is called recursion. Because the recursive call is the last thing to happen, we call it \"tail recursion\". Functional languages are (by necessity) implemented in such a way that tail recursion is efficient.",
"But here's another way of thinking about the factorial function: you take a number n, make a list of all the integers from 1 to n, and then get their product. That is, you are \"unfolding\" n into a list and then \"folding\" that list into an answer. In functional programming, you often break up functions into these steps, so special fold and unfold functions will be provided that handle the details of recursion for you. So a factorial function might look like this:",
"int Factorial(int n)\n{\n return n.Unfold(x => x - 1, x => x > 0).Aggregate((x, y) => x*y);\n}\n",
"(Aggregate is what C# calls the \"fold\" function. Unfold is not a standard function.)",
"This is more concise, and the space savings become more significant as the functions become more complex. In a true functional language where use of fold and unfold is ubiquitous, this may be yet more concise (e.g. in Haskell):",
"fac n = foldr (*) 1 [1..n]\n",
"At this point, we've removed all of the unnecessary bits. We aren't explicitly iterating or recursing. Every part of the function corresponds to some part of the sentence \"the factorial of n is the product of the natural numbers from 1 to n\".",
"The downside is that it can be a bit abstruse. (For a demonstration of this, see the examples given ",
"here",
".) As the XKCD alt text put it:",
"Functional programming combines the flexibility and power of abstract mathematics with the intuitive clarity of abstract mathematics."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccge34e",
"comment_text": [
"Functional languages invariably implement tail recursion so that it doesn't suck up extra memory like it can in other languages."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccgeuq2",
"comment_text": [
"If you follow xkcd, you will find ",
"this link",
" very useful. I think it must be run by, or affiliated with, Randall Munroe, the guy who draws the comics, because it almost always has a tremendously helpful breakdown within a very short time after the comics are published."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does a statement have more credibility when it rhymes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1gqbfw
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_campe51",
"comment_text": [
"Perhaps you should first explain your premise."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_camsutk",
"comment_text": [
"If anything, rhyming probably ",
" the perception of credibility of a statement. We associate rhyming with silliness and with poetry. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_camqdd3",
"comment_text": [
"Why do you think it does?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_camqs03",
"comment_text": [
"It does if catchiness has any relation to how often it is repeated or how readily it is remembered, which can impact persuasion. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_campwob",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think this is the case. A statement which rhymes might be more catchy, but I can't really see any evidence that it is perceived as more persuasive or credible."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How can Sony "own" the rights to characters made by Marvel? How can Marvel "sell" their usage rights?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
18gv6a
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
I get that there are copyright laws that exist. What I don't get is how they actually work in practice from an OBJECTIVE stance. Marvel, a corporation, creates characters. They are the lifeblood of the company. They control their names, plots, everything. They publish hundreds of issues of stories using them every single month. This is given. A comic book is hundreds of images, printed on a piece of paper, then bound together as a book. Peoples eyeballs see these images and interpret these characters. A movie is just hundreds of images, printed on film, then played very fast. Peoples eyeballs see these images and interpret them as characters. So, how in a legal sense, can there possibly be a way to say Marvel cannot place its own characters on a sequence of images printed onto celluloid and displayed through a projector?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8eoof1",
"comment_text": [
"So, how in a legal sense, can there possibly be a way to say Marvel cannot place its own characters on a sequence of images printed onto celluloid and displayed through a projector?",
"By making a law that says \"Marvel [if they have sold the rights to their characters] cannot place its own characters on a sequence of images printed onto celluloid and displayed through a projector\", or something equivalent to that.",
"I'm not sure where your confusion is. You may think that comic books are kinda similar to movies in certain ways, but they're clearly not the same thing; if you give someone a comic book, and then give them a movie, they're never going to be confused about which one is which."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8epyaw",
"comment_text": [
"There is (to my knowledge) no legal definition of a comic or movie. Of course Sony and Marvel both know this, so I'm sure that in whatever agreement they came up with, they also laid out constitutes a comic or a movie within the confines of their agreement. These sort of legal documents will have a whole section that strictly defines words used in the document that would otherwise be unclear and open for different interpretations. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ep9rr",
"comment_text": [
"She short answer is that Marvel promised that they would not, so that they would revive more money in the initial deal with Sony.",
"Marvel invented the character, and they can do basically whatever they want with it. They choose to make comic books. The books become popular and Marvel thinks they can make lots of money if they can have a successful movie. But Marvel does not really have the people, connections or expertise to make a movie. So they get in touch with a movie studio and offer to let them make the movie.",
"Now someone's going to have to pay for this movie. Marvel could do it, but movies are expensive and they want Sony to try super hard to make this successful (because Marvel does not know how). So they think, if Sony pays for the movie, they will try as hard as they can to get that money back.",
"So instead of marvel taking all the risk and getting all the profits. Sony takes the risk and gets the profits. But if Sony is going to get the profits what does marvel get, after all they invented the character! Sony pays marvel a fee for the rights to use the character. That's perfect, except for one thing. If sony is going to take all this risk, and put all this money into a Marvel movie they want to know that marvel is not just going to turn to someone else to make the next one. So they add a line to the contract that prevents this. Marvel agrees because Sony agrees to pay a little more to get that line.",
"A few years later Marvel is purchased by another movie studio. Now this new studio is sure as hell not going to buy the rights back from Sony, they don't want to give the competition money. So its better to just wait for the contract to expire."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8epjw6",
"comment_text": [
"Ok, but you appreciate that digital mediums make things more unclear, right?",
"Comics can live on an iPad. Now there are motion comics. Motion comics even have dialogue in them.",
"You can watch movies on an iPad.",
"At what point is a digital comic a movie? Is it defined by using real human beings?",
"If we hit an advance in CG next year that lets you do photorealistic rendering, does a photorealistic motion comic suddenly become a movie that Marvel cannot create stories on?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8epubt",
"comment_text": [
"It's possible that someone will invent/create some third kind of thing, which is kinda like a comic book and kinda like a movie. If and when that happens, we will have to update the laws to say whether it counts as a comic book, a movie, both, or neither."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Thunder (Lightning)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
19f9qc
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
Someone just told me that thunder is not actually caused by two clouds bumping into each other. I must know the truth.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nhu2o",
"comment_text": [
"Lightning is a sudden and massive discharge of electricity in the air. It's also very hot, so it heats up the air around it. Heated air expands rapidly -- so rapidly, in fact, that the sudden expansion/motion creates a shockwave. This is the loud boom that you hear as thunder.",
"If you want to know how far away lightning is, when you see the flash start counting seconds. It's one mile for every five seconds before the thunder arrives. If you ever see the lightning and hear the thunder at the same time... well, you really don't want that to happen."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8oep51",
"comment_text": [
"So where did the \"when clouds bump\" theory come from?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ooepu",
"comment_text": [
"People who don't know how lightning works. And that's not really a facetious answer. Things bang together down here -- drop a brick on the floor, clap your hands, whatever -- and they make noise. So it was a naive but logical assumption to think, \"Clouds are big. They must make noise when they 'bang' together.\"",
"Except that clouds don't so much bang as merge. Remember, they're made of water but they're not very dense."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nhu2e",
"comment_text": [
"Lightning is caused by a difference in electric charge in the sky. This builds up until it becomes so big that it creates lightning. ",
"The lightning is really hot, which heats up the air around it really fast. The hot air expands, and creates a shockwave, due to expanding so fast.",
"This shockwave makes a big noise, which is the thunder produced by the lightning.",
"\"Lightning is a massive electrostatic discharge caused by unbalanced electric charges in the atmosphere, and resulting in a strike, from a cloud to itself, a cloud to a cloud or a cloud to ground,\"",
"\"Thunder is the sound caused by lightning. Depending on the nature of the lightning and distance of the listener, thunder can range from a sharp, loud crack to a long, low rumble (brontide). The sudden increase in pressure and temperature from lightning produces rapid expansion of the air surrounding and within a bolt of lightning. In turn, this expansion of air creates a sonic shock wave, similar to a sonic boom, which produces the sound of thunder, often referred to as a clap, crack, or peal of thunder.\"",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning#Cloud_particle_collision_hypothesis"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ni1rj",
"comment_text": [
"I'm not sure what they taught you, but it's possible. I didn't pay attention in kindergarden when they taught us the order of the months and I still have trouble remembering it today."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why companies having access to your browsing habits and why targeted ads are bad things.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
19ffx6
| 2
| true
| false
| 1
|
First of all, I assume these companies don't have a live person specifically look through your browsing habits/history, and instead it all works through algorithms and code. When you look up "hemorrhoid cream", I assume there isn't some guy going, "Ha! Look at this guy!" And isn't the only incentive to do this in the first place to simply have targeted ads geared specifically towards you? Maybe ads will actually be useful and I'll know about good deals on electronic cigarettes or musical instruments or whatever else I'm interested in. Surely, however, there are some downsides as so many people are opposed to it. Can anyone explain what they are?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8njbu7",
"comment_text": [
"They don't have a live person specifically look through your browsing habits. But your browsing habits are stored in a database, so someone ",
" do this if they wanted to. Some people just aren't comfortable with that."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8njcbb",
"comment_text": [
"Imagine your friends are over, and you're browsing Reddit. Then suddenly a targeted ad pops up North Korean incestuous midget porn. That would be pretty embarrassing for most people. This could have been prevented if companies did not have access to your browsing habits."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8njdjg",
"comment_text": [
"You're correct in that it's generally automated, and things like targeted ads are in fact the normal use of browsing history.",
"The problem is that if I'm looking up \"how to cure genital herpes\", and then I leave, and my wife sits down and starts getting ads for herpes treatment on 80% of the websites she visits, she may start to suspect there's a problem. ",
"Similarly, if I'm at work, and I'm searching for new jobs in another city, I don't need ads to show up on my computer when I'm giving a presentation to a coworker.",
"In reality, targeted ads are mostly just a reminder that someone's watching what you do. Sometimes it's awesome to get an ad for a cheap plane flight to London the day after I spent an hour looking for tickets, sometimes it's creepy when I start seeing ads for a product I researched when I don't ever plan on using it and it may or may not be something embarrassing. To the people doing tracking (the big ad companies), targeted eyeballs are worth far more than random internet users - the click through rate is higher, the conversion rate is higher, the value is higher across the board. To the people being tracked, sometimes they don't even realize it, which makes them a valuable target. Sometimes they get annoyed, but what are they going to do about it?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nmsob",
"comment_text": [
"There are three primary issues",
"Employers, Insurance Companies, etc., love to gather as much info as they can before dealing with someone. And what they are usually looking for is a reason to not deal with you. Let's take an example:",
"When you lookup \"hemorrhoid cream\", you may eventually be tagged as a user with a possible medical problem. If you go on to buy hemorrhoid cream, either online or in an actual store using a credit card, that info is also linked. This information will be factored into a overall statistical score of the likeliness of a user to have a medical condition. An employer can purchase that info and see a model of how much his group employee insurance policy will rise if he hires you and chose not to hire you. An insurance company gets this info and sends it to underwriting where you premium is adjusted upward or the policy is cancelled (or worse, used to deny coverage citing a preexisting condition that was not disclosed)",
"How much of the above scenario is active today is hard to say. The technology certainly exists as does the raw data itself; the only uncertainty is how effectively it is being used. Data mining is a young industry, as I suspect that currently most data is used only in aggregate. However, this will change in the future, and remember issue #1: this information lives forever.",
"And that's the real problem. Once your browsing habits are gathered, the data just sits there waiting for somebody to come along to abuse it, and by then there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nl2ec",
"comment_text": [
"In addition to what the other users have mentioned. Data on my computer belongs to ME. If a company wants to use that data to make money (off me) I expect to be compensated for the use of my property. The companies who do this do not compensate the source of the information in any way. They take something that you own, and use it for their own marketing. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why would anyone want to buy Berkshire Hathaway's stock if they never pay dividends?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1ji5dh
| 22
| true
| false
| 0.77
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbevwjs",
"comment_text": [
"Instead of paying dividends, the company reinvests in itself, so therefore you would expect stock prices to rise faster than a company that does pay dividends. So the value you get from the stock is the increase in the value of the shares you own over time, instead of a cash payout of dividends. As mentioned, Berkshire Hathaway's stock has, historically, performed extremely well so it is a valuable stock to own."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbezyt2",
"comment_text": [
"By reinvest I guess I mean like expand the business"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbevok4",
"comment_text": [
"Lots of stocks don't pay dividends. Dividends are more often considered a nice perk unless you can heavily invest in the stock to get a good amount coming back. ",
"The reason you'd buy a stock that doesn't pay out is that you expect their value will go up so you can sell it later for a profit."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbf0cw9",
"comment_text": [
"The value in owning just a single share is that you are getting stock tips from the most reliable, non-fraudulent, and profit-oriented Business minds to walk the earth. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbevrr1",
"comment_text": [
"From wiki:"
],
"score": 3
}
|
||
Is it possible that we may not be the only universe created by a big bang?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1kd9gd
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
If there was nothing to begin with, but obviously something in which to cause the big bang, does that mean it's possible that another big bang (or more) may have or could happen?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbnrw3o",
"comment_text": [
"not in OUR universe. but u cannot prove that there hasn't been a closed universe before OUR big bang happened. you can't disprovable the statement. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbnr0dg",
"comment_text": [
"Actually, what ",
"/u/CaptainArbitrary",
" isn't necessarily true, if I'm understanding what he's saying/the question is asking correctly.",
"In an article I'm reading",
", it says studies show that the big bang is just the ",
" event that we can know within reason that created all matter as we know it. ",
"However, it's concievable that there was \"time before our big bang\" and that in that time, other big bangs may have occured.",
"I also want to point out that I believe we discovered a star ",
" It's in fact about as old as our universe at 14.5, sorry."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbnrjzr",
"comment_text": [
"i don't think \"before the Big Bang\" is meaningless. there may very well have been a time before our universe existed that some other universe bigbanged and since then has collapsed. then our big bang happened and we're still here. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbnrqdd",
"comment_text": [
"Could you explain the energy you're referring to? I get the jist of it, but the mechanics of why another universe cannot exist due to lack of energy is hard to grasp. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbnqrlo",
"comment_text": [
"No, it's not. It was once believed that that was a possibility, but observations of the universe have ruled it out. There's not enough energy in the universe to reverse the positive expansion of the metric. What that means is that all distances in the universe will continue to grow larger over time, and the metric will never contract and start expanding again. The universe does not oscillate."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do some people not get hang overs?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1kewh1
| 13
| true
| false
| 0.59
|
I never get hang overs. No matter how much I drink I never get any things close to what People describe as a hang over. If I drank a lot and forgot to drink water before passing out then I might wake up completley dry and need water, but after drinking I'm as good as new. How can my biology be so different from the majority? What exactly cause a hangover ?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo7zn8",
"comment_text": [
"Ahh... how sweet life was before the age of 30."
],
"score": 32
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo9kap",
"comment_text": [
"This video",
" explains what else is going on in the bodies (more specifically, livers) of people suffering from hangovers BESIDES dehydration. Doesn't necessarily answer the question, but I thought it was relevant."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo853d",
"comment_text": [
"im not old at all, but i did not get hangovers till i was like 22 im only 23 now.. but i now get them anytime i drink to much"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo8an8",
"comment_text": [
"Oh the dreaded two day day hangover. Just when I thought Mondays couldn't get any worse. Bam! Still hungover from Saturday. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo83pt",
"comment_text": [
"That's a WHOLE different kind of hangover."
],
"score": 8
}
|
|
ELI5: If some plants have defenses from things trying to eat it (like poison), why would marijuana be addictive, and cause animals to go looking for the plant?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1kewz2
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
I would think that, because marijuana is an addictive drug, animals would eat more of the plant than less
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo85dv",
"comment_text": [
"How did you come to the conclusion that marijuana is addictive? I don't think you would get the same effect eating it as you would smoking it. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo8c4e",
"comment_text": [
"I can't answer why marijuana is addictive (psychologically), but it's not that uncommon for some animals to, for example, eat fermented fruit to get drunk. Also some plants do want to get eaten (or at least the fruit) to spread it's seeds."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo8dot",
"comment_text": [
"It is psychologically addictive.. also you DO get basically the same effect from eating it but you need to prepare it a bit for the body to be able to use it. By making cannabutter and baking with that for example.",
"Not that i think animals are making cannabutter ;)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbo8g2x",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah you need to heat it up to get the effects from the THC. either by vaporizing it, burning it, or cooking it into something fatty. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cboh20g",
"comment_text": [
"Close, you only really need to remove the carboxyl group from the carbon chain through ",
"decarboxylation",
" "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why people chew and swallow their chocolate?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1hw90t
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.35
|
When you eat chocolate, why do people stuff their mouths and then proceed to chew several times before swallowing? Chocolate is not something you should get full off of. You should enjoy it, a small bite of chocolate you leave in your mouth to melt will provide more flavor than stuffing a ton of it and swallowing it. I cant wrap my head around why people do this... I am not against people doing this, i just cant understand why. *Downvotes for a serious question... IM NOT SAYING THERE IS A WRONG OR RIGHT WAY... im trying to understand a different perspective.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cayl1t3",
"comment_text": [
"Priority in life, you valued the chocolate experience more than those people who are \"doing it wrong\".",
"There is no \"correct\" way to eat it. Just let people do whatever that suits them. They're doing it \"wrong\" is not going to affect your enjoyment of chocolate anyway."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cayl5g5",
"comment_text": [
"There are different types of chocolate though; people who enjoy dark chocolate often savor it and let it melt, because the percentage of cocoa is higher and the flavor is more intense. Meanwhile, milk chocolate and other types are more \"watered down,\" with less cocoa and therefore less flavor, and people who eat it often take larger bites. Part of the difference might have something to do with price: dark chocolate is more expensive and often comes in smaller servings, so people feel that they must eat it slower, while milk chocolate these days comes in huge packages and costs less, therefore psychologically prompting people to value it less and takes bigger bites. But in the end it all really comes down to personal preference I think."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cayoxrf",
"comment_text": [
"Well as an economist, I would say that each piece of chocolate you eat gives you some amount of \"utility\" or enjoyment, based on the flavor and perceived value. So since milk chocolate and other less intense varieties have less flavor, lower perceive value, and thus gives you less utility per piece, it would follow that people would take larger bites and consume more in each sitting than they would eating richer chocolate, which has more utility per piece. It works the same way with other foods I would think. For instance, I always take my time and savor a $30 filet mignon or a nice bottle of wine, but when I get a $5 sirloin steak and a cheap beer, Ieat and drink faster to get a comparable amount of enjoyment out of it. Does that make sense?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_caylr2r",
"comment_text": [
"MY QUESTION ISNT ABOUT RIGHT OR WRONG though..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_caynjox",
"comment_text": [
"And my answer is it's all about personal preference. Some people just don't see the chocolate tasting experience as high as you. Which is fair.",
"Somebody taste whiskey and some people drink it like it's water. All down to personal preference."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why can't we just "invade" North Korea? (question in more detail inside)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1i92sb
| 12
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
So I see so much news on North Korea about them treating their citizens bad, threatening to kill their families, poverty/famine, stupid laws and rules, not technologically advanced compared to other countries, keeping POWS. Why can't we just "invade" them, overthrow Kim Jong Un and reunite the two Koreas? By doing this, we stop poverty, famine and all those terrible things they're doing AND we can reunite families from S Korea and N Korea. We sure have the technology and manpower to do so so why not?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb25rj5",
"comment_text": [
"A) They have a ",
"giant military",
". They have nearly as many troops as the US does, even though they're poorly equipped. There would be massive loss of life on both sides.",
"B) They have vast numbers of artillery installations within range of Seoul - South Korea's largest city, it's capital & center of industry. The North would completely flatten the city, killing countless civilians at the first sign of conflict.",
"C) China is still their ally. Aggression toward North Korea would be taken as an act of war against China. China likes having a buffer between them and the rest of the world.",
"D) Nukes. North Korea has them & is crazy enough to use them. Furthermore, so does China (see #C to see why this is relevant).",
"E) North Korea is not a direct threat to the US. After over a decade of fighting in Iraq & Afghanistan, our forces are spread thin & the American public doesn't want to start ",
" war.",
"F) There's nothing to gain. While the US often acts as the world's police, we aren't fixing everything wrong in the world. We generally need to have ",
" interest in the situation before spending fucktons of money and risking American lives."
],
"score": 29
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb25qpm",
"comment_text": [
"By doing this, we stop poverty, famine and all those terrible things they're doing AND we can reunite families from S Korea and N Korea.",
"As strange as it sounds, spreading peace and harmony is not the duty of the USA. While it is something we like to do in our spare time, the duty of our military is to look after US security and interests. Sacrificing the lives of US soldiers just to make some North Korean or South Korean's lives better is ",
" their mission.",
"Even ignoring the political issues such a move would raise with China, Russia, Germany, etc... even if invading North Korea would only have the price of a few hundred US casualties simply improving the lives of Koreans would not be sufficient justification to invade."
],
"score": 28
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb25u2i",
"comment_text": [
"Which asshat would that be? The US has been invading sovereign nations all my life, pretty much. When I was a kid, it was Nixon doing this. I suspect you aren't talking about him."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb2976i",
"comment_text": [
"World Police",
"God damn right, Team America."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb25nrp",
"comment_text": [
"Geopolitics. Consider how China would react to a unified democratic Korea off it's coast. ",
"According to the wikileaks cables, they consider this an acceptable outcome, and have privately said so to S Korea."
],
"score": 6
}
|
|
ELI5: If Earth was the size of VY Canis Majoris, and everything on it was proportionally as big, how big would actual Earth be on the surface?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pxn0v
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.25
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd74q0e",
"comment_text": [
"Well, put it this way, if you stuck VY where the Sun is it'd stretch out to Jupiter or Saturn. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd73xg7",
"comment_text": [
"So... how big is Earth compared to VY Canis Major?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd740h6",
"comment_text": [
"How big it would be compared to us, if it were laying on the surface. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd745lv",
"comment_text": [
"If you're talking about buildings, people, etc. Crushed flat. The gravity would be too immense. ",
"VY Canis Majoris is BILLIONS of kms across. The Earth is about 12000km across. The Earth is also more dense than a star, a lot more dense. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd749oy",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for trying to help. Disregarding everything that would make such a scenario possible, I just want to know how big Earth would be compared to the buildings, people, etc. I want to know so I can have a better understanding of the scale rather than the numbers. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
Why do people enjoy spicy foods, when it seems like that kind of eating experience SHOULD be a turn-off?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pwd05
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.8
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd6pyxi",
"comment_text": [
"Some people get a mild mood boost from it. Since the spicy ingredient is technically pain-producing, it alerts the pain response system and releases endorphins and feel-good chemicals. ",
"Since the degree of \"pain\" is actually tolerable, the pay-off is that the feel good is better than the feel bad."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd6rzle",
"comment_text": [
"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329301000672"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd6q11e",
"comment_text": [
"I'm guessing it's the same reason people see horror movies or ride roller coasters. It's a thrill"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd6qchy",
"comment_text": [
"It's also incredibly useful for clearing out your sinuses and sometimes can help sweat out a cold.",
"A bowl of soup with hot spices is just what the doctor ordered. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd6rryb",
"comment_text": [
"While I don't doubt that there might be some endorphin type effect as a response from the pain or whatever, I don't think that's the main reason. I personally legitimately like the flavor. Whether it's blazing hot or just a mild thing, the bite tastes good, same way people learn to like bitter tastes or sour flavors that seem counter-intuitive at first. Additionally it kind of makes your mouth more sensitive to other flavors (or at least the perception seems that way), same way a mint makes your mouth feel more sensitive to temperature."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why does Mexico use good ingredients and glass for their Coke as opposed to the cheaper, crappier ingredients?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1jbwwc
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Isn't high fructose corn syrup supposed to be cheaper? And isn't Mexico poor? Please explain.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbd4il0",
"comment_text": [
"Also, Mexico doesn't have an embargo on Cuba and their plentiful supply of cane sugar."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbd4f6x",
"comment_text": [
"High fructose corn syrup is cheaper in America because we heavily subsides the corn crop. In Mexico high fructose corn syrup is not cheaper than sugar. If it consistently was cheaper, Mexican Coke there would almost certainly be made with it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbd4izh",
"comment_text": [
"Ohh, that makes sense! Thank you for explaining to me."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbd8u1b",
"comment_text": [
"Higher fructose corn is cheaper than sugar in Mexico as well, using sugar is a marketing choice made by Coca Cola."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbd4p1h",
"comment_text": [
"Coke is made with different ingredients all across the globe. There are many many soda recipes that are all bottled and sold under the name \"coke classic.\" Coca Cola tailors their recipes based on what's cheap in a specific area: the US has lots of corn, so US coke uses corn. ",
"(also, it's worth mentioning that Mexico isn't exactly poor. Mexico currently has the 13th largest economy in the world. ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico#Main_indicators",
") "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why cant we use energy as a currency?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pxqpj
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.3
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd75c7r",
"comment_text": [
" Many people forget that.",
"We are essentially just using a more complicated form of barter trade. You could sell a pencil for $2000 and nobody would have a problem with that, as you price it that way due to your naiveness or just because you value that pencil that much. However, due to globalization, we've created relationships between different currencies and items, causing them to be given a standardized price.",
"Also, you can't use energy as a currency because there are multiple forms of energy - kinetic energy, potential energy, chemical energy, electric energy and so on. While these things too are easily subject to barter trade, some forms of energy, especially the most expensive ones, are simply too dangerous or too costly to be used as currency. You have to ",
" energy itself on containing itself for easy circulation.",
" Currency is just a placeholder, and energy is difficult to contain/transport."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd761rm",
"comment_text": [
"What about the factor of personal value? A jacket owned by Michael Jackson sells waaaaaaaay more than any other jacket of the same style. Same goes with antiques and the Monalisa.",
"Society, past and present, obviously hasn't given much importance to conserving our usable energy. It's why artists earn more than the money put into renewable energy..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd75xv1",
"comment_text": [
"We are; Petro-Dollars..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdfe97o",
"comment_text": [
"Wow you can swear and almost form complete sentences! Good job!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd75wh1",
"comment_text": [
"Currency already is kinda the place holder for energy and materials. I mean some of the price is related to however much we want to charge. Thats why I dont buy apple they charge twice as much as they should for a computer just as good anywhere else. We determine the price of an the fruit apple by how much the land costs to maintain and feed trees. the people we have to pay to pick and manage. the price of shipping. then they divide all that by how many apples they can sell. All of those factors basically can be boiled down to energy spent vs gained."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
What is the human body doing when yawning?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pxp6g
| 10
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
And why is it when I see someone else yawn I have to as well?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd74nor",
"comment_text": [
"Moves carbon dioxide out of our blood stream which makes more room for oxygen. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd779dy",
"comment_text": [
"Source? This is interesting"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd77we9",
"comment_text": [
"This is actually a myth. There was a study done where even when people are given masks supplying 100% oxygen they would still yawn. In reality, we don't know why we yawn."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd74t6f",
"comment_text": [
"How come they almost seem to be contagious? "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd764ap",
"comment_text": [
"Studies have shown carbon dioxide levels increase after yawning."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does PC have better graphics than consoles?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pxxg4
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
I mean, PCs have several uses and stuff, and have smaller hardware to the consoles. And isn't it console's jobs to be good
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd76lwz",
"comment_text": [
"Better hardware."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd76mon",
"comment_text": [
"Have you seen the size of some people's desktop towers? They can get significantly larger than that of a console. Mine is at least twice of the weight of an Xbox360 and I don't even have a high-end custom-built PC. They have more room to store larger, more powerful components, not to mention the ability to upgrade as technology does so. Your Xbox/PS3 have been using the same hardware for the past ten years, and are limited to a television set that currently only goes up to 1080p (meanwhile, my computer monitor goes up to 1900x1200).",
"In short, a PC desktop has access to the latest technology and has far more room to accommodate larger and more powerful components."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd76mvx",
"comment_text": [
"Because consoles don't want to cost more than $600, but PCs due to their open nature can be built for more. Also consoles are supposed to last for a few years until the next is released, but if you buy a PC in the middle of this release cycle the cost of hardware has gone down so you can get better stuff for the same price."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd7736c",
"comment_text": [
"Because not including the upcoming consoles your current consoles are pushing a decade in age. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd779j1",
"comment_text": [
"A PC and a Console are basically the same thing hardware wise. ",
"The main difference is that consoles are standardized to a certain specification and have software to make them work as a living room machine without requiring setup.",
"PCs can always be made better than consoles by putting in better hardware, and ocassionally with better software. This can mean more expensive parts, newer parts, or ocassionally just straight up better parts. ",
"One thing I want to emphasize is that Consoles and PCs are both basically the same. They are both computers. If you managed to put different base software on a console it could run just like a regular PC. ",
"A console isn't good at being a console for any reason other than standardization of specific software."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does the (number of upvotes/total votes) for any given reddit post rarely surpass 80%, even for seemingly non controversial posts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1qvqgb
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdh0019",
"comment_text": [
"The reddit voting algorithm deliberately \"fuzzes\" voting.",
"http://www.reddit.com/wiki/faq#wiki_how_is_a_submission.27s_score_determined.3F"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdgztez",
"comment_text": [
"I feel like it's cause there's some people and bots that just down vote everything like you said. Why? I have no clue. Seems incredibly pointless to me, but the ratio of upvotes to downvotes is absurd on reddit compared to other sites so I don't think it's just a hard to impress bunch"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdh0ic2",
"comment_text": [
"Also content quality. Sometimes it's not controversial, but it's just not good. I'll down vote that. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdgzvwv",
"comment_text": [
"Something that isn't controversial generally isn't interesting either. 'Just states the obvious' is a good reason to downvote something, to allow other more interesting/controversial posts to rise.",
"\"I disagree with that' isn't a proper reason to downvote something, just like 'I agree with that\" is a poor reason to upvote something. So if the voting system was working right, controversial posts would rise to the top, while things everyone agrees on should sink out of sight."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdh6kkh",
"comment_text": [
"This question concerns one of the most frequently asked topics on ELI5, so it has been removed. Try the searchbar next time please."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: How does mass warp space-time?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1qvirt
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdhga2l",
"comment_text": [
"Part of understanding scientific theory is having a good visual imagination. ",
"When you think of the way a planet's gravity pulls objects around it, remember that it pulls ALL matter around it. ",
"So, imagine that you are a planet and your couch is space. When a friend who is heavier in mass than you comes and sits on the couch, he pulls you toward him, but his gravity is also warping the cushion around him.",
"If someone doesn't come along and explain better, I recommend A Brief History of Time by Hawking. Seriously, it's pretty short and there's no math involved."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdhi2nb",
"comment_text": [
"Right, I understand the basic mechanics of general relativity, but my question is ",
" does mass affect space-time the way it does? Why does space time warp in the face of mass? ",
"Are the mechanics behind it known? From what previous posters have alerted to me, the answer appears to be \"no.\" "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdgxqj9",
"comment_text": [
"If I could tell you, I'd be booking a flight to Stockholm (It is Stockholm, right?) to pick up my Nobel prize.",
"The best answers you'll get are \"I dunno\", \"it just does\", and \"shut up I'm working on it\""
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdgxxyw",
"comment_text": [
"I always thought it was Oslo."
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdgxmik",
"comment_text": [
"Considering that even the most brilliant minds in the world haven't managed to figure this out, I doubt anyone here can explain it in a five year old context.",
"I can kind of explain the theory or basic idea, but not the how or why."
],
"score": 0
}
|
||
ELI5: Why are pizza places (almost) the only food vendors who do delivery?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1qslii
| 4
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
I realize that there are other restaurants deliver, but as far as I know pizza is the only type of food with nearly 100% delivery rate. Why is this? How long have pizzas been delivered?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdg0s97",
"comment_text": [
"Any Chinese* place worth its MSG will deliver, as do most Mexican places (at least in my area). In big cities I think its more common for more places to deliver. I can get sushi delivered, for example. I've never seen that in the 'burbs before.",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" ",
" "
],
"score": 16
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdg19cf",
"comment_text": [
"The argument still holds; why not just put the boxes of fast food in insulated sleeves? They made a sleeve to fit pizza boxes, they could make it in other shapes as well.",
"I'm mostly being a devil's advocate here, which is ironic considering your username."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdg0ovi",
"comment_text": [
"It's easy to keep a few pizzas warm while you're driving to make the delivery. It's a bit harder to keep someone's burger and fries nice and toasty when you have 5 bags to deliver and nothing to insulate them with."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdg0y2u",
"comment_text": [
"So pizzas stay warm because of the cardboard boxes they're in, right? Then why not deliver fast food in boxes too?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdg1asm",
"comment_text": [
"It's pretty inefficient, given that they could be delivering anywhere from one meal to five meals - at least pizza boxes are flat enough that they can stack easily, without leaving too much empty space."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: What caused the american civil war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sml6m
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Can someone explain me a few reasons why the american civil war started?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdz2960",
"comment_text": [
"The N and S had basically developed into separate cultural and economic entities, which fostered that \"us against them\" mentality. ",
"For the three decades before the war, the real area of contention was representation in Congress. As new states were admitted to the union, slave dependent southern states pushed for the new states to allow for slavery (as it fit with their interests). Free northern states opposed this as they didn't want a block of slave states dictating policies in Congress that would favor the southern economies and culture.",
"Of course this adds to the tension, as did a growing abolition movement in some northern states. It all comes to a head when Lincoln runs for President and is viewed by the southern power-brokers as a abolitionist in the White House. ",
"The south secedes from the US, declares its independence, sets up a government, and then hopes to go on its way. The Confederate States of America, in an attempt to secure its borders, blockades and then attacks a US fort in South Carolina......then war begins in earnest."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdz2ey2",
"comment_text": [
"Too complicated for ELI5.",
"Search: q=the+us+civil+war+was+not+about+slavery",
"Find: ",
"Tariffs, not slavery, precipitated the American Civil War",
"Search: q=did+the+north+have+slaves+during+the+civil+war",
"Find: ",
"http://www.slavenorth.com/",
"Quote from above: \"When the Northern states gave up the last remnants of legal slavery, in the generation after the Revolution, their motives were a mix of piety, morality, and ethics; fear of a growing black population; practical economics; and the fact that the Revolutionary War had broken the Northern slaveowners' power and drained off much of the slave population. ",
" (Revolutionary) ",
"\" (Italics and war clarification mine)",
"http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/civil-war-overview/slavery.html",
"And of course: ",
"http://www.cracked.com/article_19223_6-civil-war-myths-everyone-believes-that-are-total-b.s..html"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdz2c0p",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks! This made things more clearly!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdz4scj",
"comment_text": [
"The U.S Senate declared from the beginning that the purpose of the war was to restore the Union and that there was no other objective. They passed the following resolution on July 26, 1861:",
"http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/congress-passes-crittenden-johnson-resolution",
"From ",
"\"The Politically Incorrect Guide To American History\", Thomas E. Woods Jr. PHD pg. 66:",
"In 1861, a proposed amendment to the Constitution would have explicitly stated that the federal government had no authority -ever- to interfere with slavery in the states where it existed. Lincoln supported this amendment, saying: ",
"\"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution...has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the states, including that of persons held to service...Holding such a provision to now be implied Constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.\"",
"Edit: The war may have ended slavery but slavery is not what started it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdz4scj",
"comment_text": [
"The U.S Senate declared from the beginning that the purpose of the war was to restore the Union and that there was no other objective. They passed the following resolution on July 26, 1861:",
"http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/congress-passes-crittenden-johnson-resolution",
"From ",
"\"The Politically Incorrect Guide To American History\", Thomas E. Woods Jr. PHD pg. 66:",
"In 1861, a proposed amendment to the Constitution would have explicitly stated that the federal government had no authority -ever- to interfere with slavery in the states where it existed. Lincoln supported this amendment, saying: ",
"\"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution...has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the states, including that of persons held to service...Holding such a provision to now be implied Constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.\"",
"Edit: The war may have ended slavery but slavery is not what started it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What does a modern 'spy' actually do?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1t0az3
| 8
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce317yi",
"comment_text": [
"It depends on what it is they are trying to find.",
"Mostly the only thing that has changed is the methodology. Where in the past you might have a spy infiltrate a government facility and try to steal paper records, now you'd have someone infiltrate a government software contractor and try to get database access instead.",
"Maybe you infiltrate the software development department of a corporation and slip a backdoor into their software so that your company can break into their network later.",
"You might stick to something a little more old-fashioned and physically infiltrate an organization to collect information and report back, but instead of dead drops (which might still be useful), you'd send an encrypted communication, or a text message to a special phone, or something along those lines.",
"Maybe you ditch trying to drop in on a conversation and just send a small drone to do it for you. Maybe you use a spy satellite to do your reconnaissance - or use a UAV to fly over in the dead of night to take pictures of an encampment.",
"You could sit at a regional ISP and tap into data lines, or walk up to the outside of someones home and put a tap on their phone lines.",
"Really, the only way a 'modern spy' is different from a 'classic spy' is that modern spies have more tools to work with. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce39oxm",
"comment_text": [
"Spies have been employed for centuries for one purpose: to provide their sponsoring state additional intelligence that it cannot gain through normal channels.",
"It's very much a build-a-better-mousetrap situation. As we've caught spies, we've made better defenses. They've changed how they spy. And round and round it goes.",
"The biggest difference between spies today and spies back in the day is that it's harder to find out who is employing the spy. Sure, the CIA still has spies but they employ contractors, locals...people who are not directly linked to the CIA to do actual spying.",
"But like ",
"/u/lumpy_potato",
" said...technology has changed but the goal hasn't."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3bdcg",
"comment_text": [
"Something like >95% of the time they just collect information from public databases/other public sources and analyze it. "
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce369rs",
"comment_text": [
"Whow whoa whoa, who's asking?"
],
"score": -1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3c4sv",
"comment_text": [
"\"Heavy is spy!\""
],
"score": -1
}
|
|
Can anyone ELI5 what is a server?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1tjzka
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce8thxh",
"comment_text": [
"A ",
" is a computer on a ",
" that responds to requests for information from other computers on that network. (A network is just a group of computers that are connected together somehow).",
"Just as a (human) server brings food to a restaurant's clientele, a server computer fulfils the requests of ",
" computers, bringing it the data it asks for.",
"A ",
" is a server computer that responds to requests for website pages.",
"Unlike waitresess, there is no requirement to tip computer servers. That said, buying gold does keep Reddit 's servers running."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce8ppv8",
"comment_text": [
"A server is a computer that lets lots of other computers connect to it and talk to it all at the same time.",
"There are lots of different types of server, eg. web server, file server, database server, application server. If you've got a specie one in mind, then tell is what it is and we can explain more."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce8wqtu",
"comment_text": [
"Does the money earned through gold go to buying and maintaining the servers (hardware) or is it just used solely to pay the IT people who work on it? ",
"It's definitely a combination of both, but what's typical ratio like?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce8whqi",
"comment_text": [
"For example, a file server. I understand that files are uploaded to a cloud and made accessible to many people.",
"Similar to Google drive in concept of storage in the cloud, but what's the difference between that and servers which have been around for years?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce8xtl3",
"comment_text": [
"Nothing. The \"cloud\" is just a buzz-word for \"stored on a server somewhere\"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Starvation in North Korea
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1twius
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
If labour is cheap or free effectively... Why are the starving people in North Korea? Could they not just clear more land - even by hand and grow crops that would work in their environment? Aren't famines usually political rather than a supply chain issue? Is it the same in North Korea? If so, why?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cec5ctk",
"comment_text": [
"Farmers don't make more for growing more, so there is little incentive for growing more than you need. And much of any surplus they do produce is diverted to cities and the army.",
"In good years, they barely produce enough, and in bad years, you have famine."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cec71zq",
"comment_text": [
"With a large portion of the population pressed into military service, the North Korean government could press vagrants into food production service without much trouble.",
"The existing farmers wouldn't be terribly pleased, of course. But I think they are unlikely to complain very loudly. Kim Jong Un can have them lined up and shot if they complain.",
"It takes time and resources to set up an efficient modern farm, but the point of these people farming isn't to feed other people as much as it is to feed themselves. It doesn't take much land or equipment per person to farm if you throw a lot of people at the problem, and you can still feed all the workers that way."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cec4vj6",
"comment_text": [
"Sanctions and trade embargos. Thats why they are so pissed off at America because it bullys the DPRK."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cec58ke",
"comment_text": [
"But couldn't they put more arable land into production with all of that 'free' labour? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cec5k0i",
"comment_text": [
"These embargos are sanctioned by the UN though and even China has agreed to the latest batch. ",
"This isn't Cuba, where the US continued to violate international trading rights with their useless embargo."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why are so many black men in prison?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1t2j5v
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3o7n6",
"comment_text": [
"This is something of a hot-button topic. There are many possible explanations, of which I have heard at least the following (this list is far from exhaustive and I am very emphatically ",
" promoting one of these theories):",
"Blacks, in general, tend to be poorer (for historical reasons). The poor are arrested and imprisoned at very disproportionate rates.",
"Several laws - crack cocaine's sentencing being one I've heard a great deal - are claimed to be racially targeted (cocaine is used heavily across the board, but crack tends to be used by blacks; the sentencing for crack is considerably worse than the sentencing for regular cocaine).",
"Straight-up racist behavior by cops or by juries (e.g., stop-and-frisk).",
"Cultural differences: inner-city culture tends to glorify crime and violence, and those areas tend to be predominantly black. This has some overlap with economics, since those areas tend to be poor as well."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3pdsc",
"comment_text": [
"I would like to suggest that it has more to do with being poor than being black.(Although people often say they are poor because they are black) If you are wealthier you have a greater ability to compete with the legal system.(in terms of resource Resource management) Prosecutors are only going to spend X amount of dollars on any given case based on the evidence available. If you can't spend enough to beat a prosecutor who will likely give the very worst punishment they can give you. So most people fold and plea to something. For fear of going to jail for 25 years. Most convictions never go to trial. Most people are bullied into five years of prison instead of 15. And poorer people, poor blacks get the worst of it, get stuck with time in jail that even a just barely competent legal team would be able to prevent."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3swjm",
"comment_text": [
"There's also the fact that poor neighborhoods have worse schools, worse (and harsher) police coverage, and less infrastructure - as those types of programs tend to be run at the city level. It makes it ",
" harder to break the cycle."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3o5hi",
"comment_text": [
"A combination of socioeconomic conditions, and a justice system that is statistically proven to be harder on black males."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce3o658",
"comment_text": [
"First I read this I though it was ",
"/r/circlejerk"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: [Unbiased please] Now how is "teaching pedophiles from their sexual desires" any different from the "straight camps" that try to change the sexual desires of homosexuals?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1t6mur
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
, but if in both cases this is what their sexual desires are, and assuming they are "born with these traits", what is the difference between trying to change their sexuality (besides the fact that pedophilia is "wrong" to society's standards)? I believe there is also therapy for Necrophiliacs and other similar "strange" (to modern society) sexual desires.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce4uqot",
"comment_text": [
"With homosexuals their sexual desires/actions don't harm anyone.",
"With a pedophile, their sexual desires/actions can/do harm children.",
"In a society in which sexual relations with someone under 18 is normal, the idea of a 'pedophile' is essentially non-existent. For those societies that have decided that children of a certain age need to be protected from sexual advances/actions, a pedophile is an actual threat.",
"The logic might seem the same, but the context is important."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce4vc5l",
"comment_text": [
"What is important is not making the pedophiles change their desires, but learn to never pursue them. If a person wants to desire children in the privacy of their own head, ",
"(creepy, but legal). It is when they DO anything about those desires that there is a problem (whether child pornography or sexual harassment/abuse or whatever)"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce55dcs",
"comment_text": [
"I agree with this,I don't think you can change the sexual attraction towards children with a true pedophile. You just gotta make sure their desires stay in their head or on paper and not harming real children. Unless they also show signs of going after real children or looking at real child pornography they should be ignored.",
"Homosexuality on its own is not harmful no matter what so should be ignored."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce4w4qt",
"comment_text": [
"In both cases, the desires harm no one. The ",
" harmful part is the pedophiles acting on their desires. Let's be clear on that so that we can at least stop demonizing people for feelings alone."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce4uqrj",
"comment_text": [
"You say",
"(besides the fact that pedophilia is \"wrong\" to society's standards) ",
"That is pretty much the point. It is wrong by society's standards to have sex with a child because a child cannot provide \"informed consent\". They lack the maturity to make such a decision for themselves, and it is not right to make that kind of decision for someone else. So an act of pedophilia is tantamount to an act of rape. ",
"Homosexual acts, when done between consenting adults, are not rape. And much of the population thinks that what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms is up to them. It is part of the freedom that humans should have. ",
"Are techniques to try to \"cure\" pedophiles effective? I don't know. But taking action to prevent them from acting upon their desires is necessary to prevent the rape of children. If they cannot be cured, and cannot be relied upon to restrain their urges, then they would need to be incarcerated (or killed). ",
"There are no good alternatives. Just some that are less bad than others. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: When was the Year 0?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1u23c1
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
Was it 2014 years ago? When did people start keeping track of what year it was, and how did they figure that out? When was the year 1 BCE? In the year 500 BCE, what year was it to those living (since they don't know they're "counting down")?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cedr2ks",
"comment_text": [
"if you use the bc/ad calendar there is no year zero. 1bc represents 1 year before the \"BIRTH\" of Christ. 1AD (Anno Domini or \"in the year of our lord) would be the first year of life for Jesus. There is no year zero, we switch from 1BC to 1AD Jesus 1st birthday would actually occur in 2AD"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cedrgiz",
"comment_text": [
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(year)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cedsldl",
"comment_text": [
"Great explanation for me at least!\nWould you happen to know when it became nationalized? I know before different countries used different calendars and dates. But what happened to cause it all to because pretty much nationalized? Or worldwide is a good word. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cedswox",
"comment_text": [
"I don't know which country you are asking about, it didn't happen over night everywhere. ",
"Great Britain officially adopted it at 1752, while China as late as 1911. ",
"My own country did it at 1945. ",
"You can read more about it here: ",
"http://johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/anno.html"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cedrlv2",
"comment_text": [
"Rule #2",
"ELI5 is for requests for easy-to-follow explanations of complex concepts and subjects. That means ",
", that are subjective, a request for a guide/walkthrough, or that are objective but not asking for an explanation of an answer. ELI5 is absolutely not a repository for any question you have."
],
"score": -1
}
|
|
Why doesn't How It's Made show the most popular brands of a product?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1wvd2f
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
i.e the "Pringles" video someone keeps posting to reddit is actually some nock-off. I would think brands would appreciate the publicity?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf5q8q4",
"comment_text": [
"Getting permission to film the factory of a brand name where they probably have methods or ingredients they want to keep secret would be difficult."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf5rqje",
"comment_text": [
"For one im sure it would cost more. Bigger company names have more to lose. More difficult to get access to these type of people. ",
"But honestly if you are watching one about q-tips do you really care? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf5scnk",
"comment_text": [
"Trade secrets and liability."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf5t1rk",
"comment_text": [
"Modern marvels always shows the brand names, which is why I prefer it to how it's made"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf5ubzb",
"comment_text": [
"There was once a big name condom brand on there. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
Why is it that when it's a really cold night outside, the sky is so much clearer & crisper to see the stars more clearly? [Serious]
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1x79uf
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
I've noticed this my whole life living in southwest N. America, & I've always wanted an explanation. Can anyone help explain this to me in detail please? Is it an air pollution/pressure/moisture thing, or something else entirely? Why does this happen? Would really appreciate it :)
Edit: Thank you for your helpful answers everyone! I will certainly keep this in mind next time when it's cold out :)
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf8pu72",
"comment_text": [
"The sky isn't clear because it's cold, it's cold because the sky is clear. Clouds act like a blanket that keep the warmth radiating from the earth's surface escaping into the upper atmosphere so easily. Without the clouds, the heat escapes. This is why deserts are usually freezing cold at night - no moisture for clouds."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf8puri",
"comment_text": [
"Because clouds help trap warmth in the atmosphere. They're like a blanket over the sky."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf8q7n3",
"comment_text": [
"Cold air is less dense than warm air.",
"Uh, no. Cold air is denser. That's why warm air rises."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf8q7n3",
"comment_text": [
"Cold air is less dense than warm air.",
"Uh, no. Cold air is denser. That's why warm air rises."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cf8tv5i",
"comment_text": [
"The same conditions that lead to extreme cold also lead to still air with little cloud cover. Without wind or clouds, the object in the sky are much more clear."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do best before dates often includes hour and minute?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
258d67
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I mean it's not like my orange juice is going to be okay at 14:03 but bad at 14:04
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cheojvq",
"comment_text": [
"The hour and minute are included to identify exactly when that item was packed on the assembly line, sometimes it is called a 'lot code'. In the event of a recall it helps identify which products were affected."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chepd88",
"comment_text": [
"OP: this one here is the right answer. They're basically including the time code for when the product was packed as a way of tracking specific batches, and the easiest way to do that is just include the entire time/date code, with the present time and the date incremented by X to get to the best by date."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cheofrm",
"comment_text": [
"best before dates are an estimate; often things like milk are actually still \"fresh\" a month to two weeks after the best before date.",
"it's more like a SUPER precaution to make sure things are fresh so people don't get sick.",
"hope this helps!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cheojcs",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah, I get that they're estimates but having a hh:mm seems like a bit of a overkill.",
"I mean you can easily estimate that milk or whatever goes bad after say x many days, but then it really ought to be enough to put in the date. Why bother with hh:mm which seems to say little or nothing at all."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cheokog",
"comment_text": [
"Best by dates are an incredibly safe estimate for how long the product will last. In reality, it will last a bit longer than the date, but since they're being safe and giving an early date, might as well give one that is less vague than just the day."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: How can the international market have such cheap fruits and vegetables and why isn't this an option for poor people to eat healthier?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
24txx7
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Everyone's always talking about how expensive fresh fruits and vegetables are, and I agree that in many places they are. However I recently visited the international market and was amazed. Not only did they have about 50 fruits or vegetables I had never seen or heard of before (along with the usual stuff) but it was all so cheap. For example tomatoes were on sale for 19 cents a pound, down from 79 cents a pound and they were very fresh looking tomatoes--about the same quality as at Kroger where the tomatoes are about a dollar each. Instead of just two tomatoes, I picked up 10 pounds of tomatoes for 2 dollars. It's the same for all the other vegetables more or less. 15 limes for a dollar, 4 bunches of green onions for a dollar--as opposed to one bunch for 1 dollar at kroger... And again these were bright and fresh, and there was no difference in appearance or taste from kroger or other grocery stores. My questions are: how can the store afford to sell produce that low of a price? of course the store was not fancy looking in the slightest but still, even being the bare minimum there are still some costs. When people talk about produce being so expensive why do stores like these not come up as an option to eat cheaper? Why does no one even bring them up into the discussion?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chan34n",
"comment_text": [
"I recently watched a documentary on hunger in California's Central Valley. Farm owners said only the biggest and best looking produce will get shipped to large grocery store chains like Krogers and Safeway, they won't take anything with blemish. Some people might pick up the rest and sell them for really cheap if they are worth the labor cost, that's where cheaper grocery stores get their produce. ",
"International markets are often in suburban areas that are hard to access without a car, poor people tend to concentrate in inner city areas and rural areas. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chao7g5",
"comment_text": [
"Or bigger. Stores have really strict size limits on things. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chan65e",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah but most of their produce didn't have blemishes either. It just didn't cost anything compared to what other stores have. That's why I'm confused. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chanah6",
"comment_text": [
"It doesn't have to be obvious blemish, they could be smaller, overripe, or not consistently colored. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chap1tu",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of what people do economically is just due to habit. Why are poor people poor? Often it is because of habits of living that are passed from one generation to the next. If you change what you are doing, you change the result. If you start eating fresh vegetables from the asian market, you'll be healthier and save money. But that's not what they've always done, so that's not what they are going to do."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: how bad is the "Youth Unemployment Crisis" really?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
24s3c0
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.25
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cha3aa6",
"comment_text": [
"Where?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cha3c47",
"comment_text": [
"Fixed"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cha59j3",
"comment_text": [
"Low ranked schools aren't really existent here. There are some universities that are more prestigious than others but going to a state school for a bachelor's degree is usually a good bet. The idea of \"correct major\" is tricky, because when I graduated high school in 2006 we were all given advice to go to college for a major we are interested in, and we'll find a way to make money doing it. This was before the recession and when that did eventually happen, it was too late to switch majors and even so, there was no true answer to what jobs would still be available after graduation. Internships here are not as common as in other countries, and many are unpaid, so given the opportunity to do a summer unpaid internship or work minimum wage, many people would choose to work for money to help pay off crippling debt and expenses. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cha6488",
"comment_text": [
"Older workers aren't retiring. If you are a hiring manager, would you rather have someone with 25 years experience or someone with no experience?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cha3o38",
"comment_text": [
"I went to Texas State, and got a degree in Recreational Therapy, which is the the same as Physical Therapy, minus the gym setting. And, yes, there is a demand for people in Rec. Therapy, unlike history majors. I looked for months, couldn't find anything, and ended up working 2 part time jobs to make ends meet.",
"Now, I work in the Real Estate Industry, and don't use my edumacation."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5:Why is the word "colonel" pronounced "kernel"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
24wb05
| 21
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbh6m4",
"comment_text": [
"Article is wrong.",
"Colonel came into English from French, not Italian. And it existed before Italian, in Latin as colonellus. The r pronunciation was adopted from the French (and in Old French it's couronnel), and then people decided to get rid of the extra syllable. People decided to spell it closer to the original Latin, because that's a thing that people decided would be cool.",
"People decided that having 2 'L' sounds was too much, so they made one of them 'r' (because L and R are very close sounds linguistically). And so people assumed that the word had something to do with crowns etymologically (Fr. 'couronne', Lat. 'corona'), and kept pronouncing it that way because they thought it made sense.",
"source: OED"
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbnllg",
"comment_text": [
"In a related question, where the hell do Brits get the \"F\" in Lieutenant?!"
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbngla",
"comment_text": [
"I believe the correct pronunciation is \"ground cows anus'."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbp9sb",
"comment_text": [
"Apparently it's derived from ",
"lieftenant",
", an older French pronunciation. '[B]y 1954 the Royal Canadian Navy, at least, regarded it as \"obsolescent\" even while regarding \"the army's 'LEF-tenant'\" to be \"a corruption of the worst sort\".' lol"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbqwic",
"comment_text": [
"Interesting! Thanks!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why are "Study drugs" such as Adderall and Vyvanse considered harmful to those without ADHD, but beneficial to those with ADHD?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
24wazr
| 21
| true
| false
| 0.79
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chb9ty8",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think they're considered harmful, but rather, candidates for abuse."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbj7jj",
"comment_text": [
"They can be somewhat harmful, but they are every bit as harmful to ADHD patients also.",
"It's just a question of risk versus reward.",
"Don't get me started on the FDA's decision to not approve Modafinil for ADHD..."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbaych",
"comment_text": [
"They're just as harmful for people with ADHD, it's just that it's considered a \"necessary evil\" in those cases.",
"Also, there's a range of ADD drugs, all with their own specific effects and side-effects. A doctor will prescribe you one based on your needs and your biology. Taking unpresribed ADD medications has the elevated risk of not having this review process."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbaxxo",
"comment_text": [
"People with ADHD are thought to have insufficiently developed connectivity to brain areas that modulate arousal and attention. The drugs enhance this connectivity by increasing chemicals in the brain that facilitate these connections. For them, taking the drugs feels like a shift from not being able to attend to what they're doing, to being able to focus. For the rest of us, a bit may be good, but too much leads to overarousal, and (seemingly parodixically) poor concentration.",
"The drugs are habit forming for everyone, and are a common gateway to more serious stimulants once tolerance sets in. This is only an issue, however, for those predisposed to addiction. Most people are fine, but why risk a problem if there's nothing wrong that needs to be corrected by taking meds?"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chbcc4y",
"comment_text": [
"You dont develop a tolerance towards vyvanse. Your metabolism slowing or fastening changes how effective it is."
],
"score": 4
}
|
|
ELI5: The Inverse Cube Law
|
explainlikeimfive
|
25ttz2
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chkppp4",
"comment_text": [
"An inverse-cube force is proportional to 1 / distance cubed.",
"There's an inverse-cube law for magnetic dipoles (small magnets, small compared to the distance between them). ",
" ",
"Edit: ",
"If you get a pair of strong small magnets, you can experience inverse-",
" directly.",
"The inverse cube law also applies to tidal effect. ",
"The Sun is 27 million times heavier than the moon and 410 times farther. Distance makes the solar tide 69 million (410 cubed) times weaker, mass makes it 27 million times stronger. The result is that the lunar tide is 2.5 times stronger than the solar.",
"We notice the lunar tide directly and the solar tide when it interferes. When lunar high tide happens at noon or midnight - the time of the solar high tide - it's stronger than if it happens at 6 am/pm (solar low tide)."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chkqg1y",
"comment_text": [
"Shouldn't tidal effects be an inverse square law since it's gravity?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chkqsr0",
"comment_text": [
"Ah, okay."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chkqsr0",
"comment_text": [
"Ah, okay."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chkqubb",
"comment_text": [
"It's the slope of gravity. According to calculus, the slope of inverse squared is negative half of inverse cubed.",
"A similar argument applies to magnetic dipoles. Monopoles (if they exist) are inverse-square. The ends of very long bar magnets act like monopoles. But dipoles have a slope thing going on.",
"I'm lazy-posting and referring you to ",
"http://www.gsjournal.net/old/physics/borg4.pdf",
" for the magnetics."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: What is the difference between the old testament and the new testament, and why isn't there a clear split? How does the Jewish religion and Christians treat both?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
265ycb
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I never understood the differences between the old testament and new testament. It seems that the Jewish people seemed to be associated wit h old testament and not the new testament. The Christians will acknowledge the old testament be seemed to be more aligned with the new testament? Where are the lines splits, especially as it applies to the Jewish and Christian religions? Also, why didn't history just separate out the two religions with two distinct parts of the bible? The Jewish have the old testament, the Christians will have the new testament? Or am I looking at it wrong?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chnyxsq",
"comment_text": [
"In the simplest sense:",
"The Old Testament is the story about the creation of the world and the early history of the Jewish people, it the later books it includes many prophecies about the coming \"savior\".",
"The New Testamnet is the story about Jesus of Nazareth (later referred to as Jesus Christ). Set around 2000 years ago. His followers believed he was that savior that they had been promised. According to the New Testament he said as much, but also said that he was the son of god, the New Testament also says that he did many miracles but was eventually killed by the Roman Government. Finally, the new Testament includes letters that the early church leaders wrote, and those letters help expand upon the way that followers of Jesus (Christians) should behave towards each other and the rest of the world. At the end it has it's own prophecy about how the world will end and Jesus will return.",
"Christians today have both books. They believe the stories in the Old Testament because those stories explain that Jesus would come, why he would come, and about God.",
"Jews today are the people who don't believe that Jesus was the one that they were waiting for, and they're still waiting for that savior. So the stories of Jesus are not accurate, since he wasn't the savior that they were promised.",
"Hope that makes sense, feel free to ask any follow up questions."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chnz9x7",
"comment_text": [
"They are two separate religions. Quite separate, Christians just split off from judaism. So did Islam essentially.",
"It's just Christians still consider the old testament important. The New testament doesn't talk about the entire history of the creation of the world or any of the subsequent many years leading up to Jesus. So if you want any of that, that's what the old testament is for."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chnzfkv",
"comment_text": [
"As a point of clarification, Islam didn't split from Judaism. It's abrahamic, but since its founder wasn't Jewish, it's not technically a division of Judaism as much as inspired by (divinely, if the religion itself is to be believed). "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cho3z17",
"comment_text": [
"Jesus and his followers were Jewish. He read the \"Old Testament\", otherwise known then (and still is to the Jews) as the Torah. The New Testament was the stories of his life written by his followers who believed he was the Messiah as predicted by the Torah. Not all Jews believed this was the case, hence two religions now.",
"Incidentally, Isalm has some of the same roots. Muslims believe in the stories of the old testament, they believe in Christ as a prophet (but not the messiah). They just believe biblical stories became corrupted over time, and Muhammad (500 years after Christ's death) is the greatest prophet.",
"Think of the three books (the Torah, the New Testament, the Quran) as trilogy that were written in that order, each building upon the last.",
"If you're a Jew, it's like the Matrix trilogy. First one was great, the sequels sucked.\nIf you're a Christian, it's like the Godfather. First one was really good, second was better, third was unnecessary and forgettable.\nIf your a Muslim, it's like Indiana Jones. First one was solid, second one went off the tracks a little bit with some weird shit, then a strong finish."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chnzdt7",
"comment_text": [
"Since Jesus was Jewish he recognized the Old Testament, not that that would have been what he would have called it. Christianity began as a particular \"branch\" of Judaism. When it became culturally distinct (very quickly) it was viewed first by its own adherents, and slightly later as a distinct religion. This all happened quickly.",
"The Old Testament isn't the only book important to Judaism, though since it is viewed as the word of God, it has a central place. There are also books which interpret the Old Testament.",
"There are ",
" differences between the Jewish version of the Old Testament and the Christian OT. (Mainly in the numbering of verses, the names of the first five books, etc.)",
"I'm not Jewish (or Christian) so please forgive any misconceptions I may have - they aren't intentional or out of disrespect."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Three Paychecks for Bi-weekly employees
|
explainlikeimfive
|
275ios
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
My wife seems to think that when I get 3 paychecks in a month that means one of them in found money? It doesnt make sense to me, i still get paid each 14 days and we still get the same bills each month. So how is this extra money?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxkwu7",
"comment_text": [
"It's not really \"extra\" money but it's fairly common to budget on two paychecks a month and getting an \"extra\" one gets you some bonus cash that isn't in your normal budget."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxl0g6",
"comment_text": [
"Many large, predictable expenses are monthly. My rent, car loan, and student loans, and internet are all due every month in the same amount. If you are paid biweekly, then in most months you will receive only two paychecks. Therefore, I have to plan my expenses so that two paychecks will cover my bills with extra for food, clothes, books, and so forth.",
"When I get a third paycheck in a month, that money is above and beyond what I need to get by on a month-to-month basis. I can use it to pay down my student loans, or do shopping that I've put off."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxl0bw",
"comment_text": [
"A simpler way to approach the problem is: there's 52 weeks a year, or 26 pay periods. That's 2 and 1/6 pay periods per month, on average. If you budget things out that way, you should be fine. Though really, those 2 extra (above 2 per month) pay checks per year should probably just go right into savings anyway."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxmc1g",
"comment_text": [
"My employer thinks this too. Trouble is, I get paid based on monthly commission. So to figure what my commission check is, the employer takes the amount of commission I've earned between the first day and last day of the month, and subtracts the amount I've been paid via biweekly \"draw\" checks at 8.75/hr. So when I get 3 paychecks in a month, I get hosed."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxmf0r",
"comment_text": [
"Sounds illegal "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do Judaism, Islam, and Christianity differ so much theologically even though they all originated from the same "Abrahamic" religion?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2737pl
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
Is it just a matter of politics, culture, and religious "revolutionaires" like Jesus Christ and Mohammed who shook things up?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chx8mao",
"comment_text": [
"OK, I'm going to try to clear things up. Just remember that this will be grossly simplified. With the term Jew here I mean somebody who professes the Mosaic faith.",
"First off, these three religions did not originate from the same \"abrahamic religion\", but are called abrahamic in that they all share the particular doctrine of monotheism. Monotheism means the belief in One God, a belief that also excludes any other gods. The reason for the name of this belief is associated with Abraham, a character (patriarch) in the Old Testament/Tanach who is usually called the first monotheist, or the first Jew.\nAll of these religions profess the faith in One God (though this presentation of the faith in God is expressed in Christian terms) who is the Creator of the heavens and the earth and without whom, nothing could exist.\nAnother belief held by all three religions in their \"mainstream\" branches is the belief that God reveals himself to us human beings in the fullness of time, through prophets and through Sacred Scripture.\nI dont know too much about the Mohammedan faith on this issue, but both the Jews and Christians believe that God has a Covenant with his people. In layman's terms that means that God has a deal with his people, and this people is both in Christian and Jewish tradition called Israel (not the modern day country, but a term for a religious people that God has Chosen to be His.) This means that there are some essential obligations and laws associated with all three major religions.",
"Now Im going to go through Christianity and Judaism very briefly to outline what makes them different in hopefully a neutral light.(I do not know enough about islam to say anything very instructive about it) Please remember that this is grossly simplified. I will look at three things:\n- an extremely brief paragraph on where their held beliefs are from\n- Central points in the Faith/Central Scripture/central practices\n- Main divisions and subgroups.",
"JUDAISM\nOf the these three world religions, Judaism is the oldest and smallest. Their covenant is based in the promises made to the Old testament patriarchs, Abraham, Jacob and Isaac, and the words spoken to the Israelite people by the Prophets. The main prophet is Moses. Tradition holds that Moses wrote all five books of the Torah, the first of three parts of the Jewish bible (TaNaCh), which also are the first five books of any Bible. The Jewish law is contained in these books with elaborations and explanations later on. Jewish scripture is hard to date accurately because the texts in the Tanach are from very different eras and describe a wide range of conditions the Jewish people have lived under. The Canon (agreed-upon composition of scripture) was not established until a few hundred years before Christ.",
"The Jews believe that they are the Chosen people of God, who led them out of slavery under the pharao in Egypt. Keeping the Covenant of the Lord will lead them to the Promised Land. This is in Jewish terms quite a literal thing.\n\"Membership\" in this religion is based on loosely on ethnicity(if your mother was a Jew, then you are), and a jew will recognise another by his practices. Central Jewish practices is the observance of the Sabbath, the holidays(Pesach, Yom Kippur, among others, commemorating the history of the Jewish people) and keeping the Mosaic Law. The term Sacred Scripture is misleading to use about Jewish scriptures, because many \"non-canonical\" texts are also considered sacred. But the Tanach (roughly equivalent to the old testament) and Tanach commentary is considered sacred. Tanach is a shorthand for the three parts of this book, Tora, (the Law), Neviim, (the Prophets, and Chetuviim (The Scripture).",
"In Judaism we can divide in VERY ROUGH TERMS in three groups, by their interpretation and by their strict adherence to Mosaic Law.\nFirst is the Reformed. These attempt to keep their Judaism in line with more modern beliefs. This group is common in the USA.\nSecond is the Orthodox. These attempt to keep their Judaism in line with classical traditional beliefs. This group is the most common.\nThird is the Ultra-Orthodox. This group is not very common, but found in old Jewish establishments in Europe and the Modern state of Israel. These have a more strict/radical interpretation of the law and dress traditionally.",
"CHRISTIANITY\nChristianity is the second-oldest of these religions and it is by far the largest. Christians believe that God became man through Jesus Christ (Christ is a title, meaning the Messiah, or Savior and not a proper name.)to fulfill all the prophesies and to complete revelation. For Christians, God has revealed himself not only through Scripture, and the Incarnate God, but also through the Holy Spirit. Christianity grows out of ancient Judaism in the first century after Christ. The Christian Sacred Scripture is divided into two main parts, the first is the Hebrew Bible (Tanach) and the second part, the New testament, is about Christ and his followers, the early Christians. What Christians believe is derived from Sacred Scripture and Tradition through the Holy Spirit.",
"Christians believe in a Triune God. That is to say that God is three persons with one essence. This is particular to Christianity. There are Christian sects that disbelieve in the Holy Trinity, but they are marginal and very new, in comparison to older forms of Christian belief. Christians believe that Jesus Christ is both fully Human and fully Divine, and that he is the second person of the Trinity. God the Father is the first person, and the Holy Spirit is the third. Christian tradition is a continuation of Jewish tradition, and many of the things Christians celebrate are directly derived from Jewish tradition, such as Easter. Easter for Christian is given a whole new content though, instead of celebrating an earthly release from Slavery, we celebrate the release from the bondage of sin. Christianity places what is spiritual over what is worldly in a way that often sparks criticism from Jews.\nChristians believe that God has made a people his own through faith in Him, and the following in his commandments, and a christian wil recognise another by what they believe. Christians have three main creeds, the nicene creed, the apostolic creed and the athanasian creed (which is about the nature of the trinity and extremely complex). Christians practice sacraments, which are signs of Gods grace on earth. They vary in number, but in the Catholic branch, which is the largest by number has them numbered at seven. These are: Baptism (initiation to the Church)\nConfirmation (completion of Church-initiation, being given the gifts of the Holy spirit)\nMarriage (which traditionally is unbreakable, unlike for example is Islam)\nHoly Orders (Ordination to the priesthood, diaconate, episcophood (?), or religious orders of nuns and monks)\nExtreme Unction (Last rites, being given spiritual health before death/imminent death)\nPenance (confession of sins)\nand the most important, the Eucharist. (the Pascal meal of bread and wine, that has serious spiritual and sacramental value)",
"In Christianity we traditionally have two main branches; the eastern and the western.\nThe western branch is divided into two parts that have been in conflict since the 16th century\n- Protestants who broke off from the Church in 1517 and later, who proclaim dogmas that are not traditional, and practice in a way that is unorthodox. Protestants come in 33.000 (or more) different denominations, and the term Protestant is a blanket term for any Western Christian who is not Catholic. Protestant churches' organisation differs with flavor. in Europe, they are usually lead formally by a Regent, and practically by councils in each parish. (At least this is how it is in Norway and Denmark afaik)\n- Catholics are the traditional form of Western Christianity, it is named Catholic after a conflict that broke the communion (fellowship) between the Western and Eastern Churches (formally) in 1054, but since 400s there has been conflict over the Authority of the Patriarchate of Rome. Catholics have a supreme spiritual leader informally known as the Pope or the holy father, who is the bishop of Rome.",
"Eastern Christianity is composed of five main churches, that are in fellowship with one another. They are usually called orthodox after the conflict I spoke about above. Eastern Christians come in four different kinds based on the regional tradition in the early christian heartlands, and one newer one. I will just list these, as there are very significant theological differences. The two churches that are most theologocially alike are the Catholic Church and the Greek-Orthodox church. I will just list the two major ones. There are traditionally five patriarchates. (Rome, Constantinople, Antoich, Jerusalem and Alexandria)\n- Greek-Orthodox (Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople)\n- Russian-Orthodox (broke off from the Greek patriarchate, afaik, this is the newer patriarchate)",
"Thats it for today, I hope I could teach you something!"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chx1yz8",
"comment_text": [
"There is a clear development. Christianity is an abrupt explosion out of Judaism because of Jesus, whom they claim to be from God and equal to him. Because of this, most laws now no longer apply, since Christians interpreted that all Judaic Law to be only pointers towards Jesus. Christians, however, still maintains continuity with Judaism, in that God is supposedly laying out his plan in the form of Judaism, then completes it with Christianity. Islam. however, is quite different. Islam maintains that the whole message from God has been confused throughout the ages, and was only then retrieved in its purity by Mohammad in the form of the Quran. That's why if you read the Quran, there is the tingling feeling that all the story elements are there, but somehow do not make the same overarching story."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chx1p9v",
"comment_text": [
"I will point out that Judaism and Islam are closer to each other than either is to Christianity. Both those religions emphasise obedience without a need for us to rationalise God's actions and commands. Christianity abandons many of the traditions that persists in the other two Abrahamic faiths (such as the aversion to pork, for instance) in favour of a simpler moral code. Moreover, Christianity has strong Greek influences, so Western rationality is key. Islam progressed along this path before undergoing ",
"dehellenisation",
".",
"TL;DR: Many similarities, but very important differences."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chxbb1r",
"comment_text": [
"You so are awesome! Thank you for taking the time to write out such a thoughtful and detailed response!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_chwywne",
"comment_text": [
"How are they different?",
"They all worship the same God/Allah/Yahweh, ",
"follow the same central tenets (Don't kill, don't steal, don't be a dick, and follow God/Allah/Yahweh) ",
"and they all have the same stories/famous people; Adam/Eve, Satan, Abraham, Noah, Noah's Ark, Eden, Heaven, Michael, Gabriel, etc.",
"There are really only a few MAJOR differences",
"Judaism - Just the Old Testament",
"Christians - Follow Christ, follow Old and New Testaments",
"Islam - Follow Muhammad, the books got changed over time, so rewrite them.",
"In essence, the other differences are about as big as the difference between protestant and catholic, baptist and Presbyterian, etc."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why is it dangerous to sleep after receiving a concussion?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
28ua9x
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ciejkub",
"comment_text": [
"It has long been thought that a person with a concussion should not sleep because they might slip into a coma or lose consciousness. Through research and the expertise of UAMS doctors. we now know that there is no need to make a patient with a concussion stay awake."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ciejrll",
"comment_text": [
"I've read somewhere that there is an exception with this involving symptoms such as dilated pupils, nasea, and other symtompts. Is there any truth to that?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cieur9p",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. If they are having issues walking or they have dilated pupils its a good idea to get them to a doctor as it could be a complete different issue! If you are to hit your head you can also damage your neck,spine ect. but if the person is dazed or vomiting then its not so bad as long as you check on them every hour or two. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cieuxev",
"comment_text": [
"Id also like the point out that even tho this was researched by UAMS i still wouldn't allow a person to sleep unless you are 100% certain there is no other issues with them. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cieuyg2",
"comment_text": [
"You learn something new everyday!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why is Jimmy Hendrix considered the best guitarist ever?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
22uz4q
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgqmmgv",
"comment_text": [
"Well, he isn't. He's considered to be extremely influential due to his song writing abilities, i.e because Hendrix did it first. ",
"EDIT: To expand, nobody was doing what Hendrix was doing at the time. Emmanuel is nothing like Hendrix as a player, and appeals to a different audience. Plus he's Australian, and being noticed as an Australian is a chore. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgqmmpo",
"comment_text": [
"He isn't. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgqmmvw",
"comment_text": [
"arguments about artistic talent are almost never done on objective grounds. and fame has no real correlation with talent. fame is about appeal, relative positioning, and some degree of luck."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgqmqyw",
"comment_text": [
"People like Tommy Emmanuel are technically great guitar players. However, they are not highly influential players and that's something thats needed to become \"the best\" in many peoples opinion.",
"Hendrix may not have been the best technical player but he was doing things with his guitar playing and music that people either weren't doing or he perfected it into a sound that people loved. People to this day try and mimic his sound. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgqnnpr",
"comment_text": [
"I think Jimi Hendrix is considered a top performer introducing a unique style. His music has stood the test of time.",
"\nI think when you talk about great guitarists, you either have to specify a style, time period, or group size. You couldn't objectively pronounce just one. Eric Clapton and Phil Keaggy would definitely earn top spots in their respective styles as well."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why can hospitals charge $50 a pill for Tylenol, but I can buy a whole bottle at the store for $5?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
28sb8s
| 58
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cie153d",
"comment_text": [
"All those things you listed are charged for and listed on the bill.",
"They charge so much for tylenol because they can, actual healthcare is a distant 2nd to making an obscene profit."
],
"score": 37
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cidzr77",
"comment_text": [
"You're not just paying for the tylenol. You're paying for the nurse to give it to you, to make sure it's the right thing, for the diagnosis from the doctor to give you the tylenol, for anything any of the techs have to do for you, for the bed you're sitting in, for the air conditioning, for the TV, for the electricity, for the hospital administration and record keeping. You're paying for all of it. Going to the hospital for a tylenol is a very silly thing to do.",
"It's the exact same reason you get charged $1.99 for a coke at a restaurant, when you can get a whole two liter for $0.99 at the store. You're not just paying for the soda, you're paying to have it brought to you, with ice and a straw, in a social setting, with food available, by a server. Same idea."
],
"score": 19
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cie0xcp",
"comment_text": [
"What about like anybody who ever died from a fever before the 1900s?"
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cie9kc5",
"comment_text": [
"comment removed by user or moderators",
"What did it say?"
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cie2c2e",
"comment_text": [
"I came here to say the same thing.",
"I can't understand why anyone would down vote you."
],
"score": 10
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do some noises make us shiver?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
22jws5
| 13
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
So I was stirring soup earlier and the sound of the spoon scraping the bottom of the pan made me shiver. Why is this? And why are some people okay with sounds that others shiver at?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgnr3bx",
"comment_text": [
"For me I always shiver at the end of the National Anthem at Baseball or Football games. Every time! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgns4p5",
"comment_text": [
"I have an idea Op is talking about nails on a chalkboard"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgnsdqs",
"comment_text": [
"That too! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgnt62p",
"comment_text": [
"From a touch if brief research it seems that the more accepted theory is that the sound has similar qualities to the call or a predator or a warning call of our species, causing a subconscious reaction. I find it more interesting though that this reaction (for me at least) is associated not only with the sound but the material itself. I get shivers just thinking of chalk or sandpaper over 1000 grit, not just the sound. I'm curious to see more. ",
"(Wikipedia article for the curious ",
"http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalkboard_scraping",
")"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cgnylft",
"comment_text": [
"I have misophonia so I searched a lot about why sounds affect us in a way we can't understand. Apparently, no one is born that way. Something in your life, maybe your subconscious, associated certain sounds with something depleasing. That \"desease\" was found in 2001. ",
"I'm guessing this is the same for sounds that we do like. I mean, our subconscious linked certain sound with things we love. When someone is turning pages from a book or crumple up paper, it makes me shiver. I just love that feeling, I don't know!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What happens when I crack my knuckles/back/neck?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1bkg37
| 10
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c97k5xl",
"comment_text": [
"I've seen this discussed a few times here and I encourage ANYONE who posts an answer to back it up with a reliable source. There's just too many different answers from people who have heard from other people that the cracking is caused by X. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c97kati",
"comment_text": [
"I think that's basically it",
"Nothing too hard and a government source. Same think you'll see on wikipedia. The thing is, wikipedia only lists 3 published papers as a source, maybe because this question is of little to no interest to physicians. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c97kck9",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think there's any scientific data to support that claim. If cavitation is the reason behind crepitus (the sound your joints make when you crack them), the released nitrogen, carbon dioxyde, etc.. would dissolve again in the synovial fluid. Maybe in other fluids in your body but then again, it was dissolved in the first time, why would you need to drink water to remove it ? Sounds like detoxification theories to me. I wouldn't think much of it unless there's evidence to support it."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c97htvy",
"comment_text": [
"Where does the nitrogen go?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c97htvy",
"comment_text": [
"Where does the nitrogen go?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
||
ELI5: Politics.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1cxsi3
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9l4548",
"comment_text": [
"Don't sent the uninitiated to ",
"/r/politics",
". That's cruel and unusual punishment."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9kyour",
"comment_text": [
"You are going to need to be more specific about what you want to know because this is ",
" broad. It's like saying \"ELI5: math.\""
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9l46dp",
"comment_text": [
"They will maul you... into agreeing with them."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9l49vj",
"comment_text": [
"What if we cross post this into ",
"/r/politics",
"?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c9l4bu9",
"comment_text": [
"Oh man. My brain would hurt."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How is it that certain animals above a given size can't exist because they'd collapse under their own weight?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1nxmm6
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccmzscn",
"comment_text": [
"Life as we know it (this includes animals) is made up of cells. For a cell to survive it must be able to transport nutrients in and transport waste products out. Obviously this transport in and out can only occur at the edge of the cell.",
"Consider a spherical cell. Its surface area is a function of its radius squared. Its volume is a function of its radius cubed. As a spherical cell gets bigger (its radius increases), its volume increases at a much greater rate than its surface area. In other words a cell can only get so big before its surface area isn't large enough to be able to facilitate the transport of nutrients/waste across it to support the underlying volume.",
"The same effect occurs when considering stress. Increasing the area that the load is applied to in a 1:1 ratio with force is fine, but if you also increase the height then there is also that extra mass that fills the vertical dimension that must be considered. So a worm can be as long or as wide as it wants, but if you increase it's height then normal stress in the y-axis will increase without the x-axis footprint spreading out to accommodate it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccn0j89",
"comment_text": [
"Square cube law. It states, roughly, that mass increases faster than volume. So an animal 100 times the size would be much more than 100 times as massive, and therefore be much heavier than it could support."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccn0j64",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for your reply. \nI always thought there would just be more cells rather than larger ones. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccn0ypz",
"comment_text": [
"More cells isn't an explicit answer to your question though. I just re-reread my response and I think I might have thought I was in ",
"/r/askscience",
" when I made it.",
"As a creature grows greater mass directly upwards it generates a greater force on the bone supporting it directly below it. Each upward unit of growth increases the downward force but doesn't increase the range it is spread over (i.e. the stress)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccmzlha",
"comment_text": [
"It's theoretically possible, yes. The muscular requirements for enormous animals would be absurd, meaning they'd require a ton of food. Doesn't really work out that well in practice (except for in the ocean, where the water helps support the creature's weight)"
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: why monopolies are illegal but oligopolies aren't
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1njoih
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.62
|
just doesnt make sense to me
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccj6kyz",
"comment_text": [
"Monopolies aren't illegal, they are restricted to prevent their abuse. Price fixing and collusion between a few companies us also restricted."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccj6njb",
"comment_text": [
"oh well damn. it just seems like something that oughtta be illegal. i guess i just assumed"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccj6pqm",
"comment_text": [
"Nothing fundamentally wrong with being the only company selling something. The problem chimes when they use their power to so competition and abuse consumers."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccj6rrc",
"comment_text": [
"seems to me like the entire idea is centered around the idea of abusing the consumers"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ccj8tzy",
"comment_text": [
"The problem is that, if you assume that monopolies ",
" Abuse the customer and thus must be broken up, then there's less incentive to innovate.",
"If I invent a device called the Moskau5000 that automatically makes tie-dye shirts (just put in some dye and a shirt) and start selling it, then I'm immediately a monopoly over the tie-dye-machine market, and thus would be in violation of anti-monopoly statutes. The first person to make and sell a new type of good could be immediately brought up on charges of monopolizing a market.",
"The US has anti-trust laws. These laws prevent someone from abusing their monopoly to prevent other competition from coming in. That's what happened to Microsoft not that long ago. Microsoft was packaging Internet Explorer with all copies of Windows and (allegedly) changing Windows so it worked worse with other browsers (like Netscape). Thus, Microsoft was abusing its near-monopoly of computer sales to prevent competition from entering the internet browser market."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What is election day, who votes on what and what do I need to know as a foreigner?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2l75qg
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cls2vj5",
"comment_text": [
"If a person is not a US citizen they're not allowed to vote in the US, because they aren't allowed to register to vote. If a person is not a legal resident of a state they can't register there. If a person is not 18 at the time of the election they can't register. A few other things can disqualify someone.",
"The ballot will include an election for a member of the house of representatives, and possibly a senator (2/3 of the states will have a senate election this year). They also may include a governor race. There are also going to be a lot of state and local elections on the ballot. In addition, some states have ballot initiatives for different things, these vary based on the state."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clswaib",
"comment_text": [
"What is election day",
"The day that people vote for their political representatives, leaders, changing laws, and other people involved in government.",
"There are also going to be a lot of state and local elections on the ballot.",
"These are for offices such as state senators and representatives, state attorney generals, sheriffs, judges, mayors, city counselors, board of education administrators, et cetera. ",
"Example of 2014 Ballot for Montana",
"some states have ballot initiatives for different things",
"OP, these can include changing the amount of taxes (usually asking for an increase), issuing bonds (the state/county/city asking for loans to fund projects), changing laws (such as legalizing marijuana or legalizing same sex marriage), amendments to the state's constitution, annexing towns together, et cetera."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cls3wy7",
"comment_text": [
"In the United States elections are broken into 3 groups, local, state, and federal. In Local elections the voter votes on things that concern the city they live in such as city laws, who the mayor is, police commissioner. In State elections the voter can vote on things like who their Federal government representatives are, state wide laws, etc. The Federal election consists of things like who is President. Currently only legal resident citizens who are registered to vote are allowed to vote, but not everyone who is registered does vote and the why starts to lead into a big arguement. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clsvlv1",
"comment_text": [
"That is a bit rude and assumptive. Maybe they don't need to know it for voting purposes, but maybe they need to know it so they are more informed."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clsy0uf",
"comment_text": [
"Yea I know it came out rude....apologies. But still it's true. As a foreigner there's nothing I needed to know about it from practical point of view. From educational point of view , yes theres knowledge to be gained."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5 New audio technology
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2mofnc
| 32
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm63dtv",
"comment_text": [
"Some of those \"blue-tooth speaker things\" are stereo; they simply have a pair (or more) of speakers inside of them. Some aren't. Just because the speakers share a housing doesn't mean you can't have stereo. ",
"Why are Beats By Dre so expensive? Because they can be. People are idiots and will overpay for the perception of quality without doing the research to determine if there is a true qualitative difference worth paying more for. But that's always been true. Heck, B&O built a pretty good business on it. Bose too, in my opinion. ",
"Yes, stereo is still very much a thing. ",
"I also had $20 Koss headphones. (I'm just a tad younger than you.) By now they would have degraded, but then, so have my ears. You can do better now, but you'll pay a lot more than $20 for great headphones. ",
" \nPioneer? ",
" equipment? Really?"
],
"score": 14
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm6809g",
"comment_text": [
"To me, the glory days of audio were the '70s with great equipment from Marantz, Kenwood, Pioneer, etc. STEREO with plenty of power and kickass speakers.",
"I love the old HiFi stuff. You can still get all of that stuff, and even more. The primary difference will be that the solid state technology has gotten smaller, lighter, and more feature rich. You can even still find tube driven amplifiers if that's what you want.",
"These new Bose and other blue-tooth speaker things, are they stereo? How can you get stereo separation on these things when they are all-in-one type unit?",
"The small units may or may not be stereo, and even if they are, you won't get much separation. Nothing like sitting between 2 giant speakers and blasting Ted Nugent's Stranglehold, anyway. ",
"Bose emulates it fairly well by directing the sound outward at an angle, but the price vs quality isn't very good. You'll pay a whole lot for mediocre sound, and you can do much better for the price.",
"Also, these BEATS BY DRE, why so expensive? Is it just for the blue-tooth capability, or what? Because I must tell you that a '70s pair of Koss or other ($20) headphones are perfect and, to me, unbeatable.",
"Beats by Dre are a fashion accessory first, then a pair of cans. They sound good, but not several hundred dollars good. You can find great quality in the $50-100 range, and superb quality in the $100-200 range. You're not going to find $20 headphones that have outstanding quality, but if they're good enough for you, then that's good enough...",
"What's going on? Is \"stereo\" still a thing?",
"It's absolutely still a thing. However, most equipment these days is geared toward portability. You have to go looking for a decent home system now, but it's still out there.",
"Check out Crutchfield, they carry just about everything audio these days.",
"http://www.crutchfield.com/"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm64vjj",
"comment_text": [
"My dad had a Pioneer modular hi-fi, the dual cassette unit was fucking awesome, as was the RF tuner / power-amp.",
"I know where OP is coming from with \"Great\" equipment."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm64xad",
"comment_text": [
"People don't talk about stereo as much because it's basically the default now. In the 70's, it was a big deal whether something was stereo or not, and music was mixed in a way that made heavy use of the stereo separation. These days everything is ",
" stereo (if not surround), but music tends to be mixed in such a way that the stereo effects are subtle."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm695rt",
"comment_text": [
"I'm an audio junkie, and 2.1 speakers (two stereo speakers and a subwoofer) are great for 95% of home applications, in my opinion. The subwoofer is nice for a couple reasons. First, you don't have to have huge main front speakers to get good bass response. Second, you get better bass response than you would if you had huge main front speakers.",
"Bluetooth is just a way to wirelessly connect two things together. Could be your phone connecting to headphones, could be your iPod connecting with your reciever, could be your laptop connecting with a powered speaker.",
"Stereo separation is not great when the drivers are so close to each other, but it's a tradeoff you make for the small size.",
"If you like your $20 Koss headphones, awesome! Stick with em."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: How does compression clothing exactly work and does it really help?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2mltf9
| 9
| true
| false
| 0.72
|
I see people at my gym dressed like they about to do go surfing and I wonder if it really makes a difference.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm5fpyp",
"comment_text": [
"I don't know about the people you have seen,but I wear a compression sleeve because I had my lymph nodes taken out along with a mastectomy some time ago. I became one of the 5% that developed lymphedema, or swelling, and the sleeve, helps with that. It is tighter near the hand and looser near the sloulder, pushing lymph fluid up the arm, like the lymph nodes would do.",
"http://www.breastcancer.org/treatment/lymphedema/treatments/sleeves"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm5hxq6",
"comment_text": [
"It's tight but stretchy enough that, if sized properly, it won't cut off your circulation or bind your movement. This kind of squeezes the part of your body that it's over.",
"For athletes, it's used for a few reasons. It can help keep you warmer than loose clothing if it's cold due to trapping air rather than letting it circulate. ",
"Because it's made of a moisture-wicking material, it can also help keep you cooler when it's warm by pulling more sweat away from you and letting it evaporate than looser clothing.",
"The squeezing can also help circulation by improving return of venous (deoxygenated) blood. This is also useful for some medical issues but it's ",
" important to only wear it medically on advice of a doctor, as improper compression can make things worse.",
"The compression reduces muscle soreness and fatigue during and after a workout. ",
"It can also reduce chafing since it doesn't move around much. Likewise, if you need pads built in, it can keep them in place.",
"I don't know about studies on usefulness for non-elite athletes, but subjectively I can say that when I run wearing undershorts with a little compression, I feel somewhat less sore than when I run with looser underwear, and don't get the dreaded chub rub."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm5kz3z",
"comment_text": [
"My wife is a surgical tech and she wears compression socks everyday because she stands in the same spot for 8 hours. When she wasn't wearing them her legs would be in pain by hour 2 of work. A lot of surgery people wear them."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm5mzbf",
"comment_text": [
"things like knee bands help to control swelling. ",
"if there's some weird fad that has people going to the gym in wet suits, it's insanity. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm5r7xq",
"comment_text": [
"I wear compression shorts on dates and that's about it..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why is free and open immigration bad for country?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2md4zz
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
I read a book on libertarianism and the author said that many libertarians advocate free and open immigration. He stated that it has the potential to increase world GDP by 60-70 trillion, have little effect on wages, and little or no effect on crime. Also, they wouldn't be able to take advantage of the welfare state. Is this feasible?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm34407",
"comment_text": [
"As a Canadian born citizen, I can absolutely not find any job opportunities. I have been flat out told that employers are only looking for foreign workers by the employers themselves. I am open to immigration but I personally think it should be controlled. I see more first generation immigrants working in the places I go than Canadian born citizens, and in my seasonal job as a cashier at a toy store, I have rung through more people who can barely speak English. I love other languages, and I am fine with people speaking them, but I honestly can not help someone find what they need if they can't even give me basic nouns to describe it. The other way around as well, when I'm at another store, I can barely find help because people do not understand what I say. In my region of Canada I feel like it's gotten out of hand completely and something needs to be done. It's like the saying you can't help someone if you can't help yourself. If native citizens are struggling to find employment then obviously something needs to change. Again I'm for immigration, but it can't be a free for all because it does more harm than good. "
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm34q4h",
"comment_text": [
"1) You have ethnic and cultural issues when the native population gets too diluted. ",
"2) You have citizens unable to find jobs in their own country. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm34704",
"comment_text": [
"One aspect of the problem can arise from cultural/ethnic differences, which inevitably would result in higher crime rates/violence whenever different cultures/ethnicities interact. This can be seen all over the world, from Europe, to the Middle East, to the Mediterranean to Asia, and of course the Americas."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm34qla",
"comment_text": [
"Also Canadian and have to agree with this.",
"I like immigrants when they integrate and can respect that this is a land of opportunity but we already have too many who don't make any effort to integrate. Also about jobs, it is hard to compete when there are people who can thrive on minimum wage because they are splitting the cost of owning a house with all their relatives.",
"We might also have a problem with the provincial health care where people are/were sponsoring over relatives who never work in Canada but still collect the benefits."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cm35uir",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of immigrants I have spoken to are also just here and living on welfare. That's not fine either. They're overflowing in the workforce and in social welfare. It's not fair to native citizens one bit."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: What happens in time sensitive jobs during the Daylight Saving Time hour?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2l5mug
| 799
| true
| false
| 0.89
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clrohv5",
"comment_text": [
"We use the current time regardless in hospital settings. Obviously this can result in 2 events happening at 1 am but occurring an hour apart. It isn't a problem cause we can just communicate until we have an understanding and besides, everyone working already knows what's going on anyway.",
"Source: I work in the medical field and had a 13 hour shift that night."
],
"score": 314
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clrpvqr",
"comment_text": [
"I just now realized the difference between EST and EDT. Wowwww I'm slow"
],
"score": 149
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clroq72",
"comment_text": [
"This isn't exactly about a time sensitive job, but I used to work night shifts at a Pizza Place where my shifts went from five at night to four in the morning. Mind you I work in a college town and this is the only pizza place\nOf that franchise in the town so it gets pretty busy. I was working on Mystery Hour night and that meant that I had a whole extra hour of work ahead of me. It was getting close to 1:50 the first time and we were pretty busy. Then, right as the time changed our computer system resent all the orders that we had received at the first 1:00 back onto the make line, so we were seeing not only the orders that were coming in now but also the ones that had come in an hour earlier. Meanwhile the phones started ringing like crazy because in the confusion people weren't receiving there food and a bunch of the local clubs closed when the clock hit the second one. My manager actually freaked out and couldn't deal with the stress so he went back into the office to call IT and left me in charge of about 30 workers. I ended up having to have my orders taken down by paper and made that way, while someone else called people who placed Internet orders and told them we could only take orders over the phone. All the while I was telling drivers where to go, how to get there, and pulling pizzas out of the oven. One of the crazier nights of work I've had but definitely a fun one.my boss ended up giving me a nice raise shortly after."
],
"score": 149
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clrol9j",
"comment_text": [
"Have you watched television at 2am? They're not losing much."
],
"score": 121
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_clrpi5y",
"comment_text": [
"Because.... You know.... Daylight savings isn't a secret. "
],
"score": 117
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do we say "People with autism" because we don't want autism to define a person but we stills say pedophiles?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2ut889
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.25
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cobg2is",
"comment_text": [
"Because no one gives a shit about offending pedophiles. It's sad because if we did perhaps some of them could be helped before they hurt a child, but we don't. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cobgaau",
"comment_text": [
"Terms like epileptic, diabetic, even cripple are still used sometimes in the US. Lunatic, spastic, etc., have mostly phased out though, and more terms similar to these probably will down the road. As far as social stigmatization goes, pedophiles have a lot more to worry about than being called a pedophile vs a person with pedophilia.",
"I have epilepsy and personally, am not offended if I'm referred to as epileptic, assuming nothing offense is said in addition, of course. But I can see how others can be more sensitive about it, and many are. It wasn't that long ago in the grand scheme of things that people with epilepsy were institutionalized, regarded as insane or possessed by demons.",
"Plus, \"people with pedophilia\" is a bit of a mouthful (so to speak). "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cocnlxk",
"comment_text": [
"The term currently being popularized is: Minor Attracted Person. Or MAP I suppose."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cobg4t5",
"comment_text": [
"Whether they are consciously aware of it or not, most people view pedophilia as a choice, whereas autism is something a person is afflicted with. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cobgwxe",
"comment_text": [
"Autism refers to a spectrum of disabilities not just one. Think of it as cancer --then you have the actual diagnosis. ",
"Pedophilia, while it can technically can be a disability, it isn't necessarily. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why people want to get drunk? (for the sake of getting drunk?)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2nb5h8
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
Okay, so I can understand, actually no scratch that, why the hell do people get drunk for the sake of being drunk? For instance my brother gets drunk just because he can, he claims he hates the taste of beer etc, yet forces himself to drink it to he can 'enjoy himself', why can people not find enjoyment without drinking? I guess there's a few questions in here, I apologise. But yeah, I don't get it Edit: I am 18 - I know age shouldn't play a part, but in case it crops up, who knows Edit number 2: I am from the UK for 18 is legal to drink
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmc0esz",
"comment_text": [
"Well I enjoy the taste of beer, so that's an aspect of it as well, many people I know enjoy alcohol in some form or another and that makes getting drunk quite a bit easier. ",
"That said, you probably got ",
" drunk. There's a fine line, especially if you aren't used to drinking. Being tipsy or a little drunk is generally a lot of fun. Getting too drunk gets messy in a bad way very quickly, as I'm sure you found out. However, if you were to cut how much you drank those times in, say, half, you'd probably find that it's a very pleasant sensation - you don't care so much about whatever awful shit you have going on in your life (if there is any), you feel good, and more things are funny."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmc0um0",
"comment_text": [
"That's also possible. My best friend loves getting completely hammered and he is almost always in pretty decent control of himself relatively speaking, but he always tries to get me to go beyond my limit. Not that it works, because I hate being too drunk."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmc0lkx",
"comment_text": [
"That's definitely true, and a whole other aspect of it as well. Like I said, me personally I love a good buzz and after a long while of not really knowing my limits I finally learned how to manage my alcohol intake so I get the most fun out of the evening."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmc1il9",
"comment_text": [
"I'll give you the example of my life and my drinking habits, just to give a general idea of ",
" people like to drink.",
"In an average week, I'll consume somewhere between 2 and 6 standard drinks. 90% of this happens in my home with my girlfriend and roommates, with dinner or after dinner, in the form of a beer or two, or maybe a glass of wine.",
"I have one of those jobs that doesn't end when I clock out. Insurance/financing stuff. Sure, I usually don't take work calls and I leave my work emails alone for the night, but the fact is I have to constantly worry about what's going to happen tomorrow; who might lose their coverage, what mistake might get my company sued, who might stop working with us because we can't get their small business the cheap coverage they want, etc. As you can imagine, it can be tough to relax for the evening with all of these thoughts bouncing around.",
"So if I've had a stressful day and there's nothing else I'm needed for, I'll have a beer or two with dinner. I enjoy the taste, I sample new brews, I make a small hobby out of it. And then something very cool happens: my brain slows down a bit. Not so much that I'm really \"drunk,\" but enough that I'm a little buzzed, and while I can comfortably do any of my preferred leisure activities, I don't have that constant buzzing in the back of my head about my work worries.",
"So now I can fully enjoy that book I've been reading, or that conversation with my girlfriend, or that video game with my roommate, without that nagging worry rattling around, spoiling my relaxation. ",
"Everyone has their own form of escapism; it's healthy to sometimes ignore the problems that you can't do anything about for the moment and focus on enjoying the moment. I have an overactive mind, and a touch of alcohol helps me focus on the present, and without it, I'd be a much more stressed man on those nights I feel like having a beer."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmc1vzf",
"comment_text": [
"In my case, I like drinking only with friends or in a group of people. Firstly because I like beer under that circumstance, but more importantly, because it makes me less shy and more talkative. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Ladies' nights at clubs
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2v0f65
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.38
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_codbz74",
"comment_text": [
"They are illegal in a few states, but by and large it has to do with a principle called \"State Action\". ",
"I assume you are alleging that a \"ladies night\" is discriminatory towards men. How can any discrimination be considered legal? ",
"The big anti-discrimination amendment is the 14th amendment. But, that only protects you from \"state action\" (it effectively says that a state shall not discriminate against you). Using only the 14th amendment, a corporation could fire you for being a woman, or for being white, or for being black, and that would be allowed. A government agency could not fire you for those things because such a firing would constitute \"state action\". It is not ok for someone to fire you for being a woman, not because of the 14th amendment, but because of separate and specific laws enacted by congress.",
"There are no federal laws banning Ladies Nights. And it sounds like there are no state laws banning them where you live. It does sound like your state has anti discrimination laws regarding your barbers. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_codby8b",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of states are actually outlawing ladies' nights at bars and clubs. I think it's illegal in CA now. Most likely it will be outlawed in that state soon enough, and even then it will still happen. It just won't be specifically advertised."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_codcr4r",
"comment_text": [
"The interesting way I've seen bars/clubs get around this is have \"ladies' night\" be about specific drinks being cheap, rather than all drinks being cheap for specific people. So they'll do cheap cosmos, appletinis, and other \"girly\" drinks. Men can buy them at the same price as women if they're willing to walk around with a froufrou drink in hand. It ends up working mostly the same as typical ladies' nights - a lot of women getting drunk on cheap drinks while men pay more for their scotch-on-the-rocks or beer just to be around and have a chance of scoring."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_codcv1k",
"comment_text": [
"That's cool, because it also makes it cheaper for men to buy women drinks. Do those clubs still advertise it as ladies' night, or do they just advertise the mixed drinks being cheaper?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_codisk2",
"comment_text": [
"The one I'm thinking of calls it \"Ladies' Night Out\", but on the billboard underneath that it lists the 4 or so cheap mixed drinks. So kind of both? We're a student town with a relatively high male population, so that might impact their choice of advertising."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5 what causes 'Teflon sh*ts'?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2vgv6m
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.59
|
I heard the term 'Teflon sh*ts' first coined about 2 years ago as: 'When you shit and you only have to wipe once, or not at all due to low or no residue left behind.' What causes this beautiful phenomenon? Is there something I can add to my diet to make it happen more? Sorry for asterisk, I am not sure how to set as NSFW.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cohidlp",
"comment_text": [
"I mastered this at a young age. Provided you don't have the runs, this is easy. When you sit down, put one thigh down first at an angle. Like you are going to sit with half of your leg hanging off the toilet. Dig in, scoot your butt over like you are trying to spread your cheeks, because you are. After it is stretched as far open on that side as you can, put the other cheek down. Equalize. This is known as the spread - cheek starting position. Lean forward just a bit, torso forms a 70-80 degree angle with your lap. ",
"Next step, let the shit flow. It will take a few tries to master, but assuming the position is quick once you get it. Alternatively, you can manually spread your ass cheeks before you sit. ",
"Source: I have been doing this since I was 10 when I am in a hurry. ",
"Edit: it is because your cheeks are spread and you aren't smearing shit all over the innards of your grand Canyon. "
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cohipi9",
"comment_text": [
"He definitely has 'concentration marks' on both his thighs as he typed that up, 'cause you know he's shatting and Redditing. ",
"But agreed!"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cohjgo7",
"comment_text": [
"I've always called the 'no wipe' a flawless victory. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cohlr5k",
"comment_text": [
"No wipe? Not even a check?",
"You live a dangerous life, friend."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cohiido",
"comment_text": [
"I have to say, the procedure is rather glorious in how well you've thought it out."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why don't buses have seatbelts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2csou9
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjilv24",
"comment_text": [
"For school buses, a few reasons:",
"Ultimately: benefit does not outweigh expense (financial, logistical, or safety). I also think a lot people look at all the other safety measures (color, flashing lights, low speed, signs, etc.) that prevent buses from being involved in accidents in the first place.",
"Source: former school bus driver involved in discussions to add seat belts"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjil75k",
"comment_text": [
"All newly built buses in the UK now have to have seat belts by law as far as I am aware. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjimb87",
"comment_text": [
"This is one of the more commonly asked questions here, so I'm going to remove it. Please use the search bar and you'll find several answers to it. There's no rule against reposting questions, but please be sure to indicate that you've searched and haven't found your question listed. Thanks a lot. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjil2j8",
"comment_text": [
"Not 100% sure, but I believe it was deemed too expensive to install it on all the older buses."
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjil4xr",
"comment_text": [
"I'm speculating....",
"Expense.",
"Decreased need, due to not being launched forward. And possibly decreased chance of neck and back injuries from being jerked, due to the mass of the bus.",
"Competing requirements. A bus is more likely to flip. You'll get banged up falling all over the place, but you won't be trapped. May be an issue of many minor injuries being better than a several dying in a fire."
],
"score": 0
}
|
||
ELI5: The Puritan culture
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2d35or
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.55
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjllojq",
"comment_text": [
"The \"Puritans\" considered themselves \"pure\" and they considered the Church of England to be decadent. ",
"That is why many left England in the 17th centuries to develop a new colony, where their religion and ",
" would reign supreme. ",
"In the end, their colony ended up getting absorbed by the bigger colonies. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjlm6mg",
"comment_text": [
"In the 17th century there were many sects who were not happy with the Church of England, which was and still is the dominant religion in England.",
"The Puritans were one of these sects and they left England to create their vision of a \"perfect\" (or intolerant) society in the colonies. Yet another sect was the \"Quakers\". All of these Protestant sects suffered from discrimination in England, but were tolerated ",
". ",
"At the lowest end of the pecking order were the Catholics. Everyone, including the Protestant sects, despised them and they suffered the most oppression. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjlli6w",
"comment_text": [
"Do your research independently, Johnny. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjllked",
"comment_text": [
"Sorry to disappoint but it isn't."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjlls4u",
"comment_text": [
"But the thing is, I know the puritans are involved with Protestantism in one way or another. How and why?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5 Why is electricity the most commonly used power to make machines work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2d52fq
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
I guess steam can be used as well. But what other forms of powering machines are there? And how efficient? How different would it all be if electricity wasn't used, but one of the alternative ones instead?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjm5f81",
"comment_text": [
"imagine the amount of pipe it would take to furnish a city block with steam to run appliances today, not to mention the heat the pipes would give off. water wheels were used a lot before electricity, ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBqNxXlJxHA",
" for mills \"making flour from grains\" and saw mills \"cutting wood for buildings\" or for blacksmiths using a water-wheel trip hammer ",
"http://explorepahistory.com/displayimage.php?imgId=1-2-FB9",
" also water powered appliances ",
"http://www.notechmagazine.com/category/water-powered-machines"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjm5pi4",
"comment_text": [
"Steam itself isn't an energy source. Steam engines would use some type of fuel (usually coal, I believe) to heat water creating steam, which mechanically drives the engine. Steam is merely a mechanical part of the process. Believe it or not, nuclear power plants are basically steam engines. The water is heated by nuclear reactions, and the steam is used to drive a turbine that generates electricity.",
"For most devices, an electric motor is much more compact than other types of engines. Since electricity is functionally unlimited, you don't have to worry about running out of fuel. Electric motors can also be used indoors because they don't create exhaust."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjm5pyh",
"comment_text": [
"Electricity is used because you can send a lot of \"it\" using easy to obtain, easy to maintain, easy to install, easy to troubleshoot, and easy to repair conductors. You can then manipulate it easily for many functions.",
"You can replace the word easy with relatively cheap, relatively efficient, and relatively safe.",
"Also electricity is very easy to \"make\".",
"Let's say instead of electricity we use some fluid to power our homes. Air, oil, steam, water. Every time I said easy above replace it with either cumbersome, expensive, or inefficient."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjm540x",
"comment_text": [
"As far as I know electricity isn't a form of power in itself, but simply a method of transmitting it, and so I assume it's simply because it's the most efficient. Steam, for example, would take up huge amounts of space, waste massive amounts of energy due to heat loss and would require large volumes of water to work effectively. Compared to electricity, which can fit into small wires and is surprisingly efficient when transmitted in high-voltage power lines, it's fair to assume it's simply the most efficient and effective form of energy transmissions that we currently have"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjm55ik",
"comment_text": [
"You have combustible fuel (oil, gas and coal) and nuclear power as well (which gives steam and in turn electricity). We use what is cost effective, and in contemporary times what is renewable. The efficiency depends on the machine in question, trains and submarines use both diesel and electricity. In a country like Norway electricity is in abundance because of all the waterfalls, which makes it cheap(er)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: why do I look better in the mirror than on photos?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2czzp4
| 20
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
why do I look better in the mirror than on photos and am I actually more attractive in one instance or is it just that I'm used to seeing the mirrored reflection and not the photo one?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjkpiob",
"comment_text": [
"You don't really look better, you just look \"normal\", and normal is what you're used to. Normal is the baseline you are trying to achieve every day when you wake up and look in the mirror. If you can hit that baseline, you think you look good, when in reality you just achieved looking like how you think you normally look.",
"However, in a photo, the whole image is flipped around, the lighting is different, you aren't straight on, etc.. So it looks weird and different, and not \"normal\", which you perceive as being wrong and bad."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjl789x",
"comment_text": [
"Oh god :("
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjl7o3g",
"comment_text": [
"Well, the point is that you DON'T look bad in real life, or in photos. You just feel like you do. Ask 100 people if they think they look good in photos, and 95 of them will say no. But do YOU think those people look bad in photos? No. They look just like they normally do. From the outside, people look the same in real life as they do in photos, because you are used to seeing them that way.",
"But from inside the head of anyone in particular, they are accustomed to seeing themselves in a mirror, and so the photo version of themselves looks weird and bad, even though it's completely normal and fine looking to everyone else.",
"Don't worry, you look just fine in real life, and you look just fine in photos. You don't look nearly as bad as you fear you do. You're just not used to it. The mirror lies to you."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjkpplg",
"comment_text": [
"You are more used to see your reflexion than yourself in photo where you are flipped on the other side. You also can take the pose in front of the mirror, you control what you see. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjl6zf9",
"comment_text": [
"So to follow up on this do other people typically see me as I see myself in the mirror or as I look in photos?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: How can rappers sing about illegal things but not get in trouble?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2dp0hr
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.25
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjrn0tq",
"comment_text": [
"Because you can talk about illegal things as well, and not get in trouble.",
"Talking about them is fine, doing them is what's wrong."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjrn1nh",
"comment_text": [
"I murdered Hitler.",
"See, I said it, and it's not true."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjrn2x7",
"comment_text": [
"Well folks, me managed 5 minutes without a Hitler reference.",
"That's not bad i guess!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjrn4q5",
"comment_text": [
"I wanted something anyone could guess I was lying about. :)"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjrn0ui",
"comment_text": [
"Just a small, unimportant part of American government called the Constitution. Which has a small thing called the first amendment. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
||
ELI5: Why Can't A Pipeline Be Built For Water To Drought Stricken Regions From Huge Lakes in Other Regions?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2ebswz
| 4
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjxyx1e",
"comment_text": [
"They can, and to a point do this. San Francisco gets it's water from the ",
"Htech Hetchy valley",
".",
"Generally it's not economical to do so. putting in major lengths of piping to move fresh water would be quite expensive. We do that with oil, but that costs $4 a gallon vs I pay about $0.05 per gallon of water."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjxzd11",
"comment_text": [
"Because Midwesterners will vehemently and possibly violently object to water from the Great Lakes going to a desert.",
"Source: I grew up in Wisconsin."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjxzo1a",
"comment_text": [
"They're all connected and draining Michigan would mess the whole system up."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjxzlgd",
"comment_text": [
"Even if they didn't, the Great Lakes are international with Canada and they'd be opposed to siphoning them off to a desert in America."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjy00il",
"comment_text": [
"Lake Michigan is actually covered under the various Great Lakes agreements since they all cover the entire watershed. In fact, several of them were signed in Milwaukee which is ",
" Lake Michigan."
],
"score": 2
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do Americans glorify their soldiers?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2ebwuy
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjy06d3",
"comment_text": [
"Glorifying troops and soldiers has been happening since the Romans were alive, probably even earlier..."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjy03fn",
"comment_text": [
"Almost every country glorifies its soldiers. Nothing special about how Americans do it. Society needs, and appreciates, people willing to do hard and dangerous things to protect others."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjy06z6",
"comment_text": [
"Because they are all volunteer. Which means we don't have to have a draft anymore. The only people who went to Afghanistan or Iraq are the ones who signed up for it. Our government was sending people there either way, and I didn't have to go because those guys volunteered."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjxzx0x",
"comment_text": [
"The media has an interest in making us support the wars because their owners are war profiteers. A soldier-friendly media makes a lot of Americans glorify and support the military, which in turn helps combat any anti-war and anti-militaristic attitudes. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cjy008z",
"comment_text": [
"Really? Someone that says, \"Your life is more important than mine, I got this...\", needs justification of praise?"
],
"score": 6
}
|
||
ELI5:Does RGB really equal white light?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2o8oel
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
If a create white light using a red, green, and blue LED, then refract the light through a prism, will I get all the colors in the spectrum or just the original red, green, and blue?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmkrzkk",
"comment_text": [
"You'd get just the original three colors. If you can understand graphs of intensity versus wavelength, ",
"this site has some neat graphs that show the spectrums of different types of LEDs",
".",
"Colors get complicated (they even confused Isaac Newton) but one thing to remember is our eyes never see the \"true\" spectrum, just an approximation of its colors based on what our cone cells do. And one consequence of that is that there are an infinite ways for different light spectrums to look like \"white\" to our eyes."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmks80q",
"comment_text": [
"That page you linked is super useful! Thank you!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmksgcz",
"comment_text": [
"Consider the color purple, which is a wavelength half way between red and blue.",
"It is?",
"Violet: 400 - 450 nm\nBlue: 450 - 495 nm\nGreen: 495 - 570 nm\nRed: 620 - 750 nm\n",
"Purple (violet) is not \"in-between\" red and blue - it's a lower wavelength than all three.",
"Purple is a really tricky one. If you had used Yellow as an example that would have worked better. It's basically halfway between red and green."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmkrxkq",
"comment_text": [
"Your eyes only have cells that can detect those three colors, so if they are all present, your eyes/brain assume it is the full spectrum."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cmks1na",
"comment_text": [
"Human eyes can only detect Red and Blue and Green. (We have three types of sensors in our eyes, optimized for those three colors. The sensors are also triggered less strongly by nearby colors.)",
"As a result, our eyes are easily fooled. Consider the color yellow, which is a wavelength part way between red and green. It triggers those two sensors equally. So if we shine a red light and a green light at equal intensities, two separate types of light mixing together, our eyes detect this as the exact same yellow as that single wavelength of yellow. What's coming into our eyes is completely different, but to us it looks the same.",
"So ",
" white light is made of equal amounts of ",
" colors. That's completely different than having just Red and Blue and Green, but to our eyes it will look the same.",
"This brings us to your question about the prism. If you create \"fake white\" out of just red, blue, and green, and then shine it through a prism, you will not see a full rainbow. You will see just three sharp lines with those three colors.",
"EDIT: Fixed as per ",
"/u/dmazzoni",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.