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: Why isn't college in the USA free like in some European countries?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
9ui2zt
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_e94ejbk",
"comment_text": [
"Because our priorities aren't in order. There are however tons of government assistance programs for low income families that will pay for you to go to school, federal student grants are SPECIFICALLY for people going to college."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_e94ekji",
"comment_text": [
"The US chooses to spend it's budget on its military rather than college education. However, that could also be said as: because the US spends most of it's budget on the military, European countries are more able to spend their budget on free higher education. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_e94fcug",
"comment_text": [
"To be fair, it would help if America didn't start so many of the wars it's involved in."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_e94l211",
"comment_text": [
"Up voted for accuracy"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_e94f49z",
"comment_text": [
"Because that would mean somebody paying for it, but the billionaires who conspire with the GOP to just cut taxes as the remedy to every issue would never allow taxes to be raised (or defense spending be cut) to fund it. Also, if everybody got free college education, then the U.S. would probably need to let in more immigrants to do the low end jobs no college educated person would do and the GOP also don't want that."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: What actually makes wind?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
anthuf
| 2
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_efvurvu",
"comment_text": [
"Pressure differences which are caused mostly by heat. Hot air is less dense than cold air, so when the air in one area is hotter than the air in the other area, it exerts less pressure on the air in the cool area than the cool area does on it. The denser cold air moves toward the low pressure area."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_efvuulb",
"comment_text": [
"It's simple. Wind occurs when air travels from a region of higher pressure to a lower pressure. The speed of this wind depends on many things like the difference in the pressures, the surrounding terrain, etc.",
"Basically, moving air is wind. It moves because it must occupy the region where it is less abundant. This is the property of all fluids. Yes, air is a fluid. Do not confuse with liquid. Fluid is anything that flows."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_efvuxft",
"comment_text": [
"Heat does, or the distribution of heat. Hot air rises because it is less dense than colder air, so when that air rises, more air rushes in to take its old place below.",
"",
"Another way of saying it is low air pressure. You know how if you have a room with two doors, one open and one closed, and you open the closed door at a decent speed, you feel a movement of air? You created a low pressure zone by moving the door (pushing air around) and then you feel the rush of more air to take that place.",
"",
"There aren't solid things like doors to do that out in the atmosphere, so it's mostly due to air movement from heat."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_efvv7b4",
"comment_text": [
"The main cause is pressure differences - air will attempt to reach equal pressure everywhere so it moves in to areas of lower pressure from higher pressure, that movement is the wind.",
"The pressure differences come from several different factors but the largest factor is going to be temperature differences caused by the Sun."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_efvuwlo",
"comment_text": [
"Hot air takes up more space than cold air so it is less dense. This means that when air near the surface gets heated by the sun it will tend to float up over colder, denser air. Them switching places requires air to flow around in a process called \"convection\". What are big masses of moving air? Wind."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5 :Why haven't we made Mount Everest easily accessible?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
bvw6q5
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epszkcj",
"comment_text": [
"There are thousands of easily accessed mountain peaks in the world. The point of Everest is that it's hard (well, there are harder climbs, but none higher). Sometimes we choose to do things because they are difficult - that makes the accomplishment all the better. Conquering a mountain that kills climbers is more meaningful than conquering a mountain made safe and accessible to all (or most). No one is forced to climb, and the risks are well known.",
"Besides, there are significant obstacles to any sort of construction project anywhere near the summit, not to mention the irreversible ecological damage that would be caused."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epsyskp",
"comment_text": [
"Everest is the world's highest mountain with some of the most dangerous terrain in the world. There are glaciers, ice canyons, ice falls, and constantly shifting rock, ice, and snow drifts. There's simply no way, and in most cases, no place to even install anything like this. Sherpas risk their lives putting fixed ropes in place, and again, because of changing conditions, those ropes have to be placed at the start of every climbing season. Handrails and stairs, even if there was a place to install them, would have to be moved every year. It's also essentially impossible to do extended work at these high altitudes. Especially near the summit, there's simply not enough oxygen to survive. Even with bottled oxygen, some climbers can't handle the exertion of making it to the summit. There's no way anyone would be able to do complex construction work, which by the way, would tie up the entire route to the summit during the short climbing season."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ept9dbe",
"comment_text": [
"What abou the mass amount of garbage people leave up there, because leaving stuff you can't use anymore behinde makes your climb/decent easier? I would call that a bigger ecological damage."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epta5ub",
"comment_text": [
"And making it far more accessible would greatly increase traffic, which would lessen the trash problem because suddenly all these extra people would be much more willing to bring the trash down with them? I just don't see that happening - people can't be bothered to pack up their trash when leaving the beach to drop it in a bin on the way to their cars, and day-trekkers in national parks leave their litter everywhere, yet this new surge of climbers (who will still face grave challenges to life and limb no matter how many staircases, ramps, railings, etc. you build) will take all their trash down with them? Sorry, it's simply not in their nature. Some may, most won't, and even if many do take down all their trash, the increase in traffic will more than offset any trash removal. If ecology is your concern, the less accessible the mountain, the better."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eptacmw",
"comment_text": [
"True, haven't thought about it that way. Only thought about the construction not abou visitors."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: why in sentencing dangerous and violent criminals will judges sometime hand down ridiculously large sentences, which the person will not live for anyway? I.e. 150 years to a mass murderer. Why not just hand down life behind bars?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
kldujv
| 24
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gh8dy7i",
"comment_text": [
"Crimes are sentences individually. If someone is found guilty of killing 20 people then they are given a sentence for each of the 20 murders, any one of which might warrant a life sentence. So this person is given 20 life sentences which might seem a bit silly (they don't have 20 lives to live), but what do you do if they are later found not to have killed one person?",
"In that case one of their life sentences simply goes away and it is clear how to proceed. If the trial for 20 counts of murder only handed down a single life sentence then when they are proved not to have killed one of those 20 it is now a big question about what if anything changes.",
"In the case of giving someone 150 years in jail for mass murder, if they killed 5 people and got 30 years for each then it totals to 150 years. Of course they won't actually serve all 150 but it is the nature of applying the laws which say killing someone can get you 30 years in jail."
],
"score": 46
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gh8egvg",
"comment_text": [
"Also, we're still not sure if vampires exist or not, so this helps cover that possibility."
],
"score": 42
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gh8etcu",
"comment_text": [
"Because sentences can also be appealed and or commuted and or pardoned.",
"So if you lump together a bunch of crimes and give one sentence for all of them, how exactly do you modify their sentence?"
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gh90ewh",
"comment_text": [
"quarentees"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gh8gud1",
"comment_text": [
"The practice of law is very formal. A judge would not give a vague sentence such as, \"in jail for a for a very long time.\" A guilty verdict requires an exact amount of years, somewhere within the maximum and minimum. If there are 10 guilty verdicts, the judge will analyze each separately and give 10 sentences. The judge would not give one long sentence to cover all ten verdicts, each verdict requires it own sentence. It might seem silly to us, but for those in the law profession, dotting the I's, crossing the T's, and tying up loose ends is an important part of the game."
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: How bad is suger free soda for me teeth? Would i be fine if i drink one glass of sugar free soda everyday for the rest of my life while maintaining a generally healthy diet?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ibldzr
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_g1wfmra",
"comment_text": [
"While also brushing your teeth? Yea. One glass won’t hurt you.",
"As long as you’re regularly finding/cleaning your teeth you shouldn’t run into many problems. Lemons and other citrus fruits can be just as acidic as soda, yet people don’t worry too much about those.",
"It comes back to the same rule, everything in moderation, one glass a day isn’t gonna kill your teeth, especially if you’re brushing afterwards, or even just drinking a glass of water after to help rinse away any left other acidity."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_g1wgph7",
"comment_text": [
"you can chunk down everything \"for the rest of the life\" - but that timespan could be very short. ",
"in case of sugar free soda, it would obviously better to not drink it every day of your life, but it won't kill you (more likely) then eating a hotdog every day, or smoking 2 cigs or whatever. for your teeth however, the thing isn't the soda (sugar or not) in and of itself but more your saliva that is laced with the sodas acid (citronat and such) hours after drinking it. if you mantain a healthy mouth hygiene (as in brushing/flossing an hour after drinking) it will not affect your life at all (exept you have food tolerance problems with the \"sugar replacement\" that can lead to dispepsie)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_g1wn1u5",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for replying. Yes have heard about one glass of water after helps but isnt brushing ur teeth straight afterwards making it worse?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_g1wp1jc",
"comment_text": [
"Why would it make it worse? The problem with soda is the acid, which if left sitting on your teeth will gradually damage the enamel. Brushing your teeth with any normal toothbrush will remove the acid and shouldn’t damage the enamel. Now I’m not saying you should be brushing your teeth everytime you eat something everyday; but an extra once a day shouldn’t cause harm"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_g1wn6tg",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are movie scripts formatted like they are? Is it because of tradition, or efficiency?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
qe70yw
| 101
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.88
|
The typical movie script is . Why are they like this? I understand how this may have started, probably because that's the easiest formatting possible on a typewriter... But why are scripts like this? Is it just tradition? I also understand "It's easier to read", but that doesn't explain why it's the only option. Movie sets don't always put a premium on doing what's easy for people's bodies — many are all about penny-pinching and saving whatever money they can. With hundreds of scripts printed on a production, wouldn't a tighter formatting save a lot of paper & ink? Even just something would eliminate a ton of spaces. I'm sure there are other formatting options now that computers are widespread — ones that are easy to read space-efficient. Why aren't those used?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hhr0q5p",
"comment_text": [
"The first is very easy to immediately see where each part begins and ends, has the speakers name immediately identifiable, has a standard and easily recognizable space for any notes to the actor/director, and has space on each side to allow marking up the script in a way that is clear.",
"When scripts are pitched the production company also wants it in a standard format - this makes their processes easier if they aren’t trying to work around the writer (and the production company is the boss here, they’re proving the $$$ so are calling the shots). The format in the first example makes it very easy for them to interpret and develop a script.",
"Given the cost of production the savings on paper trying to eliminate lines are insignificant and flatly not worth losing even the tiniest bit of clarity."
],
"score": 108
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hhr1iq0",
"comment_text": [
"Also, movie scripts are generally about a minute per page. So it’s very easy to see if a movie is running long, and if so, what scenes could be cut."
],
"score": 65
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hhrq8u0",
"comment_text": [
"Two main reasons:",
"EDIT: found a great YouTube video on how the screenplay format evolved over the years: ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5I3Tq9j29c"
],
"score": 32
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hhsr1ua",
"comment_text": [
"A minute per page eliminates any math to estimate screen time. Couple that with the ease of reading and markup and it’s pretty obvious why this format is used."
],
"score": 23
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hhrsxos",
"comment_text": [
"A lot of crew like the large spaces for writing in notes for their own departments' requirements.",
"Plus, most crew now receive digital rather than hard copies."
],
"score": 16
}
|
ELI5: since hand sanitizer contains alcohol/ethanol, why isn't it controlled by the ATF?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
qsznq3
| 6
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.66
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hkgi2bm",
"comment_text": [
"It’s controlled by the FDA. It is a registered drug because the alcohol is an active ingredient. I formulated Germ-X hand sanitizer. The alcohol is regulated by the ATF in the tanks we had in our tank farm. The finished product itself is a drug."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hkg5nrm",
"comment_text": [
"Because denatured alcohol is virtually impossible to consume. It also is so widely used for industrial purposes that it can´t be subjected to regulation in the same way as consumable alcohol."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hkg5ph3",
"comment_text": [
"To beeee faaaairrrrr, when I went to detox, I was at a 0.38 or something. I can't judge anyone lol"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hkg59aj",
"comment_text": [
"Ethanol. You can get drunk from hand sanitizer.",
"When I was an EMT I picked up a guy who drank a metric ton of it at Walgreens. Afaik he was stable when we dropped him off, but I heard his BAC was 0.2+ from a sup later."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hkjfx7s",
"comment_text": [
"As stored as a raw material but then by the FDA as a drug in the product. IPA It’s really not preferred because it’s so drying to the skin but during a pandemic it is more important to kill germs."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5- is everything relative?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
miu43c
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
Einstein said time is relative. I get all the reasoning there. But isn’t everything relative if it came from independent observation and theory? Examples: degrees (weather AND angles), measurements (inches, feet, and so on), monetary values, and so on. At some point, someone coined these terms and their values. Doesn’t that make all of them relative? Aren’t we only measuring and basing data and info on these coined terms instead of something else?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gt6lla9",
"comment_text": [
"It really depends on what you mean by relative. In a colloquial sense sure everything is relative, 5 dollars is a small amount of cash relative to a million. You could also say a metre is a small distance compared to a kilometre.",
"When Einstein showed that time is relative, he meant it in a very specific sense. Unlike previously thought, time is not the same for every observer. That is to say, time changes relative to your speed and mass for example. A lot of things are not relative in this sense. A metre is always a metre regardless of how fast you're going. The speed of light (in a vacuum) is constant, no matter how you measure it, and five dollars is five dollars, whether you're orbiting the earth or standing still"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gt7v8rd",
"comment_text": [
"... note that Einstein ALSO noted that length (and mass) are relative. So if you and Timmy are at rest with respect to each other, your seconds, meters, and yards are the same as his, and he'll agree.",
"But if he's moving fast enough relative to you that you see him slowed so his 1 second is your 2 seconds? Then he will also be length-squashed in the direction he's moving, so he will only look half as thick as he did when standing still, and it'll take twice as much force to accelerate his mass - change his velocity - as it did when he was standing still, so you'll see his mass as twice as massive.",
"And, this is the part that blows people's minds, he'll see his OWN time, length, and mass, as normal, and YOURS as the ones that have slowed, squashed, and gotten heavier. AND YOU'LL BOTH BE RIGHT.",
"--Dave, so no, it's NOT just time that's relative, in moving reference frames; length and mass also change. but you always see your OWN as being normal."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gt6oeed",
"comment_text": [
"No what I'm saying is that the whole point of measurements is that they're not relative (at least they try to be, thank Einstein for breaking time). Sure a metre is not a yard, but a metre is a metre no matter where when or how fast you are. A metre and a yard are related to each other by some ratio, so they are relative in some colloquial sense. However the length of a metre is not related to anything, it just is, therefore it is not relative in the same way that for example time is, because my 1 second could be 2 seconds for you. There is in practice no situation where my metre would be two metres for you. (This might actually fall apart in some very strict theoretical sense, I'm not very familiar with the exact definition of a metre)",
"A better example would maybe be some universal constant, like π. It is not relative. There is no way you can measure π to be anything else than what it is. My π will always be the same as your pi, regardless of any external circumstances"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gt6ow2q",
"comment_text": [
"Let's stick to euclidean geometry. We agree that full circles exist, and that one revolution of a large circle is the same amount is rotation as that of a smaller circle. We can demonstrate this easily by sweeping a line around the center of two concentric circles and observing that it makes a full revolution of both simultaneously.",
"So, we can then agree that there are two points opposing on a circle. The angle our line must sweep to travel from one to the other is once again fixed. We have yet to measure it, but we can see that it does not change. We can call that angle half a circle, pi radians, 180 degrees, or anything else, but it never changes."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gt6p4yf",
"comment_text": [
"I mean, all human language and ideas were created by humans. There's nothing fundamental about breaking up a circle into 360⁰ degrees that requires it to be that way. It's just the measurement we ended up using, and as long as we all agree on the same measurement, it works for communication between humans. All units of measurement are, at their core, arbitrary, and chosen by humans for quirky human reasons."
],
"score": 3
}
|
ELI5 What would happen in a hypothetically small and very targeted nuclear war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
gtvh1d
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fsemkyu",
"comment_text": [
"No. You’d need something that would only kill people and not cause lasting harm to the environment. Something like a ... pandemic."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fsempml",
"comment_text": [
"Well the deaths of all those people would have to be from impossible living conditions right? Like all deaths really. ",
"I’m sure there’s a way though, set it much later? In a remote part of the world that’s still habitable?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fser992",
"comment_text": [
"So if I’m remembering correctly, and I’m probably not, I had a really vague understanding of this to begin with, your ideal scenario requires really specific conditions, and unfortunately has two issues requiring solutions on the opposite end of the spectrum. ",
"SO... There’s a certain point, where if a nuclear bomb gets too big, it limits local fallout. Radiation from bombs is caused from leftover nuclear material and stuff like that, that wasn’t burned up by the explosion, and then scattered around by environmental elements and such, before falling back down to the ground. HENCE, ",
"out. ",
"If I’m correct, this limiting happens basically because an explosion was so massive that it launched stuff high enough into the atmosphere that it will not settle locally, and can be carried over all over by weather and stuff. This is the two issues I was talking about. ",
"Either you get a big enough bomb not to need to worry about radiation ",
" while totally destroying the local environment, or you use tons of smaller bombs which is going to turn your warzone into the Fallout series’ wastelands. ",
"Please, for the love of god, someone correct me if I am wrong, I was just trying to address some stuff that I didn’t se in the other comments yet."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fses52v",
"comment_text": [
"Kurzgesagt has a video on what happens if you nuke a city",
"https://youtu.be/5iPH-br_eJQ",
"Might serve as inspiration and a source of knowledge"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fseuzps",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do the same temperatures feel different?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
njz4x1
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gz9xuuh",
"comment_text": [
"More than likely it is due to humidity. The more humid it is the more you feel the temperature. It can be 120*f with no humidity and it would feel the same as 85*f at 100% humidity."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gza30h2",
"comment_text": [
"Too, our body itself changes in it's sensitivity to ambient temps. ",
"Say one day, inside your home it is at such & such temp and humidity, feels very comfortable. Next day everything is the same, yet you may feel not as comfortable as the day before."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gz9zpw5",
"comment_text": [
"Humans cool themselves by perspiring through their skin and the resulting evaporation cools the surface of the skin. In an environment with high humidity less evaporation can occur (at 100% humidity no evaporation can occur). Whereas a windy environment with low humidity will encourage evaporation."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gza261l",
"comment_text": [
"Your skin can't feel temperature, it can only feel the flow of heat. Either into your body or out of your body, and how fast it is moving. Different factors like direct sunlight, humidity, wind/air movement, can have a huge impact on the flow of heat into or out of your body."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gza2er9",
"comment_text": [
"one thing to remember: when you set smth to a certain degree, you don't necessarily get the desired temperature. I. e. a heater will produce air hotter then you have set up because it tries to heats your surroundings to the set temperature as fast as possible"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELi5 : Why do people say that the Catholic Church is corrupt/evil.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
o7tj2i
| 2
|
Other
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h30v9gx",
"comment_text": [
"There are several issues here which have lead to that belief. The first has been not only discovering that there have been many priests or other highly placed people in the Catholic Church who have abused their positions and molested children, but that the Catholic Church was aware that this was happening and had a policy of just moving priests who had done this to another location to avoid controversy, rather than punishing the priests or turning them over to the authorities. ",
"The second is a general dislike of the fact that the Catholic Church is incredibly wealthy, owns a lot of land and gets donations from its followers, yet many feel that they aren't using enough of that money to help the very poor."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h30vff9",
"comment_text": [
"Because there have been tons of stories of church members raping children and they are doing everything they can to cover it? That's just one of many exemples."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h30w6ep",
"comment_text": [
"The third is the fact that it's more pegan than it is Christian. The early Catholic church basically just 'Christianized' pegan practices. ",
"The fourth is that the Catholic church has always been more concerned with gaining power, authority, and control than actually teaching God's word."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h30wyqy",
"comment_text": [
"Gonna add number five here - missionary work. The church would send missionaries to \"civilize the savages\". In practice, this often met the definition of genocide."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h30vn53",
"comment_text": [
"It's a completely top-down organization with a lot of power and no structural checks-and-balances controls built in. An organization like that will almost always become corrupt, and the catholic church is no exception. It pursues harmful policies, particularly those related to reproduction. It is inherently sexist and discriminates openly against women. It promotes anti-gay policies. It uses its wealth to influence government despite the stated principle of separation of church and state which underpins most democracies."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Other profitable passive incomes than real estate?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
o7oia0
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h2zxcnf",
"comment_text": [
"Well, you're really talking about investments like-",
"Also I really don't have any money to invest.",
"Ah. well, that kinda narrows it down. Outside of dumping money into long term index or mutual funds (where the investment \"stuff\" is done by other people on your behalf) or real estate there aren't that many passive income things. I mean, think about it. Something that earns you money/accrues in value by just sitting there?",
"Well, if you knew some secret thing that you thought would increase in value over time, well technically that might count. Like if you thought that Funko Pops were gonna be the next Beanie Babies, you could buy up a bunch of those and toss em in a closet... but again with the no money thing, that's not really an option for you. And its speculation: if your guess of what's going to be hot is wrong, you have a bunch of junk sitting around."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h2zxngr",
"comment_text": [
"Vending Machines.",
"Figure out a way to get your hands on enough money to buy some vending machines and the drinks to stock them. Set them up near high-traffic areas. Collect the money.",
"Of course that still requires money in, as well as connections to get the drinks/snacks at wholesale value but at least it's easier than real estate."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h2zxeo0",
"comment_text": [
"I don't want to work that hard",
"I want lots of money",
"Invent a time machine, go back in time, and be born rich.",
"Other than that, you don't have any real good options without a lot of risk or a lot of work, and usually both."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h2zy214",
"comment_text": [
"You don't have to put 80's a week into real estate there is many methods to get into real estate for example some one that flips a house requires time and money. But a contract whole seller you need very little money and you can put in 10 hours a week and make good money once you get really good at it. The whole concept of passive income is to work really hard now and created enough capital so you dont have work as hard later or at all"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h2zy633",
"comment_text": [
"Also I really don't have any money to invest.",
"Well that’s gonna be a problem, since the bulk of passive income is going to be investment related.",
"Real estate is a big one of course, and the work isn’t as hard as you may think - or it wouldn’t be “passive.” Good tenants do most of the upkeep, you’re just responsible for the odd breakdown or insurance claim.",
"Then you have the stock market - buy shares in companies that pay dividends, or put your money in growth-oriented funds. There are many strategies to make money in the market, but you’ll need some spare cash to get started.",
"Extremely wealthy people can also do some more unusual passive income streams like direct lending and renting out things other than real estate, but this is riskier.",
"There’s always “side hustles” too, but again a second job isn’t “passive.”"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What is virtue signalling?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ghridu
| 1
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fqae72b",
"comment_text": [
"Doing something to be seen as good, rather than doing it because it is good. If the boss takes out the trash to show the employees that he's a team player (but not if he's in the office alone), that's virtue signalling."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fqaf4x6",
"comment_text": [
"Similar to a \"humble-brag\"."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fqam6vv",
"comment_text": [
"Doing something in a way to flaunt its goodness, rather than just for the sake of it being good. Driving a Prius, that screams \"hybrid car\", rather than a Camry hybrid that might easily be overlooked as a regular Camry is an example."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fqacecs",
"comment_text": [
"Trying to signal to the world that you are one of the good guys. Usually by yelling your opinion about a current news story even if you don’t have all the facts or not understand the nuance of it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fqadhyu",
"comment_text": [
"Great explanation. Thanks"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
Eli5 : Why do biscuits (as per U.K. definition) get soft if left in an unsealed packet, but don’t if they are in a biscuit jar, but in both cases they are still completely surrounded by air (as the jar is not vacuumed) ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
pvz9an
| 15
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.64
|
Completely negated to take humidity into account. Thanks for all your replies. Makes a lot of sense now!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hedycqs",
"comment_text": [
"there is moisture in the air, but only a limited amount. This mean that in a jar the dey biscuits will absorb all the mositure and still stay crispy since the moisture they absorbed wasnt enough to the them to stay soft. Since the jar is closed no new air can get in and make them soft.",
"Outside though they got all the moisture in the room, so they are constantly absorbing it."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hedn8nx",
"comment_text": [
"Moisture moving into air is not a problem. Air can only hold so much water before being saturated. The problem arises if that humid air then ",
" away and is replaced by drier air, taking away even more moisture. So instead of vacuum-sealing something to prevent it from drying it's far easier and equally effective to simply keep the surrounding air from moving away and mixing with other air."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_heeeyuj",
"comment_text": [
"In a biscuit tin there is a sealed amount of air. The air contains water. Biscuits are very dry, and want to have the water, so they take the water out of the air - which makes them soft.",
"If they are in a biscuit tin, they can only have the water in there. Which isn’t much. But if they are in the open air they can get fresh air with new water all the time. So they get softer faster.",
"This is why biscuit tins have that little metal pot in the lid too. You shake it and hear it rattle? It has moisture absorbing rocks inside it. The rocks want water even more than the biscuits, so steal the water fast - which makes the biscuits stay dry longer. You have to dry the lid out too, by putting it in a warm oven from time to time."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hedjsyw",
"comment_text": [
"The jar is sealed better than a packet so the softening process just takes longer but it will still occur"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_heg65uk",
"comment_text": [
"A biscuit goes soft when the atmosphere around is is slightly more moist than the biscuit itself. If left out it gradually absorbs some of this moisture until they reach equilibrium and have the same moisture content.",
"Unfortunately because a lot of biscuits are particularly dry, reaching the environmental moisture content results in them going soft.",
"When you leave a biscuit out in the open, it is trying to reach equilibrium with a huge volume of atmosphere - the moisture the biscuit is able to absorb is such a tiny percentage that the moisture content of the overall atmosphere that the change is unmeasurable.",
"When you leave a biscuit in a sealed container however, it can only exchange moisture with the air sealed inside along with it. This means the biscuit will start to absorb some moisture to reach equilibrium, but as this happens the atmosphere is losing a noticeable percentage of its moisture to the biscuit - the biscuit gets slightly more moist, while the air in the container gets slightly more dry until they balance out.",
"Every time you open the biscuit container the air circulates and changes, and the biscuit is able to absorb a small oint more moisture - this is why all biscuits will eventually go soggy, but they will last a lot longer in a sealed tub as this pauses the process of the biscuit absorbing moisture between tub openings."
],
"score": 1
}
|
ELI5: What is this Banana Republic people keep referring to when talking about current politics in the US?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
jzb089
| 3
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gdawhgq",
"comment_text": [
"A \"Banana Republic\" is a country mostly run by a corrupt corporation to exploit the area's resources. Bananas are incredibly inexpensive because Chiquita mostly runs portions of Guatamala to exploit the banana farmers and their land."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gdawk1b",
"comment_text": [
"\"Banana republic\" is a pejorative term for a country with undemocratic government. Historically the countries of South America have had such governments, often heavily influenced by American corporations. Because some of the most egregious examples included countries where bananas were an important export product, they were called banana republics."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gdb20ov",
"comment_text": [
"A banana republic is a type of ",
"plutocracy",
" where the people are ruled by the very wealthy with the intent of exploiting the lower class's labor to extract resources or agriculture. A country that is on paper a democracy controlled by it's people can still be considered a banana republic if it is in practice fully controlled by the very wealthy through sham elections, ",
"kangaroo courts",
", ",
"manufactured consent",
", etc.",
"Someone using the term Banana Republic to describe current US politics is asserting that the wealthy are the ones who are really wield governing power to the detriment of everyone else."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gdawuo0",
"comment_text": [
"Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions.",
"Off-topic discussion is not allowed at the top level at all, and discouraged elsewhere in the thread.",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. ",
", please ",
"use this form",
" and we will review your submission."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gdawuo0",
"comment_text": [
"Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions.",
"Off-topic discussion is not allowed at the top level at all, and discouraged elsewhere in the thread.",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. ",
", please ",
"use this form",
" and we will review your submission."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How come a “Tommy Gun” is also regarded as a “machine gun”?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
fsp0ee
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.25
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fm2nstf",
"comment_text": [
"\"Tommy Gun\" is literally short for",
"Thompson Sub-Machine Gun",
"It's a machine gun because it's fully automatic. As long as you hold the trigger, it keeps shooting"
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fm2ok9m",
"comment_text": [
"The differentiation between machine gun and submachine gun are really military definitions rather than legal ones a submachine gun is used in a far more offensive manner in the military than a machine gun, but the physical principles they operate on are basically the same."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fm2pa24",
"comment_text": [
"Yep as I said it meets the legal definition for a machine gun, but the military need a special category for weapons that are light enough for a single person to carry and operate to house/trench clear and other close combat actions, so they created the category submachine guns for that purpose where say a M2 Browning machine gun wouldn't be useful."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fm2psdk",
"comment_text": [
"Not sure why you are asking the question when you have the answer yourself",
"The original Model 1927, while semiautomatic only, is still classified as a Title II firearm because of its machine gun receiver and short barrel."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fm2qtls",
"comment_text": [
"A light portable machine gun is the definition of a submachine gun."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: When special forces (like the SWAT) clear a room, they often have intersecting lines of sight and sometimes cross each other’s paths. Why is that?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
lhg9ve
| 0
|
Other
| true
| false
| 0.42
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gmx2tol",
"comment_text": [
"They are not able to watch their front and back at the same time, so they work together to cover each other's."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gmxb1u9",
"comment_text": [
"Body bumping as in brushing?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gmxb1u9",
"comment_text": [
"Body bumping as in brushing?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gmxb0yo",
"comment_text": [
"Crossing? Not usually. Bypassing, overtaking. Where'd you hear that?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gmym3b0",
"comment_text": [
"Well, I actually can answer this in some way.",
"From what I know, when they quickly check rooms and say clear, they are only dealing with immediate threats (people holding the room that are visible in a quick glance). When they do that and clear the building, they then do another sweep to check things such as closets and beds to make sure they didn’t overlook anything during the initial breach."
],
"score": 1
}
|
eli5 Why do companies go bankrupt "randomly"?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
xusjhr
| 0
|
R2 (Subjective/Speculative)
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_iqx72xp",
"comment_text": [
"It's not random, and the executives know it might happen. If they tell everyone the company is about to run out of money, all the workers will seek new jobs, and the company is definitely going to be destroyed. Instead, they'd rather lie that everything is okay, and desperately try to cut costs or get loans in the background to keep the company afloat. When that process fails and they can't maintain the lie anymore, it seems very sudden."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_iqx6td6",
"comment_text": [
"it does not happen out of a sudden, but people do like to be overly optimistic, or ignore problems, or hide them from others.",
"For the kind of people who make movies and games, it would be quite typical to demand high quality and ignore budget constraints, and hope that their finance guy will be able to raise more money. ",
"in your examples, they still did finish the movie or the game. So they knew they knew early enough that there were running out of money, so they changed the level of effort to finish the project with remaining money."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_iqx74yr",
"comment_text": [
"Basically bad budgeting.",
"Let's say you want to make a game, you guess how long it will take and how much it will cost to make. Then you go and get financing either a loan or investments.",
"If the game takes longer to make than you budgeted, then at some point you will have to end it.",
"Lost of time when management knows they are about to run out of money, they won't stop developing as you can't get an investment in a dead project. They will instead try get cash wherever they can. But if they can't, then game over."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_iqx76hc",
"comment_text": [
"Poor financial planning.",
"We, as normal people, don't see the behind the scenes process of big projects. There are salaries to pay, spaces to rent, equipment to buy and maintain, marketing, and all of that adds up. In cases like movies, it's also site scouting and location, paying for rights to things like songs, paying local contract workers. They just spend way more money than they have at a rate that is not sustainable for the length of the project.",
"And when you claim bankruptcy, there are governmental protections that prevent financial backers from getting back everything that is owned. For us normal people, it really messes up credit scores and borrowing power, like how a bank will look at us and how they would consider loaning us anymore money. But for companies/entities that are perceived to be successful, it doesn't really do anything but knock you back one step of a ladder."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_iqx7hem",
"comment_text": [
"It kind of makes sense that you find out at the last minute. For example, if a company is making a game that you're really interested but say about 6 months in advance \"we're super excited about this game! However, more than likely its gonna break us permanently\" you would lose all confidence and interest in whatever they are making. So, it doesn't happen all of a sudden, but you don't hear about it until its necessary to state it."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
eli5: The cashback on debit cards
|
explainlikeimfive
|
xmbn0j
| 0
|
R2 (Narrow/Personal)
| true
| false
| 0.29
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ipngwjw",
"comment_text": [
"When it's offering cash back after a purchase, that's basically a withdrawal from your account. For a lot of people it's a convenient way to withdraw cash from their account without having to go to an ATM. It's not free money, it's coming out of your account."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ipnh0j9",
"comment_text": [
"Cash back on a debit purchase isn't like cash back on a credit card; it's more akin to buying your sandwich and then getting $50 from the ATM on your way out."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ipnhcc7",
"comment_text": [
"Debit cards, unlike credit cards, directly charge the bank account they're tied to for the total of the transaction. If you buy $20 of groceries, your bank account will instantly show a transaction of $20. If you buy $20 of groceries and take $50 cash, your bank account will instantly show a transaction of $70. This can be in your favor sometimes, if you're trying to avoid ATM fees."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ipnh58k",
"comment_text": [
"Well it depends how much you have in your account. If you always take the highest amount you might end up short for direct debits and stuff like that. ",
"Sometimes you don't get asked because they aren't allowed to give cashback. Or they dint have the money to do so."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ipnsw1l",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"ELI5 is not meant for any question that you may have, including personal questions, medical questions, legal questions, etc. It is meant for simplifying complex concepts.",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. ",
", please ",
"use this form",
" and we will review your submission."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why taxing the rich isn't easy?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
us4iin
| 5
|
R6 (Loaded)
| true
| false
| 0.58
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i91bfhf",
"comment_text": [
"Because the rich have a strong influence on government, and they make sure it doesn't happen. Also, in capitalism the idea is that the wealthy create jobs, and wealth trickles down, so fiscally liberal policy says don't tax the rich so much. ",
"As should be painfully obvious, wealth doesn't in fact trickle down, but it's very hard to get politicians to change their policies because they get multimillion dollar donations from rich people."
],
"score": 37
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i91dp9u",
"comment_text": [
"That's the general reason but it's even more complex and more grey than that. It's important to realize most of the ultra rich control companies, and their wealth is tied up in those companies.",
"Aside from the well known bezos/Amazon/Amazon HQ stuff, in Illinois for example we see a lot of businesses in Chicago threatening to move to Indiana if not given special tax exemptions, which is a very real threat to jobs in the area. Even inter-state, we just saw the bears move their stadium to the suburbs because of taxes, and football games bring in a lot of local tax revenue and jobs that now is going to leave the city.",
"So aside from the more blatant lobbying and pocket lining, corporations at a certain scale definitely have bargaining power in terms of jobs they provide, and the rich we need to tax are the actual people behind the corporations and without federal regulation and taxation they have a lot of actual power where they operate."
],
"score": 18
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i91fhms",
"comment_text": [
"We do tax the rich. ",
". Last year, Jeff Bezos paid $973 million dollars in taxes, where the average taxpayer paid ~$10,500. He paid over 92 thousand times the tax paid by the average American, and to paraphrase Sam Seaborn of The West Wing, the water doesn't come out of his faucets 92,000 times cleaner, and the police don't show up to his house 92,000 times faster.",
"And it's ",
" that we tax rich people more, they benefit more from the laws, infrastructure, and institutions that taxes pay for. Amazon uses more patents, they drive down more roads, the spend more time in courts, and they deliver packages which we rely on the police to prevent from being stolen.",
"So the real question is, \"Why don't we tax the rich ",
"?\" Well, there's a few reasons, but the most straightforward is this one: What do you think is easier to do: To collect taxes before Amazon's attorneys and accountants get done hiding it, or afterwards? When you levy a sales tax, you're taxing the income at the ",
" of the businesses which will then turn a profit on the sale. It's simpler to audit, and doesn't require a complicated tax code, and doesn't afford much opportunity for income to be hidden from the taxman via various loopholes. You sold ten million dollars worth of stuff, the sales tax rate is 10%, you owe 1 million dollars. No accountants, no lawyers, just money.",
"The other big reason we don't tax the rich more is that at a macro-economic level, it kind of doesn't matter where you extract taxes from the system, it's all a drag on the private sector economy. One of the biggest distortions of how money works is the notion that the money of the wealthy is just sitting somewhere, in an account, doing nothing. But it's not. Money is the pump that moves our economy. Money taken out for taxes slows down the pump. Taxes paid by businesses is money they're not going to spend on wages, or on R&D, or yielding to other investors, who will, in turn, put that money into other ventures.",
"Now in fairness, tax money doesn't exactly vanish, a school still pays for teachers and staff, the military still sends paychecks to servicemen, and indirectly to the technicians and engineers to work for government contractors, the NIH still pays doctors and scientists. So the real debate over taxation is actually an arm-wrestling match about ",
" of our economy should be driven by the ballot box, as opposed to the free market. And it's not an easy question with a simple answer. Some systems work pretty well when run by the government. Some things are worth having in life that you don't want to buy from a store, like clean air, and safe streets. And some markets are less free than others.",
"Now, you've probably seen an awful lot of ink written about how the wealthy don't pay taxes on all their income, and to an extent, that's true. But ",
", and the rules that govern when, and how much, taxes they pay apply equally to everyone. What's being talked about here is ",
". Unlike wages, capital gains are taxes levied on income from investments, but you don't levy the tax until the investment is liquidated for income. Here's a real-world example: From 2020 to 2021, home prices in Northern California increased by 20%. So, a family with a million dollar home (not outlandish for Norcal) would see their net worth increase by $200,000. And if we treated that as real income, they would be on the hook for a massive tax bill, due to circumstances completely outside their control. The house didn't get any bigger, nothing sinister went on, the price just went up.",
"Well, that same system applies to other investments. So when AMZN goes up by 20% in a year, that's not income until Jeff Bezos sells his shares. And it would be disastrous to levy the tax on the \"value\" of the stock, because suddenly a big upswing in the value of a volatile stock issue would put AMZN's shareholders in a giant liquidity crunch, and they'd have to sell off parts of the company, just to keep up with the tax bill. Or, more likely, they'd just deliberately sabotage the company to keep the trading price low, so that they can retain control of their asset."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i91bsul",
"comment_text": [
"There's a number of different arguments as to why taxing the rich is complicated.",
"First of all you might hear the theory of Trickle-down economics. This idea that if the Wealthy pay less taxes they'll in turn use that extra wealth to create new businesses and jobs. But this has proven to be total nonsense for the most part. The super wealthy do create new businesses and jobs but the net benefit to the average person isn't nearly as beneficial when you compare that to creating social programs or spending government money to build infrastructure. For every dollar spent on a new business only a few cents end up in payroll and benefits for employees, while that same dollar paid in taxes provides far more benefits the average person.",
"The super wealthy don't actually have that much income in the traditional sense. The wealthiest people have lots and lots of wealth because they own stocks and other assets that are worth money, but you don't pay taxes on those until you sell them.",
"So they can own Billions of dollars worth of a company and not pay a cent on that asset unless they try to sell it. The way around this is a wealth tax that taxes people that have assets over a certain value, but this would be very different from the current tax code.",
"Another point is the super rich can afford to have armies of Lawyers and Accountants that work full time to exploit various loopholes and other tricks to save them from having to pay taxes.",
"The wealthy also have an unfair amount of influence on Politics, which they in turn use to manipulate the tax code in their favor."
],
"score": 15
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i91n5pn",
"comment_text": [
"The IRS (or local tax service) has to be able to identify and locate your assets, and then use the law to demand payment. The rich can conceal their assets, and sue (or use other legal maneuvers) to prevent investigation into their assets, or postpone/refuse tax payments.",
"Say for example a CEO earns one million dollars per year. For tax purposes, they can instruct their company to change some or all of that payment into a different form of asset (like stock options) to reduce their tax liability. Or, they can create an overseas corporation to receive their paycheck on their behalf, and tell the local tax authorities that they earned nothing.",
"The IRS employs thousands of auditors but the taxes of the rich are (intentionally) complex and take months or years for a tax-savvy auditor to figure out.",
"So the tax authority may believe/suspect that a rich person made $50 million in a year, but the person claims they only earned $15 million. The IRS may decide that they're better off accepting the payment on the declared amount than spending years trying in vain to prove the receipt of the $50 million.",
"TL;DR",
"The rich do everything they can to make taxing them complex, frustrating, and expensive for tax authorities to pursue payment."
],
"score": 14
}
|
|
eli5: why does the uk have so many different accents?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
w8jd1k
| 1
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ihplbqs",
"comment_text": [
"Becuase people didnt travel very far back then. Small communities were evolving over centuries, with every group adding different spin on the same language, ending with today´s accent."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ihpoujq",
"comment_text": [
"Except it largely does just regionally… and some cities def have their own",
"New Orleans, Boston, hell New York City proper has multiple accents!"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ihppbeu",
"comment_text": [
"Rule 2 forbids straightforward questions.",
"Rule 7 requires that you search the sub before posting."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ihpvxwp",
"comment_text": [
"rule 9 says kys"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ihppc8t",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"Straightforward or factual queries are not allowed on ELI5. ELI5 is meant for simplifying complex concepts. ",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. ",
", please ",
"use this form",
" and we will review your submission."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What happens when mustard “goes to your brain” after eating too much of it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
vyb0p8
| 1
|
R6 (Loaded/False Premise)
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ig11rb0",
"comment_text": [
"If you play with fire, you'll pee the bed. ",
"Also, if you whistle at the northern lights, they will come and kidnap you in your sleep.",
"If you swallow watermelon seeds, you'll grow a whole watermelon in your belly.",
"And for the love of all things holy, don't say \"bloody mary\" into the mirror 3 times with the lights off and the door closed."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ig11fkk",
"comment_text": [
"What have your parents told you?\nIf this actually is a thing im gonna be flabbergasted."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ig12p34",
"comment_text": [
"I remember those last 2 fondly, lol"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ig14mus",
"comment_text": [
"I was a fire bug. I heard the one about peeing the bed frequently. I determined that was a lie.",
"Also, saying \"white rabbit\" when the campfire smoke is coming towards you makes it blow in another direction. Worked like 60% if the time 😂"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ig16plp",
"comment_text": [
"A chemical (",
"Allyl isothiocyanate",
") from the mustard/horseradish/wasabi ",
"binds to pain receptors in your sinus",
". The plants evolved it as a defense against being eaten, but just like capsaicin in chilis, it doesn't always work."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5 how does compressing huge files into zip files work
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10m2r07
| 0
|
R7 (Search First)
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j60oong",
"comment_text": [
"Maybe it only works as “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”, hence why files have to be unzipped.",
"\nThere are also much more large-scale patterns that are compressed, and/or different file formats (e.g. a bunch of photos, or random PDFs) that couldn’t be “compressed at the source”."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j60k3w1",
"comment_text": [
"There are 100 cars in the room, and you make a ver detailed list of what’s in the room. ",
"You can say: there is an engine in the car, that has xy parts, and 50 screws. Also there are 4 seats and 4 wheels. ",
"The list goes on, you listed everything that’s in the car, and now move to the next car…",
"You notice a pattern… if I tell you what a “car” is (the engine the screws ect) then you don’t have to list it all the time. So you say a car is xy and you say there is a car and an another an goes on..",
"It’s harder to read because you always have to go back and “check” what a car is. But it takes less space."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j60ou04",
"comment_text": [
"The original file might not be a program, but a text file where the separate As serve a purpose. In the case of a program, you can only compress it down to a certain degree until the computer can’t interpret it as a program anymore - and compilers usually already do that pretty well."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j60kijz",
"comment_text": [
"Some files are harder to compress because they have mostly unique information, but the more repetition the file has the easier to compress"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j60lsyo",
"comment_text": [
"Notably, many image, audio and video files are already compressed, often with algorithms tailored specifically for that type of content (many times a \"lossy\" one which discards details we're unlikely to notice), and won't compress much more, if at all, in a .zip."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Accents… how do those work?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
u34ph5
| 1
|
R7 (Search First)
| true
| false
| 1
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i4n2g3t",
"comment_text": [
"That’s actually really interesting, thanks"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i4n0ond",
"comment_text": [
"That makes complete sense, but how do those accents start in the first place? Like what makes someone just start pronouncing the same letter in different ways"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i4n0ond",
"comment_text": [
"That makes complete sense, but how do those accents start in the first place? Like what makes someone just start pronouncing the same letter in different ways"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i4n0tpl",
"comment_text": [
"Accents don't tend to actually change that much when an adult moves somewhere else. This is because they've already learnt how to say the sounds in their accent and the brain finds it harder to change. ",
"That being said, there will be some changes, and it may be very noticeable to people from their original accent, but quite often it's not really noticeable to people where they have moved to.",
"As to why the accent changes............ people tend to subconsciously mimic the people around them. We're a social species and mimicking others helps a newcomer fit in. If you're young enough this can result in an accent changing a lot. As I said though, it won't usually do much if you're older. Think about how much practice babies and young children have to do to make the sounds in the language and accent they first learn in."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_i4n10xl",
"comment_text": [
"This is the part I understand, but how do accents form in the first place? Like Brits Americans and Canadians all speak the same language but pronounce certain letters differently"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5 - Evaporation in the water cycle
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wz1g4c
| 0
|
R7 (Search First)
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilzsqkb",
"comment_text": [
"Water doesn't need to reach boiling point to evaporate. Evaporation happens at any temperature above freezing and even below the freezing point. And ice can actually sublimate (go straight from solid ice to gas).",
"The boiling point is just when the pressure in the water reached the same as the pressure of the air pushing on the water."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilzup0h",
"comment_text": [
"Boils =/= evaporation",
"Water changes state from liquid to gas when it gets enoguht energy. As surface of sea is constanlyy bombarded by energy from sun, some of particles will change state.",
"100° degrees is temperature where you will see buubles in your vatch of water, but water will start to evaporating a lot sooner."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilzxwua",
"comment_text": [
"Molecules are bouncing around in liquid water at a certain speed. This speed can be measured as the temperature of the water. Sometimes a molecule that is not really going fast enough to be vapor bounces near the surface and flies into the atmosphere, becoming vapor anyway. That's evaporation. If you heat the water until all the molecules are going fast enough to become vapor, that's boiling. The bubbles in boiling water are small pockets of water molecules that had absorbed enough energy to vaporize, lowering their density and allowing the molecules to float."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilzssip",
"comment_text": [
"It doesn't need to reach boiling, it can actually evaporate at near freezing temperatures. It's more about how much water is already in the air at that tempature which will determine the rate at which it is evaporating, which a boiling pot the tempature makes it obvious its evaporating. It can also evaporate directly off snow or ice which is called sublimation"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilzy9po",
"comment_text": [
"Temperature, as you may know, is basically a measure of kinetic energy of the water molecules. These molecules will constantly collide and thus exchange some of that impulse.",
"That's wy, at any temperature in any medium, there is a distribution of different velocities and some of those will be fast enough to change state. When these are near a water surface, they can leave the water and turn into steam, so to speak.",
"This happens all the time and also the other way around, which is why evaporation is faster in dry air.",
"Boiling is just the point, at which steam bubbles will spontaneously form, which is a whole different can of worms."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Theoretically, what would happen if someone put $1 into every single stock available in the world?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ld8yi9
| 0
|
R2 (Hypothetical)
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gm4e96s",
"comment_text": [
"They would have a non cap weighted index of world equity. They would lose alot of money compared to doing a cap weighted approach."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gm4gcxn",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah your portfolio would be flooded with OTC penny stock garbage that drops off the planet much faster than the big boys can grow."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gm4ewcf",
"comment_text": [
"you cant do that directly (as most stocks cost a lot more than $1 per share), but you can essentially do it by buying index fonds.",
"what would happen? on average that person would make money as stock prices kept growing longterm over the past few decades.",
"your investment (and that would indeed be an investment as there are TONS of companies listed on the various stock exchanges through the world) would be pretty stable. Workers strike in France and stock goes down? you dont care as it only makes up a tiny part of your wealth. New laws made Singapure more interesting for companies and stocks go up? great you profit from it as well."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gm4fzyk",
"comment_text": [
"I...don't exactly know what else you were after. If someone theoretically bought a bunch of things, then they'd have the things that they bought. Exactly what explanation of something \"happening\" were you looking for?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_gm4fzyk",
"comment_text": [
"I...don't exactly know what else you were after. If someone theoretically bought a bunch of things, then they'd have the things that they bought. Exactly what explanation of something \"happening\" were you looking for?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do most Fantasy Films & Games adventures have 4 people in the party?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10rk9av
| 2
|
R2 (Fiction)
| true
| false
| 0.62
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j6w2qlw",
"comment_text": [
"From what I could tell from some quick googling it is remnants from the board game Era where because pretty much all board games were played on a square board they had a max of 4 players which is the number of people you can comfortably get around a square board. From there it just became an unwritten rule."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j6w5ty8",
"comment_text": [
"It's how you'd have had a well-rounded party in the early days of AD&D. ",
"You have your fighter, who deals with most of the physical combat and anything that requires brute strength. ",
"You have your magic caster who can be your glass cannon in combat or deal with other tricky situations that require some \"mystical\" solution or require a high intelligence. ",
"You have your healer, who keeps the party healthy. ",
"Then you'd generally have your thief who would deal with traps, puzzles, and locked doors/containers, maybe do a bit of scouting if they were good at sneaking. ",
"This would have been the nominal party makeup to be able to cover just about any situation you could run into on an adventure. ",
"You could always try to run, say a melee heavy party with 2 \"fighters\" and no thief, or run without a wizard. But if you wanted all your bases covered and be ready for whatever was thrown at you, this is the part composition you'd make at a bare minimum."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j6w7042",
"comment_text": [
"There are lots of meta-rationalizations, but it mostly comes down to the fact that most fantasy films and games are conceived of by people who grew up playing Dungeons & Dragons, and four is the standard party size in D&D.",
"There isn't any particular reason for that, other than the fact that four seems to be the sweet spot for putting together a stable group. A solo group is obviously just someone talking to themselves. Two people feels like a glorified date night. Three people, and someone always feels left out. Four people gets enough variety that everyone always feels like they have something to do, but no one has too much spotlight on them.",
"You can of course have bigger groups - I used to play in a group that ranged from 6 to 12 people - but things start getting pretty unwieldy after 6. Both in terms of game mechanics - turn-based combat can really drag when there's ten people playing, especially once you get into higher-level combat - and in terms of social logistics. Trying to get a group of 12 people to all show up at the same place every week for 4+ hours at a time just doesn't work out for very long, especially as you get older."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j6wavdd",
"comment_text": [
"4 is a comfortable number. You want people to interact, but you don't want to wait for your turn too long. As a long time TTRPG player, having more than 4 player gets boring because you wait for other to play (which sadly mean that the better you are at the game, the faster your turn, while the worse you are, the slower. So the better you are the less you play while the worse you are the longer you play).",
"Having less than 3 just doesn't give any form of interaction. Giving 3 or 4 being a very nice middle ground. 3 often feels light, so 4 is the preferred number."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j6w3s9z",
"comment_text": [
"In the Percy Jackson Franchise, it was always 3 to a quest. I always rationalized it like this: If one person gets injured, one person can stay with them and the third goes for help. 4 would have a similar advantage. Plus look at games. There's usually 4 or 5 major roles. Marksman, tank, healer, fighter, second fighter/stealthy fighter/fill/jungler. Makes for an effective team imho."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How did measuring time become easier to agree upon in comparison to other measurements (e.g. length, mass, currency, etc.)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wwy8e1
| 6
|
R6 (Loaded/False Premise)
| true
| false
| 0.88
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilnypir",
"comment_text": [
"Even very primitive societies need ways to measure length, mass and currency.",
"Primitive societies also need calendars - which is why we have a host of different calendars throughout history developed independently of one another. While all such calendars have 365-ish days per year (these are fixed by the rotation/revolution of the Earth vs. the Sun), the way they divide them up and determine a starting point is often quite different.",
"Precise time-keeping, on the other hand, is only necessary for complex, developed societies. Most particularly, societies that need it for long-distance ocean navigation.",
"However, once one society has developed long-distance ocean navigation (and the time-keeping it requires), that effectively means they've set the standards for every society. Our navigating society discovers all the others and introduces the technology that requires the timekeeping methods they already invented. It doesn't make sense for the less developed societies to develop their own timekeeping systems."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilnzlcu",
"comment_text": [
"The basic answer is because the natural base unit to measure is going to be the Day. ",
"Anywhere else while you're measuring length or weight or whatever, there's no single thing where you're like \"This is THE thing we're measuring\" ",
"You could be measuring a sword or the distance to Cairo, there's nothing to conform to, nothing that has to be neat and tidy and divisible. ",
"But a Day, a Year... those are the things you want to be nicely divided, and people's instincts early on were to go with a system very easily divided, so they liked using 12s and 60s very highly factorable numbers. ",
"The other thing is the abstractness of it. ",
"with length or weight your instinct is to be to use readily available items as comparison, like your feet for a field, or the length of a tool, or maybe the weight of a stone or however much a container of liquid weighs... Even situationally, like the speed of a boat being however much rope unravels, or how much power equates to a horse... there's these physical comparisons ",
"While in time, its more abstract, you can make things like candles specifically to measure time, but you have things like the sun just happening, providing a universal clock. People aren't carrying around a random thing that takes 17 minutes to happen. ",
"So I think both those things together, you've got already a general consensus, when two completely different civilizations meet, they've each likely already decided 'A Day' is a measurement and everything else is an increment that will be a round number in a given day, so you've got a lot of common ground."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilnzi37",
"comment_text": [
"So yes, there have been many time standards, from the bronze age, bowl with a hole that slowly filled or drained of a set volume of water for irrigation to putting sticks in the ground to mark noon.",
"Base 10 time was a brief blip during the rennesance but because time needs to be more easily divisible by more numbers, base 60 is fantastic. You get: 1,2,3,4,5,6,10,12,15,20,30,60 as good whole numbers that can divide an hour. Way more than 1,2,5,10,20,25,50,100. So since it was convenient, we used 12 (again highly composite) for the hours in a day, twice then for day and night, and 60 minutes to divide those long hours into convenient chunks. 60 seconds in a minute for the same reason. A seccond is a brief human scale moment and a convenient small unit. At each step, it is about making as much of a convenient unit of time as possible. ",
"There are a lot of reasons why base 10 is useful for stuff, but base 12 is just better for a lot of things."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilo96sw",
"comment_text": [
"During the French revolution they briefly experimented with decimal time: ten hours in a day, ten days in a week, so on. The year 0 was set to be the year of the Revolution (it was a very optimistic time). For whatever reason, people just didn't like it and it never caught on.",
"This is unrelated but it bothers me, but the USA does not and has never used the Imperial system."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ilo9yvf",
"comment_text": [
"Just to add, on units:",
"The USA does not use Imperial measurements, it uses American Customary Units, those were invented well after American independence. 1 US gallon is not an imperial gallon, one US pint is not 1 imperial pint. One US Inch was not the same as British one and various Commonwealth ones until the early 1960s, when a new 'international inch' was created and defined in terms of meters. ",
"Neither the US inch or Imperial inch was ever the same as a Paris inch or Swedish inch or what-have-you, and the entire continent of Europe was filled with customary units (often multiple within the same country) that tended to be roughly the same and therefore very confusing. (and despite metric odd customary units still persist in some areas, like troy ounces) ",
"Meanwhile, dividing the day into 24 hours and hours into minutes and seconds was already established in Europe (and beyond) ",
" before that. ",
"At the same time as the metric system, the French did attempt a 'metric' system of time, dividing the day into tenths and hundredths and so on. But it did not catch on because there was simply no need for it; people all used the same units of time so there was no benefit from a common standard, and people were accustomed to them. As opposed to weights and measures, people did not need to do arithmetic with time units anywhere near as much, so there was not much convenience from using base-10 either. (on the contrary people would have to spend time figuring out how many ",
" their one-hour meeting would be)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Are we runing out of oil like within 9 years?? Is that enough time to change our life?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
op8qki
| 1
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h63ntkt",
"comment_text": [
"We are \"running out of oil within 9 years\" for the last, like, 30 years. And the deadline is moving further and further away."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h63o1su",
"comment_text": [
"No, we likely aren't running out of oil in 9 years. Every few years, people make these kinds of estimates. It's been going on for over a hundred years now, and it's never been anywhere near accurate.",
"Our reliance on oil will eventually end, but it won't be because we've run out."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h63wz95",
"comment_text": [
"It goes back a lot further than that.",
"The idea that the rate of oil production would peak and irreversibly decline is an old one. In 1919, David White, chief geologist of the United States Geological Survey, wrote of US petroleum: \"... the peak of production will soon be passed, possibly within 3 years.\"[21] In 1953, Eugene Ayers, a researcher for Gulf Oil, projected that if US ultimate recoverable oil reserves were 100 billion barrels, then production in the US would peak no later than 1960. If ultimate recoverable were to be as high as 200 billion barrels, which he warned was wishful thinking, US peak production would come no later than 1970. ...",
"By observing past discoveries and production levels, and predicting future discovery trends, the geoscientist M. King Hubbert used statistical modelling in 1956 to predict that United States oil production would peak between 1965 and 1971.[23] This prediction appeared accurate for a time[24] however during 2018 daily production of oil in the United States was exceeding daily production in 1970, ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil",
"Of course, the Earth is finite so sooner or later we're bound to stop using oil. But these days, it seems more likely we'll see peak ",
", rather than peak "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h63qv98",
"comment_text": [
"the problem with were running out of oil is that we arent running out of oil. ",
"First theres advancements in refinement, when we started using oil we would use heavier fuels like paraffin or heavy fuel oil, while gasoline was tossed away, then the advacement in internal combustion engines made gasoline and diesel fuel usful but we would still release or burn off the natural gas as gas pockets were a nuisance in oil wells which made drilling and extracting oil more difficult. now natural gas is used in heating houses, LPG cars and even power plants. ",
"Then theres advacements in drilling, originally we would go for wells with large solid reserves near the surface, but with advancements we started drilling under the sea floor, or deposits which are fragmented between rocks using fracking, wells which were unpractical or too difficult have become accesible with better drilling technology. ",
"theres also the issue of efficiency, up to the 1970´s having cars with single digit MPG was acceptable, while today many cars exceed 40-50 mpg, and with battery assist, regenerative breaking and such normal family cars could be reaching 60-70 mpg. so while we are using more oil, we are using it more efficiently, airlines also have moved away from largers planes like the 747 or the A380 since smaller planes like the 737 and the A320 give better milage per seat. ",
"the main problem with electric cars right now is energy density, a Lithium battery has a max of 2.6MJ per liter of volume. Gasoline has 34.... it means that to store the same amount of energy you need to use 13 times more space. this is offset by thermal efficiency, a normal gasoline engine has 25-30% thermal efficiency, meaning 70% of the energy is lost by heat, noise, light and only 25-30% actually reaches the wheels, while an electric car has a thermal efficiency of around 75-80%.",
"The idea would be to use renewable or nuclear and use chemical fuels as storage for electric reactions."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h63reoi",
"comment_text": [
"I work in the industry, and it's actually quite the opposite we very nearly ran out of storage space during the pandemic because the demand went down so low. There was a couple days there where the price of oil went negative because people were desperate to unload it. Stopping Wells, particularly the very deep subsea Wells that produce the most is a very involved process not just simply switching the switch off."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
Eli5 Why can men go into the “Nothing Space” and not be actively thinking about anything
|
explainlikeimfive
|
odn1c5
| 0
|
R2 (Subjective/Speculative)
| true
| false
| 0.33
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h41aj6e",
"comment_text": [
"That question has a lot of thick generalizations in it that need to be sorted before actually answering. ",
"I'd posit, are men able to go into the nothing space? I am a man and I have trouble with that...",
"I think sometimes it can seem that other people have it figured out. It's easy to say that x group of people has it easier in some regard than you, when usually people's experiences are relatively similar."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h419ua4",
"comment_text": [
"When nothing needs attention the mind rests. We just be existing sometimes.",
"Source: Personal experience"
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h417tr5",
"comment_text": [
"Are you basing this off of real world statistics or personal beliefs?",
"You are technically speaking about a form of meditation. Meditation tends to be hard for people. No matter what their sexual orientation is."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h41bzgg",
"comment_text": [
"I don't really go into a \"nothing space\" where my mind is totally blank, but it's more that I just think idle thoughts and let the train of thought go where it will, not really concentrating or focusing on any particular topic. If someone asked me what I was thinking about I'd probably still say it was nothing."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h41ckht",
"comment_text": [
"It's easy for some of us, when life is presenting us with no immediate demands, to just sit back and let it wash over us, enjoying the moment as it were. ",
"Why? Hard to say. maybe just an intrinsic understanding that it's OK to not be dealing with/reacting to things all the time."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: If the Titanic was unsinkable then how did it sink?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
zxcft0
| 0
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.3
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1zg0dp",
"comment_text": [
"It was said to be unsinkable. It was designed to be hard to sink. Hard to happen things happen once in a while, including when Titanic sunk."
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1zgnm9",
"comment_text": [
"It's not possible to make a ship truly unsinkable; the idea that Titanic was unsinkable was hype built on a (for the time period) relatively good design to make the ship very difficult to sink."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1zixex",
"comment_text": [
"True, but not having sufficient life boats didn't cause the ship to sink. ",
"Several significant regulations came out of it, along with the International Ice Patrol."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1zhoim",
"comment_text": [
"This is why you NEVER listen to a salesman.",
"Also, the problem wasn't so much the double hull, but that the water-tight compartments didn't go all the way up.",
"https://www.simscale.com/blog/why-did-titanic-sink-engineer/#:~:text=The%20lower%20section%20of%20the,unsinkable%2C%20were%20only%20watertight%20horizontally",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1zhoim",
"comment_text": [
"This is why you NEVER listen to a salesman.",
"Also, the problem wasn't so much the double hull, but that the water-tight compartments didn't go all the way up.",
"https://www.simscale.com/blog/why-did-titanic-sink-engineer/#:~:text=The%20lower%20section%20of%20the,unsinkable%2C%20were%20only%20watertight%20horizontally",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5 why trans issues/rights are so prominent in the media when those affected form such a small portion of society?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
zwwbp2
| 4
|
R2 (Subjective/Speculative)
| true
| false
| 0.83
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1x4sg1",
"comment_text": [
"There is no way to give an objective answer for this. The answer is that the people running the media want to push these issues, and have the ability to do so. But that's a vague answer, there's no objective way to give a more specific one."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1x4wtw",
"comment_text": [
"Just because a minority is a minority is no reason to denigrate attention drawn to discrimination."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1x54na",
"comment_text": [
"Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):",
"Subjective or speculative replies are not allowed on ELI5. Only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for speculation or subjective responses. This includes anything asking for peoples' subjective opinions, any kind of discussion, and anything where we would have to speculate on the answer. This very much includes asking about motivations of people or companies. This includes Just-so stories.",
"If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the ",
"detailed rules",
" first. ",
", please ",
"use this form",
" and we will review your submission."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1x5ukc",
"comment_text": [
"I don't know if you'll see this since it wasn't already removed, but maybe try ",
"r/OutOfTheLoop",
" or ",
"r/NoStupidQuestions",
". Be sure to check the rules first though because I don't know for certain they'd accept this question."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1x4xa3",
"comment_text": [
"There may not be many of them, but trans people are being more open and vocal about their civil rights now that society is starting to be more accepting of the LGBTQ community as a whole. And there's a lot of people who are upset that the LGBTQ community is getting the acceptance it has recently, and while it's not considered acceptable to lash out against gays and lesbians, are fine going after trans people."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Why was WW1 called a world war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
zwzvtm
| 0
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1xv1wa",
"comment_text": [
"I really want to emphasise what \"Europe, some allies, and some colonies\" looked like during World War I.",
" (",
"source",
") They may have provided troops, supplies, or natural resources. They may have volunteered these things, or been required to provide them because of colonisation. Some of these countries were invaded or plundered for resources by warring countries.",
"It's a long list:",
" Algeria, Angola, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, Basutoland, Bechuanaland, Belgian Congo, British East Africa (Kenya), British Gold Coast, British Somaliland, Cameroon, Cabinda, Egypt, Eritrea, French Equatorial Africa, Gabon, Middle Congo, Ubangi-Schari, French Somaliland, French West Africa, Dahomey, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mauretania, Senegal, Upper Senegal and Niger, The Gambia, German East Africa, Italian Somaliland, Liberia, Madagascar, Morocco, Portuguese East Africa (Mozambique), Nigeria, Northern Rhodesia, Nyasaland, Sierra Leone, South Africa, South West Africa (Namibia), Southern Rhodesia, Togoland, Tripoli, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zanzibar.",
" Bahamas, Barbados, Brazil, British Guiana, British Honduras, Canada, Costa Rica, Cuba, Falkland Islands, French Guiana, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Guadeloupe, Jamaica, Leeward Islands, Newfoundland, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Trinidad and Tobago, U.S.A, and West Indies.",
" Aden, Arabia, Bahrain, El Qatar, Kuwait, Trucial Oman, Borneo, Ceylon, China, India, Japan, Persia, Philippines, Russia, Siam, Singapore, Transcaucasia, and Turkey.",
" Auckland, Austral Islands, Australia, Bismarck Archipelago, Bounty, Campbell, Caroline Islands, Chatham Islands, Christmas, Cook Islands, Ducie, Elice Islands, Fanning, Flint, Fiji Islands, Gilbert Islands, Kermadec Islands, Macquarie, Malden, Mariana Islands, Marquesas Islands, Marshal Islands, New Guinea, New Caledonia, New Hebrides, New Zealand, Norfolk, Palau Islands, Palmyra, Paumoto Islands, Pitcairn, Philippines, Phoenix Islands, Samoa Islands, Solomon Islands, Tokelau Islands, and Tonga.",
" Albania, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Finland, France, Great Britain, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Serbia, and Turkey.",
" Ascension, Sandwich Islands, South Georgia, St. Helena, and Tristan da Cunha.",
" Andaman Islands, Cocos Islands, Mauritius, Nicobar Islands, Reunion, and Seychelles."
],
"score": 32
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1xujz1",
"comment_text": [
"Without taking away from the fact that this is generally true, the First World War was first described as a 'world war' in a 1914 newspaper article, and an English war correspondent titled his 1920 memoir 'The First World War'.",
"It was popularly known as the Great War through the interwar years, but its other names came about a lot earlier than I would have expected."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1xujz1",
"comment_text": [
"Without taking away from the fact that this is generally true, the First World War was first described as a 'world war' in a 1914 newspaper article, and an English war correspondent titled his 1920 memoir 'The First World War'.",
"It was popularly known as the Great War through the interwar years, but its other names came about a lot earlier than I would have expected."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1yb577",
"comment_text": [
"116,516 Americans died in WWI. 4.7 million Americans served. I don’t know how you can be so obtusely dismissive."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j1y1rgp",
"comment_text": [
"I don't think you understand how the world worked in the 1910's"
],
"score": 12
}
|
|
eli5: why can't we eat cookie dough because it's got raw egg in it, but athletes eat straight raw egg and they're fine?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
sl933a
| 237
|
R6 (Loaded/False Premise)
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hvpepot",
"comment_text": [
"Cookie dough isn't a salmonella risk because of eggs, it's an issue because of the flour.\n",
"https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/communication/no-raw-dough.html",
"\nAs well as athletes, a lot of Asian cultures eat raw or barely cooked eggs and there isn't a huge issue of salmonella from. Doing so"
],
"score": 539
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hvpphms",
"comment_text": [
"Also, this only applies to dough you're making from scratch. Cookie dough you buy in the store is pasteurized. It's totally fine to eat raw. The warning is more for them to cover their ass just in case, not because it's actually going to do anything to you."
],
"score": 182
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hvpeyae",
"comment_text": [
"Woahhh I didn't know flour did that! Thank you :o"
],
"score": 124
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hvqbrno",
"comment_text": [
"They may also heat the flour to a temp that kills the bacteria."
],
"score": 51
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hvqb89i",
"comment_text": [
"I've seen cookie dough in store that actually says on the package that it's OK to eat raw, Pillsbury I think? As long as the packaging facility is clean enough they must feel they are in the clear lawsuit- wise"
],
"score": 44
}
|
|
Eli5: is pee liquid clean? Its waste but is it clean from bacteria and maybe virus?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
y1vtml
| 0
|
R2 (Narrow)
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irznyt6",
"comment_text": [
"Not completely, even inside your bladder, although it usually does not contain very many bacteria. (A large amount of bacteria in urine is usually a sign of illness. Usually if you're talking about \"bacteria in your urine\" you're talking about these higher, easily-detectable amounts.)",
"On the way out of your body, urine comes into contact with the outside of your body, and that can contaminate it further."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irztdl3",
"comment_text": [
"The urban myth that pee is sterrile comes from the fact that all the liquid in the urine is extracted from the blood and the blood should be free of any infections. In addition urine is a quite hostile environment with high salinity and other toxins which makes it a bad growth medium for bacteria and fungi.",
"However this myth is disproved just by pointing to one of the most common diseases in the population, Urinary Tract Infection (UTI). This is caused by too much bacteria or fungi in the urinary tract or urine bladder. These infections come from the outside, which is why it is more common in women then men. You always get some bacteria into any tiny little crack in your body and this includes into the urinary system. And there are at least some bacteria which is capable of surviving in any extreme conditions you put them in, not that the urinary system is very extreme at that. So it is fair to say that everyone have some amount of infection in their urinary tract making the urine contain bacteria."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_it7dd8v",
"comment_text": [
"Idk who bear grylls is"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irzrhcd",
"comment_text": [
"Everything you touch, eat, and drink in your daily life will have some form of bacteria.",
"Your pee is no different, despite what Bear Grylls suggests."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_it7htop",
"comment_text": [
"This guy: ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axVPg5EtvKs",
" and ",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAp9aUw-qqY",
"He's apparently normally a few hundred metres from the nearest hotel or major road when he does this stuff, but he's still fun to watch."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
eli5 Why were american tribes so primitive compared to european/asian/african tribes?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
wzyxix
| 1
|
R6 (False Premise)
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_im55c30",
"comment_text": [
"It's a very complex answer but geography is the ultimate root of the issue. It was easy for very early civilizations along the east/west axis from Europe to Asia to trade. This meant technology including crop seeds could be exchanged.",
"I recommend you read the book \"Guns, Germs and Steel\" by Jared Diamond. He does an excellent job of explaining it."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_im5wefk",
"comment_text": [
"Dogs, lamas, alpaca, turkey.",
"But yes they did domesticate relatively few animals compared to old world populations."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_im5jdnk",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check out that book!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_im5bbh9",
"comment_text": [
"Many Native Americans domesticated crops corn, tomatoes, potatoes, chilies. To name a few."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_im5ipvz",
"comment_text": [
"I would disagree with that statement domestication applies to basically any non human organism that humans have crafted to meet our needs through selective breeding."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How does Post Nut Clarity work? Why do all the horny thoughts and feelings seem to disappear instantaneously?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
y07y6f
| 2,682
|
R2 (Narrow/Personal)
| true
| true
| 0.9
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irqve8i",
"comment_text": [
"It's at least partially related to your brain releasing the \"gotta get fuckin\" lock on your cognitive function.",
"When it comes to more basic/physical drives like arousal or adrenaline response, it tends to override the more cognitive portion of your brain in order to conserve/control resources. Before you go to town, you've got some base level horny swirling around and affecting your cognition, but not to the max. Once you reach post-nut, it wipes the slate to say \"alright, you busted, now you're on recharge\" and that ends the override and opens your cognition back up, hence giving that sensation of clarity.",
"It's the main reason people recommend that if you're missing an ex, or considering something down-bad, go and have an orgasm first. It clears all the arousal flags from your brain and allows you to think clearly. Should you actually get back with your ex? or were you just horny and wanting someone to get busy with."
],
"score": 2187
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irqgk5s",
"comment_text": [
"Doctor here!",
"To be honest? We really dont know, and some biologists argue it really isnt a thing, its just returning to a state of normal after a cocktail of urges and chemicals were driving is to orgasm.",
"The most commonly thrown around theories are: ",
"During an orgasm, our brains are flooded with dopamine. That \"high\" gives us clarity ",
"The adrenaline released during sex activate our more base awareness instincts. ",
"Once were not all hot and bothered, our brains go from sex to survival again"
],
"score": 1590
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irrvdau",
"comment_text": [
"It's crazy how fast my thinking is being completely overwhelmed by one thing to me going over my grocery shopping list in a split second"
],
"score": 546
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irqr428",
"comment_text": [
"Dopamine levels drop below baseline post-orgasm, and prolactin increases:",
"https://sites.tufts.edu/emotiononthebrain/2014/11/18/postcoital-neurochemistry-the-blues-and-the-highs/"
],
"score": 387
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_irrzkl5",
"comment_text": [
"Her: That was great, what are you thinking about now?",
"You: Do we need butter and milk...?"
],
"score": 363
}
|
|
eli5: How is Costco roast chicken so cheap?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10fmfih
| 2
|
R2 (Questions must seek objective explanations)
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xo0ml",
"comment_text": [
"From what I understand it's a loss leader.\nIt's sold at a price where they actually lose money on it, but... It gets you in the door and they make up the money with you buying all the other stuff."
],
"score": 16
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xo31a",
"comment_text": [
"It’s a loss leader. They might lose money on a chicken, but it gets you into the store, and then you’ll buy other products that are more profitable. It’s like when the cheapest place to get diapers was Toys R Us, and they stocked them way in the back, so you had to be tempted by all the highly profitable crap you walk by en route to the diapers."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xvzas",
"comment_text": [
"To add to the loss leader stuff that everyone else posted, they also use the whole chickens that are near their sell by date. Rather than have customers avoid those chickens until they can no longer sell them and toss them, they cook them and sell them at a lower rate. They make some of their money back that way, and the ones that don't sell they were gonna toss anyways."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xo5ud",
"comment_text": [
"It’s a loss leader. They lose money by selling chickens at that price, but nobody goes to Costco to buy just a chicken, so they make their money by incentivizing people to come get cheap dinner and buy a lot of other stuff while there."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4y16i8",
"comment_text": [
"Think of it as Costco feeding the hungry who can't afford food. Its two full chickens for the price of a combo meal at FiveGuys. You can eat for a week on this."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
eli5 - What is pain? Why can’t we just turn it off if we’d like to? And is extreme cold considered pain?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10xcpdx
| 0
|
R7 (Search First)
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j7rmfvs",
"comment_text": [
"Then we wouldn’t know something was wrong…..people who are born without pain receptors have a very reduced life span."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j7rlk08",
"comment_text": [
"It just a signal from your body that something's wrong. You can turn off pain with the right drugs or procedures, but you also lose feeling in those parts of the body because pain recepters are linked to nerves which allow being able to feel your body."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j7rq3kv",
"comment_text": [
"If you could turn it off, people would turn it off and do the exact things pain's whole purpose is to prevent you from doing.",
"Like, nobody ",
" to feel pain. You'd just immediately turn it off if you could, wouldn't you? The ",
" of pain is to make you act like you're in pain. You body is forcing you to take care of yourself because humans are great at ignoring problems unless forced to address them.",
"Eg you overextended your knee and now it's sore. Because it's sore, you walk with a limp, putting more weight on the healthy leg. If you could turn that pain off, you might think \"hey, I can just remember my knee is hurt, no need to be feeling this pain with every step\". But would you actually remember? Would you voluntarily limp, with every single step, all day? I doubt it. So the damaged knee would take more damage because you turned the pain off. ",
"So anyone who ",
" turn their pain off takes a little more damage from every injury, are more likely to die sooner as a result, and therefore gets outbred by those who can not turn their pain off."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j7rmjmd",
"comment_text": [
"Pain is not a bodily defense, but a message to you. Imagine us humans, and other animals for that matter, we have been too stupid to understand that something was wrong, and we therefore had to relax. So the body had to give us a message that forced us to not use what was hurting.",
"Pain is of mainly two kind:\n1) Pain in a point to make you not use that point, i.e. a knee or your back and so on.\n2) Headache that is to make you feel, so you still can use all your limbs but just slows down a bit.",
"Cold is a bit like headache, it is a signal to you that something is wrong, but this time would pain not make you do what is necessary, while cold will force you to get heat."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j7rqgmm",
"comment_text": [
"Yep. I got stabbed in the ankle and couldn’t even register it the first few seconds cuz there was no pain lol. Pain really tells us so much."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5 how are doctors different from nurses?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
sz1xfo
| 0
|
R2 (Straightforward)
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hy15pnd",
"comment_text": [
"Nurses are responsible for providing basic care to patients, while doctors are responsible for diagnosing and treating patients."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hy17rdb",
"comment_text": [
"Nurses are like general mechanics, doctors like luxury car mechanics, surgeons like F1 car mechanics.",
"It's more like nurses know how to use spanners and screwdrivers and can change oil on schedule but doctors can work our what's wrong with your car, and which parts to replace, if you bring it in with some weird problem."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hy1dh2e",
"comment_text": [
"A general decides on what strategy to use. The soldiers fight the actual battle."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hy1a1kk",
"comment_text": [
"Doctors study medicine for far longer, they have deeper knowledge about pathophysiology than any nurse. They have the final say on the course of treatment. ",
"Some experienced nurses are very smart. Experienced nurse practitioners are very smart. They definitely know more than some new resident doctors. ",
"But in the end, doctors has much more throughout understanding of the disease."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hy16ztj",
"comment_text": [
"Length of education. ",
"After a far longer schooling period, doctors have to work in a hospital and in a general practice (some stay here but are still doctors) before graduating completely, 16/20 years ",
"In comparison you can go from no knowledge to a qualified nurse in 2/4 years.",
"Nurses are like general mechanics, doctors like luxury car mechanics, surgeons like F1 car mechanics.",
"Specialising in something really, whilst nurses work far more they do the tyre changes and brakes using that analogy."
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: How do people with poor vision in societies without access to optometrists function?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10fmztn
| 1
|
R2 (Subjective/Speculative)
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xvyrn",
"comment_text": [
"You just make do without reading. There are lots of things you can do that don't involve great eyesight.",
"In societies where everyone had to fight to survive, you'd die. But there have never been many societies like that. Even cavemen took care of their disabled people.",
"Most people throughout history didn't need great vision. Most jobs were manual labour, most people were illiterate anyway. Cars didn't exist yet, printing didn't exist yet. They didn't need great eyesight for much.",
"Completely blind people can still function in modern society! And many people that get corrective vision now would have just been considered to be blind in the past."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xvyag",
"comment_text": [
"Short sightedness definitely does happen in places with an outdoor lifestyle, lol",
"Yeah, staying indoors a lot can make it worse, but that's not the ",
" thing that causes shortsightedness"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xtzan",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah, like I said, in modern societies vision loss is much more of a hindrance, but we ",
" have a lot more ways to correct it. You can be 100% legally blind and still easily be on reddit, for example (:"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j5040jf",
"comment_text": [
"For sure there is a genetic factor too. Spectacle wearers earn more and are more high prestige than non spectacle wearers. I read somewhere that that was the environmental reason certain nationalities tended to wear spectacles. It could also be a culture of eye care too."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_j4xrusw",
"comment_text": [
"This gets posted pretty often, but the TL;DR: is that perfect vision isn't that important in a society where, you know, you don't need to read small print or drive fast vehicles. Societies where one had to constantly fight to survive were not ones where people in general lived very long (we're talking prehistory here). A ",
" society is one where people do ",
" need to literally fight."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5, the war between USA and Afghanistan?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
p14m60
| 11
|
R2 (Religion/Politics)
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h8axc4t",
"comment_text": [
"Well, I’ll give a general overview.",
"First, let’s talk about the Taliban, the Taliban grew from earlier movements (and some other groups, but focusing on the Taliban) stem from the Mujahideen who came to power in afghanistan after driving out the Soviet invasion by just making it insanely costly/difficult for the Soviet’s. Fun fact, they did this with US Help, we sent them money and guns because anyone who was fighting the Soviets were our friends.",
"It’s kind of important to note that Mujahideen essentially means a group fighting against foreign invaders, so there are other groups today that refer to themselves as Mujahideen. But to many people in the western world the “Mujahideen” is used to refer to the group who fought the Soviet’s, so I’m using it that way.",
"Mujahideen wins, and members of that group splinter off and become majorly influential in Afghanistan. Some becoming members of the Taliban.",
"Fast forward 15-20 ish years.",
"9/11, Al-Qaeda carries out terror attacks on US Soil, infamously crashing planes into buildings.",
"This prompts the USA to start the war on terror, essentially a blanket statement to chase terrorists and their allies anywhere across the globe.",
"Well Al-Qaeda, and it’s leader Osama Bin Laden, need a place to hide, so, they take up hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan, semi supported by the friendly Taliban. Because like Al-Qaeda the Taliban is an Islamist group.\n The USA obviously wants to capture or kill Osama Bin Ladin and Al-Qaeda members, so we invade Afghanistan.",
"Because the Taliban was assisting Al-Qaeda, that makes them our enemies now (funny that, we gave them the money and guns a few decades prior, and now we are fighting them, all because we wanted to stick on to the Rooskies)",
"So, the war progresses. We have a couple of close calls with capturing Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, but he slips away. (Until 2011, when we found him hiding in Pakistan and killed him in a special ops raid).",
"By the mid 2000s, the Taliban was essentially out of power, but it and other groups were still running and insurgency in Afghanistan.",
"So, the US mission switched up from true warfare to maintaining security, doing patrols, and doing counter-insurgency operations. (With the peak amount of US soldiers there happening in 2012).",
"At the same time the US Tries to establish and democratic afghan government, as well as train up the afghan army, (the ANA) and air force.",
"Well, we tried that for several years, with moderate amounts of success, but American public opinion started to turn away from Afghanistan. The Patriotism to find and fight the terrorists isn’t there anymore, and many Americans wants US Troops to leave Afghanistan.",
"From 2012 to 2020 we see a decline of US Troops from around 100,000 to less than 10,000. ",
"Then, in 2021, the final push was made to get out of Afghanistan. Essentially public opinion had turned and no one in the USA wants to spend more time and American lives trying to fix Afghanistan, many people support leaving Afghanistan to the afghan people, and the ANA we’ve spent so much on trying to train.",
"So the US Pulls out in semi-secrecy, because they didn’t want the exact date they’d be leaving to leak to the Taliban. Leaving Afghanistan to the afghans.",
"Since then the Taliban has been resurgent, morale in the ANA was always low, and many accepted the Taliban’s deal of “surrender and we will let you go home”. And many did just go home. ",
"So now Afghanistan has areas under government control, and areas under Taliban control, and it is yet to be seen who will come out on top.",
"Edit: clarified that it was not the Taliban who fought the Soviet’s in the 80-90s, but the mujahideen, some members of which went on to join the Taliban and Al-Qaeda."
],
"score": 31
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h8btflt",
"comment_text": [
"Remember that Mohammad Omar, the leader of the Taliban, went on the record in saying that they would not give Osama bin Laden up.",
"https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/sep/26/afghanistan.features11"
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h8btubv",
"comment_text": [
"Damn. That was an excellent synopsis."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h8b3ra7",
"comment_text": [
"This is true. My guess is that many people may not be familiar with the term Mujahideen, which may more aptly describe the origins during the soviet invasion."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_h8b0rxm",
"comment_text": [
"What oil is in Afghanistan."
],
"score": 7
}
|
|
ELI5 Virtual Machines. If I use google (or microsoft) through a virtual machine, am I still being tracked?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
rbogf3
| 0
|
R2 (Narrow/Personal)
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hnpbpfv",
"comment_text": [
"Potentially, yes. ",
"A virtual machine is just a computer running inside another computer. It has all the same systems, limitations, and liabilities of a normal computer. If you are concerned with being tracked, your best defenses are using a VPN, using incognito mode, and using sites that you trust."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hnpbu6y",
"comment_text": [
"Short answer: yes.",
"Even if you're using Google/Microsoft through a virtual machine, you're still using it from your house, and more importantly, your modem. You still have the same IP address being slapped onto your traffic, and so you're still being tracked the same way."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hnpbqoj",
"comment_text": [
"Yes. The browser in your VM still works the same way. As well your isp can see what you are doing. They only way to not be tracked would be to turn off all cookies, us some sort of firewall to block other tracking requests and us some sort of encrypted connection like tor or a VPN."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hnpbvyj",
"comment_text": [
"It depends, to the VM. Google (and Microsoft) will still be tracking your habits, but they may not be able to connect the information to you. That being said, if you sign in to Google (or Microsoft) in the VM, then it appears to Google (and Microsoft) that you are still the same person, just on another computer."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hnpc8dj",
"comment_text": [
"Also, the interesting thing is that the systems that track you, don't know who you are per say. They use tofu patterns, create a profile, and assign an identifier. Then serves you ads. It also determines other criteria which will assigns value to you. For instance, these computers using AI will know fairly quickly if you were a pregnant woman, and you would be assigned the highest value. And than your profile would than be sold. Pregnant women are the most valuable because pregnant woman down a lot of money preparing for the baby. I once did an experiment. About 6 years ago I had a website with ads, I had my wife on her phone click on the ad. Most clicks got fractions of pennies. Her click garnered $10.00 because she was pregnant with our son at the time. Food for thought."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: What happens to soups and juice after it reaches our stomach?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
q983hj
| 1
|
R7 (Search First)
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hgu9jtz",
"comment_text": [
"It isn't processed much differently from solid food. It mixes with the juices in your stomach, then moves into your intestines. The walls of your intestines allow water and nutrients to cross into your bloodstream, but no, your blood would not be chicken soup flavored. A \"coffee filter\" is actually not a bad way to understand it - but the filter is in the intestines, not the stomach."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hgu9vm3",
"comment_text": [
"Food doesn’t go directly into your blood, it gets broken down by your stomach, goes through your smaller intestine where more enzymes break it down so that things like nutrients, fat, sugar and water can get absorbed into the body, which is then further passed to your liver and kidneys to be filtered, absorbed, and then excreted.",
"All of the blood that you produce is a result of the nutrients and energy that you absorb but require only certain parts of it - flavor not being a part of that.",
"That being said, if you fed yourself a diet of just chicken for the rest of your life, I’m sure if someone tried to eat your excess fat, it’ll resemble that of chicken flavor. This is similar to how farm raised fish will end up tasting like their feed."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hguhh0x",
"comment_text": [
"As someone who had their gall bladder removed and occasionally shits undigested food if I don't take an antindiarhhea...I think so yes"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hguhh0x",
"comment_text": [
"As someone who had their gall bladder removed and occasionally shits undigested food if I don't take an antindiarhhea...I think so yes"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hgubimv",
"comment_text": [
"our stomach is about pH 1, do you really think the solid stuff stays solid for long? (+chewing so its some sort of mash anyway + enzymes that break up the structure too)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: where did this image come from, what is it used for and what do the colors, shape sizes and shape positions on it mean?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
rh4hi7
| 3
|
R2 (Narrow/Personal)
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hoo35qk",
"comment_text": [
"It's what we used to call a \"test pattern\" on old televisions. When the last TV channel signed off for the night you would get this pattern on your TV screen. The rainbow of colors were used to test the colors in the picture. ",
"Now, that's just an old man's memory talking but that's what we used to call it."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hoo5wip",
"comment_text": [
"Read the wiki and your questions will be answered."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hoo6ujj",
"comment_text": [
"why did this image become so well-known and why is it used for real and fake technical difficulties?",
"It was a default signal sent by the broadcasting equipment when no other information was being transmitted. Therefore it would appear when the broadcast was suddenly stopped for whatever reason, including someone doing an \"emergency disconnect\" of the video.",
"why is this image used after the word anyway is said or instead of the word anyway?",
"I have honestly no idea what you're talking about here.",
"who made this image and on which day, month and year was it first and originally used?",
"Is this homework?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hoo4ghy",
"comment_text": [
"NTSC Color bars. An imaged used to calibrate US broadcast standard color displays and playback devices (i.e tape machines). Version in use today for digital video imaging. Here’s the wiki: ",
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMPTE_color_bars"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_hoo88kz",
"comment_text": [
"Definitely sounds like homework. He asked the same 3 questions twice in the thread. 😆"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: mansplaining, what is it really?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
bcvcld
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ektq40r",
"comment_text": [
"Well look, since you are a woman you wouldn't understand what mansplaining is. That is understandable because you are really only expected to cook and clean, and these concepts are going to be a bit beyond you. But if you ",
" know it is when things are explained sort of like how I just did."
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ektq4r0",
"comment_text": [
"Condescending explanation from a man to a woman ELI5 style. It undermines a woman’s competence and embarrasses them."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ektvgse",
"comment_text": [
"Mansplaining is when a man dumbs down an explanation to a woman about a topic that she's already familiar with. What makes it \"mansplaining\" specifically is if he wouldn't have done this to another man. ",
"For example, let's imagine that a woman goes to a mechanic because she has an issue with her car. A male mechanic asks her what brings her to the shop today. The woman describes her problem in a way that suggests that she knows a thing or two about cars.",
"The male mechanic takes a look at her car and then goes to tell her what the problem is, but he uses very dumbed down language to describe it, despite the fact that she had spoken knowledgeably about cars earlier. ",
"Now maybe he talks to all of the customers like this, not just women. Unless the woman sees him behaving the same way to another man, she will most likely feel like he mansplained the problem to her. ",
"Womansplaining would be the reverse of this; a woman dumbs down an explanation to a knowledgeable man about a traditionally \"female\" subject."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ektqwww",
"comment_text": [
"I loved this"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ekty45n",
"comment_text": [
"As good as these answers are, this is better in ",
"r/outoftheloop",
"."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5:How viable would an ebola infection "suicide misson" be as a biological warfare tactic for terrorist groups?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
2i7qso
| 60
|
Locked
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
Say a terrorist group sent members to Africa to intentionally get infected, then flew to an enemy state, before symptoms showed up, with the intent of infecting as many people as possible. Once showing symptoms (my understanding is that prior to symptoms showing, you aren't contagious yet) you could wipe spit on subway hand rails or cough/sneeze in people's faces, or generally spread bodily fluids in every way possible. If that were to happen in the US or western Europe, how effectively would we be able to contain an outbreak like that? Is this something that our governments should be worried about?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ckzn058",
"comment_text": [
"I think we'd be able to contain it fairly well. We have news and social networks to spread word quickly and much cleaner environments that we live in. We also have the money and technology to invest into containment as well as on-hand staff to deal with it. Part of the reason it's an epidemic in Africa is because they do not have the same resources we do and personal hygiene is poor there. If something like that were to happen, I'm sure their would be casualties, but not on the same scale. "
],
"score": 31
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ckzn6tw",
"comment_text": [
"Another big reason Ebola is spreading so much is that there is a widespread cultural thing where mourners touch the deceased's body. This means tons of people are coming in contact with the disease who would otherwise be kept clear of it.",
"In the US and Europe, this is far less common. Even if we had the same poor level of quarantine, that cultural difference alone would make for a big reduction in impact."
],
"score": 20
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ckzt3w4",
"comment_text": [
"Considering how you die from Ebola...blood."
],
"score": 19
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ckzn05h",
"comment_text": [
"I think the biggest issue is not \"could\" they do it but would they. I think the biggest goal of terrorist groups is notoriety and publicity. They want to see instant results and be able to take credit for it. With a slowly evolving biological attack (that may not even result in deaths at the end of the day), groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS don't have much to gain. "
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ckzn2lb",
"comment_text": [
"I guess that's true. Taking credit would mean everyone was on the lookout for infected individuals making an outbreak significantly less likely and not taking credit would be somewhat worthless as far as terrorism goes."
],
"score": 6
}
|
ELI5: planes normally charge some money if your check-in luggage is over weight, why do they charge extra even if my luggage is 26kg(let's say allowed is 23) and my gf has a 17 kg check in. Our combined is under 46 but it's still charged. is it just a scam to earn more money?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
bwmizs
| 6
| true
| false
| 0.99
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epyjuil",
"comment_text": [
"Some airlines do allow a combined figure. Usually because angry customers will just open both cases and move stuff over. I think it depends on how much of a scumbag the company is. I would expect Ryanair to charge you."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epyjwkp",
"comment_text": [
"I flew Cape Air a few years back, there it’s to so with weight distribution, so we did move stuff between bags at the check in counter. Having said that they were extremely good as an airline."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epyjwwi",
"comment_text": [
"I'm not sure on this but I could imagine that the airport also charges the airline more for handling luggage over 23kg."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epyk4dx",
"comment_text": [
"Most airlines would be reasonable if you had made a booking together and do just that because it is one booking. Worst case scenario is you just take 3kgs out of you bag and put it in your girlfriends bag."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_epykk99",
"comment_text": [
"Could be due to the fact that a 26kg bag and 20kg bag are more difficult to handle (because 26kg is harder to carry), than 2x23kg bags?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: What happens to flying insects in a moving vehicle?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
bzmn3t
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eqtn52w",
"comment_text": [
"So basically, when the car moves, the air inside also moves with the car. So after the initial jolt of starting, its like the car isn't even moving. So the insect stays in place."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eqtktfu",
"comment_text": [
"This isn't true"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eqttcp9",
"comment_text": [
"Minor detail, fluid dynamics still apply. The air condenses toward the rear of the vehicle and thins toward the front during acceleration. ",
"So not exactly crushing, but.. kind of? Anyhow, the bug would probably ride the wave slightly forward. ",
"https://youtu.be/y8mzDvpKzfY",
" (smarter everyday - balloon in van)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eqtlv2q",
"comment_text": [
"Flying insects are constantly counteracting the 9.8m/s",
" acceleration of gravity and often accelerating upwards on top of this. ",
"Keeping up with the acceleration of a car, which is rarely more than 5m/s",
" (5 sec 0-60mph = 5.555m/s",
" ), is really not a challenge for them. The air in the car moves with it, you can tell by the fact you don't pass out from lack of air when accelerating."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_eqtkwei",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, that’s true. But humans in a seat aren’t floating around like, say a fly. Any difference there?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Pouring drinks
|
explainlikeimfive
|
joj7z
| 6
| true
| false
| 0.88
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2du6ju",
"comment_text": [
"The simple answer is that surface tension is keeping the fluid attached to the original cup. This is typically a problem when using cups with rounded edges. Imagine you're at the top of a hill about to drive your car down. As you begin to descend, your wheels stay on the ground. However if you were to drive off a surface with a 90 degree angle, your car would become airborne. Similarly, liquids require a hard angle to escape from a cup, which is why drink pitchers have a spout on the end. \n(By the way, I realize gravity and surface tension are not the same thing. If anything, gravity helps prevent the drink from spilling down the side. The car just makes for a decent analogy.)\nOh, and magnets too. "
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dtq86",
"comment_text": [
"Magnets. Fuckin' miracles, man."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2du8oy",
"comment_text": [
"Good answer friend, Blood and thunder."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dtxma",
"comment_text": [
"Damned magnets. Screwing up my drinks"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2dud57",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you. You are most helpful. You deserve upvotes, but I can only give you this one."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
NP-complete, completeness, NP-hard
|
explainlikeimfive
|
k0kzd
| 3
| true
| false
| 1
|
Wikipedia just isn't cutting it for me...What exactly does it mean by nondeterministic Turing machine and NP-hard (or really what "hardness" and "easiness" really means. Thanks!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2gpk4t",
"comment_text": [
"NP stands for nondeterministic polynomial time.",
"Non-deterministic means that the algorithm can do different things on different runs (i.e. you launch the algorithm that solve you problem one time you get a result, the next time you get a different result).",
"Means that if the length of the input increases linearly, the time (of the worst case) increases according to a polynomial (e.g. n",
" + 6n, n",
" + n, etc). If an algorithm run in polynomial time is said to be \"efficient\" or \"fast\". The problems in P can be solve in polynomial time.",
"When this machine encounters a check on a condition, it branches into many copies of itself. Each copy goes on with the computation (but these copies cannot communicate).",
"A problem is in NP if the algorithm to check the solution is in P (that is: run in polynomial time). ",
"\nA more formal definition of NP is: a problem is in NP if it's solvable in polynomial time by a non-deterministic Turing machine.",
" A problem is NP-Hard if: the algorithm that solve this problem can be translated to solve every problem in NP. So, a NP-HARD problem is at least as hard as the hardest problems in NP. Not all NP-HARD problem are in NP.",
" A NP-complete problem is a problem that is both NP and NP-HARD."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2hec0a",
"comment_text": [
"I think you are confusing ",
"dynamic programming",
" with ",
"dynamic programming language",
". They are two (very) different things."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2glk1u",
"comment_text": [
"Search first. Use the handy search bar to see if your question has already been answered satisfactorily. If the question has been asked but you don't understand any answers, feel free to ask again.",
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/j4ohk/explain_the_pnp_problem_li5/"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2gnyp4",
"comment_text": [
"ELY5:"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2gqanw",
"comment_text": [
"Your example of NP problem is an adaption of the Knapsack problem, which is actually NP-complete (but since it is, it's also in NP).",
"There is no easier way to solve an NP-complete problem other than counting which takes a really long time.",
"This is not true. We can approximate, use dynamic programming or heuristics. (The travelling salesman has a complexity of c",
" when using dynamic programming, on the other hand using bruteforce it's n!)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does war have rules?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
jt9os
| 24
| true
| false
| 0.91
|
Why is ok to kill people in some ways but not others? Why can you try and kill someone, but if you fail and only injure them, you cannot interfere with the people trying to save them? Etc....
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2exzc1",
"comment_text": [
"In a perfect world, no one would fight wars. We know this isn't a perfect world, though, so we have to make it as good as we can.",
"One way we do that is by setting up rules that nations agree to follow. If they don't follow those rules, other countries can refuse to trade with them or threaten to go to war.",
"The rules we make about war have two main goals - to reduce the amount of suffering and pain inflicted on civilians (anyone not involved in the fighting), and to avoid 'unnecessary' suffering for those who are fighting.",
"For example, rules against attacking medics helps protect civilians by making sure that all the trained doctors don't die in the war. If all the doctors and hospitals were attacked, people who were never involved in the fighting wouldn't be able to get medical help after the war."
],
"score": 28
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2exzgd",
"comment_text": [
"Geneva conventions ruled that disguising soldiers as civilians is a war crime."
],
"score": 22
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2ey0ha",
"comment_text": [
"These are exactly the kind of rules I'm talking about. I abhor war, I really do, but if you're going to do it, surely you go balls out and do everything to win. Why would you play by some arbitary rules?",
"I'm not being a dick, and I know I'm being a little nieve. But I figured ELI5 was the place to do it, since this feels a bit like a 'why is water wet' question."
],
"score": 17
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2exx4r",
"comment_text": [
"Why doesn't every soldier wear medic insignia?"
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c2ey0qm",
"comment_text": [
"Good answer, especially about the medics."
],
"score": 7
}
|
|
ELI5 Why does soup boil so much faster then water?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
djs1h9
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_f47xuiq",
"comment_text": [
"Oop I misread it! My b"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_f47xuiq",
"comment_text": [
"Oop I misread it! My b"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_f47nn9j",
"comment_text": [
"Soup tends to have a lot more salt in it than water. Salt decreases the temperature necessary to boil water. Depending on the saltiness it could boil a little quicker or much quicker."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_f47wid6",
"comment_text": [
"Not to be salty, but you just said salt does and doesn’t in the same post"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_f47wid6",
"comment_text": [
"Not to be salty, but you just said salt does and doesn’t in the same post"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
How does our brain know where our extremities are?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
omkpk
| 6
| true
| false
| 1
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3ifvaq",
"comment_text": [
"I learned from Psychology class that the connection is even deeper. There is a mental map of your body and this map updates in real time based on commands given to your extremities from your brain.",
"They have proven this to be true due to studies on amputees. Even without the limb, the person can feel the existence of their missing limb as well as pinpoint where it is and where they attempt to move it even if the limb itself is no longer physically there. ",
"This amputee phenomenon is called ",
"phantom limb"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3if6vg",
"comment_text": [
"Oh I kinda get it now. So basically it tells the brain how much each joint has moved and in what direction etc. and from that it can figure out where whatever has moved is? "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3if6vg",
"comment_text": [
"Oh I kinda get it now. So basically it tells the brain how much each joint has moved and in what direction etc. and from that it can figure out where whatever has moved is? "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3iey56",
"comment_text": [
"Your brain likes to know where your body is at all times. It's like you having a friend that ALWAYS knows where all of your toys are because that's his job. ",
"See, for non ELI5: ",
"Proprioception."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3iewfi",
"comment_text": [
"Proprioception!!"
],
"score": 4
}
|
|
ELI5. Would a psychopath get scared if they were being haunted by ghosts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ee33hr
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fbodfv5",
"comment_text": [
"Psychopaths are capable of feeling fear (Hoppenbrouwers, Bulten, and Brazil, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2016), so it would depend on the individual you're talking about. They do have trouble detecting and feeling danger, though."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fbozamf",
"comment_text": [
"Also, ghosts are not real so getting being scared because you are being haunted is a little ridiculous."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fbp9c5v",
"comment_text": [
"Arguably, if you actually ",
" being haunted, being scared is entirely reasonable. If you're scared because you ",
" you're being haunted but you're actually not is... slightly more ridiculous, but it could easily still be something you should be scared of, such as a gas leak."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fbsg3k4",
"comment_text": [
"Well the original question had to do specifically with a haunting by ghosts. Ghosts are fictional."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_fbsgvq0",
"comment_text": [
"I was making a joke about your wording. You said that being scared of being haunted is ridiculous, not being scared of ",
" you're being haunted. If you were ",
" being haunted, and you could prove that, then you would be entirely within your rights to be scared of that. You'd also get to be credited with a revolutionary scientific breakthrough for being able to prove ghosts exist, which'd be neat."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do songs get stuck in the head?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
nxi5j
| 81
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3cq5s7",
"comment_text": [
"There are a lot of different theories as to why exactly (and there's a Straight Dope article that lists a bunch), but I'll cover a few.",
"It's probably safe to say that a song that could get stuck in your head probably has a catchy beat and is fairly simplistic. However, it's also probably the vocals that you'll keep hearing repeated in your head (simpler), and there might be a few reasons why.",
"Most likely is that your brain is just repeating a familiar part of a song and the more you try to ignore it, the longer it repeats. Also, your brain may be trying to remember the song for later or just try to recall the song but something isn't working. Maybe you can only remember parts of the song so it keeps repeating."
],
"score": 28
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3cqn7x",
"comment_text": [
"On this note, once you notice that a song is going around in your head and it bothers you, it becomes an issue of the ironic process theory. The classic example of this would be if I told you not to think about a white bear. You would, of course, begin thinking about a white bear, and any attempts you make to focus on suppressing the thoughts of a white bear would only make you think about it more. In the same vein, trying to get a song out of your head while frustrated about it will typically only make it worse until you calm down long enough to forget naturally."
],
"score": 13
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3cr0bw",
"comment_text": [
"Why does our brain do this to us. What an asshole."
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3crjch",
"comment_text": [
"This is why being catholic sucks."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3cqolt",
"comment_text": [
"THIS",
" explains it perfectly"
],
"score": 9
}
|
||
What do a lot of prime numbers (and discovering new ones) have to do with encryption of information and etc?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
pv0dr
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3sgduc",
"comment_text": [
"My first ELI5 post. In computer science, certain problems are easy, and others are hard. There are in fact objective ways to say this. Problems such as \"sort this list of numbers,\" or \"what's the largest number in this list\" are easy. On the other hand, there are hard problems such as \"what's the fastest route from point A to point B,\" or \"factor this number.\"",
"The idea with encryption is that you want to find a problem which is hard, but doing it backwards is easy. The problem of factoring numbers is hard, but the backwards problem (multiplying numbers) is easy.",
"So the trick is to take two super huge prime numbers (several hundred digits each) and multiply them. Even the world's fastest computers would take a long time to factor them. I let everyone know the product, but I keep the primes separate. I feel confident no one can figure out the primes; it could take the worlds best computers 100s of years to do so. Now everyone can use this number (my \"public key\") to send me messages, and no one can read them. But the trick is that I have the two prime numbers, and I can use them to very quickly decipher the message. The only way to decipher it is to know the prime numbers, so no one else will be able to read the message.",
"Of course, there's a lot of math behind how to pick the big primes, how to encode the messages, and how to decipher them if you know what the primes are. Luckily, your web browser knows how to do all of this, so you don't have to."
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3shhpy",
"comment_text": [
"I let everyone know the product, but I keep the primes separate",
"so they would take ages to figure it out, because they don't have the prime numbers, where as he/she does"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3shjui",
"comment_text": [
"no, because he was the one encrypting the message, so he came up with the two primes. for example, if your computer has a password, it is easier for you to log in because you already know it because you made it, than it is for someone to try all the passwords until one works"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3shqi5",
"comment_text": [
"You're not quite getting the scale of what we are talking here. Lets say you pick two primes that are 512 bits long. The number of primes that are smaller than 2",
" is approximately ",
"3 * 10",
". For comparison, the number of atoms in the universe is about 10",
" (that is to say, there's roughly one quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion trillion as many primes in that range as there are atoms in the universe). Clearly, you cannot store all of those.",
"The way you find a prime is to generate a random number in that range and then use some serious mathematical techniques to check whether it (or a number near it) is prime. You don't generate all the numbers, you just find one that is prime. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3shisr",
"comment_text": [
"Because originally the numbers weren't \"found\", they were chosen. It's the difference between picking a random number and trying to methodically find the specific number that someone else picked using relatively lengthy and complex solving techniques to weed out the numbers that aren't the one you're looking for."
],
"score": 3
}
|
||
ELI5: How can the same amount of digital space take up less physical space? i.e. how harddrives remain the same size but can hold more and more data?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
q6jno
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3v4k8e",
"comment_text": [
"Think of a sheet of graph paper with 1s and 0s in each space on the grid.",
"If you needed more space for 1s and 0s you can get more of the same paper or you can get graph paper with smaller grids so that more 1s and 0s fit on a page.",
"That is what is going on with hard drives, we are figuring out how to write our ones and zeros on smaller and smaller grids all the time. We'll eventually get to the point where the grids can't get any smaller but we haven't reached that point yet."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3v63b8",
"comment_text": [
"Hard drives store information by \"writing\" it very small, using magnets instead of ink. As time goes by, people have learned to write very, very small indeed.",
"Think of your own writing. Your first \"A\" took up half a page. At five, you can probably write inch-high letters. Your dad writes small enough to fit maybe 30 lines on a page. Books are printed even smaller. A whole book can fit into a smaller space than that card you scrawled out for Mommy on her birthday last month.",
"Well, each \"letter\" on a recently made hard drive platter is smaller than the red blood cells in your body."
],
"score": 10
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3v4mdg",
"comment_text": [
"Inside hard drives there are platters. You could increase the number of platters but hard drive makers don't really do that (perhaps to minimize chance of breaking and energy consumption).",
"The platter is made of millions of little magnetic spots, each one sensitive to the writing head of the hard drive. It can reverse the magnetic field of any spot, and create a succession of magnetic spots that are directed in one direction or the other.",
"This succession of - and + spots constitutes a binary language (0s and 1s) which are translated into data.",
"All you have to do to increase the data held in a hard drive is make those magnetic spots smaller, so that you can fit more spots on a platter.",
"CDs and DVDs work the same except with reflective and non-reflective surfaces. They can also increase storage by having several layers."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3v8s6g",
"comment_text": [
"The other replies were also correct but this is the only true ELI5 answer. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c3v6a55",
"comment_text": [
"CDs and DVDs have a totally reflective surface but little pits in the surface cause destructive interference. Though I understand this is not LI5"
],
"score": 2
}
|
||
ELI5: Why aren't passengers allowed to use electronic devices during takeoff and landing?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
r9k06
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.38
|
I never turn off my phone or ipod as per the flight attendant's requests; I just continue listening to my ipod and often fall asleep to the music during takeoff. I figure that they would be completely irresponsible and stupid to risk so many lives and a plane worth millions of dollars if my iphone was able to interfere with the plane's electronic equipment. So.. why do they still get you to turn off your electronics during takeoff and landing?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c440oh4",
"comment_text": [
"The general consensus is:",
"So that you're not distracted in case of an emergency.",
"Because they don't want to bother checking every single new device that comes out to see if it messes with any piece of equipment. It's just easier and cheaper for them to say, \"Look, for 90 seconds, do you think you could manage to survive without your iPod. Please?\""
],
"score": 11
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c441e1c",
"comment_text": [
"There are lots of urban legend / justifications for this. People say everything from \"it's because they're annoying\" to \"so it doesn't overload the cell towers\" to \"so you're not distracted in case of an emergency.\" None of it's true.",
"The reason is that electronic devices occasionally interfere with each other. You've probably heard some static on the radio right before your phone rings and the like. Planes use a lot of electronic equipment to take off and land, and if that equipment stops working, that's bad. So decades ago, the FAA made a very sensible rule that you can't use electronic devices that transmit signals while a plane is being operated. This was before there were cell phones and wifi networks and the like.",
"Since then, the FAA has been more or less willing to relent, but first they require that any device that is going to be allowed during takeoff and landing needs to be proven safe. Completely proving this is a very expensive process, and it's not generally worth it for companies to do this. ",
"At some point, the laws will probably shift. After all, there's no way your Kindle is going to knock a plane out of the sky. But, well, nobody wants to make the wrong call. If 300 people died because you insisted people be allowed to check their email during landing, you're probably gonna get in trouble."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c441sfu",
"comment_text": [
"As an aside, I was recently on a Qatar Air flight that had in-flight mobile phone service. Next to the \"fasten seat-belt\" light was another light indicating when it was okay to use your mobile phone. It was not on during take off/landing.",
"While voice service worked, they asked that you only use text/data as not to be an asshole.",
"This flight was not under FAA jurisdiction (Entebbe -> Doha -> Hong Kong) "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c441xkd",
"comment_text": [
"Good to know! Thanks for the explanation :)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c44724h",
"comment_text": [
"It could interfere with radio equipment."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
Why are their different levels of octane for gasoline (regular, premium, etc) and how does that effect my car (and why do some cars need regular while others need premium)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
ufqwu
| 29
| true
| false
| 0.85
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4uzm57",
"comment_text": [
"To put this into something a five year old might understand...",
"Imagine we gave you three fully-blown balloons. We wrote 87 on one, 89 on another, and 92 on the last one. That number indicates how hard you can squeeze the balloon before it pops. You can squeeze the 87 balloon a little before it pops, the 89 balloon can be squeezed a bit more, and the 92 can be squeezed even harder. The harder you can squeeze that balloon, the bigger the pop.",
"Now to bring that back up to speed (ha-ha! car pun)...",
"The ratings you see on pumps (87%, 89%, 92%) correspond to the ratio of octane to heptane. Those chemicals aren't necessarily important, but it is important to know that the higher that percentage, the more the gas can be squeezed before it ignites and goes pop. Just like with the balloons, the more compression, the bigger the pop and the more power you get from it.",
"HOWEVER, your engine has to be designed to take advantage of higher octanes or else pouring 92% in an engine designed for 87% is just wasteful. On the other end, pouring 87% in an engine designed for 92% can be damaging to the engine."
],
"score": 41
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4v16ao",
"comment_text": [
"Really? I've read that engine knocking can, in extreme cases, be, \"extremely destructive.\"",
"If detonation is allowed to persist under extreme conditions or over many engine cycles, engine parts can be damaged or destroyed. The simplest deleterious effects are typically particle wear caused by moderate knocking, which may further ensue through the engine's oil system and cause wear on other parts before being trapped by the oil filter. Severe knocking can lead to catastrophic failure in the form of physical holes punched through the piston or cylinder head (i.e., rupture of the combustion chamber), either of which depressurizes the affected cylinder and introduces large metal fragments, fuel, and combustion products into the oil system.",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_knocking"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4v16ao",
"comment_text": [
"Really? I've read that engine knocking can, in extreme cases, be, \"extremely destructive.\"",
"If detonation is allowed to persist under extreme conditions or over many engine cycles, engine parts can be damaged or destroyed. The simplest deleterious effects are typically particle wear caused by moderate knocking, which may further ensue through the engine's oil system and cause wear on other parts before being trapped by the oil filter. Severe knocking can lead to catastrophic failure in the form of physical holes punched through the piston or cylinder head (i.e., rupture of the combustion chamber), either of which depressurizes the affected cylinder and introduces large metal fragments, fuel, and combustion products into the oil system.",
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_knocking"
],
"score": 9
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4v0hey",
"comment_text": [
"Nice explanation. Thanks for that. "
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4v3med",
"comment_text": [
"The specific kind of octane that they use to calibrate the octane scale for gasoline is named ",
"2,2,4-Trimethylpentane",
", and it is one of the most common molecules in gasoline. I don't think there's much n-heptane in gasoline, though."
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: What are some of the main reasons why people hate Romney? And Obama?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10ghvs
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.56
|
I'm just curious and would like to know the collection of facts that make people hate Romney so much. This site is extremely anti-Romney which makes the comment section in an eye sore with it's "wow what a scumbag" type responses. So, why do people hate Romney so much? And even though this site hates Romney, it's not exactly pro-Obama either. What are some key factors about him that make peoples piss turn to a boil? Edit: Facts as in statistics, background. policies, what they would do if they were president, etc. Opinions are still welcome though.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6daey8",
"comment_text": [
"People hate him because he's a shill. As Republican governor of Massachusetts he crafted bipartisan legislation tailored for a liberal demographic. It worked out pretty well for him and people of MA. As a GOP candidate, he began flipflopping the positions he espoused as governor (healthcare, gay marriage, government spending, unions, etc). He is disliked by both the left and the right because they both know that he is being dishonest. The right will vote for him because he IS saying the things they want to hear, but it's so obvious that's the only reason why he has changed so many of his previously state beliefs/policies that they admit to feeling sickened when imagining voting for him. The people on the left dislike him because they dislike conservative thinking in general, along with the fact that Romney's obvious duplicitousness has not affected his standings as much as they thought it would. Furthermore, when lefties watch the righties cringe at the thought of Romney, they like to rub it in their opponents' faces.",
"And that's without even getting into the policies themselves! If you'd like to do further research on your own you can investigate the lack of specificity of Romney's economic plans (",
"http://factcheck.org/2012/09/romneys-economic-exaggerations-2/",
").",
"Obama on the other hand, receives criticism from his own camp because of his strong-handed use of executive powers. NSA wiretaps, drone killings of American citizens, medical marijuana raids, etc are things that lefties disagree with and had hoped would end with the Bush era. Instead, Obama has continued these practices and, in some cases, intensified these actions.",
"Bottom line: a) Everybody knows Mitt is lying about ",
". b) Obama's status as a political newcomer has not changed authoritarian American policies, meaning nothing ever will."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6da6od",
"comment_text": [
"or go to ",
"/r/liberal",
" and see yet another circle jerk about how great Obama is and how much of an asshole Romney is. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6dafot",
"comment_text": [
"Or ",
"/r/all",
"."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6dgi6y",
"comment_text": [
"People hate him because he has money and seems to flaunt it and mock us with it. Honestly someone could probably write an entire essay with quotes from him and his wife to outline this. Here's some quick info though:",
"He won't release his taxes prior to his campaign to show that he actually paid any. This is important because one of his things is claiming that rich people pay TOO much into the system and need tax cuts. This could also prove that he committed voter fraud in 2010, illegally became Governor of MA (he lived in Utah at the time technically), or possibly even committed felony tax evasion prior to 2009 and was part of the IRS Amnesty program. Also, it's really hypocritical of him not to release his taxes after demanding his opponents did in his 1994 campaign and his 2002 campaign.",
"His father was super rich, so he owned a house during college and had no problem affording a Masters AND Law degree from Harvard. This seems to be why he's convinced that if you can't \"make\" it in America you're lazy. He suggests borrowing $20k from your parents to go to college or start a business. Do you know anyone who has that much money saved up? I know I don't."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6d9haq",
"comment_text": [
"with it's \"wow what a scumbag\" type responses. So, why do people hate Romney so much?",
"First suggestion would be: \"read the thing that comment was said in response to\".",
"This isn't the place that tells you why other people feel things. The best source is to go ask them why they feel how they feel. If you want to know if their stats/facts are accurate once you get them, you can come here, but we can't tell you why other people feel angry about something without expressing our own bias."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: How do you type in Japanese characters (or other character-based languages)?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
10k7dp
| 4
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
I know there are specialized keyboards and I've seen videos of people mashing multiple buttons as once, but I was wondering what the various keys signified and how you know which ones to combine to get a specific character.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e5x7c",
"comment_text": [
"Japanese actually has ",
" different writing systems. ",
"The first two are syllabaries",
", which are like alphabets, but each \"letter\" represents a syllable (eg, \"ma,\" \"ka\"). One of those syllabaries (hiragana) is used for native Japanese words, and the other (katakana) is used for foreign words. Japanese sentences are usually written using a combination of hiragana, katakana, ",
" kanji (borrowed Chinese characters) all at once, and it's the kanji that are difficult to type, since there's so many of them. ",
"Today's Japanese keyboards",
" have both English letters and hiragana on them. When they type in a word (say they write さかな, or \"sakana\"), ",
"an option will come up",
" which offers kanji that are pronounced \"sakana\" (like 魚, \"fish,\" or 肴, \"appetizer\"). They have the option of changing what they wrote into kanji, or leaving it as-is.",
"In Chinese, it's similar, only they don't have the option of an alphabet to use - a lot of people today type things using our alphabet, which then ",
"gives a choice of characters",
" just like with Japanese. (Edit: This is called the \"pinyin method.\" There's ",
"other methods",
" too, but I'm not familiar with how popular those are in China or Taiwan.) Or, a lot of kids today are using just our alphabet, I've heard. "
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e72sy",
"comment_text": [
"I remember an interview on the Colbert Report with a guy who worked for a cell phone company or something. He mentioned the difficulty of getting cell phones with texting capabilities into India since they have something like 5 or 6 different alphabets. I would imagine a similar problem would happen in cell phones in Japan if this is their solution.",
"Of course, now that smart phones are becoming almost the norm, it would solve some of these problems"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e85zq",
"comment_text": [
"Different problem - in Japan all three (four, if you count Latin characters, which are also in use) are used by the same people, at the same time. That said, this method works quite well, and is in use on old dumbphones as well. Each number has a few characters associated with it, like how ours have abc on 2, def on 3; theirs have a,i,u,e,o on 1, ka,ki,ku,ke,ko on 2, and you select the kanji with the arrows.",
"On smartphones there are a few methods and you can switch between them, which is great for folks like me who are learning! You can do it the old way, or a more efficient way that has each of the characters fly out when you press a number and then you can enter it with a swipe. So if you hold-press 2, you get:",
" ko\nki ka ke\n ku\n",
"and you can swipe to the one you want, and replace them with kanji when you have enough. It's quite quick and convenient. My favorite thing, though, is that you can actually bring up a pad where you can write the characters with your finger, which is ",
" when you encounter a kanji you don't know (since you can't read it phonetically to input it). That and Google Translate was one of the reasons I went for an outrageously expensive smartphone contract here. Fuckin' future man.",
"edit: Character order is counterclockwise, not clockwise."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6e88uy",
"comment_text": [
"Do Japanese people prefer to use a hiragana keyboard or do they normally use the IME that you'd use on an English one? The Japanese people who have used my computer were completely adept at using the IME, I just wonder what they do in general. Is it a personal preference thing or does almost everyone use one or the other?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c6eax9p",
"comment_text": [
"I am not at all knowledgeable but I wanted to throw in my two cents and say that on several Japanese shows I've seen them using IMEs or something similar. I think even if you used a strict Japanese keyboard you'd still need an IME for kanji. Also, there are some words that get written out in latin letters even in Japanese."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI - Why Wind Power Turbine Blades are Thin
|
explainlikeimfive
|
yl4gh
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.78
|
It seems to make more sense to me to have them wide so that they would catch more wind...
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5wkxmo",
"comment_text": [
"Not ELI5:",
"An airfoil can on first approximation influences the air flow away from the airfoil in the same order of magnitude to its chord length. So a 3 meter wide (chord length) wind turbine blade can influence the air in an about 6 meter wide corridor (3 meters in front, 3 meters behind (in direction of the wind) around it. ",
"Lets say a wind turbine, with 3 m chord length is rotating in a wind of 6 m/s. It is enough for a blade to pass a region of the swept area only once per second to remove almost all the removable energy from the airstream, since it can influence a region of 6 meter length 6 m/s /(6m) = 1/s. ",
"Which means that for a 3 bladed air-turbine it is enough to rotate with a angular velocity of 1/3 1/s to influence almost all the air passing through is swept area.",
"In translation even though it seems that the thin blades are not using all the air passing through the wind turbine, they actually do, since the airfoil length and rotation speed are chosen in such a way, that all the air passing through the wind turbine is at least for a short time near the airfoils and thus can be influenced by it. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5wjqr6",
"comment_text": [
"Then they're really heavy and hard to move. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5wlc9h",
"comment_text": [
"Yes yes... I understand some of these words.",
"Seriously though, I got the gist. Thanks. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5wjteb",
"comment_text": [
"Actually they are pretty wide. They are also very long (longer than wider) because the turbine requires momentum of force to spin and this momentum is a product of force (from size) and distance from the axis. ",
"So making the blade longer is just as good as making it wider while like this it is easier, lighter and other economy related benefits. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c5wk6vv",
"comment_text": [
"Actually the blade is some good 2 meters wide - ",
"quick pic",
". Which is good for a 7-10 meter long sailboat. Multiply with 15 meters in length and three blades and you have a solid momentum of force. ",
"Remember, a sailboat needs the wind to push so you have no other way but to invest in sail area. A windmill needs the wind to turn so you can use standard leverage effect."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5- Tactically, where did the US go wrong in the Vietnam war?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
teq4i
| 20
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4lz8ru",
"comment_text": [
"You're not using the word \"tactically\" properly. Tactics is the hour by hour planning of a single fight. Wars are only lost tactically if there is a huge pitched battle that crushes an army or navy, like the Battle of Midway or Waterloo.",
" is the overall planning of a war, from supplies, weapons used, units brought into the theater, tactics they employ, and final objective. ",
"The US did not have a strategy for victory in Vietnam. In conventional war, capturing the enemy capital city is often the objective; the US never invaded North Vietnam at all, as this would have caused China and the USSR to become involved. Instead, they tried to fight communists in South Vietnam and hope they would get tired of fighting and quit. In fact, after the Tet offensive, the North Vietnamese were just about ready to stop active military campaigns in the south, but the threat wouldn't have ended at all."
],
"score": 27
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4lzwmi",
"comment_text": [
"Probably the biggest reason Vietnam was lost wasn't an issue of strategy per se but being there in the first place. It was obviously an extremely unpopular war throughout its conduct, and eventually Americans just had enough.",
"That being said, not enough was done by American and allied forces to engender themselves to the local populace. Kill counts and free-fire zones were ultimately counterproductive and inefficient, and oftentimes after clearing an area we would simply leave and NVA/VC would reoccupy within a day."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4lz97v",
"comment_text": [
"The US didn't do their homework- the Vietnamese had been fighting off invaders for hundreds of years, they were hardened guerrilla fighters who absolutely refused to accept foreigners coming in and trying to \"take over\" their land. The US didn't realize the ferocity with which the Vietnamese would oppose new people invading Vietnam...and that was only the beginning. "
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4m27my",
"comment_text": [
"The weaponry differences was one little facet and not the deciding factor. ",
"Beyond that, there's a couple things wrong about what you said. The 'ligher american weapons' were tremendously more accurate than the Vietnamese AK47s, which didn't matter at all since most engagements happened at such short range that the difference in accuracy really didn't come into play. ",
"The main problem with the american rifle was not the weight, but the fact that the top brass decided to use the wrong kind of bullet in the gun because it was cheaper. This made the guns rust from the inside out, clog up with filth, and generally stop working while the AK47s shooting back at them were built to be packed full of mud and still fire fine. ",
"Eventually the issues with the american M16 were sorted out, they began using the right kind of bullet and added some features to the gun that help make it work even if it's starting to jam up with crap, but that was cold comfort by that point in the war. The biggest problem was always that the Veit-cong were so much better at simply not being found. You can't shoot at what you can't see!",
"EDIT; I've owned an AK47 for five years, and I've long since stopped trying to clean it. The gun doesn't give a crap if it's filthy inside or not, it never misfires. Try doing that with an M16 and you'd probably end up having to throw the damn thing away."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c4m1doh",
"comment_text": [
"Americans were able to take over any location on the map they wished, at any time they wished. the problem was that everyone there hated them, and so you had a problem similar to the shitty tint jobs you see on cars; you can squish the bubble to get rid of it, but it simply moves elsewhere.",
"Kinda like Iraq now. if the people there dont want you there, and you can't nuke them into infinity, then eventually you will lose the game no matter what."
],
"score": 4
}
|
||
ELI5: When a young child or baby dies before they've "accepted" Christ as their savior, what exactly happens to them?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
19mh8q
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.38
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8pdldw",
"comment_text": [
"Okay, but ",
" Christians who believe in heaven and hell? Christian sects have incredibly diverse beliefs. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8pdldw",
"comment_text": [
"Okay, but ",
" Christians who believe in heaven and hell? Christian sects have incredibly diverse beliefs. "
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8pd92i",
"comment_text": [
"Within Christianity you will get conflicting answers depending on the individual's beliefs.",
"On ",
"/r/atheism",
" you would get the same answer that anyone else gets to \"What happens when we die?\", which is: You die and your concept of self which you so strongly identify with ceases to exist because your brain stops holding it up."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8pg4zm",
"comment_text": [
"Both of the above are incorrect.",
"For a long time Catholics held a belief that unbaptised babies etc went to ",
"Limbo",
". However as of April 2007 the general belief has been redirected towards the idea that individuals without 'personal' sins would be saved and have a chance at spending the rest of eternity in heaven.",
"I'm absolutely sure this redirection had nothing to do with Africa (where child mortality is high) being one of the key growth demographics of Catholisism."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8pdaaa",
"comment_text": [
"Who are you asking?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: neutrinos
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1an8is
| 5
| true
| false
| 0.86
|
I am so confused about them.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8yxy71",
"comment_text": [
"There are 3 flavors of neutrino (tau, electron, and muon).",
"All of them share the fact they only interact with us via the weak-nuclear force, which as the name implies, is really weak. They're not going to interact with anything by electromagnetic forces (which are comparatively strong).",
"Since they only interact via weak-nuclear force and not the electromagnetic force, they behave in a very ghostly fashion. They can shoot through a brick of lead that's 1 light-year long, and about half of the neutrinos would completely make it through.",
"For a long time physicists thought neutrinos were massless (like photons), but recently this was disproven. We now know they have some non-zero amount of mass. It's too tiny for us to measure, but it's not zero."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8yy31k",
"comment_text": [
"what is the difference between the three flavors?",
"and why don't neutrinos come in chocolate?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8yyp9k",
"comment_text": [
"what is the difference between the three flavors?",
"Each flavor is related to (and named after) another lepton particle. Obviously those particles they're named after are the Electron, Tau, and Muon. The reason these 3 particles are related to the 3 neutrino flavors is because of what gets produced when a decay happens.",
"For example, Tau-neutrinos come from the decaying of a Tau particle. Muon-neutrinos come from the decay of a Muon. But Electrons can't decay.",
"You don't hear much about Tau and Muon particles (unlike their famous brother the Electron) because they decay, and thus don't exist long enough to construct anything we're familiar with in nature.",
"and why don't neutrinos come in chocolate?",
"Chocolate-neutrinos would be pointless because they'd pass right through your taste-buds without interacting with them, and thus be flavorless. Chocolate we can't taste would be too cruel so the universe doesn't do that.",
"EDIT: To be clear about the reason why we pair a neutrino with a flavor: It's not about just decay, but also particle collisions that can create a particle. Electrons can't decay into anything and make electron-neutrinos, but we can collide electron-neutrinos with something (a proton I think) to make an Electron. So it's not just about decay. It's more generally a case of “",
"”."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8zdwh8",
"comment_text": [
"Technically they also interact through gravity. We know this because of the Shapiro delay from SN 1987A.",
"The pairing of neutrino with leptons is essentially the definition of their flavor. You can also define them by their mass. The interesting thing about these two definitions is that they're not the same!",
"What this ends up meaning is that you can create a neutrino of one flavor and it can change into another flavor. This is called neutrino oscillation. The details of neutrino oscillation are currently being measured at various experiments."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8zgbd8",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah I sorta deliberately left out gravity on the grounds it's (at least to me) assumed gravity will interact with anything that has any sort of energy.",
"If we want to be ",
" picky (and you started it!), neutrinos could have some electromagnetic interaction, it's just going to be incredibly miniscule.",
"The existence of a neutrino mass strongly suggests the existence of a tiny neutrino magnetic moment of the order of 10",
" μB, allowing the possibility that neutrinos may interact electromagnetically as well."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do I physically get hot when I start to get angry?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1hc7vf
| 7
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
It's always something I've been curious about.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_caswfcr",
"comment_text": [
"Blood pressure rises, and blood flows away from your arms and legs, to your trunk, to ensure that your heart, lungs, and brain are all well supplied with oxygenated blood. Distant blood vessels in your arms and legs constrict, to reduce bleeding, if you are wounded. \n-Not my original comment, got it from yahoo answers"
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_caswe9k",
"comment_text": [
"Blood pressure?"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_casxfev",
"comment_text": [
"Blood pressure is correct, but the temperature is because you are warm blooded, and when more blood congregates in an area of your body due to blood pressure, it raises the temperature.",
"this is also why your extremities get cold in the winter, because the blood in your fingers/toes/ears, etc is redirected, so to speak, to the core of your body to keep it warm. More blood around your core and head means higher temperature there, while less blood in your fingers and toes means lower temp."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_casxoey",
"comment_text": [
"Hmm. Thanks! Makes total sense."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_casxrnu",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah, blood is amazing stuff, does so many different jobs, not the least of which is regulating body temperature."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: Critical Reasoning - Philosophy.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
18eg53
| 11
| true
| false
| 0.74
|
I'm having the hardest time fully understanding Critical Reasoning. I don't know why, i'm normally good in Philosophy.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8e4kyr",
"comment_text": [
"Same. Could you be a bit more specific, OP?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8e4kyr",
"comment_text": [
"Same. Could you be a bit more specific, OP?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8fajkl",
"comment_text": [
"Well basically, I'm trying to understand the rules for proving if an argument is valid or invalid."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8fp977",
"comment_text": [
"Ah.",
"I can explain that, but I'll struggle to do it like you're five.",
"An argument is valid when, if you consider the premises to be true true, the conclusion ",
" true. It doesn't have to do with the actual truth of either the premises or the conclusions.",
"If you consider the premises to be true, but it could be the case that the conclusion is false, the argument is invalid."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8emkr8",
"comment_text": [
"I think you mean critical theory. It's continental philosophy. The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy or wikipedia may help. Or a differently worded eli5 submission.... :)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why does my water kettle always have a build up of white particles on the bottom? What is it?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
18ep27
| 28
| true
| false
| 0.73
|
Does the fact that my water kettle is stainless have an effect?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8e4iwq",
"comment_text": [
"It's mostly calcium carbonate and magnesium carbonate.",
"The water coming out of your tap comes out of the ground. Sure, before that it was in the air and stuff, but most recently it came out of the ground. Water that's in the ground gets contaminated with all sorts of horrible things: viruses, bacteria, bugs, twigs … raccoon pee. It's just nasty.",
"One of the things groundwater gets \"contaminated\" with is dissolved minerals. I put \"contaminated\" in quotes there because unlike the raccoon pee, dissolved minerals don't actually make water bad to drink. To the contrary, dissolved minerals in water may form an important dietary supplement. You need those minerals to live, see — not a lot of them, but some — and water is a good way to get them.",
"Which is why before it gets to your house your tap water is processed to remove the raccoon pee, but the dissolved minerals are left in it. They're completely harmless, and they ",
" actually be good for you, so why go to the extra trouble and expense of taking them out?",
"The downside to this — and it's a very minor one — is that these dissolved minerals will tend, over time, to precipitate out as carbonates, principally calcium carbonate and magnesium carbonate. These form a white-ish residue wherever water flows: taps, shower heads, inside pipes, and yes, inside kettles.",
"It's quite harmless. If it bothers you, you can remove it with a gentle acid, like ordinary white vinegar (acetic acid) or cream of tartar dissolved in water (tartaric acid)."
],
"score": 16
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8e744n",
"comment_text": [
"as long as its safe to drink, thank you"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8e7jch",
"comment_text": [
"It absolutely is. The medical consensus is that water with a reasonable amount of dissolved minerals in it is better to drink than distilled water, which has none."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8efjiy",
"comment_text": [
"It is perfectly safe to drink but build up of limescale (calcium carbonate) can damage the heating element and shorten the life of your kettle. It also makes it less energy efficient. You should descale it regularly and you should also descale other appliances that rely on your water supply, such as your dishwasher and wahsing machine since you live in a hard-water area. ",
"You can buy special descaling products for this or you can use home-made ",
"solutions",
" you should descale all your appliances every few weeks, it will pay dividends as your appliances will last longer and will need fewer repairs. ",
"NB - ALWAYS check the manufacturer's instructions! A solution which is safe for one appliance may not be safe for another. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ea4wx",
"comment_text": [
"I'm going to go with Calcium (etc.) deposits... They can be removed with acetic acid (vinegar). Additionally, if you buy \"Distilled water\" (about $0.98/gallon at any store) you'll avoid this problem. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5; When a scientist finds a bone, how does he know it is from a 50 million year old dinosaur and not just an elephant bone from last year?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
18xzbm
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
I use elephant as an example as they are big too.. And they say that the stegosaurus or something lived as long before T-Rex as T-Rex to humans.. How could they possibly know this?? Please no creation vs evolution, and please explain it like I am a moron!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8j05z0",
"comment_text": [
"There's a special isotope of potassium called Potassium-40, which decays into Argon over time. Argon's a gas, so when a rock forms it won't have any argon in it. However, when the potassium decays inside the rock, the argon gets trapped inside. When a scientist finds a rock, they can tell how old it is by how much argon is trapped inside."
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8j1482",
"comment_text": [
"There is a big difference between fossilized bones and bones. It's very much like the difference between petrified wood and wood: one is recent remains of life, and the other is stone that permeated the shape of something that was once remains of life. Fossilization takes substantial amounts of time (about 10,000 years), so it's immediately apparent that a fossil isn't as recent as from last year.",
"Fossils tend to be found in a certain kind of rock called sedimentary rock. This rock forms usually at the bottom of a body of water, like an ocean basin, a river, or a marshy area. Layers of solids accumulate and over time get buried and dry out and become solid. The movement of tectonic plates can push these layers around, which is how they can form underwater but be on dry land today. Anyway, generally speaking, the deeper in sedimentary rock, the older. Also, if two fossils form at the same time they will tend to be situated in about the same layer.",
"Bones also have shapes that are different for every species. Sometimes, though, the differences are very slight, and it can be very difficult to tell the species based on a single bone. But the good thing is that if a fossil forms because an animal's remains get stuck in sediment, it's likely that many fossilized bones will be found together, arranged as they were in the ancient animal. This starts to give more information. And some bones are more informative than others. Skulls are particularly informative; a mammoth skull would never be mistaken for a stegosaurus skull because of the tusks. The jaw is different too, as well as the shape of the cranial cavity, and so on. It might be a lot harder to tell which animal is which from just a rib, though. The more closely related two species are, the harder it is to tell them apart. For instance, the skull of a Neanderthal is very similar to a human skull in terms of its overall shape but it is relatively larger in some ways and smaller in others. "
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8izt8h",
"comment_text": [
"Bones have a very distinctive shape. We can tell dinosaur fossils aren't elephant bones because they aren't shaped like any of the bones an elephant has.",
"As for age, dinosaur bones are dated based on the rocks they are found based on the decay rates of radioactive isotopes that were \"locked in\" when the rock was formed."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8izyoz",
"comment_text": [
"when a paleontologist finds a fossil, it isn't actually bone anymore. The bones break down and are replaced by mineral deposits. Also, as kouhoutek points out, a lot of it has to do with the age of the surrounding rocks. You're not going to find a 2 year old croc in a layer of rock dated to be 50 million years ago. Over time, sediment layers and forms rock. You often find fossils exposed in canyon walls because a river has literally cut through the layers over time."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8j06uh",
"comment_text": [
"well certain elements within the rocks break down at a known rate over time. This process is called radioactive decay. It's hard to keep this in \"like I'm five\" territory but if you want to learn how radiometric dating works and how it's used in paleontology, ",
"here you go",
". ",
"Edit: I found this video that might help. It's a little dry, but it does a good job of explaining ",
"how different types of rocks form and how to age rocks and fossils"
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5 if a peanut isn't technically a nut, why do people who are allergic to nuts also react to peanuts?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
17telv
| 55
| true
| false
| 0.82
|
My girlfriend is mildly allergic to nuts, but NOT peanuts, and it struck me today as weird that that is a rare thing among people with but allergies, because peanuts technically aren't nuts. Why do most people with but allergies also react to peanuts and cashews?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c88qnpy",
"comment_text": [
"Nuts are often processed in the same facility as peanuts, so there's often traces or even chunks of either in both. I'm allergic to peanuts, so it's a bit of a gamble for me to eat nuts. Easier to not than end up in the hospital (again)."
],
"score": 12
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c88qurp",
"comment_text": [
"There were a couple of interesting papers in the last couple years that showed that a surprising chunk of food allergies weren't actual allergies at all, or were misidentified allergies. A common one was folks with a peanut allergy believing they're allergic to any number of other products that they didn't realize had peanut byproducts.",
"Another common issue is helicopter parents. Kid eats something, kid throws up for any number of reasons, parent assumes he must be allergic to that food with absolutely no medical evidence or intervention. I've got a late teen friend who just discovered that his incredibly specific diet as a kid was almost exclusively a product of his mother's imagination, and a single minor case of hives from some unknown allergen as a kid. ",
"As an EMT, we see this ",
". Kid has a minor virus or a case of poison ivy or mosquito bites, and we're getting a call to transport a kid supposedly in anaphylaxis. Show up and the kid has a list of allergies as long as mom's arm, and yet the allergy screen comes up negative for all, or nearly all of it."
],
"score": 8
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c88qihl",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, it is, but that doesn't mean people with peanut allergies also have nut allergies."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c88qihl",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, it is, but that doesn't mean people with peanut allergies also have nut allergies."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c88qihl",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, it is, but that doesn't mean people with peanut allergies also have nut allergies."
],
"score": 5
}
|
|
ELI5: What are the refutations to the arguments in this video? (Global Warming Skeptic)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
19eocz
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
is a production of someone who is skeptical about Global Warming/Climate Change/whatever you call it. (Skip the last couple minutes, as he gets political at that point.) It makes a lot of sense to me. My biggest issue has always been that people insist our models are accurate over decades, when we have simple never had enough time to verify any of the predictions. How am I wrong? Where do I find the evidence that proves this video wrong?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nc65y",
"comment_text": [
"The problem is that he's treating \"climate models\" as though they are one monolithic thing. By showing flaws in some of the climate models that predict global warming, he thinks he's casting doubt on ",
" climate models which predict global warming. That's just not how science works."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ncpzf",
"comment_text": [
"College.",
"I mean, I hate to sound elitist. But it's really not possible to have an informed opinion on complex parts of climate science without spending a lot of time and effort studying climate science."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ncrir",
"comment_text": [
"Well, I am a college graduate, just not in a climate science major. I have to believe that there exist differences between models that a reasonably intelligent layman can understand."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8ne4jo",
"comment_text": [
"I haven't watched the video yet but the best place to go to find out what is wrong with this sort of thing is ",
"here",
". Find the argument the video is making then look it up at that website. ",
"Here's the page that refutes the claim that climate models are unreliable",
". ",
"Here's the page that shows how accurate the IPCC models have been",
". ",
"Here's the page that talks about climate sensitivity and the tolerances the climate models have on sensitivity",
" (see, for example, Figure 4)."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_c8nex8c",
"comment_text": [
"Why is the video wrong:",
"Well first of I would like to comment on a few things with the video that should make you really skeptic, just from the start. First of, he publishes his incredible find as a youtube video and not a peer reviewed paper (I did find it written out ",
"here",
", with sources). He talks about what the \"Government Climate Scientists\" have found, like it's just a small group of government scientists that's looking into this. I can find no info about him, and no published papers. He talks about how it's being suppressed by the media.",
"Anyway, what's wrong with things he says? ",
"The models we have don't work: ",
"One of the best models we have were tested against 100 years of climate data",
". In the end it was off by a six degrees. At most. The models are actually tested quite a bit against the huge amounts of data we have, he isn't the first to consider this. ",
"Feedback effect: he talks about the feedback effects as if some scientists sat down and just guessed at a number. Yes, the number used by Hansen was to high (he used 4C/2xCO2 I think?, while 3C/2xCO2 is used now). But it's a 20 year old model. We have gotten better. And he uses -0.5, with even less data to back it up (his source says that it's negative and somewhere around 0.2 - 0.8). ",
"The graphs he has are.. At best technically sort of correct. He takes predictions, strips away the confidence intervals and checks them against data. And they aren't spot on. Which is when normal scientists go back and refine the models. He instead comes up with a theory that fit's even less.",
"Ok. This is taking for ever. It's not being ELI5 friendly, and it's not fun for either one of us. Reading the IPCC 4th report will show you why they are right. They have data going back 100 years (and more) backing up their claim. They have lots of models based on different changes, all coming to the same conclusion. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
What's the difference between the D4 and D3 gear when driving my car?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1kp88f
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.75
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr9l8h",
"comment_text": [
"4 gears: 1st, 2nd, Drive, and Overdrive. \n1st gear is 4 shaft revolutions in, 1 revolution out. \nThis is so the car can get moving, otherwise the engine would stall. \nTo go faster, the car shifts into 2nd. This is 2:1 reduction. The car moves faster. \nDrive (D3) is 1:1. There is no reduction, the engine is connected directly to the wheels. \nOverdrive (D4) is ~.6:1. The engine RPM is multiplied, so the car goes even faster. \nThe reason for overdrive is efficiency. You could go 60 mph in 3rd, but by multiplying the RPM, the engine does not have to work so hard, thus saving fuel."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr9uae",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks answering! "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr9im0",
"comment_text": [
"If I understand what you're saying, D3 will put it in drive, and only let it shift into first, second, and third. This is for moderately steep hills that you don't want to go into fourth gear on. D4 will do the same, but lets it shift out of third and into fourth.",
"Edit: IT could also mean that your car will only stay in third gear in D3 and only stay in fourth in D4."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr9tod",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks for the reply! So would you suggest I use D4 for normal driving and D3 only for hills or does it not matter much?"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr9xcu",
"comment_text": [
"No problem! D4 would be your best option for regular driving, seeing as shifting into fourth will save fuel. You shouldn't really need D3 unless you're on a steep hill."
],
"score": 2
}
|
||
ELI5: Why some vehicles sound like a helicopter inside with specific open windows?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1kpatd
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr8axl",
"comment_text": [
"Air pressure!",
"At least in the car I drive, the air pressure tends to build up and release as I'm driving, particularly at high speeds. This causes the sounds of the wind blowing into or past the window to change, and it happens very quickly.",
"Someone correct me if I'm wrong, because this is just based off of experience and not definite knowledge of all cars."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr8di5",
"comment_text": [
"The shape of a car affects the way air moves around it while it is being driven. air flow around the windows varies by car, and the shape of the windows/mirrors/weather strips will affect the sounds the moving air is going to make.",
"at any rate, opening opposing windows in the car is going to allow more air to enter the car, and will be loud, regardless of the car's design."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbra4d4",
"comment_text": [
"Same effect as blowing over a bottle.",
"At the right air velocity the column of air at the inlet is vibrating back and forth and creates what we perceive as sound. On a bottle the volume is small so the frequency is higher. On a car the volume is large so it's a much lower frequency.",
"The sound is continuous on the bottle because it's too fast for us to recognize the individual pulses. When the pressure changes happen slower than ~20x per second, or ~20Hz, our ears can make out the sounds."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbrajt7",
"comment_text": [
"As the air rushes past your ear, you hear a sound. The ",
" you hear is when the waves are partly out-of-phase. This means that you hear the beat when the sound part on one wave and the quiet part on another wave align correctly. The reason this only happens at some speeds and window configurations is because the waves have to line up perfectly for the beat to sound. The beat occurs when the waves are partially in phase (in phase the sound would be like loud wind, out of phase would be silent, but between these two are beats whose frequency is the difference between the reduced wave frequencies. For example, a 100hz sound and a 103hz sound have a 3hz beat). ",
"Sorry for the lack of organization, but this was the best I could do. Does this answer your question?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbr8aeb",
"comment_text": [
"... They do?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5:What exactly is the video that Bradley Manning leaked supposed to be of?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1ku667
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.4
|
I can't seem to find an unbiased explanation of what the video is actually representing. To me it seems like there were enemies that had guns and rocket launchers and the US shot at them? Please halp.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbsn2e0",
"comment_text": [
"The people that were shot didn't have guns, they were reporters. They also attacked a van that they knew had children inside as people in the van tried to help the reporters that were shot. To top it off, the soldiers speaking were treating the whole thing very light heartedly, as if they were fragging n00bs in Call of Duty, not taking the lives of human beings.",
"It's been a few years since I saw the video though, so I can't recall all of the details."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbsn3tj",
"comment_text": [
"They say that the people have guns though and that one has an RPG. The video definitely appears to reflect that. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbsowqf",
"comment_text": [
"Watch the first 40 seconds of that video again. The only two people who even look like they are holding anything are the two people with cameras strapped to their backs. They are CLEARLY not holding guns, and they sure as hell aren't holding AK47s. Another gy near the 1 minute mark looks like he's holding a shopping bag or something, again, clearly not a rifle."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbsnhtj",
"comment_text": [
"When I originally watched it, I remember seeing people holding black objects that didn't really resemble guns to me, they resembled cameras (which makes sense since they were journalists).",
"Assuming it was an honest mistake as I don't really think the US would kill a bunch of journalists for shits and giggles (as they were doing), the video leaking showed that the US tried to cover up the fact that they specifically targeted (unknowingly) innocent civilians. Like any propaganda machine, they covered up all the bad things they were doing (if THIS happened, what else don't we know about?) while feeding the media info about all the good they were doing, making their mission seem much better and more successful than it actually has been.",
"There have been lots of atrocities committed and scandals during the Iraq and Afghan wars, including rape against female personnel where the Government's line was that rape was a workplace hazard (instead of a serious felony), the slaughter of civilians by US soldiers (who were arrested), the pyramid stacking thing that I don't really remember too much about, torturous conditions in Gitmo, and the list goes on. This video was, if I remember correctly, one of the first major scandals that plagued the wars."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbsock2",
"comment_text": [
"Take a second look, I did and there appears to be some guns but even then if I were a journalist i'd definitely like some ground support."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: When two competing gas stations are right next to each other why doesn't one just sell gas for a few cents cheaper ?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1hl6b0
| 2
| true
| false
| 1
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cave2x3",
"comment_text": [
"It would cause a ",
"race to the bottom",
" as each store tries to undercut the other by a few cents more. They both make more money if they agree to stick to very close to the same price."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cavfmwa",
"comment_text": [
"So, kind of like an oligopoly."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cavdz6n",
"comment_text": [
"Often times, gas prices are dictated top-down and region-by-region by the gas company. For example, Shell could say \"All gas stations in South Florida should sell premium at $4.43 to 4.63 a gallon, because that's a competitive price in that region,\" even though it might not be a competitive price for each location.",
"At least, this was how it was explained to me by a service station manager in my hometown when his Philips station closed up after six years of the station next door charging 25-30 cents less per gallon."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cavgrb0",
"comment_text": [
"I think an interesting possibility is that they are working together. Maybe they have secret contacts with eachother, because they know you aren't going anywhere else (especially if they're the only gas stations in a few miles). They also realize that both of them just want to make some money, so the competition shouldn't be about who has the lowest prices, because the competitor can match them. The competition becomes about who can attract the most customers? So in reality, although the price of gas there may be lower than it has to be, you also get some kick-ass bathrooms or nice smoothies or whatever.",
"Tl;dr: Everybody is happy"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cavie4q",
"comment_text": [
"One will often cut their prices, but the other one will soon follow. The only way for both of them to make money is if their prices are the same, or very close."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: The difference between steak, beef, and a filet.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1j2ye1
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
Does seafood also use these terms the same way?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbao3i9",
"comment_text": [
"These are two cuts of Salmon",
":",
"Steak on the left: cut perpendicular to the spine.",
"Fillet on the right: boneless cut parallel to the spine."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbaki0e",
"comment_text": [
"Beef is the type of meat. A Filet is a type of cut. I think steak refers to just about any thick cut of meat.",
"Fish have filets, and I've heard people call thick cuts of fish steaks, but I don't think its that common."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbaw1cc",
"comment_text": [
"It's fairly common for salmon and tuna. To get a proper steak, you need a fairly large fish. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbao241",
"comment_text": [
"According to Wikipedia (which you should really check before resorting to ",
"/r/explainlikeimfive",
") here are the definitions:",
"Beef: cattle meat.",
"Fillet: a boneless cut of meat or fish. Depending on the animal, sometimes specific cuts (so, not just any boneless cut).",
"Steak: a cut of meat perpendicular to the muscle fibers, or a cut of fish perpendicular to the spine. Can include bones.",
"There is some overlap between steak and fillet: Filet mignon is a fillet and a steak cut. But there are exceptions: T-bone steak is not a fillet, since it contains bone. Fish fillet is not a steak cut, since it's cut parallel to the spine."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cbakkv2",
"comment_text": [
"Beef: Any meat from a cow",
"Steak: A cut of beef. Generally its used on only certain cuts of meat though, such as: a porterhouse steak, T-bone steak, sirloin steak, and others. Often times many cuts of beef are given the name steak to denote its a slice of the meat and not for example a whole slab of a portion of the cow.",
"Filet: In referencing beef, it refers specifically to a cut of meat called a filet mignon, and yes its a steak.",
"EDIT: forgot the seafood part",
"A fish steak and fish fillet (note the different spelling of fillet, two Ls) are the name for a portion of fish. They are generally used interchangeably. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: The difference between Kilojoules (kJ) and calories. Why do some countries prefer one to other?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1izpd9
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb9mh7y",
"comment_text": [
"A kilojoule is 1000 Joules. A Joule is the measurement for energy for the International System of Units. A calorie is a unit of energy which equals the amount of energy needed to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree Celsius. One calorie equals 4.184 Joules"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb9qdfq",
"comment_text": [
"Note though that one Calorie is 4,184 joules or the energy required to raise one kilogram of water one degree centigrade. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb9mjr9",
"comment_text": [
"Joules and calories are both units of energy. A joule is how much energy it takes to apply one Newton of force to an object to move it one meter. A calorie is the measure of how much energy it takes to heat 1 gram of water by 1 degree Celsius. A Calorie is 1000 calories, and known as a kcal and also what you see on food labels. A calorie is roughly 4.18 joules. This changes with temperature, but is altogether not that big a deal in ELI5. Calories are usually used as units in nutrition and chemistry b/c of the abundance of water. You can easily measure how much water heats up, and therefore find out the energy in calories pretty simply. The standard unit for energy is the joule though, so that's why you'll see it a lot."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb9qde4",
"comment_text": [
"I see some responses, but I think you're talking about nutritional calories and how food is labelled.",
"It's the same reason why some countries use the metric system and some don't. Just a historical choice that stuck for the simple reason that people don't like to change measurement systems."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cb9vyca",
"comment_text": [
"They're simply two different measurements of energy. As for countries preferring one or the other, why do countries prefer Metric or Imperial, DD/MM/YY or MM/DD/YY? It's normally the one that was there first."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: What is Money Laundering?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1pxylr
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.54
|
What exactly is money laundering? What is its purpose? Why do criminals need to do it? I hear about it and see it in TV shows and stuff but i dont know exactly what it is. Im not looking to launder any money, Im just curious.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd76w2c",
"comment_text": [
"It is a term encompassing actions with the aim of making money coming from illegitimate sorces appear as they are legitimate.",
"Example: You robbed a bank and now have 1000000 in cash you cannot just say you found. So every once in a while your lemonade stand will make a phantom sale where you earned cash, declared it, but in fact sold nothing. You just laundered 50c. Rinse and repeat."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd77ewd",
"comment_text": [
"Money laundering is taking money made from illegal actions and giving it a (fake)paper trail that makes it look legal.",
"For example, you steal a million dollars. You could go around and buy a yacht, but the government will look into where you got that much money and it reveal your crime.",
"So instead you make at deal at a club you work at. The club owners buys a ton of extra beer and writes reciepts saying he sold it all to customers at the bar. There's really no way to disprove this, so when he does his taxes everything looks fine. (He disposes of the beer somehow in the process)",
"So now you spent some of your million on taxes and startup, but everything that remains looks like legally acquired money. If you go buy a yacht the government won't say \"where did he get that much money?\" but instead will say \"he got that money from his successful club.\""
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd77gv5",
"comment_text": [
"Like Pumpizmus said, money laundering is usually something for \"cash\", that's why you can see a lot of mobsters gravitating towards legitimate activities like strip clubs, restaurants etc. where you can justify why you're carrying a bunch of bills around, or \"inflate\" the earnings, making them legitimate since you pay taxes on them. Most of those guys are a paid \"consultant\" or whatever in those clubs, it gives them a way to justify their money.",
"You can also do it with various bank transactions. Some countries like Switzerland have a loose law around opening bank accounts, that are anonymous. What you try to do is make money investing in some firms that are in countries with a nice tax system, and by various societies, bank accounts, by buying properties, withdrawing cash etc... You finally get this money on a bank account where noone knows where it comes from/who it belongs to. Then you wan withdraw it in cash anytime.",
"When the authorities try to get a mobster in prison, they have to unravel those transactions. It's not impossible, but since it usually involves several countries, firms, in countries with different laws, with ties with terrorists or corrupt government, it is usually very hard to get them convicted of anything."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd79vlc",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks everybody. This really helped."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cd95ly1",
"comment_text": [
"The example I saw in reddit recently was:",
"sell pot in your spare time. Earn £1000",
"pretend to the authorities/taxman you car washing service earned £7000"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: why does restarting a computer fix most problems? Same with phones.
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1se8d3
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdwpsxm",
"comment_text": [
"A common analogy:",
"\"Say you were playing a chess game, and noticed that somehow (incorrectly) both bishops were on the same color square. This is sort of like a software \"bug\", since the chess game is no longer operating normally.",
"If you took all the pieces off the board and set up a new game, it would fix the problem of the bishops being on the wrong colored square. Of course, you'd also lose everything about the current game in the process.\""
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdws1rl",
"comment_text": [
"This is the best explanation I've ever read. Thank you! "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdwomil",
"comment_text": [
"No expert, but often it's a program or software causing the problem, when the computer is restarted, that program is shut down."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdwonps",
"comment_text": [
"I figured as much. But my Mac wouldn't use 2 finger scrolling on only half my programs but worked on the other ones. Restarting it fixed it. I don't understand. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdwr6l6",
"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": 0
}
|
||
ELI5: What would happen if we distributed half of the wealth of the richest people and gave it to the poor?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1rxmed
| 4
| true
| false
| 0.7
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdrxcle",
"comment_text": [
"How much wealth would be redistributed?",
"A metric shit ton. Trillions of dollars worldwide.",
"It would all go into consumption so wouldn't that cause a HUGE uplift in the world economy? ",
"No. Probably most of it would go to paying off debt and then a lot of it would just be tucked away. You would get a large uptick in spending but not all of it would go immediately into consumption. The other thing that would probably happen is people would burn through all their money, adopt a lifestyle that they couldn't sustain and then just go back into debt. ",
"If so wouldn't that be great.",
"No. You're basically going to punish the rich for possessing money, which would set a precedent that wealth will be redistributed from time to time, which would lead the wealthy to either hide their assets (in the form of property, gold, etc...) and it would lead people on the low end to slack off, since they just got a huge paycheck for no real reason. In the short term it would be nice, but I think the long term consequences would be worse than the short term benefit. You can't just make huge changes like that and expect things to go smoothly. If you're going to redistribute wealth of the scale we're talking about it would take decades and generations."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdrxc7h",
"comment_text": [
"Within a short time the rich would have it all back plus some, because the poor would squander it all on products that are provided by the rich. If you add fees, interest and penalties from defaulted agreements the rich would actually end up richer "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdrxl9j",
"comment_text": [
"It would all go into consumption so wouldn't that cause a HUGE uplift in the world economy? If so wouldn't that be great and even the rich would benefit through their possession of stocks.",
"Not so much, because you just took half of their stocks and gave it to the poor people.",
"\"Wealth\" is not just money. It's houses, cars, real estate, investments, etc. which makes the entire situation posed kind of tricky. All of a sudden, you're taking ownership of companies, that may have been concentrated in a few trusted hands with well-aligned interests, and spreading it across tons of people that may not have the slightest clue what the company does or what is best for that company.",
"And you have to liquefy all the assets before they're any good to Joe Schmo. Say you have two multi-million dollar mansions, and force the rich person to give up one. Then you have to sell the multimillion dollar mansion so that the value tied up in it can be distributed. But you just took half the wealth of all the richest people in the world, so how many of them are really going to be looking to buy a multimillion dollar mansion? Not many, because they just lost half their wealth.",
"So it isn't as simple as \"take all the stuff from the rich people and give it to the poor\". You're talking a massive shift in the world economy, the end result of which probably can't be predicted. And in the end, you would have done little to solve what resulted in the wealth inequality in the first place."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdrxorw",
"comment_text": [
"you see i don't think that trillions divided by billions is going to be such a huge amount and the poor - the real poor - would spend it on food, fridges, cars, health."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdrxv72",
"comment_text": [
"It's even more than trillions though. I'm don't know if an exact number exists but it's probably enough to give every human on earth $100k...I really wouldn't be surprised if it was closer to a million.",
"the real poor - would spend it on food, fridges, cars, health.",
"Maybe, or maybe they'll invest it, throw it into a bank or under a mattress and sit on most of it after they've paid off their debts and maybe found a tiny piece of property. ",
"The other side effect would be that suddenly everyone has a ton of money to spend and it would lead to massive inflation since now everyone can afford everything, demand rises and prices go with it."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5 why do people use apple products?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1stsll
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce15udr",
"comment_text": [
"Short answer: People trust Apple to provide high-quality consumer electronics that just work, right out of the box. Apple has earned that trust by sweating the details, and consistently polishing the hardware/software/UI/services into a complete and user-friendly package.",
"For most consumers, if it says Apple, they know it'll just work.",
"We'll ignore the whole \"Apple costs more\" fallacy, as that's been repeatedly debunked when you compare quality and specs together. Yes, there are cheaper phones/tablets out there, but many of them are built to a price point by touting certain \"features\" and cutting corners on others.",
"As for \"better\" devices from their competitors, first you have to define \"better\". Bigger/faster/more pixels are important, but that alone doesn't automatically make for a better user experience.",
"The iPhone's camera is one example. It doesn't have the most megapixels, but it actually produces clearer, sharper, better-lit images because they use better quality (but less pure pixels) image sensors and flash. That, plus ease-of-use and cloud synching, is why the majority of pictures shared on the web are taken on iPhones.",
"Remember, most users don't really care about specs, they just want a phone/tablet/whatever that does what they need it to do, is easy to use, and lasts.",
"Apple provides that, year in and year out."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce161fb",
"comment_text": [
"Define \"bad decisions\".",
"What makes sense for you doesn't have to make sense for any other consumer.",
"I'm quite tech savvy, having worked in the semiconductor manufacturing business for decades. I've been in the Samsung fabs, and worked with component design for the iPhone/iPad chips here in the States. I can see the beauty in the design of an iPhone, or a Macbook Air, or an iPad mini. It's quite elegant, actually, inside and out.",
"Pure specs aren't the only measure of a product. Quality is harder to define, but just as important.",
"I had a buddy who built up the motor in his Camaro to something like 600 horsepower. And another who spent most of his cash on suspension and tires in a beat-up old Mustang, then took some professional driving courses. Sure, the Camaro would win in an out-right drag race (unless he over-throttled and just spun the tires), but when we'd go canyon racing or on a track day, the Mustang would take him every time.",
"\"Faster\" doesn't always mean faster, or better . . ."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce164xm",
"comment_text": [
"The same reason some people buy nicer cars.",
"And specs don't necessarily (and often don't) translate to end user experience.",
"The simple reason many people prefer Apple products is because (a) the hardware is consistently reliable, with great battery life, and good customer service and (b) OSX / iOS tends to win for both usability and integrating w/ new and enterprise apps.",
"I'm sure you can find better specs for the dollar, but you still may not get the above - it takes a bit of research to separate the duds from good buys with commodity hardware. And you're stuck with Windows (unless you're a Linux hobbyist) on the laptop side, which sucks.",
"With regard to price, you might be looking at that from a somewhat narrow lens (perhaps you're a college student?). Professionals with 6 figure salaries don't really care about a small premium cost for a device they're ",
" using."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce167ky",
"comment_text": [
"Here's an example",
" of a school that moved to electronic books using HP Elite Pads, after a year and a half of researching the various options.",
"They had problems with tablets failing to switch on, tablets spontaneously going into sleep mode, devices looping while performing automatic repairs, system board failures and issues with wi-fi.",
"The whole project is now being called \"an unmitigated disaster\" and the school had to purchase printed books for the entire student body just so the students could work and learn.",
"One of the reasons the cited way the HP tablet had 64GB, above that of other competing tablets. But all that memory is useless if the device won't even boot up . . ."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce19p50",
"comment_text": [
"Must be trolling. Surely."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
When we are drunk, the feelings we get, like loving or missing someone, are they real and just enhanced by alcohol? Or are they totally fake??
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1soo6l
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdznzvt",
"comment_text": [
"Ever hear the saying \"A drunk man's words are a sober man's thoughts\"? Your feelings are there, alcohol enhances them. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzxb1u",
"comment_text": [
"Yep so your feeling of being horny is greater than your fear of 'fat chicks'. (Stupid choice of words, but sticking with it). Your horniness was there sober, it was enhanced by alcohol."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzxb1u",
"comment_text": [
"Yep so your feeling of being horny is greater than your fear of 'fat chicks'. (Stupid choice of words, but sticking with it). Your horniness was there sober, it was enhanced by alcohol."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzo06o",
"comment_text": [
"Well, what do you mean by \"real\"?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzo34e",
"comment_text": [
"The feelings are most often real, but as you said they tend to get enhanced by alcohol intoxication. Also, the intoxication tends to lower our inhibitions a lot, allowing for that late night awkward drunken call to an old ex. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
What makes addictive substances addictive?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sopdz
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.81
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzonon",
"comment_text": [
"One way that drugs can be addictive is something called ",
". For example, some people who take sleeping medicine become chemically dependent on their medicine for sleep. The brain naturally produces chemicals that signal your body that it's time to go to sleep, and your brain (generally) knows to release these chemicals when it's dark, when you're relaxed, and/or when it has been a while since you've last slept. This is how the body naturally regulates sleep. Sleeping medicine floods your brain with an artificial chemical that signals your body to go to sleep; this can be very useful for people with sleeping disorders like insomnia. However, when your brain is flooded by these artificial chemicals, it recognizes that the chemicals are present and that it does not need to release its own naturally-produced chemicals. Over time, your brain produces less and less of these natural chemicals, as you never need to use them when you're taking sleeping medication. The result is ",
": your body no longer produces the right chemicals, so without the sleeping medicine you won't be able to fall asleep at all.",
"Another way things can be addictive is by triggering the reward center in the brain. This is a very useful tool in an evolutionary setting: suppose you are foraging and find a berry. You taste it, and ",
" It's sweet! The pleasure center in your brain lights up immediately, telling you to find more of these berries and to remember carefully what they look like. This is very important for your survival, but this evolved mechanism can be hijacked in some circumstances, for example by activities like gambling. Suppose you playing a slot machine. You pull the level, and ",
" you won! Money pours out, lights flash, bells rings, and again the pleasure center in your brain lights up, signaling you to try to recreate this experience. For some people, this reaction is so strong they have trouble physically pulling themselves away from a slot machine– this is when it becomes an ",
". This is why many activities can be addictive for some people in the same way that drugs are addictive– in fact, the mechanism in the brain is very similar.",
"EDIT: fixed typo"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzp2xe",
"comment_text": [
"Well, brains are very complex, and everyone's brain is different, so for many people eating the same food over and over will get boring, and losing repeatedly when gambling will make them want to quit. However, for some people their brain's response to certain stimuli is so strong that they will want to keep doing the activity long after it stops actually bringing them pleasure. Keep in mind that it is not a desire for the pleasurable feeling that keeps people there, it is essentially their brain ",
" them to keep going. In evolutionary terms, there is an extent to which it's useful to tolerate negative outcomes, if there's a chance that you will get a positive outcome if you keep trying. This is why most people don't give up the ",
" time they lose after having won at the slots; they might keep trying several times before their brain decides that it's no longer worth it.",
"I don't mean to be implying anything about free will here, just to be clear– when I say your brain compels you to do something, I just mean the brain makes signals that make you feel like you really want to do that thing (\"urges\", if you will) even if you know it's bad for you."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzpk1v",
"comment_text": [
"One way is by retraining your brain; for example, some people who are addicted to cigarettes can redirect their urge to smoke by chewing a piece of gum every time they feel the urge. In general, though, it can be extremely difficult to break addictive behavior. I know that there are a variety of pragmatic approaches in modern psychology, but unfortunately I don't know enough about it to explain them."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzpws1",
"comment_text": [
"Yes there are, sorry I neglected to mention that. It was an oversight on my part. There are prescription medications that are used to help people get over addiction. I'm afraid I don't know the details about how these drugs work, but my understanding is that different drugs are used for different kinds of addictions, and not all addictions are treatable in this way."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzosds",
"comment_text": [
"makes sense for the most part, but what about the law of diminishing returns. We never get the same \"high\" as the first time we try a food etc, plus with addictions like gambling you more often than not get a negative result. Why does this not break the addictive cycle?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
Insight on Homeless Vets and Transitional Facilites
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sozq0
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.67
|
Hey there everyone! I need to pick your brain a bit. I am currently in the process of acquiring my Masters in New Media Journalism, and am covering a story on Homeless Vets in Georgia and the Transitional Housing programs that supports them. (I know support should be for all homeless & not just for vets) however, this story just happens to be focused on the veterans and facilities that support them and what I need from you is your feedback on the topic, including homeless vets( past or present) perspectives. So, if you don’t mind dropping a bit of your knowledge to help make this story (engaging, thought provoking and moving) enough to make you want to get out and do something (if you’re not already doing it) or even support organizations already doing it, but can’t do more because of lack of space, supplies, funds, volunteers, supporters etc. So, let’s start the conversation off with these questions: What would be the most interesting angle or the most important piece of information about this story that you need to (know, learn, see and/or hear etc…) that would make this type of story engaging enough to make you want to: Keep reading Go out and support that kind of service Government’s involvement or lack there of Find ways to help a homeless veteran who really want and need the help to get back on their feet. What improvements can be made(how about maybe finding a homeless and deciding to sponsor that person for a year by offering your time to mentor etc…them back to their independancy), hmm…now that’s an interesting concept, just a thought, . Either way, let’s help support these same fallen soldiers that once stood strong to support and protect our country’s freedom. Whatever your thoughts are, they are needed and greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!!!!
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzrj3t",
"comment_text": [
"Try ",
"AskReddit",
" instead"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzss4x",
"comment_text": [
"Maybe ",
"/r/AskSocialScience",
" (or just ",
"/r/AskScience",
")."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce06k31",
"comment_text": [
"Thanks!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce06k90",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce06jvx",
"comment_text": [
"Thank you so much!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:Why Do I Have To Try Multiple Times To Get My Ipad and Phone Charger's Metal Part to Enter The Slot?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sp25u
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
I always flip it back and forth because I think it's facing the wrong way. It literally never goes in the first time. I ALWAYS have to try multiple times before the charger will fit in the frigggin' slot. Why??
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzs4yf",
"comment_text": [
"You probably actually dont; just selective memory kicks in. Theres a 50/50 chance it will go in the right way, and when you get it in on the first try theres nothing really special about it so you just forget; but when it doesnt go in you have to make a conscience effort to change it so then you selectively remember the times you didnt get it in as opposed to the times you did."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzssgm",
"comment_text": [
"I'll graph it then, because I cannot remember one time in many years that it went the freak in the first time I tried.",
"But not remembering is your point so I'm keeping data from now on."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzt9yn",
"comment_text": [
"If we are talking about the classic connector the side with the picture/icon should always face you assuming you are looking at the front of the phone.",
"The new lightning connector is reversible so next time you upgrade this problem goes away."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzu52u",
"comment_text": [
"Even on 3rd party cables there should be a rectangle icon on only one side of the connector.."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzto81",
"comment_text": [
"Ah, I was waiting for that!\nReversible...they didn't think of that the first time around?",
"I'll check for icons not sure if I have a 'classic connector'...\nThanks!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5:If 2-D and 3-D can be drawn on paper (A "3-D" object) then what is the real world and the first dimension?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sp329
| 3
| true
| false
| 0.71
|
Plus, what about inside black holes?
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzsfsz",
"comment_text": [
"It might ",
" 3D because of shading and perspective, but every picture drawn on paper is 2D."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzsfm6",
"comment_text": [
"3D isn't drawn on paper. A 2D representation is drawn on paper."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzsg6n",
"comment_text": [
"Your question makes me really confused. Exactly what is it that you're asking about?",
"As for the first dimension: A square drawn on a paper has two dimensions, height and width, right? So then a line is one-dimensional, it only have length (a drawn line physically has a width, but the line represents one dimension).",
"A 3D-object drawn on a paper is a 2D rendition of a 3D object, it's not actually 3D since you need three actual spatial dimensions (height, width, length) in order for it to be truly three-dimensional. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzst4a",
"comment_text": [
"So you can represent a 3D object on a 2D plane (like the surface of a piece of paper) but it isn't actually 3D, it's a 2D representation of a 3D object. 1D objects, or one dimensional objects, have one dimension, length. Think of a line, and the only real measurement of that line being how long it is. 2D objects, like a square drawn on a piece of paper, have two dimensions, length and height, creating their area (length x height = area). ",
"An actual 3D object is something with the dimensions of length, width and height, allowing it to have volume (length x width x height = volume). So the real world is 3D. You can have a volume of water in a glass, and a portly person has a great deal of width, and whether that is healthy is between them and their doctor, but for our purposes it's just a measurement. A 4D object would have an additional dimension... Let's call it poodth. Poodth is not a thing that exists in a 3 dimensional world. But if you can imagine how width adds something new to length and height, you can also imagine, if not fully conceptualize, how poodth would add another something, that something being a dimension.",
"As for black holes, they are highly concentrated matter that have a large gravitational pull, like a planet but many many times stronger. Dimensionally, I'm fairly sure they are 3D, but I'm no physicist. I'm just a bored guy in the back of a Paratransit van."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzswm2",
"comment_text": [
"It's not actually a 3-D object on paper. It's the use of perspective to give what is (in reality) a flat image the illusion of depth (the third dimension)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why are all Chinese takeout restaurants EXACTLY the same?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sp5te
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.43
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzt7yo",
"comment_text": [
"You live in a very boring neighbourhood, don't you? I live near a proper Chinatown, a little Vietnam and more and I see those guys in the kitchen chopping fresh vegetables, making their sauces and flipping shit in the wok all day.",
"But when I get out to the more rural area I know what you mean. A lot of that is sort of that the 'Chinese food' you find outside of an ethnic enclave is generally drawing only from the Americanized dishes of Chinese immigrants which are much fewer and more boring. There's just less to do for that kind of place."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzt5lw",
"comment_text": [
"It's a genre, and yes, there are large-scale suppliers who handle a lot of this stuff for everybody."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzv3pv",
"comment_text": [
"According to the book Fortune Cookie Chronicle, customers expect to find the same familiar food when they go to a Chinese restaurant. Even though actual Chinese cuisine is vast and diverse, most takeout places are small businesses they cannot afford to take risks by offering unfamiliar things that customers may or may not like. Every dishes they offer has stood the test of time and the format has been proven to work well. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzt76k",
"comment_text": [
"They're not.",
"Interwebz.",
"Traditions: there are traditional dishes, which change over time but are derived from similar ingredients and styles of handling veggies, meats, sauces. "
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzth30",
"comment_text": [
"No expert here but:\nChinese takeout food isn't really the food the Chinese people eat. It's more flavorful, particularity much sweeter than their tradition cuisine. Since many of these restaurants are run by immigrants or first generation Asians they need to follow a bit of a template. I worked delivery for a restaurant and they would literally steal/borrow items from other nearby Asian places. They would also make new recipes (always with some sweet sauce) and name it something random like Surprise Chicken or Tasty Trio. "
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Do orthodox conservative Christian married couples have sex? (Serious)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sp99x
| 0
| true
| true
| 0.44
|
I am not trying to troll or belittle their beliefs, although I do disagree with them. Basically, do all orthodox conservative Christians believe in no premartial sex? Do they all believe in no contraception? If so, does a newly wed couple w/o children just not have sex? Or pull out? Sincerely curious.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzu4wc",
"comment_text": [
"\"God said be fruitful and multiply\""
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzw1hm",
"comment_text": [
"Please do not use ELI5 as your soap box to voice your opinion. This post doesn't help answer the question, so it's been removed."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzw1hm",
"comment_text": [
"Please do not use ELI5 as your soap box to voice your opinion. This post doesn't help answer the question, so it's been removed."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzu5gs",
"comment_text": [
"They could just avoid having sex at the fertile points of the woman's cycle. It's not anywhere near 100%, but it does reduce your chances of pregnancy. People with that conservative a view on family planning tend to just have a ton of kids to begin with, though."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzu9dr",
"comment_text": [
"Even a fertile couple having random sex for a year might very well not conceive. If they're practicing any sort of rhythm method, I'd say it's probably even likely that they wouldn't. And keep in mind that if she's only 3-4 months along, you might not know."
],
"score": 3
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do you need a space suit in space and not the ISS besides to breathe?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spbav
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.44
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzvat1",
"comment_text": [
"There's no dumb questions, only dumb awnsers.",
"If you want to know more about space travel and science you can check out some cool youtube channels such as scishow and Veritasium. They've got tons of cool stuff about science that's all around us."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzuzsq",
"comment_text": [
"The ISS is pressurized. Also, it would be impossible to wear a spacesuit in the event of sudden depressurization for the time frames that ISS astronauts are in space."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzv3kl",
"comment_text": [
"Yes, incidentally that's also why they always look bloated during EVA's. \nBecause the inside is pressurized and the outside is a vacuum."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzvcdi",
"comment_text": [
"Cool thanks a lot, very much appreciated. Going to check them out tomorrow don't want to get carried away its to late. Lmao"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzv1so",
"comment_text": [
"Yeah I thought it had to do with pressure. So spacesuits are pressurized as well then I'd assume?"
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5 What would happen if someone ripped you apart atom by atom, then put you back together using exactly the same atoms?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spelj
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzvp37",
"comment_text": [
"As long as the bonds, relative position and velocity (ie, temperature) of each atom were preserved exactly, you wouldn't even notice it happening. One moment you'd get ripped apart, your consciousness no longer existing. Some time later (which you wouldn't know, due to not existing), you'd get put back together and go back to being conscious.",
"There is a philosophical argument to be had as to whether the \"you\" that was put back together is the same conscious mind as the one that got ripped apart some time prior, but regardless of the answer, the instrumental consequence is the same - a mind stopped existing, then an identical mind started existing some time later. It doesn't matter whether it's a copy."
],
"score": 5
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwvap",
"comment_text": [
"relative position and velocity (ie, temperature) of each atom were preserved exactly",
"Herein lies the problem. The uncertainty principle prevents you from knowing the exact position and momentum of an atom simultaneously."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzvqqu",
"comment_text": [
"My personal hypothesis is you'd end up with an exact copy of yourself, with all your memories and who thought it was you, but you would actually be dead. ",
"The reason I believe this is because of the very similar proposition - what if I copied you atom by atom and didn't tear you apart? The copy would think it was you, and no one would be able to tell it wasn't you because it would be identical in every respect, but you would still be the original you with your consciousness. If I then ripped you apart after the fact, you'd die and we'd be left with the copy.",
"This all assumes you could do the ripping apart and reassembling instantly, so biological processes weren't interrupted. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzw1as",
"comment_text": [
"Well written, thank you. I'm still having a bit of an issue wrapping my head around whether it would really be a separate but identical consciousness, the think is our body is constantly taking in atoms and expelling them, what makes my current consciousness the same consciousness as the one 2 years ago? "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwylo",
"comment_text": [
"You're correct, the matter that makes you up in effect just momentarily came together to be \"you\". The real continuity is in the pattern - ie, the way neurons in your brain are wired together. And even that changes all the time. In a way, you could argue that (you from 2 years ago) is dead, just like (you from yesterday). Atomic re-assembly of the kind you've described would disrupt the pattern even less than going to sleep does."
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5 How do Pyramid Schemes work, and why are they generally bad?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sph8a
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwew6",
"comment_text": [
"Not sure what your friend was doing, but this is how a pyramid scheme is generally marketed.",
"\"Hi! If you pay $xx.xx for product X, you'll be able to join our wonderful programme, selling product X. For every product you sell, I get a 10% commission, but if one of the people you sold X to sells a product, YOU get the 10% commission. Sell! Sell! Sell!\"",
"This sounds good, they'll often talk about how easy it is to sell, and how much money you'll make if you sell to just 10 people, and they each sell to 10 more. The problem is that you very, very quickly run out of people due to the magic of exponentials.",
"Person A sells to 3 people. | 3 People Involved",
"Each of these LevelB sells to 3 more. | 9 People Involved",
"Each LevelC sells to 3 more | 27 People Involved",
"Each LevelD sells to 3 more | 81 People",
"At LevelT | 50% of the world's population are involved, selling NOTHING",
"That's with a low number of 3, most of these schemes will talk about selling 20 packs each or things like that. After just ",
" levels the entire population of the world are now selling. ",
"TL:DR: Pyramid schemes trick people into spending money on a useless product by convincing them they'll earn so much money if they then use that product to sell it to more people. They very, very quickly outpace the population of the Earth"
],
"score": 4
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwf9j",
"comment_text": [
"Don't get into pyramid schemes. They're only profitable for the first 3 or so people involved.",
"The reason for this is that at every step down, the pyramid needs twice as many people as are already in it for anyone above to make a profit. ",
"Here's an experiment to prove why it can never be profitable if you didn't start it. Enter this formula into your favorite calculator and see how long it takes for X to be greater than the entire population of Earth: ",
"Let X = 1\nY = X*2\nNow let X = Y\nRepeat\n",
"Programmers and mathematicians, please feel free to put that into proper notation. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwkfh",
"comment_text": [
"Minor correction: this isn't a pyramid scheme, it's multi-level marketing. The difference is that in a pyramid scheme there's no product being sold at all, and no money comes from outside of the pyramid (to make money you ",
" to get people to join). This is what makes pyramid schemes illegal and not MLM."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwl0o",
"comment_text": [
"I had a feeling I was slightly misrepresenting it, thanks for the correction. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzwcff",
"comment_text": [
"You trick people into joining, the way they join is by paying you some amount and then giving you a percentage of all their future earnings (through this method). They can then go on to make their money back by doing the same to other people, this is basically the only way to get their money back, and most likely what your friend was doing to you. The higher up you are in the pyramid, the better it is for you, since you already made your money back, and now you are getting the money trickling up the pyramid (from all the people trying to get their money back by recruiting new people)."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Why can we make a hole in a piece of wood with a pin, but not with our finger?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spocf
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.46
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzxwkb",
"comment_text": [
"Pressure.",
"Pressure is force divided by the area in which the force is applied; hence the term PSI, or pounds per square-inch. When you push with your finger, you are applying your force over a small area about the size of your fingertip.",
"A pin, however, allows you to apply the same amount but focused onto a much, much smaller point. This essentially amplifies the effective pressure by a massive amount.",
"This is why you can stab a person with a knife, but you can't stab them with your fist (unless you're Bruce Lee)."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzxxv1",
"comment_text": [
"Force in a smaller area.",
"Whether you can break the bonds holding the cells of the wood together or not depends on how much force you're exerting at that point. A pin has a much smaller surface area in contact, so there is more pressure being exerted on the wood there. ",
"Say you exert 10N of force when you push with your thumb on the wood. Your thumb has a surface area of about 5cm",
" so you're putting a ",
" of 2N/cm",
" The pointy end of a pin/tack on the other hand is about 25mm",
" or about 0.25cm",
" This means the same 10N force is exerting a ",
" of 40N/cm",
"Those numbers are made up, but illustrate the importance of surface area and pressure in understanding whether something will break.",
"It's also the same principle that lets people sleep on a bed of nails. Lying down on one nail would push it through your skin, but when the pressure being exerted at each point of contact is 1/10 000th, then it isn't."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzyhk4",
"comment_text": [
"Since the others didn't really explain it for a 5-year old:",
"Same reason you don't cut your tomatoes with a piece of wood. Cutting means separating the connections between the molecules of whatever you want to cut. The stronger those connections are, the harder the material. The smaller your cutting edge, the easier it gets to cut. This is why knives are best kept sharp and glass mobile displays don't scratch that easily."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzyi52",
"comment_text": [
"For science, we should do an experiment about how much actual force you need to poke a hole of a given size into a piece of standard wood with your thumb."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzxwkw",
"comment_text": [
"Think of it like the Mohs Hardness Scale for minerals. The wood resists scratching (removal of material) because it is harder than the finger. The pin is harder than the wood, so the wood is scratched. Enough scratches and you get a hole.",
"The finger, through friction, would eventually rub a hole. Look at the top of a wooden cane to see that."
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: Why do bodies of water appear to be blue when a glass of water is clear?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spqvp
| 10
| true
| false
| 0.61
|
It probably has a really simple answer, but I really do not know
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzysu5",
"comment_text": [
"Ok so someone else is going to do a better job explaining this than me but I was here first.",
"It comes down to light scattering.",
"You know that colors are light. well when light moves through a lot of molecules that are of no color in particular it gets scattered, but only a bit, not as much as a solid object.",
"The violet side of the spectrum has a short wavelength, and the red side has a long wavelength. So that means red is going to scatter the leads, orange a little, yellow a bit more, green more, blue a lot, and then violet (indigo isn't real)",
"The more it gets scattered the more of it we see, and it turns out that the combination of the green, blue and violet scattered light looks pretty blue to us.",
"You don't see that in a glass, because there is not enough molecules to have a noticeable effect compared to the color of what you are seeing on the other side of the glass."
],
"score": 7
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzz0sh",
"comment_text": [
"TL;DR",
"Water is blue."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzz0rt",
"comment_text": [
"So it is the scattering of lightwaves? And blue wavelengths happen to be made up of lightwaves with short wavelengths? "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce008dj",
"comment_text": [
"If you want to know more check out the wikipedia article: ",
"Rayleigh Scattering"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzyht4",
"comment_text": [
"Water is blue. It's only ever so slightly blue, so in a glass you don't notice, but it's blue."
],
"score": 2
}
|
|
ELI5: How does salt melt ice? And at what temperature does salt cease to be effective?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spt03
| 0
| true
| false
| 0.5
|
We have had a week of sub zero temps where I live. Normally salt is very effective at melting ice of roads, but it does not work when the temperature drops below a certain point. I have no idea how this chemical reaction works.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzz4i7",
"comment_text": [
"Salt Water has a lower freezing point than pure water. When you layer salt on your icy driveway/road, it soaks into the ice and slowly spreads out and melts it. However, after about -10C/14F, it fails to have the same effect. This is because there is so little water above the ice that the salt has nothing to dissolve into. (Yes, there is still water above the ice at higher temperatures. Most of it is ice, but not all of it)"
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_cdzzer8",
"comment_text": [
"It works based on something known as colligative properties. Basically, what happens is that dissolved particles in a solution prevent the solution from coming together and forming a crystal structure to make a solid. It stops working at a certain temperature because the molecular motion has slowed down enough that it is able to make a solid even with the interference from the extra particles.",
"In the case of something like normal salt (NaCl) and water, we can calculate the freezing point depression with: T1 - T2 = -i",
"m where:"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce00n2t",
"comment_text": [
"The salt reacts with water in an exothermic reaction, meaning it produces heat. So when you lay the salt on the ice and something happens to slightly melt the ice (sunlight hitting the ice, or from pressure of something pressing down on it, like a foot) the ice reacts with that melt water and creates heat, which melts more ice and so on. the melt water now contains a solution of salt, which has a lower freezing point and therefore doesn't re-freeze. This also explains why salt won't work in extreme cold as the melt water can cool below the saltwater freezing point and freeze so it no longer interacts with the salt."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce06gjb",
"comment_text": [
"Well its both true and false technically. Calcium salts will produce and exothermic reaction when exposed to water because the calcium ion is relatively small and has a charge of +2, enabling very, very strong interactions with the negative end of water molecules. These release a lot of energy when they form which winds up as heat. ",
"On the other end of the scale, you have ammonium cations, (NH4+) which are relatively large. They form okay interactions with water molecules, but because of their size and shape they bust up a lot of favorable water-water interactions, which takes a lot of energy. Thus, it's endothermic to dissolve most ammonium salts in water.",
"So it can be either endo or exothermic depending on the salt used. And they use a salt that results in an exothermic reaction because, well, it would be stupid not to."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce00n8c",
"comment_text": [
"Without getting too far into the chemistry of it, adding particles typically raises the boiling point and lowers the freezing point. I.e. When you add salt to your pasta water you are raising it's temperature at which it boils. ",
"When you salt ice on the road it may mean the ice won't freeze until it's 25 degrees instead of 32. ",
"Hope that helps. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
ELI5: Nuclear Power (Request)
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spz1j
| 7
| true
| false
| 0.77
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce00u33",
"comment_text": [
"http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1j10tr/eli5_how_does_a_nuclear_power_plant_work/"
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce00te1",
"comment_text": [
"So I'm no expert, but basically you use radioactive material to heat water to generate steam to power a turbine to generate electricity. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce00ywq",
"comment_text": [
"Small particle breaks apart, makes heat. Heat cooks water, steam makes pressure. Pressure drives turbine, voila, electricity!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce021pc",
"comment_text": [
"In simplistic terms, a nuclear plant is simply a heat engine where the heat is supplied by nuclear reactions. A heat engine takes heat energy from a source (usually a boiler or nuclear reactor or combustion chamber), uses a turbine to convert some of that heat energy to useful work, and finally dumps the remaining heat into a heat sink. This is the idealized model of a heat engine.",
"In a nuclear plant, as I said, the heat is supplied by a nuclear reactor. The nuclear reactor contains various radioactive materials. The fact that they're radioactive means that they're somewhat unstable and prone to breaking apart into different elements, a process known as fission. During the process of fission, a neutron from other nearby fission processes will hit an atom of the fuel material, cause it to split and release energy, and then the neutrons from that reaction go on to make other reactions happen. So many of these are happening that there's a high amount of heat energy coming out of the reactor, which can be made to do useful work by way of that heat engine. "
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce061ta",
"comment_text": [
"Nuclear Power is the most efficient and cleanest power that we know of. ",
"However, when you talk about nuclear power, you need to ask yourself, \"Which nuclear power do you mean?\" ",
"At present, nuclear power made through uranium with a water reactor is one of the most dangerous ways to make energy. It's dangerous but it makes many companies a lot of money -- so greed wins out over reason. ",
"There is yet another type of nuclear power we could use: Nuclear Power made with thorium. This offers a much safer and cheaper option than nuclear power made with uranium. ",
"We have enough thorium in the earth to last us another 10,000 years. ",
"http://energyfromthorium.com/",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw",
" <- TED Talk, Thorium",
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZf6e0ntFrw",
" <- TED Talk, Thorium"
],
"score": 0
}
|
||
ELI5: Why is the United States make such a big deal about the idea of 'spreading democracy'?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sq566
| 2
| true
| false
| 1
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce02htx",
"comment_text": [
"It is a euphemism for securing access to natural resources via toppling governments that are unfriendly. We don't \"spread democracy\" in countries that don't have things that we want."
],
"score": 6
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce02imf",
"comment_text": [
"Case in point. North Korea. They have nothing we really want, so we have not spread democracy over there yet. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce02l5y",
"comment_text": [
"It's an easy way to sell actions that might otherwise be unpopular, basically."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce03af4",
"comment_text": [
"It's also for security reasons. There is a theory that democracies don't fight each other. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce05s3u",
"comment_text": [
"Actually, the entire reason NK exists is as a buffer zone to South Korea where we did spread democracy, and China which wants to remain communist. Except for that pesky Hong Kong which is leaning toward democracy too..."
],
"score": 1
}
|
|
If sinuses are just empty spaces in our faces, how can they be infected and cause so much discomfort and can we just fill them up and never have sinus infection?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1spxvy
| 2
| true
| false
| 0.6
|
I hate sinuses infections.
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce01kx1",
"comment_text": [
"I did my first degree in human anatomy...",
"Sinuses are spaces within bone, like you said, but the walls of those sinuses are covered in mucous membrane. This membraneous tissue is very similar to the kind of epithelium you have inside your mouth or GI tract, except in the GI tract there are various cell types present which differ from standard mucous membrane due to their need for specialized functions. Anyways, basically, you have some tissue in there, and it produces mucous, and it can get infected just like any other place. It is an ideal place for infection because it is warm and moist. When this happens you usually get increased production of fluids, and this can cause blockages and fluid build-up, pressure etc. Also, when tissue is inflamed it tends to expand due to local edema, which occurs due to cellular factors which cause an increased efflux of fluid from blood vessels into tissues. All together, you basically get a traffick jam behind your face. And to answer your final question, if you filled it up, you would just fell like you had a sinus infection all the time, since filling those mofos is why you feel like someone beat your face with a stick."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce0tyuz",
"comment_text": [
"NO PROFANITY THIS SUBREDDIT IS FOR THE KIDS"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce0ub4l",
"comment_text": [
"But sir, we are shaft brothers!"
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce01x3p",
"comment_text": [
"Bro, this is explain like I'm 5! Great explanation though, just may be better to simplify it as the whole point of this subreddit is to explain things in a way a 5 year old could understand :)",
"But fuck, you know your shit!"
],
"score": 0
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce01v0i",
"comment_text": [
"Well, when you have a cold or similar illness it fills your sinuses with fluids, which gives a suitable environment for germs like viruses, bacteria and fungi to grow. This can cause infections",
"Hope this makes it a little more understandable!"
],
"score": 0
}
|
|
ELI5: How could a system as complex, robust, efficient, and consistent as RNA/DNA have resulted from the evolutionary process?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sq84y
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.51
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce03kdb",
"comment_text": [
"Luck plus time. ",
"It's amazing what you can do with just Brownian motion when you have BILLIONS of years to do it in. To me this is easily the most non-intuitive thing about evolution.",
"DNA may well be complex, robust, efficient, and consistent, but I have a pet hypothesis that when we finally finish building the tools/languages that let us easily write/examine genomes in software, we're going to find that naturally evolved genomes are the ugliest and least elegant pieces of code in existence."
],
"score": 3
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce06zkr",
"comment_text": [
"Oh, we know enough to think they're pretty sloppy already. There is an actual mechanism for \"commenting out\" DNA, and apparently we have a LOT of old code that never gets run."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce03e6c",
"comment_text": [
"This is a really oversimplified answer, but the reason it's so complex and efficient is because it's had billions of years to \"calculate\". Each individual life cycle makes tiny changes to genetic code. If you look at organisms that have changed very little since Precambrian times, they usually only have about a dozen chromosomes, if that. Extrapolating from that data, it's not hard to imagine very early DNA only being a handful of sequences."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce03fr5",
"comment_text": [
"But even the barest of sequences is quite a complex system taken as a whole."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce03pvs",
"comment_text": [
"You're thinking of \"sequence\" in the biologically modern sense. A couple billion years ago the average genetic sequence was likely to be a few codons long. (A codon being a series of 3 nucleic acids)"
],
"score": 1
}
|
||
ELI5: Why do people disagree with the use of microwaves?
|
explainlikeimfive
|
1sqleh
| 1
| true
| false
| 0.57
|
[deleted]
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce07els",
"comment_text": [
"Please elaborate. Your question is unclear."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce07f97",
"comment_text": [
"Microwave ovens have a bad reputation among people who care strongly about the food they eat and people who are generally superstitious about certain technologies. Most people don't know how to cook food in a microwave oven, so their experiences are generally either reheating food or warming frozen processed meals.",
"Foodies will generally turn to other, more flexible heating methods for most of their cooking and will find that a microwave oven is only occasionally a convenience and thus often not worth the space they take up.",
"People who distrust the technology think about radiation and the potential harm these ovens can cause to electronic medical implants and worry about 'nuke'ing their food causing the food to become harmful or erroneously believe that it destroys the nutrition in their food."
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce07pko",
"comment_text": [
"I have heard a recent Homeopathic explanation lately but I can not remember where I heard it. It says that the water molecules get angered by the microwaves that bombard them and release anger into the consumer. When you heat slower, the water molecules become excited naturally and they bring the consumer happy thoughts. NO Shit! If I can, I will reference the article about it, I thought it was so ridiculous at the time I read it. "
],
"score": 2
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce08m7u",
"comment_text": [
"So I have come across a fair few people, I must admit generally from the older generation, who will refuse to even use/touch a microwave, let alone have one in their home. I was just wondering if why this would be."
],
"score": 1
}
|
{
"comment_id": "t1_ce08os4",
"comment_text": [
"Haha well I like this theory, please do pass on a reference if you can"
],
"score": 1
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.